Summerslam Could Be The Perfect Opportunity To Turn Roman Reigns Heel

Discussion in 'General WWE' started by The GOAT, Jun 21, 2015.

  1. ...At least if the rumored double main event of Seth Rollins vs Triple H and Brock Lesnar vs Roman Reigns for the WWE Championship is the direction they go in.

    Try to picture all of the build-up to Brock Lesnar vs Roman Reigns in a big rematch from Wrestlemania, where we finally get to see for certain whether Reigns can defeat The Beast or whether he'll just end up as another victim of Brock's. Can you imagine watching the two of them going back and forth and having a hellacious match when all of a sudden, The Authority walk down to ringside to view the match up-close and, much to the surprise of everyone, ended up helping Roman Reigns defeat Brock Lesnar to win the title?

    The logic is that if Seth is turning face, that leaves The Authority without a handpicked chosen one to represent the company for them, and that's where the idea of them embracing and endorsing Roman Reigns as the new face comes from. Now, just to clarify, I like Roman Reigns, and I see a lot of long-term potential in him as a babyface. His character, look, and move-set (specifically his signature moves like the Spear, Superman-Punch, and Leaping Basement Dropkick) to me all scream 'Babyface." But in spite of that though, the guy isn't that over for someone they want as the next face of the WWE brand, and on top of that, there's supposedly some rumblings within the company at the moment about turning a major babyface heel soon since they already have too many faces near the top of the card right now anyway (John Cena, Randy Orton, Dean Ambrose, Roman Reigns, Brock Lesnar [kind of...], Dolph Ziggler, Seth Rollins soon, etc.) All and all, should they turn anyone heel soon, it's incredibly likely that it'll be either Ambrose or Reigns that turns, and given that Dean is more over than Reigns... well... it still isn't likely that Reigns goes heel, but there is an argument for it.

    The only issue with this is Sheamus and his MITB briefcase. But perhaps when Brock defeats Seth Rollins for the WWE Title at Battleground (should the proposed double main event for Summerslam go as rumored), Sheamus tries to cash in on Brock afterwards and fails. I can't see them giving Sheamus the case just so he can fail his cash-in, but it's a way to get around it and it would be a good way of further illustrating that you don't fuck with Lesnar (i.e Brock just won his title back from the first guy who cashed in on him, and then successfully prevents a second guy from pulling it off minutes later as well.)
  2. I think Vince is too stubborn to turn Reigns heel.
    I can only imagine his old ass being like "He's gonna work as a babyface or he isn't gonna be working at all, dammit!"

    Honestly, I thought they were gonna pull the trigger on RR's heel turn at MITB.
    Him winning (although it was too predictable) the contract and then cashing in on Ambrose would've been swell.

    For the record, I like babyface Reigns. But I think heel Reigns would blow him out of the water.

    As far as this scenario of yours goes, I like it.
  3. #3 Red Rain, Jun 21, 2015
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2015
    Wouldn't this proposed angle make Triple H seem fickle?
    First Randy Orton, then Seth Rollins and now Roman Reigns? Orton was the present but they moved on from him. Perfectly okay in my estimation.
    However, one thing I can never recall Triple H being was fickle. He isn't one to simply change his mind or change alliances so 'willy-nilly'.
    Unless... it was his plan all along to bring Roman Reigns on board rendering Rollins (and maybe Orton) as mere pawns to draw a matter of desperation out of Roman Reigns

    Given Reigns' laid back nature, HHH may have deemed it necessary to map out a lengthy plan to manipulate and therefore motivate Reigns to take his 'rightful place'.

    Edit: This angle would make HHH fickle, but it would also be a nod to HHH's days of manipulating Rikishi (The Rock's samoan 'brother') to run over Stone Cold.
    Who knows? This could be a repetition of history and we could see the Rock take Reigns' turn as a personal slap in his face as he did back in 2000 with Rikishi.
  4. Turning Reigns heel is a dumb idea. He's just getting over as a babyface the past few months, something they wanted all along and now they should turn him?.. No man, that's something they should do months down the line when he becomes even more beloved by the crowd and they have a lot of strong babyfaces on the show. Now they don't have very many.

    Roman Reigns is doing great as a babyface and him not winning MITB will only help his popularity since the 'hardcore fans' don't feel he's being shoved down our throat anymore. That's what killed his popularity in the first place.
  5. Yeah, Reigns has enough swagger plus what you can tell is a cocky, holier-than-thou attitude lying beneath his usual demeanor just waiting to come out, to be an excellent heel. Here's a couple of clips of his original character from NXT where he portrayed a smug bastard in a suit. You can undoubtedly tell how this character would fit perfectly in The Authority:

    That's really the main problem I have with The Authority ditching Seth Rollins (or the other way around.) Having two different Authority-chosen champions is fine in my opinion, but having three of them, especially within the span of two years, seems a bit excessive to me. That said, if they're gonna introduce the story element of Stephanie and Hunter having to handpick someone to represent their company for the third time, I'd much rather it be Roman Reigns than Sheamus. Reigns is at least a fresh prospect, plus he has much more of the "corporate" look to him than Sheamus does as well.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. People are still talking about Reigns turning lol
  7. I don't mind the idea, but it'll never happen. I mean they've put all this effort into making reigns the face, why the hell would they turn it on a dime? Makes no sense.

    I'm not saying it's impossibly, just saying it's highly unlikely. Plus, reigns does seem to be getting over more and more with the fans.

    He would be a good heel, I can see him being much like Batista as far as his persona is concerned.
  8. Because their efforts are failing?

    He isn't getting "more and more over with the fans." That seems to be a misconception that's being perpetuated across the web lately. People tend to forget or overlook the fact that even right before Wrestlemania XXXI, crowds had already stopped booing him and started just greeting him with mostly lukewarm reactions instead, and his reactions have pretty much stalled since then. In the past several weeks, there's only been a few crowds that have given him what could be described as "good reactions", and nearly all of those were piggy-backing off the momentum of Dean Ambrose. And Reigns' reaction at MITB eight nights ago sure wasn't anything to write home about either.

    Of course they're not gonna turn him heel, but a person can dream. The two videos I posted above, while only small excerpts, prove what a natural heel he would be if they would just let him. Turning heel would be like a new start for him, and if he developed an entertaining enough persona as a baddie, then that would eventually endear the people to him once again anyway. That's usually how the greatest babyfaces are born - they get themselves over as heels first (Stone Cold, The Rock, Triple H, Randy Savage, John Cena, Batista, Daniel Bryan, etc.) and then make the organic face turn later.
  9. I was speaking more from WWE's eyes. For example, it would be easy to presume that they "failed" with Cena, yet he still sells merchandise, arenas, etc.. Is reigns not selling anything? Or selling out any arenas? I mean where's the proof? Cena is booed all the fucking time and yet he still is and has been a top dog for years and seemingly always will be.

    You can't base your whole decision on reigns saying "well he gets booed and the crowd isn't behind him." When in the hell are they always behind Cena? I mean I know Cena is a rare exception. But, and correct me if I'm wrong, aren't they pushing to make reigns the next Cena? So as long as he's selling things well... And can't put on decent matches, they will probably still push him. I would imagine they wouldn't keep trying with him unless he's been selling some stuff and doing something right.

    I get what you're saying and I would love for reigns to turn heel at SS and it would be the perfect place to do so. Rollins a face, reigns a heel, make it happen. I'm all for it.

    Also, in my opinion, I think he's been getting some better reactions. Sure, not always consistent. But not bad. Definitely not as bad as before.

    And reigns was a heel in the shield for what like 2 years? Not to say he can't be heel now... And I know he's singles competitior now.. But he has been a heel.
  10. That's the major difference between John Cena and Roman Reigns, though - Cena generates a shitload of revenue for the company through merchandise and is also the biggest draw when it comes to selling tickets for house shows/live events. In fact, to put things really into perspective about how much of a colossal seller he is when it comes to merchandise, he already had 7 out of the top 10 best-selling items by the time he captured his first WWE Championship, and at certain points has even outsold the rest of the roster combined.

    That's why anytime someone complains about why Cena hasn't turned heel yet, the retort you'll usually hear is about how Cena is still the biggest moneymaker and #1 draw for the company. You can bet your bottom dollar that if Cena wasn't raking in that dough, they would have turned him a long time ago.

    And yes, Reigns was a heel while in The Shield, but he was part of a group then rather than on his own. Since The Shield split apart, all three former members have went on to develop their own distinct personalities (although Reigns has remained the closest to what his old Shield persona was), and his face run as a singles competitor hasn't exactly been stellar.
  11. Well yes, I know all of that but how is reigns doing in sales and selling out events? Is he flat out failing? I mean if he is you'd think they'd make a heel already.

    Again, I'm not opposed to the single heel run, but it just seems WWE has some good reason for not doing it.
  12. In a case such as this, I always go back to JBL.
    He was a guy who was completely unproven, yet WWE had enough faith in his abilities to warrant a nearly year long WWE title run, culminating in being the first to put over John Cena.
    JBL was a success because he had the requisite talent and ability to fulfill such an arduous task.
    If it is believed Roman Reigns can do the same thing, they should go for it.... even if there is no evidence to truly suggest he can do it.
    Reigns may need this heel run to give him the jump start necessary to break through the glass ceiling.

    WWE conceptualized ahead of time the type of run JBL would have so they executed it.

    Edit: In today's social climate, I wonder if its possible to turn a character like Roman Reigns heel and then turn him face a year or so later. Would Reigns lose any shred of credibility? Does he have the personality to turn heel in such a vicious way only to turn around and be face of the company again? The attitude era allowed for ambiguity in ways the PG era does not. If Reigns turned now, they may risk losing money in the long run because his face run wouldn't be as profitable. Cena, even as a heel, was still the fun loving cat he is today. Reigns turning could tarnish the squeaky clean legacy and image WWE demands from its babyfaces these days.
  13. He did good numbers when he headlined the B tour in Germany (I think it was) earlier this year, but that was it. Also read he did some pretty decent merchandise numbers last year but nothing spectacular, and Ambrose has surpassed him in pretty much every way as far as selling merch is concerned (they even just released five new t-shirts for Ambrose as of yesterday... They generally only do that when your stuff is selling well. That's why Cena has more merch available than everyone else does.)

    I think it's safe to say they started having second thoughts about Reigns when he didn't go over Brock Lesnar at Wrestlemania. Everyone knows that regardless of whether Brock re-signed or not, Reigns being the one to stop Lesnar's reign of terror was the plan for months. Even if Rollins had just run down and cashed in on him afterwards, it still speaks volumes that they didn't have him defeat Brock for the title first. Obviously they haven't turned him yet because they're still hoping he'll win the audience back, but I'm curious how long they're willing to stick with him before putting their faith into someone else if he doesn't eventually win back the bulk of the fan-base.
  14. I don't watch a lot, but when I do Reigns seems to be getting as good of reactions as any babyface. Last night when he cleared the ring with Superman punches before Wyatt appeared he had the place rocking.
  15. ^Just watched it after you posted it.
    Don't know why the fuck they are wasting Reigns time with Wyatt. Like, does he have to prove that he's credible enough to take on the WWE Champion? And out of all people, against Wyatt? smh
  16. I actually don't mind the feud. He needed something to take him away from the top of the card for a brief period and this feud has actually been decent. Plus the match should be great. I think this rivalry has given Wyatt AND Reigns a bit of purpose both characters were lacking for a minute
  17. I honestly think they didn't know who to throw him in the ring with for Battleground.