Ambrose, Not Reigns, Is the Real Anti-Establisment Wrestler

Discussion in 'General WWE' started by Jacob Fox, Mar 7, 2016.

  1. Here's my latest column. Before anyone who likes Reigns gets upset, keep in mind this is not in ANY way a criticism of Roman Reigns. It is, in fact, my opinion of the absolutely poor way that WWE has handled Reigns' development while continuously ignoring the fan support of Ambrose. My argument is simply that although the WWE has been trying to make Reigns this big anti-Authority/establishment wrestler, Dean Ambrose has inadvertently become just that.

    Ambrose, Not Reigns, is the Real Anti-establishment Wrestler – Online World of Wrestling
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  2. As I said before, Reigns shoulda been a heel for a good 2 years before his major face turn for the company.
    • Agree Agree x 4
  3. I've said it before, but I hope Vince realizes that Reigns needs to be universally hated first before he's universally loved.

    Reigns vs HHH will undoubtedly be good, but the Mania crowd will turn the guy heel, so Vince should capitalize on it and finally pull the trigger. Because, right now, Reigns as a top face is obviously not working. And it may sound cliché, but turning him heel would be best for business.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Great article Jacob!

    Just got a somewhat-writing gig, so mind if I spend my first article countering yours somewhat?
    (Hopefully to lead to less dead threads around here :emoji_wink:
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Thank you! I don't mind at all :emoji_slight_smile: In fact, I'd love to read it.
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  6. inb4 fight
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  7. It's weird because they've been pushing Ambrose as an anti-establishment character from the moment The Shield splintered apart. Look how similar he seemed to a rebellious Steve Austin when he and Rollins were originally feuding - He was determined to get his hands on Seth by any means necessary and was jumping him anywhere he could. He was getting arrested or thrown out of the building by The Authority in the process for it, but nonetheless still finding ways to sneak back in so he could pound on Seth some more.

    No one will deny that this entire storyline would have fared far better if Dean had been in Roman's place. In fact, as perfect as Seth's heel turn was and as special as the Ambrose/Rollins rivalry felt (you really got that intangible feeling when they were feuding that they were born to be enemies), it probably would have made better sense to just have Reigns be the one to turn on The Shield and cause its destruction instead of Rollins. The Authority weren't completely stale at the time and they could have gotten quite a bit of mileage out of Reigns as the brass' chosen one. At the very least, he should have turned at Survivor Series.
  8. Don't know why anyone who read the article would want a fight. My article is not in any way criticizing Roman nor claiming Ambrose is better or should main event. It simply says that the method that WWE has been using to push Reigns as the anti-establishment/Steve Austin character has not won the fans over. It simply contrasts what the "establishment" was in 1997 and 1998 to what it is now and how both wrestlers fit into those definitions.
  9. And I definitely don't dispute that, just that the current situation is so much more beneficial to Ambrose simply because the WWE is trying too hard to make Reigns into that character and it's not working.
  10. They act like the establishment is against Reigns on screen. While off screen they are all pushing for him. While Ambrose is their work horse who always gets the short end of the deal.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. I hope WWE is actually using Roadblock as a test to see who gets over the crowd more, if Reigns does get massively booed maybe they will pull a switch and have Ambrose win the title at Roadblock. Resulting in a brand new storyline for mania involving Lesnar and heel Reigns.
    • Like Like x 1
  12. SCSA pointed out the unwritten part of this.

    When you think about it, Ambrose and Reigns "almost" have the same story arc since last WM, don't they?

    Ambrose was screwed over by the dusty finish at Elim Chamber, lost at MITB on a technicality, went into the Rumble after already wrestling a LMS match
    Reigns got cashed in on at WM while battling Lesnar, once at Survivor Series while battling Hunter, was attacked by the League of Losers at TLC, had to start at #1 during the Royal Rumble*
    (note the asterisk)
    The Authority has handed both title shots for no reason, the Authority has held them back, they both got ragdolled by Strowman in-between, blah blah blah. Except with Reigns it's like "It's One Verse All at the Royal Rumble!" "How dare you betray us, here's a match with the 500 pounder everyone beats!" whereas Ambrose just quietly fades into the IC title scene or off a PPV card altogether until it's time to be Roman's pop machine... because Ambrose is actually fighting the company.

    It's just like Extreme Rules 2011. "John Cena, after such a terrible year, finally has regained the WWE Championship! After all the crap he's been through with the Nexus and being fired and HE OVERCAME IT ALL MAGGLE" oh piss off just 30 minutes ago we watched Christian finally win the World Championship after 15 years it seems, now youwant us to feel bad for Cena because he had to be in a different story for a year? Go fuck yourself, do not pass Go, do not collect $200
Draft saved Draft deleted