Royal Rumble Triple H Is Perfect Challenger for Roman Reigns

Discussion in 'PPV's & Specials' started by Neptune, Dec 26, 2015.

  1. "WWE's blueprint for Roman Reigns' World Heavyweight Championship run is to begin in explosive, powerful fashion by pitting him against Triple H early, telling the story of a rebel clashing with a tyrant at the 2016 Royal Rumble.

    WWE has other options for WrestleMania. It's best to have Reigns amass momentum in a hurry in order to best take advantage of the electric connection between him and the crowd.

    Reigns spent much of the year putting on clutch performances in the ring. Much of the crowd resisted his rise anyway.

    He worked on his promo work, expanded his move set and impressively got a standout match from Big Show. Still, many fans weren't sold.

    It wasn't until he let his fury overflow and pounced on Triple H at Tables, Ladders & Chairs 2015 that things changed. That vicious attack on the corporate braggart sparked the fire WWE had been trying to light for a long time.

    ......

    Triple H vs. Reigns is the strike-while-the-iron-is-hot option, the surefire way to make Reigns' title reign memorable early on.

    The power of a hero's tale is often dependent on the quality of the villain. And in this case, Triple H is a class above Sheamus, a Jaguar compared to a Renault."

    Read More Here
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. #2 Jacob Fox, Dec 26, 2015
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2015
    As much as I hate to agree with anyone who would demean their writing by writing for that dreadful Bleacher Report, I have to at least agree with the premise of the article.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
  3. No he isn't.

    But first off, Roman Reigns hasn't expanded his arsenal of moves? He does the exact same things. Not saying they're bad, but the article isn't really touching on that. Plus, false-finishes is not a good match, let alone a standout match. It was still an upper-cut and samoan drop fest, as usual.

    People seem to forget the reputation Triple H has. Amongst most fans, he's a greedy, under-mining politician. You don't have to be a smark to understand this. It's everywhere. Not to mention, people are more than happy with the part-time champions, they already have. People are not keen on seeing older, rustier, broken-down, part-timers - take the cake. The on exception to this was Brock Lesnar. The Rock received a lot of heat for being part-time. Despite being there almost everyweek, and even on SmackDown. The point is, people want to see newer, if not, full-time competitors challenge for the championship.

    Key word is "people". Does it make sense to have this 2 year long build (if you count the spear from post-WM30 RAW, the beginning) end in a big clash at WrestleMania. Have McMahon vs. Austin but with a new Austin and a McMahon that could actually wrestle? Yes it does. But in pro-wrestling, making sense doesn't matter when the people's opinions matter- or a better way to put it - money talks. Of course in the WWE, people matter as much as the spanish announce table, but popular opinions, like Daniel Bryan, Shield vs. Wyatts and CM Punk are taken into account. To add to that, in an honest world - would a small, yet skillful, man defeat two giants? No. But in pro-wrestling, thanks to the over-whelming support, Daniel Bryan pulled it off. Now back on topic, Triple H facing Roman Reigns would be a terrible waste of a new Rumble winner, something people have desperately been clamoring for since the 2011 edition. But a great end to an epic story. But also a train-wreck to the moderate fan, who find Triple H to be an attention whore.
     
    • What? What? x 1
  4. The article actually proposes Triple H to face Reigns at Royal Rumble, not at Wrestlemania, so the prospect for a new Rumble winner is still there.

    Unless I misunderstand, because if you knew he meant at the Rumble, how would the match affect the Rumble winner in any way?

    The reason I like this idea is because I HATE the idea of Reigns vs HHH at Wrestlemania. That would be a nonsensical main event fr Wrestlemania 32, in my view.
     
  5. Don't read Bitch Report, so I decided to improvise.:diaz1:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. That's the better option... I feel like sandpapering my eyes and I only read the first paragraph.
     
  7. Triple H vs Reigns should/is going to happen but I said it before and I'll say it again, it shouldn't happen at Wrestlemania. Either Roman and Sheamus have a rematch at Royal Rumble for the title or Vince strips Roman for the title and Lesnar vs Sheamus for the vacant title happens and Roman wins the Royal Rumble to get another shot. And then at Fastlane Roman vs Triple H happens for either the WWE title or for Romans #1 contender spot at Wm32.

    Everyone always says "but Fastlane is a throw away PPV, they could only have a match like that at Wrestlemania." but I disagree completely. Everyone thought Lesnar vs Taker part III was gonna happen at Wrestlemania but it ended up being at Hell in a Cell. If HHH is in the main event at Wrestlemania, Ill be highly disappointed.
     
  8. Reigns vs Trips happening at the Rumble or Mania is a-okay with me.

    But, I actually want it to happen at the Rumble, it's a safer bet, as the event's being held in Roman's home state of Florida.
    If the match happened at Mania, then you'd face the possibility of Reigns getting booed again because of all of HHH's (s)marks at the show.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. For what it's worth, there's actually a rumor going around that HHH will make Reigns defend his championship twice at Wrestlemania - once against the Royal Rumble winner (whomever that might be) and if he can get past them, then once against him as well. That means Reigns vs HHH would probably still headline, but it also means there's huge uncertainty as to who the winner of the Rumble would be.

    Reigns vs HHH isn't happening at the Rumble or Fast Lane unless there's a bigger opponent than Roman for HHH come Wrestlemania, and right now there isn't. Rock would be that opponent but he probably won't be able to wrestle there. I don't see someone who has an ego the size of Texas like HHH suddenly switching gears from putting over the desired next face of the company to settling for a 'lesser' program against someone like Ambrose unless he absolutely has to.
     
  10. I think this should happen at WM. I'm a sucker for any idea that involves HHH winning the belt, but it's actually a good idea. I mean, if we're going to get a big match for Reigns at WM (and we ARE getting one), imo it has to be either HHH, Cena, or Brock. Could we get new guys, such as... KO, for example? Sure, but let's face it, Reigns vs Owens isn't as marquee as one of the three guys I mentioned earlier (does that suck? Sure, but you can't get anyone to that level in 3 months). It shouldn't be Cena because imo it's too early to do a passing of the torch, so to speak, I'd do it next year at the earliest. Brock would get cheered wildly, which would be bad considering Roman hasn't fully gained the crowd's support yet. Which leaves us with Hunter, who gets heat AND has a reason to want to kick Reigns' ass already.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. Brock or Rock are the only two names that come to mind. They want to put Reigns over though which is why I can't see putting him against either is a good idea. I see HHH vs Brock vs Reigns happening at Wrestle Mania. HHH will keep Reigns "safe" from a loss from Brock.
     
    • Creative Creative x 1
  12. Getting Reigns shoved down our throats actually does sound appealing - if only because the RR winner has a shot.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  13. #13 Jacob Fox, Dec 26, 2015
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2015
    All good points but they work under the assumption that WWE does what makes sense, and as we've seen many times, they don't often do that. And they very rarely learn from their mistakes.

    I'm not ready to give them that sort of credit yet.

    And I still just don't see this happening at Wrestlemania. I dunno. I also think that because they haven't yet announced who Reigns will face an the Rumble, despite having 2 Raws occur since he won the belt, indicates HHH is likely.
     
  14. Very likely indeed. Maybe they will hotshot Cena or try to give Roman his redemption against Brock, who knows? I don't think it would work though. I think it would be cool if Roman was forced to defend the belt in the Rumble match and HHH won it though.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Yeah I'd be okay with that too.
     
  16. If their sole goal is to get Roman Reigns over, at the current rate, it's really hard to predict just what the fan reaction will be towards Reigns at WM.

    Fans actually seem to be behind the guy - dude got cheered in Philadelphia of all places - but will they be able to keep this momentum going until WM? There's no real way of knowing...

    -To me, while the story of Triple H vs Reigns at Wrestlemania is the best one by far, how effective will a match that "predictable" wind up being? Would the predictability outshine the story and match quality? What are the odds that they'd throw the belt on Triple H? Backstage I just see him now as "the guy who wants to protect all his NXT talents" moreso than "the "Am I fucking going over?" guy, and even kids and newer fans can realize a guy who wrestles so little has little chance of winning the belt...

    -In terms of just the character dynamics Cena vs Reigns seems like a very polarizing choice, in the sense of how they need to treat it with the utmost care. If they want to do a passing of the torch match and have Roman and Cena go face to face several times, there's your chance to get "Cena 2.0" off Roman's back and prove how he's a completely different next top guy. No more tater tots or magic beans crap or stupid monologues, if he can be the badass in the face of the Fruity Pebble we wanted the Rock to be, then there's a new star... but ONE misstep can undo all the good will they've built up in the past couple of weeks... I also wouldn't expect much from the match.

    -Lesnar vs Roman again should work better this time, but with how beloved Lesnar is right now, having Reigns walk out of Suplex City with the title should create more groans and build resentment.

    -One other opponent might be the Undertaker, but... that just seems like the wrong move from every possible angle atm.

    Anyway I remember bitching at Wrestlemania 28 - wow has Snow changed since then - about how 4 part-timers were getting the 6 top spots at Wrestlemania, and how they needed to create new guys. Welp, guess Roman's created, but unless Seth can get some super healing powers or they can kidnap the insurance dude who's keeping Rock from working (OR FUCKING CLEAR DANIEL BRYAN FFS), there's no way to get 3 top matches this year with 5 guys unless one of them (Roman) pulls double duty, or Cena faces another young guy like the last two years

    lolWWE
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Agree Agree x 1
  17. I have a better idea, how about a surprise return challenges Reigns....

    Show Spoiler
    [/spoilers]
     
  18. Nah, they aren't gonna revisit Brock vs HHH in any form ever again. They exhausted that feud nearly three years ago. Plus, if HHH were to hypothetically place himself into a three-way with Roman, it only makes sense that the third man be another heel whom Hunter could hopefully form an alliance with in order to further ensure Reigns didn't walk out the champion.
     
  19. Maybe Cena then? Idk I am just throwing stuff out there. Good points though.
     
  20. I all of a sudden want to see WWE pull something off where they make the fans believe that Dean wins the Rumble, and Stephanie then comes out and says that there's a special 31st entrant in this match, out comes Triple H and Triple H eliminates Dean to win. If you think about it, Triple H winning the Royal Rumble does make sense and The Authority angle needs another moment where they do something really evil, and I think that this is perfect for the storyline and it would be the best heel moment in years. Heels nowadays, you don't see too many of them do something really evil, and this would be a good thing to do for the purpose of the storyline.