Who is the bigger star?......Reigns or Ambrose

Discussion in 'General WWE' started by RVD_86, Feb 8, 2016.

  1. Obviously the WWE will want you to choose Reigns, but is he really the real deal and the new age face of the company?

    I think when you see the reaction from the fans that Ambrose has been getting as of late, it tells a different story.

    I certainly think that Ambrose is by far superior in all areas of his game in my own personal opinion. He is one of the best if not the best on the mic connecting with fans at the present time. He is on par with Reigns in terms of in ring performance and overall seems to generate a lot more excitement and pops from the crowd when he makes an appearance.

    WWE really need to adjust their focus I think and start pushing Ambrose into the number 1 spot and see what they can do with him as he's doing really well at the minute but clearly being held back somewhat by WWE who are intent on succeeding with Reigns.

    What y'all think?
     
  2. Ambrose is hands down the fan favorite. He's the top babyface who is there week in and week out. I feel like Roman is more favored among little kids and women. Kids probably think he looks like a badass and they fall into what WWE tries to push because they don't really know better. And women probably just think he's good looking. But I think Ambrose was most likely placed into the main event at Fastlane because of how well his overall crowd reactions are.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Ambrose >
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Ambrose - Reigns is good but as much as I enjoy watching him he can't match Ambrose for unpredictability and showmanship which is what they need if they don't want people to get bored and wander off.
     
  5. I like Reigns, but Ambrose >>>

    If they turn Ambrose heel at Fastlane or on post-Fastlane Raw episode and that backfires, leading to Ambrose getting cheered over Reigns even more, I'll burst out laughing.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Ambrose will not live up to the main event shit. His US title was a joke, he did great going for the IC but is NOT main event material, he is the kind of guy who lifts the midcard. KO is another example. Reigns is main event because of his family, it's why we are stuck with the uso team always in the title picture considering what could be a TON of tag champs we get the same 3 teams over and over and over and over (NEW. Day rocks)

    Ambrose should midcard after he has a 1v1 vs bork but we all know how that battle ends. I'm jacked on Bray vs Bork tbh, but after tonights shit show (passed out) on RAW he might have an actual chance, unless WWE really plans on making him look weak. Most likely he leaves Fastlane looking weak, honestly.
     
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  7. Neither is really a bigger star than the other is at the moment. Reigns has the better resume as far as kayfabe accomplishments go, but a person's overall star power isn't wholly determined by that. If they both left the industry today, neither could really say they left behind a bigger overall impact than the other did.

    However, Ambrose is better than Roman in every way imo (except for maybe in-ring ability where they're about equal, but that's the least important aspect of being a successful wrestler) and given Reigns' same push, he'd eclipse Roman in pretty much every facet of popularity. Unless Reigns suddenly gets a personality transplant or something, I don't see any scenario where Reigns will be more successful than Dean in the long run. Ambrose just has the better magnetism and charisma about him, especially when he's firing on all cylinders.
     
  8. Reigns is the bigger star, WWE wise. He's been the focus of the last three Rumbles in some way, he's about to main event his second WrestleMania, and not to mention he's captured the main title twice. Whereas Ambrose has mainly been the backdrop in Roman's feuds, until recently.

    And that's partly the reason Roman isn't as over as he should be. You always have Ambrose by his side, and Ambrose just feels so natural. Extremely easy to connect to, it hurts Roman. He shouldn't be getting 50/50 pops this early on in his career. Ambrose just has a better connection with the crowd, and he's the bigger star in that aspect.

    They need to split them up, and have Roman be what he used to be but with a fresh take. Be that silent badass people loved in The Shield, but also drop all the old Shield tendencies. Drop the attire, stop coming out to the ring, but I guess keep the theme. Although, if they embraced the whole Roman Empire thing, his entrance being like how the last Rumble theme was would be dope.


    As for personal preferences, I'd never put anyone over Ambrose from the WWE. Except Styles, well they'd be the same level I suppose.
     
  9. Can I say Seth? Cause I really wanna say Seth.... SETH ROOOOOOOLLLLIIIINNNNSSS!!!! Seriously though, always thought he was the best of the three. But if I had to choose from the above... Ambrose. To be fair, Roman is good but he either tries too hard or not at all.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. He was always the best in-ring guy of the three, but Ambrose was always the best on the stick.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. Reigns, clearly. He looks about 280 or so and Ambrose is probably only 225 max.
     
  12. Okay Vince :bodallas:
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  13. It has a lot to do with their positions. Roman's out there dying on the vine doing 20 minute monologues in opening segments like every top guy is, while Ambrose's promos are usually kept short, sweet, and effective. Switch those two around and how over would Reigns be? Maybe if Roman was "held back", fans would be more accepting of the massive improvements in the ring he's made on top of getting Cesaro heat, and years and years of begging for Guy X to be pushed wouldn't be forced to change overnight, as the fans bitch about Ambrose the same way they did Rollins.

    Also Roman has more credible offense than anyone on the roster. A 280 pound Samoan swat team badass trucking you looks like it SUCKS. There's an appeal to that
     
  14. I doubt Reigns talking less would benefit him as much as people think it would. Jeff Hardy had pretty terrible mic skills, but was still extremely popular. RVD, too. Goldberg goes without mentioning. If you have charisma in spades, then a lack of good verbal skills shouldn't be enough to hold you back completely. He just isn't interesting enough for most people it seems to really get behind the way WWE wants them to.
     
  15. Ambrose should be the bigger star, but of course, they want to push Roman. I don't really care much about Roman despite them pretty much piling on the time for him, recently they've been pushing Ambrose and Brock, which is WAY more interesting to me. Ambrose just has 'It' IMO, he makes me *excuse me* believe in him, that he wants the title SO bad and is willing to put his body on the line. If WWE keep doing the short but sweet promos with him, make him more "Indestructible" (less "Lunatic crazy fringe, Maggle!") and if he stops doing that damn clothesline every match, I think they could be on to something massive here.
     
  16. Of course if the pushes were reversed the crowd reaction would be the same. Ambrose over exposed would be jeered and Reigns in small doses would have people salivating for more. That is honestly one of my biggest turn offs in watching WWE or reading about it in 2016. The fans fickle asses are so transparent with their whining

    Vince being so hands on (if reports are to be believed) in Roman's push was another big factor in ruining his character and having the mega push backfire.
     
  17. lol Completely wrong. When people love a superstar enough, they generally want to see them more and more and can almost never get enough of them. I didn't see people growing tired or apathetic of Punk during his 434 day title reign (some of his biggest reactions were even as a heel) or Bryan during his short run at the top. People were booing and rejecting Reigns before he even became champion for the first time.

    Fickle fans on the internet don't represent the majority of the fanbase.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. All these guys had something in common though: WWE/WCW knew what they were doing with them. They understood the appeal to RVD was that he did stuff in the ring that others didn't. They understood Jeff Hardy was willing to jump off scaffolds onto people. They figured out Goldberg killin' dudes in 2 minutes every Nitro became must-see TV, so they ran with these things.

    What will they run with with Roman to get him to be the star they want him to be?

    To your last point, yeah, they could have run with a Daniel Bryan title reign for a while. Maybe the appeal was more in the chase, but I doubt they seriously would have problems keeping the belt on him for a year at his peak.

    You sure about that?
     
  19. You Vinny Mac mark mafk.
     
  20. I'd say fickle fans and children represent the majority of the fanbase. And people liked Punk and Bryan because they felt like they were anti-establishment, the Indie fags that the average fan never expected to succeed in WWE. Your examples just prove my point, fans love those guys because they weren't the hand chosen stars and the fans felt they had a hand in their success, obviously moreso with dick butt.

    People hated Reigns because the business is overexposed and they knew the people backstage wanted him to be a main eventer. The fans get a puffed up chest and say "wahhhh no you can't tell us who to cheer for!" and decide to hate on Reigns no matter what the guy does. How is that fun?