Rusev Day

[tiger_rick]

15 hours ago, David said:

They have to do something then, because when Reigns comes out and is supposed to be a big deal only for the fans to boo fuck out of him it kind of destroys the flow of the TV show, doesn't it? Maybe they should be fucking about with the sound or something?

 

13 hours ago, FelatioLips said:

I know a portion of fans like him, but he's not a success by any means and if all that can't get you success then you just won't be one.

After this conversation last night, I was driving and listening to the SCG podcast about WrestleMania weekend. Their throughts on the main event were really interesting in the context of this discussion. You've got this Mania crowd who spend a fortune to completely shit on Lesnar/Reigns but are also cool for Styles & Nakamura and not as into Daniel Bryan as you might think. Yet they cheer for a 10-year old being a novelty tag champion and chant his name. It must be quite hard to read what people actually want. They obviously have info we're not privvy to such as merch salesand detailed break down of houses. Is it any wonder then that they just go with what they want to do?

I'm not defending that decision. I'd turn Reigns heel tomorrow. Well, Monday. But I'm not surprised they don't just "listen to the people".

[boytoy]

I thought the Mania crowd was just so weird though because the show was about 48 hours long...

I know what you mean about the crowd being hard to cater to because they are so weird. I wonder if the product is all over the place because they can't read the audience or whether it is the crowd being so split because WWE trying to be all for things to all people and succeeding at none. Their product is full of things that make no sense. For example, why are they running a show aimed at a PG audience that doesn't finish until nearly midnight?

[David]

20 minutes ago, tiger_rick said:

 

After this conversation last night, I was driving and listening to the SCG podcast about WrestleMania weekend. Their throughts on the main event were really interesting in the context of this discussion. You've got this Mania crowd who spend a fortune to completely shit on Lesnar/Reigns but are also cool for Styles & Nakamura and not as into Daniel Bryan as you might think. Yet they cheer for a 10-year old being a novelty tag champion and chant his name. It must be quite hard to read what people actually want. They obviously have info we're not privvy to such as merch salesand detailed break down of houses. Is it any wonder then that they just go with what they want to do?

I'm not defending that decision. I'd turn Reigns heel tomorrow. Well, Monday. But I'm not surprised they don't just "listen to the people".

Yeah, I'd go as far as saying that Mania is the one "PPV" of the year, followed by Raw the following evening where you would actively not want to buy into the crowds reaction. It's usually all manner of strange.

There is the chance that we don't know the full story, as you say. I mean, they didn't get to where they are by being complete morons so maybe there's more to what they do than we realise? That has to be it actually. Has to be.

[tiger_rick]

Just now, David said:

I mean, they didn't get to where they are by being complete morons so maybe there's more to what they do than we realise? That has to be it actually. Has to be.

Ha, you'd think so wouldn't you.

[FLips]

Raw was a hoot the next night where they immediately doubled down on their 'bizarro world' gimmick but the crowd reacted spot on for everyone but Reigns.

[BomberPat]

16 hours ago, tiger_rick said:

The problem is you can't just say its "the fans". We saw for years with Cena that he was adored by legions of fans just not the loudest ones in the crowds for PPVs and most TV shows. I've never seen any evidence that Reigns has support on that level but he's definitely a hero to the younger audience. Or he was, I don't know what the hell they've been thinking of late.

It would be interesting to see any numbers that say whether it even matters now? If it's not about PPV revenue and the TV deals are done, can anyone be the top guy? That they put a fucking World title on Jinder Mahal suggests maybe not.

This touches on the crux of it for me; it definitely appears that the majority of the audience don't like Roman Reigns, but the vocal live audience are a minority. That's the percentage of the fanbase that are prepared to pay an average ticket price of more than $100 to go to the show, so the live crowd is always going to skew more towards the "hardcore" fan than the casual TV audience, doubly so when it's a PPV.

And that hardcore audience have already made their mind up about Reigns but, more crucially, they're already watching. The people booing Reigns, by and large, are the section of the audience that's not going anywhere. They might boo him, but they still pay $150 for the privilege. They might complain after every PPV, but they're still subscribing to the Network to watch it. They're not going anywhere, so it would be foolish to change the business model to pander to them at the expense of anyone else.

I'm not sure if he's a "draw" in the traditional sense, but Reigns is selling more merchandise than any other full-timer. And in 2016, Roman Reigns was the focal point of six out of ten of WWE's most watched YouTube videos. That went down in 2017, when he only appeared in two out of the ten, though - now whether that was because of the nature of more of the videos (the return of the Hardy Boyz and Goldberg's first interaction with Lesnar were up there, so nostalgia's the draw there, and a Great Khali match and Kavita Devi's match from the Mae Young Classic both made the list, so there's likely a huge Indian contingent pushing the numbers up there), or because perception of Reigns has declined amongst even the casual audience has dwindled.

The problem now is that they're trying to have their cake and eat it - they're trying to pander to the fans that boo Reigns and complain of him being overpushed by having him lose way more often than he should, but then that will reduce his stock in the eyes of the fans who are already on side (if we buy into the trope that most of his fans are kids, for example, kids don't like a guy that loses all the time), and then doing weird pseudo-shoot interviews, and now bordering on "Lost My Smile" sad Roman Reigns stuff which just makes me ask "who is this for?". As much as the anti-Reigns crowd most likely are the minority, if they keep trying to play both sides like this, sooner or later perception becomes reality and others will start to sour on Reigns as well, for one reason or another. Something definitely has to give.

 

To drag this back around to being about Rusev, I suppose the point is that there's any number of metrics we don't see that WWE can, that all go into who gets to be a top star. And while they do seem to struggle to capitalise on someone getting over organically, there could be any number of reasons for that. It once looked like Daniel Bryan was on track to be the biggest star in wrestling, and I remember people online talking about how he was getting better reactions than anyone since Steve Austin, and how he was obviously this megastar, and then his first PPV main event against John Cena didn't draw, and the house show circuit where he was headlining against CM Punk (the other guy that we were told was the new big thing) was consistently outdrawn by the concurrent Cena/Orton main event, and he wasn't shifting merch at the level that CM Punk had.

 

[d-d-d-dAz]

1 hour ago, tiger_rick said:

 

After this conversation last night, I was driving and listening to the SCG podcast about WrestleMania weekend. Their throughts on the main event were really interesting in the context of this discussion. You've got this Mania crowd who spend a fortune to completely shit on Lesnar/Reigns but are also cool for Styles & Nakamura and not as into Daniel Bryan as you might think. Yet they cheer for a 10-year old being a novelty tag champion and chant his name. It must be quite hard to read what people actually want. They obviously have info we're not privvy to such as merch salesand detailed break down of houses. Is it any wonder then that they just go with what they want to do?

I'm not defending that decision. I'd turn Reigns heel tomorrow. Well, Monday. But I'm not surprised they don't just "listen to the people".

I think the thing everyone is ignoring at the minute is no one seems as into Daniel Bryan as they once were. It's all a little bit...off at the minute. The participative 'Yes' stuff masks most of it, as everyone likes to be involved, but the actual reactions/excitement levels just don't seem quite there yet. The fact that there was parity in popularity and dual chants when he wrestled AJ, who is over but not at that level Bryan used to be (and is presumed to be), really stood out to me.

It almost feels like people have...moved on a little bit? They still like Daniel, obviously, but they've invested in new hero's, and new proxies, since he was around the first time.

[BomberPat]

That's a fair point. I was really surprised by how little reaction Bryan got for a lot of his stuff at Wrestlemania, though largely blamed it on the booking - the guy's first match in years, his heroic comeback, and they write him out in the early going to focus on Shane McMahon, and have his first involvement not be a triumphant march back out from the locker room, but a limp breaking up of a pin that barely got caught on camera.

As much as people do love Daniel Bryan, people were invested in the story of Daniel Bryan - it wasn't just about him, it was about him triumphing over Triple H, about him breaking out from the pack and achieving what "wrestlers like him" historically don't do. In terms of people moving on and investing in new heroes - Daniel Bryan's story was of the "Indie Guy" that didn't fit the WWE template breaking down barriers and showing that people like him belong there. Now that WWE's roster includes AJ Styles, Shinsuke Nakamura, Samoa Joe, Kevin Owens, Finn Balor, and so on, that story's over. Daniel Bryan won.

[King Pitcos]

12 hours ago, BomberPat said:

As much as people do love Daniel Bryan, people were invested in the story of Daniel Bryan - it wasn't just about him, it was about him triumphing over Triple H, about him breaking out from the pack and achieving what "wrestlers like him" historically don't do. In terms of people moving on and investing in new heroes - Daniel Bryan's story was of the "Indie Guy" that didn't fit the WWE template breaking down barriers and showing that people like him belong there. Now that WWE's roster includes AJ Styles, Shinsuke Nakamura, Samoa Joe, Kevin Owens, Finn Balor, and so on, that story's over. Daniel Bryan won.

That's one of the key ways that WWE is fucked, creatively. As much as people may say they want an AJ Styles vs Shinsuke Nakamura moves exhibition headlining WrestleMania, they just weren't very invested in it because both wrestlers had too many Internet points to root against. Seven years ago, WWE did a Vince's Boy vs I WORKED THE INDIES storyline that got attention on social media, and since then they've struggled to get people invested in anything other than that. It's hard to be an effective heel unless you're a top babyface. And at this point, the top of the card makes it hard to buy the EVERYONE FROM THE INDIES GETS BURIED agenda... So it's harder to care about the struggle. A bunch of guys from the indies have beaten John Cena or Roman Reigns by now, so much so that it doesn't mean a great deal anymore.

[UK Kat Von D]

WWE have their hardcore fans, they aren’t going anywhere and will be happy enough with being given stuff like Styles/Nakamura occasionally.

The younger audience matter even less than that really. Their parents spend money on house shows and tacky merch, but they will do that for whichever goodie is put at the top of the show. Kids are the least complex and critical of all demographics. Saying Reigns is popular with kids means nothing at all, most people could fit into that role very easily. Kids will come and go, it is more important to keep them hooked and turning them into lifelong hardcore fans. 

Lapsed fans will come back the second an old name pops his head in. Chances are they will only watch for that, so something else on the show has to keep them interested. Even better, they need a person in that segment who keeps viewers tuning in after the nostalgia act is gone. 

The biggest and most important market? New fans. People who have never watched it consistently before. Dad’s who don’t watch the football and want something to bond with their kids over. The Hardcore crowd who desperately want more of their “normal” mates to like wrestling so they can go to shows together. People that don’t register in the facts and figures. WWE need to expand their audience, simple.

 

Lets be honest right now. There is one man who ticks the boxes in every category and it’s Braun Strowman. I got some mates to watch Royal Rumbls, and the main thing they came away with was the Ronda debut and Braun being a badass who can flip trucks. Stick him at the top as the Universal Champ and keep the WWE Champ as someone like Styles. Then they have covered all bases.

[LEGIT]

On ‎20‎/‎04‎/‎2018 at 9:21 AM, tiger_rick said:

I'm not defending that decision. I'd turn Reigns heel tomorrow. Well, Monday. But I'm not surprised they don't just "listen to the people".

I know what you're saying, you always put your point well.

With faces and heels, I think an element of old school should be bought back. Someone said on here a while ago that AJ Styles should start acting/wrestling like Miz in order to be a better heel. That's obviously complete rubbish. But, fact is the way AJ Styles wrestles is all high intensity and big pops. So to me, playing to his strengths, he should always be face.

Heels should be sneaky and cowardly and never cool. I've lost count of the amount of feuds in recent history where the heel is cocky, cool, bad ass and the face is dumb and lame. It should always be the other way about.

Generally, if your talent is in doing springboard 450's and fast paced comebacks, you're not going to be an effective heel. Heels should be more mechanical and good at working the crowd.

 

 

[David]

Over the past number of years I think the very epitome of what a heel should be was Triple H. He was fantastic in the role when he was more of an in-ring competitor.

[Kaz Hayashi]

On 22/04/2018 at 2:32 PM, LEGIT said:

Heels should be sneaky and cowardly and never cool.  other way about.

 

I agree with the majority of your post, but have to challenge this bit. I don’t want all of my heels to be like this (your post) or the gimmick is overdone.

I want monsters who are heels, big grotesque fuckers who aren’t cowardly and are a threat to the smaller face. (Earthquake vs Hogan). They made Braun seem cool by doing nuts stuff against a face that was being boo’ed, hence why he got cheered. We all called him mint the moment he tipped the ambulance. He’s a rare gem that will be amazing as either, but for me personally, I wanted to see more of him being a giant threat to faces, for longer than we did.

I want evil fuckers who aren’t cowardly but will be incredibly fucking nasty to everyone around them including the fans, berating those who dare to cheer. (David Shultz).

I want guys who you just fucking detest, who are completely arrogant but aren’t cool so you can’t get behind them and aren’t cowardly, but just pricks (Model Martel, Beverly Bros).

There’s space for an array of heel types, it’s just every fucker worth watching ends up being cool. 

The like of AoP for instance. They have a chance to be a hell of a heel team, especially if they keep shouting in foreign languages and beating opponents without remorse. But how long will it be until they do something ‘holy shit’ esque? Or, something to Reigns. The moment they do something that gains bloody ‘this is awesome’ wank off, then that’s it, time to speak English and apologise for their countries behaviour during the war.

Maybe the horse has bolted and there simply isn’t space for proper heels and we need to get over it. I wish there was though.

[BomberPat]

I think there's space for proper heels, but you need to put a shift in to make it work. It relies on either the audience being extremely invested in the character, or in recognising that kayfabe isn't dead, it's just changed - there's still received wisdom about what goes on backstage, about how WWE operates, and all this stuff that the fans think is ostensibly "real" that can be channelled into an effective on-screen story, but WWE tend to be too inconsistent to make it work. But it was playing on that "reality" that made Daniel Bryan a big-time babyface, there's no reason they couldn't achieve something similar for a major heel.

In terms of character work, on the main roster I can only really think of The Miz consistently nailing it as a heel - Owens and Zayn come close as characters, but occasionally rely a little too much on high spots and so on that are always going to pop the crowd.

Ciampa's the best heel they have at the moment, and getting absolutely nuclear heat, through a combination of his work, Gargano's babyface work, and the story they've told. But it proves that it's still possible to create a great heel, they just need to work for it.

[PunkStep]

3 hours ago, BomberPat said:

Ciampa's the best heel they have at the moment, and getting absolutely nuclear heat, through a combination of his work, Gargano's babyface work, and the story they've told. But it proves that it's still possible to create a great heel, they just need to work for it.

AND he's a proper indy darling, to the point where you've had big chants of 'psycho killer' over the past couple of years whenever he's wrestling. That is a true testament to the work him, Gargano and the NXT writers have done with this whole feud.