|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Feb 23, 2016 15:59:04 GMT -5
I agree that any reaction is better than no reaction, but the "top" babyface should not be getting booed. The reason I didn't feel sympathy for the beating is because I don't care about the Reigns character. I'm not invested in him. His entire character to me is one of the worst on the main roster. While Seth and Dean found identities after the Shield split, Reigns didn't. It's the reason my girlfriend and some other casual fans that I know don't care about him. It's not a dislike, it's just more of a "why should I care about him?" People felt sympathy for Triple H and Stephanie McMahon at TLC. Triple H and Stephanie McMahon. Characters who deserve no sympathy...[/quote] Maybe those people are invested in HHH and Stephanie. I'm not saying whether they deserved sympathy or not. It's like any TV show. Some people watching Breaking Bad felt sympathy for Walter White even though he did some terrible things because he was this well written, fleshed out character. I'd like to get behind Reigns, but I have no reason to. Nothing about him is even remotely interesting. That's a serious fault of WWE creative.
|
|
|
Post by TheSystem 1.5 on Feb 23, 2016 15:59:12 GMT -5
...people are actually believing this?
|
|
|
Post by TheWrestleGeek on Feb 23, 2016 16:01:19 GMT -5
Vince: I need someone to pass on a blood packet to Reigns! Cole: Nope not me! If they catch it on camera, my career is a joke! JBL: Let the maggle do it! Byron: Huh? Vince: We found our guy.
|
|
|
Post by J12 on Feb 23, 2016 16:05:19 GMT -5
People felt sympathy for Triple H and Stephanie McMahon at TLC. Triple H and Stephanie McMahon. Characters who deserve no sympathy... That's a whole different problem in and of itself. People feel sympathy for Triple H because he's also the NXT Jesus who is presented as a total babyface that brings the alternative to WWE's tired product. There's a strong overlap between the people who love and worship NXT and those who vehemently dislike Roman Reigns. Not to mention, everyone is privy to the business side of things now and they see Triple H & Stephanie as the "new school", while viewing Vince (and his obsession with Roman) as the "old school." Thus, Triple H and Stephanie become sympathetic, even though they're playing bad guys on TV (well, sometimes.) It's a convoluted mess.
|
|
|
Post by SodaGuy on Feb 23, 2016 16:09:25 GMT -5
People felt sympathy for Triple H and Stephanie McMahon at TLC. Triple H and Stephanie McMahon. Characters who deserve no sympathy... That's a whole different problem in and of itself. People feel sympathy for Triple H because he's also the NXT Jesus who is presented as a total babyface that brings the alternative to WWE's tired product. There's a strong overlap between the people who love and worship NXT and those who vehemently dislike Roman Reigns. Not to mention, everyone is privy to the business side of things now and they see Triple H & Stephanie as the "new school", while viewing Vince (and his obsession with Roman) as the "old school." Thus, Triple H and Stephanie become sympathetic, even though they're playing bad guys on TV (well, sometimes.) It's a convoluted mess. That has nothing to do with my "sympathy" for Triple H.. at all..
|
|
AJ F'n Brooks
Main Eventer
Thank You AJ Lee!
Joined on: Jan 1, 2013 8:57:26 GMT -5
Posts: 1,288
|
Post by AJ F'n Brooks on Feb 23, 2016 16:12:39 GMT -5
Maybe those people are invested in HHH and Stephanie. I'm not saying whether they deserved sympathy or not. It's like any TV show. Some people watching Breaking Bad felt sympathy for Walter White even though he did some terrible things because he was this well written, fleshed out character. I'd like to get behind Reigns, but I have no reason to. Nothing about him is even remotely interesting. That's a serious fault of WWE creative. Roman Reigns's character should be getting sympathy. The story they're telling is actually being told the right way. He did nothing to deserve the beating he took last night so yes people should side with him and feel sympathy. Problem is some fans don't like Reigns in this underdog role and refuse to look past that.
|
|
|
Post by J12 on Feb 23, 2016 16:14:12 GMT -5
That's a whole different problem in and of itself. People feel sympathy for Triple H because he's also the NXT Jesus who is presented as a total babyface that brings the alternative to WWE's tired product. There's a strong overlap between the people who love and worship NXT and those who vehemently dislike Roman Reigns. Not to mention, everyone is privy to the business side of things now and they see Triple H & Stephanie as the "new school", while viewing Vince (and his obsession with Roman) as the "old school." Thus, Triple H and Stephanie become sympathetic, even though they're playing bad guys on TV (well, sometimes.) It's a convoluted mess. That has nothing to do with my "sympathy" for Triple H.. at all.. I'm not speaking to anyone specific, just in a general sense. The way WWE presents Triple H as an all out bad guy in one promotion and literally the most likable person in the entire company on a show that a good portion of the audience sees or is aware of is hugely problematic. People love NXT, and they love Triple H for bringing them NXT. Couple that with the simple fact that Triple H is a well-established, known commodity who is essentially the antithesis to Roman Reigns and the things people dislike about him, and you have a simple formula for why a legacy act would get cheered over the chosen one.
|
|
havoc7179
Main Eventer
What is this?
Joined on: Oct 16, 2012 9:11:18 GMT -5
Posts: 4,189
|
Post by havoc7179 on Feb 23, 2016 16:14:36 GMT -5
People felt sympathy for Triple H and Stephanie McMahon at TLC. Triple H and Stephanie McMahon. Characters who deserve no sympathy... That's a whole different problem in and of itself. People feel sympathy for Triple H because he's also the NXT Jesus who is presented as a total babyface that brings the alternative to WWE's tired product. There's a strong overlap between the people who love and worship NXT and those who vehemently dislike Roman Reigns. Not to mention, everyone is privy to the business side of things now and they see Triple H & Stephanie as the "new school", while viewing Vince (and his obsession with Roman) as the "old school." Thus, Triple H and Stephanie become sympathetic, even though they're playing bad guys on TV (well, sometimes.) It's a convoluted mess. I highly doubt people feel sympathy for Triple H just because he's booking NXT. My fandom of NXT is not clouding my judgment on this. In fact, I like watching Triple H get his comeuppance. I just liked watching some blue chipper baby face who got took the place of Daniel Bryan and Dean Ambrose get an awesome beatdown. It has plenty to do with investment. But look at it from this perspective. We fans feel invested in guys like Bryan, Cesaro, Styles, Ambrose, and Owens. They won us over with their workrate. The characters WWE gave them and storylines, they flat out suck.So we want them to succeed. Reigns hasn't won the fans over with his workrate. The times, they are a changing. It's not about storylines. It's about who entertains us in the ring. We choose who we want to be invested in, and when WWE tells us we're wrong, we respond accordingly until we are either proven wrong (Zack Ryder) or get what we want (Daniel Bryan).
|
|
|
Post by ZDB on Feb 23, 2016 16:15:35 GMT -5
I feel bad that he didn't actually have to bleed for that reaction, but actually will get credit for the spot & being 'a tough guy' when it was all smoke & mirrors. His ego is only having a match with reigns because the entire roster is hurt
|
|
|
Post by J12 on Feb 23, 2016 16:17:05 GMT -5
That's a whole different problem in and of itself. People feel sympathy for Triple H because he's also the NXT Jesus who is presented as a total babyface that brings the alternative to WWE's tired product. There's a strong overlap between the people who love and worship NXT and those who vehemently dislike Roman Reigns. Not to mention, everyone is privy to the business side of things now and they see Triple H & Stephanie as the "new school", while viewing Vince (and his obsession with Roman) as the "old school." Thus, Triple H and Stephanie become sympathetic, even though they're playing bad guys on TV (well, sometimes.) It's a convoluted mess. I highly doubt people feel sympathy for Triple H just because he's booking NXT. My fandom of NXT is not clouding my judgment on this. In fact, I like watching Triple H get his comeuppance. I just liked watching some blue chipper baby face who got took the place of Daniel Bryan and Dean Ambrose get an awesome beatdown. It has plenty to do with investment. But look at it from this perspective. We fans feel invested in guys like Bryan, Cesaro, Styles, Ambrose, and Owens. They won us over with their workrate. The characters WWE gave them and storylines, they flat out suck.So we want them to succeed. Reigns hasn't won the fans over with his workrate. The times, they are a changing. It's not about storylines. It's about who entertains us in the ring. We choose who we want to be invested in, and when WWE tells us we're wrong, we respond accordingly until we are either proven wrong (Zack Ryder) or get what we want (Daniel Bryan). I think you guys are missing my intent here. I'm not arguing against you. Nor I am suggesting your judgment is clouded. I wholeheartedly agree that Triple H is the more likable character in this scenario, for a multitude of reasons, the most prominent being the fact that Roman Reigns is an unlikable character who has done nothing to warrant sympathy from the audience.
|
|
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Feb 23, 2016 16:19:39 GMT -5
Maybe those people are invested in HHH and Stephanie. I'm not saying whether they deserved sympathy or not. It's like any TV show. Some people watching Breaking Bad felt sympathy for Walter White even though he did some terrible things because he was this well written, fleshed out character. I'd like to get behind Reigns, but I have no reason to. Nothing about him is even remotely interesting. That's a serious fault of WWE creative. Roman Reigns's character should be getting sympathy. The story they're telling is actually being told the right way. He did nothing to deserve the beating he took last night so yes people should side with him and feel sympathy. Problem is some fans don't like Reigns in this underdog role and refuse to look past that. Because the WWE has portrayed Roman Reigns as a beast. Why should we buy him as an underdog? People bought Daniel Bryan, CM Punk, Shawn Michaels and others as the underdog because the WWE didn't spend months and months showing us them dominating. Reigns can single handily take out the League of Nations, so why should we worry when he's put in a tough situation? It's the same story with John Cena. Cena's at his very best when he's NOT portrayed as the underdog. (vs. Punk, vs. Bryan, vs. Owens, etc.) Every single time they try to book Cena as the underdog (except against Brock), it's laughable. "Oh my god, will Cena be able to lift Mark Henry for the AA at Money in the Bank?" Of course he will, because we've seen him do that and other feats like it before. The Authority vs. babyface angle has been done to death. It worked for Austin because his character was fantastic and it worked for Bryan as the underdog. When someone like Cena did it, it never worked quite as well (vs. Bischoff in 2005, vs. HHH and Steph at the tail end of 2014). I'm not saying all of this as a way to hate on Reigns and I don't think it's quite as simple as "some people just hate Reigns and refuse to look past that." There are multiple people in this thread who don't hate Reigns and feel the same way. Obviously there are fans that do feel the way you said, but it's not everyone. Most of the fans chose Ambrose over Reigns because Ambrose was much more interesting and engaging from the moment the Shield split. It's partially because Dean is great in the role, but also because Dean was given a character and ran with it. It's like the WWE is scared to take a chance with Reigns. They won't take the Shield training wheels off of him since they know the Shield gimmick worked and they're afraid to try something else with him.
|
|
|
Post by Todd Pettengill on Feb 23, 2016 16:20:46 GMT -5
I didn't see a video of anyone passing "blood packets".
|
|
|
Post by J12 on Feb 23, 2016 16:26:22 GMT -5
Roman Reigns's character should be getting sympathy. The story they're telling is actually being told the right way. He did nothing to deserve the beating he took last night so yes people should side with him and feel sympathy. Problem is some fans don't like Reigns in this underdog role and refuse to look past that. Because the WWE has portrayed Roman Reigns as a beast. Why should we buy him as an underdog? People bought Daniel Bryan, CM Punk, Shawn Michaels and others as the underdog because the WWE didn't spend months and months showing us them dominating. Reigns can single handily take out the League of Nations, so why should we worry when he's put in a tough situation? It's the same story with John Cena. Cena's at his very best when he's NOT portrayed as the underdog. (vs. Punk, vs. Bryan, vs. Owens, etc.) Every single time they try to book Cena as the underdog (except against Brock), it's laughable. "Oh my god, will Cena be able to lift Mark Henry for the AA at Money in the Bank?" Of course he will, because we've seen him do that and other feats like it before. The Authority vs. babyface angle has been done to death. It worked for Austin because his character was fantastic and it worked for Bryan as the underdog. When someone like Cena did it, it never worked quite as well (vs. Bischoff in 2005, vs. HHH and Steph at the tail end of 2014). I'm not saying all of this as a way to hate on Reigns and I don't think it's quite as simple as "some people just hate Reigns and refuse to look past that." There are multiple people in this thread who don't hate Reigns and feel the same way. Obviously there are fans that do feel the way you said, but it's not everyone. Most of the fans chose Ambrose over Reigns because Ambrose was much more interesting and engaging from the moment the Shield split. It's partially because Dean is great in the role, but also because Dean was given a character and ran with it. It's like the WWE is scared to take a chance with Reigns. They won't take the Shield training wheels off of him since they know the Shield gimmick worked and they're afraid to try something else with him. I think a lot of it also has to do with how quick WWE is to show their hand with Reigns as well. They won't take the training wheels off, as you said, because they're afraid of exposing his weaknesses. Fans see that. They won't change the music or the gear because it reminds fans of The Shield, something they liked. Fans see and hear that. They won't bring him out on the ramp because putting him close to the audience seems to be the only way he "connects" They won't put a live microphone in his hand anymore because they know how bad he is They see this as protecting him, but fans notice that stuff, but in reality, it's a form of exposure. Fans notice it, and they dislike it. They can sense that its fabricated and disingenuous. Not to mention, there's the whole "we're pretending to hate you on TV, but everyone who watches the show actually knows that we are the vehicle to make you our biggest star, and we're trying everything, literally EVERYTHING to make it happen." People bought that line when it was Steve Austin, but Roman Reigns is not Steve Austin.
|
|
KPnDC
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jun 8, 2013 21:58:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,754
|
Post by KPnDC on Feb 23, 2016 16:28:56 GMT -5
Damn guys we know wrestling is fake, we don't need to know how they do everything. Things like this really take away from the experience. Just imagine how excited everyone was with the unannounced return of Shane. Now granted WWE "leaks" a lot of stuff to build anticipation, but I really wish more people would Just Enjoy Wrestling and let WWE tell the story. It's like fans are obsessed with the inner working so much they're ruining it for themselves.
|
|
|
Post by The Natural Eddy Valintino on Feb 23, 2016 16:33:26 GMT -5
If it was fake, it doesn't take away from the segment. Even in the old school days, they used to do that. I remember Jim Cornette telling the story about how when Cornette or one of the Midnight Express in storyline hit Ricky Morton in the throat with JC's tennis racket and Cornette put something with Morton's own blood in Morton's mouth to give the effect that Morton's throat was crushed. No big deal if they did that with Reigns to give the storyline a little something. And what do mean by "still feel bad for Reigns"? If you mean did I feel bad cause I thought it was real but now I don't cause it's fake, then no, I never felt bad in real life. In storyline, I could see fans (mostly the women and kids) feeling bad
|
|
|
Post by King Bálor (CM)™ on Feb 23, 2016 16:33:27 GMT -5
This certainly looks like something was passed off to Reigns in the video. However, watching it last night....it seemed like Reigns nose got broken and thats why he was gushing blood like a fountain. Either way, it made for good television.
|
|
|
Post by Next Manufactured’s Sweater on Feb 23, 2016 16:35:34 GMT -5
I heard he let Triple H do the Pedigree on him too.
|
|
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Feb 23, 2016 16:42:20 GMT -5
I heard he let Triple H do the Pedigree on him too.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 28, 2024 13:48:43 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2016 16:43:54 GMT -5
I would much rather fake blood than a blade, honestly. It's cleaner, safer, and there is pretty much no danger involved. When a guy is down and has to cut himself open quickly and make sure that nobody sees him do it, it's very easy for it to go wrong, ending up with him cutting open a vessel or worse. Just look at Eddie Guerrero at Judgment Day 2004. Blood can add a lot to a match but I'd rather see fake blood than real blood.
|
|
|
Post by HHH316 on Feb 23, 2016 16:54:22 GMT -5
I love the fact that people complain because blood gets taken away.
Then they give us blood (or something blood-like, whatever) & people complain about it.
Gotta love the IWC.
|
|