seth rollins is 18% of the way to pedro morales

[NormanSmiley]

How much weight do you guys put in to title reign length compared to number of reigns?

With no competition does it give rollins more security to build his character and credibility or does it make you think the only reason he is getting any kind of rub is because of relaxed booking?

When should seth drop the strap?

[Damian Rey]

I don't care about length more than quality. Seth has done a lot of jobbing. He's tread through a lot of water. Nothing about his reign has stood out or cemented him, other than how he won it.

[Rammsteinmad]

Whether his reign has been good or not, it has given Rollins himself a chance to improve. His matches are always great to watch, and he sounds so confident and comfortable on the mic. His post-Shield character is well-and-truly fleshed out as well. His time on top has really helped him develop both on-camera and off. He will likely end up a victim of bad booking over time, but once his reign is over, he'll be a lot more established as a star and able to hold his own as a character.

Plus, I don't care much for jobbing, as it's the story-telling I'm into. All his feuds have been fun and exciting. I've enjoyed his reign. :y:

[NormanSmiley]

Will he get a 2nd reign after this?

[Emperor Smeat]

Already broke the Miz's record for longest reign from a MitB cash-in but in terms of quality, Rollins reign has been pretty bad. Not soo much his fault but more of how badly booked he's been as champion.

Probably drops the belt by Survivor Series to either Lesnar, Cena, or Sheamus since all three are the easiest and laziest options for the WWE. Would be really surprised if he held it till the Rumble or even Mania.

[Ruien]

Love everything g about Seth except the shitty booking.

[Damian Rey]

From a developmental standpoint, the increased tv and mic time has helped pushed him into a very versatile, well rounded t talent and he's more than comfortable and confident in his role.

I have no idea who he'd drop the belt to. Cena's been incredible as an upper mid card champion, and I find him incredibly refreshing in the role and feel it has plenty of legs.

No thanks in Sheamus. Lesnar is a great choice but I'm still adamant about him winning the Rumble and regaining the title at Mania.

If they do run a Triple H v Rollins angle, the Authority will need a successor to Rollins. I'd like that guy to be Roman Reigns.

[KIRA]

If a heel run can do for Roman what it has done for Rollins then holy shit.

[#1-norm-fan]

Shit reign, shit champion, shit booking. It's all shit.

At least he's shown up to the fights he's signed up for though. That's admirable.

[NormanSmiley]

Lesnar is a great choice but I'm still adamant about him winning the Rumble and regaining the title at Mania.



What should happen

[Shisen Kopf]

Shit reign, shit champion, shit booking. It's all shit.

At least he's shown up to the fights he's signed up for though. That's admirable.

Yeah, he doesnt no show after talking crap. What kind of scumbag would no show?

[Mr. Nerfect]

World class champion. I know he's lost a few matches to John Cena, Dean Ambrose, Ryback and Brock Lesnar, but it really doesn't matter, because he's the HEEL! He's not meant to be taken seriously. I'd like to know what happened to him after Kane dragged him to hell last week though. If he were a vanilla midget, I'd say he got dragged to Little People's Court, but given how hot his opening promos have been for the past 18 months, I don't think anything about the guy could be criticized.

[Big Vic]

Can't wait until he gets a 133.33% of the way there.

[Rammsteinmad]

Is that 133.33% enough to beat Scott Steiner?

[Innovator]

Nope, 133.33% only spells disaster for Rollins

[DAMN iNATOR]

(snoring)

(mumbles) 18% approval rating? I'll give you 18% of my foot in your ass...

[Corkscrewed]

Love everything g about Seth except the shitty booking.

Ditto. He's jobbed way too much, even for a heel champion. And jobbing cleanly. He's gotten his comeuppance so many times that it's lost its appeal. It's weird, because they've kind of booked him like a face in all the adversities he's had to face. It's just been odd.

I'd be fine with Brock beating him at WM to regain the strap. Give Rollins a competitive match, surprises people, might even allow him to turn face. But he does have a lot of great attributes as a heel, has a great flushed out character, fantastic nuanced mannerisms, and is good on the mic.

[Anybody Thrilla]

I like a good, lengthy reign. Rollins has been doing great. He's been retaining like a true heel. It's been awesome.

I don't know what it is that makes people think that once you get the belt, you're supposed to be an unbeatable bad ass. That was NEVER Seth's character. The way that he won the title was supposed to piss everyone off, and the fact that he keeps retaining only adds to it all.

[Rammsteinmad]

Thank you ABT! I'm glad somebody gets it!

[Anybody Thrilla]

I want Seth to retain all the way to Wrestlemania...and then retain again there.

[Mr. JL]

In the no competition/WWE Network era I think it certainly gives WWE and Rollins that security to build him up.

I think they should keep the strap on Rollins and gradually book him more as a babyface while simultaneously booking Reigns as a face but still giving some fans reasons to boo him. Eventually Triple H dangles the WWE World Heavyweight Championship carrot over Reigns and Reigns becomes more focused on chasing the title and has less time to aid Ambrose with the Wyatts.

In the big match Reigns is almost completely playing the heel to win but still can't. Then pull the trigger on the Rollins-Triple H feud when Triple H screws Rollins out of the title. Reigns aligns with Triple H and we see a nice double turn with a title change.

Then you can go any number of ways with Rollins chasing the title. Rollins realigning with Ambrose...The Rock confronting Reigns on his disapproval of aligning with Triple H. Have Rollins claiming he's going to finish what Sting started and eliminate The Authority. Rollins defeats Triple H at Mania and puts an end to The Authority (God I am so sick of H and Steph, its boring and been going on for FAR TOO LONG).

Then can still have the Reigns-Rock match with Reigns without the Authority squeaking out a win and then proceed to have Rollins free and clear to pursue Reigns for the championship.

Or stick HHH-The Rock together for Mania and go with Reigns-Rollins at Mania for the WWE World Heavyweight Championship. You could even throw Ambrose in there to make it an all Shield Triple Threat.

[James Steele]

Rollins is an amazing chickenshit heel.

[NormanSmiley]

Excatly how many times has rollins lost clean while champ? Once to cena and once to ambrose both were on raw. Were there others?

[Anybody Thrilla]

Once to Joey Mercury.

[Anybody Thrilla]

But that's neither here nor there.

[Big Vic]

He lost to Cena a few times cleanly, probably will again this Saturday.

[Anybody Thrilla]

Everyone in the company has lost to Cena cleanly, though.

[Hanso Amore]

Technically Cena holds pinfall wins over everyone in this thread.

[Anybody Thrilla]

In fairness, I had my foot on the bottom rope, but the ref missed it.

[Big Vic]

Yeah and technically I tapped out.

[Helmsphere]

I technically went thru a Table

[The CyNick]

I dont think anyone is ready to take the ball and run with it on the babyface side. Unless of course they wanted to go with Brock as champion again, which I am 100% behind.

I like the idea of building up Mania to a Triple Threat between the 3 Shield guys. I would do a deal where HHH and Rollins begin to show they are not on the same page. Then you do something where Reigns wins the Rumble again, but its controversial, and you create a backdoor way for Ambrose to be added to the match via the Network Special in February. Then you do a deal where Rollins makes a big deal about how he wants to do this on his own, doesnt want The Authority helping him, he wants to prove he's the man from The Shield once and for all. As Mania draws near, HHH and Stephanie reveal that one of the other two guys have reached out to The Authority to become the new face of the WWE. Reigns and Ambrose build tension, Reigns accuses Ambrose and vice versa. Ultimately they decide that Rollins is stirring the pot, and he's really the one who's going to have The Authority in his corner, despite what he's been saying. Then at Mania, Reigns is the one who aligns himself with Trips and Steph, but in the process Rollins would have had the match won which will help move him to the babyface side.

[#1-norm-fan]

Champions should justify their reign by being credible and making the title look like something worth winning and not something any glorified jobber can hold. If they're a chicken shit heel, they should be the best at it and constantly win via dubious, chicken shit tactics. He should still be credible even if he's a filthy cheater.

The title itself is a draw on a guy like Lesnar because he seems unbeatable. In his case it's because he's a fucking monster. So you wanna see who can possible figure out how to overcome him. Rollins should be the best chicken shit cheater in the world. He should win constantly because of it. To the point where figuring beating him actually seems like a daunting task. Not something Jamie Noble can do. If your champion is just gonna job left and right, you might as well throw the title on Heath Slater.

[Damian Rey]

Agree 100% with Fan.

[The CyNick]

Frankly I think that assessment of Rollins is out to lunch. I wouldn't call Rollins a chicken shit heel, he's just a heel champion. You're heel champion cant win match after match clean, otherwise they become a babyface really quickly.

Rollins won the title at Mania clean, he just used an underhanded tactic to do it (although he had the right to). For me, he's done what just about every heel champion does. He beats guys clean who are clearly beneath him (Ambrose, Sting, Kane upcoming) and he needs help for the babyfaces they want him to retain against (Cena, Lesnar primarily).

I dont know, I dont see how that's much different than just about any heel champion in the history of the business. Unless its a heel that was being groomed to turn babyface, then thats a different story.

As usual, its hating on the booking for the sake of being a hater.

[#1-norm-fan]

I used "chicken shit heel" because that seems to be the general consensus and I don't necessarily disagree with it. Definitely not enough to argue the point in a discussion where it wasn't really relevant. The point was WHATEVER kind of heel he is, credibility in some way is still important to justify him being champion.

And as far as "he beats the guys clean who are clearly beneath him", are you forgetting those two guys you mentioned who are "clearly beneath him" that he has already beaten clean also beat him clean just as much? How exactly is he clearly above them now? Being 50/50 or worse against a guy who's "clearly beneath" you is definitely WWE logic.

[Mr. Nerfect]

I can't even read CyNick's posts anymore. Reading #fan's though, I completely agree with him. "Chickenshit" heels lose all their heat once you have the good guy catch them and beat them up. Rollins spends enough time getting beaten that it now has no consequence.

[The CyNick]

I used "chicken shit heel" because that seems to be the general consensus and I don't necessarily disagree with it. Definitely not enough to argue the point in a discussion where it wasn't really relevant. The point was WHATEVER kind of heel he is, credibility in some way is still important to justify him being champion.

And as far as "he beats the guys clean who are clearly beneath him", are you forgetting those two guys you mentioned who are "clearly beneath him" that he has already beaten clean also beat him clean just as much? How exactly is he clearly above them now? Being 50/50 or worse against a guy who's "clearly beneath" you is definitely WWE logic.

To me, part of being an effective heel champion is to make the audience think that you dont deserve to have the spot you have. And its just booking 101 to give babyfaces non title wins over heel champions in order to build up the future title match. In the end, the heel champ wins by hook or by crook. Thats what I see from Rollins. I dont think its unique.

If you book him to just kill guys, like Lesnar was booked for example, he will get cheered, like Lesnar did. Obviously WWE doesnt want Rollins to be a face yet, so he has to be booked as a vulnerable champion.

[The CyNick]

I can't even read CyNick's posts anymore. Reading #fan's though, I completely agree with him. "Chickenshit" heels lose all their heat once you have the good guy catch them and beat them up. Rollins spends enough time getting beaten that it now has no consequence.

When did you become such a bore?

The idea of the heel champion is you want to see them lose the belt. Rollins keeps escaping with the title. Its pretty much a standard in like all storytelling where you have a villain and a hero.

[DAMN iNATOR]

Champions should justify their reign by being credible and making the title look like something worth winning and not something any glorified jobber can hold. If they're a chicken shit heel, they should be the best at it and constantly win via dubious, chicken shit tactics. He should still be credible even if he's a filthy cheater.

The title itself is a draw on a guy like Lesnar because he seems unbeatable. In his case it's because he's a fucking monster. So you wanna see who can possible figure out how to overcome him. Rollins should be the best chicken shit cheater in the world. He should win constantly because of it. To the point where figuring beating him actually seems like a daunting task. Not something Jamie Noble can do. If your champion is just gonna job left and right, you might as well throw the title on Heath Slater.

Zack Ryder for next WWE WHC! :shifty:

[#1-norm-fan]

If you book him to just kill guys, like Lesnar was booked for example, he will get cheered, like Lesnar did.

... Him killing guys like Lesnar was not something me, anyone else in this thread or anyone that I even know of has suggested at any point.

[Damian Rey]

Noticed how they've booked Owens against Ryback and Jericho? He wins, but it's chicken shit? That's how you book a no good dastardly heel to win while keeping the baby faces strong. It's not difficult. You don't book him to get hours comeuppance once a month or so. It ruins any build up to a baby face over coming the odds.

[Mr. Nerfect]

I think the idea now is that being a face or a heel doesn't matter. People are shades of grey, and they're going that way with Dolph Ziggler being a man-whore, Rusev standing up to unpopular guys even though he's a pig, Sheamus kicking everybody in the face without explanation, Kevin Owens walked out on other bad guys, Rollins having arguments with all the heels and being afraid of everybody, etc.

It's all a part of a plan to create deeper personalities. I mean, it's not working, but I can imagine that being the plan.

[The CyNick]

... Him killing guys like Lesnar was not something me, anyone else in this thread or anyone that I even know of has suggested at any point.

So what should he do? Really the only guys he hasnt beat are Cena (even though he did beat him in a heel manner), and Lesnar (who they should be protecting).

I dont get the issue.

[The CyNick]

Noticed how they've booked Owens against Ryback and Jericho? He wins, but it's chicken shit? That's how you book a no good dastardly heel to win while keeping the baby faces strong. It's not difficult. You don't book him to get hours comeuppance once a month or so. It ruins any build up to a baby face over coming the odds.

LOL

Ryback and Jericho are not the same as guys like Cena and Lesnar.

[The CyNick]

I think the idea now is that being a face or a heel doesn't matter. People are shades of grey, and they're going that way with Dolph Ziggler being a man-whore, Rusev standing up to unpopular guys even though he's a pig, Sheamus kicking everybody in the face without explanation, Kevin Owens walked out on other bad guys, Rollins having arguments with all the heels and being afraid of everybody, etc.

It's all a part of a plan to create deeper personalities. I mean, it's not working, but I can imagine that being the plan.

Heels have walked out on other heels. Watch old Survivor Series matches, its nothing new.

[#1-norm-fan]

So what should he do? Really the only guys he hasnt beat are Cena (even though he did beat him in a heel manner), and Lesnar (who they should be protecting).

I dont get the issue.

I explained what they should do on the first page in depth. I feel like you just make your point and then argue a phantom counter-point and ignore everything else completely. Noid was right. Now I'M starting to feel like Kane Knight needing to throw out "strawmans" and such...

[#1-norm-fan]

LOL

Ryback and Jericho are not the same as guys like Cena and Lesnar.

Seriously. You know he wasn't simply saying "He should be beating Cena and Lesnar like Owens beat Jericho and Ryback". You have to know that. Come on...

[The CyNick]

Seriously. You know he wasn't simply saying "He should be beating Cena and Lesnar like Owens beat Jericho and Ryback". You have to know that. Come on...

I'm dead serious.

If you go back in Rollins reign, he wins the blowoff against just about everyone. Granted, he's only been champ for 6 months, so he hasn't had a ton of real programs, but off the top of my head I know he beat Anbrose and Sting. He backdoored against Cena in their biggest match and didn't beat Lesnar. I'm assuming he will beat Kane in the end of their program. So what am I missing?

[Innovator]

Cena has beaten Rollins 4 out of 5 times, 37 in a row.

[The CyNick]

Cena is the top babyface in the territory.

[Damian Rey]

That's all well and good but it doesn't do anything but tarnish your heel champion if he's getting pinned left and right. It's one thing to lose occasionally, like the roll up loss to Ryback some weeks ago, but to be pinned as regularly as Rollins is has only made his run as champ diminish his stature. How was it he was booked better before winning the belt than after?

This is the same shit they ran with when Orton was supposed to be the top heel. Nobody is gonna pay to see a heel lose and finally pay for his sins if he's losing regularly.

[NormanSmiley]

Cena is the top babyface in the territory.

this made me lol

[The CyNick]

That's all well and good but it doesn't do anything but tarnish your heel champion if he's getting pinned left and right. It's one thing to lose occasionally, like the roll up loss to Ryback some weeks ago, but to be pinned as regularly as Rollins is has only made his run as champ diminish his stature. How was it he was booked better before winning the belt than after?

This is the same shit they ran with when Orton was supposed to be the top heel. Nobody is gonna pay to see a heel lose and finally pay for his sins if he's losing regularly.

People pay to see heels lose. If the heel is vulnerable in theory you should think he will lose.

This whole thing is crazy since Rollins keeps winning the big matches. Summerslam he beat Cena, NOC he beat Sting. HIAC he should beat Kane. Nobody will remember these random TV matches.

[Damian Rey]

Why would I pay money to see the heel lose when I can see him lose on free tv on a semi regular basis?

[The CyNick]

Why would I pay money to see the heel lose when I can see him lose on free tv on a semi regular basis?

That's like saying I won't watch any future Batman movies that feature The Joker because I've seen him lose every time.

[Damian Rey]

Not even close. The joker isn't losing at every turn. They build to a climax where only in the end does the hero triumph. You have to invest 2.5 hours of time into the movie to finally see the hero victorious.

You only have to watch weekly to see Rollins lose, with no build, no climax, no payoff.

It's not the same despite your lame efforts. And it still won't answer the question of paying to see the heel lose when I can just watch for free.

[Mr. Nerfect]

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/lb8fWUUXeKM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[The CyNick]

Not even close. The joker isn't losing at every turn. They build to a climax where only in the end does the hero triumph. You have to invest 2.5 hours of time into the movie to finally see the hero victorious.

You only have to watch weekly to see Rollins lose, with no build, no climax, no payoff.

It's not the same despite your lame efforts. And it still won't answer the question of paying to see the heel lose when I can just watch for free.

RAW is longer than most movies...for better or worse

[Heyman]

I'm dead serious.

If you go back in Rollins reign, he wins the blowoff against just about everyone. Granted, he's only been champ for 6 months, so he hasn't had a ton of real programs, but off the top of my head I know he beat Anbrose and Sting. He backdoored against Cena in their biggest match and didn't beat Lesnar. I'm assuming he will beat Kane in the end of their program. So what am I missing?



It's one thing to be a chicken shit heel, but at some point, you have to start getting clean and convincing victories in order to really take that next step. If you don't - then you ultimately become nothing more than a glorified "transitional" champ.


Case in point - Chris Jericho's title reign from Survivor Series 2001 - Wrestlemania 18. One reason why Jericho never got to "the next level" despite his historic reign as the First ever Undisputed champ, is because he was made to look extremely inferior. All of his victories over Austin, Rocky, etc., etc. came across as massive flukes, which then lead to Jericho being spanked multiple times by Triple H.


Compare that to the way Triple H was booked in 1999/2000. Yes - Triple H looked cowardly in many of his title defenses, but he also flat out destroyed guys like Mick Foley, etc., and often looked convincing in many of his victories over Jericho, The Rock, Austin (2 of 3 pinfalls), etc. \


Kurt Angle in 1999/00 - another great example of great booking. Heel Kurt Angle was beating a lot of faces cleanly and efficiently (i.e. Val Venis, Chris Jericho, Gangrel, Shawn Stasiak, etc., etc.). Angle grew massive credibility, AND the fans booed him at appropriate times.


Right now - Rollins' is coming across as a little too cowardly. Might be better for his character's longevity if he looked more convincing.

[Damian Rey]

It's not even that he comes off as cowardly. He just doesn't win. Whoopee doo he'll win a blow off match now and again and has scratched by as champ for 6 months. He's lost consistently and convincingly in that time. He just lost to Cena three times in less than a month. Who cares if he loses the title at this point? He's been booked like a loser the entire time and winning the title has done zero to his credibility. He was booked better last year before winning the belt.

[Damian Rey]

I mean, how bad an idea was it to put the US title on Rollins only for him to lose it and be beaten in the rematch in consecutive matches? What the booking of those matches says is Rollins is good enough to be WWE champ, but not good enough to be United States champion. The US title is the top belt based on what WWE is telling us through their own booking decisions.

[Simple Fan]

So what should he do? Really the only guys he hasnt beat are Cena (even though he did beat him in a heel manner), and Lesnar (who they should be protecting).

I dont get the issue.

Dating back to September 13th, WWE World Heavyweight Champion Seth Rollins has participated in 16 matches on television and house show events. Out of those 16 matches, Seth Rollins was defeated in 15 of them. His only victory was in his match against Sting at the Night of Champions event.

[Damian Rey]

But he's being booked as an effective heel.

[KIRA]

RAW is longer than most movies...for better or worse

It is weird when I think about the fact that every RAW is as long as LOTR.

[The CyNick]

It's one thing to be a chicken shit heel, but at some point, you have to start getting clean and convincing victories in order to really take that next step. If you don't - then you ultimately become nothing more than a glorified "transitional" champ.


Case in point - Chris Jericho's title reign from Survivor Series 2001 - Wrestlemania 18. One reason why Jericho never got to "the next level" despite his historic reign as the First ever Undisputed champ, is because he was made to look extremely inferior. All of his victories over Austin, Rocky, etc., etc. came across as massive flukes, which then lead to Jericho being spanked multiple times by Triple H.


Compare that to the way Triple H was booked in 1999/2000. Yes - Triple H looked cowardly in many of his title defenses, but he also flat out destroyed guys like Mick Foley, etc., and often looked convincing in many of his victories over Jericho, The Rock, Austin (2 of 3 pinfalls), etc. \


Kurt Angle in 1999/00 - another great example of great booking. Heel Kurt Angle was beating a lot of faces cleanly and efficiently (i.e. Val Venis, Chris Jericho, Gangrel, Shawn Stasiak, etc., etc.). Angle grew massive credibility, AND the fans booed him at appropriate times.


Right now - Rollins' is coming across as a little too cowardly. Might be better for his character's longevity if he looked more convincing.

You're all over the place.

Ive said this a bunch of times. Rollins HAS had clean wins over guys in high profile matches. Ambrose and Sting for example. And likely Kane coming up here for the next couple months.

You listed guys that Kurt Angle beat that apparently made him credible - such elite talent as Val Venis, SHAWN STASIAK and GANGREL!!! These wins apparently made Angle credible, yet Rollins is not for beating STING and Dean Ambrose? The truth is Angle went over JOBBERS and then lost a high profile match within a few months to a guy who was essentially an opening card guy his whole career. From there Angle went straight to mid card and was not protected against top guys - he won some, lost some. He managed to get over though. You know why? Because he was fucking awesome. Guys today are not on his level. Thats not booking, thats talent.

Jericho was never meant to be a top guy. Jericho literally was a transitional champion. He became Undisputed Champion in December and was just there to be a heel to put over returning super babyface Hunter at Mania. Rollins on the other hand is someone I believe WWE thinks long term will be a main event babyface. Likely like a Randy Orton who can be an effective face or heel at the top of the card.

You say HHH destroyed guys convincingly as a heel champion? Other than Foley, who did he beat convincingly? Rock? Not as champion. Austin? He did beat him clean one time, but that wasnt while Hunter was champion. Thats selective memory on what really happened.

The truth of the matter is Foley was vital is making both Rock and then Hunter look like credible world champions. It would be great if say Kane had the ability of Mick Foley, and he could be used to really heat up Rollins as we approach the beginning of Mania season. But Kane isnt Foley. In reality, there is no Mick Foley type on the roster. But in terms of BOOKING Kane is being used EXACTLY like Foley was against Hunter leading into Rumble 2000. Right down to the whole multiple personality thing. Maybe in 15 years when people look back they will say how much better the booking was in 2015 than it is in 2030.

[The CyNick]

It's not even that he comes off as cowardly. He just doesn't win. Whoopee doo he'll win a blow off match now and again and has scratched by as champ for 6 months. He's lost consistently and convincingly in that time. He just lost to Cena three times in less than a month. Who cares if he loses the title at this point? He's been booked like a loser the entire time and winning the title has done zero to his credibility. He was booked better last year before winning the belt.

Lay out how Rollins should have been booked between Mania and now without turning him babyface.

[The CyNick]

I mean, how bad an idea was it to put the US title on Rollins only for him to lose it and be beaten in the rematch in consecutive matches? What the booking of those matches says is Rollins is good enough to be WWE champ, but not good enough to be United States champion. The US title is the top belt based on what WWE is telling us through their own booking decisions.

It was done to create more interest in the US title and also create a money fight for Summerslam by putting Rollins against the top star in the company. I personally am not a huge fan of how that match at Summerslam ended, but I understand why WWE does those types of things. It should lead to another big WWE title match for Cena against Rollins some point down the road.

Its funny how people like to complain that WWE doesnt elevate the secondary titles, then when they do, its like "oh my God they are burrying the WWE title".

[The CyNick]

Dating back to September 13th, WWE World Heavyweight Champion Seth Rollins has participated in 16 matches on television and house show events. Out of those 16 matches, Seth Rollins was defeated in 15 of them. His only victory was in his match against Sting at the Night of Champions event.

LOL - oh no house show losses!

How many of those matches were on TV that he lost?

How many of those TV matches that he lost were singles matches via pinfall or submission against someone other than Cena?

[The CyNick]

But he's being booked as an effective heel.

Thats subjective.

[Damian Rey]

It was done to create more interest in the US title and also create a money fight for Summerslam by putting Rollins against the top star in the company. I personally am not a huge fan of how that match at Summerslam ended, but I understand why WWE does those types of things. It should lead to another big WWE title match for Cena against Rollins some point down the road.

Its funny how people like to complain that WWE doesnt elevate the secondary titles, then when they do, its like "oh my God they are burrying the WWE title".

They didn't need that match lead to another big match to Cena and having them square off as often as they have has watered down interest in seeing another match from them.

Putting the belt on Cena was more than enough to elevate it. Putting it on Rollins, only for him to job it back cleanly the next month while retaining the world title effective elevated the US title above the WWE title. That benefits Rollins in zero way going forward.

I also wouldn't have booked him to lose constantly, including being jobbed cleanly on back to back Raw shows before and after Night of Champions. Or jobbing in general. A heel who constantly loses is not interesting. When he loses the title it'll be no big whoop because he consistently loses anyways. There's nothing special about it.

[Simple Fan]

LOL - oh no house show losses!

How many of those matches were on TV that he lost?

How many of those TV matches that he lost were singles matches via pinfall or submission against someone other than Cena?

Why should it matter if its against Cena or not ? He's the WWE champion jobbing to the US champion every chance he can. If he is a heel why have him losing so much to Cena. If he cant beat Cena there is no incentive to hate the guy, he's just a push over compared to Cena.

[The CyNick]

Why should it matter if its against Cena or not ? He's the WWE champion jobbing to the US champion every chance he can. If he is a heel why have him losing so much to Cena. If he cant beat Cena there is no incentive to hate the guy, he's just a push over compared to Cena.


A company should protect their top babyface. Cena is the top babyface. When WWE used to run house shows in the late 90s with Austin challenging a heel champ (say Hunter), Austin would have the match won, and then there would be interference to cause the DQ. Fans groan. Austin comes back lays out everyone with Stunners. Fans are happy. Austin still looked superior to Hunter every single night. The difference here is they can have a US title match and have Cena win the actual match and make the fans go home happy.

The point is losing to the top babyface in a territory should never be a big deal. If Rollins was losing every week to some opening card guy, that would be a newsworthy story.

[Simple Fan]

Cena doesn't need protection, he's John fucking Cena. He could lose for a month straight and get one win and be back were he's at now. If Rollins was beating Cena on regular basis fans would hate the their "favorite" superstar keeps losing to Rollins and in turn hate Rollins. Why should a Cena fan hate Rollins at the moment ? In no way has Rollins seemed like a threat to Cena. What the use of a heel if he presents no threat ?

[DAMN iNATOR]

I think either Survivor Series, Royal Rumble or Fastlane may be the time for someone to step up and take the gold from Rollins, and if it's one of the latter two, it should NOT be John Cena.

[Damian Rey]

A company should protect their top players. It shouldn't be "oh, we'll make sure this one, lone, single guy is protected, and fuck all the rest". I don't remember the Rock getting pinned regularly on free fucking tv when he was on his run to Mania 15. In fact, other than the empty arena and butts in the seats match, I don't recall him losing much at all in that run.

Just like I don't recall Triple H losing much after getting the belt from Foley on Raw. Think he lost to Vince once on Smackdown and "lost" to Jericho on Raw. Other than that, that dastardly mother fucker would either get dq'd or cheat to win, and when the Rock finally went over at Backlash it was fucking glorious.

Hell, how often was Triple H pinned from 2002 through his least title run on free television and or ppv? Beating a heel Triple H meant something.

Beating heel Rollins means jack shit these days. It happens regularly. He's a midcard player, booked no differently than the likes of Ziggler or Rusev. The only difference is he carries around a title that should mean he's the man but is really just s prop that has done nothing for his character.

[Blonde Moment]

A company should protect their top players. It shouldn't be "oh, we'll make sure this one, lone, single guy is protected, and fuck all the rest". I don't remember the Rock getting pinned regularly on free fucking tv when he was on his run to Mania 15. In fact, other than the empty arena and butts in the seats match, I don't recall him losing much at all in that run.

Just like I don't recall Triple H losing much after getting the belt from Foley on Raw. Think he lost to Vince once on Smackdown and "lost" to Jericho on Raw. Other than that, that dastardly mother fucker would either get dq'd or cheat to win, and when the Rock finally went over at Backlash it was fucking glorious.

Hell, how often was Triple H pinned from 2002 through his least title run on free television and or ppv? Beating a heel Triple H meant something.

Beating heel Rollins means jack shit these days. It happens regularly. He's a midcard player, booked no differently than the likes of Ziggler or Rusev. The only difference is he carries around a title that should mean he's the man but is really just s prop that has done nothing for his character.

I think that in the old days Rollins would not be booked the same way he is now but right now in 2015 there is a story that is slowly being told involving HHH, Rollins and judging by the occasional glances Stephanie. Its about Keeping a Legacy, building a Legacy and who is using who. The injury to Sting derailed this but I still see the big payoff as HHH(c) vs Rollins with a slight chance Steph turning on HHH potentially retiring him.

[Damian Rey]

I see that they're going to go that route at some point. But the way they're getting there is awful. Seth was this golden boy, handpicked future star, and once he got the belt, all of sudden he has to prove himself and they're giving him pep talks when he's in unfavorable positions when in reality he should be getting the cards stacked in his favor.

They did the same thing with Orton. The Authority pushed him as the face of WWE and all that, and within months it was "prove yourself Randy. Show us we were right to pick you Randy. Don't let is down Randy". It was the exact opposite of what they're were saying before the title win.

Makes no sense. I'm sure we'll see Triple H and Rollins at some point but the path to getting there has been far from compelling, imo.

[BigCrippyZ]

Compare that to the way Triple H was booked in 1999/2000. Yes - Triple H looked cowardly in many of his title defenses, but he also flat out destroyed guys like Mick Foley, etc., and often looked convincing in many of his victories over Jericho, The Rock, Austin (2 of 3 pinfalls), etc. \


Kurt Angle in 1999/00 - another great example of great booking. Heel Kurt Angle was beating a lot of faces cleanly and efficiently (i.e. Val Venis, Chris Jericho, Gangrel, Shawn Stasiak, etc., etc.). Angle grew massive credibility, AND the fans booed him at appropriate times.


Two great examples, HHH & Angle here. Both of those guys were kinda "chicken shit" heels but you knew in a "fair" 1 on 1 match they could both "compete" with the best of them and the result could go either way because HHH, Austin, Rock, Angle, etc., were all on the same level in a "fair fight."

[Blonde Moment]

I may be wrong, but hasn't almost all of Rollins losses come due to his cockiness and not to his lack of ability?

[#1-norm-fan]

The point is losing to the top babyface in a territory should never be a big deal. If Rollins was losing every week to some opening card guy, that would be a newsworthy story.

First of all, stop saying "territory". You sound like a douche.

Secondly, he should lose to Cena. Him losing to Cena isn't the problem. Him losing to Cena and then booking the match to happen an ungodly amount of times so he can lose to him again and again and again and again is much more of a problem. Put him over some guys, FFS. There are other guys Cena can go over and other guys Rollins can face so he doesn't have to be a jobber who holds the top title in the company for some retarded reason.

LOL - oh no house show losses!

How many of those matches were on TV that he lost?

How many of those TV matches that he lost were singles matches via pinfall or submission against someone other than Cena?

Since he won the title, I can specifically remember him losing to Sting, Dean Ambrose multiple times, Ryback and Jamie Noble...

Explain why he has the top title in the... territory as opposed to any other jobber heel in the company now?

[#1-norm-fan]

WWE has this dumb thought process that champions jobbing constantly somehow gets them over. To the point where it can't be an accident. It's gotta be part of a plan in place that champions need to job a lot for... some purpose. It makes no sense.

[DAMN iNATOR]

Hell, how often was Triple H pinned from 2002 through his least title run on free television and or ppv? Beating a heel Triple H meant something.

Counted singles-only matches from WM X8-WM 21 using help from profightdb.com, and unless I missed something he was only pinned 11 times in that just over 3 year period. Pretty fucking incredible.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Yeah, I remember reading Ambrose, Ryback and J&J all got wins over Rollins. Oh, and The Dudleys beat him on RAW.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Let's go back 11 losses for Rollins:

1. To Bubby Ray & D-Von Dudley on RAW.

2. John Cena at Madison Square Garden.

3. He lost to Kane and The Dudleys on SmackDown when he was teaming with The New Day (WWE Tag Team Champions).

4. He got pinned by Dean Ambrose on SmackDown. Ambrose is not the champion.

5. John Cena forced Seth Rollins to submit the night after Night of Champions. Cena is not the WWE Champion.

6. He got pinned by John Cena at Night of Champions and lost the United States Championship. John Cena is not the WWE Champion.

7. Dean Ambrose & Roman Reigns beat Seth Rollins & Money in the Bank title shot holder, Sheamus on SmackDown.

8. John Cena & Sting defeated Seth Rollins & Big Show when Seth tapped out to the Scorpion Death Lock.

9. John Cena, Darren Young & Titus O'Neil defeated Seth Rollins and The New Day.

10. Ryback pinned Seth Rollins. Ryback is not the WWE Champion.

11. Randy Orton defeated Seth Rollins.

I'll give the WWE some credit. To trace back 11 televised losses for Seth Rollins, you do have to go back to August 10. That's almost 3 months. And the list only includes Bubba Ray Dudley, D-Von Dudley, Darren Young, Dean Ambrose, John Cena, Kane, Randy Orton, Roman Reigns, Ryback, Sting and Titus O'Neil.

[Ruien]

So what, 11 times out of 28 shows? Lol

[DAMN iNATOR]

So what, 11 times out of 28 shows? Lol

But that's in 3 MONTHS as opposed to Triple H only losing 11 times in 3 YEARS:


Backlash '02, to Hogan
4/23/02 SD!, to Y2J
5/28/02 SD!, to Test
KotR '02, to 'Taker
SummerSlam '02 to HBK
Unforgiven '03 (World Heavyweight Championship match), to Goldberg
3/29/04 RAW, to Shelton Benjamin
7/26/04 RAW, to Benoit
8/30/04 RAW, to Eugene
1/3/05 RAW, to Orton
WM 21 (World Heavyweight Championship match), to Batista


And clearly, the caliber of opponent that Trips lost to in those 3 years is somewhat higher than that of Rollins' opponents.

[#1-norm-fan]

August 10th would only be 2 months/20 shows.

To be fair, some of those were DQ and countout losses which, while lazy and boring when overdone, don't hurt a heel as much. 6 were pin/submission though. And he's only won 3 matches in that time. He's real, real bad at winning wrestling matches.

[Damian Rey]

Love him or hate him during his reign of doom, Triple H losing was a big deal.

[James Steele]

That list is missing HHH tapping out to Benoit at WMXX.

[Ruien]

But that's in 3 MONTHS as opposed to Triple H only losing 11 times in 3 YEARS:


Backlash '02, to Hogan
4/23/02 SD!, to Y2J
5/28/02 SD!, to Test
KotR '02, to 'Taker
SummerSlam '02 to HBK
Unforgiven '03 (World Heavyweight Championship match), to Goldberg
3/29/04 RAW, to Shelton Benjamin
7/26/04 RAW, to Benoit
8/30/04 RAW, to Eugene
1/3/05 RAW, to Orton
WM 21 (World Heavyweight Championship match), to Batista


And clearly, the caliber of opponent that Trips lost to in those 3 years is somewhat higher than that of Rollins' opponents.

I think you missed my lol. That is a terrible ratio to have your champion losing at.

[XL]

First of all, stop saying "territory". You sound like a douche.

Secondly, he should lose to Cena. Him losing to Cena isn't the problem. Him losing to Cena and then booking the match to happen an ungodly amount of times so he can lose to him again and again and again and again is much more of a problem. Put him over some guys, FFS. There are other guys Cena can go over and other guys Rollins can face so he doesn't have to be a jobber who holds the top title in the company for some retarded reason.

All of this.

Kevin Owens could still be a top, top guy right now if they'd learn to pace themselves a little better. If he'd come in, beat Cena in his debut and avoided a rematch we could still be chomping at the bit for Cena-Owens II.

What did they have to lose with that? He'd already said he didn't want Cena's US championship, he already proved he was better than Cena. You have the two go off in opposite directions whilst keeping their issues bubbling under the surface. The loss could eat at Cena, Owens could dine out on that win and never let anybody forget about the fact he beat Cena. Meanwhile, he's dominant elsewhere; winning hard-thought battles with Cesaro, or cheating to win elsewhere. Even if he lost occasionally, he'd still have the fact he beat Cena in his debut match to remind everybody off. Eventually we get the rematch.

Instead, they fought 3 times in a month and we know without a doubt that Cena is better than Owens, and they've pissed the potential draw down the drain.

[Damian Rey]

The bigger waste was not getting the US belt on Owens. To put it on Rollins, only to have him lose it right back to Cena with zero benefit to anyone wasted the last 6 to 7 months of build up behind Cena add US champ. Had Owens just won it, a transition into wrestling Cesaro or keeping the open challenge going but purposely only wrestling jobbers would've worked fine until Cena decided he's not over the loss and goes after the US title to avenge himself. Easy as pie. Hell, with Cena requesting time off, you could've had Owens put him on the shelf only for Cena to return and build match 3 for Mania. Not that hard.

[XL]

Well, yeah. Not much to add there.

[DAMN iNATOR]

I think you missed my lol. That is a terrible ratio to have your champion losing at.

Didn't miss it at all. It was a comparison for comparisons sake. Comparing him with a man whose finisher he's been using for several months now.

[The CyNick]

First of all, stop saying "territory". You sound like a douche.

Secondly, he should lose to Cena. Him losing to Cena isn't the problem. Him losing to Cena and then booking the match to happen an ungodly amount of times so he can lose to him again and again and again and again is much more of a problem. Put him over some guys, FFS. There are other guys Cena can go over and other guys Rollins can face so he doesn't have to be a jobber who holds the top title in the company for some retarded reason.



Since he won the title, I can specifically remember him losing to Sting, Dean Ambrose multiple times, Ryback and Jamie Noble...

Explain why he has the top title in the... territory as opposed to any other jobber heel in the company now?

You get oddly annoyed about things. I didnt realize you were the language police.

Anyway, WWE books heels in a certain way. More often than not they will have heels lose non title matches to build to something. Either a match with the guy who beat them, or the guy who they are building a match costs them a match to build heat. WWE has always booked like that. They seem to be surviving just fine. Maybe you should get a job booking ROH or something and see how you can skyrocket their business. I'll trust the industry leader.

The problem with fans like you (and you're not alone, although in the vast vast vast minority), is you take every little thing too seriously. If you think people stop watching RAW because Seth Rollins lost a throwaway match involving Jamie Noble , well you just dont get it. You're cherry picking matches that you know meant nothing, and nobody outside this message board would remember. The broad strokes are by hook or by crook, Seth Rollins has turned away all challengers for his championship, and for that people should hate him and want to see him lose the championship.

[The CyNick]

Counted singles-only matches from WM X8-WM 21 using help from profightdb.com, and unless I missed something he was only pinned 11 times in that just over 3 year period. Pretty fucking incredible.


How about using a comparable time?

HHH won his first world title in 1999. How many times did he lose between Summerslam 99 and say Rumble 2000? I seem to recall Trips putting over a non wrestler FOR THE STRAP!!! And he never got to beat that guy for the title again. Somehow HHH managed to still become one of the all time greats.

But yeah, keep saying the booking is so different today.

Honestly now.

[The CyNick]

All of this.

Kevin Owens could still be a top, top guy right now if they'd learn to pace themselves a little better. If he'd come in, beat Cena in his debut and avoided a rematch we could still be chomping at the bit for Cena-Owens II.

What did they have to lose with that? He'd already said he didn't want Cena's US championship, he already proved he was better than Cena. You have the two go off in opposite directions whilst keeping their issues bubbling under the surface. The loss could eat at Cena, Owens could dine out on that win and never let anybody forget about the fact he beat Cena. Meanwhile, he's dominant elsewhere; winning hard-thought battles with Cesaro, or cheating to win elsewhere. Even if he lost occasionally, he'd still have the fact he beat Cena in his debut match to remind everybody off. Eventually we get the rematch.

Instead, they fought 3 times in a month and we know without a doubt that Cena is better than Owens, and they've pissed the potential draw down the drain.

Did Austin vs Rock draw in 2001?

[Innovator]

How about using a comparable time?

HHH won his first world title in 1999. How many times did he lose between Summerslam 99 and say Rumble 2000? I seem to recall Trips putting over a non wrestler FOR THE STRAP!!! And he never got to beat that guy for the title again. Somehow HHH managed to still become one of the all time greats.

But yeah, keep saying the booking is so different today.

Honestly now.

Still got his win back in December.

[The CyNick]

Still got his win back in December.

Not for the title. And if you're comparing losing to Vince to anyone Seth has lost in a one on one match to, well, I dont know what to say.

[#1-norm-fan]

Triple H lost less in that "comparable time" than he did during the time DAMN iNATOR mentioned and WAY less that Rollins does now. Because he was a new main eventer/champion and they wanted to put him over by making him look strong and win constantly as if him having the title meant he was actually the best and really tough to beat. Crazy concept, I know.

[The CyNick]

Triple H lost less in that "comparable time" than he did during the time DAMN iNATOR mentioned and WAY less that Rollins does now. Because he was a new main eventer/champion and they wanted to put him over by making him look strong and win constantly as if him having the title meant he was actually the best and really tough to beat. Crazy concept, I know.

Let's take a look at Trip's stellar run(s) in 1999.

Summerslam - Austin uses his power to avoid having to JOB to him
RAW - Trips wins in what is essentially a 3 on 1 match
Smackdown - Vince beats Triple H for the WWF Title
Other TV's - loses to Mideon and Viscera and Big Show
Unforgiven - wins 6 pack challenge
No Mercy - Trips beats Austin (Rock actually cost Austin the match but a win is a win right?)
Survivor Series - loses the belt to BIG SHOW
Dec PPV - Trips finally gets his big win back against Vince!
RAW - Trips beats Show for WWF title

As you can see not unlike Rollins reign. He lost to a lot of guys while being champion, and never beat any of the top stars on his own. Yes, he did pin Austin, but thats not different that Rollins pinning Cena at Summerslam.

Yes, as 2000 rolled around, they booked him strong against Foley, but he would still lose matches on TV to guys like Austin and Rock.

[#1-norm-fan]

lol 2 of those matches you listed were him being pinned or submitted. 2. And some of them he didn't even lose at all...

If that's your evidence that his reign was remotely comparable to Rollins, I think my point is proven.

[Big Vic]

Right now - Rollins' is coming across as a little too cowardly. Might be better for his character's longevity if he looked more convincing.
Was thinking "WTF" when Edge a crippled guy punked him out when he had New Day behind him.

[Big Vic]

Other TV's - loses to Mideon and Viscera and Big Show

Are you talking about the Night on smackdown where he wrestled 5 times and lost to Big Show because it was a 'ChokeSlam Challenge' match, along with losing a handicap match against Mideon and Visera in a Casket Match because he was unable to fit Mideon and visera in the casket at the same time.

[XL]

Hahaha.

[XL]

Did Austin vs Rock draw in 2001?

Yes. But both men had been built up consistently for 3 years prior to that.

Austin wrestled Rock 8 times one-on-one between 7th December 1997 and April 2001 (6W/1L/1D).

Cena and Owen had 4 matches between (2/1/1) May 18th and June 19th this year.

Can we all stop making shit comparisons?

[The CyNick]

Yes. But both men had been built up consistently for 3 years prior to that.

Austin wrestled Rock 8 times one-on-one between 7th December 1997 and April 2001 (6W/1L/1D).

Cena and Owen had 4 matches between (2/1/1) May 18th and June 19th this year.

Can we all stop making shit comparisons?

Its not my fault your argument is built on a house of cards. Dont get sad now that you're painted into a corner.

Your hypothesis is that Owens is ruined because he lost 2 matches to Cena. By your own admission Rock only got one win in 8 matches vs Austin. From what I can tell Rock is still a pretty big draw.

Could be that talent wins out in the end.

[The CyNick]

Are you talking about the Night on smackdown where he wrestled 5 times and lost to Big Show because it was a 'ChokeSlam Challenge' match, along with losing a handicap match against Mideon and Visera in a Casket Match because he was unable to fit Mideon and visera in the casket at the same time.

Just like everyone is acting like Rollins loses clean to Jamie Noble every week.

[The CyNick]

lol 2 of those matches you listed were him being pinned or submitted. 2. And some of them he didn't even lose at all...

If that's your evidence that his reign was remotely comparable to Rollins, I think my point is proven.

So HHH dropping the strap to Vince is "HHH was booked like a killer" and Rollins losing to Cena is "burrrrrrrrried"?

[Ruien]

Its not my fault your argument is built on a house of cards. Dont get sad now that you're painted into a corner.

Your hypothesis is that Owens is Ruiened because he lost 2 matches to Cena. By your own admission Rock only got one win in 8 matches vs Austin. From what I can tell Rock is still a pretty big draw.

Could be that talent wins out in the end.

Corrected.

[#1-norm-fan]

So HHH dropping the strap to Vince is "HHH was booked like a killer" and Rollins losing to Cena is "burrrrrrrrried"?

A) HHH dropping the strap to Vince was a huge markout moment... in part because the guy didn't lose constantly. (Also, I could easily argue Vince is way more credible than JAMIE FUCKING NOBLE.)

B) If you're still gonna argue Rollins losing to Cena as if people are arguing that that's the problem, you're making it pretty clear that you're just avoiding the actual argument so that you're not put in a position to defend it. I mean... your examples of HHH "jobbing like Rollins" made that pretty clear already but if you're gonna keep arguing the Rollins losing to Cena strawman (Goddammit, Kane Knight) after the words "Rollins losing to Cena isn't the problem" has literally been said to you already, it's pretty telling...

[The CyNick]

A) HHH dropping the strap to Vince was a huge markout moment... in part because the guy didn't lose constantly. (Also, I could easily argue Vince is way more credible than JAMIE FUCKING NOBLE.)

B) If you're still gonna argue Rollins losing to Cena as if people are arguing that that's the problem, you're making it pretty clear that you're just avoiding the actual argument so that you're not put in a position to defend it. I mean... your examples of HHH "jobbing like Rollins" made that pretty clear already but if you're gonna keep arguing the Rollins losing to Cena strawman (Goddammit, Kane Knight) after the words "Rollins losing to Cena isn't the problem" has literally been said to you already, it's pretty telling...

Losing to the top face in the territory is never a step back.

Losing your title as a new champion who didnt beat the top guy for the belt to a non wrestler who is 20 years older than you is a step back.

[#1-norm-fan]

if you're gonna keep arguing the Rollins losing to Cena strawman (Goddammit, Kane Knight) after the words "Rollins losing to Cena isn't the problem" has literally been said to you already, it's pretty telling...

Losing to the top face in the territory is never a step back.

Losing your title as a new champion who didnt beat the top guy for the belt to a non wrestler who is 20 years older than you is a step back.

Jesus Christ. In the very next post??? lol

[NormanSmiley]

A) HHH dropping the strap to Vince was a huge markout moment... and norman was there.

Rollins is now 19 percent to tying pedro. 70 percent of the way to jbl

[XL]

Its not my fault your argument is built on a house of cards. Dont get sad now that you're painted into a corner.

Your hypothesis is that Owens is ruined because he lost 2 matches to Cena. By your own admission Rock only got one win in 8 matches vs Austin. From what I can tell Rock is still a pretty big draw.

Could be that talent wins out in the end.

Wrong.

I never said Owen is ruined. I never said it was due to losing to Cena twice.

I questioned whether it was smart for them to have 4 matches in the span on 1 month. Rock and Austin had 8 matches in 3 years. And your example was of two outstanding indivuals, not all that comparable.

Is Owens ruined? No. Do I think he could be more valuable than he is right now? Absolutely. Do I think there could still be value in a Owens vs. Cena programme if they'd not burned through it in a month? Yeah.

You're the one comparing Owens to The Rock. Which is a little unfair.

[Big Vic]

Just like everyone is acting like Rollins loses clean to Jamie Noble every week.
HHH lost a match he could not win. It's impossible to fit those 2 people in a casket at the same time.

[The CyNick]

The bottom line is Owens was set up better long term by working that program with Cena. You should ask him yourself how he feels about it.

Just don't complain for the sake of complaining. This was an example of WWE elevating a talent right off the bat. If you think the Cena program did more harm than good, you don't get it.

[The CyNick]

HHH lost a match he could not win. It's impossible to fit those 2 people in a casket at the same time.

So we accept that not all losses are created equally.

This is a good start!

[NormanSmiley]

So we accept that not all losses are created equally.

This is a good start!

We're getting somewhere

[Ruien]

Pretty sure Cynic started this as a legit debate but started trolling a couple days ago.

[Simple Fan]

Jim Ross has posted his latest blog entry online. Check out the highlights:

On Seth Rollins: “The booking of WWE Champion Seth Rollins to rarely win on TV and to be an enhanced chickensh!t heel is a head scratcher. I thoroughly understand the concept of the vulnerable antagonist but for one’s champion to rarely win on TV is questionable. The booking of Rollins needs addressing IMO.”

[Damian Rey]

Pffft. How many territories has Jr booked.

[Big Vic]

Who has the longest reign for a heel Champ? Someone said it was Macho Man? Was he a heel during his year long title reign?

[#1-norm-fan]

He turned heel near the end of it to feud with Hogan.

Longest was Billy Graham.

[The CyNick]

I think a week before JR was saying he likes where WWE is heading with Rollins. Compared it to early HBK days if I recall.

I think JR might be just trying to appease his audience there. Similar to what Foley does.

[Big Vic]

JR is a Meltzer Sheep.

[The CyNick]

JR is a Meltzer Sheep.

To a degree I would agree.

But Meltzer is a carny, so it's odd.

[DAMN iNATOR]

How about using a comparable time?

HHH won his first world title in 1999. How many times did he lose between Summerslam 99 and say Rumble 2000? I seem to recall Trips putting over a non wrestler FOR THE STRAP!!! And he never got to beat that guy for the title again. Somehow HHH managed to still become one of the all time greats.

But yeah, keep saying the booking is so different today.

Honestly now.

Alright, we'll do your little comparison YOUR WAY, in a 3 month timespan. Sure HHH lost to Vince on 9/16/1999 edition of SD!, but he didn't get a chance for a rematch only because with Vince as then-WWF owner, it was a conflict of interest for him to hold his own company's World title. Even still, he won back his title later that month at Unforgiven and was rarely pinned between mid-September and mid-December 1999...he only lost by pinfall 4 times in 21 singles matches in that timeframe (or, ironically, 19%, the same percentage NS somehow figures Rollins is to the length of Morales' reign, LMAO), as compared to Rollins, who from between mid-July and Monday night, has lost 11 out of 39 singles matches, or 28% of the time, nearly 10% more than late-1999 Triple H!

Why do you suppose that is? Could it be that Vince and co. backstage really DON'T have as much confidence in Seth Rollins as modern-day champion as they did in late-1999 Triple H? Or will you accuse me of some logical fallacy you perceive in my response because you just always HAVE to be right, or because you don't realize that the booking was far superior back then, even if between mid-September and mid-December 1999 Triple H only held the belt for ~ 2 months out of 3, despite winning over 80% of his singles matches?

[#1-norm-fan]

If CyNick's plan all along was to force us into talking about logical fallacies and stats to make us all feel more nerdy than discussing wrestling online already makes us... then mission accomplished.

[SlickyTrickyDamon]

WWE has this dumb thought process that champions jobbing constantly somehow gets them over. To the point where it can't be an accident. It's gotta be part of a plan in place that champions need to job a lot for... some purpose. It makes no sense.

Does a shit purpose count as a purpose? It's to make quick challengers to the title. Lose match and then there is the chance he won't squirm out of it for the title match. He chickenshits himself into winning the title match and nothing else matters because he is the champion.

Chickenshit heel. It's not new but it hasn't always been this glaringly obvious.

[#1-norm-fan]

It's been done for a while on occasion. Not with every feud against every challenger (and in some instances, against guys who don't even end up challenging for the title). Your champion shouldn't be jobbing on a TV at the same rate as your jobbers. It doesn't make sense why the title is on him and not the jobbers at that point.

[DAMN iNATOR]

It's been done for a while on occasion. Not with every feud against every challenger (and in some instances, against guys who don't even end up challenging for the title). Your champion shouldn't be jobbing on a TV at the same rate as your jobbers. It doesn't make sense why the title is on him and not the jobbers at that point.

HEATH. FUCKING. SLATER. :shifty:

[The CyNick]

Alright, we'll do your little comparison YOUR WAY, in a 3 month timespan. Sure HHH lost to Vince on 9/16/1999 edition of SD!, but he didn't get a chance for a rematch only because with Vince as then-WWF owner, it was a conflict of interest for him to hold his own company's World title. Even still, he won back his title later that month at Unforgiven and was rarely pinned between mid-September and mid-December 1999...he only lost by pinfall 4 times in 21 singles matches in that timeframe (or, ironically, 19%, the same percentage NS somehow figures Rollins is to the length of Morales' reign, LMAO), as compared to Rollins, who from between mid-July and Monday night, has lost 11 out of 39 matches, or 28% of the time, nearly 10% more than late-1999 Triple H!

Why do you suppose that is? Could it be that Vince and co. backstage really DON'T have as much confidence in Seth Rollins as modern-day champion as they did in late-1999 Triple H? Or will you accuse me of some logical fallacy you perceive in my response because you just always HAVE to be right, or because you don't realize that the booking was far superior back then, even if between mid-September and mid-December 1999 Triple H only held the belt for ~ 2 months out of 3, despite winning over 80% of his singles matches?

Are you comparing singles matches to singles matches?

[DAMN iNATOR]

Are you comparing singles matches to singles matches?

Yes, I am.

[Wishbone]

Kinda laughing at y'all actually arguing with CyNick. I mean y'all do realize he's trolling the shit out of your asses, right?

[NormanSmiley]

(or, ironically, 19%, the same percentage NS somehow figures Rollins is to the length of Morales' reign, LMAO)?

Whats with the parentheses and "somehow" and the lmao,dick?

[The CyNick]

It's been done for a while on occasion. Not with every feud against every challenger (and in some instances, against guys who don't even end up challenging for the title). Your champion shouldn't be jobbing on a TV at the same rate as your jobbers. It doesn't make sense why the title is on him and not the jobbers at that point.

How many JOBs did Lesnar do as champion? Same bookers, same Vince. Why the difference?

[The CyNick]

Kinda laughing at y'all actually arguing with CyNick. I mean y'all do realize he's trolling the shit out of your asses, right?

what are your thoughts on the issues were discussing.

Im not a fan of people trying to railroad conversations by throwing out the term troll. If you have something to add, do it, if not, run along little buddy.

[Wishbone]

what are your thoughts on the issues were discussing.

Im not a fan of people trying to railroad conversations by throwing out the term troll. If you have something to add, do it, if not, run along little buddy.

I refuse to leave this thread until I am given a shot at the world heavyweight championship!

[NormanSmiley]

Are you old enough? Kane pushing 50, sting pushing 86

[Simple Fan]

Seth's been champion for 202 days. Undertakers 4 reigns have a combined total of 238 days. He's already surpassed Edge, Jericho, Batista, Eddie, Ric Flair, The Miz, Sheamus, Big Show, Mankind, Alberto Del Rio, and Daniel Bryan.

[SlickyTrickyDamon]

That's a big problem right there. People think days as champion=quality. The Rock was champion for a short time frame each time he had it but still made it important chasing and defending the title.

[Simple Fan]

Well the longevity of a reign is a big part of a champion, more defenses and more TV time. The problem I see with Seth is this long reign might end up hurting him. He hardly wins on TV and then pulls something out of his ass on a PPV. I'm almost wondering if they are trying to beat Punks 434 days kind of like AJ.

[DAMN iNATOR]

Whats with the parentheses and "somehow" and the lmao,dick?

Cool story, bro. :y:

[Mr. Nerfect]

Well the longevity of a reign is a big part of a champion, more defenses and more TV time. The problem I see with Seth is this long reign might end up hurting him. He hardly wins on TV and then pulls something out of his ass on a PPV. I'm almost wondering if they are trying to beat Punks 434 days kind of like AJ.

I could see Rollins keeping the title until WrestleMania. The only real possible challengers for him are Brock Lesnar, Roman Reigns, a combination of Brock Lesnar and Roman Reigns and a combination of Roman Reigns and Dean Ambrose. I personally like the Shield Triple Threat. Easiest way to get there is have Reigns win the Royal Rumble in Florida, then Ambrose beats Sheamus for the Money in the Bank briefcase at Fastlane. Boom.

If they go with a Triple Threat as the main event, I could see Rollins somehow snaking it out with the World Title. Will they have him bust the 434 day mark? I'm not sure, but I can definitely see them being really stubborn with the length of this thing.

[NormanSmiley]

I could see Rollins keeping the title until WrestleMania. The only real possible challengers for him are Brock Lesnar, Roman Reigns, a combination of Brock Lesnar and Roman Reigns and a combination of Roman Reigns and Dean Ambrose. I personally like the Shield Triple Threat. Easiest way to get there is have Reigns win the Royal Rumble in Florida, then Ambrose beats Sheamus for the Money in the Bank briefcase at Fastlane. Boom.

If they go with a Triple Threat as the main event, I could see Rollins somehow snaking it out with the World Title. Will they have him bust the 434 day mark? I'm not sure, but I can definitely see them being really stubborn with the length of this thing.

So basically what cynick said that got shit on as trolling?

[The CyNick]

So basically what cynick said that got shit on as trolling?

Haha

If i knew how to rep someone i would

[DAMN iNATOR]

Haha

If i knew how to rep someone i would

Click " http://tpwwforums.com/images/buttonsgreen/reputation.gif" icon (bottom-left corner of person's post), select "I approve" for positive (green dot) or "I disapprove" for negative (red dot). You only HAVE to leave a message for negative, for positive it's optional, hit "Send rep" or whatever the little green button says.

[NormanSmiley]

Please only neg rep me, I want to be in the red forever. Never hit green please cynick.

[DAMN iNATOR]

Please only neg rep me, I want to be in the red forever. Never hit green please cynick.

MY BAD! :(

[NormanSmiley]

Id expect nothing less from the guy who wont explain his parentheses

[NormanSmiley]

Thanks cynick. Keep the red flowing brother.

[BigCrippyZ]

That's a big problem right there. People think days as champion=quality. The Rock was champion for a short time frame each time he had it but still made it important chasing and defending the title.

This. :yes:

[The CyNick]

Thanks cynick. Keep the red flowing brother.

Anytime!

[Shadrick]

I think a week before JR was saying he likes where WWE is heading with Rollins. Compared it to early HBK days if I recall.

I think JR might be just trying to appease his audience there. Similar to what Foley does.

You think JR said that? I dont recall reading it but....

[Big Vic]

Hmm, wow just learned that rock only had one reign over 100 days.

[NormanSmiley]

When you look at title reigns things can be odd in hindsight. Rock title wins felt big when they happened but he never held it for long.

Also cena's 12 reigns with the wwe title add up to 1240 days so virtually a three month average and way less when you consider two of his reigns took up over half of that time (660).

[The CyNick]

You think JR said that? I dont recall reading it but....

I could be wrong. But i just recall reading JR being critical of Rollins booking and thinking he was not too long ago saying how people should be patient with his booking and seth reminds him of a heel HBK.

It's entirely possible i made it up though

[Big Vic]

Yes JR said both things.

[The CyNick]

Yes JR said both things.

So i was right. How not surprising.

[Mr. Nerfect]

So basically what cynick said that got shit on as trolling?

No, actually.

[NormanSmiley]

I dont think anyone is ready to take the ball and run with it on the babyface side. Unless of course they wanted to go with Brock as champion again, which I am 100% behind.

I like the idea of building up Mania to a Triple Threat between the 3 Shield guys. I would do a deal where HHH and Rollins begin to show they are not on the same page. Then you do something where Reigns wins the Rumble again, but its controversial, and you create a backdoor way for Ambrose to be added to the match via the Network Special in February. Then you do a deal where Rollins makes a big deal about how he wants to do this on his own, doesnt want The Authority helping him, he wants to prove he's the man from The Shield once and for all. As Mania draws near, HHH and Stephanie reveal that one of the other two guys have reached out to The Authority to become the new face of the WWE. Reigns and Ambrose build tension, Reigns accuses Ambrose and vice versa. Ultimately they decide that Rollins is stirring the pot, and he's really the one who's going to have The Authority in his corner, despite what he's been saying. Then at Mania, Reigns is the one who aligns himself with Trips and Steph, but in the process Rollins would have had the match won which will help move him to the babyface side.

Its pretty god damn close.

[The CyNick]

I can now see that being the booking for Survivor Series. Should be clearer after tonight.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Its pretty god damn close.

That's not what he was accused of trolling for.

[The CyNick]

That's not what he was accused of trolling for.

Everyone should just have a blanket apology for ever referring to me as a troll.

It's completely unwarranted. And yet I still push forward.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Hahahahaha!

[NormanSmiley]

Theres so much fucking trolling that when you discuss actual wrestling concepts people get accused of trolling for being serious. Then the rasslin is serious guy pops up. Then a tatanka picture, then an owen brown meltdown, jazzy brings up a diva, noid writes a story and the sun rises again

[NormanSmiley]

Seth now 20 percent of the way there, looking at the current roster and style of booking, do you see anyone who will hit the thousand day club in the future? Brock has a legit shot if he gets a serious reign

[#1-norm-fan]

Theres so much fucking trolling that when you discuss actual wrestling concepts people get accused of trolling for being serious. Then the rasslin is serious guy pops up. Then a tatanka picture, then an owen brown meltdown, jazzy brings up a diva, noid writes a story and the sun rises again

You forgot "NormanSmiley acts like a tough guy and then pussies out of a fight".

[NormanSmiley]

You forgot #1 fag lies to look cool knowing he wont have to follow through and nobody will find out he's a limp dick grey boy.

[#1-norm-fan]

See.

[NormanSmiley]

Si

[Big Vic]

How come you were afraid to fight him norman?

[The CyNick]

It's a sad state.

It's okay, we'll whip this place into shape. It's like coming back to your childhood home and seeing its been vandalized and used as a crack house. So now you've come home, and you just gotta fix the place up one weed at a time.

[Mr. Nerfect]

And then it turns out you're actually in the mental asylum eating from the skip and yelling at the nurses.

[Wishbone]

You know I kinda wish this place was a crack den sometimes. At least then there would be an excuse for people (and I use that term loosely) like CyNick to be so disconnected from reality all the damn time.

[Mr. Nerfect]

There would actually be figures like Tammy hovering around blowing owenbrown.

[The CyNick]

You know I kinda wish this place was a crack den sometimes. At least then there would be an excuse for people (and I use that term loosely) like CyNick to be so disconnected from reality all the damn time.

Congrats, you got me to quote you in one of my posts. The highlight of your run on here.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Wishbone is fantastic, CyNick. C'mon now.

[James Steele]

Dean Ambrose could easily be the #1 babyface.

[BigCrippyZ]

Dean Ambrose could easily be the #1 babyface.

Totally agree. The guy is super charismatic. He has a great look and is more than solid in the ring, especially for the mainstream WWE style of matches.

[Wishbone]

Gotta agree 100% with James Steele. Ambrose has that badass anti-hero vibe about him that people would just eat up. He's also not nearly as small as people make him out to be so the whole "vanilla midget" thing doesn't apply to him. He's about the same size as Rollins, and Rollins looks perfectly in place standing next to guys as big as Triple H. If they'd actually book Ambrose correctly he could surpass any of the current "next top guys" WWE has running around. He's not a bad looking dude, he's got crossover appeal, he's good on the mic and he's above average in the ring. He's about as close to the total package as we've seen in over a decade.

[Mr. Nerfect]

I dunno, there's something that's not all together there with Ambrose. I think it's how he's presented. He kind of meanders and doesn't win the big one. Could that all change? Sure, and I'd love it to -- but I feel he's going to make his most money as a vicious heel.

[Mr. Nerfect]

I can't wait for the WWE to move past this Authority stuff, because I feel there's a whole new exciting saga with a top heel that isn't connected to Triple H and Stephanie McMahon in any fashion.

[The CyNick]

Wishbone is fantastic, CyNick. C'mon now.

He's Tito Santana to me

[The CyNick]

I can't wait for the WWE to move past this Authority stuff, because I feel there's a whole new exciting saga with a top heel that isn't connected to Triple H and Stephanie McMahon in any fashion.

Trips and Steph are not going anywhere so I believe they should be the central figures on the show. You can invest time and money into a character and they can bolt leaving a void. Any investment into the Hunter and Steph characters you know are for the long term.

Doesn't mean you can't phase then in and out of TV as the focal point, but they should always have a presence.

[Damian Rey]

You know, the way you get around a void left by departing or injured talent is by building a protecting several guys who could be considered top heel or face material. That way, if you run into another Lesnar or Bryan situation, you have a well built replacement waiting in the wings.

[Evil Vito]

<font color=goldenrod>I'd be less sick of The Authority if their characters and their motives were more consistent. Like when Steph does stuff related to the Divas Revolution, she's sincerely trying to play to the crowd. But then that very night she'll be in a segment where she's very blatantly meant to be a heel.

I dunno, it's just awkward. You'd never see Vince McMahon circa late 1998/early 1999 open a show all smileyfaced running through the match card to big cheers only to revert to his usual "I hate Austin" self a few segments later. He'd stay out of anything not related to Austin or DX or whoever.</font>

[Evil Vito]

<font color=goldenrod>To that end...that's gotta be one of my biggest pet peeves in wrestling. Why is it that nearly every week the main event gets booked, seemingly organically and on-the-fly, in the opening segment?

I know I know, "that's just wrestling" but christ. Are we to assume that The Authority were so busy during the week that they couldn't sit down and figure out a main event for Raw until after the broadcast has already started? That's some Paul Heyman-on-speed ECW stuff.</font>

[The CyNick]

You know, the way you get around a void left by departing or injured talent is by building a protecting several guys who could be considered top heel or face material. That way, if you run into another Lesnar or Bryan situation, you have a well built replacement waiting in the wings.

Its tough to find a ton of guys who fit that bill. There isn't an assembly line of top talent just waiting to get their shot.

You know Hunter and Steph are amazing at their jobs. They can be used to give the rub to new talent but maintain their presence.

[The CyNick]

<font color=goldenrod>I'd be less sick of The Authority if their characters and their motives were more consistent. Like when Steph does stuff related to the Divas Revolution, she's sincerely trying to play to the crowd. But then that very night she'll be in a segment where she's very blatantly meant to be a heel.

I dunno, it's just awkward. You'd never see Vince McMahon circa late 1998/early 1999 open a show all smileyfaced running through the match card to big cheers only to revert to his usual "I hate Austin" self a few segments later. He'd stay out of anything not related to Austin or DX or whoever.</font>

I find that odd as well with Steph. But sure the reasoning behind it.

[The CyNick]

<font color=goldenrod>To that end...that's gotta be one of my biggest pet peeves in wrestling. Why is it that nearly every week the main event gets booked, seemingly organically and on-the-fly, in the opening segment?

I know I know, "that's just wrestling" but christ. Are we to assume that The Authority were so busy during the week that they couldn't sit down and figure out a main event for Raw until after the broadcast has already started? That's some Paul Heyman-on-speed ECW stuff.</font>

But thats been going on since like 1997. They think it's better to start the show open ended where anything can happen.

I don't think it's s big deal, but I do like the odd time where you pump up a TV match a week ahead of time.

[Swiss Ultimate]

Why is Seth Rollins "the guy"?

[Damian Rey]

Its tough to find a ton of guys who fit that bill. There isn't an assembly line of top talent just waiting to get their shot.

You know Hunter and Steph are amazing at their jobs. They can be used to give the rub to new talent but maintain their presence.

While I agree in principle, the current roster has several main event caliber players who, if protected, are easily believable as main eventers. Reigns and Ambrose on the face side, Wyatt as a heel, even Owens. If those 4 are consistently kept protected from constan losing and go over enough, they're interchangeable. Owens has been booked well since the Cena feud, I have top admit. I'm iffy on Reigns only because I feel he's lacking that one big match win. Beating Wyatt, who hasn't won a long term feud in ages it seems, came off as just spinning Reigns' wheels, imo.

Wyatt and Ambrose are a bit further than those two. They'd need to go over really well the next few months.

Nonetheless, that's a helluva lot of of depth.

[The CyNick]

Why is Seth Rollins "the guy"?

Skilled in the ring, good talker, handsome.

[The CyNick]

While I agree in principle, the current roster has several main event caliber players who, if protected, are easily believable as main eventers. Reigns and Ambrose on the face side, Wyatt as a heel, even Owens. If those 4 are consistently kept protected from constan losing and go over enough, they're interchangeable. Owens has been booked well since the Cena feud, I have top admit. I'm iffy on Reigns only because I feel he's lacking that one big match win. Beating Wyatt, who hasn't won a long term feud in ages it seems, came off as just spinning Reigns' wheels, imo.

Wyatt and Ambrose are a bit further than those two. They'd need to go over really well the next few months.

Nonetheless, that's a helluva lot of of depth.

I agree, you have named some guys that WWE has turned into stars.

I think Wyatt is an example of a guy kinda like Foley back in the day, where they feel he doesn't need to win a lot, he can talk and stay over. The fight with Reigns at HIAC was great, and I think both guys were further ahead because of it.

Owens to me is a guy who can go as far as he wants, he just needs to prove he is serious about wanting to be a top guy. Assuming he does I think he's heading in the right direction. He's the classic IC title guy that you can see moving to the next level. If there is a babyface world champ coming out of Mania, I can see him positioned as a major challenger.

Ambrose is a guy who has grown on me. He's another guy who WWE seems to think can lose and not hurt him. I would like to see him get a solid run of wins or at least a long term program for the IC title.

[Ol Dirty Dastard]

Skilled in the ring, good talker, handsome.

Not that great of a talker. Needs that signature moment, but for the most part could get there.

[Ol Dirty Dastard]

Signature promo that is

[Swiss Ultimate]

I remember him getting bitchslapped on Twitter by Dana White.

[The CyNick]

I remember him getting bitchslapped on Twitter by Dana White.

Seth?

[Swiss Ultimate]

Yeah, that's the one.

[The CyNick]

Missed that

Dana is an easy target these days

[Swiss Ultimate]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr"><a href="https://twitter.com/RKORollins">@RKORollins</a> I hear u bro but fake shit should be 9.99</p>&mdash; Dana White (@danawhite) <a href="https://twitter.com/danawhite/status/627301270248751105">August 1, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[The CyNick]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr"><a href="https://twitter.com/RKORollins">@RKORollins</a> I hear u bro but fake shit should be 9.99</p>&mdash; Dana White (@danawhite) <a href="https://twitter.com/danawhite/status/627301270248751105">August 1, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Classic Dana. Ripping on a fan. He should be crowned Internet Tough Guy World Champion.

[Swiss Ultimate]

This led to Seth Rollins actually commenting and the two trading insults.

[The CyNick]

This led to Seth Rollins actually commenting and the two trading insults.

I'm sure Dana slayed with his rapier wit

[Mr. Nerfect]

Trips and Steph are not going anywhere so I believe they should be the central figures on the show. You can invest time and money into a character and they can bolt leaving a void. Any investment into the Hunter and Steph characters you know are for the long term.

Doesn't mean you can't phase then in and out of TV as the focal point, but they should always have a presence.

Ah, the old "The booker makes himself the central figure because he can depend on himself trick." Worked great when Jeff Jarrett was the NWA World Heavyweight Champion in TNA for eight years or so.

[Big Vic]

Rollins is not handsome.

[Sixx]

Rollins is not handsome.

Come on, that 4 feet long neck is sexy as fuck.

[The CyNick]

Ah, the old "The booker makes himself the central figure because he can depend on himself trick." Worked great when Jeff Jarrett was the NWA World Heavyweight Champion in TNA for eight years or so.

I wouldn't know I only follow WWE

I know it worked really well with Vince.