Most Overrated

User avatar
Joe Lanza
Site Admin
Posts: 2732
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:00 pm

Re: Most Overrated

Post by Joe Lanza » Mon Dec 28, 2015 4:09 pm

Reigns isn't over to the level of his push. "Over to the level you need to be to be a modern WWE main eventer" sounds like the most backhanded of praise possible to me.

They pulled out all of the stops to "get him over" and ONE WEEK LATER he was getting tepid responses again.

He just hasn't connected, and more importantly to the topic at hand, he did not connect in 2015. Roman Reigns is very clearly the most overpushed person in wrestling this year. It just didn't work.

User avatar
Joe Lanza
Site Admin
Posts: 2732
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:00 pm

Re: Most Overrated

Post by Joe Lanza » Mon Dec 28, 2015 4:17 pm

I'm also pretty tired of hearing about the "star making machine being broken".

Maybe they're just picking the wrong stars.

Roman Reigns looks the part. So did Tom Magee. And Lex Luger. And Sean O'Haire. And a million other guys.

One guy gets over organically and they fight it tooth and nail for some odd reason. Then they decide based on hair & dreamy eyes to push another guy, and the fans just don't seem to want it. Blaming the booking is easy. No one was booked worse than Bryan. He got over. The selection process is what might be broken here. The star PICKING machine is the issue.

User avatar
mlev76
Posts: 2576
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:32 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Re: Most Overrated

Post by mlev76 » Mon Dec 28, 2015 4:18 pm

Joe Lanza wrote:Reigns isn't over to the level of his push. "Over to the level you need to be to be a modern WWE main eventer" sounds like the most backhanded of praise possible to me.

They pulled out all of the stops to "get him over" and ONE WEEK LATER he was getting tepid responses again.

He just hasn't connected, and more importantly to the topic at hand, he did not connect in 2015. Roman Reigns is very clearly the most overpushed person in wrestling this year. It just didn't work.
The case against Reigns as most overrated seems to rest in many ways on one of my most hated current trends-blaming all failures on WWE creative/excusing away successes because WWE creative sucks. We saw the flip side of this when people shit on the Bryan coronation at Mania XXX because it wasn't the plan. No it wasn't but in the end, it worked.

In the end, Reigns hasn't gotten over to the level of his push in spite of his talent and partly due to WWE creative failings. The reasons/excuses don't matter, the result does.

User avatar
ceftaxias
Posts: 158
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2015 12:53 am

Re: Most Overrated

Post by ceftaxias » Mon Dec 28, 2015 4:48 pm

Joe Lanza wrote:I'm also pretty tired of hearing about the "star making machine being broken".

Maybe they're just picking the wrong stars.

Roman Reigns looks the part. So did Tom Magee. And Lex Luger. And Sean O'Haire. And a million other guys.

One guy gets over organically and they fight it tooth and nail for some odd reason. Then they decide based on hair & dreamy eyes to push another guy, and the fans just don't seem to want it. Blaming the booking is easy. No one was booked worse than Bryan. He got over. The selection process is what might be broken here. The star PICKING machine is the issue.
Man you know this is a much more complicated debate than something like "Bryan and Punk got over, why can't Reigns? Case closed".

Bryan and Punk (I know you didn't mention him but he's the other example of a guy getting over in this era) were actually booked a lot better in comparison to the rest of the midcarders, each were consistently given actual storylines/character development and promo time. I actually think it's ridiculous to say no one was booked worse than Bryan because I think the total opposite in that he was booked amazingly well considering he doesn't tick any of the boxes required to grab the brass ring. Him and Punk are obviously both outliers in many ways compared to the FCW produced group of guys as well, one of those outliers being that they are two of the more talented guys of the era and probably the only real American hall of fame candidates post-Cena.

Sorry for using the dumb phrase again but the star making machine is so clearly broken. No one gets over unless you are such an outlier that you are an all-time great worker or they trust you enough to work your own angles and cut your own promos, how is the machine not broken? They can't even get their chosen ones over unless Triple H steps in and makes sure his opponent gets heat. I guess their chosen ONE at this point because everyone else is Stephanie's doormat.

And a good point Dylan has brought up, we're also in an era where being the chosen one is more of a negative than it's ever been, and the greatest examples are Sheamus and Reigns, two really solid workers who have label as chosen ones by fans who are just going to dislike them regardless. I hate to generalize like that but I've been on the internet for too long not to see that. And of course neither guy is booked to be relatable or likable in any way, but I think that just adds to my point that with some of these guys it's not their fault.
Last edited by ceftaxias on Mon Dec 28, 2015 4:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
ceftaxias
Posts: 158
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2015 12:53 am

Re: Most Overrated

Post by ceftaxias » Mon Dec 28, 2015 4:56 pm

But regardless, I'm still not seeing the case for Reigns over Rollins for this when Rollins was in so many more dull segments, so many more main events, got over to an equally disappointing level or even less than that, and (in my opinion) had a worse year in ring than Roman. I don't care if secretly the evil McMahons actually think Reigns is the star, Seth was the one on top that entire time until November. What is the argument that Rollins as the champion main eventing most PPVs and TVs and in the most segments wasn't more over pushed in comparison to Reigns?
Last edited by ceftaxias on Mon Dec 28, 2015 5:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Joe Lanza
Site Admin
Posts: 2732
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:00 pm

Re: Most Overrated

Post by Joe Lanza » Mon Dec 28, 2015 5:00 pm

ceftaxias wrote:But regardless, I'm still not seeing the case for Reigns over Rollins for this when Rollins was in so many more dull segments, so many more main events, got over to an equally disappointing level or even less than that, and (in my opinion) had a worse year in ring than Roman. I don't care if secretly the evil McMahons actually think Reigns is the star, Seth was the one on top that entire time until November. What is the argument that Rollins as the champion main eventing most PPVs and TVs and in the most segments and the top guy wasn't more over pushed in comparison to Reigns?
I don't have a problem with choosing Rollins for this if you want, but don't confuse being champion with being pushed as the top guy. Not in WWE.

User avatar
mlev76
Posts: 2576
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:32 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Re: Most Overrated

Post by mlev76 » Mon Dec 28, 2015 5:25 pm

Rollins was booked to be the undeserving lackey champion who kept stealing wins. His reign seemed like the prelude to Reigns coronation. He was certainly not booked well, but part of that was intentional.

User avatar
duyarvish
Posts: 125
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2015 8:21 pm

Re: Most Overrated

Post by duyarvish » Mon Dec 28, 2015 5:50 pm

I'm going to make an argument for arguments sake about Roman being the best choice for most Overpushed. I don't think anyone will argue that he was clearly not over to his push from the rumble to mania. We can argue until we are blue about why but I think we can all agree on the end result there.

Which leads to my next questions. If Roman is over do we actually get the Seth Rollins death reign? Does Undertaker end up being the one to get the "rub" from the streak? Does Sheamus ever get the belt? Do ratings decline as bad as they did?

Outside of the Undertaker one there is no definitive way to answer any of those questions. At the same time can we really ignore them? It's easy to keep saying to ignore the fact that he was pushed as "The Guy" but why should we do that. He had the top spot in the two biggest events in Sports Entertainment and failed to get over in either of them. Even if you don't think he's the best choice, how can we possibly say that he isn't at least a valid one?

User avatar
ceftaxias
Posts: 158
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2015 12:53 am

Re: Most Overrated

Post by ceftaxias » Mon Dec 28, 2015 6:04 pm

Alright we might be overthinking this one now lads.

User avatar
cbacon87
Posts: 334
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:50 pm

Re: Most Overrated

Post by cbacon87 » Mon Dec 28, 2015 6:29 pm

Reigns is absolutely winning.

Nobody's going to put that much thought into the choice. It's going to be "I don't like Roman Reigns and he wins a lot of matches".

People were mad about the Reigns "the guy" push before they'd even actually started doing it on TV and it was just a blurb in a newsletter. Now it's actually happened and hasn't done anything for business, he's absolutely winning. The fact that they finally made it work in December kinda proves it wasn't 'over pushing', it was the company doing a terrible job of pushing him. But that's irrelevant. He's winning and it won't be close.

User avatar
Joe Lanza
Site Admin
Posts: 2732
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:00 pm

Re: Most Overrated

Post by Joe Lanza » Tue Dec 29, 2015 3:24 am

So I've been thinking about this "award" a lot.

I was planning on Reigns 1, Minoru Suzuki 2, based on being pushed hard and not getting over at the level of their respective pushes. Suzuki is quantifiable based on NOAH business trends, Roman struggled to get crowd reactions all year (Rumble was this year, btw guys), and even the very next week after VKM got him over more than ever, he got tepid reactions again.

However, some of you make valid points about both guys clearly not lacking ability or charisma, as the criteria states.

So there are two ways of looking at the award. People who are pushed who lack ability/charisma, or most overpushed in the sense that regardless of talent the person was "overpushed" based on what they produced from a business perspective relative to their push.

I find it hard to wrap my head around someone like BJ Whitmer (not picking on whoever brought him up, just a good example to use) being considered more overpushed than guys like Reigns or Suzuki who fans simply did not respond to this year, especially since they were pushed VERY hard and at the top of the card, as opposed to guys in the middle where at the end of the day it really doesn't matter.

Am I punishing Reigns & Suzuki too hard for business strategies and/or booking that sucked?

User avatar
mprentice84
Posts: 182
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2015 9:25 am
Location: Rochester, NY
Contact:

Re: Most Overrated

Post by mprentice84 » Tue Dec 29, 2015 3:43 am

Suzuki is an interesting one that I hadn't really considered.

User avatar
cbacon87
Posts: 334
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:50 pm

Re: Most Overrated

Post by cbacon87 » Tue Dec 29, 2015 12:25 pm

I haven't kept up with NOAH strongly enough to know, but is there any way of telling if NOAH crowds actively didn't want the Suzuki-gun angle to happen and they should have pulled the plug on it, or it's just NOAH's too far gone and unless it's KENTA it doesn't matter?

I guess the Nagata run worked, but I don't know where NOAH and it's fanbase really stands this year compared to then. Also with Suzuki, you can make the arguement of "if not him then who", but again that's not a factor if it's clear NOAH fans were actively rejecting him and the storyline.

User avatar
DylanWaco
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 5:56 pm

Re: Most Overrated

Post by DylanWaco » Tue Dec 29, 2015 4:12 pm

The most overpushed guy in wrestling is HHH. It's not close. He should win.

User avatar
ceftaxias
Posts: 158
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2015 12:53 am

Re: Most Overrated

Post by ceftaxias » Tue Dec 29, 2015 4:38 pm

I would vote HHH and Steph #1 and #2 but I'm not sure if you're supposed to include non-wrestlers in this. I checked last year's results a while back and I don't remember seeing either of them on the ten listed in the awards issue.

This award is just strange in a lot of ways.

"The wrestler who gets the biggest push, despite lacking ring ability or charisma."

That criteria doesn't even necessarily mean the most "over pushed" which is what everyone replies with when people ask what this award means. It doesn't indicate you should vote for a guy who's age or just plain staleness should prevent them from being pushed to whichever degree either. It means the most pushed with the least talent, and in that case Big Show, Reigns, Rollins, HHH and Suzuki shouldn't at all be considered for this. The only one that stands out from the obvious picks to me is Kane who has his fans in both work and promos but I'm not one of them.

But people will vote for these awards however they want to of course.

Post Reply