Round 1 (Pillman): [1] Roman Reigns vs [16] Jay White

[Rob McCarron]

Round 1 - Brian Pillman Region

[1] Roman Reigns vs [16] Jay White

[mlev76]

Oh, for fuck's sake....

[Rob McCarron]

Jay White looking to upset the #1 seed in the Pillman bracket! Can he make a run!!

[mlev76]

Jay White looking to upset the #1 seed in the Pillman bracket! Can he make a run!!

If only VOW was around in the 80s, we'd be preparing for the Steve Lombardi upset over Hulk Hogan.

[cherrylimeaid]

LMAO. For this alone best tournament ever.

[mlev76]

LMAO. For this alone best tournament ever.

In other news, Randy Mulkey upset Ric Flair...

[Rich Kraetsch]

Haha, oh boy. I'm legitimately stunned it's THIS polarizing. Remember, this is just supposed to be fun but it's still pretty hilarious to see what's happened.

FWIW, Reigns certainly isn't the star Flair and Hogan were and Jay White is far better than Randy Mulkey, Lombardi or any paint-by-numbers WWF jobber so it's somewhere in the middle.

[HurriOwl]

Haaahaha! A #16 seed has yet to defeat a #1 seed during March Madness, but it'll happen during Match Madness.

[mlev76]

Haha, oh boy. I'm legitimately stunned it's THIS polarizing. Remember, this is just supposed to be fun but it's still pretty hilarious to see what's happened.

FWIW, Reigns certainly isn't the star Flair and Hogan were and Jay White is far better than Randy Mulkey, Lombardi or any paint-by-numbers WWF jobber so it's somewhere in the middle.

If I were a conspiracy minded person (and I'm not), I'd try to make the case that this was a political hit by the proprietors of VOW. But, since I'm not, I'll just say my point is if this is really a legitimate point of discussion, there is not case to be made that White is better at this moment in time. If its a booking thing, then how does one justify selecting someone who loses to every non-Young Lion by force of his position over a main eventer in the biggest promotion in the world?

And its really not "in the middle" since White is in a different caste completely. That was my point in the comparison.

[CThrash13]

This one isn't even close. Smh. I'm disappointed in the VoW readers on this one. I'm not even a big Reigns fan, but he's far and away the best in this match-up.

[cherrylimeaid]

Haha, oh boy. I'm legitimately stunned it's THIS polarizing. Remember, this is just supposed to be fun but it's still pretty hilarious to see what's happened.

FWIW, Reigns certainly isn't the star Flair and Hogan were and Jay White is far better than Randy Mulkey, Lombardi or any paint-by-numbers WWF jobber so it's somewhere in the middle.

If I were a conspiracy minded person (and I'm not), I'd try to make the case that this was a political hit by the proprietors of VOW. But, since I'm not, I'll just say my point is if this is really a legitimate point of discussion, there is not case to be made that White is better at this moment in time. If its a booking thing, then how does one justify selecting someone who loses to every non-Young Lion by force of his position over a main eventer in the biggest promotion in the world?

And its really not "in the middle" since White is in a different caste completely. That was my point in the comparison.

It really depends on what you consider to be "best wrestler". Booking might be the only thing Reigns wins hands down.

Overness when compared to how you are booked. White wins by a landslide.

Ability to put various matches together to tell various stories. Less of landslide. I don't know what White is calling. I know I've seen a variety of more match stories with White in there than Reigns.

In ring I haven't done any side by side viewings. But White is considered to be damn good. Not just for his years in the business. But damn good.

I'm glad this isn't just booking. If it was anybody from WWE would win hands down period against everybody else. The top four would be Lesnar, Cena, Reigns, and HHH and we could vote on the 4 till our hearts are content. All as I'm saying is there is more of a case than "hone" if you can see that this tournament is bigger than that, IMO. Then I'm again I'm sure there are those that would love those being the final 4 which is fine. They may vote for that.

Look or ring presence I suppose goes to Reigns but I will say even in losing White has a little something and a little something else seems to be developing IMO.

Main eventer does not make you a "best wrestler" by ANY damn stretch there miev. I could start listing "main eventers" if you don't get that point and you can rank them as "best wrestlers". Miz, Leno......

Again this is subjective. To be being over while losing every match takes a whole lot more talent that being given the ball and not sizing up to what you are supposed to do. To me "best wrestler" does not mean push, presence, or how they are booked more than how match they captivate me in the ring. For me that is Jay. For you I accept that is something else.

BTW this would be GREAT Lanza rant.

[mlev76]

It really depends on what you consider to be "best wrestler". Booking might be the only thing Reigns wins hands down.

Overness when compared to how you are booked. White wins by a landslide.

Ability to put various matches together to tell various stories. Less of landslide. I don't know what White is calling. I know I've seen a variety of more match stories with White in there than Reigns.

In ring I haven't done any side by side viewings. But White is considered to be damn good. Not just for his years in the business. But damn good.

I'm glad this isn't just booking. If it was anybody from WWE would win hands down period against everybody else. The top four would be Lesnar, Cena, Reigns, and HHH and we could vote on the 4 till our hearts are content. All as I'm saying is there is more of a case than "hone" if you can see that this tournament is bigger than that, IMO. Then I'm again I'm sure there are those that would love those being the final 4 which is fine. They may vote for that.

Look or ring presence I suppose goes to Reigns but I will say even in losing White has a little something and a little something else seems to be developing IMO.

Main eventer does not make you a "best wrestler" by ANY damn stretch there miev. I could start listing "main eventers" if you don't get that point and you can rank them as "best wrestlers". Miz, Leno......

Again this is subjective. To be being over while losing every match takes a whole lot more talent that being given the ball and not sizing up to what you are supposed to do. To me "best wrestler" does not mean push, presence, or how they are booked more than how match they captivate me in the ring. For me that is Jay. For you I accept that is something else.

BTW this would be GREAT Lanza rant.

White has had 4 singles matches that went more than 10 minutes in the last year, all against fellow young lions. Reigns has been almost exclusively been a main eventer over the same period. They're not even wrestling in the same way here. One is a future project, the other is a person that money is lost/made on. Their roles are not the same. And the greatest irony is the paradigm in the promotion that White is known for would make him beating Reigns ridiculous/insulting.

Does White have more upside? Maybe. If you put them in the same circumstance, would he produce better matches? Possibly. But this is about NOW, not the future. And while the future may be White's, Reigns is better now. I don't even know how anyone can say otherwise.

[OmegaMan]

I voted for White based on the fact I've simply enjoyed his matches more than I've enjoyed Reigns recently. I'm enjoying watching White grow while Roman just frustrates me. I like Roman but his character isn't appealing to me in its current state.

[cherrylimeaid]

Again I don't know how "Well he is in a main event, or main events" is a valid argument at all. At least for me. Simply answer this. Have you studied wrestling to stay aware of wrestling enough where you know terrible WRESTLERS have been in main events continually, normally carried by great WRESTLERS? Please please please miev76 answer that. If you don't believe a terrible wrestler has ever been put in a main event status spot our conflict of opinions is spelled out right there, and Baron Vonhowever you spell his last name Roshkee can rest a little easier.

This is not a best status as of right now tournament. FOR ME. Again I'm always allowing you to make this tournament only about status in your votes. That is your prerogative. In fact this COULD in fact be, put these two guys in the same situation. There is zero chance I trust Roman to be able to put White over in a good match. My life or company on the line I'm much more likely to trust White to be able to put Roman over. For me it's simple as that. I"m sorry that Roman has the undeserved status he has. I, and most, really are. But at the end of the day that's really all he has.

But thank you for the "put in similar circumstances argument". Since this tournament does include indies and with 64 people can't possibly include all main eventers that IS exactly what this tournament represents FOR ME. All the more power for what it represents FOR YOU.

[DETROIT_KEJB]

I get that in the grand scheme, this tournament isn't that serious. That being said, I think VoW has made some head-scratching decisions on this tournament.

The idea that there isn't room to include Honma and Makabe or Fish and Oreilly, but there is room for Kongo Kong. On a forum with 99% smark tendencies, making Roman a 1 seed is the equivalent of click baiting. Rob/Rich and whoever had to see that this was exactly what would happen.