|
Follow @TheDocLOP QUESTION OF THE DAY: Do you think Cena vs. Owens is the best WWE rivalry in years? If not, what do you think is the best WWE rivalry in years? The following is a case study of WWE’s product for the month of June 2015. Is John Cena vs. Kevin Owens WWE's Best Rivalry In Years? At various points throughout WWE history, we have witnessed similar occurrences. One wrestler engages another and, just like that, magic is in the air. With later in-ring altercations as gripping as their talking segments, a rivalry is born that strikes an emotional chord within the fanbase. The ensuing reverberation captures our imaginations and becomes the subject of our fan forum water cooler talk for years to come. The night that Kevin Owens sauntered out to the ring unexpectedly, something clicked between him and the subject of his verbal barrage, John Cena. It's been a thrilling six weeks since. In this day and age of instant gratification, something that used to take several months to accomplish can be achieved in a matter of weeks. Thus, it occasionally needs reminding that Cena vs. Owens has only been going in since the middle of last month. It has been so awesome, though, that it has taken on a strange phenomenon that I can best relate to a personal matter. My wife and I recently celebrated our wedding anniversary. We discussed over dinner how our relationship, on the one hand, seems like it has been going for many more than its current number of years but, on the other hand, it seems like it was just yesterday that we met. The Owens-Cena rivalry seems that way, too, doesn't it? With a rivalry such as theirs, time passes and stands still all at once. It has been a while since I've seen the level of organic chemistry we're seeing from Cena and Owens. Christian and Randy Orton in 2011 is the last time I recall such a pleasant, mid-year, surprising mix of that special something in a series of matches which we just don't see all that often. I remember The Rock once saying about a different subject that “it has that x-factor; that intangible; you just can't describe it.” That's how I feel about Cena vs. Owens (and Orton vs. Christian or Mysterio vs. Jericho '09). Maybe the best way to describe it is that when those two guys are interacting, the rest of the world stops. I tend to currently gravitate toward more epic tales (like Ambrose-Rollins this month), but having been such a fan of the Smackdown Six Era, I still love a barrage of athletic assault like Cena vs. Owens. From an in-ring performance standpoint, it reminds me of Edge vs. Kurt Angle in 2002. Overall, though, the presentation feels more authentic. Cena has always been at his best when interacting with men who are perceived as underdogs. Whenever he has tried on that hat, himself, it hasn't felt natural. No one in their right mind can ever question how hard he worked to earn his spot, but even when he was scratching and clawing his way to the top, he still looked the part of his OVW moniker: The Prototype. In modern wrestling lore, it has been proven that people either flock to the superhero or the everyman; and Cena was destined to play the superhero from day one. Any storyline that attempts to make him relatable is foundationally flawed. You can make an everyman look like a superhero, but you can't make the superhero look like an everyman. Owens has followed in the footsteps of CM Punk and Daniel Bryan as a wrestler from the indies that embodies a simple ideal: that the best wrestlers in the world should get a chance to prove their worth on the biggest stage no matter what they look like. Since Cena, whether he likes it or not, does look like the classic WWE Superstar and – since he made it – does get the opportunities afforded to the archetypal WWE top guy, anyone he is pitted against who fits the everyman mold and has considerable confidence and talent is embraced by those that gravitate toward the everyman. Most fans beyond childhood can easily relate to Owens even if they prefer superhero tales just because he's not larger than life. “He’s one of us,” notes Grantland's David “The Masked Man” Shoemaker. “And in pro wrestling, being one with the crowd is the most important thing.” Owens, as much as Punk, Bryan, or anyone else in WWE lore, just looks like a normal guy who won a contest to appear on Raw. Yet, he has taken Cena to his limits at every turn. He is an elite talker and an outstanding wrestler. Like the best of Cena's rivals, Owens has pushed the Golden Boy to – as odd is it may seem – try to further prove himself. As big a proponent as I am of “it's all about the follow-up” and taking the complete picture into account when attempting to historically rank in pro wrestling, I am well aware that the following is an audacious claim. Nevertheless, if the Owens vs. Cena rivalry manages to meet a satisfying and logical conclusion, then – to answer my own question - I'm going to argue that, yes, Cena vs. Owens is the best WWE rivalry in quite some time. Match of the Month: John Cena vs. Kevin Owens at Money in the Bank My feelings about this month's competition were made clear in the Money in the Bank Review below; I thought it was quite the two horse race. Samuel Plan wrote a detailed description of what made the Ambrose-Rollins match a classic and I agree with his assessment despite most of the fanbase finding that the Ladder match paled in comparison to Owens vs. Cena II. I, personally, deem that to be a completely understandable viewpoint for the basic reason that Cena vs. Owens better fit what the modern wrestling enthusiast wants, but just because Imitation Game wasn't as popular as Dawn of the Planet of the Apes doesn't mean Apes is necessarily better – just that it appeals to more people. When matches struggle to separate from the pack upon multiple viewings, I break out my trusty formula. You take the basic elements (selling, psychology, and execution) and which match had the superior climax and add in depth of the story, the quality of the near falls, the investment of the crowd, and the strength of the feud leading in. For the June 2015 bubble, I'd take Owens vs. Cena as the superior storyline, but overall it's a wash until further notice because Ambrose-Rollins has been producing great TV and PPV for a year. If anything, Ambrose-Rollins gets the nod for longevity and consistency. Owens vs. Cena had more compelling false finishes, while Ambrose-Rollins was a far more meaty story in 35-minutes of action. Still equals. I enjoyed both match endings, so the tie continues. The basic elements would seem, on the surface, to favor Rollins vs. Ambrose, but Cena's dynamic personality in the match with Owens drew the bouts even yet again. So, it all boiled down to the crowd's enthusiasm; and it was quite clear which match the live crowd favored – it's Owens vs. Cena by a Hunter Hearst Helmsley nose. Previous MOTM winners: Seth Rollins vs. Brock Lesnar vs. John Cena at Royal Rumble (Jan), Daniel Bryan vs. Roman Reigns at Fast Lane (Feb), Roman Reigns vs. Brock Lesnar (vs. Seth Rollins) at WrestleMania (Mar), Big Show vs. Roman Reigns at Extreme Rules (Apr), and John Cena vs. Kevin Owens at Elimination Chamber (May) Wrestler of the Month: Kevin Owens It seems odd to me that, a few months ago, I wrote in the March Review that Rollins would likely win a plethora of these WOTM awards. Here we are three months later and I've given it to six different wrestlers in the first six months of the year. Owens earned it in June, continuing the momentum he began in the second half of May and barely edging his dance partner, Cena. The Golden Boy has narrowly missed out twice now, but even more so for this month for all the reasons described in the “Rivalry” portion above. What it boiled down to was not that Owens outperformed Cena; rather, Owens added a moment to his short career resume that Cena could not match over the last 30 days: laying a beat down on Machine Gun Kelly. With top notch character work and a second consecutive Match of the Month to boot, it was really a no-brainer. Previous WOTM winners: Brock Lesnar (Jan), Daniel Bryan (Feb), Seth Rollins (Mar), Sheamus (Apr), and Dean Ambrose (May) Money in the Bank Review I've had a unique viewing pattern for these last two PPVs, watching them sporadically throughout the night and day that follow them. Some commented on my lack of review of the undercard from Elimination Chamber and forgive me if I don't spend much time on it for MITB either, but I've had to be picky with what I watched given a infant-centered schedule and I thought MITB was clearly a 3 match event anyway. Here's a couple of quick hitting mid-card thoughts: -Ryback-Show was OK. If Ryback Shellshocks Show in the payoff, then it's a career highlight to be replayed for the rest of his life. -I was shocked at the Tag Team Championship change. Why take the straps off the hottest act in the division? I'll be curious to see what's next. -Nikki Bella and Paige have the best chemistry of any current main roster Diva combo. I liked the booking of the finish, though I can see why many wouldn't. It, much like the main-event at EC last month, builds depth to their storyline. The Money in the Bank Ladder match was standard fare. Last year's version had the meat and potatoes necessary to create a new blueprint for the gimmick and this year's just didn't have much to offer beyond takes on the spots we've seen ad nauseum via the modern plethora of Ladder matches. The exception to the last part of that statement was Bray Wyatt's appearance, leading to the overwhelming favorite to win the briefcase, Roman Reigns, walking away empty handed. I'm ready and raring for that feud and have been for several months, feeling as though they could potentially each be elevated by it in a Trips-Rock circa 1998 sort of way. Sheamus winning is intriguing. I've been a Sheamus supporter since the beginning. He has what it takes to excel as a top heel. That said, I'm surprised that he won. I had the MITB briefcase pegged as a method used to get us the Shield triple threat for WM. I'd be curious to know, if you want to see that, how you'd propose that we get there now that MITB is off the table. Sheamus has some interesting options for cash-ins. I've wanted to see Brock vs. Sheamus since Lesnar returned. I'd also be all for Reigns vs. Sheamus; I think they'd work really well together. All in all, the MITB Ladder match was exactly what I expected it to be for 20-minutes and surprising for the final 50 seconds due to the unexpected winner. (*** 1/2) John Cena vs. Kevin Owens II was fantastic and another strong candidate for Match of the Year. Put those pair of matches together and you've got as enjoyable an hour to spend watching wrestling as you'll ever see. Some things were better and others worse than the original, but I'd call them equal overall. John Cena was excellent at showing emotion when questioning the referee on several of those two counts. It's not been often that someone has been presented as his equal in the ring. Some have been presented as physically superior (i.e. Brock), but when push comes to shove during a back and forth match, Cena usually gets the better of his opponent in the end and looks reasonably comfortable adorning his figurative Superman cape. With so few exceptions who have legitimately cracked his hardened exterior (Punk, Bryan, Rock), it really does matter when another person adds his name to the list. Owens has done that, but for perhaps more than any other rival sans for Rock, Cena sold it so very well; he made it clear that beating Owens meant something to him on a different level than 95% of the rest of his opposition throughout his career. Both men delivered, but Cena made that match for me with his character work. (**** 1/2) Dean Ambrose vs. Seth Rollins may very well become the Bret Hart-Owen Hart (at Summerslam) of Ladder matches, in that people in some quarters are calling it one of the all-time greatest matches and others are scratching their heads wondering why anyone would heap that caliber of praise on it. I thought it was a phenomenal match, personally. About 10-minutes in, ironically after the part that the detractors called "boring" or "slow" yet I found to be a nice start to a 35-minute match, I found myself wondering aloud if I was witnessing the early moments of something truly special. It's the longest Ladder match of all-time, so that's going to hurt it in some circles. Could the length and, hence, the more deliberately paced parts, end up making HHH vs. HBK Hell in a Cell (in 2004) a better historical comparison, I wonder? I once described that match as one that "I never wanted to end." I have a hard time sitting through it today; it drew similarly mixed opinions a decade ago. I need to re-watch Ambrose vs. Rollins a couple of times before I outright proclaim it as an all-time classic that can stand time's test, but I did think it was a tremendous story told. They seem to enjoy going against the grain of a gimmick's basic blueprint. Last year, in addition to the aforementioned redefinition of the Money in the Bank Ladder match, they redefined what we could expect from a Lumberjack match, which fundamentally should be a somewhat tedious affair with a lot of non-important players interfering with the chemistry of the line-up. They turned that stipulation on its head, frankly, and a great match ensued to which all future Lumberjack matches will be compared. A few months afterward, they climbed to the top of Hell in a Cell and crashed off its side through a pair of announce tables, reconditioning a fanbase that had come to assume "nothing overly innovative is going to happen in the Cell's confines" and had people proclaiming another gimmick match had a new, modern blueprint. Why should it have surprised us that they didn't do what's come to be so common in Ladder matches - endless stunts with limited storytelling? Using the HBK-Razor, Rock-HHH, HBK-Y2J formula, Rollins and Ambrose had a match that just so happened to involve ladders. Ambrose was presented as relentless; Rollins as resourceful and cunning. Both came away stronger than they entered, with the door left open for future rematches by a finish that offered no definitive victor (I really liked the ending, for the record). (**** 1/2) July Predictions I'm going ahead with this section now because we already know the two big matches to be featured at the July PPV: Rollins vs. Lesnar and Wyatt vs. Reigns. I have a hard time not seeing both of these bouts being rematched at Summerslam. Brock Lesnar vs. Seth Rollins minus the Authority's help ought to make for an interesting month, but I expect that whatever happens at Battleground will get the Authority back to supporting the Architect. It makes little sense to muddy the waters with Brock/Heyman and Trips/Steph. There's business to be attended to, but they shouldn't be buddy-buddy at all. I think a dynamic will emerge that will help Rollins escape next month, but that same dynamic will simply act as more for Brock The Conqueror to overcome in August. Wyatt will end up defeating Reigns at Battleground by some sort of psychological twist (I loved that they had Wyatt use Roman's family photo in his promo to kickstart the verbal details of that feud). Reigns will have to work hard to overcome this challenge, I hope.
|
