411 Fact or Fiction Wrestling: Was Daniel Bryan Losing to Rusev The Wrong Call?

Welcome back to 411 Fact or Fiction, Wrestling Edition! Stuff happened, people loved/hated it and let everyone else know. I pick through the interesting/not so interesting tidbits and then make 411 staff members discuss them for your pleasure. Battling this week are 411’s Ken Hill & Steve Cook.

Questions were sent out Tuesday.

Participants were told to expect wrestling-related content, as well as possible statements on quantum physics, homemade pharmaceuticals, the Turtle Total Trip Theorem, pizza and hydroponics.

1. Daniel Bryan losing to Rusev on Smackdown was the wrong call.

Steve Cook: FICTION – It doesn’t sound great on the surface, right? Bryan is fresh off a big return & we’d like to see him booked strong as possible. I’m as big a Rusev fan as you’ll find around these parts, but we all know that WWE’s treatment of his character hasn’t been the most consistent. Sometimes he’s a threat, sometimes he’s not. If this win over Bryan along with the reemergence of Lana into his storylines ends up being the catalyst to a renewed push for the Bulgarian Brute, it’s a great move. If Rusev is back to being a joke within a couple of weeks, it’s a waste of time. Hopefully it’s the former. There’s also the factor of this being a Money in the Bank Ladder Match qualifier. Even if Bryan is 100%, it’s best to hold him out of matches like those for the time being. We don’t need him trying to do headbutts or superplexes off of ladders, which we know he would try to do if he was in the match.

Ken Hill: FICTION – Rusev losing? On Rusev Day? BLASPHEMY! Really, though, I’m not at all upset with the call; I can’t imagine WWE is 100% comfortable with having Bryan in a unpredictably dangerous gimmick like a ladder match, plus they just had him make his record-breaking run in the GRR event over in Jeddah (and end up having his chest look like raw meat on a butcher block, to boot), so they don’t want to take any chances and literally wear him out on his in-ring return, especially not with all the precautions they’re having him take before and after every match. Not many of us were comfortable with him being in a ladder match at WM 31 during his initial return (I was among the consensus that he had returned too early), so I don’t blame WWE for probably wanting him to sit this out. Plus, he’s at an elevated status in his career where he doesn’t NEED the MITB for a championship opportunity, Rusev needs that sort of rub more, a loss to Rusev doesn’t hurt Bryan, and a clean win over another popular superstar in Bryan can’t help but give some notoriety to the Lion of Bulgaria going into the Men’s MITB match. Far as I’m concerned, WWE made the right call (for once).

2. Kevin Owens signing a new 5-year deal with WWE is great news.

Steve Cook: FACT – Of course it is. KO will continue to do what he loves on a major stage & provide for his family for at least five years. That’s always a good thing. Overall, WWE has been very good to Kevin Owens during his stint on the main roster. There have been some bumps in the road, & Kevin himself has expressed doubts at times. But at the end of the day, he’s been Universal Champion, Intercontinental Champion & United States Champion. He’s been used near the tops of cards more often than not. It’s not like Owens has really dialed things back since he joined WWE either. He doesn’t do the package piledriver, but other than that he gets to go nuts. I couldn’t be happier for him.

Ken Hill: FACT – According to Kevin himself, he and his family are content at the moment and he sees no problem in wrapping up with WWE what would be a storied 25+ year career in professional wrestling. Kevin has been a virtual world traveler when it comes to the squared circle, from ZERO1 and Dragon Gate in Japan, to New Jersey’s CZW, cross-countrying to Pro Wrestling Guerrilla in SoCal, making his name in ROH alongside forever frenemy Sami Zayn, and finally making it to WWE where he has found success as a former NXT, US, IC and Universal Champion and has become one of the company’s top consistent performers. Kevin’s had a longer journey throughout the industry than some people tend to realize, he’s a family man now, and if Kevin sees fit to tie himself to WWE for the foreseeable future to give himself and his family a good steady life, I’m happy for him and I say let KO-Mania ride on.

3. If WWE runs a three MITB matches at this year’s MITB PPV they will run the risk of burning out the gimmick.

Steve Cook: FICTION – I am at odds with most people when it comes to the Money in the Bank gimmick. I hate it. It’s a proven loser when it comes to establishing talent. It either leads to title reigns that nobody has any real interest in seeing, or the talent in question loses their title match and looks like a dope. We’ve seen more Jack Swaggers, Damien Sandows & Baron Corbins in recent years than Edges & Mizs. There was a time where the concept was good as gold, but I’m beyond done caring. That being said, most of you still seem to buy into it. The ladder matches are fun, people love working themselves into a frenzy whenever a champion seems vulnerable, and the cash-ins get good pops. In the More is Always Better world that we live in, three ladder matches is better than two, which is obviously better than one. It’s going to suck for whichever one gets to follow the other two, but I can’t see most WWE fans losing interest just because there’s one more briefcase than last year.

Ken Hill: FICTION – I don’t really think so. It’s not entirely unprecedented to have three MITB matches in a year (see 2010, WM 26 and the first MITB PPV). That being said, having three on the same show may seem like a little much, but you also have to remember the differences in the gimmick matches as performed by either the men or the women. Take this year’s Elimination Chamber PPV, for example. The first-ever Women’s Chamber match was far more storyline-based, what with the presence of Absolution, the beginning of the end of the Sasha-Bailey friendship, and Alexa looking to try and make it out of the chamber with her title and body intact. That is to say, the women’s match wasn’t as big on popping the crowd with shocking spots and brutality like we saw in the Men’s Chamber match, with Strowman throwing everyone around and destroying half the pods in the process, but rather it focused more on the multiple stories being told, with one or two shocking moments (Sasha knocking off Bayley, Alexa retaining) thrown in for flavor. Plus, I think as long as WWE structures the PPV properly (Tag Team MITB 1st, Women’s MITB 2nd, Men’s MITB 3rd), they can pull off having three ladder matches without totally exhausting the crowd by the time the main event rolls around. Tag Team goes on first to get the crowd heated up, the Women’s MITB goes on second to help the other middle matches wind the crowd down a bit, then pick them right back up with the Men’s MITB near or in the main event.

SWITCH!

4. WWE attempting to portray Roman Reigns as a “Daniel Bryan-like” figure is a poor plan.

Ken Hill: FACT – Whereas Rollins had “Redesign, Rebuild, Reclaim” in 2016, Vince’s motto for Roman in 2018 seems to be “Retreat, Recycle, Reuse”. That’s what so sad about this attempt; it’s not even the first time Vince has tried something like this. They spent the latter half of 2015 and the first quarter of 2016 trying to build up Roman as an anti-authority figure in the same vein as Bryan, Punk or Austin, rallying against Triple H and the evil McMahon clan, which never really came off as something with any real substance simply because people didn’t buy the big Samoan badass being one to struggle against a senior citizen, a middle-aged COO and his Lorena Bobbitt fangirl of a wife. It also didn’t help that the whole confounded feud culminated in one of Triple H’s patented 20+ minute “technical snooze-fests” which sapped the audience of any potential feels they might have had for Roman finally overcoming “The Game.” Now they’re basically trying the same thing here, but with Roman playing a more meta role in ranting against Brock and his perks as a “special attraction” in WWE and claiming he, Roman, represents all the full-time Working Joes in the back, as well as complaining about having the screws put to him by management. If it were someone like any of the three men I mentioned above, fans would be able to empathize with them and it would make at least a modicum of sense. With Roman, though? It comes off as nothing but sour grapes because of his coming up short against Lesnar multiple times and sounds more like he’s jealous that he hasn’t gotten those same perks and accolades that Brock has, which screams first-world issues, not something many of us “deal” with and thus can’t really get behind. This, along with the fact that Roman himself is publicly known as being well liked and protected by management, just makes him come off as a whiny hypocrite. I’ve said this before: The more they have Roman fail and the longer Vince holds back on pulling the trigger that he should’ve fired three years ago, the worse it reflects on WWE as a whole.

Steve Cook: FACT – Nobody buys it. There isn’t a soul alive that thinks “the man” is out to get Roman Reigns. Daniel Bryan pulled off the role because he was the role. He was undersized. He looked like a goat. He wasn’t the ideal WWE Superstar. Reigns is the right size, even if he has to wear a vest to cover up. I’m comfortable enough in my sexuality to say he’s a good-looking dude. He is the ideal WWE Superstar. Losing to Brock Lesnar over & over again while claiming he’s been screwed isn’t going to win anybody over. Reigns is at his best when he’s an ass-kicking machine that runs over anybody in his path. Weakness isn’t something he does well. Reigns haters aren’t going to feel sorry for him, and his fans don’t want to feel sorry for him either. Trust me, trying to appear sympathetic doesn’t work with people in the demographics of Roman’s fanbase.

5. The AJ Styles vs. Shinsuke Nakamura feud has been completely under whelming so far.

Ken Hill: FICTION – The key word there is “COMPLETELY” underwhelming; have the matches under-performed to this point? I’d generally agree with that assessment, and I’ve also never quite been a fan of WWE using Mania as a platform for igniting a new rivalry. When you use your biggest stage as a springboard, you have to have your performers leave an equally big enough impression that makes fans say, “I don’t want this to end, I wanna see more!” Problem is, there are many times where WWE fails to live up to that expectation on the Grandest Stage. While I’m sure commenters will bring up several other examples, two relatively recent ones that stand out to me are Daniel Bryan vs. Sheamus (WM 28) and Bray Wyatt vs Randy Orton (WM 33). The former example was an unmitigated 18-second flop, but it ultimately served as the catalyst of Bryan’s “YES!” movement and lead to a physical, well-done 2-out-of-3 Falls Match at Extreme Rules 2012, so WWE did manage to pull something worthwhile out of that proverbial fire. The latter example, however, was a dismal effort on the part of Orton, Wyatt and the writers, and only got worse going into their much-maligned (and deservedly so) “House of Horrors” match at Payback 2017. So why do I say Fiction, you ask? The matches haven’t lived up to the five-star standards we’ve come to expect from veterans like Styles and Nakamura, but they haven’t been complete dumpster fires like the Bryan-Sheamus 18-second debacle or the godawful Orton-Wyatt saga either. Rather, they are telling a story of a rival in Shinsuke turned to darkness and embracing his devious side to undermine his former friend Styles and AJ subsequently turning those tactics back on Shinsuke, even at cost to himself, slowly building up to the point where the two will go all out to destroy one another in the true “dream match” that we’ve been expecting of them since their Wrestle Kingdom 10 encounter in 2016. Telling the proper story, to me, is a very important aspect of professional wrestling. I’ll reiterate a previous statement: Have the matches under-performed? Perhaps. Have they been telling me a story that has me genuinely interested to see where it ends up? Most definitely. Was I hoping Shinuske would win and sign things off in their No-DQ match? Part of me did, yes, but another part of me is glad that it continues; as long as the story continues to build as it does and gets a more proper, epic payoff, I think it’s worth sitting through a couple “awful” good matches to get there.

Steve Cook: FICTION – These under whelming questions always get me. I think most people have higher expectations for these things than I do. If you expected Styles & Nakamura to have six-snowflake classics every time they went out there, you would be disappointed. I haven’t been enthralled with every match, but they’ve been good for the most part. More importantly, it’s given us Evil Shinsuke, his ball punching & his fun new music. AJ’s been good in his role as pissed off champion. It’s not perfect, but I’ve enjoyed it for what it is.

6. WWE Backlash was a horrible PPV.

Ken Hill: FICTION – This isn’t a “FICTION” I say with a great deal of conviction, mind you, as I can certainly understand and agree with a lot of people’s frustrations with Backlash in terms of the lax booking, missed opportunities and overall misuse of talent, but the PPV did have some bright spots: It put on an excellent opener in Rollins versus Miz, closed the book (for now) on Miz’s mission to bring the IC Title back to prominence in a big way and, done in Miz’s own way on the post-show, passed that torch onto Seth. One other bright spot was the Styles-Nakamura match. Now I know a lot of people derided it for having a non-finish on a PPV, among other things, and normally I’d agree, but I paid attention to the fact that Styles’ mindset and promos leading into the match were keyed more towards revenge than just defending the championship. A wise saying about revenge: “Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves.” I steeled myself for one of two outcomes, one being that Shinsuke would take advantage of Styles’ blind rage and the No-DQ stipulation to come away with the championship (which many of us wrongly predicted), or that Styles would manage to get back at Shinsuke, but at a great cost to himself (in this case, a double KO, which means he retains, but it keeps Shinsuke in the loop as a challenger). With that said, I don’t consider Backlash an absolute, abject failure, but it did leave a lot to be desired outside of the aforementioned bright spots.

Steve Cook: FACT – Seth Rollins vs. Miz was really good. The problem with their match was it set the bar way too high considering what was to come. It looked like a good card on paper, but everybody was off their game. The wrestlers weren’t great. The booking was the usual. It was just one of those nights where nothing worked. I kinda liked the Bryan vs. Big Cass match simply because it was the right result & they didn’t waste time. Every other match either had the wrong result, wasted way too much time doing nothing, or featured both of those qualities. WWE PPV events in the Network Era should be better because they don’t have limits set on them by cable & satellite companies. They can reach their full potential with a show. Instead, the lack of limits encourages them to embrace their lesser qualities. But hey, the stock price is higher than ever, so expect more shows like this one.