411 Wrestling Fact or Fiction: Is the Roman Reigns and Cody Rhodes Tag Team a Good Idea?

Welcome back to the 411mania Wrestling Fact or Fiction. I’m your host Jake Chambers.

This week we’re returning to our semi-annual Larry Csonka Memorial Wrestling Fact or Fiction Tournament. I will try to put this together as often as I can here at 411 in remembrance of the legendary reviewer’s voice of the Wrestling Zone for so many years, the editor who gave so many writers a chance, and just a great guy we lost way too early.

This week’s first round match up features the returning champion from 2023, and finalist in 2022, and current weekly NXT reviewer, Jeremy Thomas. He’ll be facing off with first time Fact or Fiction participant, and current AEW Collision reviewer, Theo Sambus.

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.

Statement #1: You’re excited to see Cody Rhodes and Roman Reigns as a tag team. 

Theo Sambus: FACT – BuT CaN ThEy Co-ExIsT?! ‘Excited’ is probably too strong a word, but I do think they’ll provide some engaging TV over the coming weeks. Any time two superpowers of wrestling team up, it’s a fun time for the fans. Cody and Roman are the two biggest names in WWE right now, and their begrudging alliance in order to face the bigger threat of the Bloodline is classic storytelling. We’ll no doubt see some of the tropes and cliches of the genre, but Rhodes and Reigns have the skills to breathe new life into it. It’ll be interesting to see how far they stretch it out – you’d have to believe we’re gearing up for Survivor Series and a potential War Games match, in which case we have the added dynamic of who leads the team. Those two big egos vying for the top spot should create some underlying tension which will be a blast to watch.

Roman will no doubt be keeping one eye on ‘his’ championship, but I’ve seen enough of Rhodes and Reigns as opponents for the time being. We all know they have chemistry in the ring, so a brief tag run together could give us some fun moments and provide an entertaining stopgap until Face Roman is ready to challenge for the title again. The danger is that Cody’s title run takes a back seat to all of this, so they’ll have to tread carefully.

Jeremy Thomas: FACT – I’m not at the edge of my seat for it, but yes I’m definitely looking forward to the notion because it represents the next phase of the story.  Whatever issue people may have with the Bloodline story or with how Rhodes has been presented, these two are great together and putting them together against The Bloodline does seem like a natural step in the story.  It has been at least a little while since we’ve had the “can they coexist” story in WWE so it doesn’t feel as exhausted as it did a couple of years ago, and it’s also a smart way to put Reigns and Jacob Fatu opposite each other in a tease for the eventual one-on-one storyline.  Works for me!

Statement #2: The AEW All Out PPV was too violent.

Theo Sambus: FICTION – The beauty of pro-wrestling comes in the smorgasbord of styles and presentations, offering a little something of each to cater to different tastes. Personally speaking, I’m not a big fan of needles in my wrestling, so that was a tad too far for me but I’m one guy. As long as the ultraviolent deathmatch spots are used sparingly, I take no issue in giving something to the ‘sickos’, especially when it fits with the storyline, as it very much did so for Swerve vs Page. The bigger crime is when hardcore spots are casually tossed out with no rhyme or reason, as that doesn’t help anyone get over. When it has a purpose, violence can heighten the drama, creating a visceral response from the audience, and that’s exactly what we saw in action at All Out.

AEW has always promoted edgier content than rival mainstream shows, and they certainly pushed the envelope here. Perhaps there’s an argument that the Danielson suffocation would have been even more effective in isolation if it weren’t followed by deathmatch wrestling, but people were talking about both in the days following the PPV, so I don’t think anything was truly lost. Moxley has tremendous sway with the fans thanks to years of putting his body on the line, as well as respect for gambling on himself when choosing to leave WWE. As such, he had to do something wild and unhinged in order to gain legit heel heat. Putting a plastic bag over the head of one of the most beloved wrestlers on the scene and straight up trying to murder him doesn’t make him a ‘cool badass’, it’s makes him a sick mf’er. The on-screen response to it in the coming weeks is going to be really interesting. From a kayfabe point of view, having witnessed that level of violence ‘that has no place in our company’ it’ll be up to the AEW locker room to put a stop to it, perhaps reigniting the old hardcore vs technical wrestling arguments from the ROH/CZW war, maybe even pulling up some of the stuff from Moxley’s scrapped feud with Mick Foley. That’s all fantasy booking, but there are a lot of directions they can go with this now.

As for the rest of All Out, most people enjoyed the Willow vs Statlander Street Fight even more than I did, and it still managed to feel like a different level of violence to the later offerings, so I really have no qualms. With MJF vs Garcia and Ospreay vs Pac giving us the necessary antithesis to these kinds of matches with a wrestling clinic and an insane display of athleticism respectively, All Out really had that full smorgasbord on display.

Jeremy Thomas: FICTION – I’m going on a technicality here.  Was it something I wanted?  Not at all.  I’m not a death match guy and I think Swerve and Hangman are absolutely fucking nuts.  I have not watched the show, but have seen clips of the match and what I’ve seen is more than enough.  So it’s not something I was keen on.  But those kinda of matches aren’t for someone like me.  There’s no way around it: AEW has an audience that wants extreme content.  Clearly, that kind of thing doesn’t scare off WBD or ad buyers, so there’s no incentive for them not to do it.  I can recognize when something that isn’t my personal cup of tea is hitting with a certain audience, and more power to them.

Look, there are a number of complaints I’ve seen about it, and none of them hold too much water.  The plastic bag didn’t have any risk to the talent, and there’s no indication that Swerve vs. Hangman had negative health effects with the possible exception of the unprotected chairshot to the head (which I fucking hate, but was clearly gimmicked).  So complaining for the talents’ sake is dumb.  And at this point folks, you should know not to have your kids watch an Unsanctioned Lights Out match between a man who previously drank the other’s blood, and another man who committed arson.  So that’s performative outrage there too.  AEW has had their questionable decisions, but this isn’t the Matt Hardy All Out moment or the Shawn Spears headshot to Cody Rhodes.  Again, this stuff is not my kind of thing but when I know it’s going to happen, I don’t watch.  I invite everyone else do to the same.

Statement #3:  With the reduction of house shows, 5-match PLE cards, bragging about record gates thanks to historically high ticket prices, more on-screen product placements and commercials cutting into matches, WWE is currently practicing some heinous shrink-flation.

Theo Sambus: FICTION – Where to start with this one? The on-screen product placement has been ROUGH this year…I have an indelible image in my head of Jimmy Uso vs Jey Uso at Wrestlemania, and the DUDE WIPES logo completely overshadowing the solemn nature of the blood feud. Record gates can still be celebrated, but there should be the caveat about the insane ticket prices, especially when it comes to the international shows. Glasgow is not that far away from me, but I would have had to sell both kidneys merely to get a nosebleed seat at Clash at the Castle…no thanks. I love that WWE is experiencing a boom in business and popularity, and that it’s being matched creatively in what we’re seeing on-screen, but from an economic standpoint, these factors play a large role.

Where the ‘less is more’ approach is working wonders is in the 5-match PLE cards. I think we’re all in agreement that pretty much every PLE this year has nailed it, with matches getting time to breathe, allowing the performers to deliver in the ring each month. They also haven’t dragged on for hours on end, preventing viewer burnout. That’s been especially vital for those rabid overseas crowds, who have managed to maintain energy right the way through to the main event. Protracting the event would risk a dip in energy on 4-hour-plus cards, and as much as I loved being at Wembley for All In, we did see that towards the latter half of the show (*side-eye at Mercedes Mone vs Britt Baker).

The reduction in house shows is a smart move too. Although historically they’ve been a great place to try out ideas, get some reps for the younger/fresher talent, and generally have fun without the pressures of TV, the loops are often hell on the body. I’m a fan of protecting the ‘bump card’ of a wrestler as much as possible, so if the business can do without house shows, scrap ‘em I say!

So, economic success is perhaps being inflated, yes. But shrink-flation? No, I’m a fan of the current approach, and we as viewers are reaping the rewards.

Jeremy Thomas: FICTION – I don’t care about house shows in any real capacity, I like shorter PPVs, and I don’t care about product placement/PIP.  So… yeah, maybe I’m the wrong person to ask about this, but I absolutely don’t think it’s “heinous.”  The notion of shrinkflation suggests people are paying more but getting less.  Is that true in quantity?  Arguable, but sure I’ll go with it just on a sheer volume capacity.  But in reality, not really.  The vast, VAST majority of the wrestling audience do not go to non-televised live events, and those who do are missing what, one show a year, maybe two?  That’s not much, certainly not enough to be heinous.

As to the five-match PPVs, again I say “good.”  One of my biggest frustrations with AEW is that they throw 14 matches on a PPV and by the end of the night everyone is pretty well worn out.  Big match cards are good for the talent, but they aren’t good for the consumer for the most part.  Product placement gets a shrug from me because I expect that, and those commercials would be there regardless.  The amount of ad time hasn’t increased in any way I’m aware of, so you should probably actually say that fans are getting more out of the weekly shows since they’re getting to see those matches.  By any actual measurement, this is a clear FICTION.

¡SWITCH!

Statement #4: Despite having a lot of factions these days, WWE should avoid making a 6-man tag team championship.

Jeremy Thomas: FACT – Oh gods, please.  I like that WWE has made the titles more important over the last year or two, but we truly do not need six-man tag team titles.  WWE doesn’t do enough with the tag teams they have, and the company’s factions are built in a way that they don’t go well with six-man titles.  I can maybe see an argument for a few stables, but then you’re just cannibalizing the tag team division for a six-man tag team division and there’s no point to that.  If they want to feature more guys as talent, write them in more compelling storylines.  I have zero desire to see another Six-Man Tag Team Championship in wrestling.

Theo Sambus: FACT – If WWE didn’t create Trios titles back in The Shield heyday, there’s no chance they would now. We already have a surplus of championships across all the top promotions, and I don’t feel WWE is missing anything by not having 6-man belts. Let’s face it, as much as I love a lot of the trios groups in AEW, the championships themselves have provided little added substance to the feuds. Very often, we’ll see split focus among a strong trio, with one member going for a singles run, or two members making a play at the tag titles. It’s very rare to have a legitimately solid three-man squad, all presented as equals, and only ever appearing as a trio. That’s what you need in order to have a valid purpose for 6-man championships. As it stands, I’d much rather that TV time goes towards establishing proper tag team feuds instead.

Statement #5: Jon Moxley will defeat Bryan Danielson for the AEW World Title and send him into (semi) retirement.

[Ed. Note: These responses were submitted before AEW Dynamite Grand Slam.]

Jeremy Thomas: FICTION – I can understand that notion, but no.  Danielson should go out putting the title on someone who hasn’t been World Champion yet.  And yes, that probably means Darby Allin at WrestleDream, which I’m okay with.  Moxley’s storyline with the rest of the BCC and Marina Shafir doesn’t need the World Championship; there’s a storyline already there.  Danielson has been all about elevating new talent, and putting over Allin in Seattle or perhaps someone like Daniel Garcia at Wrestle Dynasty makes way more sense.  I wouldn’t be livid if it’s Moxley that does it; Mox is AEW’s Old Faithful and there’s nothing inherently wrong with putting the World Championship back on him so someone else can win it.  But it would seem like a very missed opportunity to put over the likes of Allin, Garcia or the like, one I hope doesn’t pass Tony Khan by.

Theo Sambus: FICTION – I don’t think that’s the right play. We know Danielson has been so selfless over the last few years, putting all his energy into getting new talent over, and whoever beats him will undoubtedly be a huge ‘passing of the torch’ moment. As such, I can’t see Moxley being the guy to dethrone him. Moxley and Danielson obviously have history in AEW, but we won’t really get anything new out of those matches, even with this new dynamic between them.

Yes, Moxley is still one of the primary players for AEW, and his heel turn all rides on him having some kind of master plan, but Mox is someone who doesn’t need the title to be at the top of the card, and he doesn’t need the ‘rub’ of sending a legend like the American Dragon into retirement.

As for who SHOULD retire Danielson, that’s a tough call. Maybe you have the tiebreaker match between Danielson and Zack Sabre Jr, with ZSJ finally solidifying himself once and for all as the best technical wrestler in the world. Maybe Daniel Garcia reignites his Dragon Slayer moniker (although Garcia seems to be doing just fine in this face run). If Nigel McGuinness were returning to the ring on a long-term basis, he would absolutely be my pick, but I’d imagine that will be a done deal after their Grand Slam match.

Regardless, Moxley would be an uninspiring choice to seal the fate of Danielson’s full-time career.

Statement #6: Pro-wrestling is better when it’s predictable.

Jeremy Thomas: FICTION – This is a blanket statement and I hate those.  But it needs an answer and I don’t try to have it both ways, so in terms of which is better I’m imagining it this way: is a show where everything is a surprise better or worse than a show where everything is predictable?  The answer is neither.  A surprise on its own is meaningless; a predictable moment is similarly so.  It’s about the execution in every situation.  Is it predictable that Jordynne Grace is going to win a Knockouts Title match against Tatum Paxley in NXT?  Yes, but the match was actually quite good.  On the flip side, when we don’t know what happens at the height of a match between two evenly matched opponents, that’s great too.  A surprise has value, and so does an expected adherence to storyline.  It all depends on how those elements are utilized, and thus  and thus by definition predictable is not inherently “better.”

Theo Sambus: FICTION – Oh man, this is SUCH a good question. My absolute cop-out answer would be ‘it should be a bit of both’ – classic good vs evil stories, with a little unpredictability thrown in there to spice things up. But that’s cheating, so I’ll get off my fence now.

It’s true that there are times when the predictable outcome is the right choice. Take Cody Rhodes vs Roman Reigns at Wrestlemania this year – Cody HAD to win to finish the story, and that ethos had been drilled into viewers all year. The result to that match was predictable in a sense, but the sheer elation from fans that WWE delivered on their promise on the biggest stage of the year shows that it was the right call. Sometimes, you have to give the people what they want, even if it’s telegraphed from a mile off.

That said, in this day and age, wrestling is all about buzz. Online chatter spreading like wildfire, memes, clips, GIFs… dare I say it, ‘moments’. And more often than not, that buzz only catches on when fans are presented with something unpredictable and genuinely shocking. Those are the moments that stand the test of time – the barbershop window, the Festival of Friendship, Seth Rollins’ chairshot to the back of Reigns, Lesnar DESTROYING Cena in a squash match. Shocking imagery like the debut of the Age of the Fall after that hellacious Briscoes/Steenerico Ladder War. These are some of the moments that come to mind for me, and all felt like they came out of nowhere.

Especially in the age of smart fans, dirtsheets, and the internet, genuine moments of unpredictability mean so much more, and drive engagement across the board. The original Summer of Punk is a fantastic example – winning the ROH championship in his final booking with the company before departing for WWE, only to hold it hostage and continue defending for the next batch of shows. It was unheard of and genuinely thrilling, especially as at the time WWE contracted staff simply did NOT get to wrestle outside of the company. Even if you had a mere passing interest in wrestling at the time, it got serious traction in the IWC in 2005, and I’d wager it’s the jumping on point for many fans of the promotion, purely because that level of unpredictability made it appointment viewing.

A more recent example would be Danielson vs Swerve at All In last month. We all knew Danielson was winding down his full-time career, and one big final sendoff at Wembley in the main event against the company’s top ‘new’ star player made the world of sense. The Title vs Career stipulation was made, and everything was in place for an emotional farewell. We heard reports of Danielson’s neck health, plus the announcement that his family would be ringside. And then rumblings started to build…are we being swerved, no pun intended? With WrestleDream in Danielson’s hometown of Seattle in October, is there a chance he could actually win? I’m sure plenty will stick their hand up and say they absolutely KNEW Dragon was winning the title, but if we’re honest, there was a palpable level of uncertainty. That lead to an unbelievable atmosphere in Wembley, and the reaction on some of those nearfalls speak for themselves.

Pro wrestling at its core is formulaic, so any time something comes along to upset that, it immediately stands out. We all want to be that big kid again, completely enraptured by what we’re seeing on our screens. When wrestling gets that right, my God there is nothing better in the entire world.

Two great performances today, but who will move on to this year’s Larry Csonka Memorial Wrestling Fact or Fiction Tournament finals? Exercise your right to vote in the poll above!

Good luck and thanks to Jeremy Thomas and Theo Sambus for taking part today.

Don’t forget to follow Jeremy on his social media and read along with Theo’s ever growing list of 411 Wrestling reviews.

And the GoFundMe for Larry’s daughters is still active, please follow the link for more details: https://www.gofundme.com/f/larrymania-living-on-in-his-girls