On this past Monday’s edition of RAW, the main event featured John Cena and Dean Ambrose against Kane, Seth Rollins and Randy Orton. While the actual main event was entertaining, filled with signature moves and the top of the line in-ring action that is typically expected of the WWE, there were some sentiments on social media sites about the action being repetitive and old.
On one hand, I can see where the fans are coming from. Those superstars can be utilized in other scenarios, namely competing against other wrestlers. Why not have Ambrose go against someone like Jack Swagger or The Miz to shake things up a bit? Perhaps have Seth Rollins interfere at the end of the match rather than as an opponent against Ambrose prior to the pay-per-view? Is it necessary to have essentially the same match pairings week in and week out?
On the other hand, recurring matches can help build up a feud. The intensity increases with each respective victory and defeat. When the feud cumulates at the pay-per-view, the victory will be even more meaningful. Feuds would take months and months to reach their conclusion in the past, especially in the 80’s. However, is it necessary to have a situation like the one that took place at Battleground in which Triple H ejected Ambrose from the arena for attacking Rollins prior to their match, robbing the fans of one of the most anticipated matches of the night? Does the story lose its meaning if it’s scattered with forfeit victories?
Some may wonder if this is the dawn of an era of reverting to the classic methods of storytelling with an exciting build up or whether or not the match pairings are dragging on a bit too long. Only time will tell and the pay off will come into focus, especially with the Cena/Ambrose/Authority storyline at Hell in a Cell this Sunday. And yes. For only $9.99 on the WWE Network.
-Celine
Wrestling News Blog 