Roman Reigns, the self-proclaimed “Head of the Table,” has redefined his career and the WWE landscape since his shocking return at SummerSlam 2020. But is this transformation truly revolutionary, or is it WWE’s biggest mistake in recent years?
Supporters of Roman Reigns argue that his heel turn and subsequent reign as Universal Champion have breathed new life into WWE. Reigns’ new persona is layered and complex, a far cry from his previous “Big Dog” gimmick that many fans found stale. With Paul Heyman as his advocate and the compelling narrative of family loyalty and betrayal, Reigns has become the most talked-about superstar in WWE.
His matches are not just about in-ring prowess but storytelling. The emotional weight of his feuds, especially with family members like Jey Uso, has added a dramatic flair that WWE has been lacking. Fans who were once critical of Reigns now find themselves captivated by his every move. They argue that he is the perfect example of what happens when WWE listens to its audience and allows a character to evolve naturally.
On the flip side, there’s a growing faction of fans who believe WWE is making a grave mistake by putting all their eggs in the Roman Reigns basket. They claim that WWE’s obsession with Reigns is alienating a significant portion of the fanbase. Every storyline, every main event, and every major pay-per-view seems to revolve around Reigns, leading to a sense of predictability and monotony.
Critics argue that WWE’s focus on Reigns has stifled the growth of other potential main event stars. Wrestlers like Big E, Shinsuke Nakamura, and Aleister Black have been overlooked in favor of pushing Reigns to the moon. This has led to a lack of variety in the main event scene, with many fans feeling that WWE is repeating the same mistake they made with John Cena – pushing a single star at the expense of the entire roster.
The long-term impact of Roman Reigns’ dominance is a hotly debated topic. Will Reigns’ reign be remembered as a golden era for WWE, where one man’s vision reshaped the company for the better? Or will it be seen as a period of creative stagnation, where WWE’s unwillingness to diversify its main event scene led to declining interest and viewership?
Roman Reigns has undoubtedly left an indelible mark on WWE, but whether that mark is positive or negative is up for debate.
Is he the revolutionary leader WWE needs, or is he the embodiment of WWE’s biggest creative misstep? As fans, it’s up to us to decide. What do you think? Has Roman Reigns revitalized WWE, or is he driving it into the ground?
