Craig Wilson, Brian Damage & Jamie Lithgow
At Hell in a Cell Seth Rollins will defend his WWE title against Kane and presuming he wins, who is the next viable contender for the promotion’s number one title? That’s the topic of today’s Sunday Sermon.
Craig: I think, for a start, we can all agree that Kane isn’t going to win the title. It’s his annually awarded WWE title opportunity. What might be harder to agree on, however, is who is next.
I sincerely hope that it’s not John Cena. I hope that following the MSG steel cage match for the US title that that means Rollins is done with the US title scene and kept away from Cena for a while. It’s not that I don’t like their matches – their bout at Night of Champions was excellent – it’s more to do with not particularly being fond of weekly altercations between the same guys…
It does leave a whole at the top of the card, though. I think we can rule out Sting so who else? Hopefully the IC title will be used to elevate Kevin Owens but he’s not ready just yet for a World Title programme.
Is it back to Brock vs Rollins or do we start to see booking towards Rollins vs Roman Reigns or even a former Shield member triple threat at WrestleMania?
Craig: it’s tough to take Sheamus seriously as a credible challenger when the fans chant “you look stupid” at him. It’s a credibility thing. He doesn’t look credible nor have the wwe built him up as a credible threat. Time and time again we point out the risible short term booking of the company.
Brian: I disagree with your point on Sheamus. Regardless of what he looks like….he is still a capable wrestler and brawler. Sheamus’ look is getting him attention…attention that he never had for years quite frankly. Am I a fan of it? Nope, but it has helped him upon his return to the WWE. I don’t think they are booking short term either…like say TNA is doing now. WWE has always booked stuff a year in advance. Granted, injuries and things change with plans..but they have an idea who will be the top contenders. We just have to guess whom.
Jamie: WWE are – generally – a big picture kind of company, so I assume there is a masterplan when it comes to Sheamus. That said, I’m with Craig. Granted Sheamus is more interesting than before, but not by much. It is a credibility thing, I just don’t see him as WWE Champion at the moment. He is garnering more attention these days, but so is Stardust and – entertaining as he is – he is not supposed to be seen as a top guy; he’s a goofy comic guy and he plays that role perfectly. The problem with Sheamus is that I think we are supposed to take him seriously. Even with his mohawk and bizarre beard I find him dull and uninteresting. At the moment the closest I can see him coming to the WWE Title is being one of a number of challengers defeated by a babyface champion, i.e. a clip in a montage about someone else.
Sheamus is also a heel who is nowhere even close to becoming a face, so surely that discounts him from a Rollins feud? Here’s a shout from left field; The Undertaker. If Taker can get a win against Lesnar then maybe he could be written into title contention. With Rollins’ never ending feud with Kane there are plenty storylines to explore too.
Brian: I was thinking that an Undertaker feud could come out this Kane program too…it would be nice to see the Dead Man get one last big run at a title. Getting back to Sheamus for a quick second…are we just assuming he will win the WWE title? I have a feeling…he will end up like Damian Sandow and unsuccessfully cash in. Just a hunch…
Giving the Undertaker another run would certainly be a feel good moment for most fans but it’ll all come down to what schedule he can do. Not that I think, as I articulated the other week, that the champion necessarily needs to be on Raw every week anyway…
Jamie: I don’t think Sheamus will capture the WWE Title either. I was convinced that having both the US and WWE Titles on Rollins would result in Sheamus inadvertently winning the US Title instead of the WWE belt. I realise that would have made Sheamus look like a complete div and devalued the US Title after Cena’s efforts to raise its stature…. but this is WWE we’re talking about.
My thinking with The Undertaker suggestion was that Rollins has a win over Lesnar, he’ll likely beat Kane so he could continue his run as a ‘monster killer’, or something along those lines. However, if he were to feud with Taker he would once again take the lead and have to appear every week while his opponent may not.
Ultimately I think Rollins needs a break, if only for the fans’ sake. He’s over exposed, over used and ultimately he’s a bankable star for the foreseeable future but may be milked try within months because WWE have nobody else.
Craig: Yup, 100% spot on Jamie. If WWE cite lack of viable guys to use instead of Rollins on TV if they give him a break then they only have themselves to blame.
If the WWE booked things cleverly they wouldn’t need guys to appear every week. Rollins could appear on our screens every week without having to be there. We don’t need to see the same guys week in week out or we will get over exposed to them.
That said, the lack of viable contenders for Rollins’ title is also there fault. Heaven forbid it happened but who, if Rollins picked up a knock, would the title go to? I know a title tourney etc could help elevate whoever they choose to be next in line but it’s not obvious. There lies the problem.
I also see that The Rock has been moved from alumni on the WWE website to ‘current superstars’…
You can read all previous Sunday Sermons here.