The women's match was ok, but they would benefit so much from splitting up Nikki and Brie, the best either of them has ever been was when they did that last fall. Also, I'd love a crowd that just screamed "Come on Nikki" in a sarcastic manner after every time Brie does it.
		
		
	 
 
 
	
		
	
	
		
		
			Reigns-Show was an ok match, with a garbage ending. I wish they'd retire last man standing matches. I'm still not seeing this Roman Reigns has proved himself with these last 3 PPVs talking point. 2 matches where he was carried by elite performers, and a lumbering match that was just ok with a dumb ending. Also, someone pointed it out earlier, but say what you will about Show's in-ring ability, the guy is outstanding as a talker.
		
		
	 
I agree in re Reigns... we've still only seen 4 moves out of the guy.  Although I will acknowledge that last night's match was entertaining and that most wrestlers have a limited move set against Big Show.  With that being said, he can't be carried by his opponent in every match or rely on weird match gimmicks.
		
 
		
	 
We're down to 4 moves now?  I thought it was 5.
It's perfectly fine not to like the guy, but this just isn't accurate.  Nor is it all that important.
		
 
		
	 
It's a fact that Reigns has an extremely limited move set.  And it is important given that it greatly limits his matches.  It's the same reason why Ric Flair's matches were 100x better than Hulk Hogan's matches, particularly after you saw more than 3 Hogan matches and figured out the script.
		
 
		
	 
Flair was better in the ring, but who drew the most money?  Who did most people find more entertaining?
		
 
		
	 
Hogan obviously drew more.  That's not even in question.  But you also know that shtick wouldn't last today (as has been woefully evident the last 4 months).  The uber-man hero petered out 20+ years ago.
And the WWF's massive advantage in distribution over the NWA and WCW in the 80s/early 90s had a lot to do with Hogan's success... Hogan obviously aided that, of course, but I'd still say Hogan was more of a beneficiary of that than the cause.
		
 
		
	 
I would make the case that a lot of guys could have been Hogan, if they were booked the same way he was. I'm not sure their were many who could have been Flair.
Getting back to Reigns, my problem with him, is that he is boring as a character and in-ring. He's plenty capable, but he's just not interesting, he'd be way better as a monster heel. I thought Sheamus had the exact same problem when they were pushing him as a top face.
		
 
		
	 
I used to believe the bolded because: (1) I'm not a Hogan fan; and (2) I've seen Vince flourish without Hogan.
With that said, I've listened to Dave Meltzer of the Wrestling Observer on enough different wrestling podcasts discussing the 80s WWF that I now believe the bolded is false and Hogan was more instrumental in the WWF flourishing in the 80s than I originally gave him credit for.
Meltzer has reported that when Vince went national in the 80s he wanted to build the WWF around one of three guys:  Hogan, Flair, or Kerry Von Erich.
Meltzer said that Vince was perhaps most intrigued with Von Erich because he was younger, more built, and perhaps more popular than Hogan at that time.  Vince knew that he'd likely be unsuccessful in wooing Von Erich away from his family business, though.
Meltzer then said that while Vince considered Flair, Vince was never fully enamored with Flair as the centerpiece because Flair didn't have the body and he was older than both Hogan and Von Erich.
Finally, Meltzer said that if Vince wasn't able to woo any of the above guys (including Hogan), then Vince was prepared to build around Orndorff.  Vince's love of the physique again.
Now here's where I became convinced that Hogan was more instrumental for the WWF explosion than I gave him credit for.  Meltzer noted that early on Vince was looking to build successors to Hogan so that Vince had another stud champion ready to go if Hogan jumped ship or business began to dip under Hogan.  Vince put the title on the Macho Man in WrestleMania IV, in part, because Hogan was leaving to film No Holds Barred and, in part, because Vince wanted to build that replacement champ.  Just one year later Vince put the belt back on Hogan at WrestleMania V because ticket sales and ratings dipped under Savage.
Same thing with Warrior.  Vince put the belt on Warrior at WrestleMania VI.  One year later Vince took the title off Warrior (via Sgt. Slaughter as intermediary champion to Hogan) because ticket sales and ratings dipped under Warrior as champion.
Same thing with Bret Hart's first title run.  Just several months after Hart won the title Vince took it off him (via Yokozuna as several minute intermediary champion) before putting the title back on Hogan.
From '84 all the way into '93, whenever Vince worried about business declining he'd put the title on Hogan, and business would pick up as a result.
Listen, I don't get it either because Hogan does nothing for me, but Meltzer makes convincing arguments about Vince needing Hogan as much as Hogan needing Vince during that 80s-early 90s run.