ctorres wrote:Ok, my thoughts on Ziggler/Cesaro and Ambrose/Rollins (the main two matches I cared about):
Loved every moment of the Ziggler vs Cesaro match. Two things I liked about Ziggler getting the clean sweep. For one, it makes him look VERY strong as the Intercontinental Champion. Second, it would have been fairly predictable to have Ziggler and Cesaro trade falls. Ziggler getting the 2-0 victory added an enjoyable surprise element to the match. Also, Ziggler and Cesaro had the opening match of the PPV. They would have had to rush all 3 falls and the match was fast paced as it is with just 2 falls.
Considering the match was 12 minutes and 15 seconds long, Ziggler and Cesaro crafted it as good as anyone possibly could. Their attention to detail was outstanding and arguably, they had the toughest assignment out of any of the other matches when you take into account the stipulation and the fact that they had the opening match.
Rollins vs Ambrose was the best story driven match I've seen since both of Daniel Bryan's matches at Wrestlemania 30. I had no issue with the finish at all. LOVED the hologram, the speaking in tongues, crowd's reaction with the phone lights. An Ambrose/Wyatt feud is a fan's dream.
Also, neither Rollins nor Ambrose looks weak after the match. Rollins is still the chickens**t heel that managed to steal the win and gets more heat. Ambrose succeeds in not only getting sympathy as a babyface, but this puts heat on Wyatt as a heel and dissuades the crowd from cheering for him to turn.
As Triple H had explained in a recent interview with Michael Cole, Hell In A Cell isn't about winning, it's about surviving. While sure, sometimes you MUST have a clear winner, I think in the case of Rollins and Ambrose it was more about the substance within the match than who won or lost at the end of it. Ambrose's character, much like Bray's, isn't scared of losing. Ambrose wanted to Rollins inside a cell so he could beat up on him and Ambrose was able to do so.
I was not ready for the Ambrose and Rollins story to be completely over. I feel the match succeeding in not only beginning a new feud between Ambrose and Wyatt, but it further extends the feud between Ambrose and Rollins allowing it to be revisited for a later date. This is similar to how Bryan briefly feuded with Bray Wyatt before getting to set his sights again on the WWE World Heavyweight Championship.
The rest of the matches were good but I would need to watch them again to give thoughtful analysis on them. I will say however that I wish Orton would have beaten Cena, so we could see Orton vs Lesnar with Orton as a babyface. As much as people say they prefer Orton to be a heel, I actually prefer him as a face.
Orton plays the heel role very well, but he's such a badass that I'd much rather cheer for him. Unlike Cena, Orton is a natural in the ring. I look at a guy like Orton and I don't see a guy that should have to depend on "The Authority" for protection. A guy like Rollins is more believable as the frail, insecure top heel, especially considering that Ambrose and Reigns are the true standouts of The Shield.
Great post. The one thing I'll disagree re Orton is that he's a bad arse. To me, it's all about being willing to face Lesnar, and until he does that, I have the feeling that he lacks the legit toughness that Cena has. And I'd be surprised to see it happen.
