'%20x='0'%20y='0'%20height='100%25'%20width='100%25'%20%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20xlink%3Ahref=''%3E%3C/image%3E%3C/svg%3E)
Wrestling is built upon feuds. It gives motivation for the people involved to fight and a reason for the audience to care about the competitors involved. While there usually has to be a winner or loser of a particular feud, the best ones manage to elevate all the of the talent involved, showcasing their in-ring talents as well as their ability to make their case for their antagonism towards their opponent.
A great feud is not usually just a single match, but a series of individual encounters that build to a climax where the outcome is not only unclear but credible from either end. On the other hand, bad feuds lead an audience to jump ahead, knowing exactly what will happen, how it will happen, and how it would benefit (or potentially damage) the people working together. They can be clumsy, boring, and only present to fill the substantial amount of time the WWE has for its programming nowadays.
Trending
Since the brand split, neither Raw or Smackdown get too many chances to book feuds between their talent, and while we've taken a look at feuds between the two brands that really could work, let's take a look at the other side of that, where talent comes together for no material benefit to either the parties involved or the audience watching them.
#10 Lana vs Dana Brooke
Lana is one of the most charismatic personas that the WWE has seen in the past 10 years, valeting Rusev and being his mouthpiece for the pro-Russian, anti-American stance that got the Bulgarian wrestler over with the crowd as a heel and which made his defeat to John Cena as potent and as unsurprising as it did.
Despite her obvious skill on the mic, WWE (and it seems by her own account as well), has tried to turn Lana into an in-ring performer too which has seen her exposed, not as the cool and calculating manager of a dominant heel, but a clumsy, inexperienced wrestler way below the average quality of talent the Women's division is enjoying at the moment.
Dana, meanwhile, is a case of someone called up too soon. Still just finding her feet in NXT, she formed a memorable duo with Emma as they attempted to take on Asuka, but injury and a foreshortening of her development upon her promotion to Raw have seen her flounder, failing to live up to the rest of the division.
Putting the two together in a match would not only seem confusing, giving their allegiances but also demonstrate the pair's inability to work smoothly, damaging their credibility as a whole. Not to mention the effect it would have on a crowd, interested in Lana only as a manager, and barely interested in Dana Brooke at all.
#9 AJ Styles vs The Big Show
As a huge fan, it's hard to picture AJ Styles ever having a bad match in the WWE. His terrific work has showcased the talents of people on the roster who have never been quite appreciated for their in-ring performances quite in the same way before, and he sits comfortably near the top of the card, ready to be a credible opponent for any who may challenge him.
The Big Show has been around forever, his sheer size catapulting him into the main event in WCW with a program against Hulk Hogan as a member of the delightfully nuts Dungeon of Doom faction, culminating in a monster truck face off at 1995s Halloween Havoc (yes, really).
The Big Show is a surprisingly adept hand in the ring, given his size, but a secession of terrible main event programmes and a wildly inconsistent character (according to some reports, he has turned face or heel 20 times since joining the WWE) has made the crowd indifferent to him, despite his obvious gifts.
It is possible that a match between Styles and Big Show would be fine to watch in the ring, but it's a no-win contest for either, not providing a credibility boost, and only a potentially damaging demotion on the card to Styles if he were to lose.
#8 Jason Jordan vs Bobby Roode
I'm not sure the WWE knows quite what to do with either Jason Jordan or Bobby Roode. Both were main event performers at NXT, Jordan forming one-half of American Alpha, whilst Roode carried the main belt for 6 months in programmes against Shinsuke Nakamura, Hideo Itami and Kassius Ohno.
Jordan was given a push upon the premature break-up of American Alpha and his announcement as Kurt Angle's son but has floundered wildly since, failing to get over with the crowd, even as he continually defeats Elias, whom everyone loathes.
Roode however, has perhaps gotten over despite himself. A theme tune that will raise an entire arena into singing along, as well as an entrance that Ric Flair would envy, led him to main event status quickly in NXT, even as a loathsome, elitist heel who belittled the crowd and his opponents alike. His promotion to Smackdown has seen him arrive as a face, perhaps on the strength of his entrance, but he has been treading water since, with unmemorable feuds, most notably against fellow water-treader, Dolph Ziggler.
A match between the two would be technically sound, albeit in a fairly basic way, but the distinct lack of charisma between the two performers would lead the crowd to wonder whether or not that it would last long enough for them to get to the bathroom and back.
#7 The Hype Bros. vs The Club
The Hype Bros. Zack Ryder is a charismatic talent, able to get over with the crowd in the ring and in person through his pioneering work on social media, most of which has been appropriated by the WWE for its own programming. His partner is Mojo Rawley, someone who brings intensity, energy, and more exclamations of the word "Bro!" than one could ever possibly want to hear in a lifetime.
The Club is the forgotten remnants of NJPWs Bullet Club, who arrived in the WWE with some fanfare, but quickly devolved into being AJ Styles' lackeys for his feud with John Cena. They are not an untalented tag-team, but they seem to lack a distinct direction of their own and seem to be marking time until they're released back into the wild, able to rejoin the faction that made them a desirable acquisition for the WWE in the first place.
A tag match between the two would easily grace the opening of any event... on the house show circuit, whilst people were still finding their seats or browsing the merchandising tables. A PPV appearance for the two is unlikely in the extreme, though if they were ever to face off at Survivor Series, a relieved audience would sure make good use of the time, perhaps on Facebook or Twitter.
#6 Carmella vs Alicia Fox
Carmella has shown promise in her run as a heel on Smackdown, something which, given her less than stellar performances on NXT and premature call-up, must be heartening for fans. Her partnership with James Ellsworth is certainly not to everyone's taste, but there's a clear motivation for her character and a direction in which she's heading, despite her relative inexperience and rocky in-ring performances.
Carmella is Alicia Fox if she doesn't improve in 10 years. On the roster since 2008, Fox's work has generally been unimpressive and awkward, feeling like an unwanted remnant of the Diva's division of years past. She has had fleeting moments that have shown her potential, but her weaknesses are clear to everyone and her ability to carry a significant women's division feud, especially in the company she is surrounded by, is poor and a loss to Fox would damage the credibility of that person.
Carmella would easily win here, with both the potential to improve as well as the investment of time and care that Fox perhaps lacked upon her arrival into the company, but the most important thing is that hardly anyone would care when it happened, and barely anyone would remember it shortly after.
#5 The Miztourage vs The Singh Brothers
I am still a Bo-liever. Bo Dallas' run in NXT as the pretend face of the developmental brand was an early indication for me that it was a show worth watching, not just for its in-ring performers, but for the work that was being put into the wrestlers outside of matches. Since his promotion, as like many NXT call-ups, all of the work in Florida, on his character, was mostly undone. Then after that, on his tumble down the card, Dallas managed to catch the jutting branch of The Miztourage before he fell off the roster completely.
The other half of The Miztourage, Curtis Axel, is a victim of circumstance (his tag-team with Damien Sandow was abruptly cut short due to real life concerns over the people they were parodying) and poor booking. Together they are a team put together to stand next to The Miz and get beaten up regularly. They lack credibility, not only in the eyes of the audience but in WWE's eyes too, with their replacement with The Bar at TLC.
The Singh Brothers, likewise, have similar problems, only the person they stand next to lacks both the in-ring credibility and outside the ring charisma of The Miz. They exist purely as easy excuses for his victories over clearly stronger opponents.
Who would win between the two teams of lackeys? More importantly, despite this Bo-liever, who would care?
#4 The Hardy Boyz vs The Ascension
One of the most celebrated tag teams in the history of the WWE, a big part of the success of the Attitude Era, and an influence on many in-ring performers now, The Hardy Boyz have done it all. What they haven't done since returning to the WWE at WrestleMania is be particularly good.
Their work has been unmemorable, but flashes of their previously great work are still evident, whilst there's always the lingering hopes that Matt will eventually break and turn into the lovable nutcase that stole everyone's hearts in TNA last year.
The Ascension, on the other hand, has become a joke. Rampant in NXT, demolishing tag teams at such a rate that their entrances were longer than the contests, their call-up to WWE saw them immediately humiliated by legends, such as JBL, for no apparent good reason.
Since then, the pair has done nothing to warrant their place in the federation, although their recent inclusion in the always entertaining Breezango backstage skits has seen their star rise somewhat, and audiences can now be seen to actually recognise who they are when they enter the ring.
The Ascension would lose, obviously, and the emphasis would be on the Hardyz to carry the match to an entertaining conclusion, something they've struggled with in recent times. It would all add up, no matter how much care or time put into it, as something that would be purely ranked as "filler.
#3 Baron Corbin vs Bray Wyatt
Baron Corbin is a mystery. Pushed as a monster in NXT before given a prime spot on Smackdown as the United States Champion, Baron Corbin is a mystery because I'm at a loss to explain why he is where he is in the first place. His stilted performances in the ring, dull mic-work and lousy attitude have marked him out as someone who can be perhaps best described as "Tall Randy Orton." Except Orton has had main event success and been part of some excellent storylines. Corbin's merits remain elusive.
Bray Wyatt on the other hand, has obvious talent. He's a good wrestler, a great talker, and has an entrance that is truly different from anyone else on the roster. It's a shame that his credibility has been smashed to pieces by wildly indifferent and inconsistent booking by the WWE, and he now seems to be languishing. Wyatt could have been, and perhaps with time still can become a true main event performer, perhaps akin to a Bayou version of Mankind, but right now he resembles nothing more than a scruffier version of Gangrel.
I see an in-ring promo battle go something like this:
Wyatt: "Baron, you've been sitting in the shade too long and your time in the sun will surely burn you. I am the light, Baron, and you will bask in me and it will be your undoing."
Corbin: "No. I won't."
#2 Kane vs Randy Orton
Kane has had a stellar career. Debuting at the top of the card in a feud with the Undertaker, he has rarely left the main event and has been a massive part of the WWE's success over the past two decades. The company's faith in his abilities is evident even today, with his destruction of main event talents such as Seth Rollins and Finn Balor.
In much the same vein, Randy Orton will sit comfortably aside Kane in the Hall of Fame one day. Since his run in Evolution and becoming the youngest world champion in WWE history at Summerslam in 2004, he has fought and beaten absolutely everyone. From new talent to old, Orton has RKO'ed his way through them all.
Then why, with two such historic talents such as Kane and Orton, would a match between them leave such a bad taste in the mouth? It's a matter of chemistry and history (and perhaps a few other sciences too). Kane and Orton are safe, and at times, plodding in-ring performers who work well with dynamic opponents who can change the pace of a match, through either their skill or courage. They've also fought plenty of times before and never added to anything more than something that was observable by the human eye.
#1 Jinder Mahal vs Roman Reigns
On paper, it sounds like something the WWE might actually put on our screens and expect us to enjoy. Jinder Mahal is a champion without credibility, pushed to the main event for seemingly obvious business reasons, whilst the audience knows why he's there and resent that someone who is clearly substandard occupies a spot that more talented individuals would thrive in.
There's still time for Mahal to grow into the role that was thrust upon him, but his booking so far has been baffling, with unconvincing wins over main event talent who seem like they have to stoop for him to win. It has added up to someone the audience cannot buy into just yet, and someone who desperately needs a credible victory over the main event talent.
Which wouldn't come against Roman Reigns. Since his debut in the Shield, Reigns has been pushed as WWE's next top star, with dominant performances against everyone in the federation, plenty of time and attention away from the ring for the audience to get behind him, and the backing of practically every higher-up in the company along the way. The audience backlash was palpable, with a majority of the audience rejecting what Reigns and the WWE were offering, especially in the wake of Daniel Bryan's improbable rise to the main event.
The difficulty in this match is not the work in the ring - for wherever Reigns' faults lie, he is a credible wrestler - but how the match would be booked. Treating both with the lightest of touches in terms of protecting their investments for future opportunities, the contest between the two could only finish poorly, leaving an already indifferent crowd angry that the fight settled nothing and ultimately, meant nothing too.
Vince Russo answers who killed WCW HERE
