That's the crux of my argument. WWE can't have a top guy (singular) right now because no one on their current full time roster is going to fit that bill. Not Roman. Not Rollins. Not Ambrose, Styles, Owens, Zayn, Bayley, Banks, New Day, Balor, etc. None of them have that kind of universial appeal. So the should be moving into a more "all hands on deck" where the goal is to make as many strong brands as possible. Give as many different types of people as possible a reason to tune in, even if it's just to see the one act they like.
And that probably is what they're trying to do. But their current approach isn't working (for a number of reasons that extend beyond talent), so it would behoove them to rethink their approach.
I think we basically agree on everything else, so my only argument against this is there's always a top guy, even when there isn't a top guy.
Nobody stands out if everybody is at the same volume.
Obviously yes, they should absolutely book people better. My argument has always been they shouldn't start booking Roman Reigns like Dolph Ziggler. They should book more people like Roman Reigns (except actually better).
But, just by how wrestling works, there has to be somebody the promotion largely revolves around. Right now, it's still Cena.
For instance, you can't have a GoT style sprawling cast because you still need people to buy a ticket to see somebody specifically. I have zero doubt that if GoT was a weekly TV show in front of a live crowd that had to draw a few thousand people in a new city every week, all of the sudden, there'd be more of the dwarf, Jon Snow, and the dragon lady on my TV screen.
The money is not in Reigns selling merchandise as a heel.
The money is in positioning him as a heel who fans can hate all they want, but down the line will end up cheering and getting behind way more than they ever will if he never turns heel.
The mistake with Reigns has always been that they didn't play the long game with him.
Fans had to sit through years of Punk and Bryan sitting in the midcard before getting main events and it's just handed to Reigns immediately after The Shield breaks up.
Like, what did anyone with a brain think would happen?
No, because the smart fans will just turn on Roman again the second he's a babyface again.
So, they should waste a guy who's already a main event level talent in the ring simply because they've made a previous mistake with previous wrestlers that the fans liked? When you put it like that, it sounds like the fans are the issue here,
I mean, Michael Hayes was in main events when he was 19. There is instances of young stars getting megapushes all throughout wrestling history even when more "deserving" wrestlers got botched pushes.
Not everybody needs to wait until they're 37 and wrestled in the indies for 15 years to be a main eventer.
That's fair enough.
Edit: Still think they could've done this Berg/Brock program but had KO beat Berg clean at Fastlane.
There was never a universe where it made sense for Owens to beat Goldberg clean. I could maybe buy it if Lesnar absolutely destroyed 'Berg before hand and then Owens got a sneaky dirty pin, but there's no way to make non-hardcore fans buy Owens the way he'd been pushed and his look beating Goldberg, especially after he beat Lesnar.
Also, Lesnar likely doesn't wrestle 'Berg if he loses to Owens clean.