Seth Rollins On if WWE Exploited Roman Reigns' Leukemia for Dean Ambrose's Heel Turn
WWE is about creating moments, not regulating morality. And under this rationale, Seth Rollins was [...]
WWE is about creating moments, not regulating morality. And under this rationale, Seth Rollins was and is fully behind WWE's choice to flip Dean Ambrose the night of Roman Reigns' leukemia address.
While Ambrose's heel turn was always imminent, no one thought it would happen after Reigns' shut down the wrestling world with his somber news. So when Ambrose lashed out at Rollins that night—directly after becoming Raw Tag Team Champions with him, to boot—it caught us all on our heels.
The move was potently effective, but some fans think that WWE exploited Reigns' mortality in the name of show business. But in an interview with The Rock 105.3, Rollins tried to explain things from WWE's point of view.
"You know, it's one of those things, where obviously the situation with Roman is real life, and very unfortunate," Rollins said. "But at the end of the day, I understand why Ambrose did what he did on that night, in the sense that Roman was going to be gone. There was no if, and or buts that he was going to be gone. And so if you're going to strike out on your own, you're going to try and make a name for yourself, I understand to a point, doing it on that night. You're going to make the biggest impact you can make, and if that's your goal, if you're saying your story is that The Shield has made you weak, and you kind of want to step out of the light so to speak, out of the shadows, that's going to be the best time to do it. You're going to have the most eyes on you that night, that moment, and you're going to get the most people talking about it," he said.
Rollins answer in 2018's cryptic version of kayfabe, but he's certainly not wrong. Given the impact of Reigns' reveal, Ambrose's turn was guaranteed to have maximum exposure.
"It sucked, especially for Shield fans, and it was an emotional roller coaster of a night, going from the announcement that Roman made earlier in the night, to me and Ambrose winning the Tag Team Titles later in the night by defeating Ziggler and McIntyre, and then Ambrose doing what he did. It was a lot to take in, if you're a viewer and you're a fan, but you're never going to forget where you were that night, if you were watching on TV or if you were live, you're never going to forget that, and really that's what we do, is we create moments that you're going to remember for the rest of your life, good or bad," he said.
Like the booking Roman Reigns himself, Becky Lynch, or Brock Lesnar, WWE can get passionate opinions much easier than universal popularity. Clearly, Vince McMahon and Co. were aware that some would take issue with the timing of Ambrose's turn, but their decision was likely a measured —one where the good outweighed the bad. From marks like us, it's easy to get lost in the cold reality of the situation, but from WWE's perspective, the show must go on.
Do you think WWE's choice to flip Ambrose in the wake of Reigns' news was in poor taste? Let us know in the comments:0comments