JBL has had enough of Conrad Thompson’s Roman Reigns argument, and the latest episode of Something to Wrestle turned into a full-on debate over whether WWE’s biggest star deserves credit for the company’s historic business.
With Bruce Prichard absent, JBL stepped in alongside Thompson and spent a good chunk of the show pushing back against Thompson’s claim that Reigns is the most overrated main-event star in WWE history. By the end of the argument, JBL had heard enough and flat-out labeled Thompson a “Roman Reigns hater.”
Thompson’s position hasn’t changed. He believes WWE decided Roman Reigns was going to be its top guy long before fans fully accepted him, and he doesn’t believe Reigns working only a handful of dates each year means he should get credit for WWE’s massive television deals and financial success. JBL wasn’t buying that logic. He argued that wrestling has always judged the top star partly by how business performs while that person is carrying the company.
“If business is bad, you blame the top guy. If business is good, you give the top guy credit to some degree or not. Is Nick Khan one of the greatest executives? He’s one of the greatest executives in the world. He’s not just wrestling. Nick Khan’s a genius. But Roman is the guy that’s spearheading the ship. Now, is he surrounded by a lot of great talent? Absolutely. So was Hogan. So was Sammartino.”
When Thompson questioned who actually decided Reigns was WWE’s top star, JBL pointed directly to Roman’s track record and his position whenever he appears.
“He’s main evented more WrestleManias than anybody in history. How is he not the top guy? He comes back, he’s main event. How is he not the top guy?”
Thompson then brought up the infamous crowd reaction where Reigns was booed relentlessly for roughly eight minutes. Thompson saw that as evidence WWE forced Roman into a position fans didn’t want him in. JBL saw the exact opposite.
“We never thought we’d see dominance like Bruno until we saw Roman. And you mentioned that the people sat out there and booed for eight minutes without a break. Name another character in the last 20 years that people would do anything for for eight minutes.”
When Thompson pushed back, JBL argued that whether the reaction was positive or negative didn’t matter nearly as much as the fact that Reigns could generate that kind of emotion.
“I know it, but at least it’s a reaction. I’m telling you, it’s a reaction.”
JBL then went straight at Thompson’s argument that Reigns shouldn’t receive credit for WWE’s record-setting business because he didn’t personally negotiate the company’s television contracts.
“Will people come to see him lose? I don’t give a s** if he’s called a babyface or a heel. He’s a draw, and Roman is the face of the company in the most profitable era in wrestling history. I never dreamed you’d have billion-dollar TV contracts.”*
Thompson responded by asking JBL to show him a television contract Reigns actually negotiated. JBL fired back that Hulk Hogan and Steve Austin didn’t negotiate WWE’s television contracts either, yet nobody uses that against them when discussing the business they helped generate.
“Show me the TV contract Hogan negotiated. He didn’t negotiate it. Stone Cold didn’t negotiate it. My argument is that he oversaw that. He’s the top guy. He’s not negotiating the contracts. There’s a lot of other great talent there at WWE that are responsible for it also, but he’s the top guy.”
That’s where JBL accused Thompson of holding Reigns to a completely different standard than previous WWE megastars. Then came the line that pretty much summed up the entire argument.
“You’re picking and choosing. You’re cherry-picking. Oh, it meant something when Hogan was in it. It meant something when Stone Cold was. It doesn’t mean anything when Roman does it.”
“I didn’t realize you’re such a freaking Roman Reigns hater.”
JBL also went after Thompson’s claim that Paul Heyman was responsible for transforming Reigns into a true top-level star. Thompson has called Reigns’ success “the greatest trick Paul Heyman ever pulled” and argued there are essentially two versions of Roman — before Heyman and after Heyman. JBL compared the situation to Bruno Sammartino working with Arnold Skaaland and argued that Heyman’s presence only worked because Roman Reigns was the centerpiece. JBL then used an NFL comparison to make his point.
“Some little campy group that Sami Zayn was still as charismatic with instead of Roman Reigns, would it have been as effective? No, because it’s because you’re playing off of Roman Reigns and Paul Heyman.”
“It’s like saying Joe Montana would not be a great quarterback without Jerry Rice. They happened to play together, and because they did, they both made each other better.”
Thompson still isn’t backing away from his original position, but JBL clearly isn’t letting the argument slide either. What started with Thompson calling Roman Reigns the most overrated WWE main-event star ever has now turned into a wider debate over whether Roman was manufactured by WWE or simply became exactly the superstar the company always believed he could be.
Do you think JBL destroyed Conrad Thompson’s argument, or does Thompson have a point about WWE forcing Roman Reigns into the top spot before fans were ready for him? Let us know what you think and leave your feedback in the comments.
