Is Big E Langston/Dolph Ziggler the New Batista/Triple H Feud?
Don’t look now, but could the WWE attempt to do what it has so unsuccessfully done in the past by trying to recreate a feud that really has no chance of surviving?
Big E Langston isn’t Batista (hell, he isn’t even Bobby Lashley) and Dolph Ziggler is not Triple H. However, you could draw the same comparisons in these two duos that could make for an interesting summer.
This is just another type of wrestling “spot” that seems to come around all the time and while it works successfully in some instances, this one may not be as adventuresome as others. When Evolution was a major part of the WWE program, we all knew what would happen. With the way Triple H talked to Batista, the mannerisms, the authority and lack thereof, it was slated to be great and done beautifully. It culminated with Batista winning the World title.
Right now, we aren’t even sure Dolph Ziggler will wear the title around his waist before WrestleMania 29. Also take into account AJ Lee’s association with both men (something is brewing) and there is tension on the horizon.
Where there is AJ, there is fire.
If the WWE is smart (and hopefully they get this memo) it will not go down this road. In listening to your comments from past stories, some of you are tired of the brand, tired of the lack of interest, tired of the lack of imagination. This is one feud that could be worth it if it is plucked right and Langston is not as stiff or poor with the microphone in the future as he is now. There are reasons he is on NXT and there are reasons he needs seasoning.
Ziggler could help get him over, but it will take more time for progression than it did for Ryback. The way the WWE is right now, it would appear Langston does not have that kind of timetable.
Right now, everything with the WWE is a gamble except for CM Punk and The Rock. Trying something off the wall like this would be a mistake, but I see it happening at some point should things continue the way they are.
We all love re-creating the old and making it new. However, in this case the old is much better and the new cannot hold an armbar to it.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?