The superplex used to be a genuine high spot in a show, you know. It was one of those moves that, if you were thinking of pulling it out, you'd need to check with the other guys on the card to find out whether they'd had the same idea, and then argue about who got to use it in whose match. Barry Windham used to use a floatover version as a finish, for God's sake: if you half-inched it from him to use mid-match, he'd no-sell you being born. These days, anyone in WWE dumb enough to take their time performing a move from the turnbuckle gets set up for a superplex, or a teased counter to their move in the form of a failed superplex attempt. Not only is it dangerous to keep an elevated suplex as a regular spot in matches up and down the card, but it's an overused storytelling device that only makes sense when it's used sparingly. Overuse of a move breeds familiarity, which takes all of the impact out of it. Signature moves are one thing - you're depending on the audience recognising the set up, in order that you can milk their reaction and build heat. The superplex is not a signature move in today's WWE, and the more it's used as a generic mid-match spot, the less the audience believes in it. While I'm on the subject, Seth Rollins needs to take the seamless superplex-to-falcon-arrow transition out of his repertoire when he returns. WWE's been selling the superplex as equally brutal to both participants for about two decades now. Rollins no-selling the big suplex to instantly hit a sitout suplex might have worked in Ring Of Honor, but in WWE it's a kayfabe killer.
Professional writer, punk werewolf and nesting place for starfish. Obsessed with squid, spirals and story. I publish short weird fiction online at desincarne.com, and tweet nonsense under the name Jack The Bodiless. You can follow me all you like, just don't touch my stuff.
