WWE WrestleMania 32: 10 Reasons It Didn't Suck
8. Roman Reigns Vs. Triple H Was Actually Pretty Good
Pitchforks will be out for this entry, but I'm going to posit that the WrestleMania main event wasn't actually too bad a match overall. Maybe placing it in the headline slot was a tad ambitious/short-sighted on WWE's part, but they were determined to give Roman Reigns that big 'Mania post-victory fireworks display.
Ignoring the arguments about card placement for one second, the content of the bout was largely well-worked.
Natural comparisons can and have been made to Triple H's previous WrestleMania main event failures against Chris Jericho (2002) and Randy Orton (2009), but this was nothing of the sort. In fact, the action was smooth and had an old-school main event flavour to it, which was refreshing.
Reigns and Triple H didn't pretend like they were going to match the weapon shots prevalent in Dean Ambrose vs. Brock Lesnar, or the big bumps visible in Shane McMahon vs. The Undertaker.
It was far from perfect, granted, but to count it a miserable flop would appear inaccurate. Upon second viewing, Reigns vs. Triple H comes across in a better light, and it's obvious that it simply suffered from the scathing eyes of the live pay-per-view following other matches.