[Mr. Nerfect]

Originally Posted by Fignuts Wasn't around when this was posted so, late reply. I think okada vs omega told the better story. You had omega working the back and neck, to soften him up for the One Winged Angel. Meanwhile Okada is doing everything he can to avoid getting hit with it, instead of just kicking out of the finisher, which we see in every other big match including styles vs cena. The story goes begins before match itself in that regard, as they built up to it by making omegas finisher a one hit kill. Something that's very unique and different in japan, and even here in the states these days. Styles vs Cena is more or less your basic big star wwe match, though they executed it as beautifully as anyone. The problem is its the same kind of match they had before at summerslam. Where as okada vs omega uses the continuity of the last six months to tell its story, cena vs styles is content to do more of the same. They even repeated the super AA kickout, which while still a cool spot, lacked the impact that it had the first time, because you knew aj was going to kick out. It just seemed a tiny bit lazy, to just put in an already used big spot, rather than making something different.

That's a good analysis. I felt more drawn into the action of Cena/Styles, because, to me, Cena has more cache, so things like AJ Styles kicking out of his moves means more than a dude I don't know's finish. It's possible I would change my opinion if I followed New Japan a bit more closely and was more invested in Okada as champion and Omega as a challenger.

I thought it was a great match. I did find stuff like the Dragon Superplex took me out of it completely. It was a bad emotional note to play, in my opinion, and to me that was a big deal, but I want to re-state that I did think it was a good match. I just find the child-like hyperbole around it a bit silly.