Let's Talk Wrestlemania! (Has WWE booked Lesnar too strong?)

DudeistBelieve

TellEmSteveDave.com
Sep 9, 2010
4,771
1
0
I mean, Wrestlemania is next sunday, and I just wanted to talk about something that's been on my mind.

In our world of fictional combat, has the current WWE Champion Brock Lesnar been booked too strong?

-He beat Triple H so badly, the next night Triple H lost to Curtis Axel!

-He destroyed the Big Show in route to Wrestlemania at the Royal Rumble last year. Just flat out destroyed him.

-He defeated the Undertaker at Wrestlemania, obliterating the seemingly unstoppable win-streak.

-He beat John Cena decisively. He literally beat WWE's Superman so bad he's out of the main event scene.

Now at Wrestlemania he's facing Roman Reigns, does anyone really believe (because wrestling is all about believing) that he stands any chance at all? Against the man that beat DEATH and SUPERMAN?

I mean you could say the same thing about the other person we wanted instead, Daniel Bryan, but at least to Bryan's credit he has the same legitimate aura about him Chris Beniot had in 2004. Sure Reigns is Samoan, but he certainly isn't a wrecking ball like his cousin Umaga was.

I'm left wondering who on the entire roster could be seen as a equal match up to Brock. Rusev, maybe, but even his dominant time as U.S. champion has shown moments of weakness... Weakness that Brock Lesnar has never had. Bray Wyatt is a strong possibility but only if he can get inside Lesnar's head, which would be rather difficult since Lesnar is basically a Prize Fighter and only shows up on PPVs.
 

Hazy992

Why does this place still exist
Aug 1, 2010
5,265
0
0
The problem with Reigns is that he's billed as a big strong guy, but Lesnar is just better than him. He's a lot stronger and incredibly quick for a guy his size, so it's hard to suspend your disbelief and buy that Reigns would even have a chance against him.

Bryan would have worked better because a) it's a David & Goliath story that just writes itself, plus he never actually lost the title, and b) even though he's not as strong as Lesnar he is faster, more manouverable and has a bigger moveset. You can trick yourself into thinking the matchup works, like with CM Punk or Eddie Guererro.

Not only that, but Lesnar/Bryan would probably just be a better match to watch. I really hope I'm wrong and that Lesnar and Reigns tear the fucking house down, but I don't see two wrestlers who can't lead a match, and one of whom is still a little green, putting on that great a show.
 

Xan Krieger

Completely insane
Feb 11, 2009
2,918
0
0
SaneAmongInsane said:
I mean, Wrestlemania is next sunday, and I just wanted to talk about something that's been on my mind.

In our world of fictional combat, has the current WWE Champion Brock Lesnar been booked too strong?

-He beat Triple H so badly, the next night Triple H lost to Curtis Axel!

-He destroyed the Big Show in route to Wrestlemania at the Royal Rumble last year. Just flat out destroyed him.

-He defeated the Undertaker at Wrestlemania, obliterating the seemingly unstoppable win-streak.

-He beat John Cena decisively. He literally beat WWE's Superman so bad he's out of the main event scene.

Now at Wrestlemania he's facing Roman Reigns, does anyone really believe (because wrestling is all about believing) that he stands any chance at all? Against the man that beat DEATH and SUPERMAN?

I mean you could say the same thing about the other person we wanted instead, Daniel Bryan, but at least to Bryan's credit he has the same legitimate aura about him Chris Beniot had in 2004. Sure Reigns is Samoan, but he certainly isn't a wrecking ball like his cousin Umaga was.

I'm left wondering who on the entire roster could be seen as a equal match up to Brock. Rusev, maybe, but even his dominant time as U.S. champion has shown moments of weakness... Weakness that Brock Lesnar has never had. Bray Wyatt is a strong possibility but only if he can get inside Lesnar's head, which would be rather difficult since Lesnar is basically a Prize Fighter and only shows up on PPVs.
Also he broke Mark Henry's arm, the World's Strongest Man.

That said I'm so sick of Brock Lesnar, can't wait for him to leave. Ideally Roman would beat him and we'd never have to hear from him ever again. Keep Paul Heyman, drop his trained gorilla.
 

snappydog

New member
Sep 18, 2010
947
0
0
The issue I'm more worried about (personally, I think the best option is for Lesnar to beat Reigns and Seth to cash in) is Bray and Taker. How do you book this?! I mean, you can't have Taker lose twice in a row; it just cheapens the entire streak as well as Brock's victory. But Wyatt can't afford to lose either, and how much does losing to the Undertaker mean now that he's already lost? Neither man can really afford to lose.

Also, I realise this isn't amazingly relevant to Wrestlemania Play Button, but it's wrestling-related and all wrestling fans should watch it.
 

Marter

Elite Member
Legacy
Oct 27, 2009
14,276
19
43
Lesnar's been booked too strongly if he loses clean to Reigns. I wouldn't believe it. Honestly, I'm thinking at this point Lesnar retains, Rollins tries to use the Money in the Bank contract and he loses, too. Lesnar walks out looking even stronger than he already does. How does he eventually lose it? I don't know. SHIELD reunion? That could be fun, although booking it wouldn't exactly be easy.

Triple H can't beat Sting unless he cheats and they set a rematch for, like, Summerslam or something. Bryan wins the IC title, Cena wins the US title, the Divas match doesn't matter, Sheamus returns to win the Andre the Giant Memorial Battle Royal, and Orton/Rollins doesn't matter, either.

I think Wyatt/'Taker is a bad idea at this point. Last year, with the WM StreakTM still intact? Sure. But now? A 'Taker loss makes the potential for him and Sting at next year's show less intriguing, while a Wyatt loss reminds us that Wyatt loses almost all of his big feuds and sets him back. About the only thing I could see "working" -- but it would be incredibly difficult to properly pull off -- is a Wyatt face turn that "sides" him with The Undertaker, which sees 'Taker give Wyatt his "powers" or "aura" or w/e you want to call it. Can that work in this era? Probably not, but it's the only thing I can see not hurting one of them.

And those are my brief WrestleMania thoughts.
 

TakerFoxx

Elite Member
Jan 27, 2011
1,125
0
41
snappydog said:
The issue I'm more worried about ut (personally, I thinkthe best option is for Lesnar to beat Reigns and Seth to cash in) is Bray and Taker. How do you book this?! I mean, you can't haveUndertakerer lose twice in a row; it just cheapens the entire streak as well as Brock's victory. But Wyatt can't afford to lose either, and how much does losing to the Undertaker mean now that he's already lost? Neither man can really afford to lose.
You could do something similar to the first Buried Alive match against Mankind: have Bray lose the match, but Undertaker is the one that leaves in the coffin.

As for Lesnar, personally I think he hasn't been booked strong enough. Having him lose to Cena at ER and to HHH at Wrestlemania were mistakes. But in my opinion, the best ending would be to have Lesnar beat Reigns decisively, then Undertaker attacks Lesnar for revenge and tombstones him, and then Seth cashes in.
 

Kolby Jack

Come at me scrublord, I'm ripped
Apr 29, 2011
2,519
0
0
Honestly I don't think Lesnar should have been champion, or at least he shouldn't have been champion for as long as he has been. Absentee champions are pretty lame. Even the Rock's brief stint as Champ before was lame. Not having the title be a presence at your weekly shows is a huge loss. Not having your champion at the weekly shows is a huge loss. All we've been getting for most of these past few week's shows have been talking about the match and how Reigns will do against the champion and whatever, but if the champ isn't there for rebuttals, who cares? It's just one-sided talk.

I'm also in agreement with many others about Reigns. He's a decent wrestler, but I don't think he's done much to earn this main event. His promos are straight garbage, his style is a poor match against Brock, his biggest claim to fame is as part of a great stable and since the end of that stable he's just been... bleh. It's not his fault, for sure. It's the WWE's fault.

I also can't help but see Daniel Bryan's entrance into the IC title picture as a massive demotion. John Cena can elevate the US title, but Daniel Bryan can't elevate the IC title. This just feels like him bending to the company's shitty designs. I don't know if that's the case; I mean, he wants to keep his job, but maybe he's speaking up about it backstage. Who knows? It just seems like he's been shut down, maybe out of fear for his neck, and WWE is trying to tuck him away in the most irrelevant title match so we'll hopefully forget he exists. It just might work at this rate.
 

TakerFoxx

Elite Member
Jan 27, 2011
1,125
0
41
Kolby Jack said:
I also can't help but see Daniel Bryan's entrance into the IC title picture as a massive demotion. John Cena can elevate the US title, but Daniel Bryan can't elevate the IC title. This just feels like him bending to the company's shitty designs. I don't know if that's the case; I mean, he wants to keep his job, but maybe he's speaking up about it backstage. Who knows? It just seems like he's been shut down, maybe out of fear for his neck, and WWE is trying to tuck him away in the most irrelevant title match so we'll hopefully forget he exists. It just might work at this rate.
Given how quickly the Ambrose vs. Barrett rivalry got changed into a six-man ladder match, I'm starting to suspect that it was done specifically to shoehorn Bryan into it so they could put the IC title on him as a sort of consolation prize for his fans. His inexplicable (at least from a management point of view) popularity has been fucking up WWE's master plan for years now, so they're probably hoping that by giving him a big victory and walking out with a belt will mollify the crowd and keep them from booing the main event. It's not going to work though. They've been trying to get him out of the way for a long time, and it just keeps making him more and more popular. If they can't get their shit together with Lesnar's contract, Seth Rollins cashing in at the end is pretty much their last hope.
 

Hazy992

Why does this place still exist
Aug 1, 2010
5,265
0
0
The Rusev/Cena feud isn't really doing anything for me either. As somebody who isn't American and not particularly patriotic anyway I end up just rooting for Rusev cause I'm so bored of Cena.

And it's kinda frustrating seeing another promising up-and-coming star getting fed to Cena. He shouldn't have beated Wyatt last year and he shouldn't be beating Rusev this year. What the hell happened to Rusev/Ryback? I swear Vince has the attention span of a goldfish, he just gives up on things and then pretends they never happened.
 

lord canti

New member
May 30, 2009
619
0
0
Personally,and I know this would never happen because they are both heels, but I would have loved to have seen Rusev go up against brock at wrestlemania. I mean it would be two unstoppable beats go at it and I think it would have been a great match.
 

Hazy992

Why does this place still exist
Aug 1, 2010
5,265
0
0
lord canti said:
Personally,and I know this would never happen because they are both heels, but I would have loved to have seen Rusev go up against brock at wrestlemania. I mean it would be two unstoppable beats go at it and I think it would have been a great match.
The whole babyface/heel dynamic is so limiting. I don't see why we can't get more babyface vs babyface or heel vs heel championship matches.
 

Vedrenne

New member
Feb 8, 2010
116
0
0
Booking Lesnar as they have is a fairly good idea, the buy rates have been up whenever Lesnar has defended the title (year on year). It's kinda sad they didn't push CM Punk as strong during his year long reign. The problem is twofold - (1) Roman Reigns is not ready for this push and (2) Lesnar's contract runs out immediately after Wrestlemania.

If they decide to hold off on having Reigns win, Lesnar will be in a position to get all the money and as little appearances as possible, for fear of him running off with the belt to UFC. If Reigns does win, he will be more hated than Rock was in 1997 (I miss the old "Die, Rocky, Die" chants). Lesnar will get a face reaction, of that i'm certain. Reigns has been getting Cena levels of hate from crowds and if the crowd in California realise that Reigns is going to be more in our faces than Cena was, he'll be booed out of the building. I can't help but feel that this could have been avoided if WWE had booked the Rumble better.

The only hope for the main event, if Reigns does win, is for Rollins to cash in and win the title. It would give something for Reigns to chase and would give him time to develop.

The other matches are...dull. Sting vs HHH would have been great in 2001-2004, but now both are older and slower. Wyatt vs Taker should have been last year, with Taker passing the torch to a guy who was practically guaranteed to stay, not leave for UFC and with at least 15+ years of a career in front of him. Cena vs Rusev will be the same as their match at FastLane, but with Cena winning.

The IC title match will steal the show, but it's a crying shame that it's such a clusterfeth. I can't understand why they didn't go ahead with Bryan vs Ziggler and have Barrett defend against the Ambrose. All the other guys should be in the Battle Royal, that's what it's there for.

Sheamus is winning the Andre Battle Royal. Orton vs Rollins will be like every Orton match, a technically perfect snoozefest. AJ Lee and Paige should beat the Bella's, but Bella's will get the nod.

I would have liked to see Goldust vs Cody on it's own here, especially as their match at Fastlane ended in a cliffhanger. The lack of a tag title match at this point shows how far that division has fallen. The tag title scene is depressing, especially with how the Ascension has been booked and the stupid decision to break up the Wyatt's.

This PPV will entirely hinge on the main event. If it's good (and Reigns doesn't walk out with the belt), it'll be an above average WM. If it sucks (entirely possible, with Reigns inexperience and Brock's history of not giving a feth when he's leaving) and Reigns leaves as champion, this will be one of the worst WM ever (maybe on par with Wrestlemania 9).
 

lord canti

New member
May 30, 2009
619
0
0
One thing I am hoping for is that Sandow finally turns on the miz. The've been teasing that feud for so long that it almsot puts gold and stardust boiling feud to shame.
 

Hazy992

Why does this place still exist
Aug 1, 2010
5,265
0
0
lord canti said:
One thing I am hoping for is that Sandow finally turns on the miz. The've been teasing that feud for so long that it almsot puts gold and stardust boiling feud to shame.
It seems pretty likely that Sandow will turn on The Miz at the Battle Royal and eliminate him. Hell he might even end up winning the thing.

I'm worried about what happens to Sandow next though. People want him to turn on The Miz, but Mizdow was what got him so over in the first place. Where do they go with him from here?
 

Username Redacted

New member
Dec 29, 2010
709
0
0
Thoughts from a former hardcore and now more casual wrestling fan:

The Untertaker: I've been a fan of the dead man since grade school. I don't care if he wins or loses to Bray Wyatt as long as he retires. He's given the business enough and it's time for him to walk away. This is actually one of the areas where I give mad credit to Dana White with the UFC in that for a couple of really popular fighters at the end of their careers he's just flat out refused to give them any more fights. Does anyone doubt that Chuck Liddell could have continued to sell PPVs until his brain resembled a jell-o pudding snack? Dana said: "Hey Chuck, here's some money but you're not fighting any more". I wish the WWE would do something similar with some of their aging talent.

Sting: Very excited to finally see him in the WWE even if it's 5-10 years too late to expect a really great run out of him. I think he and (mostly) HHH will produce a solid match and I'm interested to see where the angle goes from there.

Reigns: Ring work is improving. Mic work is still kind of painful to listen to. Very much not ready for this push with the WWE very obviously not caring about or aware of this fact.

Wyatt: Love the character but I have no idea where he can, will or should go. If Undertaker is retiring Wyatt probably wins if not then loses.

Rollins/Orton: I feel like this match should have had Rollins' Money in the Bank contract at stake. At least that way I'd care about the outcome.

Cena: zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Divas: I didn't realize that AJ Lee was back (see also the 'casual fan' disclaimer at the beginning of this post). It's a shame that both of the women who can really go are on the same team.

Other stuff: I find it really hard to care about matches that involve more than four people. As others have stated the IC match is pretty clearly the WWE trying to appease Bryan's fans with that almost certainly not working. Ooooh a battle roya....zzzzzzzzz.
 

TakerFoxx

Elite Member
Jan 27, 2011
1,125
0
41
Hazy992 said:
lord canti said:
One thing I am hoping for is that Sandow finally turns on the miz. The've been teasing that feud for so long that it almsot puts gold and stardust boiling feud to shame.
It seems pretty likely that Sandow will turn on The Miz at the Battle Royal and eliminate him. Hell he might even end up winning the thing.

I'm worried about what happens to Sandow next though. People want him to turn on The Miz, but Mizdow was what got him so over in the first place. Where do they go with him from here?
He could go back to his intellectual savior gimmick. He was crazy over back then as well that it's kind of baffling that he was booked as such a loser.
 

Catfood220

Elite Member
Legacy
Dec 21, 2010
2,098
357
88
ThingWhatSqueaks said:
Sting: Very excited to finally see him in the WWE even if it's 5-10 years too late to expect a really great run out of him. I think he and (mostly) HHH will produce a solid match and I'm interested to see where the angle goes from there.
Seeing as I don't have Sky, I have to get all my wrestling action through TNA on Challenge TV (go ahead, laugh) which up until last year was where Sting plying his trade. Having seen him in a few matches, I wouldn't get your hopes up for anything great or even that exciting. He was awesome back in the day, but that day has been and gone.
 

Vedrenne

New member
Feb 8, 2010
116
0
0
LucasGrimms said:
No matter how awesome you think he is, he still lost to the more beastly Goldberg.

Now that was a match.
That match was horrific. 15 minutes of Brock and Goldberg doing nothing until the Spear. That's why i'm worried about the Reigns vs Lesnar match.

Catfood220 said:
ThingWhatSqueaks said:
Sting: Very excited to finally see him in the WWE even if it's 5-10 years too late to expect a really great run out of him. I think he and (mostly) HHH will produce a solid match and I'm interested to see where the angle goes from there.
Seeing as I don't have Sky, I have to get all my wrestling action through TNA on Challenge TV (go ahead, laugh) which up until last year was where Sting plying his trade. Having seen him in a few matches, I wouldn't get your hopes up for anything great or even that exciting. He was awesome back in the day, but that day has been and gone.
I had a different view of Sting in TNA, being a fellow Brit. He did everything fine, had no bad matches...but he didn't have any great ones either. The only match I can remember of his I can remember from TNA (starting from when it was on TWC on Sky) was the 1 minute title match against Jeff Hardy. Even then, that was Sting doing the correct call and stopping Jeff from embarrassing the company. Against anyone else he would have a 2.5/5 match...against HHH, it will be the slowest match of the night.
 

Username Redacted

New member
Dec 29, 2010
709
0
0
Vedrenne said:
Catfood220 said:
ThingWhatSqueaks said:
Sting: Very excited to finally see him in the WWE even if it's 5-10 years too late to expect a really great run out of him. I think he and (mostly) HHH will produce a solid match and I'm interested to see where the angle goes from there.
Seeing as I don't have Sky, I have to get all my wrestling action through TNA on Challenge TV (go ahead, laugh) which up until last year was where Sting plying his trade. Having seen him in a few matches, I wouldn't get your hopes up for anything great or even that exciting. He was awesome back in the day, but that day has been and gone.
I had a different view of Sting in TNA, being a fellow Brit. He did everything fine, had no bad matches...but he didn't have any great ones either. The only match I can remember of his I can remember from TNA (starting from when it was on TWC on Sky) was the 1 minute title match against Jeff Hardy. Even then, that was Sting doing the correct call and stopping Jeff from embarrassing the company. Against anyone else he would have a 2.5/5 match...against HHH, it will be the slowest match of the night.
Agree on Sting/HHH likely being the slowest match of the night. However I wouldn't be surprised if it's a better match than Lesner/Reigns as there have been a couple of matches where Reigns has shown a surprisingly shaky gas tank and that's not something that you want to be worrying about in the main event slot. That said if the match [Sting/HHH] isn't so good then I think that WWE may want to take the lesson to heart of maybe not having two out of the three oldest wrestlers on the card being involved in the same match.