Current Top 4 'Mania Matches

[IHW]

-The Rock vs John Cena for the WWE Title
-Brock Lesnar vs Triple H
-CM Punk vs The Undertaker
-Randy Orton vs Sheamus for the World Title


I don't see them having two of the top four matches being rematches from 2012. Rock v. Cena and HHH v. Lesnar were two big time matches they focused on in early to mid 2012. I just don't see it happening like this. I would understand one or the other, but not both.

 

[The Dragon Saga]

Summary of the report...

Top 4 Wrestlemania 29 Matches
John Cena vs. The Rock, Lesnar vs. Triple H, CM Punk vs. The Undertaker and Sheamus vs. Randy Orton.

However there is no confirmation at all that these may happen, but then again they might, or its possible the names above might even compete in several variations of the above pairs. Who knows, I'm talking out my ass!

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

I don't see them having two of the top four matches being rematches from 2012.

When they have Brock Lesnar and Rocky, WWE doesn't care. I can absolutely see this happening. I'd much rather see Undertaker vs. Brock and HHH (McMahon's) vs. CM Punk (with Heyman), but this wouldn't bother me.

 

[Papa Pillman]

If these are the top matches the WWE fails on all levels...

The Rock vs. Cena for the WWE Title- kind of puts a damper on Once in a fucking Lifetime, huh??

HHH vs. Brock- They don't know if Brock is gonna stay around, so obviously the best way to use him is to have him put over the part timer who runs the company, instead of using all that money you spent to give a rub to one of your fulltime guys. As long as Triple H looks strong in the long run, nothing else really matters. Right?

Undertaker vs. CM Punk- This is actually one of the matches I want on the card, IF CM Punk is still champ. Without Punk's title streak on the line, this match means less than nothing. Every member of the "universe" knows the outcome of this match if its non-title. But it makes sense right? Why would the WWE ever want to put Punk over against HHH, Rock, or Taker at a major PPV? They obviously need the wins worse than Punk does, Right??

 

[London_RKO]

I'd be hugely disappointed if that was the final card. Not only are we getting two rematch's from under a year ago, they are matches with predictable endings as well.

Rock vs Cena II
Who believes in their right mind that Cena would lose this match again - especially if the WWE title is on the line. It would be a set-up for Cena to gain his win over Rocky and end WM on THAT moment when poster boy is champ once again. Not an ending a vast majority want to see. And what happens to 'Once in a lifetime' I'll just throw that DVD away then.

Taker vs Punk
While this would be a better feud, it's another predictable ending. Punk will make you believe he can beat Taker but he won't. The only way to make it more interesting is to have the title on the line. At least then, there would be a small question over a Taker loss.

Lesner v HHH
Wasn't really into this at SummerSlam let alone a rematch for Mania. Two part-timers, one of which maybe even be off for good post the event. And having lost to Lesner last year, surely Trips will predictably win this one too?

Sheamus v Orton
Turning Orton heel would freshen this match-up, but it still doesn't give me that WOW factor Mania should have. It still feels like I've seen them feud not that long ago (even it was 2011).

If I could pick, I'd go a bit left-field with the options;

CM Punk v Rock v Punk
For me this freshen's up these three and the matches we've seen. I'm not usually a fan of triple threat's but this seems to work organically. Three biggest stars in the ring at one time and you'd be hard pressed to call a winner.

Lesner v Taker
Been teased when Brock was still in UFC and could be a top brawl. While the outcome would still be predictable I think there's more life in the feud between these two. Natural heel v face too.

Sheamus v Orton
Most of the WHC possibilities don't excite me to be honest. Part of me wants Ryback v Show, but that could be done without the belt. So I'm sticking with what's planned, but having Ziggler cash in his MITB post match.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

Where does Bryan fall?

This is going to be the smarkiest crowd (NY/NJ) in wrestling history.

Is it possible he gets a re-re-match against Sheamus?

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

If these are the top matches the WWE fails on all levels...

The Rock vs. Cena for the WWE Title- kind of puts a damper on Once in a fucking Lifetime, huh??

No, actually it doesn't. WWE can't control who's champion and #1 contender when WrestleMania rolls around. Of course that's going by kayfabe, something smarks refuse to acknowledge.

HHH vs. Brock- They don't know if Brock is gonna stay around, so obviously the best way to use him is to have him put over the part timer who runs the company, instead of using all that money you spent to give a rub to one of your fulltime guys. As long as Triple H looks strong in the long run, nothing else really matters. Right?

I don't particularly care for the pairing of HHH and Brock again, but for the right reasons. Their first match was nothing to remember, and I thought the feud ended fairly well.

Who would you have Brock feud with? Probably Dolph Ziggler or Daniel Bryan, right?

Undertaker vs. CM Punk- This is actually one of the matches I want on the card, IF CM Punk is still champ. Without Punk's title streak on the line, this match means less than nothing. Every member of the "universe" knows the outcome of this match if its non-title. But it makes sense right? Why would the WWE ever want to put Punk over against HHH, Rock, or Taker at a major PPV? They obviously need the wins worse than Punk does, Right??

The only issue I have with this match is believing CM Punk, who is now a cowardly heel, has a real chance at beating the guy no one can beat at WrestleMania. That's minor, though.

Your issues, again, are ridiculous. The title isn't necessary when Punk has the Streak in his grasp. The title should close the show for a change, and that's with Rocky vs. Cena. Saying this match means less than nothing without the title is idiotic. Every Taker match at WrestleMania means something at this point, with the Streak being its first or second most consistent draw. Punk's a heel, so no, he really shouldn't be going over any babyface at WrestleMania.

 

[BaconBits]

Rock vs Cena II
Who believes in their right mind that Cena would lose this match again - especially if the WWE title is on the line. It would be a set-up for Cena to gain his win over Rocky and end WM on THAT moment when poster boy is champ once again. Not an ending a vast majority want to see. And what happens to 'Once in a lifetime' I'll just throw that DVD away then.

The vast majority? Bull fucking shit. Cena is, by far, the most over full time guy in the company. He hasn't had the title in over a year. Putting the belt back on him is fine, and the vast majority of fans will be okay with it. Happy even. Especially when The Rock endorses him after the match.

 

[cult_of_icecream_bar]

I have problem with only one match on your card.That's CM Punk vs The Undertaker.Let's see punk's odds.Can he tombstone taker?No!Can he make taker submit?No!Can he pull off a better combo than Superkick+Pedigree?No!So does punk have any belivable chance against taker?No!He doesn't have the freakish ability or body like Cena or HHH or Lesnar.And if memory serves me right,Taker squashed Punk whenever they faced each other.So no,i won't be attracted to the streak this year.

 

[Fire Marshall Bill]

This is going to be the smarkiest crowd (NY/NJ) in wrestling history.

This. If Cena wins he'll be booed so loud his head will explode. Not arguing about the matchup, just saying.

GSB, as for Bryan, what about a possible 1v1 with Kane?

No, actually it doesn't. WWE can't control who's champion and #1 contender when WrestleMania rolls around. Of course that's going by kayfabe, something smarks refuse to acknowledge.

Exactly why I've always hated that stupid "once in a lifetime" argument. How can they control it if Cena wins the Rumble? It was set up once in a lifetime, but by pure chance they could meet again. Some people try to be too smart for their own good.

Anyways, my only gripe with this card is HHH/Lesnar. I would've liked to see Lesnar put over Ryback, personally. The match wouldn't be pretty, but I bet it would be pretty brutal if they made it a no DQ or something. But Ryback will probably be taking care of Shield.

Also, where's Ziggler? Do you think they'll have him cash in and drop it that quickly, or wait until after WM?

 

[BaconBits]

This is going to be the smarkiest crowd (NY/NJ) in wrestling history.

That's not true. Wrestlemania XX was in MSG and super smarktastic. That was a tiny arena with limited seating that was comprised almost exclusively of New Yorkers.

It's going to be in a much larger, open air venue with more folks from out of town. It won't be as nearly as loud or vocal.

Now, the Raw after, the crowd will be smarkier than the crowd at last year's post WM Raw crowd. It'll be on original ECW levels of smark.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

I'll be skipping Mania this year if those are the top 4 matches. Sheamus & Orton have faced eachother numerous times and I don't think I've ever seen then rip it up. Triple H avenging his SummerSlam loss? Not for me, thank you. I though The Rock & Cena achieved all they could with a year's worth of build and a so-so match last year. Punk & Taker is a fresh match, considering they had a nothing feud 3 and a half years ago and the growth of Punk/limited appearances of Undertaker. But I don't see Punk as a worth Mania opponent for the Deadman, even after a year plus WWE Championship reign.

Lesnar vs. Rock and Cena vs. Undertaker would be more appealing, and they're the biggest matches WWE could promote.

 

[IHW]

Where does Bryan fall?

This is going to be the smarkiest crowd (NY/NJ) in wrestling history.

Is it possible he gets a re-re-match against Sheamus?

Somewhere with Kane.

 

[Coco]

Where does Bryan fall?

This is going to be the smarkiest crowd (NY/NJ) in wrestling history.

Is it possible he gets a re-re-match against Sheamus?

I reckon the only thing that makes sense is a match against Kane or (if the WWE really cares about the tag division) a tag title match with Kane as his partner.

 

[Mr Mikey Mike]

Not feeling those top matches. I'd rather have Rock vs Cena vs Punk for the wwe title, Taker vs Lesnar,
a heel Triple H vs Ryback, and heel Orton vs Sheamus for the world title.

 

[The Dragon Saga]

Where does Bryan fall?

Epic showdown with Charlie Sheen.

 

[Papa Pillman]

No, actually it doesn't. WWE can't control who's champion and #1 contender when WrestleMania rolls around. Of course that's going by kayfabe, something smarks refuse to acknowledge.

We know there would be no chance of Cena losing this match again, so you're saying it makes more sense to headline the show with two matches that have gaurunteed foregone conclusion finishes?

Who would you have Brock feud with? Probably Dolph Ziggler or Daniel Bryan, right?

No, I'm no Ziggler mark. But if Ziggler's not gonna be in the world title match, he may be a good opponent for Triple H, put Steph in Hunter's corner and have AJ in Ziggler's and it feels like a somewhat of a big deal.

I also don't see Hell No being over by Mania either, so that leaves Bryan out.

I'd say if they're intent on having Cena/Rock in some fashion, maybe throw Brock into that match as a three way. They're the three faces WWE are going to sell either way in this event. Might as well build it to one match. Atleast Heyman being involved in the promo build would keep us from getting a re-hash of last year's played out exchanges.

Or possibly match up Brock with Ryback. It could be logically done using Heyman as the catalyst. That would give Ryback a chance for a big Mania moment, and Lesnar could lose to Ryback and give a guy a rub without looking weak as a result.

The only issue I have with this match is believing CM Punk, who is now a cowardly heel, has a real chance at beating the guy no one can beat at WrestleMania. That's minor, though.

Your issues, again, are ridiculous. The title isn't necessary when Punk has the Streak in his grasp. The title should close the show for a change, and that's with Rocky vs. Cena. Saying this match means less than nothing without the title is idiotic. Every Taker match at WrestleMania means something at this point, with the Streak being its first or second most consistent draw. Punk's a heel, so no, he really shouldn't be going over any babyface at WrestleMania.

It means something only because its the streak. It's a match that Punk could never be booked to win, and therefore no one would care strongly. Taker's match should be built as if not the equivilant of the next top match on the card, atleast damn close. Without Punk having the belt the match is only relevant for adding another notch to Taker's belt, and absolutley nothing more.

And I agree with you that Punk shouldn't end the streak, but atleast if you put the title on the line it creates the illusion that he perhaps has a chance to do just that. Plus it is the best way to end Punk's historic reign without Punk looking bad in any way. If he loses to a movie star at Royal Rumble it devalues the reign to a degree. If he loses to Taker at Mania, no one can hold that against him.

 

[Fire Marshall Bill]

If he loses to a movie star at Royal Rumble it devalues the reign to a degree. If he loses to Taker at Mania, no one can hold that against him.

I love when people use that word. It's such a funny word for a prop.

When/If Rock wins the title at the Royal Rumble, no one outside of WWE is going to hear about that, right? Not a soul. Oh wait... Yes, THEY WILL! Pop culture will be all over it. ESPN will have a story about it. I can practically guarantee you that. If that's not an increase in value for the WWE Title or the WWE as a whole, I don't know what is. Increasing the value of the WWE Title itself will then increase the value of anyone who holds its reign. Including CM Punk. Not to mention, he's got the longest reign in 24 years. Pretty sure no ones knocking that off the pedestal anytime soon. The length of the reign itself gives it all the value it needs.

The Rock winning the WWE Title is good for business, and it's good for publicity. Simple.

PLUS, unless you have a time machine, you don't know he's going to anyways.

 

[The Dragon Saga]

Yeah, basically anything The Rock does makes sites like TMZ and E! He bought his mom a car for Christmas and I saw several pictures of it on Facebook alone. That shit will make magazines, newspapers, sporting magazines who don't even cover WWE. Plus old fans who feel this era is shit are gonna crap their pants cause Rock was their childhood.

However, if CM Punk beats The Rock It'll get a shit ton of publicity too. Some may call it a "prop" but the WWE Championship is viewed as the highest prize in WWE. It just adds to the match itself.

 

[Papa Pillman]

I love when people use that word. It's such a funny word for a prop.

When/If Rock wins the title at the Royal Rumble, no one outside of WWE is going to hear about that, right? Not a soul. Oh wait... Yes, THEY WILL! Pop culture will be all over it. ESPN will have a story about it. I can practically guarantee you that. If that's not an increase in value for the WWE Title or the WWE as a whole, I don't know what is. Increasing the value of the WWE Title itself will then increase the value of anyone who holds its reign. Including CM Punk. Not to mention, he's got the longest reign in 24 years. Pretty sure no ones knocking that off the pedestal anytime soon. The length of the reign itself gives it all the value it needs.

The Rock winning the WWE Title is good for business, and it's good for publicity. Simple..

Clearly I said it devalues Punk's reign, not the title itself. The WWE title is the most protected prize in the business, its not in danger of being devalued. Punk's reign on the other hand can be devalued no matter how long it has been. Hell, many already criticize the importance of the accomplishment due to the fact that in spite of it he still isn't seen to be the best the company has to offer, the way that Hogan, Cena, or Sammartino were when they had their long reigns. So what perfect way to fully finish the job of overshining the magnitude of what Punk has done?? Easy, have him lose the belt to an A-list star, so that way Rock's win and him being champion and him going on to face Cena is all anyone(especially the mainstream media you mentioned) picks up and cares about and speaks about. Those media outlets wouldn't even mention Punk's name in the story. His reign would be fully reduced to a mere footnote in the light of the acheivement by the mighthy mega-star prodigal son.

PLUS, unless you have a time machine, you don't know he's going to anyways.

Obviously this entire thread is specualtion. That's why we're using if's when discussing the scenario. But thanks for your need to point this out anyway.

 

[Nate DaMac]

His reign would be fully reduced to a mere footnote in the light of the acheivement by the mighthy mega-star prodigal son.

... So? If Punk did what Rock has done for the business or even anywhere near what Rock has done, you'd have a point. What does sucking Punk off and giving him a longer title reign do? He's done all he can with this one, time to see if he can still be considered a top guy without the title.

He IS a footnote compared to The Rock. He should be treated accordingly.

 

[FlexAmerican Dynamite]

Aside from the possible Rock/Punk/Cena match up things look pretty grim for the marquee matches this year.

Also I doubt Sheamus vs Orton will be for the WHC, with them pushing Del Rio hard and Ziggler still clutching to the MITB.

 

[jmt225]

I really hope Punk vs. Undertaker happens.

Their feud in 2009 didn't get nearly the minutes it deserved, despite the matches and promos being very good regardless. Plus, it'll still feel like a "first time" thing because of that and I'm positive it would be terrific.

And I'd really like to see Rock and Lesnar wrestle different guys, especially Lesnar. There's absolutely no point to a rematch with HHH. HHH should put over The Shield on the show and Lesnar should put over Ryback. But of course, heaven forbid that kind of shit. No, all the stars must face each other.

 

[Nate DaMac]

I don't care about any of that stuff, I just don't want to see Lesanr and HHH stink up the place again. That match was so underwhelming.

 

[Coco]

No, all the stars must face each other.

Look at the buyrates for Mania and SummerSlam last year and explain how they're wrong.

Keeping in mind, of course, that I've been captain of the "wins and losses don't matter" brigade for the better part of a year now. Saying that these guys should be used to "put over" newer guys isn't the sort of thinking that works for me. Consistent, high-profile booking makes stars. Not being "put over." Accordingly, big guys should be used for big matches. That's what they're being paid big money for.