Do they go back to the old way of operating?

[chicagokmc]

Now that we have to think, how did everyone like the infrequent appearances of the world champion on weekly tv? I know there are some that resent the part time arrangement lesnar has and will continue to have now. but I think wwe made the best of it and I think it made for better tv. I got tired of the old way of operating where the champion was out there every week either in tag or multi person competition. I would have preferred him to be there a bit more frequently but I didn't have a problem with the champ not being there weekly. I'm an old school 80's guy and before the Monday Night Raw era, that's what we wrestling fans got. The champ was there when he was there and it felt special when we did see him on tv.

we're probably going to go back to seeing rollins in some kind of competition every week. wwe should seriously consider having the champ around without having him compete every week. that would be the differentiator from lesnar. rollins on tv every week is good just don't shove him down our throat by having him to wrestle every week. the champ doesn't have to do that to move storylines and be impactful.

 

[Mac]

The champion needs to be on television every week. I was pretty much sick of seeing Lesnar show up once in a blue moon. This isn't the 80's anymore, the shows are usually built around your champion and im just glad that we have some normalcy back in the WWE.

 

[Wald]

I liked it, but then I'm in favour of a rotating roster where everyone from John Cena to Luke Harper get taken off TV for a minimum of three months a year.

I honestly do not need to see anyone on the WWE roster on my TV once or twice a week. Overexposure is the WWE Superstar's biggest obstacle to overcome today. I don't care how much you like Cena or Daniel Bryan, there's only so many times you can see Cena overcome the odds or watch Bryan leading a crowd in a Yes chant before you get bored of it. Brock has felt more special because his appearances are special. He's by far and away the biggest attraction WWE has today so I hope they use him wisely in the coming three years.

 

[laodaron]

Going back to the old way seems like such a regressive step. The Brock way of being champ was so well done. I actually expect him to beat Rollins tonight on Raw and get his belt back and leave Raw until Sumemrslam.

 

[chicagokmc]

I can understand people wanting the champion to be on tv every week to promote himself and the next pay per view. but why does that champ have to wrestle in a tag team or 6 man tag match? why can't he just be there to promote or even run in matches? how many times do you want to see rollins teaming either with j&j or kane/big show on weekly tv?

 

[Mustang Sally]

The three posts before mine reflect three points of view. Plainly, something in the middle would probably work best.....with Brock Lesnar's rare appearances on TV representing one extreme....and Seth Rollins and Daniel Bryan being on every single episode of Raw and Smackdown the other.

I didn't care for the way Brock was doing it, although you have to admire the way in which the world is his oyster....when he originally quit WWE, it was because he didn't want to be on the road 300 days a year....and now, he has a schedule that must be the envy of every person in the WWE troupe.

But things weren't good enough, at least with Brock as champion. Now that he's chasing the title again, it won't be as annoying because when he's not there, he's not there. Other performers trying to win the world title need not make constant reference to Brock, because he won't be the one they're after.

One thing I was totally wrong about: I was wondering last night if Paul Heyman might betray Brock and go to Roman's side, as some had predicted. Of course, that was foolish; after Brock signed a new contract, he'll continue to need Heyman, more for the times Brock is away from WWE than when he's around. Someone has to keep Lesnar in the minds of fans, and who better to use for that purpose than the best talker in the game? Had Brock been leaving WWE, a betrayal might well have taken place, to set up Heyman's next gig.

Now, Paul's next assignment is his present one. Yeah, they go back to the old way of operating.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

Rollins IS going be on TV more often... but doesn't mean he is defending the title any more often.

How Seth avoids all his contenders or rigs the odds back into his favour is going to be THE storyline of his reign... Brock had his contract, so now Rollins can say... if Brock could, I can... I choose when I defend, no 30 day rule for Brock, none for me...

Seth builds an entourage, probably involving Heyman, Barrett, Sheamus maybe even Reigns himself... so they can all take matches for him rather than him putting the title on the line. After all that "We said WE would do it, not YOU would do it" argument might make sense to see the Shield reunite under Heyman.

Brock doesn't need Heyman if he's face... if anything the going away and then returning would work better without Heyman if he's moved on to Rollins as most suspect will happen. If anything Brock being away for a few months builds it... let Rollins get comfy, maybe using his entourage to get by Orton, Reigns if needed and maybe even Bryan (especially if Barrett is involved) as IC is #1 contender... THEN just when he gets comfy... here comes Brock...

Rollins doesn't need Heyman but it makes a lot of sense. Brock CAN talk, he's going to be face whatever now and Heyman fails in that role if he is... Hell I can even see Brock "firing" Heyman and Paul going for revenge, having to "goad" Brock to show up rather than the betrayal.

Either way, get used to fewer defences of the title but the champ on TV more which is the happy medium... Brock hopefully has more dates in this deal or windows where he is on TV full time... I'd hate to see WWE just blindly giving him the same kind of deal... but if he insisted on that, then that is most likely why the belt is off him. The idea of defences being rarer is in place now, but they need whoever has the belt on TV nearly every week.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

My guess is that we are going back to the pre-champ Lesnar ways of doing things. In fact, with Rollins losing to Orton my guess is that the workhorses that Orton and Rollins have been over the past couple years will continue in a feud that carries on over the next two months where we see them on a weekly basis.

Maybe Orton will get the strap again leading to the Orton/Lesnar feud that some have clamored for in time for SummerSlam.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I fall somewhere in the middle. On one hand, Lesnar being on TV rarely and defending his title did make the title defenses feel more like a "must see" sort of event. At the same time, the fact that 3 of his last 4 matches featured John Cena wore down the novelty. Not hating on Cena, I like the guy, but it's also hard to get interested in seeing someone that's done it all so many times that it's gotten dull seeing him in the main event scene. As for his match with Reigns, the match itself was great, far better than I think most were expecting, but the build left a lot to be desired and that didn't help things.

If the IC & US titles had been more prominently featured over the course of the past 7.5 months, I think that Lesnar being gone for such long periods wouldn't have been that much of an issue. Rusev did a good job as United States Champion, but it's only been within the last few months that the title was elevated to a level it should have been since Lesnar was gonna be gone for so much. As for the Intercontinental Championship, it's been at a pretty low point for quite a while. Again, it was nice to see it elevated during WrestleMania season, though I certainly could have done without Barrett losing every match he was in as all that does is devalue the title. Now that Bryan & Cena are the mid-card champs, they're the best opportunities to elevate those titles to levels they should be.

Getting back to the WWE WHC picture, I think it'll be more along the same lines of the traditional format. Rollins will be on TV each week, but I don't think he'll be defending the title every single month. I've no real reason as to why I think it'll go down like that, it's just something I feel. Of course, that all depends on whether or not Lesnar regains the title whenever he faces Rollins since he has an automatic rematch. If Lesnar regains, it'll go back to how it was with Lesnar only defending every 3 months or so, though hopefully the IC & US titles will be brought up to where they'll be able to fill in the gap.

 

[gmanversion1]

I have liked the way it was with Lesnar. His speradic appearances felt special. I have felt for a while that the WWE Title should be defended at the big 4, and maybe Night if Champions.

The MITB holder could cash in any of those 5 nights, the rare tv appearance, or force the champ to show up by declearing a cash in date like RVD and Cena did.

And hey, this does help elivate the US and IC straps

 

[bioshock]

It would of been fine had Lesnar actually been in a match every month. People speak of it being like the 80s, well in the 80s Hogan was still in a tv match at least every month, mostly on SNME, but still every month.

I think WWE has more issues then worrying about the champion being on every show, they need to fix their ways of putting a show together and stop with having 20 minute promos starting every single show. It really hurts when its the same faces talking about the same thing doing the same promo, thats the problem, not how many times the WWE champ is on tv.

 

[FromGlasgow]

Brock as champion made the world title match feel a lot more special and mean more, It feels so rushed and forced building a new world title match feud every month on PPV, Every week on Raw and sometimes more than once on Smackdown for that week.
It also made the US and Intercontinental titles seem more important I actually know who all the champions are now rather than losing track and not caring about who's wrestling for what.

 

[H33LTurn]

Having the champ compete regularly every week is more than a bit counterproductive. If the current "face" of the company is competing regularly, then he can't possibly lose a match (fairly). The company runs the risk of making the champion look weak if he does. If the champ wins every singles match he's in (a la John Cena) then it makes him look invincible and it becomes much harder to have him drop the title to someone at a PPV without undercutting all those wins.

I agree with what you said about seeing the champion being a special occasion, but Seth Rollins is no Brock Lesnar. Seeing Brock Lesnar should be a special event, both for people who buy tickets to the arenas and those that watch at home. I think, however, if you're buying tickets during the regular season of WWE action, you deserve to see the champion ever week. Also remember, this setup worked very poorly when The Rock was WWE champion during his feud with Cena. The only reason it worked with Lesnar is because WWE had top notch rivalries in the main event spot. A card with a missing world champion and no great rivalry can't and won't sell big.

I feel WWE attempted to resolve this issue in the past by booking champions into tag matches ever week. It would be interesting to see what they do now, given that the tag team main event setup has been widely mocked by plenty of fans over the past year. My prediction is a lot of singles or tag matches with the champion at ringside as manager/commentator. There are plenty of people in The Authority for guys like Orton to face while Seth Rollins sits around and stalks his #1 Contender.