Survivor Series 2002: A Feud That Never Happened: Brock Lesner Vs. HHH (What If?)

[Midnite Express 2009]

9 years ago the WWE's annual November event, Survivor Series was held inside New York City's Madison Square Garden. Of course, this year it's going to be back at MSG with the highlight of the night being the long-awaited return to the ring of The Rock as he teams with John Cena against The Miz & R-Truth (talk about a major push for R-Truth!). But it got me to thinking about the last time SS was at MSG and who the champions were then and why the never crossed paths in the ring. Perhaps it was bad timing, other bookings on both Raw and Smackdown or some other reason, but I had to wonder what would have been the end result of a feud between Brock Lesner and HHH.

Both Lesner & HHH walked into MSG as their respective brand's champions (Lesner was the WWE/Smackdown Champion & HHH had just been "awarded" the newly created World Heavyweight Championship in September by Eric Bischoff after Lesner refused to defend the WWE title on Raw, thus creating a void of a brand champion). Lesner was facing The Big Show, who had just ran through The Undertaker to become the new #1 contender and HHH was facing Shawn Michaels, Kane, Rob Van Dam, Chris Jericho and Booker T. in the 1st ever Elimination Chamber match. Neither of these men would end the night as champion, as Lesner lost to the Big Show after his manager Paul Heyman screwed him out of the WWE title (thus creating one helluva feud with Show) and HHH lost the title to his former best friend Shawn Michaels.
(sidenote: HHH doesn't seem to keep friends for long)

But what would have happened if both men had actually won their matches and went onto feud leading up to WrestleMania? Lesner was an unstopable force and HHH was by far the best in the game at that moment in time. I know it would have been a longshot since both men were in two completely different worlds, so to speak, and Lesner's feud with The Big Show really got him over, even after losing the title. The HHH/Michaels feud was what it was, with Michaels basically getting the belt more as a reward for being who he was and to help further his feud with HHH, more than anything else IMO.

HHH would go on to feud with the likes of Scott Steiner, Goldberg, Chris Jericho and Chris Benoit, not to mention Michaels along with various members of Evolution. This is not to knock Jericho, Michaels or Benoit, but the feuds with Steiner & even Goldberg were unimpressive and IMO not what he needed to be apart of. Whereas with Lesner, he went onto feud with The Big Show and Kurt Angle and even had the great match with Eddie Gurrerro to name a few.

In a nutshell I would have liked to have seen how Brock and HHH would have matched up to each other, maybe in a title vs. title match at WrestleMania. Since Lesner was pretty much a newbie to the company and HHH was by far and away the "man", would he have given Lesner the victory the same way he did with Goldberg? Don't you think now in hindsight that Lesner deserved that victory (if he had gotten a chance at that match) more than Goldberg? Just saying. We all know the rumors that back then HHH wasn't the best person to work with, politics wise backstage, but would that have effected things between he and Lesner? And what about Flair and Heyman? Ric Flair was basically the manager of Evolution and Heyman was Brock's "agent" would they have played a role? even if it dated back to the NWA/WCW days?

So what's your take? Who do you have winning and why? What should have been the outcome of 2002 if these guys had crossed paths? Or should it have remained the way it was? Lemme know. Thanks.

 

[Shockwave]

Liking the look of this topic...definately would have been a huge deal for both...especially when you consider both would have gained from it. Triple h cementing his place as the best heel in the business and Brock Lesnar getting some major lessons in becoming a ring general. Personally, i think Triple H would and should win the WM Match but it would have needed to have been a close call...perhaps without use of a finishing move...which would have also make it that much more memorable. Two guys, legitimately tough s.o.b's beaten senseless and one winning through the skin of their teeth. Just my opinion but thats what i would have liked to have seen.

 

[Midnite Express 2009]

IMO I believe Smackdown's creative team should have kept Lesner feuding with The Undertaker a little more and held off their classic Hell in the Cell match till December of 2002 instead of October of that year. The reason being they could have REALLY had Brock as this unstoppable force who was beating all of the legends...way before a certain somebody started calling himself the legend killer. In hindsight I think the feud with The Big Show was rushed and the title switch was premature. It should have never went down, especially the way it did. It made Brock look like the giant guy who was too dumb to not see he was being played by his own manager. Too many times the big, strong machine gets tripped up by a manager and that's what happened to Brock.

If he were going to lose, he should have lost to HHH at WrestleMania. That loss for Brock would have been almost as big as a win, since his first WrestleMania would have been a title for title match against arguably the best in the business at the time in HHH. Meanwhile HHH could have stood to have lost that night to Shawn Michaels since Michaels was essentially thrown a bone with that World Title reign. Having HHH win it back at the Royal Rumble from Shawn and then having Brock come out after the Rumble itself and having a staredown with HHH would have been MEGA HUGE! Being built for months with both men would have been great. I just think HHH deserved this feud and so did Brock Lesner. That's that one that got away and I wish it wouldn't have.

 

[Shockwave]

Oh i totally agree with you, things were definately rushed with that feud...but that happens with alot of promoters in wrestling, not just Vince (trust me, i know from my own experiences wrestling here in England haha)...Vince is just more noticeable for it because he's a success. The feud with Taker should have definately been lengthened a bit further but unfortunately, it wasn't. I also agree that the loss to HBK wouldn't have mattered either on HHH's part...I think everyone wanted to reward Shawn for overcoming the demons he battled with throughout most of the 90's and he got the title mostly because of that but seeing as he dropped the belt back to HHH at Armageddon anyway, it would still have set up a feud with Brock which would have eclipsed most of the feuds HHH ever had! The only thing that makes me wonder about all of it is that, you consider the run Brock went on afterwards, would, say, Eddie Guerrero have been looked at as a possibility to take the title from brock what would have been nearly a year after the WM in question. Everyone knows Eddie deserved it...but would it still have happened? Despite that though, i still totally agree that the Brock vs HHH feud is definately one we'd have all loved to have seen.

 

[Midnite Express 2009]

To answer your question about Eddie getting the title, I would have to say yes, but it would have taken longer, perhaps toward the middle or end of 2003 once the feud with HHH and Lesner died off. I think that they could have had essentially what is going on on both Raw and Smackdown now with both champions showing up on both shows. I certainly believe that a HHH vs. Brock Lesner feud heading into WrestleMania would have drawn so much more than what was presented, and don't get me wrong, those WrestleMania matches that year were great.

I think The Big Show getting the push he did was so undeserving to say the least. It's almost how it is now, 9 years later, even though the jeans wearing Big Show who didn't smile and just beat people up is far and away better than the always smiling, "weapon of mass destruction" t-shirt wearing, fans waving Big Show that we're getting now. But again, he's getting the same push he got in 2002 mainly because of his size. Brock dropping the belt and then losing his first match at SS was sad, looking back on it now, because it could have been and should have been saved for later. We all expected the Elmination Chamber match to come down to HHH vs. Shawn Michaels, hell the match was basically made for those final two. Brock should have went into SS with The Undertaker to defend and if not, then a triple threat match. He had essentially won the fans over by defeating The Undertaker at Hell in the Cell, so the obvious heel/face sides had already been established.

Having HHH enter Mania as the WHC and Brock as the WWE champ would have been great on so many levels. The boat was truly missed on this one when it should have been a slam dunk. Eddie, JBL, even Cena could have waited!

 

[Shockwave]

Looking back, i think it's safe to say that the only good thing that came from all of this is the Brock vs Angle match at WM...that was an epic match. Brock beating Taker at Survivor Series would have been a major gain for him as well due to the event being Takers birthday so to speak...you ask any WWE fan about survivor series and most will say "aint that where Undertaker made his debut?" That would have elevated Brock to the level he NEEDED to be at to face HHH in such a high level match at WM. Starting to wonder whether maybe we should be on the creative team with this type of topic. All seriousness though, These are all perfectly good points for why this feud should have taken place and it's sad that it never happened. WWE missed out on a huge money maker there.

 

[Shockwave]

Also, with the Big Show point you made...It's kind of the same as Kane. Both given a push as unstoppable monsters...both then given pushes again when their characters are so much more dull years later.

 

[Midnite Express 2009]

What gets me is that they had Brock lose twice within 6 months of each other to people whom he should have honestly never lost to, that being The Big Show and then to Eddie. Not to take anything away from Eddie, but even his title reign seemed a bit out of the loop all things considered. From day one Brock Lesner was billed as a legit bad ass monster (he still is to some degree, maybe a little less than now in UFC). He was WWE's version of a better Goldberg but to have him drop the title twice to people who he should have beaten made him look weaker IMO. HHH on the other hand was a different story. Again I say, losing the title to Shawn Michaels only enhanced their feud, whereas giving the title to The Big Show didn't do much for their feud at all. Brock eventually gained it back but not much else. Here's a question:

Do you think a long term feud with HHH would have made much of a difference in Brock staying or leaving? If he had been able to feud with someone like HHH or HHH himself, would he have stayed?

 

[The Brain]

I’ll take the other side of the argument. Triple H vs. Brock Lesnar should not have happened at WM19. With their amateur backgrounds Angle vs. Lesnar was the match people wanted that year. Triple H vs. Lesnar would have been a great mania match but at the time it was assumed that could happen somewhere down the road. No one knew Lesnar would leave WWE only a year later. The biggest hole in this is title vs. title. WWE brought in world title only six months earlier. Why would they have a unification match so soon? To this day they haven’t had one and it’s been nine years. No way were they going to eliminate a title they just created.

 

[Midnite Express 2009]

I see your point with the unification match and not wanting to consolidate the titles. I was hesitant in going that way, but it would have been interesting nonetheless.

 

[Shockwave]

WWE brought in world title only six months earlier. Why would they have a unification match so soon? To this day they haven’t had one and it’s been nine years. No way were they going to eliminate a title they just created.

Hate to admit it but thats a damn good point! Having Brock vs HHH to unify world titles when one was only created 6 months earlier would definately have had people asking "what the hell was the point in that?"

 

[Midnite Express 2009]

Perhaps it didn't have to be a unification ending. I know people will be like, well what's the purpose of the feud if the belts weren't on the line while both men were title holders? I suppose here's the thing. There's never really been a complete screw-job ending in a WrestleMania, well how about this being the 1st one. Of course HHH would end up with both the WWE and World Heavyweight titles for obvious reasons, one being that he just was awarded the World Heavyweight Championship and two, he is meant to go over on Brock, effectively ending his extremely long reign as champion. But let's suppose they have the Starrcade '85 ending where we all thought Dusty Rhodes won the NWA title from Flair only to discover he didn't.

This could keep their feud going. Perhaps someone helps HHH win the titles (maybe a Paul Heyman turn) or maybe its an obvious screw from someone else. Smackdown doesn't have a title holder coming off the heels of WrestleMania and no one knows what's going on. Brock gets his rematch for the title, or maybe HHH is stripped or gives it up. There's various avenues by which we can go here, it doesn't mean HHH loses his title at all because he was supposed to have beaten Lesner anyway. They could afford to take the title off Lesner without him looking weak and making everyone wonder what in the hell did they create the World Heavyweight Championship for?

 

[Shockwave]

and alas, a solution to that specific problem. WM ladder match - Brock vs HHH - Both belts on the line - Brock goes for the belt, belts are lifted higher...Brock is screwed out of the titles - Everybody looks at Vince due to it being a repeat from KOTR 99 with Austin...Ric Flair (who was managing HHH at the time) planted a young kid called Randy Orton in the rafters to perform the screwjob - RESULT: The formation of Evolution in a different way, starting at WM...keeping to the idea of a screwjob at WM. Probably a horrible idea, what do you think?

 

[DeathClutch]

I’ll take the other side of the argument. Triple H vs. Brock Lesnar should not have happened at WM19. With their amateur backgrounds Angle vs. Lesnar was the match people wanted that year. Triple H vs. Lesnar would have been a great mania match but at the time it was assumed that could happen somewhere down the road. No one knew Lesnar would leave WWE only a year later. The biggest hole in this is title vs. title. WWE brought in world title only six months earlier. Why would they have a unification match so soon? To this day they haven’t had one and it’s been nine years. No way were they going to eliminate a title they just created.

Try WWE bringing the World Heavyweight Championship in 2.5 months earlier, 11 month earlier they were unified.

HHH/Lesnar happening at Survivor Series 2002 would have been ******ed considering HHH had been feuding with Kane, RVD and Shawn Michaels in the three months leading up to Survivor Series and Booker/Jericho had been going at it for a month and a bit, the Elimination Chamber debuted so no Lesnar/HHH shouldn't have happened.

My opinion is Lesnar/Kurt and Benoit should of went at it with Kurt pinning Benoit to win the belt and feud with Chris though Royal Rumble with Lesnar getting his rematch at Rumble, but either way we got a classic triple threat tag match

 

[mr.nobody]

Angle vs lesnar was always the plan at Wm 19 and Wwe would of never did the unification of the titles all over.
My personal opinion of why they never met was one man and one man only..... Goldberg.
Who were the two main feuds for Goldberg in wwe...... Triple H and lesnar. Goldberg in wwe affected a lot of feuds in 2003 cause he had to be the main event face always.