A Huge What If....

[jrush1978]

So complete random thought as we close in on WrestleMania. What if 2 years ago The Rock had not gotten hurt in his match against Cena? According to a lot I've read before and after that match was the main even of WrestleMania 30 (or one of the top matches) was pretty much set to be Brock-Rock with the seeds for the feud to be planted on Raw the night after WM 29. However Rock flew home after getting injured and it never occurred.

Obviously if that match occurred Brock wouldn't have wrestled Taker last year to end the streak, he may or may not have still went on to squash Cena at SS.

But what do you think, if that injury had not occurred and the supposed planned segment took place the night after WM 29 what do you think would have been different about WM 30 and 31?

 

[FlairFan2003]

Cena wasn't supposed to be the champ last year....Daniel Bryan was to hold the title till SummerSlam, but his injury forced a storyline re write and having Cena as champ is guaranteed money, plus it gave some much needed legitimacy to Lesnar as a bad A#@ champion/heel.

The Rock has never said he was signed for anything more than the two match series with Cena. There were rumors at the time WWE was leaning towards a Rock-Lesnar fued but that would have likely meant a lot more time invested by Rock that he wasn't interested in. It also would have pretty much made Lesnar a high priced enhancement talent, he would have lost to Cena, barley won 2 of 3 with a loss at W-Mania vs HHH, and likely lost to Rock. It definitely would have been different than now but it seems a bit unlikely.

 

[Dmbfantomas]

Vince had planned for Brock to beat Taker when he signed him. He knew he wasn't doing it right away, but it was something he wanted for a VERY long time. Vinny Mac wanted to end The Streak on terms that he and Taker would be good with, and Lesnar was the only guy that fit both bills.

 

[Mustang Sally]

What if 2 years ago The Rock had not gotten hurt in his match against Cena? According to a lot I've read before and after that match was the main even of WrestleMania 30 (or one of the top matches) was pretty much set to be Brock-Rock with the seeds for the feud to be planted on Raw the night after WM 29. However Rock flew home after getting injured and it never occurred.

Not sure about this. After all, I don't see that Rock getting hurt at WM29 had anything to do with his non-participation at the Wrestlemania a year later. Whatever his injury was, how long could it have taken to heal?

As for Brock vs. anyone at WM30, I don't know that Vince McMahon was counting on him; wasn't Brock's contract status uncertain at that time? Then, as today, we don't know what Brock plans to do about his WWE participation. So, matching two part-timers in the main event would have to be nailed down contractually a long time in advance.

I believe Rock was scheduled for a 1-year time span that encompassed two Wrestlemanias, plus the obligatory appearances to build the gate. As for Brock, it's hard to say if the company had in mind a match with Undertaker as early as the OP suggests. But who really knows?

 

[THTRobtaylor]

Not sure about this. After all, I don't see that Rock getting hurt at WM29 had anything to do with his non-participation at the Wrestlemania a year later. Whatever his injury was, how long could it have taken to heal?

As for Brock vs. anyone at WM30, I don't know that Vince McMahon was counting on him; wasn't Brock's contract status uncertain at that time? Then, as today, we don't know what Brock plans to do about his WWE participation. So, matching two part-timers in the main event would have to be nailed down contractually a long time in advance.

I believe Rock was scheduled for a 1-year time span that encompassed two Wrestlemanias, plus the obligatory appearances to build the gate. As for Brock, it's hard to say if the company had in mind a match with Undertaker as early as the OP suggests. But who really knows?

He hasn't wrestled since so yes it DID have a lot to do with it. He was in serious danger of breaching his contract for Hercules with the injury, hence why he went home immedately to get the surgery. His salary for that movie was in the region of $25m, he nearly learned the hard way that you pull out of the movie cos you get hurt, you lose far more than that with compensation etc.

I am not sure that Rock would have continued to wrestle, especially against a legit bad ass like Brock where he could get hurt worse, but that being said Brock is very "business" so he'd know to protect Dwayne.

I actually think this has stopped more recent stuff rather than anything that far back... had the injury not happened I think we'd be seeing Rock v Rusev at Mania for example.

 

[Dave]

Absolutely everything would have changed about WrestleMania 30 and 31. But that could be said about any number of things in the WWE. Wrestling is an ever changing business and even the best made plans often go awry. This is especially true when it comes to injuries. Look at Daniel Bryan's run as WWE Champion last year for example. It's a damn shame that he got injured when he did because he could have had a great run with the Championship. As it stands, it was pretty unremarkable except for the win at WrestleMania.

Injuries are just part of the deal when it comes to wrestling. Rock versus Brock might still happen, perhaps at next year's show. But who's to say that Daniel Bryan would have been given the opportunity he did last year if this report of The Rock being injured is true. Like I said, everything changes in wrestling and it's all about making the most of the opportunities that come from that. Personally, I think that things have been a lot more promising for everyone, especially people like Daniel Bryan and Roman Reigns. There's no telling what could have happened but the landscape of the WWE would have changed, that's for sure.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Not sure about this. After all, I don't see that Rock getting hurt at WM29 had anything to do with his non-participation at the Wrestlemania a year later. Whatever his injury was, how long could it have taken to heal?

The Rock's abdominal and adductor tendons were torn from his pelvis, which he had reattached via surgery on April 23. Basically, some of the tendons connecting The Rock's lower stomach muscles to his pelvic frame were ruptured.

From what I understand, at least based just on what I've read, it had more to do with The Rock jeopardizing his acting career, which had been back on the upswing the past few years, rather than the severity of the injury itself. Because of the injury, The Rock had to miss out on promoting the Pain & Gain movie in which he co-starred with Mark Wahlberg and filming for the Hercules movie had to be pushed back until he'd sufficiently recovered to do his scenes. Various reports over the past few years indicate that studio executives were uneasy about The Rock wrestling due to the fact that potential injuries suffered could have significant impact on major, big budget films, WrestleMania 29 was an example of what could go wrong. Probably the most outspoken in the film industry was director Michael Bay who flat out stated that he was jeopardizing an increasingly lucrative career as an action star by wrestling even part time. He wasn't criticizing WWE or wrestling itself, he just that The Rock's decision to wrestle in even one match could make studio executives hesitant in offering him roles in their movies. Plus, there's always the possibility of The Rock suffering an injury, or injuries, that winds up crippling him. Given that he's someone who's bread & butter is as this big, muscular, alpha male stud in the movie industry, an injury that renders him physically disabled to one degree or another could mean his career is effectively over.

 

[Just Do It]

I still consider it such a shame we never got the Rock / Brock match at Wrestlemania. The build and execution of that one would have been beautiful in 2014. I still keep my fingers crossed that this is something we will get at some point in the future.

 

[kadroan]

So complete random thought as we close in on WrestleMania. What if 2 years ago The Rock had not gotten hurt in his match against Cena? According to a lot I've read before and after that match was the main even of WrestleMania 30 (or one of the top matches) was pretty much set to be Brock-Rock with the seeds for the feud to be planted on Raw the night after WM 29. However Rock flew home after getting injured and it never occurred.

Obviously if that match occurred Brock wouldn't have wrestled Taker last year to end the streak, he may or may not have still went on to squash Cena at SS.

But what do you think, if that injury had not occurred and the supposed planned segment took place the night after WM 29 what do you think would have been different about WM 30 and 31?

The injury wasn't that bad if he was able to still film Hercules not too long after WrestleMania. I just think WWE and Rock weren't on the same page. WWE needed him more than he needed them. I can imagine there's a lot of egos and politics when it comes to dealing with Vince, HHH, Rock and Brock. They could have easily had Brock vs. Rock at WM 29.

But who knows what can happen in the future, maybe The Rock's Hollywood career goes slow again, seeing how returned to WWE not too long after Tooth Fairy bombed as he tried rebrand himself as an action star joining Fast Five.

 

[jrush1978]

My point wasn't that the injury kept him out for a year or out of WM 30. Just that it did cause him to miss the following nights raw (Which I believe even Rock said somewhere the program with him & Lesnar was to start that night) and as someone else already said supposedly gave Hollywood enough concern for him to possibly stay away from wrestling.

If Rock-Brock had happened last year we may have gotten Taker-Wyatt a year earlier and be getting Taker-Sting this year.

 

[RKO920]

Rock openly said in a few interviews I remember one off the top of my head that was on ESPN where he said the plan was for him to be on Raw the night after 29 to start the program to work towards 30 to face Brock. This clearly would have changed who Taker faced at 30 and the Streak may not have ended at 30.

It's then possible that this year we would have gotten Sting vs Taker with the Streak still intact. Brock could have beaten Rock at 30 and still won the title at SS against Cena. So, the main event in theory would still be the same but Bray Wyatt and Triple H would be without matches or at least who they are scheduled to face.