Brock Lesnar doesn't HAVE to hold the WWE WHC for a long time

[TheICChampion]

Well, for months now, I've heard people saying that Brock Lesnar will win the WWE World Heavyweight Championship at SummerSlam, and how impractical it might seem considering how few dates he will work. Everyone also seems convinced that it will be Lesnar passing the torch to Reigns at WrestleMania 31. But is it all set in stone? Of course not. Plans may change, as well they should. I agree that Lesnar holding the title for roughly 8-9 months while only showing up once in a blue moon would not be a good thing. So, who says that he can't drop it to someone else? Hold the title for a few months, drop it, then win it again in time for WrestleMania, if that's what WWE truly wants. I don't know WHO he could drop it to. Maybe you guys have some ideas? All I'm saying is it seems like that might be the best thing WWE could do. What are your thoughts?

 

[rge2010]

I disagree. Brock being champion for 7/8 months all the way through until Mania and only turning up every once in a while could be a really good thing. It will make a show and the belt seem really special when he shows up every so often. Jim Ross said in his blog this week it wouldn't be a bad thing at all. They can get around this easily.

As for Brock winning the belt and immediately losing it. No. Just no. Now that is BAD for business. Brock defeats the streak, he wins the belt, he loses the belt a month or so after = his stock has dropped, the streak is meaningless...it would be a terrible idea.

Brock needs to look unstoppable. Triple H, Punk, Big Show, Taker, Cena...that is five superstars he will have gone through. He holds the belt for 8 months and defends (and drops) and Mania 31. Now that is a money match in the making...

 

[GOOZEKING]

I think lesnar wins the title at summerslam and loses to cena at night of champions since they making that a big event too. Then Rollins cash in on cena because I can't think of a better time for him. Ambrose and Rollins fued over the title maybe they have a match at hell in a cell or maybe when bryan comes back and wins the title. Lesnar beat the streak, he didn't save the world or something. Those same people who said that the steak should be broken because no one is bigger than wwe, the same thing can be said about lesnar .

 

[TheICChampion]

As for Brock winning the belt and immediately losing it. No. Just no. Now that is BAD for business. Brock defeats the streak, he wins the belt, he loses the belt a month or so after = his stock has dropped, the streak is meaningless...it would be a terrible idea.

I didn't say it had to be a month or so after he wins it, did I? I'd be fine if he held it until like Survivor Series.

 

[The Fabulous Rougeau's]

I am of the belief that WWE can make it work but to make it work I think Brock would have to work some extra dates. We know he will be here for the next 2 months. So long as he pops up for the big stuff (Survivor Series and Royal Rumble) in between now and Mania I think it could work.

If WWE goes down the path the OP suggested and have Brock win the title than drop it before picking it up at the Rumble again the only way I could see that working is if he is stripped of the title as opposed to being beat for it. That way he never lost the title and when he comes back for him Mania run can win the title and justify it by having never lost it in the 1st place.

 

[Blade]

I don't think anyone expects him to hold the title for the 8 months until Wrestlemania, though I would like to see that, if he was willing to hang around for eight months.

What I think will happen instead is that the Authority will be happy with Lesnar as champion for a while, until they realise they can't control Lesnar, and Heyman is unwilling to help them. They'll throw all their guys at Lesnar, and each guy will get destroyed one by one until, finally, Rollins cashes in and takes the title when Lesnar is at his weakest. I don't know what'll happen once Lesnar loses the title. But I'm guessing he'll show up before Royal Rumble, demanding his one on one rematch. He'll get the rematch at Royal Rumble, win the title back from whomever is champion, then drop it to Reigns at Wrestlemania.

Problem solved. Lesnar stays looking strong and has a good reign without having to stick around for eight months, Rollins gets his successful cash-in, and we still get Lesnar vs. Reigns at Wrestlemania.

 

[Wald]

I'm a fan of the idea of Brock winning the belt and barely showing up with it. Makes the title feel more special and could also lead to a very interesting set of storylines where the Authority needs to champion someone like Daniel Bryan or Roman Reigns in the hopes of getting the belt returned to the company.

I know the plan seems to be for Reigns to win it at Wrestlemania 31 but there's a massive storyline waiting to happen whereby Triple H and Steph need to turn to Daniel Bryan to return at the Royal Rumble and take on Brock at Wrestlemania. Won't happen but would be a great way to build off last Mania

 

[Jack-Hammer]

If Brock Lesnar was willing to stick around and actually work a decent schedule for the next 8 months or so, I might not mind him being champion until WrestleMania. However, there's almost no chance of that happening and WWE can't have a champion who only pops up to wrestle once or twice every 4 to 6 months. Brock Lesnar generally likes to get as much money as possible for as little work as he can get away with. Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking him for it because, let's face it, most people would very much love to make a lot of money for having to do very little work. Brock Lesnar knows that he's a draw who can help WWE make a lot of money when he's on the card, which gives him an advantage and here's why: 1,010,000, 1,600,000, 1,160,000, 1,050,000 and 535,000. Those are the buyrates for the 5 UFC ppvs Brock Lesnar headlined. Even the two he didn't headline drew 600,000 and 625,000. Those are big numbers and Vince McMahon wanted Lesnar to help bring some of those big numbers his way.

However, Lesnar simply can't be WWE World Heavyweight Champion if he only wrestles once or twice within a 4 to 5 month span. Pro wrestling is driven by pro wrestling characters and storylines because people know that the "fights" are scripted. In the UFC, where it's ultimately about genuine fights with genuine wins and losses, it's perfectly acceptable and normal. After all, in real championship fights, fighters have to be checked for injuries and they're paid per fight. Lesnar's first two fights in UFC made him $250,000 a piece and every fight thereafter earned him $400,000, that's not counting whatever endorsement deals he had on the side.

I have little to no doubt Lesnar will take the title from Cena. Whether he drops it to Cena or someone else at NOC, I've little to no doubt he'll drop it. I have a feeling he'll drop it back to Cena for the simple sake of John Cena being able to tie Ric Flair's recognized total of 16 World Championship wins.

 

[Softcore Holly]

It's a tough situation. The last time WWE had to deal with a absent world champ was DB, and it took Evolution coming back just to make sure no one missed having a title defense on a PPV, and then having a new champ crowned the PPV after that. How are they going to managed even to SS with just Heyman is anyone's guess. Of course things would be a lot easier if Brock agreed to more dates, but we all know that's unlikely at best.

Assuming he has, like what...3-4 matches in his deal counting WM31 I just can't see him having a long, or even a medium sized title reign. It just doesn't work, especially if Brock won't even be on Raw the vast majority of the time. Heyman is the go-to guy for situations like this but he never had to deal with stalling for multiple months at a time, especially not for the top title holder.

TL-DR: Either they have to convince him to work a lot more dates or they'll have to settle for 1 month title reigns. So SS-win, NOC-lose/stripped/w-e, EC win, WM31 lose. Not a great solution I know but it's the only one I can see them taking.

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

I don't think anyone expects him to hold the title for the 8 months until Wrestlemania, though I would like to see that, if he was willing to hang around for eight months.

What I think will happen instead is that the Authority will be happy with Lesnar as champion for a while, until they realise they can't control Lesnar, and Heyman is unwilling to help them. They'll throw all their guys at Lesnar, and each guy will get destroyed one by one until, finally, Rollins cashes in and takes the title when Lesnar is at his weakest. I don't know what'll happen once Lesnar loses the title. But I'm guessing he'll show up before Royal Rumble, demanding his one on one rematch. He'll get the rematch at Royal Rumble, win the title back from whomever is champion, then drop it to Reigns at Wrestlemania.

Problem solved. Lesnar stays looking strong and has a good reign without having to stick around for eight months, Rollins gets his successful cash-in, and we still get Lesnar vs. Reigns at Wrestlemania.

BOOM! That sounds like a plan to me! If Lesnar was to hold the belt all the way to WrestleMania (which would be my preferance in an ideal world), then whoever took the title from him, which would likely be Roman Reigns, would only have a short title reign, as Seth Rollins would only have 2 or 3 months left of his MITB contract in which to cash in, and I highly doubt they'd have him cash in and lose.

The way you described it would be perfect except for 1 change I would make. While Lesnar was Champion, I'd have Rollins turn on the Authority and go off on his own as a face. Then, when Lesnar (still a heel) is at his weakest, have Rollins come in and cash in on the Beast, becoming Champion. Lesnar gets the belt back at the Rumble PPV, Roman Reigns wins the Rumble and then beats Brock at WM31 for the title.

 

[Mustang Sally]

Since WWE has allowed a part-timer to end pro wrestling's greatest streak, I have no doubt they could also arrange for him to hold their top title belt. Personally, I have no idea why they'd want to elevate a guy that has so little to do with their company; it would seem to me that the rest of the hard-working roster might be very resentful seeing this guy waltz in when he feels like it and decimate everything in his path.

Still, it isn't what the fans see that determines what Brock's gonna get and what he isn't......it's what WWE management sees. To that end, the small group of people who play WWE management on-air (The Authority) might be instrumental in orchestrating Brock's title reign. Plainly, the Family Levesque wants Randy Orton to be the world champion, right? The Authority could use some fancy dancing to strip Brock of his title shortly after he wins it.....give it to Randy....and use some corporate maneuvering to put it back around Brock's waist in time for him to lose it at WM31.

It might sound kind of dicey, but I have no doubt Creative could make it seem real enough.....and it would solve the problem of having a world champion who's only loosely associated with the company.

 

[kingofkings1]

what if Brock won the gold at summer slam and triple H tricked Paul and Brock by using his power , so that Rollins can cash in money in the bank over lesnar or there is one more idea of using Cesaro, where Cesaro helps john cena in retaining the title against brock . which will ultimately leads to Cesaro facing Brock at another ppv.

 

[The Samoan Heritage]

I want Lesnar to turn on the Authority, and have him face off against Kane and Orton, maybe build up Cesaro a lil and give him a match against Lesnar at a throw away PPV. Also as someone else mention, I also like the possibility of The Authority having to depend on a face to overthrow Brock Lesnar.

I want to see brock Lesnar win at Summerslam and head into Wrestlemania as champion. Have who ever wins the royal Rumble start a personal, hard fought rivalry with Lesnar(my preference Sheamus, give Reigns Triple h) but at Wrestlemania have Lesnar win, and give Sheamus a rematch at Extreme Rules were Lesnar wins again but gets cashed in on after the match by Rollins. That gives Lesnar a great/long championship run and he doesn't have to put anyone over, yet. It also gives WWE another year to build up Reigns to be the one to finally get a clean one on one victory over Lesnar.

WWE can really use Brock Lesnar to build prestige back into the WWE world heavyweight championship, and use Lesnar long dominant run to put over another talent. They just really need to do things right with Lesnar and not just let him lose to anyone.

 

[Seosa]

Ideally Brock wrestles at every PPV but only does 1 or 2 Raw shows a month. Even then, one of those Raw appearances could be a pre-taped interview.

It may go against the grain but it creates an aura around him; he shows up at the PPV against the next challenger, wins and moves on to the next. He is set as the top dog who does things his way while Heyman covers the mic work.

It won't please everyone but it could work.

 

[King Patrick Star]

I like the idea of Brock Lesnar winning the WWE World Heavyweight Championship at SummerSlam. I wouldn’t mind if he dropped the Titles at Night Of Champions, Survivor Series, Royal Rumble, or WrestleMania. With his limited appearances, it could make the richest prize in this industry seem richer, and elevate the Intercontinental and United States Championships by default. I also wouldn’t mind seeing Cena as Intercontinental Champion. If Bobby Lashley is going to take the TNA Championship Title Belt to Bellator, then Lesnar should take the WWE Championship to UFC. How’s that for copying storylines!?

 

[Charismatic Enigma]

When Rock held the title from RR to WM last year, and only showed up a handful of times, especially following an incredible run from Punk, I think it would have to go down as one of the all time worst championship reigns in history.

I'm not underestimating the value of Paul Heyman to try and further the story in Brock's absence, but spending the next 7 months running around saying "my client the WWE champion beat the streak, etc. etc." is gonna get old real quick.

On the other hand, Lesnar/Cena has already happened since Lesnar's rejoined WWE and they jobbed him out. So it's not like this match holds a ton of excitement because we've already seen what it has to offer. I think it was a mistake to book this now, I think if he won it at Survivor Series or RR and held it til WM it would've been easier with his schedule to make it work, but not having a champion be around full time for roughly the next 7 months simply isn't gonna work.

Also, Reigns is white hot at the moment. I was at Battleground, and the crowd was going crazy for him, far more than the other 3 guys in that match. This reminds me a lot of when Ryback was the most over guy in the company. Who's to say that by the time WM31 happens Reigns will even be this over anymore? I feel like everything is being hot shotted, and they should've used this time to have a feud between some other people, like Rollins and Cena until they were ready to start the big push towards WM.

 

[chicagokmc]

Ideally Brock wrestles at every PPV but only does 1 or 2 Raw shows a month. Even then, one of those Raw appearances could be a pre-taped interview.

It may go against the grain but it creates an aura around him; he shows up at the PPV against the next challenger, wins and moves on to the next. He is set as the top dog who does things his way while Heyman covers the mic work.

It won't please everyone but it could work.

I may sound like an old fart with this post but I wouldn't mind this at all! I need a break from the cookie cutter "let's set the ppv match and then spend the next 3 weeks on raw and smackdown in tag teams or beatdowns, etc.". I wouldn't even care if he skipped a ppv. (I'm not a big fan of the ppv a month thing either). and I definitely think this could be a time to elevate the other belts especially on raw. I love your comment about facing a guy then on to the next. Its different than today's world but that is a nod to the days of old where a Hogan may fight Piper one month, Muraco the next and Orndorff the month after. This far less soap opera-ish than what we have now with the champion vs the Authority pretty much dominating this entire calendar year. And finally, why do we have to see the champ wrestle on tv every week? Because that's how WWE gives it to us now? Champs didn't always wrestle every week. They were there usually cutting spots, but wrestling on tv was usually saved and made a big deal when they did. I'd be fine with that in today's world too. After all, its not like the belt is on the line on tv the weeks leading up to the PPV.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

Personally I'm under the "I hope Lesnar holds the title to WM31" category. This idea the champion has to be on TV every week is fairly ridiculous, especially when Lesnar has Heyman managing him. Lesnar could win the title, show up once a month for a PPV title defense and Heyman can be on TV each week with the belt over his shoulder building up the feuds, its not like Heyman doesn't do that anyways and he's obviously more than capable.

I think that would be a great way to go about it and it gives fans more incentive to watch their special events and PPV's if its the only time they get to see Lesnar do his thing. The champ doesn't need to be on TV every week and this has been proven a million times over in the past, it actually might help the drawing power of the champ if he's not around every week.

 

[rbv13]

I have yet to watch RAW from this past week, need to get caught up, but is there any chance Brock takes the title and hands it over to Triple H? This would allow NOC to hold a one night tournamet honoring a Night of a Champion. Like I said I'm not fully up to speed on how the situation came off on TV.

 

[chicagokmc]

I have yet to watch RAW from this past week, need to get caught up, but is there any chance Brock takes the title and hands it over to Triple H? This would allow NOC to hold a one night tournamet honoring a Night of a Champion. Like I said I'm not fully up to speed on how the situation came off on TV.

Based on the following 2 points I believe the answer to your question is no, he won't hand over the belt.

• Point 1 - Announcers, who always try to lead us where creative wants us to go, reminded us about how Lesnar is the guy who broke HHH's arm. Heyman's appeal to HHH is that Orton is preoccupied with Reigns and Rollins is dealing with Ambrose, my guy Lesnar isn't preoccupied with anyone and can beat Cena now. Bottom line, this is an uneasy partnership being done out of necessity only - no one is going to be doing anyone favors.
• Point 2 - Heyman's promo after being awarded the match was 100% about Lesnar only and made no reference to the Authority.

I think the storyline is that the Authority wants Lesnar to get the belt off Cena and they'll figure out as they go how to deal with Lesnar/Heyman.

 

[resignedknight]

I'm a fan of the idea of Brock winning the belt and barely showing up with it. Makes the title feel more special and could also lead to a very interesting set of storylines where the Authority needs to champion someone like Daniel Bryan or Roman Reigns in the hopes of getting the belt returned to the company.

I know the plan seems to be for Reigns to win it at Wrestlemania 31 but there's a massive storyline waiting to happen whereby Triple H and Steph need to turn to Daniel Bryan to return at the Royal Rumble and take on Brock at Wrestlemania. Won't happen but would be a great way to build off last Mania

I love this idea. It feels fresh, and it's a major swerve that would be both a surprising turn from last year while still perfectly consistent with everybody's characters.

 

[PowerHouse]

Lesnar doesn't need to be around every week on Raw and Smackdown. He only needs to be available at PPV if its decided that he will be defending the title. I like the idea of the title being on Brock at this point cause Cena, Orton and basically everyone else holding has become totally stale. I'd like to see Cesaro win the title from Brock.I'm not on the Reigns bandwagon like so many others are I just don't see anything special about the guy.

 

[Pedigree1]

Brock likes to work as little as possible while earning the most dollars.. IMO quite frankly,i am sure Brock could give two shits about being champion.. A short reign i could see happening.. He destroys Cena at Summerslam,goes on a rampage,the authority cant control him,paul cant.. Trips throws everyone and i mean everyone at him,finally Brock gets weakened enough,and Seth cashes in..

Brock is only advertised till after NOC,and no more dates.. Maybe he pops up at Survivor Series,and then again at Royal Rumble.. Challenges whoever is champ,and drops the belt to Roman at Wrestlemania! Make no mistake,of course i would want Brock to work a decent schedule but we all know he wont! He likes the money aspect,and i dont blame him,but doesn't love the business!

 

[Reflection]

So, who says that he can't drop it to someone else? Hold the title for a few months, drop it, then win it again in time for WrestleMania

I think you messed up on a few things here...
A few months title reign... Let's say a 4 months reign till TLC...
Then drop the title and then win in back in time for Wrestlemania. Let's say win it back on Elimination Chamber...

Now the problems are, first of all, what will Lesnar gain from a 4 month reign if the streak-conqueror is gonna lose it so soon? What's the point?
Secondly, the guy that wins the title from him will only hold it for a couple of months. What will he gain from that? On papers, stats will be that he got a chance and failed, but a 2-month reign will only work against the talent, especially if he is young.
Finally, Brock Lesnar loses the title at Wrestlemania- that would mean the title has had suffered its fourth consecutive lackluster reign in a row- Cena for <2 months, Lesnar for 4 months, some guy for 2 months and then Lesnar again for <2 months. Four champions in ~9 months, but no one gained anything.

The guy that wins it from Lesnar at WM31 doesn't win anything historic either, since he wins it from a 1-month long champion who already lost the title once, less than 6 months ago.

If Lesnar does win the title at SummerSlam, then he will have to hold it till WM31, dominating everyone in between, so that the guy that finally beats him at the Grandest Stage comes off as the one who conquered the unconquerable.

 

[Kidpolean]

Why is everyone assuming that Reigns is gonna face Brock at Mania? I'd make a bet that that doesn't happen. DB vs Brock will most likely be the main event. Do fans want huge face title wins every year at Mania? We just went through this push a guy at Mania crap last year. We need two proven stars this year.