Brock Lesnar is being wasted as WWE World Champion.

[Bruno's Sanctimony]

First off, let me say that I am entirely in favor of the idea of a monster heel, "unbeatable", World Champ and Lesnar definitely fits that mold. He was the perfect pick for the role.
Secondly, I am fully behind the idea of WWE title defenses being the rarity rather than the norm.

These ideas make the championship special; something to strive for an attain rather than something to "pass around" and, the fact that it's Lesnar holding the strap, winning the title becomes nearly insurmountable. The guy who finally beats him gets an incredible rub and an aura of legitimacy that he otherwise wouldn't get.

The WWE was incredibly right in setting that table when they Lesnar go over Undertaker at WM and, then, dominate Cena to take the strap at SS.

However, and unfortunately, WWE is blowing a good thing. Here are my four major points on what they have done, are currently doing, and seem to be gearing up for, that are wrong and why...

Point 1 - No Lesnar until the Royal Rumble and his opponent is likely to again be Cena and, worse, the next one is going to be tainted by a Rusev interference?

Sorry, this is a multi-fold problem...
While the idea of keeping championship defenses and even the champion, himself, off weekly TV is a good one, he still has the upper tier of a roster he should be facing and beating. The next champ is robbed of the rub he might otherwise get if Lesnar's only achievement as champion is two tainted defenses against John Cena.
If Lesnar's contract is limited and for big money, fine. Invest in your World Heavyweight championship, invest in your company, invest in your roster, and pay whatever it takes to get him to perform at the monthly PPV every month and engaging your top tier talent. Such a move lifts all boats.
Do everything possible to keep him pummeling the upper tier of the roster on a monthly basis and have him plow through all of them convincingly, except for the guy who finally beats him.
There isn't a single member of the WWE roster who is going to lose their spot or their own rub simply because they were beaten by Brock Lesnar. The guy is supposed to be an unstoppable monster.
Then, after Lesnar has beaten all the top guys, the guy who finally beats him will literally be on top of the world. It would be the biggest championship win, probably, since Ultimate Warrior took the belt from Hulk Hogan and would give WWE the man who is likely to be their most marketable star since Stone Cold Steve Austin...IF they choose the right guy.

Point 2 - The tainted finish at 'Night of Champions'.

In the immortal words of an obnoxious superstar, 'Really? Really?'
I'm not going to try any fantasy re-booking of this mess except to say that it shouldn't have happened, that Cena should have lost and, that if corporate still felt a need to get Rollins involved, Lesnar should have driven him into the dirt, too.
I read all about Vince's fear of booking Cena weak and think the story is ridiculous. Cena could have been booked strong and still lost. Heck, that strong booking might have made an attempt by Rollins to cash in...and also lose...look more legitimate instead of "fake". It would have maintained Cena's 'Never Give Up' schtick and maintained Brock's aura of invincibility.
The only way to possibly have fixed this mess would be to have had the final Lesnar/Cena blowoff happening at 'HIAC' so that Lesnar could get onto the rest of his challenges. (See Point 1)
But leaving it all "as is" until the Rumble only exacerbates this awful finish.

Point 3 - The Authority/Lesnar Connection.

I've touched upon this before, in other discussions. There's an entire story to play with here and, it seems, people being paid very well to write scripts and storylines for WWE don't even see it. The Authority spent an entire year going back and forth with Daniel Bryan over the fact that he was "only a B-Plus player". So, other than it just being another typical heel reaction, why were the Authority so bothered about the belt going to Cena @ MITB? He's been WWE's ultimate "A-Plus player" for ten years.
But even if we suspend disbelief and allow the Authority their typical heel reaction to Cena as champ, what is their motivation for involving themselves with Lesnar? Why would they want the belt off a 'company guy' so they could put it on an uncontrollable, unbeatable mercenary? What do they gain from this? How do they not lose because of this?
The people with the pencils are not doing their jobs, here. You'd think HHH, Stephanie and Vince would know better. But then again, they seem very content in wasting Brock's entire reign altogether.

Point 4 - Roman Reigns.

No knock on Reigns. In fact, I won't knock any performer and haven't. I'm strictly looking at this from the perspective of booking and perception. Reigns hasn't been around long enough, accomplished enough, or become a seasoned enough performer either in the ring or on the stick to beat Lesnar at WM31. It's too soon and Reigns has too much ground to cover. In the long run, Reigns may absolutely be "the guy". But, if so and if WWE is insistent upon his being so, then they need to stretch this out for at least another year and target WM32 for it to happen.
This gives Reigns more time to work out the kinks in his progression as a performer. It gives WWE a chance to give Reigns a deeper look to ascertain if he's truly the "1 to beat the 1..." It gives WWE a chance to correct the mistakes they're making with Brock now.
They can sign Brock for another year and feed him The Rock at WM31, as is being rumored to be a potential choice, and it will sell a ton of tickets.
But as it is now, Reigns would beat Lesnar at WM31...defeating a guy with nothing more than 2 tainted victories over John Cena. That might look great as the ticker tape comes down on him @ the end of the show. But the following night on RAW, the WWE Championship goes back to 'business as usual'.

All boats could have been lifted by a Brock Lesnar title reign. His reign could have allowed WWE to make some serious changes in their booking strategy and long term prospects that would have benefited their entire roster. They could have regained some of their lost viewership in doing so; gained new subscribers to WWE Network to see the latest challenge to the unstoppable monster, etc...and they could have eventually built up Roman Reigns (or anyone else they wanted to, for that matter) as their next major superstar.

But they're blowing the entire thing.

Thanks for the opportunity to rant.

 

[sMark]

Vince so afraid about his goldenboy losing popularity (because of Vince's own made up reasons), he forgot he have around 60 other guys under his contracts, with around 10 of them who could become a big main event players by now in their own terms, given a chance. He is lucky Cena is terminator like guy who will work 365/24/7 and stay healthy for the most part, but more big main event players could sell more merchandise & get in more viewers than Cena alone. Brock sure could help in making new stars, but it looks like Cena is the only guy Vince care about, until it changes WWE could sign Jesus Christ himself and continue to get less and less viewers and money income.

A millionare who could be a billionare (c)

 

[Jack-Hammer]

You're operating as if the reports that've come out in the past day or two are rock solid gospel when there's no degree of confirmation whatsoever that these are indeed the plans. Trust me, just because Dave Meltzer says so doesn't make it true as he's been wrong numerous times concerning info given to him by "sources." He just doesn't like to admit whenever he's been wrong.

However, when I read about these potential plans yesterday, I was a little disheartened myself. I don't really have much of a problem with Cena & Lesnar at the Royal Rumble, don't really have any problem with Rusev interfering. What I have a problem with is the likelihood of Rusev being fed to Cena at WrestleMania XXXI.

As far as the tainted finish at Night of Champions, as usual, I think it's something that some fans have blown WAY out of proportion. I've seen some posts from fans actually trying to ludicrously claim that Cena squashed Lesnar in that match despite Lesnar controlling a good 75% of it. A month earlier, Lesnar handed Cena the most decisive and lopsided loss of Cena's entire career and people are actually upset because the 2nd match was a little more even? Or that Rollins interference meant Lesnar was beaten? If Lesnar had been fed to Cena, I'd get the outrage, but he wasn't, so I don't know what the big deal is. When you think about how lopsided their match at SummerSlam was, toning down Lesnar's dominance of Cena somewhat was the only way to go. My biggest problem with the whole thing didn't involve Lesnar at all, but rather Vince's paranoid insistence that people would stop "believing" in Cena because of the loss to Lesnar and his further insistence that Cena be booked to look like a beast while making The Wyatt Family look like a buncha chumps. Vince protects John Cena sometimes to such a degree that it's a detriment to others on the roster and believes that the ultimate heroes aren't supposed to show any weakness, that they can overcome any obstacle set in front of them without having to ultimately give something of themselves up. I think it's a legit example of something Vince is out of touch with because invincible heroes tend to stop being fun after a while.

As far as Lesnar's bout at the Rumble, you have to remember that, as of right now, there aren't a whole lot of top tier talent on the roster who're, as of this moment, credible threats to Lesnar. Aside from John Cena and possibly Daniel Bryan, who's out injured, there's not really anyone there. Dean Ambrose has potential, but he still needs more time because he's not at that credible level yet. Seth Rollins is playing a somewhat cowardly heel, so you know he's not gonna be seen in the same light as Lesnar. Roman Reigns is out injured and even if he comes back in time, unless he's able to make some significant strides as a character, a program with Lesnar could be potentially a huge bore.

As far as Lesnar's contract goes, you're either not taking into account the possibility and probability that Brock Lesnar isn't remotely interested in working anything heavier than his current schedule. Would he be willing to reconsider if he was offered more money? Possibly so, but there's a limit to how much even Brock Lesnar is worth. If Lesnar's appearances on Raw were drawing record numbers not seen since the Attitude Era, then maybe it'd be something worth considering. However, since Lesnar's appearances, while a significant draw, haven't produced any extraordinary numbers, it'd be reckless to just simply throw oodles of cash away just to have him appear each week if he doesn't bring in the numbers to warrant such big money. Lesnar's limited schedule was why I personally thought it'd be a big mistake to put the title on him and while there were some fans who wanted it, this is the result. So, just have to grin and bear it .

As to why The Authority was against Cena being champ at MITB, it's because Cena's on a different level than the other members of the roster. There's a limit to how far suspension of disbelief can be stretched and ain't nobody gonna suspend disbelief enough to "believe" that The Authority is gonna fire John Cena for defying them. He could've AA'd Stephanie McMahon through the center of the ring and, somehow or another that utterly defies any sense of logic, Cena wouldn't have been "fired" or "suspended" as Vince would've instructed the writers to come up with some hair brain technicality to protect Cena that nobody'd buy into in the first place. Whether you're a hardcore internet fan, a casual fan or an average fan, you know that Cena has been THE true face of WWE since the mid 2000s. The Authority can make it "difficult" for Cena, they can try to screw him over, but they ultimately can't really "control" him. From a storyline perspective, even though this wasn't touched on during the story, Cena and the fans both know that.

 

[Bruno's Sanctimony]

I certainly hope none of the future projections are rock solid gospel, and I don't disagree with the idea of booking Cena strong @ NOC. I just feel that they could have done so while still letting him lose clean.

The rest...good food for thought. I just hope they make the best of it all because, thus far, I don't think they are.

 

[Ric 'The Nature Boy' Flair]

Just have CM Punk come and beat him at WM after Punk wins the rumble. Simple.

 

[whoopin' ass]

This is the problem when you treat your secondary titles like garbage and forget your own rules. Titles are supposed to be defended at least once every 30 days or the champ gets stripped. Right there gives you an easy way to get Lesnar on tv - shows up once a month as he says he is contractually obligated, Heyman picks some easy victim like Ryder and 2 minutes later Brock is done. This happens a few times which allows Cena or whoever to build a storyline saying Lesnar is scared to face real competition and eventually a match between the 2 is formed. Or at least that is how anyone would normally do it except wwe "forgets" that 30 day rule and has to problem letting champ not appear on tv for a long time which is incredibly stupid.

Add to this the IC and US titles. While it is still dumb to keep your World Champ off tv, had the wwe not crapped all over those titles, they could easily be gives the chance to shine now that you don't have your main champ there. Have them come out and say that unlike Lesnar, they are there every week and steal the show. Tough to do that right now though as no one cares.

Having a champ like Lesnar is not necessarily a bad thing if you plan it out but wwe doesn't plan anymore. This could have been a great storyline - the unbeatable champ who destroyed everyone and walked away with the title - but instead we get Lesnar won't be on tv the week as he only works so many days and wwe needs him later on.

 

[Mudlup50]

This is the problem when you treat your secondary titles like garbage and forget your own rules. Titles are supposed to be defended at least once every 30 days or the champ gets stripped. Right there gives you an easy way to get Lesnar on tv - shows up once a month as he says he is contractually obligated, Heyman picks some easy victim like Ryder and 2 minutes later Brock is done. This happens a few times which allows Cena or whoever to build a storyline saying Lesnar is scared to face real competition and eventually a match between the 2 is formed. Or at least that is how anyone would normally do it except wwe "forgets" that 30 day rule and has to problem letting champ not appear on tv for a long time which is incredibly stupid.

Add to this the IC and US titles. While it is still dumb to keep your World Champ off tv, had the wwe not crapped all over those titles, they could easily be gives the chance to shine now that you don't have your main champ there. Have them come out and say that unlike Lesnar, they are there every week and steal the show. Tough to do that right now though as no one cares.

Having a champ like Lesnar is not necessarily a bad thing if you plan it out but wwe doesn't plan anymore. This could have been a great storyline - the unbeatable champ who destroyed everyone and walked away with the title - but instead we get Lesnar won't be on tv the week as he only works so many days and wwe needs him later on.

I always assumed it was one of those things that only existed when they needed it. So like a kayfabe thing?

Also Lesnar squashing Ryder serves no purpose for him with or without it...shouldn't he want to fight the best competition being a mercenary?

 

[CrucifiedRaven]

If they're going to do Cena/Lesnar III - Do it at Survivor Series, and do it in a cage or something. And Lesnar needs to go over Cena again, in similar fashion to SummerSlam, no screwy endings. Cena can cut a promo the next night on RAW... or disappear for two weeks, and come back and be fine. As strong as ever. In fact, I'd keep Cena off TV until the Royal Rumble and have him make a surprise return there... and kick off his feud with Rusev in the Rumble. Everyone will have completely forgotten about his Lesnar loss. He has been booked so strong for so long that he can afford one loss to the MONSTER who ended the STREAK and still be "protected".

From there, they need to turn Orton face and have him challenge Lesnar at the Rumble. And maybe again at Elimination Chamber and Lesnar needs to go over both times. If BOTH Cena and Orton can't stop Lesnar, who the hell can? He is unstoppable! That's how you push your new guy, if that's the direction they want to go in.

Just PAY Lesnar. He's expensive. You have to pay for more dates than are in his contract. Well... you booked him to end the streak. You booked him to win the title. Clearly he is worth it, don't ruin this because you're cheap. PAY him!

 

[LODemolition]

I like what they're doing with Hell in a Cell, giving Ambrose and Rollins the main event (assuming Rollins beats Cena) instead of relying on Lesnar/Cena III. Now if they don't make Lesnar defend the title until the Rumble, that's a problem. I'm perfectly fine with them conveniently forgetting the 30 day rule on title defenses. Now I'm also fine with Lesnar not defending the title at Survivor Series...however, he needs to at least be on the card. If it's in a traditional elimination match, I think that could be a good move to re-establish him as a total badass if he was the last man left on his team and was down 3 to 1 or even 4 to 1, and to battle back and be the sole survivor.

I'd much rather see this than for them to give Big Show his obligatory yearly push and suddenly become #1 contender...and we'd be expected to just forget all about Lesnar destroying him at the Rumble just 9 months ago.

Who could contend against Lesnar that we would take seriously? The only one that comes to mind is if they decide to turn Orton face. Though I hate Orton as a "good guy", that match would interest me. If Daniel Bryan can return by the Royal Rumble, I really hope he and Lesnar are the main event. This would be the ultimate David vs. Goliath story.

 

[Navi]

First off, let me say that I am entirely in favor of the idea of a monster heel, "unbeatable", World Champ and Lesnar definitely fits that mold. He was the perfect pick for the role.
Secondly, I am fully behind the idea of WWE title defenses being the rarity rather than the norm.

These ideas make the championship special; something to strive for an attain rather than something to "pass around" and, the fact that it's Lesnar holding the strap, winning the title becomes nearly insurmountable. The guy who finally beats him gets an incredible rub and an aura of legitimacy that he otherwise wouldn't get.

While I agree with you there is a problem with your theory. First of all no one is unbeatable, even the biggest guy can be brought down with the right moves. Yes he's been booked that way, but now you have the problem with who the hell can beat him. Cena one of the strongest guys on the roster almost got destroyed, Reigns might be able too, but I doubt it. So you have this big unbeatable monster sitting there with the title belt and no one can take it off him. And with him just sitting there and not defending it, just how unbeatable does he look? In his one title defense he almost got beat, so the answer is to leave him off TV for the next couple of months so we remember exactly what?

Because of the lack of depth in the main event for the past couple of years, of course the title has been as little tarnished. Orton and Cena and too a certain extent Punk have just been passing it around like a hot potato. Why, because there was no one else the WWE trusted enough with it.

Now you have guys like Ambrose, Rollins, Bryan, Reigns, Cena, Orton and Lesnar, and where is the title, sitting at home with Lesnar. There are credible players in the game now, and to me anyway the WWE isn't making him look invulnerable they are making him look lazy to the extent that he won't even show up to defend said title.

Worse than that, you now have Cena involved in the hottest feud of the year, because he simple has nothing else to do.

 

[sMark]

The best excuse they can use is, John Cena had his rematch and he lost, Brock defeated Taker at Mania and squashed John Cena twice, and by that very reason he can't see any deservable challengers left and wont waste his time. (make it a seatdown interview with Lesnar or use Heyman).
But at the same time MitB contract says that the person who have it, can challenge the champ any place any time and champion should compete or forfit the title (use Cena for it, since he was MitB winner and should know what written in this contract)
...so this give several characters the reason to hunt down Seth Rollins and get his briefcase, so they can challenge Lesnar and he should be forced to appear and defend the belt.

 

[BenChillin]

The problem is basically that there's no "legit" opponents in my opinion. WWE hasn't built enough big name stars in the past decade. They messed up. This is a product of it.

Also, Brock's run with WWE is almost done. We'll probably get him at the Rumble, then Mania, and that's it. We'll be lucky if he's at Elimination Chamber but I don't know who the opponent would or should be. Again, no credible competition.

Rumble it's another John Cena match, Mania it's another John Cena match except this time it's the new John Cena, Roman Reigns.

I really don't wanna see Lesnar get taken out with three spears. The crowd will probably be dead by then anyway if that's the last match.

 

[Darkshadow1234]

Honestly I don't see the appeal in lesnar. The guy hasn't earned anything in his whole career. He had shit handed to him on the silver platter. Hasn't payed no dues.

I don't like him as wwe champion at all. He isn't there. There are no challenges for his title.
This isn't the 80s, where the champ is barely there. That shit doesn't cut it this generation or time. I would wish people would stop using that as an argument. Different time period.
Right now, wwe can't afford not to have their champion on the show or ppv.
The champion should be the there everyday.

Giving lesnar the title is a bad business move. Doesn't accomplish nothing. Making the product suffer anymore.
WWE hasnt learned from the last time with the rock.

Stop giving part timers the world championship.
If they aren't going to be there everyday.
smh

Next time we may see lesnar is at the rr. Which is stupid.

 

[theblasterkid]

First off, let me say that I am entirely in favor of the idea of a monster heel, "unbeatable", World Champ and Lesnar definitely fits that mold. He was the perfect pick for the role.
Secondly, I am fully behind the idea of WWE title defenses being the rarity rather than the norm.

These ideas make the championship special; something to strive for an attain rather than something to "pass around" and, the fact that it's Lesnar holding the strap, winning the title becomes nearly insurmountable. The guy who finally beats him gets an incredible rub and an aura of legitimacy that he otherwise wouldn't get.

The WWE was incredibly right in setting that table when they Lesnar go over Undertaker at WM and, then, dominate Cena to take the strap at SS.

However, and unfortunately, WWE is blowing a good thing. Here are my four major points on what they have done, are currently doing, and seem to be gearing up for, that are wrong and why...

Point 1 - No Lesnar until the Royal Rumble and his opponent is likely to again be Cena and, worse, the next one is going to be tainted by a Rusev interference?

Sorry, this is a multi-fold problem...
While the idea of keeping championship defenses and even the champion, himself, off weekly TV is a good one, he still has the upper tier of a roster he should be facing and beating. The next champ is robbed of the rub he might otherwise get if Lesnar's only achievement as champion is two tainted defenses against John Cena.
If Lesnar's contract is limited and for big money, fine. Invest in your World Heavyweight championship, invest in your company, invest in your roster, and pay whatever it takes to get him to perform at the monthly PPV every month and engaging your top tier talent. Such a move lifts all boats.
Do everything possible to keep him pummeling the upper tier of the roster on a monthly basis and have him plow through all of them convincingly, except for the guy who finally beats him.
There isn't a single member of the WWE roster who is going to lose their spot or their own rub simply because they were beaten by Brock Lesnar. The guy is supposed to be an unstoppable monster.
Then, after Lesnar has beaten all the top guys, the guy who finally beats him will literally be on top of the world. It would be the biggest championship win, probably, since Ultimate Warrior took the belt from Hulk Hogan and would give WWE the man who is likely to be their most marketable star since Stone Cold Steve Austin...IF they choose the right guy.

Point 2 - The tainted finish at 'Night of Champions'.

In the immortal words of an obnoxious superstar, 'Really? Really?'
I'm not going to try any fantasy re-booking of this mess except to say that it shouldn't have happened, that Cena should have lost and, that if corporate still felt a need to get Rollins involved, Lesnar should have driven him into the dirt, too.
I read all about Vince's fear of booking Cena weak and think the story is ridiculous. Cena could have been booked strong and still lost. Heck, that strong booking might have made an attempt by Rollins to cash in...and also lose...look more legitimate instead of "fake". It would have maintained Cena's 'Never Give Up' schtick and maintained Brock's aura of invincibility.
The only way to possibly have fixed this mess would be to have had the final Lesnar/Cena blowoff happening at 'HIAC' so that Lesnar could get onto the rest of his challenges. (See Point 1)
But leaving it all "as is" until the Rumble only exacerbates this awful finish.

Point 3 - The Authority/Lesnar Connection.

I've touched upon this before, in other discussions. There's an entire story to play with here and, it seems, people being paid very well to write scripts and storylines for WWE don't even see it. The Authority spent an entire year going back and forth with Daniel Bryan over the fact that he was "only a B-Plus player". So, other than it just being another typical heel reaction, why were the Authority so bothered about the belt going to Cena @ MITB? He's been WWE's ultimate "A-Plus player" for ten years.
But even if we suspend disbelief and allow the Authority their typical heel reaction to Cena as champ, what is their motivation for involving themselves with Lesnar? Why would they want the belt off a 'company guy' so they could put it on an uncontrollable, unbeatable mercenary? What do they gain from this? How do they not lose because of this?
The people with the pencils are not doing their jobs, here. You'd think HHH, Stephanie and Vince would know better. But then again, they seem very content in wasting Brock's entire reign altogether.

Point 4 - Roman Reigns.

No knock on Reigns. In fact, I won't knock any performer and haven't. I'm strictly looking at this from the perspective of booking and perception. Reigns hasn't been around long enough, accomplished enough, or become a seasoned enough performer either in the ring or on the stick to beat Lesnar at WM31. It's too soon and Reigns has too much ground to cover. In the long run, Reigns may absolutely be "the guy". But, if so and if WWE is insistent upon his being so, then they need to stretch this out for at least another year and target WM32 for it to happen.
This gives Reigns more time to work out the kinks in his progression as a performer. It gives WWE a chance to give Reigns a deeper look to ascertain if he's truly the "1 to beat the 1..." It gives WWE a chance to correct the mistakes they're making with Brock now.
They can sign Brock for another year and feed him The Rock at WM31, as is being rumored to be a potential choice, and it will sell a ton of tickets.
But as it is now, Reigns would beat Lesnar at WM31...defeating a guy with nothing more than 2 tainted victories over John Cena. That might look great as the ticker tape comes down on him @ the end of the show. But the following night on RAW, the WWE Championship goes back to 'business as usual'.

All boats could have been lifted by a Brock Lesnar title reign. His reign could have allowed WWE to make some serious changes in their booking strategy and long term prospects that would have benefited their entire roster. They could have regained some of their lost viewership in doing so; gained new subscribers to WWE Network to see the latest challenge to the unstoppable monster, etc...and they could have eventually built up Roman Reigns (or anyone else they wanted to, for that matter) as their next major superstar.

But they're blowing the entire thing.

Thanks for the opportunity to rant.

I agree with all the points you have made. If the WWE used Brock in such a fashion, it would allow for interesting feuds at the top. Personally, I don't want to see a Cena vs. Lesnar 3(4). It would mean that the only opponent Lesnar defended against was Cena, which in my book means s***. The WWE could have Brock face opponents such as Orton, Sheamus, Cesaro, Big Show (he never got his revenge), and or Henry (one last push). I hated the way NOC ended because it was the same old Super Cena bs as usual, and it made Brock look weak. As for Reigns facing Lesnar and winning at WM31, it's way too soon; unless Rollins cashes in, but I still think it's too soon for Reigns to go over on Lesnar. I agree with Vince's rumored plan on this one, The Rock vs Brock at WM31 is the right route to go at this time. The only question is, how will it happen? The Rock wins the Rumble perhaps? The Rumble winner and gets a kayfabe injury setting up a #1 contenders match at EC (I just thought of this one)? It will be interesting how they move forward with this one.