Brock Lesnar? One of the Greats?

[HurriKane]

Whenever I see discussion talking about the all time greats in WWE, the same names would usually be mentioned such as Stone Cold, The Rock, Hogan, Cena, Bruno, Shawn Michaels, Savage, and such. But I wanted to know if at this moment, if you were to again, rank the all time greats in WWE were would you have Brock Lesnar on your list? Top 10? Top 20? Or maybe he doesn't even come close to that?

Being a 4 time WWE Champion, main-eventing 2 Wrestlemanias, beating guys like The Rock, Hulk Hogan, John Cena, Triple H, ending the Undertaker's streak, and having the credentials outside of WWE that Brock Lesnar does, I actually think at some point Brock Lesnar should start cracking some people's all time greatest WWE superstars. Now I know, he did leave wrestling for a few years, and he doesn't have the most likeable personality, but with all the things Brock Lesnar has done, I would actually put him at number 11 (if I were ranking WWE greats on a scale of 1-20 in order) in my ranking of greatest WWE superstars of all time.

My question is where would you put Lesnar on your list? And if you don't think he should be on the list of WWE greats, why?

If I had to make a list with Brock Lesnar in mind it would go like this

1. Hulk Hogan
2. Stone Cold
3. Bruno Sammartino
4. John Cena
5. The Rock
6. The Undertaker.
7. Shawn Michaels
8. Bret Hart
9. Randy Savage
10. Triple H
11. Brock Lesnar

Etc..


Edit: I put this in the old school thread, because we're talking about all time greats, despite the fact Brock Lesnar is a current part on the wrestler.

 

[Bernkastel]

I'd consider him to be an all time great. He's top 50 all time material for sure. From the list the OP gave I'd add Bob Backlund, Billy Graham, Randy Orton, and Kurt Angle and then Brock Lesnar is right there. Ahead of those like Chris Jericho, Bill Goldberg, and Big Show definitely.

The biggest issue that I have with Brock now isn't that he's a part timer; it's that he doesn't participate in the show. I wouldn't care if he wrestled 4 times a year as long as he remains an integral part of weekly television. Without that I cannot be invested in him as a fan. If he becomes a bigger part of the show now that he's resigned with WWE I might move him up a couple of spots once this run is over. If he doesn't then I'm happy keeping him where he is.

 

[Vader]

Just a point to consider, if we look at guys like Hogan and say,"But look what he did for wrestling bringing wrestling into the mainstream." I think the same thing could be said for Lesnar. Between his stint in the NFL, NCAA championship, and especially being the UFC heavyweight Champion, he's been a huge ambassador for the WWE. I don't know many pro wrestlers who end up on sports shows when they decide to resign their contract.

 

[OYDK]

To me, Brock Lesnar will be remembered more as an attraction than a prototypical "all-time great", similar to how Andre the Giant is remembered today. Now I'm not saying ATG is not an all time great... ask anybody and they will say he's one of the GOAT, but ironically he's not in many people's top 10s. Why? People don't generally think of Andre as a "wrestler", but as an attraction. Andre kind of superseded wrestling, and it was always an event when he showed up. Lesnar is the same thing in the modern era.

So to answer your question. Brock will be remembered as an all-time great... but I doubt he makes many top 10 lists.

 

[Mustang Sally]

He's top 50 all time material for sure.

I'd agree with that. The difference between Brock and everyone else is that he's being booked as an all-time great now. As recently as his first modern day contract with WWE, when he was losing to John Cena and Triple H......did he appear as fearsome then?

No, it's only since he beat Undertaker..... and WWE decided they were going to feature him as a monster. Yes, he's done a great job in the role, yet that's how he's been booked, so it's hard to take just this past year and cast Brock as a "top ten in wrestling history" performer.

As do others in this thread, I have a problem with his part-time status. Hey, he's got the world on a string; the biggest sports entertainment organization in the world is at this guy's feet, giving him a deal most of the folks on the WWE roster probably despise........and it's not as if WWE is backing off on this; they just renewed, and I kind of doubt he's taking a cut in pay.

Lastly, for someone who's getting so much, wasn't he rather oddly shaped at WM31? I disliked his gut hanging over his trunks; it was unsightly.....and worse, it gave the impression he couldn't even bother getting into the best shape for his employer's biggest event of the year.

I'm impressed with Brock and it isn't a question of saying he isn't a fine performer.......but when we start to bandy about the term "all-time great," we would do well to remember that a performer in a scripted form of entertainment is only as good as the owners and creative staff allow him to be.

Top 50 is a good place for Brock Lesnar, imo. With a 3 year contract and no more of this UFC stuff clouding the picture, maybe he'll be an all-time great by the time he's finished.

 

[relentless1]

Brock would probably crack the top 10 if we are strictly talking WWE but I have a hard time placing him in the top 20 even if we are talking pro wrestling all time greats, even though he's the best thing going today in the biz

 

[kumarjtk]

he is not a all time great. I don't know why u guys suddenly rooting Brock. bcoz he is opposite to roman and beating cena. if he face bryan at mania then whole situation is against Brock. everyone turn against Brock. whole arena boo to Brock.
so these thread are waste.

 

[Goldie]

Cummulatively he hasn't been a part of WWE a long time... His first stint was 2 years as a full timer. And post UFC, he has only wrestled a handful of times a year.

I think its a good point being raised that he is an Attraction rather than an all time great.

However he has star quality.... something that many modern wrestlers lack.

Would he make my top 20 all star list? Probably not.
A top 50? Definitely so.

 

[CrucifiedRaven]

I think he will definitely be remembered as one of the greats, when all is said and done.

He just oozes charisma. From his debut until SummerSlam 2002 he was billed as the "next big thing" and that could not have been more accurate. Austin and The Rock were both leaving or winding down and they had just found his beast of an athlete to take the reigns at the top.

I don't think we've seen Vince bend so much for a superstar the way he has with Lesnar. During his first run, it's no secret Brock was unhappy. He hated the travel schedule and his heart was never into it. I'm pretty sure I remember hearing rumours that he had his own private jet to fly around in as champion.

I've really enjoyed his second run, since after WM28. He gets paid absurd amounts of money to perform a very limited schedule. He's one of the few guys who have been afforded this luxury, because Vince knows he's money. Especially after his run in UFC, where he received tons of mainstream exposure but also legitimized him as a real fighter and a real champion.

He's also more often then not put on fantastic matches in the ring. His return match vs Cena was great. His match with CM Punk was excellent. His matches with Triple H were good, but nothing special, much like a lot of Triple H matches lately.. The match with Taker can't really be judged due to the concussion, but it definitely made history. And this year his rematch with Cena, the triple threat at the Royal Rumble, and the 'Mania domination of Roman Reigns have all been great matches. He can clearly still go in the ring, and be relied upon to put on a main event match whenever he wants.

His first run was very good, but short. His accomplishments though can't be ignored. In combination with his second run I think it definitely puts him into the "all time greats" class.

 

[rmp0012002]

I know this is a WWE biased board but Lesnar just happens to fit into the current time period. All time greats? No. What are you basing it on? He was champion for 364 days and wrestled four times. If it wasn't for Heyman he wouldn't have came across as he did.

 

[Wrestlingaholic]

Firstly, being in anyone's top 50 would still make him an all-time great - Pro Wrestling Illustrated, for example, publish a yearly top 500. Accounting for every wrestler that had ever been on that list once, plus the thousands that haven't, too 50 is, to me, an all-time great, especially since pro wrestling has over a century of history.

Personally speaking, on pure ability and athleticism, I would rank Brock certainly top 20; his personality would rank lower, as he isn't the strongest talker, but his overall character these days supercedes that. Match quality? Certainly up there, how many bad matches has this guy had? I think overall, Brock would comfortably break my top 20, and that's a list based on 25 years of watching, plus plenty of 'historical analysis' on pre-1990 shows.

Regarding his current run: it's a misnomer to think that Brock has been booked as a bad ass since breaking the streak. With the exception of two misguided losses to Cena (one by dq) and a feud-furthering loss to Triple H, he has (I believe) won every match he has been in, up until Sunday. People seem to forget, for example, that he destroyed the Big Show at last year's Royal Rumble ppv in less than 5 minutes, then proceeded to annihilate him post match - arguably the starting point for the current 'unstoppable monster' mega push - and did similar to Mark Henry, though not in a match situation, on an episode of Raw around the same time (the next night?)

And regarding his physique, it has not been the same since he was diagnosed with diverticulitis whilst recognised as the UFC heavyweight champion. I very much doubt it is a case of him 'not being bothered', as he has had a noticeable gut since his return from that major illness.