Brock should lose to...

All you have to do to beat Brock Lesnar is....... BOLIEVE! Clearly Bo Dallas should pin him clean in the middle of the ring at WrestleMania 31.

Cena's beat him before, he can do it again. Give him weapons.

Make it No DQ and the opponent stands a better chance against the Beast. If you look at all his matches since his comeback, Cena/Lesnar 1, all 3 HHH's, and Punk all were No DQ. The use of weapons helps actually hurt Lesnar. Taker/Lesnar and Cena/Lesnar 2 were not No DQ, and Lesnar destroyed them.
 
It is inevitable that Brock and Heyman get the entire roster out on the stage and, in that case, Bo should confront them. He should be a fearless warrior.
 
I'm starting to think that Brock is going to end up rematching Taker at Mania for the title. Brock squashes Cena again at NoC and maybe somebody like Sheamus at SS or the Rumble or something. Taker does the absolute impossible and returns at the Rumble where he wins and gets his rematch with Brock for the title and wins that in an absolutely brutal match involving lots of weapons. Taker retires for good the next night on Raw and goes out as a champion.
 
Unless Ambrose can drive a tank he's just gonna give himself whiplash.

I imagine such an attempt from Ambrose would play out like this

borkwithstands_zps84aa113f.jpg


Moral of the story: you can't take out a tree with a car.
 
Seeing Bryan latch on during an F-5 & lessen the impact while putting Lesnar right into the Yes Lock- would be pretty damn cool. Question is, would they give Bryan that super-push and be the one to make Brock tap?


Honestly, If they let Lesnar keep the title till WM, then it will be Roman Reigns that gets the win. If Brock loses the belt before then- I say Cesaro is your man. Perfectly executable storyline already in place, so even for the WWE creative team it would be paint by numbers. It would go over huge with fans & Cesaro pulling off a deadlift suplex on Lesnar would be awesome. Vince loves this guy & maybe the recent downswing is just a precursor for something bigger. The WWE has done that a time or two, so its logical.


Either way, keep John Cena out of it. Make him wait for that #16 for at least a year or so. Far too many other guys who would make great champs, so we dont need another Cena run for the time being.
 
Watching the match and reactions and reading the responses in this thread I feel like WWE couldn't have found a way to make their roster look weaker. Cena, the guy who dominated a decade, looked second rate to Lesnar - the guy who can't even be bothered to show up regularly as WWE is beneath him. In turn, everyone in the company not named Bryan or Orton looked second rate to Cena, making them third rate in the grand scheme of things.

Breaking the Streak and squashing Cena are two of the biggest rubs in the history of wrestling and could've made two stars, but were given to the guy who was almost as established before and hasn't proven himself to be a massive draw. This might be the strongest push in the history of wrestling alongside Goldberg, and I see Brock in a similar position to Goldberg after winning the title.

If Brock doesn't defend regularly it devalues the company as a whole. The world title match is the main selling point of PPVs / Network Specials. Taking it away will hurt buys and interest. Additionally, making the regulars fight for the best of the rest position won't give them a lot credibility either and makes the program, again, look second rate. So if Brock is still a part timer, have him lose fast. Otherwise, try your best to make your guys look credible against the guy who stepped in for a cup of coffee.
Whoever beats Lesnar needs to win methodically and decisively. Counter the meatheadedness with intelligence, find a weakness and exploit it.

So, who should do it?
Reigns? He doesn't seem to be able to back up the hype (yet). Overpushing will make people turn on him, and turn mercilessly. He needs another year to warm with the crowd and doesn't look like the guy with the antidote. His power style wouldn't contrast all that well, and you can't believably outmatch Lesnar with power.
The Rock? Great choice if you want to make the regulars look even more terrible and kick the legs out from under your roster. Same for HHH or Angle.
Cena? Eh maybe, but it makes the last match look like a waste.
Cesaro? Fallen through the floor.
Wyatt? Cena made him look like a total chump, and Cena looked like a total chump against Brock.
Rollins, alongside other difficulties, has a huge heel vs heel hurdle that would diminish the showdown. Brock needs to be slain, not screwed.
Bryan would be perfect, but he's out until January and only an option if Brock defends regularly, for reasons described above.
I'm stuck with Ambrose, who has a great crowd connection and is crazy enough to find a key to Brock's weaknesses. Screw the authority by conquering the briefcase and conquering the conquerer of the Streak, but make it a fair cash-in and heroic victory in a showdown. He could use and most probably handle the rub to shoot him to the sky, so he's my choice.

Overall I'm worried, but it will be interesting to see what the plans are (, if there are any, that is :rolleyes:).
 
@Vega - a year ago I may have agreed with you; however now we have the WWE Network as the focus rather than individual ppv buy rates, so WWE have the opportunity to try something different.

Remember, the WWE Title wasn't defended on the first Wrestlemania; only once in the first 5 Summerslam events was it the main event (1990, when it had double billing with Hogan v Quake), and on 3 of those occasions the WWE champion was in a tag team match; it took until the 5th annual Survivor Series in 1991 for the title to be defended, and the champion even took part in the Royal Rumble match in 1989 and 1990.

Point is, there was a time before the champion headlining every ppv became the norm; long reigns boosted Hogan's popularity and a short (by the standards of the time) did the Warrior no favours; likewise, few remember Sgt Slaughter's reign, or Ivan Koloff, etc etc.

Lesnar holding the belt for a long time could be exactly what WWE needs to increase interest right now - but only if it is booked correctly....
 
What would you book instead? Hogan participated at those events. Because he wasn't above the company and there were other stories that deserved his attention. He was in most main events and drew, he was the main attraction and legitimized the events.
Everything without Lesnar, especially everything with Cena, will look second rate after Brock made Cena look unworthy yesterday.

How they want to secure buys without a fighting champion is beyond me, but WWE has such a tremendous booking department that they'll find a way. ;)
 
With every competitor beaten (even Roman Reigns), Daniel Bryan, Dolph Ziggler, Dean Ambrose, Cesaro and Bray Wyatt will withdraw their 5 magic rings to summon the IWC's greatest champion.
 
Right now it's Reigns, but if the fans turn on him, which they may, Bryan steps in. If Bryan can't go, Cena has his revenge.

At some point, though, I see Taker beating Brock. When? Who knows.
 
I think it comes down to Reigns, Cena or the Undertaker. I don't think Reigns will be ready by WrestleMania. I think he needs at least another year or so. So that leaves either Cena or Taker. I just don't see how Cena can agree to get absolutely decimated by Lesnar without being promised some sort of revenge. I mean Cena has been the face of the company for the last 10 years and he was made to look like he didn't even belong in the same ring with Lesnar last night. Then there is the Undertaker. It would be a nice storyline for him to make his comeback at the Rumble and win it and then beat Lesnar for the title at Mania and then retire. However, my guess is the Undertaker has wrestled his last match. So by process of elimination I think it will be Cena. I think it has to be him though to restore whatever credibility he lost at Summerslam.
 
If the WWE asked me what to do with Lesnar for my entertainment, I'd tell them have him defend it like twice before Mania in long feuds then send Bryan after him for the title at Mania. Plan B is let Lesnar keep the belt for years defending it the way Hogan used to or even the way Flair did
 
... Bray Wyatt. I think Wyatt cuts better promos than Heyman. Heyman's promos are long and drawn out, it would be neat to see them get interrupted by Bray. Then, you got Harper and Rowan. Two huge monsters. In the past, when the Wyatt family would attack someone, people like the Usos would come to the rescue. No one on the roster will try to rescue Lesnar. So Lesnar will have to deal with two behemoths and a demented individual who enjoys the pain Lesnar dishes out. I think they can carry that for several months.

Although realistically, the fact that beating Lesnar would be a huge rub, I think WWE will just give it to Cena.
 
Breaking the Streak and squashing Cena are two of the biggest rubs in the history of wrestling and could've made two stars, but were given to the guy who was almost as established before and hasn't proven himself to be a massive draw.

I could turn around and say that breaking the streak and squashing Cena should be Brock instead of two up and comers because they could flame out. Brock is legit as it gets. His UFC numbers prove he's a draw.

If Brock doesn't defend regularly it devalues the company as a whole.

If you defend your top prize too much, you devalue it.

The world title match is the main selling point of PPVs / Network Specials. Taking it away will hurt buys and interest.

This is no longer the territory days or even the 90s. The WWE is a brand which people will go see regardless who is the champion. Brock is a special attraction and the champ. That will generate more interest.
 
I could turn around and say that breaking the streak and squashing Cena should be Brock instead of two up and comers because they could flame out. Brock is legit as it gets. His UFC numbers prove he's a draw.
Guys like Bryan, Cesaro, Reigns or Ambrose won't flame out and could've used the rubs. Even if they do they're put in a position to prove their worth, there's not a lot to lose. On the other hand, Brock gains little and is no reliable part of the future.
If he didn't get a mega push in 02/03 he wouldn't be where he is, and if the new generation doesn't get huge rubs there won't be new megastars, regardless of talent. Hogan, Savage, Warrior didn't pass the torch to the new guys and the WWF suffered.

If you defend your top prize too much, you devalue it.
There needs to be steady competition, once a month is perfect. It has worked for twenty years and the market demands more and more program. You need to keep momentum and high-profile programs, there's little room for downtimes. "This is no longer the territory days or even the 90s."

This is no longer the territory days or even the 90s. The WWE is a brand which people will go see regardless who is the champion.
Yes, as long as the events have enough on the line, with credible guys contending in matches where the outcome matters. The world title has always been the main attraction, removing the top prize from cards will diminish interest, how is that even debatable? If people buy what WWE delivers regardless of content there's no reason to worry about network registrations.
 
I used my WWE 2k14 simulator to see who should beat Brock Lesnar for the WWE title.

Brock Lesnar is going to be defeated at Wrestlemania for the title by Retro Brock Lesnar.

yay wormhole in time
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,851
Messages
3,300,884
Members
21,726
Latest member
chrisxenforo
Back
Top