Bryan VS Lesnar - Believeable Or Not? Keep It All Here!

[CyberPunk]

I was going through Daniel Bryan's interview while promoting WWE 2k15. The full interview can be found here. He mentions that one man he wants to face if and when he returns is Brock Lesnar.

Whether it'll happen or not is anybody's guess. I was reading up some more from fans who mentioned that the match would not be believable. That got me thinking.

Last year, a lot of people said how Punk vs Lesnar is not a 'believable' match up. Eventually, they put on one of the best matches of the night and may be of the year. Now same is being said about Bryan vs Lesnar. My question is, what makes a match believable?

Sure I can understand where these fans are coming from. Brock has been on amazing roll. He conquered the streak, decimated the 15 time world champion in Cena and looks an unstoppable monster at this time. However, how does that determine that a match between Bryan and Brock would be unbelievable? Over time, there have been many David vs Goliath stories where David has slain Goliath. Plus, Bryan's wrestling technical wrestling style is very different from Cena's or Taker's power based wrestling style. Why would that be unbelievable? Another match up people haven't really thought much about is Ambrose vs Lesnar. I can understand that Ambrose might not be ready for such a high profile match up, but why wouldn't they be able to deliver a believable high quality match up?

So, here are my questions:

Would a Lesnar vs Bryan match be believable? Why or why not?

What makes a match believable anyway?

I am looking forward to what you guys have to say.

 

[Nate DaMac]

If Punk were to try to throw punches and wrestle with Lesnar, it would have been a completely ******ed match that Lesnar would have dominated. Punks used a lot of springboard and top rope strikes and head kicks in that match because he knew that fighting Lesnar straight up would be stupid (see Cena, John.) Also, the No DQ element helped quite a bit.

I assume that if Daniel Bryan were to have faced Lesnar, a lot of these same tactics would have been used.

 

[CyberPunk]

If Punk were to try to throw punches and wrestle with Lesnar, it would have been a completely ******ed match that Lesnar would have dominated. Punks used a lot of springboard and top rope strikes and head kicks in that match because he knew that fighting Lesnar straight up would be stupid (see Cena, John.) Also, the No DQ element helped quite a bit.

I assume that if Daniel Bryan were to have faced Lesnar, a lot of these same tactics would have been used.

That's exactly my point. I've read this around this forum as well that Bryan would just not be a believable opponent for Brock. Yes, Brock will throw him around and yes, Bryan will be dominated for most part of the match (that's how Brock's matches have been since he came back). However, the match can still be completely believable back and forth match.

 

[Sean Valjean]

Noticeably F.A.T. pretty much nailed it. As long as Bryan sticks and moves and waits for Brock to slip up instead of charging at him constantly like a moron, people would (likely) buy it. After all, what else could Bryan do besides that and maybe run Brock down with a Prius?

Belivability, for me, depends I guess based on my perception of the wrestlers and my expectations of what they'd do to each other in whatever type of match they have. I could only suspend my disbelief for Bryan/Lesnar if Bryan hits and moves, like Punk did. If he out-brawled Brock and took him down like any other guy, that's not belivable because Bryan is almost half his size and Brock is a former UFC champ.

Undertaker taking an insane amount of punishment that would end anyone else makes sense because his character is billed as being near-indestructible. Would you buy Heath Slater kicking out of two F5's? No, because we know that Slater is a joke. I'm not sure if any of that made sense, but I think you get where I'm coming from.

 

[Mudlup50]

I think part of it is the booking, which is always important. Daniel Bryan was insanely over for basically being unbeatable. You figure he beat Triple H, Orton and Batista in the same night. That's the booking he had. If he didn't get injured and had the belt for about 4 months up to SummerSlam, I'd think it'd be believable. Yea Lesnar is a UFC guy but Daniel Bryan is an ROH guy. And as the others have mentioned, he'd have to adjust his style but I don't see that being a problem for Daniel Bryan.

Now I don't think Ambrose versus Lesnar is believable yet. Ambrose pretty much lost every match since the Shield broke up, not hating just fact. It'd be hard to believe that Ambrose could beat Lesnar. Bryan...I could see

 

[JoeFromTomsRiver]

A Lesnar-Bryan match could be "believable", in that if Lesnar squashed Bryan, it would be believable.

What wouldn't be believable is Bryan going over Lesnar clean. It would be ridiculous. I don't think that was EVER going to be considered.

Lesnar is a legit fighting champion. In theory, all of his matches should look like the Summerslam match. Picturing him in the ring with Bryan right now is almost laughable.

 

[blueskyy]

Honestly, I don't really understand what you're trying to get across in your post. I'll just answer your title question directly if I may.

Believability is NOT how you book a match, it's how you WORK your match. Can Daniel Bryan and Broke Lesnar have a believable match? Yes, certainly. When you win, it has to be believable, and what leads up to that win (the back and forth) has to be believable.

 

[Mudlup50]

Honestly, I don't really understand what you're trying to get across in your post. I'll just answer your title question directly if I may.

Believability is NOT how you book a match, it's how you WORK your match. Can Daniel Bryan and Broke Lesnar have a believable match? Yes, certainly. When you win, it has to be believable, and what leads up to that win (the back and forth) has to be believable.

It is kind of the booking to the match. I mean, Heath Slater versus Orton on Raw. Who wins? Slater can work the match perfectly but we don't believe it's a serious match until the match starts...because the booking for Heath has been poor to say the least. So we wouldn't believe in this match. I know what you're saying, but it's both.

Believability before a match is booking:Rey Mysterio can be booked to be a believable opponent for Batista.

Believability during a match is working:Someone else pointed out the CM Punk/Lesnar match

That's just how I take it at least

 

[blueskyy]

Believability before a match is booking:Rey Mysterio can be booked to be a believable opponent for Batista.

Believability during a match is working:Someone else pointed out the CM Punk/Lesnar match

You may be right there, but this was how I looked at it. You can give a wrestler (superstar) a string of wins, but if his matches weren't believable, that would be ruining the booking.

 

[MartialHorror]

For those who say that Punk Vs Lesnar isn't believable, allow me to point out that muscles do not automatically mean better fighter. Lesnar's badassery stems more from his established MMA career, but if Punk isn't a believable opponent for that reason than the entire roster wouldn't be able to compare to Lesnar.

I'd love to see Lesnar Vs Bryan: The beast vs the everyman. It would make an interesting matchup and Lesnar is at his best when he's with someone who is good at carrying the matches- which Bryan is.

 

[Soulblazed]

The only way I can see this match being believable is if "Daniel Bryan" turns back into Bryan Danielson and truly goes full force against Lesnar, including putting Lesnar in the Cattle Mutilation. For anyone who's seen Danielson go against Takeshi Morishima (a 300lb plus Japanese wrestler) in 2008 in ROH, then you know precisely what I'm getting at. In one of their matches, Danielson snapped on Morishima and whooped his ass with a steel chain.

 

[Dream]

There is zero percent believably in having DB beat Lesnar. Why? It would never, ever happen in real life. Lol unless DB came out with a gun.

 

[A11oftheLights]

There is zero percent believably in having DB beat Lesnar. Why? It would never, ever happen in real life. Lol unless DB came out with a gun.

I kinda gotta agree with this.

When Brock Lesnar beat the streak, some justified it by saying it was what would happen in a real fight, but turned a blind eye to Bryan winning two fights in the one night.

So if your going to with Brock beating Taker on the whole "legit fight" argument i think it isnt anymore believable that Bryan would win

 

[George Steele's Barber]

A Lesnar-Bryan match could be "believable", in that if Lesnar squashed Bryan, it would be believable.

What wouldn't be believable is Bryan going over Lesnar clean. It would be ridiculous. I don't think that was EVER going to be considered.

Lesnar was a legit fighting champion. In theory, all of his matches should look like the Summerslam match. Picturing him in the ring with Bryan right now is almost laughable.

Fixed that for you. Not that it matters. Even in kayfabe, professional wrestling is a completely different science than MMA.

I was one of the doubters when it came to Punk and Lesnar and Punk proved me wrong. He looked competitive in his loss. Bryan is a guy who seems to have the same skills to keep distance and counter when he gets in trouble.

I'd like to see this match up and expect that it would be a good show. If Bryan were to win, it would probably make the most sense for it to be with a knock out or some type of ankle submission.

 

[Mustang Sally]

Plus, Bryan's wrestling technical wrestling style is very different from Cena's or Taker's power based wrestling style.

You make interesting points, but in a Bryan-Lesnar contest, I believe the problem would be Brock's wrestling ability, not Daniel's.

In Brock's first run with the company, he never used finesse moves; he didn't need to because it wasn't his style. Everything was "straight ahead, plow through your opponent....and the guy had better be able to handle the roughhouse stuff." That was Brock, and after his experiences fighting "for real" in mixed martial arts, he's even more of the roughneck type than before. Imagine fighting in MMA where you don't have to worry about making your opponent look good.... then coming back to WWE and fighting a guy half your size.

To my mind, Daniel doesn't have to adapt his style to Brock's.....it's the other way around, and I don't know that Brock can do that well enough to make this match seem believable. Against Triple H and John Cena, it was all good because they had the bodies to handle Brock's rough stuff while being tough enough themselves to give Brock something to work with as far as taking their offense. Even Punk wrestled in more "power" mode than usual; I didn't think it was a great match because, no matter what WWE was trying to sell us, Punk didn't have the body to look as if he could measure up to Brock. Still, I'll admit it was more effective looking than I thought it would be.

Daniel Bryan is a different story. He's even smaller than Punk, and what Daniel has for physical equipment is unimpressive....compare his physique to that NXT guy Adrian Neville.

As I see it, the biggest problem is Brock adapting to what Daniel is throwing at him and making the little guy's offense look effective. The idea of having Daniel using his finesse maneuvers to take down Brock Lesnar just doesn't seem feasible. Yes, they can have Daniel defeat Brock, but if it looks phony, they might simultaneously give Daniel his championship back......but look ridiculous in the process.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

You make interesting points, but in a Bryan-Lesnar contest, I believe the problem would be Brock's wrestling ability, not Daniel's.

In Brock's first run with the company, he never used finesse moves; he didn't need to because it wasn't his style. Everything was "straight ahead, plow through your opponent....and the guy had better be able to handle the roughhouse stuff." That was Brock, and after his experiences fighting "for real" in mixed martial arts, he's even more of the roughneck type than before. Imagine fighting in MMA where you don't have to worry about making your opponent look good.... then coming back to WWE and fighting a guy half your size.

To my mind, Daniel doesn't have to adapt his style to Brock's.....it's the other way around, and I don't know that Brock can do that well enough to make this match seem believable. Against Triple H and John Cena, it was all good because they had the bodies to handle Brock's rough stuff while being tough enough themselves to give Brock something to work with as far as taking their offense. Even Punk wrestled in more "power" mode than usual; I didn't think it was a great match because, no matter what WWE was trying to sell us, Punk didn't have the body to look as if he could measure up to Brock. Still, I'll admit it was more effective looking than I thought it would be.

Daniel Bryan is a different story. He's even smaller than Punk, and what Daniel has for physical equipment is unimpressive....compare his physique to that NXT guy Adrian Neville.

As I see it, the biggest problem is Brock adapting to what Daniel is throwing at him and making the little guy's offense look effective. The idea of having Daniel using his finesse maneuvers to take down Brock Lesnar just doesn't seem feasible. Yes, they can have Daniel defeat Brock, but if it looks phony, they might simultaneously give Daniel his championship back......but look ridiculous in the process.

Sorry Sally but we bought DB getting RKO-Power bombed through an announce table only to win the WWE title against two blue chippers with the powerful leadership of the company ready to screw him at any point. We can buy him getting suplexed and rammed in to a turn buckle. We also can easily be convinced Lesnar has a soft chin and an even softer abdomen plus legs that pail in comparison in strength to his upper body.

It is the magic of good versus evil and too much Disney as a child.

 

[Wrestlingfan100]

Bryan is TRAINED in MMA. Punk was trained muy thai since age 14 and trains in MMA, very believable that they could beat brock lesnar because in his UFC career Brock was beaten by smaller guys. For the last time it's skill not size. You have a slow out of shape 6ft4 guy pick a fight with say 5ft martial artist, he gets his ass kicked, same thing in any other sport.
You can have a weight lifting contest, the big guy doesn't train relies on his size, boom loses. Floyd Maywether 5ft8, very small build, best boxer

 

[Wrestlingfan100]

Daniel Bryan has been training in MMA ever since he was first released from WWE where he also learnt the british wrestling from Regal.
Many people forgot or just were unaware that CM Punk trains in MMA and muy thai( since 14) and now the same thing with Daniel Bryan. William Regal said on Colt Cabana's podcast that Bryan is a nice guy who just happens to be able to break your fingers and this was evident by the whole robbery thing where he put the guy in a rear naked choke.

People also forgot, Lesnar has lost UFC fights to smaller guys

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JC-V0vm0Ylg

I hate this arguement that size trumps all, no bullshit, it's SKILL and it happens in any sport or competition no matter your size, no matter how tall you are if you are not as skilled as the other person you have a smaller percent chance of victory.

Now Brock is very talented in MMA, amateur wrestling but can we at least give Bryan Danielson credit as a guy who has a realistic chance instead of being stupid and saying " oh he's just 5ft8, 185 lbs, it's unbelievable if he wins"

 

[Poop Master Flex]

Would a Lesnar vs Bryan match be believable? Why or why not?

It most certainly can be, it all depends on how the match is wrestled. For example, Bryan can't go toe to toe with Lesnar, that just wouldn't happen but if Bryan used his speed, endurance, technical ability and his in ring intelligence then yes its could definitely work wonders.

Although KB has said it a million times Sting vs. Vader is a good example of this. When Sting went straight at Vader he got destroyed, when Sting was actually thinking and used his speed to make Vader miss then he had a shot at beating him. Although Bryan isn't Sting the same idea could hold true for Lesnar vs. Bryan. It all depends on how the match actually goes down.

What makes a match believable anyway?

In my eyes a believable match is one that is held in some realm of possibility. Luckily with wrestling you can push the boundaries of realism and still have a believable match, there's a big difference between far fetched and unrealistic. Using Lesnar as an example again there's a reason why his matches with Cena and Punk were good and his matches with Triple H weren't. Even though his matches with Triple H had more action and had a lot more back and forth wrestling it didn't work because there is no way in hell Triple H could go toe to toe with Lesnar. Realistically he would get destroyed in 5 minutes. It's hard to draw people into a match where the flow makes no sense.

Now when you look at his matches with Cena they were both top notch matches in my eyes because it made sense. Because Cena is the type who never backs down, never surrenders and has a ton of heart so he went straight at Lesnar which makes sense but what made even more sense was that Cena was completely overmatched in taking that approach. Everyone knows Lesnar is a former UFC Heavyweight champion so its ludicrous to think any wrestler can go head to head with him (even Cena), it just wouldn't happen.

Punk on the other hand took a completely different approach. He used his brain and speed to wear Lesnar out and to make him miss, just to the point Punk could make a match out of it and make people believe he could really pull this off. It may have been a bit far fetched but it was based enough in reality to make fans buy it.

A match can be easily believable in wrestling but its important not to go too far into unrealistic territory or else the fans just won't buy into what's happening.

 

[WBL]

Almost any match can be believable if you put the proper build behind it. That's what the TV shows are supposed to do, isn't it? Give you the proper build so you feel so into the match that you want to pay money for the Network/PPV/Live feed?

And the biggest thing you need to remember is that believability is different from federation to federation. Seth Rollins cinder-blocking Dean Ambrose is considered brutal in the WWE, but in CZW, Ambrose's old stomping grounds, it'd be considered just a transiational move. And picture this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejQFkSFDpn8

... happening anywhere BUT Chikara or Kaiju Big Battel.

There's a lot more to do with who your audience is and your federation's mission statement than with just what two guys you throw together.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

Although Bryan could believably give Lesnar a great match I don't think its because of his MMA skills. He may be skilled but so is Lesnar, Lesnar was UFC Heavyweight champion and he has a massive size advantage on Bryan, Lesnar really just has to get a hold of Bryan and the match is over.

Given Bryan's skills as a wrestler, coupled with his speed, endurance and mental prowess inside a ring he can definitely beat Lesnar while making it believable. Lesnar's great in the ring but he's also a cocky fuck, couple that in with what Bryan brings to the table and the ingredients are there for a great match that people can buy into. In regards to MMA skills though I just don't see it. Lesnar has way too many advantages in that department over Bryan and I'm not just talking about his size either (his experience in actual MMA fights for example).

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Bryan's had experience in mixed martial arts since long before coming to WWE. Aside from training in various wrestling styles, which have included training in catch wrestling, wrestling & grappling based martial arts like Judo & Jujutsu, he trained at Randy Couture's Xtreme Couture gym when he was living in Las Vegas and was roommates with Neil Melanson, the head grappling coach at Couture's gym.

When it comes to "believability" in pro wrestling, I think some fans and the company itself tries to take things too seriously or stretch believability to such a degree that it's almost comical. For instance, it's pure, 100% myth that a "little guy" can't win a legit fight against a bigger opponent. This should be extremely common knowledge, especially to anyone that's ever witnessed a genuine fight, but you'd be surprised how many people always base the outcome of a fight on who is physically bigger and can lift heavier weights. Some of the most dangerous men I've ever come across in my life aren't exactly of titanic stature. If anything, John Cena would probably be less likely to be able to beat Brock Lesnar in an actual, 100% fight than Daniel Bryan because Cena's had no martial arts background or training that I'm aware of. Yet Cena is more muscular and physically stronger than Bryan.

In professional wrestling, technically, anybody can beat anybody but there are obvious limits to how far suspension of disbelief can be stretched. For instance, nobody is going to buy into the notion or even want to buy into the notion of Hornswoggle beating Brock Lesnar in a pro wrestling match. Now, would that mean that Horny couldn't win in an actual fight between them if he had the proper background and physical training in martial arts? Not at all, but perception is reality and it's difficult to imagine a 6'3" 285 lb. former NCAA Division I Heavyweight Wrestling Champion and former UFC World Heavyweight Champion losing a fight to a 4'4" 130 lb. dwarf even if said dwarf had black belts in martial arts coming out his rear.

If I can "believe" that Seth Rollins drove Dean Ambrose's face into a stack of concrete blocks hard enough to shatter them, why shouldn't I believe that a 5'10" 210 lb. man with a genuine background in catch wrestling and martial arts can be a worthy opponent for Brock Lesnar?

 

[FreezeIzGAWD]

This is stupid....

I hate smarks....

Y'all are so smart EVERYTHING U SAY IS STUPID....

NO ITS NOT BELIEVABLE....

ITS A TERRIBLE MATCH......

I hate how you guys change rules to make them fit your theories....

Yes a small guy trained in MMA might beat a bigger JOE PRO.....

BUT BROCK IS A FORMER UFC HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPION...

THIS MATTERS....

If size didn't matter then why are there weight classes in EVERY REAL COMBAT SPORT.....

Because all things being equal....

BIG GUY WINS....

PERIOD...

DB would like Brock's kid brother in a fight.....

STUPID

 

[L@RISANO]

First of all, I have no doubt that a match between Daniel Bryan and Brock Lesnar would be brilliant. I think there styles would actually make for a great match.


However, would it be believable if Daniel Bryan was to slay the guy who conquered the Streak and just Destroyed the Face of the Company in a clean manner?
Personally, I say No.


Now, I see people talking about CM Punk, but that Brock Lesnar was the guy who lost to John Cena and Triple H, and booking had him as a beatable "Beast" who was nowhere near invincible at the time.


Now, Brock Lesnar has been given a kind of booking that makes him unbeatable, and whoever defeats him should be someone who looks the part of a guy who can go toe to toe with him and finally "slay" the beast.

Also, with his contract possibly ending at Mania31, it would mean that whoever defeats him at that Mania event, would be immediately elevated tenfold as the Top Babyface of the Company, and has to do it in a way that it wouldn't look like a fluke, but rather, whoever does it has to make it seem as though Brock has actually been defeated 'once and for all'....only then,lMO, will the payoff seem worth it, provided the plan is for Brock Lesnar to be the Big Bad Evil Boss that needs to be slayed.


Now, a good plan to make Brock Lesnar totally hated(which I think was the original plan actually) is to have Brock dismantle the beloved Daniel Bryan to get the fans totally against the Beast Incarnate, so that whoever defeats would get the perfect rub that is possible.

 

[CyberPunk]

This is stupid....

I hate smarks....

Y'all are so smart EVERYTHING U SAY IS STUPID....

NO ITS NOT BELIEVABLE....

ITS A TERRIBLE MATCH......

I hate how you guys change rules to make them fit your theories....

Yes a small guy trained in MMA might beat a bigger JOE PRO.....

BUT BROCK IS A FORMER UFC HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPION...

THIS MATTERS....

If size didn't matter then why are there weight classes in EVERY REAL COMBAT SPORT.....

Because all things being equal....

BIG GUY WINS....

PERIOD...

DB would like Brock's kid brother in a fight.....

STUPID

And these kinds of remarks made me start the thread. All things being equal? What make Brock and Bryan equal in terms of ability? Brock's a former UFC heavyweight champion. So? Does that mean he can handle everything and anything thrown at him? Brock is a powerhouse (that's how he has been booked so far) while Bryan is a scrappy, fast paced technical wrestler. The match will be very believable if, as many have already pointed out, the match is Bryan's speed and agility vs Brock's power. What's so difficult to understand there? When have you seen Brock doing suicide dives and top rope missile drop kicks? Have you seen Bryan delivering an F5? Bryan can work long matches and so can Brock with the right opponent. That's where the similarities end. Bryan is ingenious inside the ring, Brock is a raging bull. They compliment each other.

But probably you were trolling, so I am the fool here.