Could it all have just been a ploy....

WWE4EVA!

Occasional Pre-Show
Before WrestleMania 29 it was rumoured that Brock Lesnar vs The Rock was going to happen next year at WrestleMania 30, after getting injured at WrestleMania in his match with John Cena, Rock quickly left WWE and it has been said he will not wrestle again.

BUT

Could this have all been a ploy, at Summerslam Cm Punk will fight Brock Lesnar so what if The Rock attacked Brock thus setting up the WrestleMania Match and starting the fued.
 
No. I think The Rock learned the hard way that his movie career is more important than his wrestling career, after his injury following Wrestlemania. I would be VERY surprised to ever see him wrestle again.

Also, there's no logic to them starting a feud. Why on earth would The Rock show up - out of nowhere - to attack Brock?
 
I will be surprised if the Rock wrestles again. I am incredibly happy if he comes back. Announces he is retiring from wrestling and gains his rightful spot in the HOF. Even though its nice seeing these guys come back for a while it does take away spots from other younger guys. Its time to build up the next generation and stop looking in the past.
 
I wouldnt really want Rock to come back at Summerslam if anything have him come back the usual time. If we have to have Rock vs Brock I'd want Lesnar to win which I don't see happening since it most likely will be Rock's final match. But if thery're setting it up it won't be at Summerslam
 
No. I think The Rock learned the hard way that his movie career is more important than his wrestling career, after his injury following Wrestlemania. I would be VERY surprised to ever see him wrestle again.

Also, there's no logic to them starting a feud. Why on earth would The Rock show up - out of nowhere - to attack Brock?

I wouldn't be surprised to see him wrestle again... I would be surprised if it happened anytime soon. While his movie career was damaged slightly because of the injury, it was a small impact compared to the heights his career saw after returning to WWE. He was becoming a hollywood hack taking comedy roles and being shuffled around with the other C list stars. Tooth Fairy, Game Plan, Be Cool, even Doom was horrible.

Since his return, he's become a major player in the Fast franchise, had a solid box office with Journey 2, was picked to play one of the most recognizable GIJOEs, and is now being rumored to star with Arnold in the latest Terminator movie (and has been rumored to be in the running for a Star Wars Role).

When Rock completely distanced himself from wrestling, his box office drawing ability was a lot less than it is now. If he were to completely distance himself again, it could happen again. I see WM34-35 to be his next series of matches. It gives enough of a break that he can focus on his movies, but would feature a return before all the wrestling fans turned on him again. It would also have enough of a break that his return would feel special again.
 
I think the Rock got injured, realized "Holy shit. This could have ruined my career" and is officially done.

Personally I'm not sure why everyone wants to see a Rock-Brock match at Wrestlemania. Neither has anything to gain from it except a pay check. And since Lesnar just wants the money and doesn't care about wins and losses, a loss to someone up-and-coming would help someone else. Rock winning would do nothing for me if all he does is skip town again.
 
I agree. Not interested at all in Rock/Brock. I would rather see someone young get their spot on the card.
 
The Rock vs Brock Lesnar at WrestleMania XXX would awesome. The Rock will be back, the injury was not exactly a career ending one. Whilst I know he probably realized that it could have destroyed his acting career, He will still make a big return. The WWE and The Rock overplayed the whole injury angle to actually make it a surprise when he finally does return. I am not buying the whole story that he stormed out of Metlife stadium.

If he does return, I really don't see any other opponent left for him to face. He is not going to put over any young guy, he's too much of a draw for that. Brock Lesnar is the perfect guy for that feud.
 
No one cares about any of those facts you just mentioned. The IWC makes up about 10% of WWE fans and the rest are all casuals. Your average casual fan would love to see that match just for star power alone, The Rock has huge mainstream appeal and so does Brock Lesnar. All of your points are have basically no relevance.
 
It wouldn't makes sense, if you're suggesting Rock and WWE quietly put together a kayfabe injury storyline. First of all, there would be no logical reason to come up with a ploy for a planned Brock VS Rock match. And it wouldn't make sense for Rock to attack Brock. If an attack were to happen, it would be other way around, because Brock is the heel.

There's a lot of money in Rock's movie career, and if I remember correctly, Rock wasn't healthy enough to travel and promote Pain & Gain. I'm sure he took some heat for that, and Rock isn't going to jeopardize a career, where he can make millions of dollars without the brutal wear and tear life as a pro wrestler.

Also, I wouldn't be surprised to see Rock completely distance himself from WWE and pro wrestling again. That major injury had to be a wake up call for Rock, and he probably realized he can't do wrestling and movies at the same time, because the risks would outweigh the rewards.
 
If he does return, I really don't see any other opponent left for him to face. He is not going to put over any young guy, he's too much of a draw for that. Brock Lesnar is the perfect guy for that feud.

I agree Lesnar is a good choice for a feud I've been thinking maybe he could face Orton I mean Rock has faced Cena and Punk why not Orton he's probably considered a top guy (don't give hate it's my opinion)
 
No one cares about any of those facts you just mentioned. The IWC makes up about 10% of WWE fans and the rest are all casuals. Your average casual fan would love to see that match just for star power alone, The Rock has huge mainstream appeal and so does Brock Lesnar. All of your points are have basically no relevance.

First off, let me give you a little advice: If you're going to reference a previous post in a thread, quote it. That way, I can know which "facts that nobody cares about" that you're referencing.

Second, while I agree that the IWC DOES make up a VERY slim margin of the WWE fan demographic, and while I do agree that a Rock vs. Brock match would be a damn big WM draw, but in the VERY long term, what would it help? Both of these guys are as over as anyone will ever be. You see, promoters are GREAT at putting together shows that get that instant payday, and that's an important thing to do. But with a company as big as the WWE and the ability to sell tickets JUST by the brand name alone, you could pit The Rock against someone else and even if The Rock wins the match, that opponent will still get his name out there just for standing in the same ring with one of the most famous wrestlers of all time.
 
The only thing that was a "ploy" was the pretend injury. Does anybody actually still believe that was legit? Anybody who watched the match can tell you that neither man tore his abductor muscle off the bone. I don't care who you are, you don't continue to move normally with a muscle not attached to a bone. That muscle stops working when it's unattached, which means whatever its function (in this case, lateral movement of its respective leg) stops happening. Did either of The Rock's legs stop moving laterally? I sure didn't see it. And, before anybody brings it up, no, adrenaline does not cover up an injury like this. You see how Triple H no longer had use of his leg when he tore his quad off the bone? That's what happens when muscles are torn off the bone, adrenaline or not. The Rock might as well have said he severed his spinal column for as realistic as it is that he tore a muscle off the bone.

Not to mention the fact that he supposedly didn't know it until the next day(again, anybody would notice if their leg wasn't moving, and they would notice immediately), then he and his doctors supposedly elected to not have surgery and let the muscle roll up - again, no doctor would recommend this, and no athlete who ever had any intention of ever using his leg normally would agree to this. (Yes, I know he later "had surgery" that was obviously fake to anybody who saw the pics of him in the hospital and him with his doctor.)

Look, I don't know what the truth is. But I do know that what the dirt sheets are trying to make us believe - that The Rock was legitimately injured, didn't tell anybody, and no showed Raw without telling anyone because he was unhappy with the booking decisions - even though they obviously agreed to the plan before they ever started executing it, and there's no way in hell WWE expected him to be at Extreme Rules given the fact that he knew he'd be unavailable due to his Hercules filming schedule - is laughably, pathetically, and insultingly stupid and unrealistic on every level. It has more holes in it than Swiss cheese.

Seriously, why do so many people buy this crap without questioning it at all? I know I'm not the only one who doesn't take all of these stories as gospel without applying any common sense, but so many people do just that, and it drives me insane.
 
The only thing that was a "ploy" was the pretend injury. Does anybody actually still believe that was legit? Anybody who watched the match can tell you that neither man tore his abductor muscle off the bone. I don't care who you are, you don't continue to move normally with a muscle not attached to a bone. That muscle stops working when it's unattached, which means whatever its function (in this case, lateral movement of its respective leg) stops happening. Did either of The Rock's legs stop moving laterally? I sure didn't see it. And, before anybody brings it up, no, adrenaline does not cover up an injury like this. You see how Triple H no longer had use of his leg when he tore his quad off the bone? That's what happens when muscles are torn off the bone, adrenaline or not. The Rock might as well have said he severed his spinal column for as realistic as it is that he tore a muscle off the bone.

Not to mention the fact that he supposedly didn't know it until the next day(again, anybody would notice if their leg wasn't moving, and they would notice immediately), then he and his doctors supposedly elected to not have surgery and let the muscle roll up - again, no doctor would recommend this, and no athlete who ever had any intention of ever using his leg normally would agree to this. (Yes, I know he later "had surgery" that was obviously fake to anybody who saw the pics of him in the hospital and him with his doctor.)

Look, I don't know what the truth is. But I do know that what the dirt sheets are trying to make us believe - that The Rock was legitimately injured, didn't tell anybody, and no showed Raw without telling anyone because he was unhappy with the booking decisions - even though they obviously agreed to the plan before they ever started executing it, and there's no way in hell WWE expected him to be at Extreme Rules given the fact that he knew he'd be unavailable due to his Hercules filming schedule - is laughably, pathetically, and insultingly stupid and unrealistic on every level. It has more holes in it than Swiss cheese.

Seriously, why do so many people buy this crap without questioning it at all? I know I'm not the only one who doesn't take all of these stories as gospel without applying any common sense, but so many people do just that, and it drives me insane.

I've researched multiple places to find information on this type of injury, and they all say basically the same thing.

There are five adductor muscles, the pectineus, adductor brevis and adductor longus (called short adductors) go from the pelvis to the thigh bone and the gracilis and adductor magnus (long adductors) go from the pelvis to the knee. The main function of these muscles is to pull the legs together. They are also used quite a lot in sprinting, playing football, horse riding and hurdling. A rupture or tear in the muscle usually occurs when sprinting, twisting or when kicking something that doesn't move.



Symptoms include:

Tightening of the groin muscles that may not be present until the day after competition.
A sudden sharp pain in the groin area or adductor muscles.
Bruising or swelling (this might not occur until a couple of days after the initial injury)
Inability to contract the adductor muscles
A lump or gap in the adductor muscles.



Grade 1, 2 or 3?

Groin strains are graded 1, 2, or 3 depending on how bad they are.
The athlete with a grade 1 strain might feel mild discomfort, possibly a little tenderness at a particular point but no swelling.
A grade 2 strain might feel more painful with swelling, pain to touch, reduced range of motion and interference with running.
A grade 3 strain may be very painful, lots of swelling and total inability to run or even walk.

What can the athlete do?

Apply R.I.C.E. (Rest, Ice, Compression, Elevation) immediately.
Rest and use crutches if needed.
See a sports injury professional who can advise on rehabilitation of the injury.
For a grade 3 strain seek professional help immediately.

What can a sports injury specialist or doctor do?

Use ultrasound or laser treatment.
Use sports massage techniques after the acute phase (very important).
Operate if the muscle has torn completely.
Advise on a rehabilitation program consisting of soft tissue treatment, stretching, strengthening and sports massage..

In addition, I have personally had a similar injury, tearing the muscle almost completely from the bone. My doctor elected not to perform surgery, and the tear eventually healed on its own, although slowly. The pain was the worst I can remember in my entire life, at least until I got my pain meds, and even then it was bad enough to make it difficult to do anything, even sleep. But, I only missed a half-day of work with the injury (the time I spent to go see my doctor). Just because you don't believe something doesn't make it untrue. The fact that you believe someone bailed out on a promotional tour that could have potentially cost the film company millions of dollars just to avoid tying up a wrestling storyline leads me to believe that you are the one lacking in common sense.

That all being said, the OP doesn't make a lot of sense either. What exactly would be the Rock's motivation for attacking Brock? It's not like they actually ran the angle of Brock attacking him the night after Wrestlemania. It would be totally random, and therefore vastly unlikely.
 
There is absolutely no reason whatsoever for The Rock to just turn up out of the blue and randomly attack Brock Lesnar, especially when he's fighting CM Punk
 
The Rock making a shock appearance isn't likely. If they are going to convince him to do a show than they will advertise it so that buyrates/ratings will be higher.

The idea of Rock v Brock is something I'd be up for; however, The Rock would be making a serious decision getting in the ring with Brock. Look at his matches with HHH and especially Cena - they have been brutal and injury is much more of a possibility.

I don't think The Rock will appear at SummerSlam but I do think he will wrestle at WM30. Will it be against Brock? I have my doubts but I'm sure he will be involved.
 
I agree. Not interested at all in Rock/Brock. I would rather see someone young get their spot on the card.

Like Ziggler vs Bryan main event? LOL, yeh that will really draw.

Rock is nowhere near done with Wrestling. People have said this before but he came back. The injury caused a few problems but The Rock doesnt just call it quits and that is that. The Rock has his retirement match and that is a fact.

Rock will be at Mania 30 in some capacity. Maybe not a match just yet, but he isnt done yet.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,837
Messages
3,300,747
Members
21,726
Latest member
chrisxenforo
Back
Top