How would you feel if a part-timer VS part-timer match headlined Wrestlemania?

[Creepy Old Man]

If Rock vs. Triple H happens, then it demands the main event. Rock vs. Brock? Seems like a lock to close WM if it happens. Sting vs. Undertaker? Could feasibly headline as well.

How would you feel about two ageing part-timers closing the show? Sure, it would draw, but what about the future? Should an older talent be headlining along with a younger guy to give him the "rub"?

 

[LuckyLouie]

It all depends on how it is built.
If they go with Rock vs HHH it could be great or forced like the Punk vs Rock.
Guys like HHH, Austin, Rock, HBK, Taker have earned a few things that lets them close mania.

 

[Brushfire]

I have to say that despite the draw that these guys are I'd much prefer it was given to someone that actually works every date for the company, that works house shows and busts their ass off every day to get there than someone earn fucking huge money for one month of gym time, a couple of television appearances and then the main event. There will still be a debate as to whether Roman Reigns deserves that spot but I'd rather it him than Rock, Triple H, or even Sting. The only way to build new stars and stop relying on glorified guest appearances from part-timers that have no desire to work a full-time schedule is to actually let them main event and become stars in their own right instead of slotting the guys that might actually get over in the mid-card or these "semi-main event" spots.

 

[L@RISANO]

Whatever match happens, it will depend on how strong of a build it gets to justify it.

I'm still waiting to see how much momentum Roman Reigns can build before judging how much of a good idea it would be for him to headline Mania 31. I do think he has the ability, but given the booking of Lesnar, Reigns will need a shitload of momentum if the Main Event between the 2 is to work out for the better in the long term, especially for Reigns himself.


However, if say, Brock vs Rock is to happen, I think the mere fact that both have a huge following outside of WWE, means that such a match would be a definite Headliner and money-maker for the company and would also greatly interest the casuals as well, epic build or not.


I, for one, don't see anything other than a title match headlining Mania anyways, unless it involves 2 Faces of the company(Stone Cold vs Cena, for eg.) or it involves guys with outside interests(Brock vs Rock).
Matches like Rock vs HHH/Taker vs Sting/Cena vs Hogan...if they happen would not likely headline the event,lMO, unless the title belt is bizzarely involved.


So, basically, for me, it is the Storyline that plays out which interests me most, and obviously the characters/superstars in the storyline have to be good as well.

 

[LBGetBack]

It really depends on how over the feud is, and how well built the match is. If it's Rock/Brock or Rock/HHH and the fans are insanely into it? Go for it.

Look at WrestleMania 18. Rock/Hogan should've went last. Hogan was a part timer, and while maybe the Rock wasn't quite that just yet, the writing was on the wall and everyone knew his days were numbered. Jericho/HHH going on last actually hurt that match. The fans left it all out there for the Hogan/Rock match. They had nothing left. Jericho/HHH probably would've gotten a much better crowd reaction if it went on earlier because the match was actually pretty good.

 

[Aquaman6686]

Depends on who it is and how the match is built. A guy like Brock Lesnar doesn't deserve to headline WrestleMania, because he doesn't care about the business and didn't put the time in to be a true legend. Guys like The Rock, Hulk Hogan, Undertaker, Triple H, Chris Jericho, those guys EARNED the right to work the part-time events and be treated as special. Lesnar didn't.

 

[HurriKane]

I don't care really. If the build is good, and the match lives up to it, I don't care what the main-event is really.

I would love to see Cesaro, Bryan, Wyatt, or even Roman Reigns main event WM.

But I would be lying, if I said I didn't want to see a Sting Vs The Undertaker, or Sting Vs Triple H main event WM. Or hell The Rock Vs Triple H or The Rock Vs Brock Lesnar again.

But I

 

[FreezeIzGAWD]

Only do wrestling NERDS just throw away longevity and make it a bad thing. If the guys can still DRAW and can still go why not? I hate hearing what about the new guys? Fuck them....

They want the spot then get yourself in a position in which people want to see you. Period. No one wanted to see Husky Harris. Matter of fact did you smarks forget when Wyatt debuted you were dissing him by chanting the name. Why don't you do it anymore? He put HIMSELF in a position where you couldn't. Their are a lot of young undefeated boxing champs out there soooooooooo should the young guns get the spot or 2 old past their prime guys like Pacquaio and Mayweather? I mean shit Floyd only fights one maybe twice a year. Why should he go last? Their are guys who fight 4-6 times a year. What has he done to ALWAYS get the last spot? What about the Rolling Stones? Why should those old bastards be able to close the night on their 50 year anniversary tour? I know a mean group of young guys who rip up every show in Patucka Kansas and although NO ONE but the people in that area knows them man they can ROCK ALL NIGHT. Plus they have an underground fan base that moves 675,000 units without AIRPLAY!!!! How dare the Stones end the night when it's all about the young kids!!!!!! SEE HOW FREAKIN DUMB THAT SOUNDS?

The reason the part timers get to HO last is because they ARE THE BIG MONEY!

PERIOD!!!

U don't like it? BECOME THE BIG MONEY!!!

All the part timers at one time were NOT the main event. The Rock, SCSA, BROCK, Sting. Taker, Triple H all at one time were mid or low cards but they kept working and when they got the chance they grabbed the ball and scored. You want to Main Event.

BECOME A MAIN EVENT PLAYER AND QUIT BITCHIN LIKE SOME HOES!!!!!!

 

[Zycho32]

Only do wrestling NERDS just throw away longevity and make it a bad thing. If the guys can still DRAW and can still go why not? I hate hearing what about the new guys? Fuck them....

They want the spot then get yourself in a position in which people want to see you. Period. No one wanted to see Husky Harris. Matter of fact did you smarks forget when Wyatt debuted you were dissing him by chanting the name. Why don't you do it anymore? He put HIMSELF in a position where you couldn't. Their are a lot of young undefeated boxing champs out there soooooooooo should the young guns get the spot or 2 old past their prime guys like Pacquaio and Mayweather? I mean shit Floyd only fights one maybe twice a year. Why should he go last? Their are guys who fight 4-6 times a year. What has he done to ALWAYS get the last spot? What about the Rolling Stones? Why should those old bastards be able to close the night on their 50 year anniversary tour? I know a mean group of young guys who rip up every show in Patucka Kansas and although NO ONE but the people in that area knows them man they can ROCK ALL NIGHT. Plus they have an underground fan base that moves 675,000 units without AIRPLAY!!!! How dare the Stones end the night when it's all about the young kids!!!!!! SEE HOW FREAKIN DUMB THAT SOUNDS?

The reason the part timers get to HO last is because they ARE THE BIG MONEY!

PERIOD!!!

U don't like it? BECOME THE BIG MONEY!!!

All the part timers at one time were NOT the main event. The Rock, SCSA, BROCK, Sting. Taker, Triple H all at one time were mid or low cards but they kept working and when they got the chance they grabbed the ball and scored. You want to Main Event.

BECOME A MAIN EVENT PLAYER AND QUIT BITCHIN LIKE SOME HOES!!!!!!

Whelp, I do agree that the Part-Timers in question offer a grander mainstream appeal, which in turn attracts the draws and the money... the problem is, and this is amplified by how strangely out of touch Vince is, how exactly can a Present-Timer outside of John Cena prove he's main event material and is justified being in the same stratosphere as these living legends?

Now, it's not WCW in the 90's or TNA at the turn of this decade- where old 'Legends' for lack of a better word were inserted ahead of the younger talents without rhyme or reason and probably anyone who tried to barge in got squashed in the ring and backstage for it- but the same overall sense of inbreeding exists in the current format. In fact, it's starting to transcend and nullify the notion that the Full-Timers can prove their worth on merit alone; CM Punk pretty much proved THAT reality when he outright said Vince brought back Batista as the Heroic Babyface for Wrestlemania 30. Just like that; right into the Main Event picture, even though this time around there was a genuine Full-Timer who at the very least had the crowds in the palm of his hand in Daniel Bryan, who had a storyline tailor-fucking-made for that Main Event. And the plan was to knock him all the way down to face Sheamus. (Note: I've desperately maintained that incident was a swerve of massive proportions, but I can't hide behind that theory any more, and there's only the after-effect of wanting to vomit despite how the result ultimately paid off)

The Batista Push as I'll call it is really a personification of how embracing Part-Time Superstars and Legends can in fact be done in the wrong way; when that attention is at the expense of the Full-Timers. A guy like Undertaker by contrast was at least in a consistant position to elevate talent when he wasn't having an Epic Program with HBK or keeping HHH out of anyone else's momentum, ergo a method of pushing Part-Time talent done right.

To sum up; you can rock with the old-timers all you want, but you have to elevate the young bucks too, regardless of whether they 'deserve' it, else you just keep going back to that slowly-drying well over and over and over and over and... well, you get the idea.

 

[bioshock]

It all depends on how it is built.
If they go with Rock vs HHH it could be great or forced like the Punk vs Rock.
Guys like HHH, Austin, Rock, HBK, Taker have earned a few things that lets them close mania.

That is a dumb thing to think, do you imagine Austin would of been happy if lets say Bob Backlund and Rowdy Piper were the main event of Wrestlemania 14 or 15? Just because "they have earned a few things, let them close mania".

Comes a point when the past is the past. You go with what gets you to the dance. Austin and Rock doesn't become who they are in wrestling if they were the undercard in their prime to old hacks well past their prime.

I've never been in favor of old stars in the main event, what did that ever do for WCW? WCW put old stars in the main event scene for 12 months a year, and WWE tries doing it for its biggest shows. Its something that just doesn't favor the company over time.

 

[Rocky84]

Rock vs HHH would never be the last match of Mania. Triple H hasn't had the last match in ages, and the Rock has had matches with older guys like Austin and Hogan as co-main events while letting the younger guys get the spotlight (Jericho, Angle, Brock) ahead of him, so he's no stranger to that.

These two know (as we all should) that this has co-main written all over it and that a Roman Reigns vs John Cena or Reigns vs Brock match should go on last.

 

[chuckmdubya]

A really good legends match that practically no one is talking about would be Austin vs Sting. These are two guys, neither of them too old, neither of them out of shape, and they were the two biggest faces on their respective sides of the Monday night wars. This is a huge draw for wrestling fans, a match that probably happened vs stunning Steve, but never against Stone Cold. If Austin can do a match without a big risk of injury, I'd much rather see Sting than Hogan, HHH, or the Rock, or Lesnar.

 

[luxferre]

If it was the right match i'd have no problem with it. A Rock vs HHH match for me isn't a main event match. Been there, done that. I'd put that match before the main event.
A Rock vs Brock match would be a main event.. only worked a few house shows together and one ppv. Given the success both have had within WWE and away from it it's a natural headliner.

I can see the argument as to not having them there but there's a reason Vince keeps calling them up. All year the guys have been delivering average buy-rates, low ratings etc... Big name returns shift the needle and put focus on the guys from fans who wouldn't normally watch.

 

[kadroan]

If Rock vs. Triple H happens, then it demands the main event. Rock vs. Brock? Seems like a lock to close WM if it happens. Sting vs. Undertaker? Could feasibly headline as well.

How would you feel about two ageing part-timers closing the show? Sure, it would draw, but what about the future? Should an older talent be headlining along with a younger guy to give him the "rub"?

It depends on how the storyline is built. I feel like Rock/HHH would be forced since they don't have nothing major to fight for. Rock/Brock, I'm assuming Rock wins the Rumble. Sting/Taker, dream match.

The future just have to make the most of their opportunity regardless their position on the card.

 

[HBKistheHOF]

By biggest issue with it is that I simply have little to no interest in seeing most of the purposed part-timer vs. part-timer matches.

Rock vs. HHH has already been done to death & there is no way it's going to be better than it was in the 90's, Brock vs. Rock was a great one off Summerslam main event but I don't have any interest in seeing it again & once again it most likely wouldn't be half as good as it was back in 2002, etc.

The only part-timer vs. part-timer match that would be truly worthy of closing Mania these days IMO would be Sting vs. The Undertaker & frankly I think it's much better left as a dream match that never was. Both men are quite old now & I just don't know if it would even live up to the hype anymore. Not to mention, personally after seeing Taker's somewhat poor Mania performance last year & the end of The Streak, I'd really just prefer to see Taker retired at this point & preserve what's left of his legacy.

 

[Judah's Lion]

speaking of part-timer vs. part-timer headlining Mania, does anyone remember two years ago when two part-time guys were in the main event / co-main event? Triple H vs. Brock Lesnar for sure had a lot of focus and attention and time devoted to it, even though it was a rematch from SummerSlam the year prior.

yeah, at Mania 28, Rock/Cena was the main event at Mania even though neither guy had a title on the line. but it was a dream match and at least one of those guys was a full-time performer. and when it happened a year later, the World Title was in fact on the line. so it made a little more sense.

what didn't make sense to me, at the time and even now looking back on it, was Brock Lesnar vs. Triple H, the rematch, as the co-main event at Mania, with nothing on the line. nobody ever once believed that Triple H would actually lose and retire, so yeah, nothing on the line.

when Brock/Taker happened last year, another example of two part-timers getting a great spot on the biggest card of the year, at least the Streak was on the line.

all of that to say that I am not a fan of the proposed part-time vs. part-time guy as the main event of Mania. you can book the match, give it a proper build with lots of time and effort put into the story, but let the last match on the grandest stage go to at least one guy that will be at work the next day.

like him or not, I think CM Punk would agree with me.

 

[Dave]

When I write this response, I am thinking about the future. And for that reason, I don't think I would like to see this happen.

There can be no doubt that any combination of The Rock, Triple, The Undertaker, Sting or Brock Lesnar will take the main event at WrestleMania. But am I the only one who feels as though doing this is like a massive “fuck you” to the people who are constantly putting in the work for the WWE week in and week out? I know it has been said by many but I just feel as though you should be concentrating on building stars to get to the same level as some of these guys, rather than constantly booking the old guard over those who will carry your company forward into the future.

Think about it like this, when Sting, Taker, Triple H and The Rock are gone forever, and the day will come. Who is going to take the company on their shoulders? Who is going to main event the biggest show of them all? And, more importantly, who is going to do it and make us believe that they truly deserve it? With the obvious exceptions of Cena and Orton, who really looks like they could be a main event talent at this point? No one. Even Daniel Bryan only got there because of his gimmick and the way he carried himself throughout the Yes Movement; it was inevitable that it would happen.

With CM Punk leaving the company, so did the future. Ryback isn't the answer, neither is Seth Rollins for that matter. I look at the roster and just can't imagine the future. So, for that reason, I would like to see someone who works full time get the rub of being the main guy at a WrestleMania. I think, at this point in time, the WWE needs it more than anything else. They are so light on real “stars” that it is about time they start creating some.

 

[Mustang Sally]

Admittedly, there's a part of me that rebels at the idea. I watch WWE every week, become invested in the characters and storylines put in front of us, and figure it's correct and logical that the monthly pay-per-views feature those same characters. That an occasional part-timer or "guest" will show up and wrestle one of the regular guys is fine with me, especially when it qualifies as a genuine "event".....as did John Cena vs. the Rock.

But even while the notion of two guys who don't perform for WWE on a regular basis being pitted against one another goes against the grain.....in the end, it's the match-up that counts. Especially as a WWE Network subscriber, I'm willing to take this "special" contest as just one part of the whole PPV.

Is it a match I'd be interested in seeing? Could I work up a rooting interest for one competitor or the other? Do I care about who wins and who loses?

If the answer to all three question is "yes".....then it's fine with me to have it on the program.

The day after, I can bitch & moan all I want on this forum about whether the match merited top billing......but on Sunday night, the only thing that matters is whether I enjoyed watching the fight.

 

[Reflection]

Rock vs Brock, Sting vs Undertaker, Stone Cold vs Triple-H- I wouldn't mind any of them. The reason is simple- I've stopped using an over-smarky perspective to look at things. I just want to be entertained, and I have come to terms with the fact that they are more entertaining than the likes of John Cena, Big Show, Kane and Bray Wyatt. A good part of me still wants a younger superstar to win the World Championship on the biggest night, but I won't be sad about him not getting the final match.

 

[The Boss]

Well, seeing as how I want to see Brock Lesnar defend the WWE World title against HOLLYWOOD HULK HOGAN anyways, I would be perfectly fine with two part timers main eventing WrestleMania. Especially with the lack of main event faces at the moment. With CM Punk leaving, Cena having already wrestled Brock 4 times (after the Royal Rumble), Daniel Bryan out for an unknown period of time and Sheamus also out injured, the choice for opponents for Lesnar is limited.

Even with the return of Roman Reigns expected soon, I don't feel that he is ready nor would there likely be time to build up a match since Reigns has no history as a main eventer nor does he have any history with Lesnar. HOLLYWOOD HULK HOGAN however has both. He has a history with Lesnar and of course decades as a main eventer.

Ironically, had CM Punk not left like a crybaby for not getting to main event WrestleMania, he would likely get the spot for the same reasons mentioned above.

 

[Dagger Dias]

It depends on who is competing in the match, but for the most part I'd really not want to see it happen. They need to rely more on the guys who are there all year long and try to make future stars of tomorrow before they run out of legends who can come back and work a good match, let alone close the show. I've stated this many time before, I firmly believe the World Heavyweight Championship needs to go on last unless there is a huge dream match on the card. If Triple H were facing Sting at Wrestlemania, but the same card had Seth Rollins VS Dean Ambrose VS Roman Reigns in a triple threat for the World Heavyweight Championship, then the latter needs to go on last. Even if it IS Sting's first Wrestlemania. I'd even argue if they did Sting VS Undertaker that it should not go on last.

There are only so many dream matches that are big enough that they should close the show. John Cena VS The Rock was big enough to go on last and it still had a full-time member of the roster wrestling in the match. Very few possibilities are available when looking at the part-time legends for matches that can and SHOULD go on last. The number is even less when you narrow it down to part-timer VS part-timer matches. There's really no matchup that comes to mind that I'd want to see close the show at a Wrestlemania between two part-timers anymore. The World Championship match should go last anyway, Flair said so himself, and the part-timers should NOT be holding the belt now that there's only one World Championship. I won't even start on Lesnar, that's a whole other issue.