Why Did Punk Lose to Lesnar?

[spiketbear]

This has been rolling around in my mind since Summerslam. At first I was angry that CM Punk lost to Lesnar. Punk is my 3rd favorite wrestler after Undertaker and Kane. Some really snarky conspiracy theories were brewing. After all, since Lesnar has returned, both Cena and Triple H have been booked to beat him. Why not Punk?

I was thinking that the WWE "powers that be" were still not respecting Punk's abilities and thinking of him as the main eventer that so many of us know him to be. After all, they haven't booked him to win many high profile matches, except against Cena, and those were with interference. Punk has lost to Randy Orton, Triple H, The Rock, Undertaker, and Lesnar when they were in the spotlight. This really grinds my gears since I know Punk has the potential to be the face of the company, and an even better one than Cena.

Then I had an idea. Maybe this loss to Lesnar is just like Triple H's loss to Lesnar at last year's Summerslam. It is building to greater things for Punk in the future. When I think of it this way, it doesn't seem that bad that Punk lost to all of those main guys. It really is an honor that the WWE even booked Punk to face The Rock, Undertaker and Lesnar at all. Not many people get that honor. Both of these losses seem to be stepping stones for a massive push Punk will receive along the road to Wrestlemania.

Here's what I think the main events will be in the coming months, all culminating in a well deserved main event at Wrestlemania for Punk:


Night of Champions:

-Punk beats Mr. Perfect Jr., and right before he gets his hands on Heyman, The Shield beats down Punk. This officially puts Heyman in the Corporation's corner and Punk in Bryan's corner. In the coming months, the two will team up (with much fanfare) in multiple tag matches against corporate/heel teams like Orton and Ryback.

-Daniel Bryan is about to beat Orton when the Shield runs in and beats Bryan to a pulp, giving him the win by DQ.

-RVD is about to beat Del Rio, when Ricardo turns back into a heel and sides with Del Rio. He hits RVD with a bucket or something and Del Rio wins.


Battleground:

-Punk gets an Intercontinental title match with Axel and wins.

-Bryan gets another rematch for the WWE Title. It's under whatever stipulation Battleground is supposed to be. Either way, Bryan gets ganged up on by the Corporation and is pinned by Orton.

-RVD defeats Del Rio for the World title.


Hell in a Cell:

-Punk successfully defends the Intercontinental title to an up and coming heel like Fandango.

-Bryan finally defeats Orton for the WWE title in a Last Chance Hell in a Cell match.

-RVD successfully defends the World title against Del Rio in a cell.


Survivor Series:

-Bryan has to defend the WWE title in a gauntlet match against all three members of the Shield and Randy Orton. If anyone on Orton's gauntlet wins, then Orton wins the WWE title. Bryan is able to defeat all four men.

-RVD defends the World title in a traditional Survivor Series match. If his team wins, he retains the title. If his team loses, he loses the title to whoever made the final pin. Punk is on RVD's team. RVD's team wins.


TLC:

-Punk successfully defends the Intercontinental title against Alberto Del Rio in a Chairs Match.

-Bryan successfully defends the WWE Title against Orton in a Ladder Match.

-RVD successfully defends the World title against Ryback in a Tables Match. After the match, Ryback attacks RVD from behind and Shellshocks him repeatedly. Damien Sandow cashes in his Money in the Bank and becomes the World Heavyweight Champion.


Royal Rumble:

The Mcmahons hand pick an opponent who is capable of taking down the biggest thorn in their side, Daniel Bryan. They choose Brock Lesnar to be Bryan's opponent for the WWE title. At the end of the last Raw before the Rumble, Paul Heyman is seen handing a stack of cash to the McMahons. This is to ensure Punk gets a pathetic draw in the Rumble Match.

-Daniel Bryan can not overcome the overwhelming odds of being attacked by Triple H, Orton, and the Shield, and loses the WWE title to Brock Lesnar.

-Damien Sandow successfully defends the World Title against RVD.

-In the Royal Rumble, Punk comes out at No. 2. He outlasts returning stars like Sheamus and John Cena, and last throws out Orton to win. Naturally, Punk immediately announces that he will be facing either Daniel Bryan or Brock Lesnar for the WWE title at Wrestlemania.


Elimination Chamber:

-Punk loses the Intercontinental Title to Ryback. With lots of interference.

-WWE Champion Brock Lesnar vs Daniel Bryan is held with Triple H as the guest referee. Lesnar wins.

-Once again, Damien Sandow successfully defends the World Title against RVD.

-Cody Rhodes wins the Elimination Chamber match to determine the number one contender for the World title.


Wrestlemania:

-Kofi Kingston defeats Dean Ambrose for the USA title.

-Prime Time Players defeat the Shield to win the Tag Team titles.

-Daniel Bryan defeats Triple H with the Yes Lock.

-The Undertaker defeats John Cena and retains his streak, then retires.

-Cody Rhodes defeats Damien Sandow for the World title.

-Dolph Ziggler defeats Ryback for the Intercontinental title.

-Cm Punk defeats Brock Lesnar for the WWE Title.


There's Punk's long awaited Wrestlemania moment. Well, a man can dream, can't he?

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I read a report after SummerSlam that alleges the ending of the Punk vs. Lesnar match was changed just days before the match itself. The rumor, at least this was the rumor at the time and I haven't read anything to suggest differently, was that The Undertaker informed WWE officials that he would take on Brock Lesnar at WM XXX. As a result of this alleged verification of Taker vs. Lesnar, WWE officials didn't want Lesnar going into WM XXX with a 2-3 ppv record since his return. It's also been stated by various sites & reports that Lesnar isn't expected to return to WWE television until sometime after the new year, possibly on the night after the Royal Rumble, to begin the build for is match against Taker.

So that's the rumored reason why Punk lost to Lesnar. If it's legit, then it's understandable when you consider Taker vs. Lesnar is a big money match for WM. Lesnar is really the only major star in WWE of the past 15+ years or so that's ever really gotten the better of Taker all in all. They only wrestled a handful of times but Lesnar always managed to come out on top, usually with Heyman's aid, but Lesnar's clean win over Taker at HIAC was a major moment for Lesnar. Given the overall state of Taker's health, the fact that Lesnar always came out ahead against him and Lesnar's legit badass credentials; WWE will have no problem booking Lesnar as a massive threat to the streak.

 

[rge2010]

Lesnar is a beast and Lesnar is money. Having the skinny fat guy beat him would do nothing for his characters credibility. At leats with Cena and Triple H beating him it looked believable but he got the better of Trips anyway. It would be nice if somehow Lesnar could avenge his Cena loss but doubt that will happen.

Taker vs Lesnar = yes please. That is a cracking main event. Throw in Cena vs Orton, Bryan vs Punk and Rock vs Triple H and they will break records.

 

[kingofkings1]

This is really an awesome post.
I feel that wwe gave lesnar a win over punk and in return wwe may give a punk a win over lesnar at wm30.
As you remember, paul heyman said, ''i would like to see brock face punk at wm30 for unified world title & i would like to be in corner of any 1 (whether brock or punk).''
hence punk will win and become the first unified wwe world champion.

 

[nxtgeneration]

I like the idea, but i still think the biggest and best match possible at wrestlemania is CM Punk v John Cena, whether it is for a world title or not. I could see Punk and Heyman/Axel join either side of the corporation towards summerslam and be in a traditional survivor series match up: Shield, Orton and Axel v Bryan, Punk, Ziggler, Show and Kofi. Towards Rumble, have Cena start some promo's on HHH and the Corporation. In the rumble match, have Shield decimate Punk, when cena comes out and saves him. Punk gets annoyed at the "Hero" coming to save the day , and eliminates Cena. At Elimination Chamber, Punk and Cena are in Chamber match, where Punk starts the match and cena comes in last. Punk gets frustrated and unleashes in a post-EC raw promo, demanding he starts to get the respect Cena recieves. Ends with Cena v Punk in WM moment. Punk would still be a "face" to the older audience, and this would create an epic atmosphere, ending show with Punk finally beating "the man". my card:

Kidd v Axel
Rhodes v Sandow
Orton v Ziggler
HHH v Bryan
Taker v Barrett
Big E v Ryback
Rock v Brock
Shield v RVD, Jericho and Big Show
Cena v Punk

 

[sdelfin]

I think the WWE booking is pretty good right now. A year and a half ago, not so much. Someone mentioned that there are reports that Undertaker has agreed to face Lesnar at Wrestlemania, which is a good reason to have Lesnar beat Punk. Aside from that, WWE made it so Lesnar pretty much had to beat Punk by not having any clue what to do with Lesnar when he came back. Lesnar, as a special attraction, is in a position where his win/loss record actually matters for him to remain a PPV draw. Having Lesnar lose to both Cena and Triple H was a mistake which left them no room to book Punk to beat him if they were so inclined. The loss to Cena was particularly dumb. Cena was coming off a big loss to the Rock, so of course they had Cena lose by pin to Tensai two weeks before his match with Lesnar. They weren't going to have him lose three big matches so close together. The match with Lesnar was no count out and no DQ which gave them few option. Better to hold off on Cena/Tensai, then perhaps use Tensai to have Brock beat Cena(after a strong comeback). Having Lesnar take those early losses was a big mistake.

 

[Dirk]

At first I was angry that CM Punk lost to Lesnar.

This is not very bear-like behaviour...

This really grinds my gears
since I know Punk has the potential to be the face
of the company, and an even better one than
Cena.

Neither is this...

As to why Lesnar lost to Punk, here are my guesses:
*Lesnar has and will always be a monster, so he has to be booked like one. Don't know exactly why he lost to Trips recently (except the obvious ego-stroking), but he needs some credibility if he's going to be a threat in the future.
*It sets up for a rematch that Punk will win. That sets up the rubber match that Punk will probably win, seeing as he's a more permanent feature than Lesnar and could do more with the momentum.

The Undertaker informed
WWE officials that he would take on Brock Lesnar
at WM XXX.

If this is true, Lesnar winning makes even more sense. Personally, I wouldn't care for Lesnar v Taker, but it'll bring in money, so it's fine. I just hope the WWE is happy with their usage of the Deadman's last few matches...

 

[Mustang Sally]

Lesnar is a beast and Lesnar is money. Having the skinny fat guy beat him would do nothing for his characters credibility.

Yes, damaging the aura of Lesnar is something that would require a top-flight opponent, one who is physically imposing as well as a compelling character.

C.M. Punk is not physically imposing. John Cena as a foe for Brock?.....fine. Triple H?.....fine. But Punk is very narrow shouldered, with little muscular definition and a bit of flab around his middle. He simply doesn't look as if he could defeat Brock Lesnar, and no matter how much ring skill a guy is supposed to have, the company realizes there might be a point past which the public won't accept a "giant killer" as far as what they're seeing before their eyes.

You can argue that they're accomplishing this very thing right now with Daniel Bryan cleanly defeating John Cena.....and you'd be right. But Daniel is on a unique program at this time and, small as he is, if they don't have him slaying giants, there's no oomph to his mission. But if we're going to see little guys beating big ones all the time, why not throw Kaitlyn in against Brock and see how she does? If it's all scripted, maybe she could bring it off, huh?

Plus, there's Brock Lesnar to consider. Remember back when he objected to being matched against Hardcore Holly because he didn't think Holly was enough of an opponent for him? Face it, Brock is going to have some input, too. If they don't at least listen to his words, he'd probably be happy to not renew his contract next time it comes up. It might be he wanted to protect his image by not losing to someone as small as Punk. Just a thought.

Yes, Brock and Punk put on a fine match; the "science" of performance art wrestling allowed for that. But what do you think would happen if Phil Brooks had a shoot fight with Brock Lesnar in the locker room?

Stuff like this has to be considered.

 

[The Eighties]

I've never had trouble buying that a smaller guy can beat the bigger guy, even the mighty Lesnar, especially when a guy actually is trained in disciplines as opposed to being muscle for show.

Punk vs Lesnar for Mania is possible and could be the final chapter in the saga with Heyman, but Lesnar vs Taker seems more likely sadly.

 

[Kodo Sawaki]

Its simple, he lost because the rivalrly would go on. If you look at WWE scene at the moment only rivalry that is "big" is "Corporate vs Bryan" and "Punk vs Heyman". Since it might be too early to put him in "Corporation" storyline he can continue with this for some time.

If he lost to Brock, then rivalry would go nowhere. I mean, are we suppose to believe that Heyman and Axel could beat Punk if Lesnar and heyman couldnt do it. He gave very good match and proved that he can be "toe to toe" with Brock. Dont see that losing against such opponent can damage Punk in any way...

 

[spiketbear]

Thanks for the responses and compliments, guys!!

So, many of you think there will be a rematch of Punk vs. Lesnar at Wrestlemania, while some of you think Punk will face Bryan and Lesnar will face Undertaker. Another possibility is trying to recapture the MitB spark and have Punk take the title off of Cena at WM. I'm OK with this either way. These are all potentially incredible matches. My personal preference is probably Punk vs Lesnar, since that is the one that could get Punk the most mainstream media coverage. Either way, I think he deserves his main event moment next year. He's earned it.

 

[MCMG]

Lesnar is a beast and Lesnar is money. Having the skinny fat guy beat him would do nothing for his characters credibility. At leats with Cena and Triple H beating him it looked believable but he got the better of Trips anyway. It would be nice if somehow Lesnar could avenge his Cena loss but doubt that will happen.

I disagree. I think Lesnar's reputation is something that cannot be hurt even with a loss to Punk.

I think that we could see a re-match between Punk and Lesnar at Wrestlemania. Everyone enjoyed the first match and there is no doubt the match will be entertaining. There is still the Paul Heyman factor - we know how good he is, so the rematch will be adequately hyped. If there is a rematch I think they should put the World title on the line. I think we could see Punk take the belt of Del Rio, hold it until after WM30 and then drop it to Sandow. Alternatively, giving Lesnar the belt could entice him into doing more shows; however, he was a champion in the UFC so why would he care for a "fake belt".

 

[dtroppe]

The reason Lesner won is obvious, to keep him credible and to have something to remind the fans of coming into Mania season.

Lesner is a bigger draw than Punk, and its important to keep him looking like a Beast in order to include a decent name on the WM card.

 

[pepentorresHHH]

Why cant CM Punk beat a legend? HHH beat him aftr 3 pedigrees and a jacknife powerbomb but sucked out steam from the Summer of Punk.
The Rock ended his 434 day title reign and retained at EC.....
Taker beat hom for the belt back in 09 for th belt and now at Wrestlemania to reretain the streak .... The STREAK
And noe Brock has beaten him to head to his match with Taker at WM XXX with a 3-2 record....

Bad timing is all as far as Punk goes i presume..... He is over, a main eventer when wins and losses dont hurt him i guess?

 

[Headman]

Because everytime Brock loses he loses value. Punk being a full time guy can take a loss and rebuild momentum but for Brock the big matches are all he has. He should rarely lose until the end of their working agreement.

 

[LSN80]

After all, since Lesnar has returned, both Cena and Triple H have been booked to beat him. Why not Punk?

It's a hard truth for some of the IWC to swallow, but John Cena and even an in-retirement HHH are bigger stars than CM Punk, by a large margain. They're also imposing figures that, when you look at them, you can see them having a chance to beat Lesnar in a fight. And even in the cases of both men who beat Lesnar, there were extenuating circumstances.

A. Cena beat Lesnar after being dominated by him, essentially hitting a 'home run shot' on Lesnar when he got too cocky and drilled him in the head with a steel chain, then gave him an AA on the steps. Some people may just remember that Cena won the match, but it was a dominant performance by Lesnar.

B. HHH beat Lesnar, yes, but lost to him twice as well. He was beaten cleanly with no interference in their Summerslam match, and Lesnar broke HHH's arm. The match in which HHH won? He had HBK ringside, which more then negated Heyman's interference on Lesnar's behalf.

You can argue that they're accomplishing this very thing right now with Daniel Bryan cleanly defeating John Cena.....and you'd be right. But Daniel is on a unique program at this time and, small as he is, if they don't have him slaying giants, there's no oomph to his mission. But if we're going to see little guys beating big ones all the time, why not throw Kaitlyn in against Brock and see how she does? If it's all scripted, maybe she could bring it off, huh?

This is a great point to consider, especially about throwing any competitor in against Lesnar and having them beat him, and the correlation between Bryan beating Cena yet Punk not beating Lesnar. Here's the difference: Bryan beat Cena in a wrestling match, where-as Lesnar beat Punk in a fight. Both there are believable scenarios. Punk beating Lesnar or, furthering the analogy, Bryan beating Cena in a fight, is truly stretching any logic.

1. This was a fight, not a wrestling match. Brock Lesnar, youngest WWE Champion in history and former UFC Champion, against CM Punk. Punk's accomplished much in his wrestling career, but this match was No-DQ, and very much a brawl. And a fight between Brock Lesnar and CM Punk favors Lesnar, plain and simple. Punk got in an incredible amount of offense against the former UFC Champion, and even had what appeared to be 3 on Lesnar after hitting the GTS had Heyman not interfered. Punk's loss ultimately came at his own hands, essentially, as his obsession with getting his hands on Heyman cost him the match.

Punk was incredibly protected in this match and lost nothing in defeat, truly.

2. Punk beats Lesnar, and the feud ends right there. So they've put together this match between Punk and Axel/Heyman, which is obviously a step down from Punk/Lesnar. But all things being equal, both Axel and Lesnar are simply proxy's for Paul Heyman. The true feud, regardless of how good the Lesnar Punk match was, is between Heyman and Punk. You sacrifice Heyman's top guy right away, and just like Cena/Lesnar, it's over. Here, it extends a very personal feud that would have ended prematurely. The idea in the end is for Punk to get his hands on Heyman and hurt him, not Lesnar.

Punk's getting his chance on Sunday to do exactly that to Heyman. Paying it off now, with Heyman in a match, is exactly how it should be. There was no reason for Punk to beat Lesnar.

3. As another poster mentioned and has been noted on several sites, the plan for Wrestlemania 30 is for Lesnar to face the Undertaker at Wrestlemania. Will Lesnar wrestle again before that time? I highly doubt it, given his schedule, and how do you get people to care about/buy into the idea of Lesnar having a chance at ending the streak if he can't beat CM Punk,
and heads into a match with Undertaker with a 2-3 record since his return?

I know I surely wouldn't, and given Undertaker's 21-0 record at Wrestlemania, Lesnar needs to head into that match as strong as possible. Which does it: Punk beating Lesnar with the GTS, or Lesnar getting the vicious win with an F-5 on a steel chair?

Punk, for a number of reasons, didn't need this win. Lesnar did. I think the better question is this:
Why shouldn't Punk have lost to Lesnar?

 

[The AntMan]

The only logical reason is that Punk vs Lesnar II will happen at some point. It's pointless otherwise, because Lesnar is just a part timer, and isn't going to be there that much.

 

[SinCityBlitz]

They really couldn't have Punk win because he can bounce back but if Lesnar lost again it would look bad. They needed to set Lesnar up strong for Wrestlemania.

Lesnar is a beast and Lesnar is money. Having the skinny fat guy beat him would do nothing for his characters credibility. At leats with Cena and Triple H beating him it looked believable but he got the better of Trips anyway. It would be nice if somehow Lesnar could avenge his Cena loss but doubt that will happen.

Taker vs Lesnar = yes please. That is a cracking main event. Throw in Cena vs Orton, Bryan vs Punk and Rock vs Triple H and they will break records.

Right now Punk is money because he is making the WWE a lot more of it than Lesnar is. Why is it that people bitch about Punk beating Lesnar but never say a word about Guerrero beating him?

A Taker vs Lesnar match is going to be shit. Neither guy is going to be able to carry that match and it is going to be a train wreck. Bryan vs Punk is okay as long as Punk is the champ. Cena and Orton is shit and so is HHH and Rock.

 

[rge2010]

Yes, damaging the aura of Lesnar is something that would require a top-flight opponent, one who is physically imposing as well as a compelling character.

C.M. Punk is not physically imposing. John Cena as a foe for Brock?.....fine. Triple H?.....fine. But Punk is very narrow shouldered, with little muscular definition and a bit of flab around his middle. He simply doesn't look as if he could defeat Brock Lesnar, and no matter how much ring skill a guy is supposed to have, the company realizes there might be a point past which the public won't accept a "giant killer" as far as what they're seeing before their eyes.

You can argue that they're accomplishing this very thing right now with Daniel Bryan cleanly defeating John Cena.....and you'd be right. But Daniel is on a unique program at this time and, small as he is, if they don't have him slaying giants, there's no oomph to his mission. But if we're going to see little guys beating big ones all the time, why not throw Kaitlyn in against Brock and see how she does? If it's all scripted, maybe she could bring it off, huh?

Plus, there's Brock Lesnar to consider. Remember back when he objected to being matched against Hardcore Holly because he didn't think Holly was enough of an opponent for him? Face it, Brock is going to have some input, too. If they don't at least listen to his words, he'd probably be happy to not renew his contract next time it comes up. It might be he wanted to protect his image by not losing to someone as small as Punk. Just a thought.

Yes, Brock and Punk put on a fine match; the "science" of performance art wrestling allowed for that. But what do you think would happen if Phil Brooks had a shoot fight with Brock Lesnar in the locker room?

Stuff like this has to be considered.

Bang on the money.......the only way Punk should defeat someone like Lesnar is with outside interfearence or escaping a cage. Cena had to use an AA on the steel steps and HBK aided Triple H at Mania. Like you said, it is scripted but we want to believe it is believable!!!

If Lesnar is going for the streak, I would love to see him defeat Kane maybe in a match at Rumble or Chamber. I know his dates are limited but him going against Taker is a huge deal and he needs another victory so he can chalk off Triple H, CM Punk and someone else as his victims before he goes at The Deadman...

 

[vikas7]

First of all, this is pro wrestling & not MMA. David vs. Goliath is wrestling 101. Cm Punk can beat Brock Lesnar one on one in a wwe ring. You need to accept that.

 

[spiketbear]

I've seen "small" guys beat "big" guys a million times. This has nothing to do with body type. You guys have brought up some good points about Punk losing to Lesnar as a way to keep Lesnar strong going into Mania. Punk can win any day. Lesnar only fights at Summerslam and Mania, so wins are badly needed.

I'm fine with this as long as there is some kind of actual payoff. Whether it's Punk vs Bryan and Brock vs Taker, or Punk vs Brock and Bryan vs Triple H, either Punk and/or Bryan need to be in the main event at Mania. The WWE title should be on the line, and they need to eventually conquer the Corporation. This is WWE's chance to make CM Punk and Bryan immortal, make them faces of the company, and make them real stars. It's time to stop relying solely on Cena to be the only hero.

 

[rge2010]

I've seen "small" guys beat "big" guys a million times. This has nothing to do with body type. You guys have brought up some good points about Punk losing to Lesnar as a way to keep Lesnar strong going into Mania. Punk can win any day. Lesnar only fights at Summerslam and Mania, so wins are badly needed.

I'm fine with this as long as there is some kind of actual payoff. Whether it's Punk vs Bryan and Brock vs Taker, or Punk vs Brock and Bryan vs Triple H, either Punk and/or Bryan need to be in the main event at Mania. The WWE title should be on the line, and they need to eventually conquer the Corporation. This is WWE's chance to make CM Punk and Bryan immortal, make them faces of the company, and make them real stars. It's time to stop relying solely on Cena to be the only hero.

Correct, but Brock Lesnar is the exception to that rule because he is a legit tough guy with credentials. He is more than character, he is BROCK LESNAR. He doesnt cut promos, he isnt a WWE employee, he doesnt do live shows, or interviews, PR etc....he came back from UFC as a former World Champion. Big Show, Mark Henry, Khali etc etc they are all characters and can lose to Rey, Cara, Santino all day long. Those Lesnar credentials create money and while we all know it is scripted, we don't like to see major plot holes.

Lesnar needed the win more than Punk anyway.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

It's so refreshing to have a Punk mark acknowledge that despite all the losses Punk has been able to feud prominently and competitively with guys like UT, Jericho, Cena, Lesnar, HHH, and The Rock over the last couple years. He also held the biggest title in the industry for over 400 days. Those are great honors for Punk whether someone thinks it matters if he wins or loses or whether or not he earned or deserved it. Orton is currently playing the so-called 'Corporate Chosen One' right now and it couldn't be further from the truth. Next to Cena, and at certain times more than Cena, Punk has been the chosen one. Punk got to chase The Streak while Cena was having a rerun with The Rock to get his win back. Punk was defending the title while Cena was facing the glorified bump taker and a 90 pound girl. Punk looked competitive against Lesnar while Cena got one shot in with a chain.

As far as Punk losing to Lesnar there are three ways to look at it:

1. Match quality - does it matter who wins when the two guys get the time and direction to put on a five-star match? Even Cena is not getting as much IWC hate after some of the classics he's put together with Punk. Punk and Lesnar putting on a thrilling bout that overshadows the wins and losses.

2. Punk's strength - not only was the match incredibly entertaining but it also made Punk look strong. Strong in his offensive abilities and especially strong in his ability to withstand punishment. Some would argue he was the better competitor that day despite the loss. That he only lost because his desire to get his hands on Heyman were more important that his desire to get a win over Lesnar. It's sort of stupid for his bright character to make this mistake, but it makes me think that a focused Punk can beat Lesnar in the future.

3. Money - this has been discussed to death already. Punk beating Lesnar would damage interest in a rematch and somewhat Brock's future as a credible draw etc.

So Punk losing to Lesnar made complete sense no matter how you look at it. Punk could be given the WWE Title tomorrow and his loss to Lesnar would not take any credibility away from the title. It may even make Lesnar competing against Punk for the title more interesting.

 

[SkyCommanderWinky]

Punk lost to Lesnar because, unlike other people, Punk isn't in charge of writing and can't book himself to beat someone who, realistically, he has no chance of beating. Remember Lesnar has beaten the following people, The Rock, Hulk Hogan, and The Undertaker.

 

[Dusty Roids]

It's best for business-ehh.. as Paul Levesque would say.

The reason I think is that they need Brock to be a threat when he enters Wrestlemania 30, probably against the Undertaker.

He has beaten HHH in their last match so I already thought it was unlikely that Punk would beat Lesnar.


I actually enjoyed the match and I was't that disapointed when Punk lost.