Guest Anglesault Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 Okay, now you all know that I have been ranting and raving about how Brock is an unover, undserving champ. And most of the time, it leades to flaming. But now, I really just want to have a serious discussion on what exactly you think it is that convinced McMahon to give Brock the belt. Post your theories, reasons as to why he was better than other choices, and ideas for the future. And please, try not to start ranting and raving, and keep the "incriminating photos" jokes to a minimum. I want a real discussion. Thank You.
Guest BionicRedneck Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 IMO, you don't really have to "deserve" things in wrestling. I mean you could say, "What did Kurt Angle do to deserve his push when he first came in" or replace Kurt Angle with Undertaker. In other words, I have no idea.
Guest CanadianChick Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 Because Vince likesd big guys, and Lesner is a big guy.Vince sees him as agood monster wreslter, and I have to say that I agree with him. Do I htink that he should have the title? NO, but that doesn't take awayfrom the fact that he is a very good monster heel. Also, Vince likes homegrown talent. If Brock was signed from WCW, he wouldn't get this push.
Guest Anglesault Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 CC, Being big and homegrown are my theories too.
Guest CanadianChick Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 Do you think that being a former amatur wreslter has anything to do with it? You know, for experience?
Guest El Psycho Diablo Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 He's yet another Vanilla Hoss.
Guest HossSauce Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 -He's an awesome physical specimen. -He's INTENSE~! -His matches are entertaining. He's just awesome to watch. He manhandles people and it's fun. -He's probably the strongest guy in the entire WWE. -He's not THAT green for a 6-month rookie. He had a *** 3/4-**** (IMO) match with The Rock in the main event at the second biggest show of the year. -The fans buy him. This ties in with his look and his strength. -He's a former NCAA amateur wrestling champion. The WWE can milk something like that.
Guest Anglesault Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 Do you think that being a former amatur wreslter has anything to do with it? You know, for experience? Vince had a former amature athlete in kurt Angle. If that factored in to his decission, that would be stupid.
Guest Slapnuts00 Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 After hotshotting the titles around between several old guys, they decided they wanted a fresh face to hold the belt for an extended period of time, a heel who could be a monster, destroy several fan favorites all leading up to a face becoming elevated by finally beating the monster (probably Angle or RVD). It happened to be Brock since he was the prize of the developemental system, he's big, scary looking and has been dubbed the "next big thing" anyway. Plus I think he has some good moves, like the F 5, triple powerbomb and I'm still waiting for him to bust out the shooting star press. He's become more over as champ, thus it works both ways, the title helps Brock in getting over and Brock will help the title by holding it for a long period of time and gaining decisive wins. When a face wins it, it will be all that more meaningful. At that point Brock can turn on Paul and have a happy heel run. I think this is the Brock Lesnar plan, and I for one think it's a good one.
Guest Slapnuts00 Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 -He's an awesome physical specimen. -He's INTENSE~! -His matches are entertaining. He's just awesome to watch. He manhandles people and it's fun. -He's probably the strongest guy in the entire WWE. -He's not THAT green for a 6-month rookie. He had a *** 3/4-**** (IMO) match with The Rock in the main event at the second biggest show of the year. -The fans buy him. This ties in with his look and his strength. -He's a former NCAA amateur wrestling champion. The WWE can milk something like that. I agree with all of that too! I too enjoy watching him manhandle people. Too bad he doesn't have the voice to match his crazy twitches. BROCK SMASH! BROCK SMASH!
Guest Bricks Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 I think Brock Lesnar is what Vince wants the World Champion of his company to look like. He's big. He's muscular. He's homegrown. He's a legitimate wrestler with accolades. He's also got lots of potential and he probably was going to be the cornerstone of the company in the future, but I don't think Vince could wait that long so he gave him the title now.
Guest HossSauce Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 Vince had a former amature athlete in kurt Angle. If that factored in to his decission, that would be stupid. It did factor into his decision. The WWE has always been bashed for not being a real sport. Well, with Kurt Angle, now they could brag about having a WWE champion who was a former OLYMPIC GOLD MEDALIST in amateur wrestling. And they did flaunt that. And it was a smart move.
Guest candie45 Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 Vince is probably thinking that Brock has the look to be a WWE star... big, mean, and well, big. I can't think of much else. He hasn't proven himself as far as why he should be champion yet, mic-wise or ring-wise. "I am the youngest champion! I'm 25! The youngest! Ever! I am the youngest! 25! The youngest WWE Undisputed Champion! Ever!"
Guest CanadianChick Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 -He's probably the strongest guy in the entire WWE. Isn't Mark Henry the strongest. After all, he IS the strongest man in the world
Guest Edwin MacPhisto Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 Brock was in the right place at the right time. Despite acquiring or having the ability to acquire every major wrestler from the big 3 feds over the past 2 years, Vince seemingly wanted to make his own star from scratch. Checking out the prospects recently promoted from OVW, Brock or Batista are the most physically intimidating...and perhaps Brock was more good to go 5 months ago, when they wanted to debut him. Brock's big, Brock's young, and Brock's totally new. No one outside the WWE machine can take any credit for him, and he is so young that I anticipate he'll easily be active for 10 years after this. Here's my question: Brock wins the biggest title in wrestling 5 months into his career, and probably holds it for a decent chunk of his first year in the business. Where, then, does he go from there? Will Lesnar be a fixture of the main event for the next decade, or will he take his stints in the midcard too? No one's ever gotten everything this fast, so it's almost impossible to guess what's in store.
Guest CanadianChick Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 Here's my question: Brock wins the biggest title in wrestling 5 months into his career, and probably holds it for a decent chunk of his first year in the business. Where, then, does he go from there? Will Lesnar be a fixture of the main event for the next decade, or will he take his stints in the midcard too? No one's ever gotten everything this fast, so it's almost impossible to guess what's in store. This really reminds me of the BigShow. Seeing where he is now, I fear for Brock's future, I really do.
Guest HossSauce Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 10 more years? Only if he retires at age 34. Brock is going to be around for a loong time. We're looking at 2 decades of destruction, not 1.
Guest CanadianChick Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 I very much doubt that Brock will be a top guy for 20 years. Come on, be realistic
Guest Anglesault Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 Now those two decades of destruction, does that mean I destroy my TV everytime heatless Lesnar goes over Kurt/Benoit/RVD/Jericho/Eddy/Booker/Anyone in a horrible match for two decades?
Guest CanadianChick Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 You may be buying a lot of TVs then AS...
Guest Anglesault Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 I'm going to own stock in Best Buy or something.
Guest Smell the ratings!!! Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 Hey! No ranting! Brock is just a big blond guy on juice, the kind of wrestler Vince alwas gets behind. Personally, I think Brock has a lot of talent, but it's gonna take a lot more than 6 months of spinebusters and Heyman jumping up on to the apron to make him into a star. It certainly doesn't hurt that he isn't an ECW cult hero or something, but it's mostly just Vince longing for the 80's, when all he had to do was find a really big guy once every few months and have Hogan run them over.
Guest HossSauce Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 First off, Lesnar is NOT heatless! Secondly, even if he WAS heatless right now, don't you THINK that his heat might CHANGE in 10-20 years?? I very much doubt that Brock will be a top guy for 20 years. Come on, be realistic I bet your ancestors said the same thing about Hogan, Flair, Bret, etc.
Guest BionicRedneck Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 Personally, although it isn't a cool thing to say on the net, I don't really mind Lesnar. I feel sorry for him more than anything. He shouldn't be the champ yet, but thats the WWE's fault.
Guest CanadianChick Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 First off, Lesnar is NOT heatless! Secondly, even if he WAS heatless right now, don't you THINK that his heat might CHANGE in 10-20 years?? I agree that Brock isn't heatless, but when you say he might chamge is 10-20 years, who cares? As far as I see, winning the title this early was a very bad idea. See The Big Show. Face it, he will probably peek in the next 2 years and won't be able to live up to his success for 10-20 years.
Guest Anglesault Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 First off, Lesnar is NOT heatless! He is somewhat over, but not anywhere near over enough to be world champion. The only time he was REALLY over was Summerslam, and that was just anti-Rocky.
Guest CanadianChick Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 First off, Lesnar is NOT heatless! Secondly, even if he WAS heatless right now, don't you THINK that his heat might CHANGE in 10-20 years?? I very much doubt that Brock will be a top guy for 20 years. Come on, be realistic I bet your ancestors said the same thing about Hogan, Flair, Bret, etc. Bret? Your kidding right? He wasa top guy 6-7 years.
Guest HossSauce Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 Brock has 10x the talent of the Big Show. I cannot believe you would even compare the two. The Big Show is a lazy, fat, 500-pound slob who has never shown any potential. Brock has shown more athletic ability, work ethic, and potential in 6 months than the Big Slow has in 7 years. Bret? Your kidding right? He wasa top guy 6-7 years. My point is this...Brock is already a top guy. And the longer that he is around, he's only going to get better. So why would his status change over time? This guy is going to be a PHENOM in a few years.
Guest CanadianChick Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 Brock has 10x the talent of the Big Show. I cannot believe you would even compare the two. The Big Show is a lazy, fat, 500-pound slob who has never shown any potential. Brock has shown more athletic ability, work ethic, and potential in 6 months than the Big Slow has in 7 years. I wasn't comparing talent, I was comparing how similar their pushes have been.
Guest BionicRedneck Posted September 2, 2002 Report Posted September 2, 2002 The comparison isn't between the wrestlers work, its the fact they have both won the the World title too early. Bret was a top guy for 20 years? wow.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now