Lightning Flik Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 Let me ask you something.......do you honestly think the NFL gives a shit about Brock Lesnar and merchandising in the WWE. NFL is the number 1 sport, attendance, rating, and popularity wise in the country. They couldn't care less about Brocks ties with WWE. Like I said before........Drafting a 27 year old with NO football experience is VERY risky. I'm talking about merchandising period. Owners give a pretty big damn about it. Yes, it is risky in drafting him. But say you make him a tackle for you team. Marks would turn around and buy his stuff and see his first game as a member of whatever team which would bring in a profit that will probably make up for whatever guarentees are given to him. Then what if he turns out to be a good tackle. He doesn't have to be all-star quality. Just so long as he does his job well and does it effiecently, you more than justified bringing him in because you get the marks there consistantly for your team. You can't tell me that someone wouldn't be willing to take a shot at the upswing. Might be risky, but the upswing is there to be good.
Use Your Illusion Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 Reading through this thread, I can say that the only person I am totally agreeing with here is Downhome. Don't come back Lesnar. UYI Please, please don't tell me you find nothing wrong in a guy who was promoted to be the next star, who's fucking slogan was "The Next Big Thing", jobbing in a feud to a guy who in effect is The Old Big Thing. No matter how much of a Taker mark you are, there's some bad logic in that. I understand where you are coming from, but what I don't understand is Lesnar's hissy fit over jobbing to a major star in the company. Old or not, Taker is exceptionally over with the marks and casual fanbase of WWE, and I hardly see how Lesnar doing to job to the Deadman would be detrimental, overall, to the career of Lesnar. Personally, I'd have Dead-Taker go over lesser-known talent, for example guys like A-Train, initially just to put over the gimmick before moving him onto anything significant, like a Lesnar feud. However, Vince sees things another way and, if I were Brock, I'd be willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and do as I am told. See, if this were, say, Benoit, I would have a totally different opinion - as Benoit has been working his sorry ass off for his entire career, which is over 15 years. Lesnar walked into WWE after WM2002 and by SummerSlam was their World Champion. Brock needs to pull his head out of his ass, knuckle down and start working for the company, and not just himself. UYI
bobobrazil1984 Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 Well from the latest articles, it sounds like all of this, the things he's upset about, etc etc, all narrow down to the simple fact that this business isn't for him. he cant handle the travel schedule (I dont mean that in a derogatory, wrestling's travel schedule is insanely hard. For all the wrestlers that do it, there ten times the wannabe wrestlers who cant do it. I sure as fuck couldn't do it). He never really put in the time on the road and never got used to it. He came straight from college to pro wrestling and BANG got a main event push. It's probably good for him that he got out now.
Guest Anglesault Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 I think the general concessus (And Brock's opinion, it seems) Is that in the 2003 feud BikerTaker really went out of his way to make Brock look awful. Now, playing a character that by its very nature doesn't have to sell at all combined with the fact that they still have to establish the Deadman again, it looks like Taker is gonna squash Brock while making all of his offense look weak. And that DOES hurt Brock's career.
Use Your Illusion Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 But we don't know what incarnation Taker will return as yet. The Deadman of 1996 upwards sold offence and could be hurt. We still don't know if Taker is returning to his original character (that, yes, sold nothing) or if he is coming back as a new version of the gimmick altogether. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt though, AS, and we'll say he does return as No Selling Undertaker. I can only see Taker not selling Lesnar's offence as detrimental to his career if he only did it when he faced Lesnar. Undertaker no-sold jack-shit of Hulk Hogan's offence back in the day when he won his first World Title, and that sure as hell didn't stop Hogan from moving onto bigger and better things. UYI
chaosrage Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 Yeah, not like the man has a legitimate point or anything. Not like Vince gave him one of the biggest pushes ever and he's leaving without putting anyone over. Or anything.
Guest Anglesault Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 But we don't know what incarnation Taker will return as yet. The Deadman of 1996 upwards sold offence and could be hurt. We still don't know if Taker is returning to his original character (that, yes, sold nothing) or if he is coming back as a new version of the gimmick altogether. Well, Brock, who should be in the know, seems to think it's straight up sell nothing Taker. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt though, AS, and we'll say he does return as No Selling Undertaker. I can only see Taker not selling Lesnar's offence as detrimental to his career if he only did it when he faced Lesnar. I think in 2004, someone no sellig everyone's big moves will make them look bad.
Guest Anglesault Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 Yeah, not like the man has a legitimate point or anything. Not like Vince gave him one of the biggest pushes ever and he's leaving without putting anyone over. Or anything. He put Eddie over.
chaosrage Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 He put Eddie over. Because goldberg came in and speared him.
Guest unleashedfury Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 See, if this were, say, Benoit, I would have a totally different opinion - as Benoit has been working his sorry ass off for his entire career, which is over 15 years. Lesnar walked into WWE after WM2002 and by SummerSlam was their World Champion. Brock needs to pull his head out of his ass, knuckle down and start working for the company, and not just himself. Brock was a ligitimate NCAA champion and had 6 years of amature wrestling experience before he started the pro game in OVW 4 years ago. So I guess he has worked his ass off for 10 years to get where he's at right now. It wasn't a matter of Brock spending an entire career like Benoit to "pay his dues". I believe it was a matter of Brock becoming the best all around performer in WWE along with Eddie and Jericho in such a short time. Obviously the anti-Brock fans would overlook the fact that Brock has all the tools that it's too obvious he's going to be the guy to watch out for in the next 10 years. So don't blame the guy for trying to protect his spot and complaining about his travel scheduel. Anyway, There is still hope that Mcmahon will find a way to convince Brock to stay.
Slickster Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 I'm against this move, and not because of how Brock has been or will be booked. Think about how much time, money, and effort the WWE has put into promoting Brock as one of the top 5 guys in the company. The trade-ad campaigns that reportedly center on him as an example of WWE's top talent are now useless. Regardless of whether or not the wrestling lifestyle is right for him or not, Brock should have given the WWE more notice before his departure or he should at least work a limited schedule until JDay in May. That way, they can phase him out and use him to do the 'time-honored tradition' on his way out the door.
EdwardKnoxII Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 He put Eddie over. Because goldberg came in and speared him. But, that had nothing to do with Brock. WWE would have booked it that way even if Brock didn't say anything.
Guest Anglesault Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 He put Eddie over. Because goldberg came in and speared him. Which he continued competing after until Eddie countered Brock's finisher. The Spear wasn't what beat Brock.
Kahran Ramsus Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 Let's face it, Brock was/is being a bitch about it. Unfortunately, it seems Vince needs Brock more than Brock needs Vince. I blame Brock for this a lot more than I do Vince, but I'm not about to say 'fuck him' because this really does hurt the product. They need Brock now, and he's running away.
Downhome Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 I'm not crazy, I'd take Brock back in a second if he decided to stick around. I've really taken to the guy over the past few years, which contributes to my being as pissed off at him as I am.
Guest Anglesault Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 Let's face it, Brock was/is being a bitch about it. Unfortunately, it seems Vince needs Brock more than Brock needs Vince. I blame Brock for this a lot more than I do Vince, but I'm not about to say 'fuck him' because this really does hurt the product. They need Brock now, and he's running away. Oh, Vince is absolutely more to blame. You'd think after Austin, he'd know better than to deliberately piss off his stars.
tommytomlin Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 I like the bashing of Brock because no other main eventer has EVER done something like this before. Bret Hart refused to job to HBK. HBK refused to put over Austin until he was eventually 'convinced', and had previously 'lost his smile' and deserted the WWF at one of its lowest points. Steve Austin quit the WWE. The Rock left the WWE to go film movies. Triple H has single handedly manipulated RAW into a one-man show. Hogan did the same in WCW. The Ultimate Warrior deserted the WWF three times. Brock is just doing what every other main eventer has done in the past, look out for himself. That's how the business works. It's his career and it's his life, there's no point talking about whether he was justified to do it or not, because we're not Brock. We don't know what he's going through. The WWE, on the other hand, did. They failed to do anything about it, so now they're paying the price AGAIN. Hopefully this forces them to re-evaluate how they treat their talent, because with Rock, Foley, Goldberg and Lesnar leaving after Mania, Angle, HBK, Flair and Austin unable to work full schedules or at all, their big new star Orton floundering, they're left with Benoit, Guerrero and Cena. These three all HAVE to go over at Wrestlemania for the WWE to secure their future.
chaosrage Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 Which he continued competing after until Eddie countered Brock's finisher. The Spear wasn't what beat Brock. Eddie only countered it cause Brock was stunned by the spear.
chaosrage Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 He put Eddie over. Because goldberg came in and speared him. But, that had nothing to do with Brock. WWE would have booked it that way even if Brock didn't say anything. I know, I'm just saying that he's leaving without putting anyone over and it's wrong. He owes them after they put all their effort into making him such a huge star. Why does he care if he wrestles a few more matches and puts over Cena or even Undertaker clean? He wants out and plans to never come back.
Guest Anglesault Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 I thought we agreed to never mention the prospect of another Cena/Lesnar match ever, ever again? And I think he wants out partially because they want him to have his offense destroyed and job clean to Taker.
Guest 11and0baby Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 Well if this all ends up being true then if they are in need of an insta-heel at the top of the card on SD that at least has name value then they do have someone on their roster to fill the void. Man im gonna get ripped apart with this but what the hell. WCW Scott Steiner is a good heel that can be stuck in and be credible with name value and Vince might actually get something outta Steiners contract instead of having him versus or whomever. And with Steiner injured at the moment it makes it easier for them to give some reason as to why he is on SD.
Guest Choken One Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 Well if this all ends up being true then if they are in need of an insta-heel at the top of the card on SD that at least has name value then they do have someone on their roster to fill the void. Man im gonna get ripped apart with this but what the hell. WCW Scott Steiner is a good heel that can be stuck in and be credible with name value and Vince might actually get something outta Steiners contract instead of having him versus or whomever. And with Steiner injured at the moment it makes it easier for them to give some reason as to why he is on SD. Steiner rules it... Him and Eddy would be amazing to witness at least from the promo standpoint.
AndrewTS Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 There are people that think that Steiner has any use left in him aside from mid-card roadblock? On what basis? Because he used to be good?
Guest Mulatto Heat Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 Yes, from some character done in WCW's VERY WORST DAYS. I'll never understand it.
AndrewTS Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 Yes, from some character done in WCW's VERY WORST DAYS. I'll never understand it. In Scott's current condition, Rick would be a better choice.
Kahran Ramsus Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 I like the bashing of Brock because no other main eventer has EVER done something like this before. Bret Hart refused to job to HBK. HBK refused to put over Austin until he was eventually 'convinced', and had previously 'lost his smile' and deserted the WWF at one of its lowest points. Steve Austin quit the WWE. The Rock left the WWE to go film movies. Triple H has single handedly manipulated RAW into a one-man show. Hogan did the same in WCW. The Ultimate Warrior deserted the WWF three times. All of them, except Rock who actually helps the WWE through his movie career, were wrong too. Brock leaving wasn't the absolute worst I've seen since he is actually finishing his program, but he is still the primary figure at fault. The worst ever would be Shawn Michaels who bailed on the main event of Wrestlemania XIII because he was asked to do a job. That was completely unprofessional and he should have been sent packing to WCW for it.
Guest Anglesault Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 Him and Eddy would be amazing to witness at least from the promo standpoint. Disagree completely. There are three people on the active roster who would be good in a promo battle situation with Steiner. Rock, Jericho, Christian. The three men who would pull out a "No one knows what the hell you just said."
Lil' Bitch Posted March 11, 2004 Report Posted March 11, 2004 I'm still in shock about all this. I mean he was one of my favorites. Now...just one less reason for me to enjoy SD.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now