Brock Lesnar Returning to WWE

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Lesnar losing before he meets Batista at WM 22, which is what the main event there should be, would be stupid. Same with Batista doing a short term title change before then. And Lesnar should be dominant in his matches for sure. Lesnar might not have to squash people, but he absolutely should dominate, and he absolute cannot be seen to struggle against anyone below upper midcard status.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Well, you may think what I proposed is stupid, but I'd find what you proposed completely boring and predicatable. To each his own.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have a hunch, just a hunch mind you, that mine would make more money.

[nl5xsk1 0]

My biggest fear about having Lesnar & Batista go on undefeated streaks between now and WM is that they're creating the appearance that there are two wrestlers head-and-shoulders above the rest, meaning every other main eventer is beneath Lesnar & Batista. What do you do after WM has come and gone?

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

My biggest fear about having Lesnar & Batista go on undefeated streaks between now and WM is that they're creating the appearance that there are two wrestlers head-and-shoulders above the rest, meaning every other main eventer is beneath Lesnar & Batista.  What do you do after WM has come and gone?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My biggest fear about having Lesnar & Batista go on undefeated streaks between now and WM is that they're creating the appearance that there are two wrestlers head-and-shoulders above the rest, meaning every other main eventer is beneath Lesnar & Batista.

 

The main event on the biggest card of the year should be between the two guys that are seen as above everyone else. That's what draws the most money; the wrestlers seen as the very best in the promotion going head on.

 

What do you do after WM has come and gone?

 

You follow up on what you should have been doing before WM, and using the guys you've built back up after getting beaten by Lesnar and Batista.

[bob_barron 0]

I'm just glad that I'm not the only one here who doesn't see Brock/Batista as some sort of "dream match".

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Just because you don't like Batista, doesn't make it not a dream match.

 

It's the WWE's two biggest badasses, still in their relative prime. who have beaten everyone and rarely looked weak finally colliding in a showdown to see who is the top dog in the WWE.

 

That's a dream match.

 

what you proposed completely boring and predicatable. To each his own.

 

What is predictable usually works and makes money.

 

Why should Brock be doing jobs before a big match with Batista? How will that make people want to see the match?

[ChrisMWaters 0]

If Brock wasn't against all the traveling, here's an idea I had for him (based on a dream about myself as a wrestler)

 

Basically, McMahon hires him back to shake up both Raw and Smackdown. So, insted of being aligned to one show or another, he can go to either show whenever he wants. Thus making him a kind of permanent free agent...goes on Raw some weeks, other weeks he's on Smackdown. That sort of thing.

 

Course, since the last time Brock left was because of all the traveling, I doubt WWE would do that with him.

[Precious Roy 0]

Why should Brock be doing jobs before a big match with Batista? How will that make people want to see the match?

 

It's not like he'd be doing jobs on shows leading up to the match. How is one or two jobs to main-eventers 3-4 months before the match, jobs that he'll get back clean, going to hurt him as a draw? They wouldn't. If anything, done correctly, they'll make him a more compelling character. He'll get his convincing monster run, but it doesn't have to happen immediately, and undefeated streaks are rather meaningless in this day and age.

 

My initial idea had him being built back up into a killer after working off the ring rust, without doing any jobs, but looking decreasingly vulnerable from the time he debuts. We see the guy who hasn't wrestled in well over a year evolve in a convincing manner, til he regains his old form. How is that possibly a worse idea for the company than making everyone look completely inferior to him off the bat? If any idea is stupid it's that. And something tells me Vince might like my idea a little better.

[Guest Brian]

Why should Brock be doing jobs before a big match with Batista? How will that make people want to see the match?

 

It's not like he'd be doing jobs on shows leading up to the match. How is one or two jobs to main-eventers 3-4 months before the match, jobs that he'll get back clean, going to hurt him as a draw? They wouldn't. If anything, done correctly, they'll make him a more compelling character. He'll get his convincing monster run, but it doesn't have to happen immediately, and undefeated streaks are rather meaningless in this day and age.

 

My initial idea had him being built back up into a killer after working off the ring rust, without doing any jobs, but looking decreasingly vulnerable from the time he debuts. We see the guy who hasn't wrestled in well over a year evolve in a convincing manner, til he regains his old form. How is that possibly a worse idea for the company than making everyone look completely inferior to him off the bat? If any idea is stupid it's that. And something tells me Vince might like my idea a little better.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

So you're plan is to make him beatable, then act as if he's unbeatable.

[Precious Roy 0]

Is what I said really that difficult to comprehend? Maybe HTQ is right, heavy handed, predictable, simple booking is the way to go, I guess I give wrestling fans too much credit....

[Guest Brian]

Well, the thing is, he's not that much of a killer if he's getting beat. He's never going to get the point where he's invulnerable if he's been proven vulnerable. You're trying way too hard to find ways to make Brock job, when that's the last thing they need to do if they want to get money out of him.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Well, the thing is, he's not that much of a killer if he's getting beat. He's never going to get the point where he's invulnerable if he's been proven vulnerable. You're trying way too hard to find ways to make Brock job, when that's the last thing they need to do if they want to get money out of him.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

At least someone else around here gets it.

[bob_barron 0]

Hey- I agreed with you too HTQ.

[bob_barron 0]

It's not like he'd be doing jobs on shows leading up to the match. How is one or two jobs to main-eventers 3-4 months before the match, jobs that he'll get back clean, going to hurt him as a draw? They wouldn't.

 

It will take away his unbeatable aura. He's not unbeatable, if he well, can be beaten,

 

If anything, done correctly, they'll make him a more compelling character. He'll get his convincing monster run, but it doesn't have to happen immediately, and undefeated streaks are rather meaningless in this day and age.

 

Brock's first undefeated streak helped get him over. They're not meaningless if you do them right.

 

My initial idea had him being built back up into a killer after working off the ring rust, without doing any jobs, but looking decreasingly vulnerable from the time he debuts. We see the guy who hasn't wrestled in well over a year evolve in a convincing manner, til he regains his old form. How is that possibly a worse idea for the company than making everyone look completely inferior to him off the bat? If any idea is stupid it's that. And something tells me Vince might like my idea a little better.

 

But your idea sucks. A lot.

 

Brock doing some jobs going into his match with Batista is the dumbest booking decision they can make. If Brock can be beat by Benoit or Taker or someone, why should I give him a chance against Big Dave?

 

Brock and Big Dave both keep going over their opponents, slowly building to a Wrestlemania match and then boom- they collide.

 

How hard is that to understand?

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

The most effective storylines are the ones that are really simple. Two seemingly invincible guys going at it at the biggest stage of them all=money.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Brock and Big Dave both keep going over their opponents, slowly building to a Wrestlemania match and then boom- they collide.

 

How hard is that to understand?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Very hard for a lot of people.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

The most effective storylines are the ones that are really simple. Two seemingly invincible guys going at it at the biggest stage of them all=money.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I hear that worked well for Hogan and Andre.

[The Niggardly King 0]

Who would Brock's first ideal feud be against before he gets to Batista? Benoit? Booker T?

 

And would Brock be a full blown heel, or just a badass tweener?

[Guest]

In a feud he would have to look somewhat vulnerable, which isn't any good.

[iggymcfly 0]

Well, the thing is, he's not that much of a killer if he's getting beat. He's never going to get the point where he's invulnerable if he's been proven vulnerable. You're trying way too hard to find ways to make Brock job, when that's the last thing they need to do if they want to get money out of him.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Oh, bullshit, you could do it absolutely fine, and make compelling television without hurting Brock one bit in the long run. The trick to it is just to spell it out for the fans. Go ahead and have him lose his first PPV match to someone he's never lost to like the Undertaker.

 

Then, after the match, have him just completely snap, destroying wrestlers for a few weeks, until Teddy long brings in someone like Heyman to help control him. Heyman tells him how he should be an undefeatable monster and tells him how pathetic it is that he's losing to the Undertaker. Then, we see training videos with Brock and Heyman similar to the 2002 ones, after which Brock becomes a cold, calculated machine in the ring.

 

Finally, to cap it off, he does something really definitive to beat the Undertaker (win 2-0 in a 2/3 falls match), and boom, he's back stronger than before, and you have three month of interesting television instead of boring crap before the big showdown with Batista.

[Guest]

No, Brock loses to nobody unless they want to just totally fuck things up. There is absolutely no point in making him do the job to Taker. Ever.

[iggymcfly 0]

The "point" is interesting television and character development. Do you really think my scenario would hurt Brock or Wrestlemania one tiny little bit in the long run? I sure don't.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Anybody who wants Brock to lose before a WM 22 main event against Batista would make a shitty wrestling promoter. To make the most money possible, and I'll repeat that so the slower ones amongst you can understand, to make the most money possible, neither Brock nor Batista can go into their WM 22 main event tarnished by clean jobs, or any jobs, or anything that takes away from their monster auras. That means no jobs for Brock, no short term title change program for Batista, and no scenarios where either man looks stupid or weak.

[Guest Ransome]

Well, the thing is, he's not that much of a killer if he's getting beat. He's never going to get the point where he's invulnerable if he's been proven vulnerable. You're trying way too hard to find ways to make Brock job, when that's the last thing they need to do if they want to get money out of him.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Oh, bullshit, you could do it absolutely fine, and make compelling television without hurting Brock one bit in the long run. The trick to it is just to spell it out for the fans. Go ahead and have him lose his first PPV match to someone he's never lost to like the Undertaker.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

See, regardless of what comes afterwards, if you job Brock out in his first match you're placing an impression into the minds of the viewers that Brock is inferior, which greatly damages his image in the long run. In many ways, Brock's first pay per view match after his comeback will make or break him, and by extension the WM main event.

 

Although, are there any rumours that Brock vs Batista *will* mainevent WM at all? I know it seems logical, but we did also assume that WWE would logically hold off the HHH vs Randy Orton matchup until WM 21, and we know how that turned out.

[Precious Roy 0]

Well, the thing is, he's not that much of a killer if he's getting beat. He's never going to get the point where he's invulnerable if he's been proven vulnerable. You're trying way too hard to find ways to make Brock job

 

 

It will take away his unbeatable aura. He's not unbeatable, if he well, can be beaten,

 

Where is the idea coming from that he carries this untarnished image of being a monster killer? Didn't he job his title to a spear followed by a delayed frog splash? Oh yeah, that unbeatable aura, the one that saw him jobbed out to Goldberg CLEAN in his last match? He didn't go out unbeatable, why should he come back in like that. BUILD IT UP. Right now he DOESN'T HAVE AN UNBEATABLE AURA, it was taken away, IT NEEDS TO BE BUILT UP FROM SCRATCH, which is why you can TAKE THE TIME TO DO IT and have the luxury of jobbing him early if you so choose. Does anyone here honestly think wins and losses are the most important thing in wrestling? Book it smart and you can get away with the jobs, and sorry to say HTQ, but any booker worth his salt could pull it off and draw MORE money than with your sorry excuse for a plotline because the fans might actually, you know, be entertained and surprised at times between point A and point B, plus you'll have more left over to draw more money with down the line. This isn't 1987 and it isn't Hogan/Andre.

 

What's one or two jobs when he comes back in if he goes on a killer run after that? If a football team loses their first two games and then sweeps all the way to the championship are they not a dominant team? Do fans not care about that years super bowl if they lost to a non-playoff team early in the season? Hogwash!

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Lesnar needs to be protected because he's one of the few guys in the WWE that people would think "this guy could destroy just about anyone in a legit fight". Actually, I can't really think of anyone else who has _that_ aura. And its that rare bit of legitimacy he needs to keep by every and any means possible. Jobbing, especially to guys perceived lower and weaker than he, puts nice big dents in that legitimacy. In a fake sport, and especially in the very fake WWE, even a hint of realness gets the fans off. Taking that away from Brock wouldn't be a wise move, because once you lose it, it's very, very, VERY, hard to get it back.

[Black Lushus 0]

^ didn't Goldberg's popularity somewhat die down once they started making him seem so beatable? And I don't mean in the sense of "man, I barely beat him" but more like "eh, he's not so hard to beat"...I may be wrong, but he didn't seem to be quite as popular anymore once that happened...

[Precious Roy 0]

Jobbing, especially to guys perceived lower and weaker than he, puts nice big dents in that legitimacy.

 

Would you perceive Benoit or Undertaker to be lower and weaker, because those are the only guys I would even consider letting go over him, and in either case the jobs would be returned in a much more convincing fashion.

 

And of course, I think it goes without saying that Lesnar has to go over Batista.....

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

Jobbing, especially to guys perceived lower and weaker than he, puts nice big dents in that legitimacy.

 

Would you perceive Benoit or Undertaker to be lower and weaker, because those are the only guys I would even consider letting go over him, and in either case the jobs would be returned in a much more convincing fashion.

 

And of course, I think it goes without saying that Lesnar has to go over Batista.....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Taker is 40 years old. Brock has beaten him every time out. He should not job to Taker at all prior to Mania. Hell I'd keep Taker and Brock away from each other (though I would probably want to have Batista go over Taker to give him more credibility as a monster face). They were in middle of giving Benoit a push against Brock in early 2004 so in 2004 had Brock not left and Benoit not gone to Raw, it would have been credible if Benoit beat Lesnar. Now? With no visible push, it's less credible to have Benoit go over Brock. In fact I'd peg Benoit as Brock's first feud where he dominates Benoit to the point of killing him in the blowoff (Not kill off, but a near squash). This would anger the Benoit fans, but he has been jerked around too long that his credibility is a bit damaged. No reason to hurt Brock's credibility right now.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

*crap*

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You really don't get it. You would make a shitty wrestling promter.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

^ didn't Goldberg's popularity somewhat die down once they started making him seem so beatable?  And I don't mean in the sense of "man, I barely beat him" but more like "eh, he's not so hard to beat"...I may be wrong, but he didn't seem to be quite as popular anymore once that happened...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Which is exactly why Lesnar's first loss after his return absolutely should not be done in some throwaway manner, and should not happen before any WM 22 main event with Batista. The first loss has to mean something big, both in order to get over the guy inflicting the loss and to not weaken the aura of the guy suffering the first loss. Beat Lesnar before WM 22, no matter how you do it, and should Batista face Brock at WM 22 and beat him, it won't mean anywhere near as much as if Lesnar goes into WM 22 unbeaten, and Batista is the man who finally stops him. If Batista beats an unbeaten Lesnar on the biggest stage of them all, it will mean so much more than if Batista beats a Lesnar who has done any jobs since his return.

[Black Lushus 0]

with that being said, when do you debut Lesnar (say he signs a contract tomorrow)? as niskie pointed out, WM is a long ways away and I can't see them keeping those two apart for that long on a limited roster...Hold off on bringing him in until S. Series or sometime in December or what?