Rasslin is YES! YES! YES!

[Reaper16]

Last thread has well over 10,000 replies. Its body is breaking down like The Undertaker's. Seeing as we might have crossed the threshold into a new era in the business, here's a fresh new thread.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Questions: What are the feelings towards 1) the streak ending 2) a part-time attraction being the one to end it?

[loochy]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Questions: What are the feelings towards 1) the streak ending 2) a part-time attraction being the one to end it?

1. I'm glad it's over. Dude can't even handle wrestling once a year anymore. Plus, the fan reactions were great.

2. Brock was a puzzling decision.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by loochy

1. I'm glad it's over. Dude can't even handle wrestling once a year anymore. Plus, the fan reactions were great.

2. Brock was a puzzling decision.

So, the general POV that you should leave on your back still applies to UT at WM? Interesting. Thanks.

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Questions: What are the feelings towards 1) the streak ending 2) a part-time attraction being the one to end it?

I think it was fine if that's how taker wanted to go out (and it apparently was), and I think if they play their cards right it could really turn Lesnar into a huge draw. It was basically a one-night fix-all to the way they wasted him for however much time he's been back (losing to basically everybody).

If I were in charge, I'd say he shouldn't lose at all to anybody (period) at least until next year's Wrestlemania, make him into the monster that he should be. He's pretty much the only legitimately scary guy on the roster at this point, as in somebody who's a wild card who could injure somebody (in story) at any time. Let Paul do all the talking, and let him just squash people. Then, finally, use him to put over somebody in a huge way next year (or even sometime later).

Basically, I think you can get more out of him (as a part-timer) than you could have ever gotten out of taker, assuming taker could ever even get in the ring again.

Although, in the end, I suspect they're just going to build toward Brock/Rock as has been rumored.

I'm not sure Bryan should be losing anytime soon, so I'd keep him away from Lesnar. Long term, maybe Lesnar can help him get to even another level (talk about the ultimate underdog match).

Also the potential of cesaro, I think. Paul Heyman gives a sort of built-in rivalry potential there. Although I really think that's more about giving Heyman something to do while Brock is gone. But you could ultimately use that as a platform to break Cesaro off from Heyman and potentially turn him into a megastar face.

[Sassy Squatch]

Don't get the opposition to it being Brock. He desperately needed to look like a badass again and that did it. If he was a once a year part timer I would understand but he will be around for all of the big PPVs at least.

[ILChief]

Originally Posted by Reaper16

WWE has more legit talent right now than it ever has.

Ziggler is the man. Wish he wasn't always in the doghouse

[Sassy Squatch]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

I think it was fine if that's how taker wanted to go out (and it apparently was), and I think if they play their cards right it could really turn Lesnar into a huge draw. It was basically a one-night fix-all to the way they wasted him for however much time he's been back (losing to basically everybody).

If I were in charge, I'd say he shouldn't lose at all to anybody (period) at least until next year's Wrestlemania, make him into the monster that he should be. He's pretty much the only legitimately scary guy on the roster at this point, as in somebody who's a wild card who could injure somebody (in story) at any time. Let Paul do all the talking, and let him just squash people. Then, finally, use him to put over somebody in a huge way next year (or even sometime later).

Basically, I think you can get more out of him (as a part-timer) than you could have ever gotten out of taker, assuming taker could ever even get in the ring again.

Although, in the end, I suspect they're just going to build toward Brock/Rock as has been rumored.

I'm not sure Bryan should be losing anytime soon, so I'd keep him away from Lesnar. Long term, maybe Lesnar can help him get to even another level (talk about the ultimate underdog match).

Also the potential of cesaro, I think. Paul Heyman gives a sort of built-in rivalry potential there. Although I really think that's more about giving Heyman something to do while Brock is gone. But you could ultimately use that as a platform to break Cesaro off from Heyman and potentially turn him into a megastar face.

Or what you said. That works too.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

I think it was fine if that's how taker wanted to go out (and it apparently was), and I think if they play their cards right it could really turn Lesnar into a huge draw. It was basically a one-night fix-all to the way they wasted him for however much time he's been back (losing to basically everybody).

If I were in charge, I'd say he shouldn't lose at all to anybody (period) at least until next year's Wrestlemania, make him into the monster that he should be. He's pretty much the only legitimately scary guy on the roster at this point, as in somebody who's a wild card who could injure somebody (in story) at any time. Let Paul do all the talking, and let him just squash people. Then, finally, use him to put over somebody in a huge way next year (or even sometime later).

Basically, I think you can get more out of him (as a part-timer) than you could have ever gotten out of taker, assuming taker could ever even get in the ring again.

Although, in the end, I suspect they're just going to build toward Brock/Rock as has been rumored.

I'm not sure Bryan should be losing anytime soon, so I'd keep him away from Lesnar. Long term, maybe Lesnar can help him get to even another level (talk about the ultimate underdog match).

Also the potential of cesaro, I think. Paul Heyman gives a sort of built-in rivalry potential there. Although I really think that's more about giving Heyman something to do while Brock is gone. But you could ultimately use that as a platform to break Cesaro off from Heyman and potentially turn him into a megastar face.

So, booking wise, would you be ok with them to build to Rock v. Brock at WM XXXI and give the rub to Rocky, or do you make someone a transitional champion late in the year, have Lesnar destroy them, and then have Bryan win the title, as opposed to just defending it, at next year's WM?

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

So, booking wise, would you be ok with them to build to Rock v. Brock at WM XXXI and give the rub to Rocky, or do you make someone a transitional champion late in the year, have Lesnar destroy them, and then have Bryan win the title, as opposed to just defending it, at next year's WM?

Rock can't go over in that situation. Has to be Lesnar. And I'd make it non-title, although I'm not sure how you keep Lesnar out of the title picture. But those two wouldn't need a title to draw.

My problem right now is coming up with a good way to get the title off of Bryan without killing his momentum, which I think is still going to be fragile. This is WWE we're talking about, would anybody really be shocked if they just destroyed him at or after summerslam and dumped him back to the midcard...

(Hope they don't, but we've seen it a thousand times before...)

My fear is that it ends up on Batista round about the time that Guardians of the Galaxy hits theaters (august 1 - two weeks before summerslam).

[Sassy Squatch]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

So, booking wise, would you be ok with them to build to Rock v. Brock at WM XXXI and give the rub to Rocky, or do you make someone a transitional champion late in the year, have Lesnar destroy them, and then have Bryan win the title, as opposed to just defending it, at next year's WM?

Brock vs Rock is FINA as long as the championship is far away from it.

[Sassy Squatch]

But if they really want Reigns to carry the company into the future he should be the one to beat Brock.

[loochy]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

So, the general POV that you should leave on your back still applies to UT at WM? Interesting. Thanks.

No, just my POV

[WhiteWhale]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

Rock can't go over in that situation. Has to be Lesnar. And I'd make it non-title, although I'm not sure how you keep Lesnar out of the title picture. But those two wouldn't need a title to draw.

My problem right now is coming up with a good way to get the title off of Bryan without killing his momentum, which I think is still going to be fragile. This is WWE we're talking about, would anybody really be shocked if they just destroyed him at or after summerslam and dumped him back to the midcard...

(Hope they don't, but we've seen it a thousand times before...)

My fear is that it ends up on Batista round about the time that Guardians of the Galaxy hits theaters (august 1 - two weeks before summerslam).

If you've been watching you know that won't happen.

The more they 'bury' Bryan (and there has been very little of that over the past 2 years) the more the fans get behind him.

[Sassy Squatch]

Looks like Cesaro is playing the cowardly heel now.

[TimeForWasp]

I wresled in high school. To me alstar wrestling is an insult to wrestling.