mrjl
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,319
|
Post by mrjl on Dec 20, 2012 18:19:26 GMT -5
My problem with that match (other than the oh look Triple H won again factor) is why would Brock fight Hunter again? there's nothing to gain, beat him last time left him laying Have Rock win the WWE title at the Rumble. Then in the Rumble match Brock returns, maybe taking someone's spot. He won his WWE title beating Rock and he'll do it again. Then have Trips come out and work from there
|
|
|
Post by Todd Pettengill on Dec 20, 2012 18:19:55 GMT -5
You know, the crowd jeered Triple H with "You tapped out," after his Summerslam match with Brock... What makes anyone in the writer's room think that Triple H needs to get his win back?
|
|
8.2.11/SAVIOR_NEZ
Don Corleone
Michael Nesmith, inventor of all you hold dear!
Posts: 1,534
|
Post by 8.2.11/SAVIOR_NEZ on Dec 20, 2012 19:36:58 GMT -5
As much as it seems like Hunter is an egomaniac, and I have no doubt he'd want his win back from Brock, I think his little comment about Undertaker on RAW is foreshadowing a Lesnar vs. Taker match. They wouldn't have had HHH namedrop Taker if there wasn't something coming that intertwined them both. That's what I'd thought, too. And I think that makes the most sense. But that still leaves the question of what Triple H does. Seems hard to believe they'll leave him off the card entirely, and if he does have another match, it wouldn't make a lot of sense for him (kayfabe speaking, obviously) to not want another shot at Lesnar. They could always have HHH ref the match or something. I really enjoyed the HHH/Brock match at Summerslam (the feud wasn't all that great, though), but we really don't need to see it again. I hope they go the Undertaker/Brock direction. On another note, I could really do without Sheamus winning another Rumble. His World Title reign was one of my least favorites. Whoever wins the Rumble this year should actually challenge for the WWE Title and, I don't know, actually main event the show.
|
|
|
Post by mjolnir on Dec 20, 2012 19:40:33 GMT -5
I'd much rather see Lesnar face any of Orton, 'Taker or Punk at 'Mania. By a long stretch. I'm not even a HHHater but, good lord, what's the point? It just sounds boring, and I wasn't even that excited by the prospect the first time around. Triple H, of all people, shouldn't be hurting their business by taking away another big moment and big match from somebody else for the sake of "getting his win back" at this stage in his career.
And, the other two mentioned matches?
Yuck.
I don't even see how they'll do Orton/Sheamus, unless they somehow turn Orton between now and then & have him win the belt at some point too. Otherwise, I get the impression the fans are going to side fully with Randy on this one. Any way you slice it though, that looks to be a boring match and I have zero interest in it right now.
Rock/Cena II I knew was going to happen and...I'm somewhat okay with that. For the sole reason that I truly believe that John Cena will finally get his Wrestlemania moment from this match, something I don't feel he's ever gotten. As ridiculous as that is to say about a guy as dominate as him. Even if the end result is a transitional reign for Rock, another reign for Cena and overall a match I have little interest in seeing again.
|
|
saintpat
El Dandy
Release the hounds!!!
Posts: 7,664
|
Post by saintpat on Dec 20, 2012 19:56:55 GMT -5
First off, I loathe the idea of HHH-Brock.
But this "he lost clean, there's no reason for a rematch" refrain is tiresome. Did those who say this just start watching wrestling this month? Umm, Shawn lost clean to Undertaker at WM ... and got a rematch. Same for HHH. Same for, um, what, tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of wrestling rematches?
I just wonder if, for a change, more than HHH's ego is at work here -- or at least not in the usual sense. It seems like Brock's deal with WWE truly hasn't gone the way expected -- I believe the company contracted for or expected more appearances, more real interest and support from Brock than what was intended from the start of his comeback. I detect from scattered, unsourced reports that there is some kind of problem here.
So I wonder if Mr. Lesnar isn't just a really difficult guy to work with, and that makes me wonder if HHH is kind of pissed at how this whole thing has gone down. So in the ego sense of showing Brock who's boss he wants to 'berry' him at WM ... so if he proves to be impossible to work with going forward, Hunter can at least have the satisfaction of sending him out the door in what HHH considers to be a more satisfactory manner.
It's still ego, but not in the 'I want my win back' kind of way.
I wonder.
|
|
|
Post by MichaelMartini on Dec 20, 2012 19:58:59 GMT -5
I suggested this in the book the big 6 thread and I haven't read all of this one so I don't know if it's been mentioned but what about- CM Punk & Brock Lesnar vs HHH and Taker?
|
|
mrjl
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,319
|
Post by mrjl on Dec 20, 2012 20:07:55 GMT -5
I suggested this in the book the big 6 thread and I haven't read all of this one so I don't know if it's been mentioned but what about- CM Punk & Brock Lesnar vs HHH and Taker? I thought of that a while back.
|
|
|
Post by joebob27 on Dec 20, 2012 20:10:38 GMT -5
First off, I loathe the idea of HHH-Brock. But this "he lost clean, there's no reason for a rematch" refrain is tiresome. Did those who say this just start watching wrestling this month? Umm, Shawn lost clean to Undertaker at WM ... and got a rematch. Same for HHH. Same for, um, what, tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of wrestling rematches? I just wonder if, for a change, more than HHH's ego is at work here -- or at least not in the usual sense. It seems like Brock's deal with WWE truly hasn't gone the way expected -- I believe the company contracted for or expected more appearances, more real interest and support from Brock than what was intended from the start of his comeback. I detect from scattered, unsourced reports that there is some kind of problem here. So I wonder if Mr. Lesnar isn't just a really difficult guy to work with, and that makes me wonder if HHH is kind of pissed at how this whole thing has gone down. So in the ego sense of showing Brock who's boss he wants to 'berry' him at WM ... so if he proves to be impossible to work with going forward, Hunter can at least have the satisfaction of sending him out the door in what HHH considers to be a more satisfactory manner. It's still ego, but not in the 'I want my win back' kind of way. I wonder. Yeah, but what does that prove if the other guy doesn't care? Then you just have *another* bad Brock WM match and Trips is a "business" guy, he knows what happened then.
|
|
|
Post by gnr123 on Dec 20, 2012 21:39:16 GMT -5
First off, I loathe the idea of HHH-Brock. But this "he lost clean, there's no reason for a rematch" refrain is tiresome. Did those who say this just start watching wrestling this month? Umm, Shawn lost clean to Undertaker at WM ... and got a rematch. Same for HHH. Same for, um, what, tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of wrestling rematches? I just wonder if, for a change, more than HHH's ego is at work here -- or at least not in the usual sense. It seems like Brock's deal with WWE truly hasn't gone the way expected -- I believe the company contracted for or expected more appearances, more real interest and support from Brock than what was intended from the start of his comeback. I detect from scattered, unsourced reports that there is some kind of problem here. So I wonder if Mr. Lesnar isn't just a really difficult guy to work with, and that makes me wonder if HHH is kind of pissed at how this whole thing has gone down. So in the ego sense of showing Brock who's boss he wants to 'berry' him at WM ... so if he proves to be impossible to work with going forward, Hunter can at least have the satisfaction of sending him out the door in what HHH considers to be a more satisfactory manner. It's still ego, but not in the 'I want my win back' kind of way. I wonder. Did Undertaker break Shawn's arm twice? Did Undertaker pummel John Cena like we never saw before? Is Undertaker a legit MMA fighter? No, no, and no. Triple H lost fair and square and had his arm broken twice by one guy. Not to mention there was no personal heat between the two in the feud, and Brock doesn't need to fight Triple H again, he's already proven who's better. Shawn had his rematch with The Undertaker because Shawn put his career on the line. That's the only way Taker accepted the rematch. The only way they can have Triple H/Lesnar again is if Trip's wants to put his career on the line. Because Lesnar has nothing to gain from accepting another challenge from Triple H. Undertaker challenged Triple H to a rematch because he wanted to prove that's not old and frail, and still has what it takes. Triple H basically said he "won the war" with Undertaker a few months before the road to Wrestlemania. Undertaker wanted to prove him wrong. And Brock Lesnar isn't just another wrestler on the roster, he's basically like The Undertaker and The Rock, he's a special attraction. No reason to have him face a guy twice in one year who he has no personal heat with and the story just isn't as interesting as say, Undertaker vs. Lesnar.
|
|
|
Post by xxshoyuweeniexx on Dec 20, 2012 22:34:54 GMT -5
Didn't Hunter get "You tapped out" chants after he lost? Then the night after, he hammed it up with the crying and expected some loud ovation but it was mild at best?
Yeah...I like Triple H alright, but no one cares about him vs Lesnar.
|
|
|
Post by hughgrection on Dec 20, 2012 22:38:04 GMT -5
Didn't Hunter get "You tapped out" chants after he lost? Then the night after, he hammed it up with the crying and expected some loud ovation but it was mild at best? Yeah...I like Triple H alright, but no one cares about him vs Lesnar. He thinks he is this beloved HBK like figure, but he's not. He spent the prime of his career as a hated heel.
|
|
mizerable
Fry's dog Seymour
You're the lowest on the totem pole here, Alva. The lowest.
Posts: 23,475
|
Post by mizerable on Dec 20, 2012 22:50:11 GMT -5
Haha...WWE has no idea what it's doing.
You would think that Ryback after chasing Punk for so many months and screwed over...that it would be him who won the Rumble and finally ended Punk's reign. THAT is a WM moment.
Instead we have a 9 time World champion fight a 2 time Rumble winner, who in turn wins his 4th World title. How exciting and original.
It's hilarious at how mismanaged Lesnar has been. Sure, he's had his moments to look like a monster, but there's no consistancy...and if it's going to end with him losing again...then I'd rather save that loss for someone he hasn't faced yet.
I predict Punk will face Taker...because Punk has a shot of winning. RESPECT.
Ryback will be facing...I don't know...Barrett? Maybe he'll win the MITB match. Why not? Makes sense for someone like him.
Feels like WM27 all over again...completely unorganized nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by Baldobomb-22-OH-MAN!!! on Dec 20, 2012 23:07:57 GMT -5
/\ yeah I agree with your assessment, mizerable.
it's like they already planned out what Wrestlemania matches they wanted at Summerslam and didn't intend for various players to get over the way they have. so their booking strategy leaves a bunch of really over guys who need a big Wrestlemania this year like Ziggler and Ryback out in the cold just to appease ideas they had 8 months ago. how the hell can you ignore Ryback like this? or Ziggler? or hell how can you make guys like Daniel Bryan, The Shield and Team Rhodes Scholars an afterthought at a time when these are the guys getting a reaction? all to put over a worn-out John Cena, part-timers from yesteryear, and Sheamus, a man the fans have largely turned on. this is the kind of shit people mean when they say WWE doesn't do anything to make new stars. they have tonnes of guys who can be huge given the opportunity but they decide to just coast on a bunch of guys who are over-exposed, in some cases old as f***, and all prone to diminishing returns.
|
|
|
Post by thelonewolf527 on Dec 20, 2012 23:15:08 GMT -5
Haha...WWE has no idea what it's doing. You would think that Ryback after chasing Punk for so many months and screwed over...that it would be him who won the Rumble and finally ended Punk's reign. THAT is a WM moment. Instead we have a 9 time World champion fight a 2 time Rumble winner, who in turn wins his 4th World title. How exciting and original. It's hilarious at how mismanaged Lesnar has been. Sure, he's had his moments to look like a monster, but there's no consistancy...and if it's going to end with him losing again...then I'd rather save that loss for someone he hasn't faced yet. I predict Punk will face Taker...because Punk has a shot of winning. RESPECT. Ryback will be facing...I don't know...Barrett? Maybe he'll win the MITB match. Why not? Makes sense for someone like him. Feels like WM27 all over again...completely unorganized nonsense. Yeah because Ryback vs. CM Punk for the WWE Championship will be a bigger draw than The Rock as WWE Champion
|
|
|
Post by mjolnir on Dec 20, 2012 23:16:35 GMT -5
/\ yeah I agree with your assessment, mizerable. it's like they already planned out what Wrestlemania matches they wanted at Summerslam and didn't intend for various players to get over the way they have. so their booking strategy leaves a bunch of really over guys who need a big Wrestlemania this year like Ziggler and Ryback out in the cold just to appease ideas they had 8 months ago. how the hell can you ignore Ryback like this? or Ziggler? or hell how can you make guys like Daniel Bryan, The Shield and Team Rhodes Scholars an afterthought at a time when these are the guys getting a reaction? all to put over a worn-out John Cena, part-timers from yesteryear, and Sheamus, a man the fans have largely turned on. this is the kind of s*** people mean when they say WWE doesn't do anything to make new stars. they have tonnes of guys who can be huge given the opportunity but they decide to just coast on a bunch of guys who are over-exposed, in some cases old as f***, and all prone to diminishing returns. So, basically how Wrestlemania's been for some years now? Don't get me wrong, I hate it. But WWE's formula for this time of the year has seemed to been for ages now, re-push or push further the tested names, push down any hot but untested parties. Past years' victims have been Sheamus, Punk, Wade, Miz, and others. I think it's because they're more interested in grooming people for the Wrestlemania card now. Rather than using it to be their platform to make their moment or have that career defining match that brings them to the dance. Which is confusing and depressing in a way, just imagine if they had always used this formula. I mean, it derails talents that could be potentially a big name draw for them for the sake of playing it safe. Look how damaged Wade was from his radical de-push once we neared Wrestlemania time two years ago. Rather than go for the perfect Wrestlemania main event, Cena vs. Wade, they played it safe.
|
|
|
Post by Can you afford to pay me, Gah on Dec 20, 2012 23:25:36 GMT -5
Are they trying to not want me to care about WM. These sound terrible. When you have Rock and Lensar for limited time. Why in the hell are you wasting them with rematches. I don't care to see Cena vs. Rock again. There not Austin vs. Rock and there not a damn thing to care about after being shoved down my throat for a year for the first match.
HHH vs. Lensar great they already fought at SummerSlam. Not that Special. Then you want to give us Orton and Sheamus? WTF. This is WM why is it rematch central. Where is that WM marquee match that is going to make me care?
|
|
mizerable
Fry's dog Seymour
You're the lowest on the totem pole here, Alva. The lowest.
Posts: 23,475
|
Post by mizerable on Dec 20, 2012 23:36:11 GMT -5
It's getting worse though. You would think that they might have some long term planning for guys not named Triple H, Rock or Undertaker. So many times anymore, they'll hit the reset button around the Rumble or so...maybe sooner. As a result, it just seems rushed. Like I said before, Ryback ending Punk's reign at WM just seems so much like one of those "moments". Moments we hardly get anymore because things are just done for the sake of being "big" and such. We're going to put most of the focus on Undertaker, Rock, Triple H and Lesnar....4 guys who won't be part of the longterm plans. What does that say about the product? It's supposed to be the Super Bowl of wrestling...but only if the Super Bowl meant that the Super Bowl was played by a bunch of guys who retired. Yeah...there's no "limit" in pro wrestling, but it would be nice to build a consistent story around a person every now and then. I can't remember the last time someone had a "boyhood dream" moment...I guess Mysterio at WM22. We just get the same stuff every single year...and none of it seems very special. Hell, the last time I thought Wrestlemania felt like a supershow was probably at 21. Every other time, it just feels like crap is thrown together, with the focus being on the older talent.
|
|
mizerable
Fry's dog Seymour
You're the lowest on the totem pole here, Alva. The lowest.
Posts: 23,475
|
Post by mizerable on Dec 20, 2012 23:45:38 GMT -5
Yeah because Ryback vs. CM Punk for the WWE Championship will be a bigger draw than The Rock as WWE Champion Yeah, because the Rock being there, doesn't sell people on the match itself. Rock as champion will definitely bring in 100,000 more buys, right? Or is it 200,000? Wait...how can you determine who draws and who doesn't? Rock is only going to be there for a couple months. Are we only trying to pop the rating for that time, or should level out the focus a bit, in order to get other guys to look good? Not according to you! Let's put our entire stock on these guys who aren't going to be around for the rest of the year. Call me crazy, but I like it when an idea they've been holding out on for a while gets a big pay off at a big show...as opposed to...oh...just having the title dropped to a guy whose only claim to a feud is that he got blindsided by the champion. Hell, even last year...Cena/Rock was so underwhelming because it wasn't even a f***ing feud. We didn't see these guys quarrel and frustrate each other week after week. We saw them talk crap, every other week. That's a feud nowadays? The absolute MINIMAL effort between two guys who really have no reason to hate one another. Yeah....I want to see THAT match!!! Storytelling...that's what I want. Not a bunch of part timers who roll in there and do the same thing we've seen many times before.
|
|
|
Post by mjolnir on Dec 20, 2012 23:51:28 GMT -5
It's getting worse though. You would think that they might have some long term planning for guys not named Triple H, Rock or Undertaker. So many times anymore, they'll hit the reset button around the Rumble or so...maybe sooner. As a result, it just seems rushed. Like I said before, Ryback ending Punk's reign at WM just seems so much like one of those "moments". Moments we hardly get anymore because things are just done for the sake of being "big" and such. We're going to put most of the focus on Undertaker, Rock, Triple H and Lesnar....4 guys who won't be part of the longterm plans. What does that say about the product? It's supposed to be the Super Bowl of wrestling...but only if the Super Bowl meant that the Super Bowl was played by a bunch of guys who retired. Yeah...there's no "limit" in pro wrestling, but it would be nice to build a consistent story around a person every now and then. I can't remember the last time someone had a "boyhood dream" moment...I guess Mysterio at WM22. We just get the same stuff every single year...and none of it seems very special. Hell, the last time I thought Wrestlemania felt like a supershow was probably at 21. Every other time, it just feels like crap is thrown together, with the focus being on the older talent. Oh, I agree. And, yeah, I'd say 21 is right around when you started seeing it happen, the change in how Wrestlemania was set up. Traditionally, beforehand, while the top talent was always on hand and booked, there was room. Newer talent, still being established talent could take high spots and could be made still at the event. I actually think that's partially why John Cena's never had that definitive Wrestlemania moment. He was shoved to the side, in comparison to most of the time, during the Wrestlemanias he was being groomed during. Then, by the time he wasn't, he was already a made man. So he transitioned that moment that takes somebody from just a guy at Wrestlemania to a headliner at Wrestlemania. I guess, part of my problem is I'm somewhat apathetic to it now. Sure, it could change, and we're the ones who have the power to make it change. But chances are, it won't. Chances are WWE won't change this way till something major happens, like less returns on their investments. But even then, they can just groom somebody on off-Wrestlemania season and slot him into that position come Wrestlemania. Now that I think about it, I think that's partially why the Royal Rumble doesn't feel quite as special anymore. Besides their dicking around with it in recent years, putting it not as the main event, adding more people to it, ect. I think the fact that we subconsciously know we won't see somebody fresh win it & go on to make their Wrestlemania moment takes from it. Even when somebody relatively new like Del Rio does win it, he's opening, jobs, and he's quickly brushed aside for the "big guns".
|
|
|
Post by mysterydriver on Dec 21, 2012 0:14:26 GMT -5
I still feel that Brock has been wasted money by WWE. Completely misused beyond his first match back.
They might as well burned money in the middle of the ring.
|
|