Should Ambrose go over Lesnar?

[Deleted]

Yeah it's the perfect time to do so. The Undertakers Wrestlemania streak happened two years ago and it sounds less impressive as time goes by especially if they have Shane beat The Undertaker. Second I think fans are getting sick and tired of Ambrose's always looking strong and coming close in big time matches he never wins. At this point it could be momentum damaging and a win can seriously put a rocket up Ambrose's ass.

[A Platypus Rave is Correct]

Yes.

[Crappler El 0 M]

Beating Brock would obviously be good for Ambrose, but if they do beat Brock, they better protect Ambrose and use him like a big deal after Mania. Even when Cena, Orton, and Rollins come back, they can't have Ambrose go right back to where he was on the card. Otherwise, it was not worth beating Brock.

Yes, I realize I've made this point like three times now said different ways. Please forgive me.

[Deleted]

Man, Reigns turning heel and feuding with Ambrose, eventually putting him over the WWE title? That's like a blueprint for a top face. WWE's stumbled into a situation where all the pieces are in place.

Again.

[lemonyellowson]

100 percent yes. They can do it with shenanigans to keep Brock strong.

[darkjourney]

People do realize the Mcmahons aren't going to push Ambrose as the top baby face right regardless.


You know why? Because thats what the FANS want. So this would only hurt Lesnar's aura and at the same time do nothing for Ambrose since if they really wanted Ambrose as the top face they would have done in years ago when the Shield split up.

And with Cena returning, and Rollins returning both guys will be pushed over Ambrose along with Reigns. Even if Ambrose does get a main event push it will only be for a few months. So what you will have is:

1. Ambrose only getting a moment benefit slaying the beast (without proper follow up). He'll be back to the upper mid card rarely if ever winning any matches
2. Lesnar's invincibility/credibility hurt

This hurts on two fronts.



No to this. No 1000X

[joediego]

Mar 23, 2016 8:50:07 GMT -5 Lizuka #BLM said:

Mar 23, 2016 8:46:49 GMT -5 joediego said:

No. Ambrose is nowhere near Lesnar's level. They are saving Lesnar for Reigns.

So, save Brock for someone already established as a world-beater, who's been widely rejected any time they've actually positioned him for a major match, who if he ever faced Brock again would likely just inspire booing at best and indifference at worst given it'd be blatantly obvious who was winning, who previously was only shown as a threat to Brock in a way where if it happened the same way again would make both guys look like utter morons, when Brock's in a match where he could easily lose by a complete fluke and still keep every bit of his aura afterward. Makes sense.

That's the WWE for you.

[Cela]

It's pretty clear that Ambrose is winning. It would be Booker/HHH levels if he lost after this build up.

He'll just keep coming with his weird seal flipper punches and wacky faces and end with a dirty deeds on stairs.

Predicting his rope clothesline gets countered into an F5 at one point, so there's that.

[Deleted]

Mar 23, 2016 12:16:42 GMT -5 darkjourney said:

People do realize the Mcmahons aren't going to push Ambrose as the top baby face right regardless.


You know why? Because thats what the FANS want. So this would only hurt Lesnar's aura and at the same time do nothing for Ambrose since if they really wanted Ambrose as the top face they would have done in years ago when the Shield split up.

And with Cena returning, and Rollins returning both guys will be pushed over Ambrose along with Reigns. Even if Ambrose does get a main event push it will only be for a few months. So what you will have is:

1. Ambrose only getting a moment benefit slaying the beast (without proper follow up). He'll be back to the upper mid card rarely if ever winning any matches
2. Lesnar's invincibility/credibility hurt

This hurts on two fronts.



No to this. No 1000X

1.) The topic's called "should Ambrose go over Lesnar" and not "will Ambrose go over Lesnar".

and 2

2.) Ambrose beating Lesnar is still not the same as anyone going over Lesnar in a 1v1 sanctioned standard match which is what the company has been enforcing. It's the same reason why Taker beat Lesnar months ago the way he did and the same reason why Rollins technically won the triple threat at WM. It's a stipulation that keeps Lesnar strong and only helps who wins. This doesn't damage Lesnar.

This does not hurt Lesnar and if anything this revolves around your opinion of Ambrose as a whole rather than how it helps his character given what you've said about him in other threads. You've commented on Ambrose losing all of his matches and yet here's a match that he has a chance of winning that fits his style and doesn't even hurt Lesnar given he's lost matches due to stipulations in the past and yet this is a bad idea?

That makes no sense.

[Deleted]

He is going over, but that's just so he is strong for Roman to squash.

Seriously though I think when Brock finally loses it should be in THE main event.

[StuntGranny®]

No.

Yes, I hate Ambrose, but he can still look good in defeat. Lesnar is God status right now in WWE. He ended the streak and has obliterated guys left and right. The guy to cut him down shouldn't be Dean Ambrose. It's not believable and it's not necessary. Again, Ambrose can put up a hell of a fight, take Brock to the limit, and have him come up short in the end. Many guys have lost and gone on to look better because of it. It'll be fine and won't hurt him to lose to a guy like Lesnar.

Having said all of that, I fully expect Brock to lose to Ambrose thanks to interference from the Wyatt family. That and the "Shield bias" the WWE has been planted in for what seems like forever now.

[Hit Girl]

Yes

They are running out of chances to light the fuse on Ambrose. No one in WWE looks strong in defeat anymore. If you lose, you're a loser. The part time guy should not be going over the full time guy they need to build up.

[Fade]

Mar 23, 2016 13:35:45 GMT -5 Cela said:

Predicting his rope clothesline gets countered into an F5 at one point, so there's that.

Or a suplex. And with the momentum Dean gets with his rope-thing.... geez.

[CATCH_US IS the Conversation]

Mar 23, 2016 18:04:28 GMT -5 StuntGranny® said:

No.

Yes, I hate Ambrose, but he can still look good in defeat. Lesnar is God status right now in WWE. He ended the streak and has obliterated guys left and right. The guy to cut him down shouldn't be Dean Ambrose. It's not believable and it's not necessary. Again, Ambrose can put up a hell of a fight, take Brock to the limit, and have him come up short in the end. Many guys have lost and gone on to look better because of it. It'll be fine and won't hurt him to lose to a guy like Lesnar.

Having said all of that, I fully expect Brock to lose to Ambrose thanks to interference from the Wyatt family. That and the "Shield bias" the WWE has been planted in for what seems like forever now.

Thing is that if WWE keeps using "God status" as an excuse, then it's never going to happen, and they'll end up wasting the Lesnar rub on someone who doesn't need it. Which is exactly how we ended up with Lesnar breaking the Streak in the first place.

[Sephiroth]

Be worth it just to see Heyman freaking out

[Kevin Hamilton]

Ya know how ya get Dean near Brock's level?

Have him beat Brock.

[Deleted]

And to go along with what Kev said above...

What's the point of making it a No Holds Barred match with weapons (Ambrose's specialty with weapons from legends) if Ambrose is supposed to get beaten? Just have it be a standard match in that case and have Ambrose eventually do damage to Brock like Reigns when he fought him last year and only got damage at the very end of the match. Start the match off with Ambrose not doing damage until he attacks Lesnar's legs, more high flying moves and then eventually get in some of his specialties and boom, he loses.

The stipulation's in for a reason.

[hashtagdaley/JudasDay]

Quick answer... Yes.

But the more important question is how is the chainsaw going to be used in the match? There aren't many weapons in wrestling that are less believable than Janice, but a freakin' chainsaw is one of them. A chainsaw right in the diverticulitis does sound like the blueprint for defeating Brock though.

[Deleted]

Mar 23, 2016 21:16:29 GMT -5 hashtagdaley/JudasDay said:

Quick answer... Yes.

But the more important question is how is the chainsaw going to be used in the match? There aren't many weapons in wrestling that are less believable than Janice, but a freakin' chainsaw is one of them. A chainsaw right in the diverticulitis does sound like the blueprint for defeating Brock though.

Ambrose grabs the chainsaw and then Lesnar grabs his hand immediately and breaks it somehow. I don't know say he breaks the chain rendering it useless.

[bigalbass86 AKA Smokin Vokoun]

Yes....a MILLION times yes.


Plus, I'm very tired of the "looking good defeat" line of thinking. Especially for a guy who, as stated before, loses almost every big match. And Brock is the kind of wrestler that won't look weak at all for losing. And if WWE really cares about the future, Dean HAS to win. Looking good in defeat does not cut it for me.