Brock Lesnar's Big Announcement

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2015/0324/591705/more-details-on-brock-lesnar-big-wwe-announcement/

So he's staying! New multi year deal with pretty much the same commitments as now. What does everyone think? Personally think they done this to stop the crowd Poopie all over the main event ala the Goldberg match.

Amazing! Absolutely amazing. The crowd is going to be so pro Lesnar now!!!!

Great news, I think the crowd would have been pro Lesnar anyway, as the fans aren't as resentful to wrestlers working part-time schedules/leaving as they were 10 -15 years ago.

I don't see where they can go with the current incarnation of Lesnar as a heel. He's too popular with the crowd, and there aren't too many opponents that are at his level right now. Daniel Bryan could have been a contender, but he's done too many clean jobs. I can see Heyman turning on him to align himself with someone else at some point.

Yeah they would have been pro Lesnar anyway but I think that would have due more to them being anti Reigns. Reigns is in for an even worse night now.

There's the answer then. Heyman turns on Lesnar and sides with Reigns, turning Reigns heel (already hated) and Lesnar face (already loved).

Makes the wrestlemania main event interesting now

Great news, I'm still of the opinion that the WWE need more from their WWE Champion and it hinders the product not being able to base storylines around the champ enough but I'd possibly not be in such a rush to get the belt off him now.

As a fan it is a truly great result, Brock might not wrestle often, but when he does it is in the best matches of the year for WWE.

There are some great potential matches in the next couple of years. I think a face Brock beating Rusev will get a massive pop.

I'm dying to see Uhaa Nation stand side by side with Brock.

And you know what happens to a bully like Kevin Owens when they are not the biggest kid in the school yard any more.

Kay Fabe wrote:Great news, I'm still of the opinion that the WWE need more from their WWE Champion and it hinders the product not being able to base storylines around the champ enough but I'd possibly not be in such a rush to get the belt off him now.

I disagree on this one, I don't think the title being on say John Cena or even Seth Rollins for the past eight months would have improved the quality of the show, I do however think that Lesnar being champion had made the championship matches more important.

If it wasn't for Rollins having the case I could see Reigns turning and Heyman costing Lesnar the title. Suppose Heyman could help Rollins but it would be a waste to have him backed by both Heyman and The Authority.

Please give us Lesnar vs Bryan at Summerslam now in front of that New York/European crowd.

Yeah even if Lesnar doesn't somehow retain, this is now the perfect opportunity to use Lesnar for huge matches.

Think Lesnar/Bryan has to happen at Summerslam, I wouldn't care who won it, I didn't care when Lesnar beat Punk at Summerslam 2013 and I think that's the case with this match.

If Rusev is still on for the main event over the next year a match with Lesnar would be a good idea as well.

My main hope for Lesnar now is that we don't see him against Cena or Triple H. Both those have been done now and there simply isn't as lot of demand for it. My worry is that they'll have Cena/Lesnar again and give Cena the win in order to try and boost Cena after losing quite a lot.

From what I've heard Lesnar is really keen on Bryan and would love a match with him. Part of the reason he walked out from RAW a couple of weeks ago is that they wanted to do the Bryan match that night, and he wasnt happy with it. He wants it to be a huge event and get the build up it deserves.

If they keep the title on Lesnar I can see him dropping it at Summerslam to Bryan, who wins the Elimination Chamber the PPV before.

The only problem with that is what do you do with Rollins and his MitB?

Samo wrote:The only problem with that is what do you do with Rollins and his MitB?  

Failed cash in. Maybe Orton ruins it for him which keeps their feud going and keeps Rollins looking strong.

Ambrose blocking it once more would be even better

Crimey wrote:

Kay Fabe wrote:Great news, I'm still of the opinion that the WWE need more from their WWE Champion and it hinders the product not being able to base storylines around the champ enough but I'd possibly not be in such a rush to get the belt off him now.

I disagree on this one, I don't think the title being on say John Cena or even Seth Rollins for the past eight months would have improved the quality of the show, I do however think that Lesnar being champion had made the championship matches more important.

Maybe I wasnt clear enough, it was more a branch to my point on another thread, I think putting the belt on Lesnar was 100% the right thing to do and having him hold the belt and defend it in the manner he has was also good but in doing so the WWE have seriously limited themselves and while I believe it was a successful experiment I also believe its now almost run its course.

I agree that Lesnar has elevated the title and has made those title matches feel more important but for me there just isn't enough of them - He is  great character but I feel the product actually suffers more from his absence than peaks with his attendance and that for me is down to the fact a number one contender basically has to keep himself over until Vince is ready to use one of Lesnar's dates.


I think we are nearing the time to try somethinf different although with him re-signing it takes the pressure off WWE actually doing it for the wrong reasons

For me that's a failure of WWE to not be able to write interesting storylines without the champion and I'm certain once Lesnar drops the title the quality of story around the championship won't increase just because they're on TV more. In fact what I imagine will happen is we'll see a lot more physical interaction between the champion and number one contender, and probably see the champion looking weak on Raw.

If he wasn't disappearing for months on end then it'd be worth it. Its a shame they may not get to run with a story where WWE is desperate to win it back, The Authority realising they've let Lesnar take the title and do what he wants with it. I'd have them bring in a newly heel Sheamus as their plan "B", that way Sheamus gets a huge feud, Lesnar gets to be cheered, and then Rollins can cash in after Lesnar beats Sheamus

This news opens up what will happen on Sunday but I think it's a red herring and Reigns still leaves as champ. Although www may be having second thoughts and wouldn't be surprised if they are unsure who to win at this point.

They had a real chance to put the lower titles to the forefront in the last 8 months and showcase the talent they have but have failed to do that.

To extend on DZ's I would be in favour for Lesnar holding it for another 8-10 months having gone through most of the locker room like a beast then a return from someone/whoever can win it back for the locker room.

Crimey wrote:For me that's a failure of WWE to not be able to write interesting storylines without the champion and I'm certain once Lesnar drops the title the quality of story around the championship won't increase just because they're on TV more. In fact what I imagine will happen is we'll see a lot more physical interaction between the champion and number one contender, and probably see the champion looking weak on Raw.

It depends who becomes Champion in my opinion - I think Rollins will be an excellent Champ, the majority seem to still be behind Daniel Bryan too, if these guys were Champ or even possibly Rusev then I think the product would be viewed as good or at least "getting better" although if Cena won it back I'm sure most will dispair.

I can completely understand why fans want Lesnar to keep the belt, I do too to an extent but personally I feel that its went almpst as far as it can, the Title needs to be the main focus of the show, it hasn't been for a while, it is when Lesnar is in town but its just not enough for me.

If they can guarantee him being there for Extreme Rules, Payback, SummerSlam, Night of Champions and Survivor Series then I wouldn't have a huge problem with carrying the belt on Lesnar's charisma.

I'd also want him to defend against lots of different people. Orton, Rollins, Bryan, Ziggler and then Ambrose. Then you could give him TLC off before losing it at the Rumble.

Sadly, its more likely he'd appear at SummerSlam, Night of Champions and then the Rumble

I love Lesnar, but I would still rather he be at less dates than you're suggesting. I think maybe just one more would have been great since last Wrestlemania in my opinion. 

So if he did Wrestlemania, Payback, Summerslam, Survivor Series and then Royal Rumble, Wrestlemania that would be fine and actually ideal for me. I still think he'd remain the best if he did more, but I like actually missing a wrestler and being excited to see them again. Even when he did two in a row with Summerslam and then Night of Champions I felt that it just wasn't quite the same excitement, it was at a high by the Rumble though.

I think they need to manage his Raw appearances better though, I'd like more appearances from him at Raw, but less just standing next to Heyman, they're such a waste of him but for some reason it's WWE's favourite way to use him. His best use on a Raw was when he came out and attacked Jericho and then got into the cage with Cena and Rollins.

But would you prefer the Ic title as main event on the next PPV after wrestlemania and Brock as champ, then when he is in town its a big freaking deal or would you want Reigns vs Big Show for the wwe title at the next PPV.

To be fair, thats a little harsh. I'd rather watch Reigns v Rollins than Lesnar v Zack Ryder.

Depends how its booked. I believe it was Hero who said he'd rather watch a 3 star match with a 5 star story than vice versa, and im inclined to agree with him.

Crimey wrote:
So if he did Wrestlemania, Payback, Summerslam, Survivor Series and then Royal Rumble, Wrestlemania that would be fine and actually ideal for me. I still think he'd remain the best if he did more, but I like actually missing a wrestler and being excited to see them again. Even when he did two in a row with Summerslam and then Night of Champions I felt that it just wasn't quite the same excitement, it was at a high by the Rumble though.

My two points would be:

It was less exciting cos it was Cena again.

Could he not still do that but without the belt?

bretmeharty wrote:But would you prefer the Ic title as main event on the next PPV after wrestlemania and Brock as champ, then when he is in town its a big freaking deal or would you want Reigns vs Big Show for the wwe title at the next PPV.

I think thats going from one extreme to the other,  most Wrestling fans wont want to see the belt on Cena or the Big Show in a title match so using those as alternatives kinda makes the question rhetorical,  if the alternative was Rollins vs Reigns or Rollins/Reigns vs Ambrose or Rollins/Ambrose vs Bryan for the World Title then answers would be different

WWE have signed a deal with TapOut so expecting to see Lesnar in some MMA style/sponsored clothing

Fernando wrote:WWE have signed a deal with TapOut so expecting to see Lesnar in some MMA style/sponsored clothing

Doesnt Lesnar own his own brand of MMA clothing? DeathClutch I think?

Samo wrote:

Fernando wrote:WWE have signed a deal with TapOut so expecting to see Lesnar in some MMA style/sponsored clothing

Doesnt Lesnar own his own brand of MMA clothing?  DeathClutch I think?

No idea fella, It seems bit of a strange move otherwise unless getting a Frak load of money.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

Crimey wrote:
So if he did Wrestlemania, Payback, Summerslam, Survivor Series and then Royal Rumble, Wrestlemania that would be fine and actually ideal for me. I still think he'd remain the best if he did more, but I like actually missing a wrestler and being excited to see them again. Even when he did two in a row with Summerslam and then Night of Champions I felt that it just wasn't quite the same excitement, it was at a high by the Rumble though.

My two points would be:

It was less exciting cos it was Cena again.

Could he not still do that but without the belt?

I think it being Cena definitely contributed to that.

Of course he can, but I would rather he kept the belt because I feel that it elevates the belt higher and I don't think Reigns or Rollins are ready to be champion and they're the only other two who can leave Wrestlemania with the belt.

Does Lesnar really need the WWE title?

GSC wrote:Does Lesnar really need the WWE title?

I hate that question and I cant stand when people say "insert name" doesn't need the Title


It shouldn't be about that ever

Yeah that brings up the age old argument of whether the championship should go to somebody who needs it, or if it should go to the best. For some reason, over recent years I think that it's become more common for people to suggest that unless somebody 'needs' the championship, they shouldn't have it.

Kay Fabe wrote:

GSC wrote:Does Lesnar really need the WWE title?

I hate that question and I cant stand when people say "insert name" doesn't need the Title


It shouldn't be about that ever

It does apply to Lesnar though. He's a special attraction, so does he need that belt to be the special attraction?

I think the Championship needs Brock. He's the biggest, baddest bad ass in the WWE, he knocked UT silly, he rag dolled Cena. He makes the title look credible.

I speculated a while ago that a rumoured deal with Tapout might have been a way that WWE could cover Brock's wages via merchandising (given that he doesn't do house shows, there are no PPV buy rates and its hard to see what if any impact he's had on the Network). I see that closely following Brock's announcement, this Tapout deal has been signed. So I do wonder if we'll see Brock in their apparel soon.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

Kay Fabe wrote:

GSC wrote:Does Lesnar really need the WWE title?

I hate that question and I cant stand when people say "insert name" doesn't need the Title


It shouldn't be about that ever

It does apply to Lesnar though. He's a special attraction, so does he need that belt to be the special attraction?

Lesnar never needs the title but thats not the point is it? At this moment in time he is the best man for the job

Is he if he takes the belt away from the company for long stretches of time?

Thats the companies call isn't it? They must see a greater value in it this way if they've stuck with it for so long.

Personally I've enjoyed his reign although I do think its coming the time to maybe try something different, the pleasing thing about Lesnar signing a new deal is that there is now no great pressure on them making him drop the the belt at Mania unless they are 100% committed to the idea