Rumoured main events already for WM 29

Wrestling Observer are reporting the following as the rumoured main events for Wrestlemania 29

WWE Title Match: The Rock v Brock Lesnar
CM Punk v Stone Cold Steve Austin
The Undertaker v John Cena

Simply put, wow if that is the case.

If that is indeed the card, I think Kleenex will be making major profits.

if thats that is epic!

I'm liking the sounds of Punk vs Austin, but the other two I'm not so keen on. I think having two older guys feuding over the strap is a massive step backwards tbh, and I think Taker should just retire, he'll never be able to top HIAC.

Rock vs Lesnar and Cena vs Taker sound terrific.

Punk vs Austin, not so much; Austin can barely walk and it can hardly be SES vs Beer drinker as Punk would end up in the heel role and he is supposed to be the next big babyface.

- WWE Title Match: The Rock vs. Brock Lesnar

- Steve Austin vs. CM Punk

- The Undertaker vs. John Cena

source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter

Merging with this:
https://www.606v2.com/t27312-rumoured-main-events-already-for-wm-29

Hope that they don’t turn Punk heel. He doesn’t have to. His straightedge lifestyle is more than enough reason to feud with the beer swilling Austin. No need to make either of them the bad guy. Let the audience decide!!! And maybe HHH vs Vince (or someone of his choosing) for ownership of WWE!

That would be brilliant. Cena has to turn heel and take the streak.

Only problem is that it will leave guys like Dolph Ziggler, The Miz, Sheamus, Wade Barrett, Christian, Alberto Del Rio & Daniel Bryan as an after thought again.

would of made more sence to swop rock and cena, since brock f5'd cena

True but WM 29 is a year away so cena and Lesnar have time to feud first.

paulscholes wrote:would of made more sence to swop rock and cena, since brock f5'd cena

They will have a match at SummerSlam I think, I can't see them stretching out another feud for a year.

Im not convinced Austin will wrestle again, he's taking major risks with his health if he does. If he was to wrestle again, I don't think it will be on the same card as The Rock/Lesnar and Cena/Undertaker. If he returns he Is worthy of top billing, so I think they will wait until Wrestlemania 30, which is likely to be in Texas. If Stone Cold does come back for 30, and it is in Texas, then id have him face Undertaker, as he's also from Texas, in what could be billed as Undertakers final match.

I think the other 2 matches are definately possible for 29, though they may not work out like that, I think they could go Undertaker/The Rock and Cena/Lesnar. Any combination is possible though, other than a Rock Cena rematch.

I think they will build up Brock Lesnar all year and he will face The Undertaker next year for the streak. A match which Taker will of course win.

If that is the card, I will start my 1 year mark out!

Don't see the point of Lesnar vs Rock for the title. I would rather a Ziggler or Rhodes or even Orton take the title off one of them to either cement their place as a true main eventer for years to come or to solidify themselves, in the case Orton, ensure he becomes 'The man' of the WWE.

CM Punk Austin would have been great 10 years ago, now Austin's body is a mess, I wouldn't like to see it, rather Punk take on Cena in match that ends a year long feud or somewhere along the lines of that.

Taker should retire, he should go out on a high on the back of an absolutely legendery match with Triple H. The streak won't be beaten and that's that, just enjoy your retirement and then return for your HOF induction, that's what I believe.

If that is the card then o my god.

I personally would like to see taker retire though. Amazing match at mania that should be the end he is 20-0 the match was titled "end of an erra" keep it that way.

CM Punk vs Stone Cold would be so goooood. I would be buzzing for that match the most.

But WWE do change the card a lot in the year long bulid up. This time last year they were rumouring Undertaker vs Chris Jericho for the main event.

CM Punk v Stone Cold yes.

As for the rest no.

Why fill the mania Card with old stars instead of using the current roster....how will they ever gain experience of been top of a card if they get pointless 10 minute mania matches!

Yes have one match as a headline which is unlike any other on the card but dont just over fill it with them.

I would personally like to see Ziggler, Rhodes, Del Rio, Miz, Bryan and Orton headlining next years mania in some way instead of Rock, Brock or Taker.

Rocks had his moment and will never come back full time.

Brock isn't going to stick around he proved that first time round.

Taker is done 20-0 if he does another Mania he is going the same way as Flair and Hogan and refusing to let go and admit when its time to end it.

WWE has to learn how to take risks and trust the current talent instead of relying on the old guys....how else will the company ever evolve!

VoiceOfTheVoiceless wrote:

WWE has to learn how to take risks and trust the current talent instead of relying on the old guys....how else will the company ever evolve!

VotV - little lesson for you. You are only allowed to criticise TNA for that around these parts If WWE do it, its great, if TNA do it, its desperate.

Your welcome

John Cena and Lesnar are only 35, so if hardly say they are old.

Am I the only one who isn't interested in seeing Punk vs Austin?

Got to be worried whether Austin is up to it, and especially against someone as energetic as Punk. If Punk is out of the title picture, Cena out of the title picture and Brock and Rock part time, the title is taking a back seat in in 2013.

I don't agree Taker should retire, but I'd rather he took on a younger guy and beat them, but put them into the limelight. He should take Ziggler, attack the show off, the new HBK, and give him a big match to get him over even with a loss.

Personally, save Austin for a Texas night when there's less figures from the past around so that we can see more progress from the here and now. Got to see what the draft does yet

Rock vs Brock for the title = Money. The Summerslam 02 rematch.

Gregers wrote:Am I the only one who isn't interested in seeing Punk vs Austin?

Your not Gregers, it doesn't really excite me, I mean it should on paper, but, when thinking about it the only way they could do it is to turn Punk heel, which would be stupid when building him up as the new top baby face. Austin would be awful in the ring, his body won't be able to put on a good match and he risks doing more damage to what is already a battered body.

Is WWE peaking too soon in some respects? After this Mania and what looks to be the top 3 matches for next year. Is there anyway that they can top that for WM30?

Only matches I could think that would be left after that (if you assume Lesnar and Rock are only on 1 year deals) would be:

Punk Vs Taker and Cena Vs Orton. Admittidly its 2 years so enough time to make new main eventers, but the scale of the matches at Mania in the 2 years previous would dwarf this Mania which is why I would think Cena Vs Orton would have to happen as they wouldn't have had a fued for 5 years or so. Persoally I think they will hold of Undertaker Vs Cena until WM30 for their main event there.

Just because Lesnar's only signed a 1 year deal, it doesn't mean he wont extend it.

true, but if it gets to a year and he doesn't it leaves them a year to develop something.

I can see Lesnar doing just the 1 year as he is reportedly getting £5m for a years work.

It looks good on paper, but what about the younger guys? Also, all three of these matches would be worthy of WM main event status, surely they'll save at least one of them for WM 30?

Adam D wrote:

VoiceOfTheVoiceless wrote:

WWE has to learn how to take risks and trust the current talent instead of relying on the old guys....how else will the company ever evolve!

VotV - little lesson for you. You are only allowed to criticise TNA for that around these parts If WWE do it, its great, if TNA do it, its desperate.

Your welcome

Difference being Lesnar, Rock, Taker and HHH can still go. Sting, Hogan and Flair can't!

It is a jaw dropping trio of matches, but will these be for titles? Lesnar v Rock can't be surely...unless either one is planning to stay around. Punk v Austin, if for a belt, means I can only see a Punk win. And Cena v Taker will be for the streak.

And if memory proves me right, that will most probably be Cena's 3rd Mania loss on the bounce.

Yes it would be

Wouldn't be surprised if cena was told he would get the streak when he found out Rock was going over him - it would make him a legend on par with the greats, the guy who ended the streak.

He will win at WM 29 no doubt, as he is on a 2 WM losing streak.

As for Punk Austin, I know Punk is brilliant and massively over, but you would have to be an incredible mark to be interested in this match when you look past the billing - Austin can barely walk now and it would take an absolute masterclass to make it face vs face.

Is this correct in regards to Austin because the last I heard was that he was feeling in decent shape and believing he could do another match.

Hero wrote:Is this correct in regards to Austin because the last I heard was that he was feeling in decent shape and believing he could do another match.

I dunno man I'm no expert, but a broken neck and being in 2 knee braces 10 years ago doesn't suggest it.

Whilst I'm sure he keeps fit I doubt he is in prime physical shape, he will be 48 come WM 29 and hasn't had the commitments to keep fit like the Rock (action star) and Lesnar (MMA fighter) have.

Hell even if he had never had one injury I'd be doubting he could go for 30 mins at wrestlemania 10 years since he'd been in a wwe ring.

who said it would be a 30 min match?

They could get off doing a shorter one tbh, there would be enough star power in the PPV for people to buy it and if anything the quicker Punk wins as you assume you would the more convincing it is

Austin doesn't have to be in tip-top shape; Punk is good enough to carry him for certain periods during a match. And if a match is agreed soon (behind the scenes), then he has year to get fit, or fit enough I should say.

Lets face it...Austin was never the best physical specimen, but then it didn't have to be as it didn't fit his character.

I don't see the point in either and disagree Punk is good enough to carry a nearly 50, previously retired on medical grounds, legend to any sort of spectacle - no one is.

Honestly the fans will just turn against Punk if a nearly crippled stone cold is wheeled out just to try put him over.

Don't know if anyone's seen any of the q&a's that Austin's been doing on his new website, but he said last week that he's in the best physical shape for years and doesn't suffer from anything more than a few aches and pains which come with getting older. He still looks good physically as he's in movies too and says if he was struggling for money he could easily come back for a 2 year full time run. I get that he wouldn't be as good as before but I don't think he's quite as broken down as some think.

So The Rock, Brock or Austin to win the rumble?

Mark_Seven wrote:Don't know if anyone's seen any of the q&a's that Austin's been doing on his new website, but he said last week that he's in the best physical shape for years and doesn't suffer from anything more than a few aches and pains which come with getting older. He still looks good physically as he's in movies too and says if he was struggling for money he could easily come back for a 2 year full time run. I get that he wouldn't be as good as before but I don't think he's quite as broken down as some think.

Fair play to the guy if he is in good nick and the writers can do a good job with the feud then it could be exciting to watch - I just doubt it, even if he retired in full health the guy is nearly 50 and has been out of the ring for 10 years.

Age is not important. Sting and Taker can still have good matches and they are around the same age if not older. Austin coming back would be a huge thing for the federation, just like the rock returning. That the matches straight after would be of a poor standard is, however wrongly, insignificant. It is all about getting a huge a buzz so that peopl will spend money to buy the PPV.

TwisT wrote:Age is not important. Sting and Taker can still have good matches and they are around the same age if not older. Austin coming back would be a huge thing for the federation, just like the rock returning. That the matches straight after would be of a poor standard is, however wrongly, insignificant. It is all about getting a huge a buzz so that peopl will spend money to buy the PPV.

Austin makes regular appearances and isn't a mainstream star like the rock or lesnar.

Age does matter when you've been out of the ring 10 years unfortunately.

It might be amazing, I have my doubts - lets wait and see

Stone Cold can barely walk???

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oG-G9REH4xQ

That's from Raw last year.... He's in great shape. Barely walk

Austin has said a few times lately on twitter that he's got one more match in him and is in decent shape. His condition can't be any worse than The Undertakers and look what he achieved. Austin would also be in there with an incredible worker in CM Punk. He wouldn't do it if it could jeopardise his legacy.

I think the bigger issue is the fact that you risk killing all of Punk's momentum as the top face by putting up against Austin. If I was to book it, it would have to be a passing of the torch with the handshake at the end and Austin endorsing Punk.

Steve Austin recently spoke with Zoo Magazine in the UK about the release of his new DVD movie Recoil and said that he could return to the ring for a match in the right situation. "If the right situation, the right opponent and the right circumstances came up for the WWE, then it would certainly be something worth considering," he said. "Could I have another match or two? Yeah. Physically I am in really good shape right now. People seem to think I am half-dead!... In my movies, I do some pretty hellacious fight scenes that, maybe, a normal person couldn't do. So my physicality is fine, my neck is fine after having it all fused-up. I am not pitching for another match but if it was a win-win situation for everybody, then absolutely, I would consider it.

Crimey wrote:I think the bigger issue is the fact that you risk killing all of Punk's momentum as the top face by putting up against Austin. If I was to book it, it would have to be a passing of the torch with the handshake at the end and Austin endorsing Punk.

Austin with a beer, Punk with a pepsi I can see it now!

I'm still really surprised WWE, CM Punk and Pepsi haven't come to some kind of deal. Punk could do for Pepsi what Austin did for Budweiser.

Why do you people who 17/18 talk about the attitude era when they would have been about 5?

HitmanOwl wrote:Why do you people who 17/18 talk about the attitude era when they would have been about 5?

Because they all think guys like Lesnar were part of the AE too.