Who will get their 1v1 Title Match first?

I don't remember a time where so many people were "owed" a Title Match. With Brock Lesnar currently Champ, it isn't clear who he'll face, how long he'll hold it for or who he'll drop the title to.

Out of these 5 wrestlers who are owed a 1 on 1 Title Match, who do you think will get their shot first and are there any who you think won't get them at all?

The 5 candidates are:

The Rock - Dropped the title to John Cena at Wrestlemania 29 so technically due a rematch. As far as I know it's never been mentioned.

Randy Orton - The first WWE World Heavyweight Champion lost his title at Wrestlemania 30 but wasn't pinned nor did he submit so he is due a rematch, something he has bought up several times.

Batista - Never had the title but as Royal Rumble winner was entitled to a 1 on 1 match at Mania which he never got so although he was the one that tapped out, he is due a singles match for the title. This was the storyline reason for him leaving as Triple H wouldn't give him his match.

Daniel Bryan - Had to drop the title due to needing neck surgery so should be given a title match on his return as he never lost the belt in a match.

John Cena - Seth Rollins cost him his chance to regain the title at NoC so he will probably want a fair rematch at some point.

As the question is "Who willget their shot" it's gonna be Cena. It's always Cena. If it was "Who shouldget their shot" I'd say Orton, then DB, then Dave, then Rocky, all before Cena.

I've gone for Cena, as I cant see there being another credible challenger to Brock at the current time. Agree that if Orton was built up by WWE a little bit it should be him as hes been putting on some good shows lately - plus it breaks the Brock/Cena main event cycle

Hard to tell really. WWE are really struggling for viable opponents for Brock, so much so that Big Show was rumoured to be next up. Cena is due a proper rematch but Brock doesn't appear to be working HIAC atm so maybe their program is done - if so that makes the ending to their NOC match even more cheap, but what's new.

Batista or Orton, can't see it as Brock will be kept heel plus the former is not active atm.

The Rock, possibly if rumours are true and Vince gets his way althuogh surely this rematch 'clause' has a time limit.

Daniel Bryan, yep maybe. I'm going for him. Bryan vs Brock at the Royal Rumble.

All five of those guys a perfectly viable opponents for Lesnar at this stage. I think they should go for Orton next because its a feud we never really saw when Brock was around last time. Both guys could work really well off of each other.

Depending on when Batista is back he could be up next. I feel bad for him because of the reaction he received last time. He himself wasnt the problem but he was indicative of what the problem was. Bringing him back at the height of YestleMania and pushing him to the main even wasnt a good idea, and I feel he still has something to give.

The Rock vs Brock is a big time event, worthy of WrestleMania, but shouldnt be for the title. Its a match that doesnt need the title.

I think Bryan should be the one to topple the beast. They told the story the despite his size, Punk could use his impressive skill set to go toe-to-toe with Lesnar, and they could easily do the same with Bryan, albeit with a different outcome.

Samo wrote:Its a match that doesnt need the title.

Statto00 wrote:

You think it does?

It's just the opinion in general that makes me . Your best fighters should be feuding for the title. That's what makes the belt credible.

To be fair, his point is valid. He's not saying they shouldnt be title contenders, but as a match that will draw an audience it doesnt need the title, whereas I think Bryan v Batista, for example, probably would need the title for it to feel like a main event.

If it needs the title it shouldn't be for the title.

Not sure I agree with that. Bryan, Orton and Batista in a triple threat match at Mania only works with the title, the storyline by itself would have been a let down if it had concluded on a normal triple threat.

Will anyone evwr remember Orton was in that match, the whole set up was Bryan vs Batista, thats one match that didn't feel like a Triple Threat match at all, felt for Orton going into Mania, it ahould have been the peak of his 3 year Wrestling clinic but he walked in and then out of the main event at WrestleMania as an afterthought

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Not sure I agree with that. Bryan, Orton and Batista in a triple threat match at Mania only works with the title, the storyline by itself would have been a let down if it had concluded on a normal triple threat.

That's cause a) the story was built around Bryan winning the title so stripping out the title leaves no story and b) triple threats are rarely used outside title matches anyway.

If Batista/Bryan is not main event (I disagree) then it implies one or both are not main event attractions which means they should not be competing for the title.

Neither should a match not 'need' the title as this implies there are more important things in wrestling than winning the top prize.

It depends how you're quantifying main event. Are we saying TLC main event or WrestleMania?

And aside from the story, there is no way Bryan vs either of those two, let alone the single match, would have felt like a main event. It would have felt secondary like Cena/Wyatt

I'm saying that the title is (should be) main event i.e. the most important match on the card. So any match without it is inherently not main event.

But that does not mean that the title makes any match main event quality or should be used to do so. The title is the pinnacle of the (kayfabe) sport not a hoist to the pinnacle.

That's IMO how it should be but doesn't seem to be that way in WWE for most of the time the last 5 years.

Main event doesnt automatically mean last match on the card, but a match people are most looking forward to seeing, thats why we usually get two or three 'main events' at WrestleMania.

Some of the best matches I've ever seen were purely about two guys trying to prove who the better man is. Kurt Angle vs Shawn Michaels is a prime example. They were probably the two best in the company at the time and were trying to prove it to the other. Thats a match that didnt need title, because it was a personal rivalry, not a championship rivalry.

The Rock vs Lesnar would sell itself. Just like I thought Cena vs Lesnar would sell itself. Some matches are already a huge draw that you can have two other top guys fight for the title.

If that's the case then you are booking your title all wrong. The title is not supposed to be a supplement. If 2 men are the best in the company they should be fighting for the title else you are telling the fans the title is not the most important thing in the company.

It's like Barca playing Madrid in the CL final and saying you know, our rivalry is enough so no need for that big trophy or the big stage of a final. It goes totally against the logic of sport and wrestling is kayfabe a sport.

There is a huge difference between a match "not needing the title" as opposed to a match actually "needing the title"

El Classico being contested in a CL final takes the event from a 10 to 11. Just because theres no title on the line doesnt degrade the quality of a match.

Keeping with the football analogy, look at the Real Madrid - Man Utd pre-season friendly in America that had an attendance of 75'000 fans. Arguably the two biggest clubs world football has ever seen, and it didnt need to be a Championship Final to draw fans because its STILL a huge spectacle.

Answer me this, did HBK vs Undertaker at Wrestlemania 25 need the WWE title?

Nope it didn't. No match should need the title to draw and the likelihood is it won't make it draw on it's own. If a match does 'need' the title then it shouldn't be for the title. And I've gone full circle!

liverbnz wrote:If that's the case then you are booking your title all wrong. The title is not supposed to be a supplement. If 2 men are the best in the company they should be fighting for the title else you are telling the fans the title is not the most important thing in the company.

It's like Barca playing Madrid in the CL final and saying you know, our rivalry is enough so no need for that big trophy or the big stage of a final. It goes totally against the logic of sport and wrestling is kayfabe a sport.

In that case every ppv main event should now be Lesnar v Cena for the title, as they are the two biggest stars in the company. Wrestling is not as simple as the best two fighting for the title.

If Real Madrid played Barca every year in the Champions League final nobody would mind as the chances are it would be entertaining. Having the same main event repeatedly in wrestling soon gets old!

Enforcer wrote:

liverbnz wrote:If that's the case then you are booking your title all wrong. The title is not supposed to be a supplement. If 2 men are the best in the company they should be fighting for the title else you are telling the fans the title is not the most important thing in the company.

It's like Barca playing Madrid in the CL final and saying you know, our rivalry is enough so no need for that big trophy or the big stage of a final. It goes totally against the logic of sport and wrestling is kayfabe a sport.

In that case every ppv main event should now be Lesnar v Cena for the title, as they are the two biggest stars in the company. Wrestling is not as simple as the best two fighting for the title.

If Real Madrid played Barca every year in the Champions League final nobody would mind as the chances are it would be entertaining. Having the same main event repeatedly in wrestling soon gets old!

you've caught the wrong end of the stick completely with what Liverbnz is saying, at no time was he meaning the two biggest names should face off for the belt, what he's meaning and is correct in my opinion is that the two guys who are in the title match are in a kayfabe sense the most deserving and have earned the right to be there

going back to the old Football analogy, if Blackpool were fast tracked to the Champions League final to face Barca for some reason then noy many people would give them much hope and Barca vs Blackpool doesn't have the same ring to it anyway, however if Blackpool won Promotion then made it into the Champions League then earned their way to the final people would be interested in them, they'd still be underdogs but they'd have a fighting chance and would be fully deserving of that spot, the story has to be good

But Kay Fabe, are we discussing this situation in kayfabe terms or not? In kay fabe then yes, Kay Fabe, it should be the biggest match, but it isn't in reality.

I think, essentially, it is a new situation in wrestling based on the use of part-timers.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:But Kay Fabe, are we discussing this situation in kayfabe terms or not? In kay fabe then yes, Kay Fabe, it should be the biggest match, but it isn't in reality.

I think, essentially, it is a new situation in wrestling based on the use of part-timers.

I think recent history shows that its not the biggest match although I don't think that changes my opiniom that it should be, now that doesn't mean just using the same top tier guys, it simply means I feel the writing of the story should reflect the position of the card you are on, if you are in the title picture I think that should always be the main main story, there is the odd exception of course, but for the majority of the time i feel that should be the case

The reason it hasn't been the biggest is all down to booking. I mean, I can't even remember who CM Punk defended the title against a few years back at mania. That's poor booking. In fact, other than his reign being long, it was unmemorable. Again poor booking

If Cena and Lesnar seem more important than a title match on a card - speaking theoretically - then it's been presented that way, which IMO it should not be.

The title is the only constant in WWE, so making it secondary is short-term thinking.

We addressed this on the podcast this week. But not before I'd thoroughly butchered the pronunciation of liverbnz...

Todd from Minnesota will do

liverbnz wrote:Todd from Minnesota will do