Is Brock as champ really a good thing?

[Senhor Perfect]

Most of us are in agreement that Brock will walk out of SummerSlam with the championship. However, is that really what's best for business? Brock has a limited amount of dates. If they want him to remain champion until the Royal Rumble, or even Survivor Series, how often will he be able to appear on RAW? It irked everyone, and rightfully so, when the Rock was champ and either appeared via satellite or not at all. Will we just get Paul Heyman hype jobs every Monday without seeing the champion at all until a week or two before a PPV? Brock is a great name to have as champion and brings legitimacy to the WWE like pretty much no other man can, I just don't know if having a champion who won't be around much is such a great idea.

 

[Just Kevin]

From the time that Brock broke the streak until he returned as plan C, it was Heyman who kept him alive. Who's to say that a Heyman promo every week hyping the next title defense with the obligatory appearance by Lesnar for the random beatdown of his opponent won't work? They could try it for a month or two and gauge audience reaction and go from there. We all know that Heyman on the mic is pure gold and I don't think we have to see Brock every week for a feud to be hyped.. him standing beside Heyman bouncing and making random faces won't hype much honestly. He shows up once a month.. beats up his opponent and Heyman does the rest.. in the meantime the midcard gets the chance to shine as we see more talent coming up in the ranks on RAW rather than the typical main event finish based around whatever WHC feud is going at the moment.

If any of that made sense let me know =)

 

[The GOAT]

I sincerely doubt that Lesnar is keeping the strap all the way till Wrestlemania. From the sound of it, he may not even be keeping it past Night Of Champions. But regardless, for however long he does keep it, there ARE clever ways to book around it without demanding that he appear every single week. Paul Heyman stated it perfectly in an interview just yesterday:

Fans who say Brock Lesnar shouldn't win the WWE World Heavyweight Title because he's a part-timer:

"I don't know if any of those critics of privy to an agreement Brock Lesnar may or may not have with WWE. So I don't understand how anybody can credibly say this is what Brock Lesnar's schedule is going to be when he becomes the WWE champion. Second, I think the WWE championship is the defended too often and lost some of the prestige because of the beast of monthly pay-per-views. The champion having to defend on every single pay-per-view, let alone at every single arena, has taken away from the special event that is when a champion defends the title."

"Here is the best example I can give you. Why don't we just do 12 WrestleMania events a year? I mean it's the brand name in pay-per-view. You know people understand that WrestleMania means it's something special and unique and doesn't happen all the time. It's can't miss. Well, you can't do 12 WrestleMania events a year because then you water-down WrestleMania, and it won't mean as much on the rare occasion you present the brand name WrestleMania."

"It's the same with Brock Lesnar. If you present Brock Lesnar 52 weeks a year and you have Brock Lesnar defend the title 12 times a year, you're losing money. You're not making money because you are watering down the unique opportunity that the audience can have to see an once-in-a-lifetime athlete on the rare occasion that he dons the tights and laces up the boots and goes into the ring to beat people within an inch of their lives."

"Plus, here is one more thing to consider. If Brock Lesnar were to work a full-time schedule he would wipe out the roster at once. There would be nobody left for him to fight. So how can people be clamoring for Brock Lesnar to be work a full-time schedule? Then you'll have three hours of Brock and Paul Heyman sitting alone in a ring talking to each other because there would be nobody left for Brock Lesnar to conquer."

 

[Red Rain]

It isn't a matter of him defending the title, its a matter of him showing up to the arena at all.
For some reason, a person will always feel cheated if he goes to an arena and the champion is too busy to show.
It makes the other stars look second rate. Even worse would be the live RAW's he would miss.
As for the Rock comparison, there really is none. The Rock isn't a wrestler anymore. He was similar to a trophy wife, a paper champion if you will.

Lesnar still has the cred so if he isn't defending the title it isn't because he's a protected commodity, its because he's simply better.

 

[Leo C]

It's a good thing. I'm quite sure he'll beat Cena at SS, retain at NoC, and then on the following Raw he'll lay down in the ring and Rollins will pin him, because he's just their mercenary to get the belt off Cena. Then Rollins has the belt, and, well, he'll probably drop it back to Cena so he can do the job to Reigns at WM but yeah, Lesnar won't hold it for more than a month or so.

 

[Red Rain]

Sorry, anybody who lies down for anybody is the stupidist mother***king idea ever.
I wouldn't OK it even if it rocket launched Rollins into superstardom
The person signing off on this would be a jacka**, then again this is HHH we're talking about here.
He might think its funny, ironically it was funny once HBK handed HHH the Euro title

I'd refuse that sh** if I were Rollins. WWE really would be c*nts if they ok'd this idea

 

[Leo C]

Sorry, anybody who lies down for anybody is the stupidist mother***king idea ever.
I wouldn't OK it even if it rocket launched Rollins into superstardom
The person signing off on this would be a jacka**, then again this is HHH we're talking about here.
He might think its funny, ironically it was funny once HBK handed HHH the Euro title

I'd refuse that sh** if I were Rollins. WWE really would be c*nts if they ok'd this idea

It's the best way I figured they could do it. That way, Cena doesn't kill the guy who broke the streak his first match after, Lesnar doesn't hold the belt for long and we get Seth's reign out of the way (since I think Reigns is getting it at WM and having Rollins cash in afterwards would result in a failed cash in or a short reign from him and Roman, which wouldn't be great). Granted, titles switching hands this way isn't great to see, but unless Lesnar does a job to Cena/someone destroys him causing him to be cashed in on (which would turn Lesnar babyface, which... I dislike) I'm not sure how they could get themselves out of this. Unless they want Brock to hold it until WM and drop to Roman or whatever.

 

[Just Kevin]

It's the best way I figured they could do it. That way, Cena doesn't kill the guy who broke the streak his first match after, Lesnar doesn't hold the belt for long and we get Seth's reign out of the way (since I think Reigns is getting it at WM and having Rollins cash in afterwards would result in a failed cash in or a short reign from him and Roman, which wouldn't be great). Granted, titles switching hands this way isn't great to see, but unless Lesnar does a job to Cena/someone destroys him causing him to be cashed in on (which would turn Lesnar babyface, which... I dislike) I'm not sure how they could get themselves out of this. Unless they want Brock to hold it until WM and drop to Roman or whatever.

We could, of course, just see Lesnar destroy Cena at SummerSlam and him allowing Rollins to cash in now after Ambrose feigns an injury earlier in the night to prevent him from stopping him... it wouldn't make Lesnar look bad to destroy Cena and HHH gets what he wants because his plan worked. It would probably disappoint some people but it would make sense and Brock wouldn't be needed to show up for anything afterward.

 

[Leo C]

We could, of course, just see Lesnar destroy Cena at SummerSlam and him allowing Rollins to cash in now after Ambrose feigns an injury earlier in the night to prevent him from stopping him... it wouldn't make Lesnar look bad to destroy Cena and HHH gets what he wants because his plan worked. It would probably disappoint some people but it would make sense and Brock wouldn't be needed to show up for anything afterward.

So Brock does the job? I particularly wouldn't like to see that but, yeah, it would solve most problems.

 

[Just Kevin]

So Brock does the job? I particularly wouldn't like to see that but, yeah, it would solve most problems.

No... Brock doesn't even pin Cena.. Rollins comes out and cashes in after Cena is lying there. That's what I was thinking at least.

 

[Leo C]

No... Brock doesn't even pin Cena.. Rollins comes out and cashes in after Cena is lying there. That's what I was thinking at least.

Oh, I see. So it's basically the same idea of him laying down (doesn't want the belt and is just a mercenary) but instead of stretching it out just do it at Summerslam. It would look better in the fact that Brock doesn't have to lay down, but I'm sure they want Lesnar to work Night of Champions and I think a Cena rematch would be the best way to go here.

 

[Red Rain]

We could, of course, just see Lesnar destroy Cena at SummerSlam and him allowing Rollins to cash in now after Ambrose feigns an injury earlier in the night to prevent him from stopping him... it wouldn't make Lesnar look bad to destroy Cena and HHH gets what he wants because his plan worked. It would probably disappoint some people but it would make sense and Brock wouldn't be needed to show up for anything afterward.

I dig this idea.
I wouldn't write it as a foregone conclusion that Seth Rollins even cashes in successfully. If anyone had Intercontinental Championship written on him, its this dude.
He'll win it later of course but as good as I've always thought he was, the Empire is pushing a tad harder than I expected. Unpredictability may be a good thing, however.

 

[Dolph'sZiggler]

I'll take 1 appearance a month from Brock as champ over anyone else on the roster showing up 4 times a month.

 

[The GOAT]

The current rumor is that if Lesnar loses the championship back to Cena at Night Of Champions, it'll be in a Steel Cage match since he wouldn't have to take a pinfall there to lose. Plus, Paul Heyman could cut a promo the next night saying that only by "running away" from Brock Lesnar (i.e escaping the cage) could Cena reclaim the championship. If they still used the old school design of the steel cage (the ones with the bars), they could have ripped off the ending of Austin vs McMahon from St. Valentine's Day Massacre when Big Show threw Austin against the side of the cage so hard that it swung open, allowing Austin to drop to the floor and win via escape.

The thing with Lesnar losing it next month (as opposed to laying down for Rollins) is that Lesnar could just invoke his rematch clause to get another shot but I guess they could just choose to conveniently ignore that in this case. I agree that Brock laying Cena out at Summerslam allowing Rollins to cash in is the ideal scenario, but since they want Brock to work NOC, I don't see that scenario playing out.

 

[Red Rain]

This begs a question I've had for sometime. When does a rematch clause expire? Cena had a rematch clause with Bryan, but putting Bryan over was the sole purpose of that match.
Hulk Hogan never got his rematch with Warrior, did he? Once Bryan regains the championship the rematch will be revisited, not because of the clause, but out of respect.
The Rock still has a rematch clause with Cena, does he not? This is all empty rhetoric because rematch clauses seem only to occur out of convenience.

If Lesnar lies down, Rollins may end up holding the title until the Empire has an angle written that would allow Bryan, Reigns, Lesnar and Cena to be heavily featured at Wrestlemania.