Lesnar vs Punk II @ Wrestlemania XXXI

[Aids Johnson]

Nah man, couldn't watch it without having those special features, ya know?

The best part by far is the end after credits. I still gots the magic, I still gots it.

 

[The GOAT]

The whole thing doesn't really make sense, it's worded to me like Paul found a new client to replace Punk when that isn't the case obviously. Plus it just sounds like a rushed way in to the story. This puts me off given I'm not interested in the two facing each other again.

"There would at least be an interesting story behind it, what with them being connected to Paul Heyman, and with Heyman being able to say, "You couldn't defeat Brock Lesnar before and Brock even had to go and do what you failed to do the previous year and that was end the Undertaker's streak... what leads you to believe you have even the slightest chance of surviving now?"

I fail to see how that's worded funnily. Do I need to specifically mention that Heyman was managing Brock Lesnar at the time of the Punk/Lesnar match? It's written with the assumption that the reader already knows this. The paragraph as a whole is just me paraphrasing how Heyman would explain to Punk why he wouldn't/shouldn't stand a chance against Lesnar given the latter's credentials.

 

[seabs]

"There would at least be an interesting story behind it, what with them being connected to Paul Heyman, and with Heyman being able to say, "You couldn't defeat Brock Lesnar before and Brock even had to go and do what you failed to do the previous year and that was end the Undertaker's streak... what leads you to believe you have even the slightest chance of surviving now?"

I fail to see how that's worded funnily. Do I need to specifically mention that Heyman was managing Brock Lesnar at the time of the Punk/Lesnar match? It's written with the assumption that the reader already knows this. The paragraph as a whole is just me paraphrasing how Heyman would explain to Punk why he wouldn't/shouldn't stand a chance against Lesnar given the latter's credentials.

The entire story is Brock did what you didn't isn't it? Yeah that to me sounds like you're bringing it up like Paul needed to upgrade from Punk to Brock which he obviously didn't. Not everyone needs to enjoy every post you make, jeez.

 

[The GOAT]

The entire story is Brock did what you didn't isn't it? Yeah that to me sounds like you're bringing it up like Paul needed to upgrade from Punk to Brock which he obviously didn't. Not everyone needs to enjoy every post you make, jeez.

The entire story doesn't rest upon that, that's just the material that Heyman would use in order to convince everyone that Punk has no chance against Lesnar. That, and the fact that Brock already defeated Punk once before. The whole point is to make Punk out to be the ultimate underdog who has to dig deep and give the best performance in his entire career to win, which would make his victory look even more triumphant.

Theoretically, Punk winning the Rumble and going to challenge a huge adversary like Lesnar for the championship at Wrestlemania is the only story there needs to be, but when you factor in the history between all three men as well, that provides more meat to it. It would arguably have more of a backstory to it than probably half of the matches that have headlined Wrestlemania throughout history.

 

[Red Rain]

The whole thing doesn't really make sense, it's worded to me like Paul found a new client to replace Punk when that isn't the case obviously. Plus it just sounds like a rushed way in to the story. This puts me off given I'm not interested in the two facing each other again.

"There would at least be an interesting story behind it, what with them being connected to Paul Heyman, and with Heyman being able to say, "You couldn't defeat Brock Lesnar before and Brock even had to go and do what you failed to do the previous year and that was end the Undertaker's streak... what leads you to believe you have even the slightest chance of surviving now?"

I fail to see how that's worded funnily. Do I need to specifically mention that Heyman was managing Brock Lesnar at the time of the Punk/Lesnar match? It's written with the assumption that the reader already knows this. The paragraph as a whole is just me paraphrasing how Heyman would explain to Punk why he wouldn't/shouldn't stand a chance against Lesnar given the latter's credentials.

I see where both of you are coming from.
Once Undertaker agreed to job to Lesnar at Wrestlemania it shifted the entire balance of booking for the rest of the year regarding the WWE Championship.
From that point forward, Paul Heyman essentially became a huge asset in terms of storyline progression.
In other words, Paul Heyman has to pull something out of his a** on a weekly basis to promote Lesnar's matches.
On the basis of this, both of you are correct.

A large reason creativity is extinct is partially due to last minute booking changes garnering a 'rushed' storyline that isn't sexy enough for the intellectual.

 

[CFCrusader]

If I don't get my Lesnar vs Bryan or Lesnar vs Cesaro, I want Lesnar vs Punk. The baddest man on the planet vs 464 days of WWE Championship holding (although I'd have to re-count because Heyman did hold it for him quite a lot).

 

[Prince Bálor]

If I don't get my Lesnar vs Bryan or Lesnar vs Cesaro, I want Lesnar vs Punk. The baddest man on the planet vs 464 days of WWE Championship holding (although I'd have to re-count because Heyman did hold it for him quite a lot).

434* days, I believe. But yeah, I'd definitely like to see what you wrote there, bro.

 

[CFCrusader]

434* days, I believe. But yeah, I'd definitely like to see what you wrote there, bro.

Hmm, you're right. I decided to go with 4something4 and thought that 6 was a good middle number because I was too lazy to google "Punk record reign" or something like that.

 

[t4terrific]

Vince and H never liked Punk. They certainly don't seem to want him back. This isn't the Vince McMahon anything to help business era. This is the HHH "Be PC, but don't forget." era.

Angle was a threat to H as a WWE superstar and talked shit about him after leaving. Now Angle is too risky to bring back? Yeah right. What about the druggie Orton? What about Mysterio?

No. H holds a grudge and puts his personal interests ahead of the company. He is no Vince.

He will not bring Punk back. Ever. He's more interested in pissing off the fans and proving a point to "talent", than what's best for business.

 

[t4terrific]

434* days, I believe. But yeah, I'd definitely like to see what you wrote there, bro.

I believe that's what Google says...

 

[Prince Bálor]

I believe that's what Google says...

No shit, Sherlock.

 

[Red Rain]

Vince and H never liked Punk. They certainly don't seem to want him back. This isn't the Vince McMahon anything to help business era. This is the HHH "Be PC, but don't forget." era.

Angle was a threat to H as a WWE superstar and talked shit about him after leaving. Now Angle is too risky to bring back? Yeah right. What about the druggie Orton? What about Mysterio?

No. H holds a grudge and puts his personal interests ahead of the company. He is no Vince.

He will not bring Punk back. Ever. He's more interested in pissing off the fans and proving a point to "talent", than what's best for business.

 

[Danielson]

I'd rather see Bryan win the title and have punk vs Bryan headline mania.

 

[Danielson]

Or punk vs scsa

 

[Prince Bálor]

Or punk vs scsa

What?:happy: