I've been saying pretty much a month or two after Ryback debuted that he'd be the ideal person for Punk to lose his title reign to at WrestleMania (as a matter of fact, one of my first post detailed this). Although admittedly I thought they fucked up the chances with that by moving Ryback up to face him earlier but I quickly realized that it was actually for the better if they go this route. I have moderate hope that this is where they'll be going.
Just the first five minutes, Dolph's promo with Mick Foley was the moment I decided that my ideal situation would be for Dolph to [successfully] defend his WHC against The Rock (which again, I detailed in an earlier post). Now I'm not saying Dolph's promos with The Rock will outshine the ones he'll be having with Punk regardless of who Rock faces at Mania or his ones with Cena, but I honestly believe Dolph will be able match Rock.
Then again, I'm someone who didn't really think most of Rock's promos were all that great during his Cena feud as it seemed half of them either jammed in way too much Twitter related content or was just a typical Rock promo where most of what he's saying is catchphrases. Not that some of them weren't great but still.
And furthermore, I'll argue this to death, but I honestly believe that Rock facing Dolph and losing at Mania is legitimately the best business decision they can make. Why? Well, simply put it would solidified him as a main eventer (considering they build him strong enough leading into, and if they were going to have him face The Rock they would). know Dolph vs. Rock wouldn't draw as much as say Rock vs. Punk vs. Cena and that's what most will bring up to me but here's two counterarguments. A) You still have The Rock wrestling (& Brock, & Taker according this build), they're still going to draw big, they really won't be losing all that much. B) Ultimately, it's only one show. In the long run, a really big buyrate isn't going to keep them stable. It's not like getting the biggest buyrate they can for Mania is going to make them money a few years later, or even a few months later (okay, technically it will because of DVD sales but not my point, shut up XD). The Rock's been fishing for them, he's time better suited teaching Dolph to fish.
If you come out of Mania with the Mania I have in mind, you'll pretty much have both Ryback and Dolph Ziggler as solidified stars who'll be able to draw and make more money cumulatively that in hindsight going with the triple threat seems like a ridiculous idea. I mean yeah, WWE will have to continue booking them correctly, but really can you think of a better point in time than right now, with the scenario's presented that will make these guys big lasting stars? Something WWE drastically needs, since they have like what, five people that can actually draw? And that's counting part-timers.
But wait, what was this thread about again? Oh right, the fact that WWE is supposedly thinking of CM Punk defending his WWE Championship against Undertaker at Mania. Has WWE lost it. I mean, I wasn't even sure that still had it to lose but I guess they do because that is just a terrible booking decision. This is the picture perfect example of what I was talking about. Booking a show just so that show draws rather than booking a show to help ensure that futures shows draws.
First, when it comes to ending the streak, no matter which way I look at it, CM Punk just isn't that guy. It would literally do nothing for him, their be no real reason he'd have to do it, no real connection to Taker's character like Kane does that will make it work . . . oh sorry I'm being redundant here. I just discussed this in my last post and have no motivation to rephrase my previous words.
Secondly, let's assume Taker wins. There's no chance he'll be keeping it for more than a day, as he body is too damaged to go past one big Mania match and on the [extreme] off chance that he can he still can't work house shows (unless that rule applies to The Rock). So basically, the culmination of what would be CM Punk's 504 day WWE Championship reign will be one match against a man with literally not a thing to gain in his career, who will then proceed to drop the title and effectively killing pretty much all the momentum that reign had going for it. I mean, you have a chance to make Ryback a star, or hell, even Cena winning it will allow him to ride the high of ending Punk's reign for a little bit. Especially considering how long it's been since Cena last was champion, he does have something to gain from ending Punk's reign. But Taker, with arguably one or two exceptions, there isn't a single person on the roster who will benefit less ending the streak. Pretty much everyone on the roster has more to gain than Taker in winning the title from Punk, mostly because everyone else can stay and keep building momentum.
Nobody can convince me that that would be a smart decision. But I've rambled on long enough, so I'm going to ignore the decision of Rock vs. Cena II at Mania (another possibility I'm really against)) and just stop posting now.
1: