SummerSlam Undertaker vs Brock Lesnar

[Prince Bálor]

Bet. Me.

Seeing as how you've got a little bit over 1K of forum cash, let's bet on that.

If Lesnar wins (DQ ending bullshit won't count, has to be clean), I'll transfer you 1K. If Taker wins (again, DQ bullshit won't count), then you transfer me 1K.

Gonna say it again... If the match ends in some DQ or no contest BS where there's no real winner, then nothing happens with our bets.

You wanna do it?

 

[Aids Johnson]

Seeing as how you've got a little bit over 1K of forum cash, let's bet on that.

If Lesnar wins (DQ ending bullshit won't count, has to be clean), I'll transfer you 1K. If Taker wins (again, DQ bullshit won't count), then you transfer me 1K.

Gonna say it again... If the match ends in some DQ or no contest BS where there's no real winner, then nothing happens with our bets.

You wanna do it?

sig/avatar bet me for a month and you can have the 1k on top, i can't give one single fuck about forum cash.

 

[Prince Bálor]

sig/avatar bet me for a month and you can have the 1k on top, i can't give one single fuck about forum cash.

Okay, let me get this straight.
The loser of this bet has to wear a sig/avatar of the winner's choosing for a month, plus 1K on top?

I'll accept the bet only if there's a clear winner (pinfall or submission).
If the match ends in a DQ or no contest or some other BS, then the bet is off.

 

[Aids Johnson]

Okay, let me get this straight.
The loser of this bet has to wear a sig/avatar of the winner's choosing for a month, plus 1K on top?

I'll accept the bet only if there's a clear winner (pinfall or submission).
If the match ends in a DQ or no contest or some other BS, then the bet is off.

Deal. You don't need to pay me, but you get 1k if you beat me. Bork wins, lol.

 

[Prince Bálor]

Deal. You don't need to pay me, but you get 1k if you beat me. Bork wins, lol.

We'll see about that, homie.

Good luck to both of us.

 

[Solidus1]

woah :henry2:

 

[Fuzion]

Undertaker is going to win because he is probably going to have his last match at WrestleMania 32 and how pathetic would it look if taker lost to brock again, especially after that big return.

 

[edge4ever]

Undertaker is going to win because he is probably going to have his last match at WrestleMania 32 and how pathetic would it look if taker lost to brock again, especially after that big return.

Or he's putting Brock over one last time and going into the hall of fame at mania 32

 

[Jacob Fox]

Or he's putting Brock over one last time and going into the hall of fame at mania 32

What would Lesnar really gain from that? He's already beaten the Undertaker three times, as well as eliminating him from the 2003 Royal Rumble to win it.

If Undertaker loses to Lesnar again, it doesn't really put Lesnar over much. He's already beaten him three times, with two of those three matches clean. The only thing WWE would gain from a Lesnar win is a permanent and damaging blot on the Undertaker's career and a LOT of pissed off Undertaker fans that would be baffled as to why WWE refuses to give Undertaker a win over this guy. Furthermore, I'm sure the Lesnar and Undertaker rematch and the 4 hour Summerslam are WWE'S push to get new August network buys... having Undertaker lose on that level just seems too risky. Undertaker is a guy whose name can bring old fans who stopped watching back to watch again, but they won't continue to watch just to see him get trounced again.

Now, please keep in mind that I'm not an Undertaker fan. I'm definitely not one of the people who will have a hissy fit if he loses. But it just doesn't make sense to think that Lesnar gains anything by winning this. Undertaker on the other hand, loses a lot by losing this match. He looks not only bad by proving he can't beat Lesnar, but he looks like a bit of a crybaby by causing Lesnar to not regain the title and coming back after 18 months for vengeance, only to lose yet again.

WWE shits on their workers a lot, but to deal such a blow to one of their most loyal employees and enduring characters is just beyond stupidity.

Oh and also let's not forget that WWE tends to be more rather than less predictable. And having Undertaker win seems more predictable to me.

And I'm just being devil's advocate here. I'm not losing sleep over it either way. If I had a horse in this race, it would be Lesnar. I'm not an Undertaker fan, or even a Lesnar fan really. I'm a huge Paul Heyman fan though and could imagine the AMAZING promos he would give if Lesnar wins.

 

[Snowman1]

But after all they've done for Brock, having him end the streak and obliterate Cena and crush Reigns and break formula by chasing down Rollins so many times and get this guy over as this unbeatable MF and have Heyman put him over as a God among men... they'd be beyond stupid to put Taker over.

 

[Jacob Fox]

But after all they've done for Brock, having him end the streak and obliterate Cena and crush Reigns and break formula by chasing down Rollins so many times and get this guy over as this unbeatable MF and have Heyman put him over as a God among men... they'd be beyond stupid to put Taker over.

I disagree. Lesnar's reputation and overness isn't going anywhere, regardless of whether he loses to the Undertaker.

If Lesnar DOES beat Undertaker, then having anyone else ever beat him would be unbelievable. You've basically booked him into a corner where all he can do is beat everyone and humiliate everyone and see how quickly your other top guys will stick around just to look like Lesnar's whipping boy.

Undertaker is the most credible guy to beat Lesnar. Yeah, to most of us here Taker is a 50 year old man with knocky knees who shouldn't be in the ring. To the majority of fans out there, he's still the Undertaker. He's still the most credible threat.

It would be colossally stupid to have Lesnar beat Undertaker at Summerslam. There is absolutely zero gain from it.

And why dies everyone talk like Lesnar's booking as an unstoppable force is something new? It's the exact way they booked him during his first run. This man's reputation is NOT going anywhere, regardless of what happens at Summerslam.

So I completely disagree with you. I think it would be stupid to book Undertaker to lose.

 

[Snowman1]

I disagree. Lesnar's reputation and overness isn't going anywhere, regardless of whether he loses to the Undertaker.

If Lesnar DOES beat Undertaker, then having anyone else ever beat him would be unbelievable. You've basically booked him into a corner where all he can do is beat everyone and humiliate everyone and see how quickly your other top guys will stick around just to look like Lesnar's whipping boy.

Undertaker is the most credible guy to beat Lesnar. Yeah, to most of us here Taker is a 50 year old man with knocky knees who shouldn't be in the ring. To the majority of fans out there, he's still the Undertaker. He's still the most credible threat.

It would be colossally stupid to have Lesnar beat Undertaker at Summerslam. There is absolutely zero gain from it.

And why dies everyone talk like Lesnar's booking as an unstoppable force is something new? It's the exact way they booked him during his first run. This man's reputation is NOT going anywhere, regardless of what happens at Summerslam.

So I completely disagree with you. I think it would be stupid to book Undertaker to lose.

Agree to disagree, yo. That's why debating with you is fun. Losing to Undertaker may not "bury" Lesnar. Far from it, but I can see him losing to anyone putting a dent in this "unbeatable" aura that Lesnar currently has, even losing to this "mythological legend" in Taker.

After all, there's a reason that they had that big plan to do all this with Lesnar just for Roman to finally topple him at WM31, much of which is "beating the guy who beat the guy who went 21-0 at Wrestlemania, recently in classic match after classic match"... Taker just getting his win back kinda sucks when it comes to that, and while there's a big difference between Wrestlemania Undertaker and Anywhere Else Undertaker, both sides are magnified.

The lack of main roster credibility is an issue as you say. That was one of the big problems with Reigns, since anyone who beats Lesnar clean at this point looks so much farther above the rest of the roster... This only makes that a bigger problem.

(Although while typing this it came to me that a Undertaker win could be used to set up the rubber match at WM32... That would be okay. Would wonder how much interest that would really draw but it's not like this match is really lacking in interest...)

Match quality is also an issue, not from a star ratings standpoint, but Lesnar matches always work because of the whole beastly aura of Brock. Most of them are about how he goes in there and trucks someone with slams and suplexes and rarely sells and any opponent is DOOMED when he's going up against the Beast Incarnate... or it's a battle where the other guy/guys have to cleverly think of a way out... With Undertaker, not only would it be bad for the health of "a 50 year old Undertaker" to take a billion suplexes, but it's two of the scariest characters in WWE history locking horns and it certainly doesn't make sense for the damn Undertaker to get thrown around at all. Makes for an excellent casual fan draw but we'll see how great of a hoss fight this will be.

 

[Jacob Fox]

Agree to disagree, yo. That's why debating with you is fun. Losing to Undertaker may not "bury" Lesnar. Far from it, but I can see him losing to anyone putting a dent in this "unbeatable" aura that Lesnar currently has, even losing to this "mythological legend" in Taker.

After all, there's a reason that they had that big plan to do all this with Lesnar just for Roman to finally topple him at WM31, much of which is "beating the guy who beat the guy who went 21-0 at Wrestlemania, recently in classic match after classic match"... Taker just getting his win back kinda sucks when it comes to that, and while there's a big difference between Wrestlemania Undertaker and Anywhere Else Undertaker, both sides are magnified.

The lack of main roster credibility is an issue as you say. That was one of the big problems with Reigns, since anyone who beats Lesnar clean at this point looks so much farther above the rest of the roster... This only makes that a bigger problem.

(Although while typing this it came to me that a Undertaker win could be used to set up the rubber match at WM32... That would be okay. Would wonder how much interest that would really draw but it's not like this match is really lacking in interest...)

Match quality is also an issue, not from a star ratings standpoint, but Lesnar matches always work because of the whole beastly aura of Brock. Most of them are about how he goes in there and trucks someone with slams and suplexes and rarely sells and any opponent is DOOMED when he's going up against the Beast Incarnate... or it's a battle where the other guy/guys have to cleverly think of a way out... With Undertaker, not only would it be bad for the health of "a 50 year old Undertaker" to take a billion suplexes, but it's two of the scariest characters in WWE history locking horns and it certainly doesn't make sense for the damn Undertaker to get thrown around at all. Makes for an excellent casual fan draw but we'll see how great of a hoss fight this will be.

Oh yeah. I agree about agreeing to disagree and I appreciate the compliment. The same applies to you. It's nice to debate with someone who wants to talk things out rather than argue. Too many people get bent out shape when you disagree with them.

One thing too that I just wanted to add. I am not saying Undertaker will win. I really haven't decided who I think will win yet. Just that I think Undertaker makes more sense. But we'll see how it plays out

 

[Snowman1]

Oh yeah. I agree about agreeing to disagree and I appreciate the compliment. The same applies to you. It's nice to debate with someone who wants to talk things out rather than argue. Too many people get bent out shape when you disagree with them.

One thing too that I just wanted to add. I am not saying Undertaker will win. I really haven't decided who I think will win yet. Just that I think Undertaker makes more sense. But we'll see how it plays out

Haha, thanks for the compliment for you, too, man.

While so often it's easy to see people talk about predictability, though, this Summerslam card is anything but. Have no clue who's winning the top three matches (assuming Cesaro vs Owens is one of them), only exception we can safely knock out is "Rollins wins clean".

 

[edge4ever]

What would Lesnar really gain from that? He's already beaten the Undertaker three times, as well as eliminating him from the 2003 Royal Rumble to win it.

If Undertaker loses to Lesnar again, it doesn't really put Lesnar over much. He's already beaten him three times, with two of those three matches clean. The only thing WWE would gain from a Lesnar win is a permanent and damaging blot on the Undertaker's career and a LOT of pissed off Undertaker fans that would be baffled as to why WWE refuses to give Undertaker a win over this guy. Furthermore, I'm sure the Lesnar and Undertaker rematch and the 4 hour Summerslam are WWE'S push to get new August network buys... having Undertaker lose on that level just seems too risky. Undertaker is a guy whose name can bring old fans who stopped watching back to watch again, but they won't continue to watch just to see him get trounced again.

Now, please keep in mind that I'm not an Undertaker fan. I'm definitely not one of the people who will have a hissy fit if he loses. But it just doesn't make sense to think that Lesnar gains anything by winning this. Undertaker on the other hand, loses a lot by losing this match. He looks not only bad by proving he can't beat Lesnar, but he looks like a bit of a crybaby by causing Lesnar to not regain the title and coming back after 18 months for vengeance, only to lose yet again.

WWE shits on their workers a lot, but to deal such a blow to one of their most loyal employees and enduring characters is just beyond stupidity.

Oh and also let's not forget that WWE tends to be more rather than less predictable. And having Undertaker win seems more predictable to me.

And I'm just being devil's advocate here. I'm not losing sleep over it either way. If I had a horse in this race, it would be Lesnar. I'm not an Undertaker fan, or even a Lesnar fan really. I'm a huge Paul Heyman fan though and could imagine the AMAZING promos he would give if Lesnar wins.

I mean I wouldn't be "surprised" if taker won, that's def fair to say. However, to say that Brock wouldn't gain from this is crazy.

Taker comes back, huge epic rematch, and then Brock dominates the phenom yet again? I mean it would be huge. Arguably just as big as when he killed Cena at the 2014 SS.

The average fan doesn't recall how many times Brock has beaten taker. They're more concerned with the streak breaking. Thus, to the average fan, it's their second match. This means that if Brock beats him not only by snapping the streak, but also dominates him at summerslam... Well, there is def no question as to who the real phenom of this era is: Brock lesnar.

I get your point, but, again, I do feel that Brock winning would be huge.