|
Post by theoutlaw1999 on Jul 27, 2014 15:43:06 GMT -5
Since it has been widely speculated that Lesnar will win at Summerslam and hold the belt right through to Wrestlemania it has came under many peoples concern that as a part timer he will rarely be seen on Raw due his limited dates.
But the main issue I would have is the PPV's.
Between Summerslam and Wrestlemania there will be 6 PPV's with one of them being Night of Champions were Lesnar will have no choice but to compete which leaves it down to 5 and I can honestly not see Brock wrestle 8 straight PPV's unless some new mega bucks deal is made. PPV's need the WWE title to be defended unless they have a huge drawing star like Taker or Rock compete so if TLC or Hell in a cell had no title match they could end up having very low buy rates which would be bad for business.
As a full time wrestler Brock as champion would be fantastic and he would be a true monster champion that destroys everyone in his path but as a part timer his reign would need to be short.
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Jul 27, 2014 15:47:28 GMT -5
Do buy rates really mean that much with the network? Summerslam is the last PPV from the networks launch. Say Lesner is on NOC and wwe gets the network subscribers to resub then you have 6 months of people committed to the network.
|
|
|
Post by theoutlaw1999 on Jul 27, 2014 15:50:50 GMT -5
Do buy rates really mean that much with the network? Summerslam is the last PPV from the networks launch. Say Lesner is on NOC and wwe gets the network subscribers to resub then you have 6 months of people committed to the network. I don't know much about the Network. I will subscribe when it debut's in the UK.
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Jul 27, 2014 15:52:16 GMT -5
Do buy rates really mean that much with the network? Summerslam is the last PPV from the networks launch. Say Lesner is on NOC and wwe gets the network subscribers to resub then you have 6 months of people committed to the network. For renewals, Night of Champions (for day one subscribers) and Hell in a Cell (for WrestleMania subscribers) are the big events. They need to be pretty loaded. But WWE can't just ignore the other months... They desperately, desperately need more subscribers. They need title matches on Survivor Series, TLC, Royal Rumble and Elimination Chamber, unless they have something huge as a substitute. And I don't think The Rock's working Survivor Series this year, so there'll be a title match.
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Jul 27, 2014 15:52:55 GMT -5
Do buy rates really mean that much with the network? Summerslam is the last PPV from the networks launch. Say Lesner is on NOC and wwe gets the network subscribers to resub then you have 6 months of people committed to the network. I don't know much about the Network. I will subscribe when it debut's in the UK. My bad, when it launched in Febuary you had to pay for 6 months so you were locked into if no matter what. I'm pretty sure it's still a 6 month commitment on signups. I heard wwe may be beta testing the network in the uk so it won't be to much longer for you guys
|
|
Dante, The Voc
Main Eventer
If I'm not online, I'm on the toilet
Joined on: Dec 5, 2010 9:48:02 GMT -5
Posts: 1,374
|
Post by Dante, The Voc on Jul 27, 2014 15:56:35 GMT -5
What frightens me is that Brock had (and possibly still has) the three PPV matches per year thingy in his contract. The Royal Rumble match with Big Show (utterly useless) and Wrestlemania make two, and Summerslam would be the third. I can't see him losing to Cena a second time, especially coming off conquering the Streak. It would be a slap in the face to the 23 years that Undertaker was dominating Wrestlemania, only for his conquerer to lose to a guy who has never taken any opponent seriously.
He has to win. And he has to win the rematch. Why give the proclaimed "Most dominant competitor in WWE history" Undertaker's streak AND the WWE Title only to lose it and look weak a month later? What, to let Cena tie Ric Flair, only for the eventual Rollins cash-in (which, in my mind, shouldn't happen until after 'Mania next year). But like you said, how many shows is he gonna show up to? Rock held the belt for two months and barely made appearances and everyone crapped on it. I can't imagine the backlash over an eight-month period without the champion on camera. Again, his contract possibly has been altered where he's wrestling on more than three PPVs, but who knows.
I still think a Wrestlemania main event of Brock/Reigns would be bad. Real bad. Save Reigns' crowning moment for WM 32, no need to send him to the stratosphere when he's gonna have Cena in the same space for 5-10 more years. Maybe we're getting a slow, slow burn push of Cesaro. Maybe Rock or Batista will resume the part-time main-eventing role. Maybe it's Cena again. Bryan may be back in time, and even though he's hurt he's still getting fantastic reactions for his name being dropped on Raw.
The whole WWE Title picture is really murky for Wrestlemania at this point; rightfully so, however; telegraphing the main event half a year in advance would be ugly.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 26, 2024 8:46:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2014 15:57:56 GMT -5
Is Brock not scheduled for Night of Champions?
|
|
|
Post by theoutlaw1999 on Jul 27, 2014 16:01:57 GMT -5
Is Brock not scheduled for Night of Champions? He would have to be because every title is defended.
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Jul 27, 2014 16:02:41 GMT -5
What frightens me is that Brock had (and possibly still has) the three PPV matches per year thingy in his contract. The Royal Rumble match with Big Show (utterly useless) and Wrestlemania make two, and Summerslam would be the third. Lesnar's contract runs WrestleMania to WrestleMania, not January to December, and the latest one (the two-year deal that came into effect after WM29) looks to be for Mania plus three other matches a year. He's winning at SummerSlam, and he's losing it shortly after. Is Brock not scheduled for Night of Champions? Yup, he is.
|
|
|
Post by Sleazyness on Jul 27, 2014 16:06:36 GMT -5
COULD BE? It is, dude. Id rather have abeyance get another reign.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 26, 2024 8:46:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2014 16:12:50 GMT -5
Part of me wonders if they're willing to throw more money at Brock to get him to work SurSer and the Rumble.
|
|
|
Post by BrIaNMeRcY on Jul 27, 2014 16:26:12 GMT -5
Part of me wonders if they're willing to throw more money at Brock to get him to work SurSer and the Rumble. I heard a rumor that Brock Lesnar is going to work more dates that what is allotted in his current contract. It is possible Lesnar could work on a per-appearance deal. Given how the WWE is revolving themselves into the network sinking or swimming, it is plausible we could see Lesnar more often from now till WrestleMania XXXI.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 26, 2024 8:46:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2014 16:28:01 GMT -5
Unless they know something we don't, WWE really booked themselves I to a corner. Brock Lesnar is so hot right now that anything other than a title victory would be a huge disappointment and it would destroy the prestige of beating the streak,
At the same time wwe really needs a champion at every PPV, especially now that they need network subscribers.
The only way I see this ending good is if Brock Lesnar agreed to work at least 1 raw and a PPV every month.
|
|
|
Post by The Natural Eddy Valintino on Jul 27, 2014 17:14:35 GMT -5
I can see them make it work. Hopefully they will build some strong storylines where they don't even need Lesnar to defend the title that PPV. As long as they got strong storylines like the one Ambrose and Rollins has now, I don't see them needing the champion defend. I'd say if Lesnar did win the title, I could see them having Lesnar defend the title at Night of Champions, Survivor Series and Royal Rumble until it's time to build the Wrestlemania title match. I'm sure they'll have a plan for that if they plan on Lesnar winning the title.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 26, 2024 8:46:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2014 17:22:57 GMT -5
with the way WWE loves to ram Cena Down every one's throat. It wouldn't surprise me to see Cena win And summer slam to go off the air with Michael Cole.Going OMG Cena just beat the guy that beat the streak. He is the Greatest superstar of all time.
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Jul 27, 2014 17:51:04 GMT -5
Part of me wonders if they're willing to throw more money at Brock to get him to work SurSer and the Rumble. Not when they're losing fifty million this year.
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Jul 27, 2014 17:52:35 GMT -5
with the way WWE loves to ram Cena Down every one's throat. It wouldn't surprise me to see Cena win And summer slam to go off the air with Michael Cole.Going OMG Cena just beat the guy that beat the streak. He is the Greatest superstar of all time. Would be hilariously great, but not gonna happen. We already know he is the greatest superstar of all time.
|
|
|
Post by jayrod2009 on Jul 27, 2014 18:23:40 GMT -5
I'm ok with Lesnar holding the title until WM31. I'd be even happier if he broke Punks streak as Champion.
|
|
|
Post by skribbel24 on Jul 27, 2014 18:37:33 GMT -5
Brock is money. Putting the strap on him may be best for business.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 26, 2024 8:46:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2014 18:45:20 GMT -5
Do buy rates really mean that much with the network? Summerslam is the last PPV from the networks launch. Say Lesner is on NOC and wwe gets the network subscribers to resub then you have 6 months of people committed to the network. I think the quality of Battleground would prove 'No'. But WWE forgets that the rest of the planet either has to pay £15 or get it for free. Battleground fell under the '£15' category. Ridiculous. About Brock? I subscribe to the 'NOT CENA' theory.
|
|