|
Post by marino13 on Jul 27, 2016 11:05:08 GMT -5
I don't agree that WWE "needs" Brock. RAW this week was great and last I checked Brock was not on. IMO Brock showing up four times a year doesn't really add anything to the show. Especially if all he is going to do is suplex someone around, F5, and win easily. If he was having competitive matches and building up stars like Roman, Bray, or Ambrose, then it would be different.
IMO let him eat an RKO, Dirty Deeds, Pop Up Power-bomb, and maybe a Coup De Gra and let him go back to UFC.
|
|
thebigzakbowski
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jun 30, 2011 17:49:38 GMT -5
Posts: 1,020
|
Post by thebigzakbowski on Jul 27, 2016 11:15:48 GMT -5
Id love to see ratings on raws with brock compared to the raw before or after. See how much he changes things. Im a brock fan so i admit bias so i want to see if the numbers support
|
|
|
Post by k5 on Jul 27, 2016 11:19:22 GMT -5
I don't agree that WWE "needs" Brock. RAW this week was great and last I checked Brock was not on. IMO Brock showing up four times a year doesn't really add anything to the show. Especially if all he is going to do is suplex someone around, F5, and win easily. If he was having competitive matches and building up stars like Roman, Bray, or Ambrose, then it would be different. IMO let him eat an RKO, Dirty Deeds, Pop Up Power-bomb, and maybe a Coup De Gra and let him go back to UFC. after ambrose's lackluster loss to lesnar at mania, i'd love to see some redemption. put the champ over. but yeah, i think brock's ability to attract outside interest has waned severely.
|
|
jacktunney
Superstar
Joined on: Jan 3, 2012 22:50:33 GMT -5
Posts: 726
|
Post by jacktunney on Jul 27, 2016 11:39:09 GMT -5
Good, I want to see as much Brock as possible.
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Yeeter on Jul 27, 2016 11:55:35 GMT -5
I don't think any of the part time/occasional performers (Rock, Brock, HHH, Shane, Taker etc) are subject to the testing, possibly because a suspension would be pointless for the reason you mentioned. They all are subject to Drug testing Hmmm... Are you sure?
|
|
|
Post by JC Motors on Jul 27, 2016 12:31:13 GMT -5
They all are subject to Drug testing Hmmm... Are you sure? I'm positive or the federal government would be putting WWE on trial again
|
|
|
Post by @.@ Hempsterdance @.@ on Jul 27, 2016 12:34:55 GMT -5
From what I've read about Reigns, WWE learned over the weekend he was suspended and pushed back on announcing it to get thru Raw. Once again it's a case of WWE playing favorites. If anyone outside of their top guys was nailed they would have been suspended immediately. Look at Billy Gunn his failed drug test during a weight lifting contest cost him his job but Brock Lesnar no Billy Gunn was a coach at the performance center so the wellness policy counts for him. It's complete bullcrap that he won't get punished for it, part timer or not you make a mockery out of the wellness policy...although come to think about it the wellness policy has been a joke for years.
|
|
|
Post by ThugSuperstar on Jul 27, 2016 14:29:02 GMT -5
What an incredibly stupid statement to give. It makes the Wellness Policy look like an even bigger joke now than it already did. They should've simply just said that Brock has never failed a WWE administered drug test, therefore the company won't be suspending him. That would've been a simple and accurate statement. Now, they pretty much made themselves look like fools by releasing this statement.
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Yeeter on Jul 27, 2016 14:29:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Word™ on Jul 27, 2016 14:37:53 GMT -5
I don't agree that WWE "needs" Brock. RAW this week was great and last I checked Brock was not on. IMO Brock showing up four times a year doesn't really add anything to the show. Especially if all he is going to do is suplex someone around, F5, and win easily. If he was having competitive matches and building up stars like Roman, Bray, or Ambrose, then it would be different. IMO let him eat an RKO, Dirty Deeds, Pop Up Power-bomb, and maybe a Coup De Gra and let him go back to UFC. WWE needs mainstream media, which is something Brock provides. Brock brings in an audience. Brock is a big name. WWE wants/needs that.. WWE cross promoting with UFC? Something WWE wouldn't have had without Brock.. Summerslam being promoted on multiple platforms, multiple news sites.. Brock is up there with The Rock when it comes to free press for the WWE.
|
|
|
Post by RybackV1 on Jul 27, 2016 14:41:50 GMT -5
Nice loophole.
|
|
savage
Main Eventer
Joined on: Dec 6, 2011 11:10:45 GMT -5
Posts: 1,299
|
Post by savage on Jul 27, 2016 14:45:40 GMT -5
From what I heard, he tested positive for clomid which isn't anything crazy. It restores natural testosterone and gets the boys functioning better. He might be trying to have a kid.. Who knows? Better yet.. Who cares? Definitely not worth suspending your biggest draw in the company. He tested positive for an anti-estrogen that pairs with a steroid cycle and its 100% worth suspending your biggest star. You don't take clomid with a steroid cycle. Know what you're talking about before spewing regurgitated information.
|
|
|
Post by JC Motors on Jul 27, 2016 14:53:16 GMT -5
WWE seems to be a bit hypocritical
|
|
|
Post by GreyHaze:Big Bad Booty Daddy on Jul 27, 2016 15:21:50 GMT -5
It's funny how upset everyone got here with Reigns failing the testing policy and with Brock....
|
|
|
Post by attitudesback on Jul 27, 2016 15:34:12 GMT -5
This is such a non story, we've known for a long time that part timers are exempt. The Rock at WrestleMania proved this. Lol
|
|
|
Post by PJ on Jul 27, 2016 15:51:32 GMT -5
I haven't been paying to much attention to this other than hearing he possibly failed a test. Was it a WWE administered drug test? Or just a UFC administered drug test? If it is a UFC test and they aren't punishing him how can the WWE? They aren't part of the "chain of command" to know that all the procedures were followed. I am sure if it was just a UFC administered test Brock's legal team would get him off if the WWE tried to fine/suspend him.
|
|
|
Post by sitruC on Jul 27, 2016 15:54:44 GMT -5
At least this adds interest to his Orton match cause I have no idea who will win now
|
|
|
Post by The Everlasting Spirit © on Jul 27, 2016 15:59:07 GMT -5
Brock should be suspended. No double standards!
I don't like Reigns either so I'm not saying this because of that. Ultimately you can't pick and choose who you punish if you want people to obey the rules.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 23, 2024 9:29:04 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2016 16:16:43 GMT -5
WWE does not NEED Brock Lesnar. They managed perfectly well without him from 1963-2001 and again from 2004-2012. NO ONE is bigger than the company.
I'm a fan of Brock - but he's got to stop getting what he wants.
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Jul 27, 2016 19:05:36 GMT -5
I don't agree that WWE "needs" Brock. RAW this week was great and last I checked Brock was not on. IMO Brock showing up four times a year doesn't really add anything to the show. Especially if all he is going to do is suplex someone around, F5, and win easily. If he was having competitive matches and building up stars like Roman, Bray, or Ambrose, then it would be different. IMO let him eat an RKO, Dirty Deeds, Pop Up Power-bomb, and maybe a Coup De Gra and let him go back to UFC. after ambrose's lackluster loss to lesnar at mania, i'd love to see some redemption. put the champ over. but yeah, i think brock's ability to attract outside interest has waned severely. That WM match left a sour taste in my mouth. It was a dud IMO. I want nothing more than to see Dean get his rematch and a victory over Brock.
|
|