The majority of the time, I try to keep my cool while writing. I don't like to over react to any one event. It's bad and makes me come off as rash and hostile, at least in my opinion. As a writer one needs to stay objective and observe things from the big picture rather than giving a split second reaction. Any time a writer reacts quickly and negatively it can come off as rash and unprofessional.
All of that is what I did last week after Brock Lesnar lost at Extreme Rules to John Cena. At the time, I was pissed and confused at the same time. Here is the guy you brought in to make you money. He was here to go up against the top guys and improve your ratings and PPV buys. And what happens in his first match back? He loses top John Cena. I was furious. What I thought had been a great PPV up until that point went down in my eyes after this result. I let it drag down my review of the show at the end. It went from being a 9 to a 7.
Looking back, that was a quick and irrational decision by me. I apologize for what some might call over-reacting to the situation. That can be the problem sometimes with doing live reviews. Everything has to be done in such a quick and timely manner that you write the first thing that comes to mind. So naturally, as a fan and a writer, I was pissed at the result. If I had to write my Extreme Rules Review today, I would probably give the show an 8. I wouldn't go back to my 9 because I still don't agree with the decision to have Brock Lesnar lose, but I can see the reasons why he did from people who have pointed it out.
In my original review, I talked about how the mystique of Brock Lesnar was lost with his defeat to John Cena. Why would anyone care about Brock now after he lost to the WWE's top star? I thought the idea of Brock Lesnar going through the stars of the WWE undefeated heading into Wrestlemania 29 was a good one. Lesnar could have gone through Cena, Randy Orton, Triple H, C.M. Punk and maybe even The Undertaker before taking on The Rock at Wrestlemania. But I felt all of those possibilities were gone after Lesnar's loss to Cena. I thought that is how you book one of Lesnar's LAST matches in the WWE, not the first one.
I went to bed and slept on it, and woke up the next morning realizing a couple of things. The first was that even though Lesnar had lost, he still looked like a dominant force in the match. He beat the crap out of John Cena. He also had the "visual three" when he had Cena pinned with the ref down. Lesnar had one slip up that cost him the match. Had he used Cena's chain, he may have won. But he didn't, because Brock thought he didn't need too. Then there's the argument that if Brock beat John Cena, why would any of his matches even matter after that? Brock beat the WWE's top guy, so then people would expect him to beat the likes of Randy Orton and C.M. Punk. Beating John Cena would make all of those matches seem like obvious outcomes. Plus, Lesnar came out of Monday Night RAW looking dominant again with his attack of Triple H. So while I still side with the "Lesnar Should Have Won" camp, I can see the arguments for him losing not being as bad.
So, where are we with Brock Lesnar now? I know there was a reported "blow-up" by Brock Lesnar after Extreme Rules when Cena gave his post match promo. Apparently it wasn't suppose to be a part of the script. But depending on who you believe, the blow-up was scripted as well. And the WWE wanted news to leak on Monday that Lesnar had quit and walked out. I think the WWE is trying too hard to play the fans who follow stuff on the Internet. Just stick to your guns, don't try to get cute and play with a certain portion of the audience. The correct story is going to leak sooner rather than later, even if they try to fool people and succeed for a short period of time.
Having said all of that, it appears that we are on the course to a Triple H/Brock Lesnar match, more than likely at SummerSlam. Again, this is another big time match the WWE can do with Brock. The two never had a one-on-one match during Brock's first run with the WWE. With the current crop of WWE guys, Brock/HHH is the next best option. I would not be opposed to Brock facing C.M. Punk or Randy Orton, but going against HHH will probably result in the most money and PPV buys.
The story going into it makes sense. John Laurinaitis brought Brock Lesnar in and he wants Brock to be the new face of the WWE. But Triple H doesn't approve of it, or Lesnar's actions and new contract demands. When HHH tried to change everything up, Lesnar snapped and "broke" HHH's arm. This puts Hunter out for a few months, with a return and match against Lesnar at SummerSlam seeming the most likely possibility.
But then the question remains: Do you keep Brock Lesnar off of TV until July? The WWE has a limited number of dates for Lesnar. I could see him being storyline suspended for at least a month. If Brock is to work a minimum of two dates a month, he could always show up at Over the Limit and do something. Whether it is to interfere on behalf of John Laurinaitis or do something else, I think keeping Lesnar off TV for too long could turn bad for the WWE. The fans could lose interest in Lesnar then. Lesnar could appear at Over the Limit and have that be his only appearance in the month of May. Lets say Lesnar interferes on behalf of John Laurinaitis and somehow helps him defeat John Cena. Cena begs Triple H or whoever to reinstate Lesnar so he can face him at No Way Out. Lesnar gets reinstated, and we get Lesnar/Cena in a Cage Match at No Way Out.
So what happens after that? Then you keep Lesnar off of TV until the build to SummerSlam starts. The ratings for the WWE struggle during the summer no matter what is happening, so keeping Lesnar off TV won't hurt. Plus, Money in the Bank is a PPV that sells itself on its own and Lesnar wouldn't be needed to help sell that. After SummerSlam? I guess Lesnar wouldn't appear at Night of Champions, but I almost think you have to have him wrestle and Hell In A Cell. Whether its a rematch against Triple H or a match against the Undertaker possibly, you have to have him at the PPV. Come fall, that is when you have Lesnar start to chase the WWE Title. At that point, especially if C.M. Punk holds on to the WWE Title for a whole year, a match between Punk and Lesnar at Survivor Series good be big money.
I still think the best match the WWE could do at Wrestlemania is Rock/Brock. It will have the most money attached to it. Lesnar/Undertaker would work, but it wouldn't be as a big a draw. If they did Lesnar/Taker, that leaves Cena/Rock as a double main event, with the possibility of Punk/Austin as well. Of course, all of this depends on when The Rock is coming back. If Rock is coming back only for Wrestlemania then this works. If not, then things must change. Obviously HHH/Lesnar is happening. I think one of Lesnar/Orton or Lesnar/Punk will happen. And I think Lesnar/Rock will happen at Wrestlemania 29.
So while I may not agree with the ending to Cena/Lesnar, it doesn't spell the end to Brock Lesnar. There are still a world of opportunities out there for Brock and a handful of money matches than can still be done. This is what happens when you make snap judgements kids. When you end up thinking things through, you realize something may not be as bad as it seems.
Until Next Time,
Follow Me On Twitter @JCWonka