It is currently: Mar 29, '24, 1:29 am

Comparison between Brock Lesnar and CM Punk's title reigns

Talk about what's going on in the WWE in this forum!

Moderator: Str8Shooter

Comparison between Brock Lesnar and CM Punk's title reigns

Postby KaiserGlider » May 09, '18, 8:26 pm

Image
  • 0

User avatar
KaiserGlider Male
Ring General
Ring General
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Topic Author
Posts: 2204
Topics: 472
Age: 31
Joined: Tue Oct 8, 2013
Reputation: 1294

Re: Comparison between Brock Lesnar and CM Punk's title reigns

Postby Hanley! » May 10, '18, 3:47 pm

And Lesnar has still probably had more main events in his reign.
  • 0

User avatar
Hanley! Male
World Champion
World Champion
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 5605
Topics: 165
Age: 37
Joined: Tue Oct 8, 2013
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Reputation: 3988

Re: Comparison between Brock Lesnar and CM Punk's title reigns

Postby Everlong » May 11, '18, 10:13 am

I never even really thought of it, but WWE is definitely using Lesnar to wipe out CM Punk's reign.
  • 0

Image

Image

YOU HEARD IT FROM TAJ FIRST FOLKS
User avatar
Everlong Male
SquaredCircle Commisioner
Living Legend
Living Legend
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 10544
Topics: 2439
Age: 35
Joined: Tue Oct 8, 2013
Location: Brew City, USA
Reputation: 3827

Re: Comparison between Brock Lesnar and CM Punk's title reigns

Postby DBSoT » May 12, '18, 3:57 am

Everlong wrote:I never even really thought of it, but WWE is definitely using Lesnar to wipe out CM Punk's reign.


It does seem that way. Which is funny because CM Punk's reign was with a different title and isn't actually a record. It is just the longest in recent memory.
  • 0

Image
User avatar
DBSoT Male
Ring General
Ring General
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 2576
Topics: 218
Age: 35
Joined: Wed Oct 9, 2013
Location: Detroit
Reputation: 851

Re: Comparison between Brock Lesnar and CM Punk's title reigns

Postby KaiserGlider » May 13, '18, 7:45 pm

Hanley! wrote:And Lesnar has still probably had more main events in his reign.


:( That's a good point.
  • 0

User avatar
KaiserGlider Male
Ring General
Ring General
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Topic Author
Posts: 2204
Topics: 472
Age: 31
Joined: Tue Oct 8, 2013
Reputation: 1294

Re: Comparison between Brock Lesnar and CM Punk's title reigns

Postby Hanley! » May 14, '18, 11:09 am

The overall takeaway here is that WWE can't make long title reigns work.
  • 0

User avatar
Hanley! Male
World Champion
World Champion
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 5605
Topics: 165
Age: 37
Joined: Tue Oct 8, 2013
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Reputation: 3988

Re: Comparison between Brock Lesnar and CM Punk's title reigns

Postby The Legend » May 14, '18, 12:18 pm

Hanley! wrote:The overall takeaway here is that WWE can't make long title reigns work.


Because all of their guys are overexposed. 3 hours of RAW, 2 hours of SD (which sadly with the brand split being less meaningful means we're closer to the champion appearing 5 hours a week), a PPV roughly every 3 weeks. They can't make long title reigns work because one week in WWE time is like 3 weeks in any other promotion's time. Then when they have a guy like Lesnar, they try to protect, but as a result he's never around.
  • 0

Image

Credit to Tim/Everlong for this awesome sig
User avatar
The Legend None specified
World Champion
World Champion
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 5641
Topics: 331
Joined: Tue Oct 8, 2013
Reputation: 1830

Re: Comparison between Brock Lesnar and CM Punk's title reigns

Postby Hanley! » May 14, '18, 2:05 pm

Overexposure is a problem, but it's not the real reason that they can't make long title reigns work. It's generally just bad booking and shitty priorities.

Punk's reign sucked because he wasn't given main events and because he didn't beat a lot of the company's top names as the company were more concerned with protecting them than him. Overexposure wasn't really behind either of those problems. He wouldn't have burned through opponents so quickly if he was around less, so I guess overexposure contributed to that issue. But it was still easily avoidable, had they just positioned Punk on top and prioritised his opponents over those of Cena, etc.

Lesnar's title reign has sucked because he's over-pushed and under-exposed. He beats everyone he faces, and is held up on a pedestal above everybody else, even though his matches are mostly bad. He also barely shows up, which kinda makes him feel more special, but considering how long he's been doing this and how lackluster his appearances generally are, it also makes him incredibly dull. It doesn't help that the company hasn't been doing enough to create viable opponents for him.

That's what made the New Day's long run so rough towards the end: they just ran out of opponents. But they had to keep the titles anyway to take a record away from Demolition. Because, you know, McMahon priorities.

The company has a bad track record when it comes to building depth in general, which makes it hard for a champion to have a year long reign where it doesn't feel like they're treading water for large periods. If you want someone to have an engaging title run, they need a variety of credible opponents. Not the same couple of guys over and over again, or a parade of midcard nobodies that the fans don't believe in.

Okada has held the IWGP Championship for almost two years now, and has had a fantastic run. One of the best ever. And it would be wrong to credit his success to less televised appearances. The reign has worked because New Japan have built a lot of depth in their main event scene, giving Okada a number of big time opponents. He works the main event of every big show, he has a great match, he wins clean, then moves on to the next guy. But despite his dominance there are at least three guys there at the moment who feel like they could realistically take the belt from him.

This kind of booking is simple, but it works. And there's no reason that WWE couldn't do it; their priorities just lie elsewhere.
  • 6

User avatar
Hanley! Male
World Champion
World Champion
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 5605
Topics: 165
Age: 37
Joined: Tue Oct 8, 2013
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Reputation: 3988

 


Return to WWE

Who is Online Now?

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests

cron
Reputation System ©'