Rollins/Lesnar sacrificed for The Undertaker

[Headlesspete]

Ya know, I've always been a massive Undertaker fan. I supported the streak, always jumped to the defense of how WWE allowed him his big match at WrestleMania, and i never grew tired of his same old routine, because deep down, I'm an Undertaker mark. And then things changed.

6 months ago, WWE had the perfect opportunity to turn Bray Wyatt into a megastar. The Undertaker's streak was gone, so another lose at WrestleMania would hardly ruin the Undertaker's career, but it would have made Wyatts. Instead, The Undertaker inexplicably went over, and Wyatt was left to flounder. Again, I've always supported the streak as a marketing/money tool, but with the streak gone, i didn't see the need for Taker to continue to win. I'm not going to even go into how Wyatt had to build the entire thing up for 6 weeks while Taker stayed away, point is, the wrong guy went over.

And so come along to tonight, with Rollins, your future of WWE and the guy thats in the most need of looking strong, and Brock, the most over guy on the roster who's got the most chance of bringing in your casual fans. I admit, i was worried WWE might not be able to keep both guys looking strong, but i had hoped they would try. Instead, WWE out did themselves as only they can, and made both guys look shit. Rollins got his ass kicked the entire match and then promptly disappeared, and Lesnar got beat up by a guy who looks unable to lift up a toothbrush, never mind Lesnar!

This isn't a hate thread on the Undertaker, i have a ton of respect for him and I'm all for him coming back to help build the WWE for the future. That being said, tonight he came out looking better than the 2 people who most needed to look good tonight. Its worrying how WWE don't seem to realize how much they're sacrificing the future .

All will probably seem OK when Rollins beats them both at SummerSlam, but still, if anyone paid for the PPV tonight for that main event, or purchased the Network to see what WWE could offer, i can't help feel that main event disappointed.

[VaderBomb]

Yup, I was excited as the match began but there wasn't even a fucking bell ring after The Undertaker got involved. This is the second time that we've been left without a bell ring in the past month. It's inexcusable, especially during the main event of a PPV with such a legendary pairing of Lesnar and Rollins.

[SlightlyJames]

I'm watching it right now and literally the only thing on my mind is how fucking hairy the Undertaker's back is. Was it always like that?

[Str8Shooter]

Having Taker bear Lesnar probably isn't ideal with how unbeatable Lesnar has looked. But to be honest I don't think a loss kills him that much, he's lost to Triple H and Cena since coming back and recovered to look unstoppable.

I just wonder how they're going to book it with Lesnar pretty much a face now. Taker kicking him right in the balls was interesting, surely they're not going to try and heel Taker?

[AkydefGoldberg]

I'm watching it right now and literally the only thing on my mind is how fucking hairy the Undertaker's back is. Was it always like that?

Never mind his back. Looking from the pictures, it's his beer belly that needs a focus on. At WM31, he looked OK vs Bray but doubt he'd survive a trip to Suplex City..

[KaiserGlider]

The match was disappointing. I was looking forward to seeing what strategies Rollins would employ to take down Lesnar (or at least get close), but we barely got any of that. Just some half-assed work on Lesnar's leg which didn't last long before Lesnar beast-moded out of it. I dig Lesnar being a wrecking machine as much as the next guy, but why not take him in a different direction which could work just as well. Have Rollins pull off some mastermind shit to take Lesnar down and get the advantage, but have Lesnar survive everything until he gets the upper hand and is about to win the match. That would have done a ton for Rollins. This was his most interesting feud as champion and they didn't capitalize on the match the way they should have. Didn't even let him kick out of one F-5.

[prophet]

I don't mind that the match ended dirty because that's the only way we should've expected Rollins to retain, I don't mind Taker being back and I've already said I'm happy with that.

I just don't like that he's involved with Lesnar (and maybe Rollins). It's fucking retarded to think he's still salty about the streak ending (unless he's going to be heel now, which I doubt) and it's a stupid lose-lose scenario they're now in. Either Taker defeats Brock which would be the stupidest decision they've made in a while or Brock defeats Taker in which case what was the point in him coming back?...or they find a way to both shit on Rollins whilst fighting out a stalemate.

I don't like this at all.

[Hanley!]

I'm 99% certain that Undertaker will win if they fight again. There's no point in Lesnar winning, unless it's to set up a third match where Undertaker eventually wins. Story-wise a Lesnar win is redundant and leaves us with nowhere to go.

Undertaker is getting his win back. It's just going to happen.

It's really fucking stupid though. It'll hurt Lesnar and it won't help him. It's gutless WWE booking at its finest. They can't let anyone actually benefit from a victory.

[Tom]

I don't mind that the match ended dirty because that's the only way we should've expected Rollins to retain, I don't mind Taker being back and I've already said I'm happy with that.

I just don't like that he's involved with Lesnar (and maybe Rollins). It's fucking retarded to think he's still salty about the streak ending (unless he's going to be heel now, which I doubt) and it's a stupid lose-lose scenario they're now in. Either Taker defeats Brock which would be the stupidest decision they've made in a while or Brock defeats Taker in which case what was the point in him coming back?...or they find a way to both shit on Rollins whilst fighting out a stalemate.

I don't like this at all.

I think they just see dollars in the situation. They see a Brock/Taker rematch from Wrestlemania 30 as a selling point given the fact that Brock ended the streak. Basically, they are doing what they usually do with Wrestlemania (taking two part time superstars and pairing them to get a so called "dream" match). In WWE's terms it makes business sense.

I agree that the set up of the match kind of come out of nowhere. Why did Taker not try and avenge the loss at Mania and leave it so long? etc. But I am not surprised they are doing because in this day and age's WWE it is the kind of thing they would do. I also don't see Taker beating Brock doing anything to hurt Brock's character. I think WWE have always done a great job of making Brock look like a beast after his previous defeats and they will have no problem doing it again. To counter him losing they'll probably just have him go into beast mode on the Raw after and set up his next feud for Mania or maybe even beforehand.

Although it was a terrible way to end the match also (without an official ending), I don't think Rollins really looked bad throughout. He looked as good as anybody has under that time limit against Brock with the exception of Triple H. And lets be honest, it's Brock Lesnar as well. Was anybody expecting Rollins to get a great deal of offence in the match? I am glad he still has the belt. They easily could have just had Brock win and then have Taker interrupt at the end, meaning Taker vs Brock would have been for the title!

[War Daddy]

Something tells me it'll be last man standing type double count out Ala Michaels/HHH.

[AkydefGoldberg]

@Tom nailed it as it does appear WM32 will see Lesnar vs. Undertaker II after Summerslam in which Taker wins to make it all evens and you imagine Lesnar will beat down Taker sometime next year, to set up the Mania match. I think they might have Taker lose, but in a more "heart-breaking" fashion and I think Taker will then announce his retirement and call it quits.

[KaiserGlider]

As Hanley said, I think Taker beating Brock only hurts Lesnar. It doesn't make sense from a kayfabe standpoint that Brock was able to beat Undertaker at Wrestlemania, where Undertaker is in his most unbeatable state, but NOT be able to beat him at Summerslam 2015 when Brock is at 100% full power, no diverticulitis, and has completely dominated Cena, Reigns and Rollins. Unless they really play up the concussion at Wrestlemania 30 and say that Taker has been training his ass off after the match with Wyatt (which he barely won). Will they bother to give the match that much story though?

A different scenario would have been to have Rollins somehow retain/cheat against Lesnar, and then have Undertaker return on Raw the next night to challenge Brock and shift him away from Rollins. No reason for Taker to be a dick and cost Lesnar the title, just have Taker cut a promo saying that Brock beat him fair and square, and now he wants to beat Brock the same way to redeem himself.

I was thinking that perhaps the original plan was Reigns cleanly pinning a heel Lesnar at Wrestlemania, then Undertaker beating a heel Lesnar at Summerslam, and they haven't completely changed that plan even though Lesnar went babyface. If that's true and they want Lesnar heel from now on, what they could do is have Brock just mercilessly destroy Taker with a weapon before Summerslam in a way that makes the fans hate Lesnar and get behind Taker. If they don't do something like that, we've got a face vs face match - not sure how that feud will work.

One thing I can get behind is Sting costing Undertaker the match at Summerslam to start their feud, but that doesn't do shit for Lesnar either. This is a baffling no-win situation, almost intriguing really. Lesnar has been booked so incredibly well since he ended the Streak, I didn't think things would turn out this way.

[Hanley!]

I also don't see Taker beating Brock doing anything to hurt Brock's character. I think WWE have always done a great job of making Brock look like a beast after his previous defeats and they will have no problem doing it again.

I wouldn't be so sure. Lesnar's return to the WWE was lukewarm until he ended the streak. When he was losing matches to Triple H and John Cena, people barely gave a fuck about him. 18 months ago, people did not really consider him one of the best guys in the company, let alone the guy.

Lesnar has exploded in popularity and effectiveness since he ended the streak. Or perhaps more importantly, since they started to genuinely treat him like an unstoppable monster. Losing to the Undertaker would hurt his aura of invincibility without question. And there's every chance that he then goes back to being just another guy. Just like he was right before his Wrestlemania 30 match with the Undertaker.

Wins and losses do matter, as much as WWE loves to pretend otherwise. A big part of why Lesnar is more over than everyone else right now is that he's the only guy on the roster who's not doing jobs.

Why anyone would want them to throw that away to give a win to the bloody Undertaker is far beyond my comprehension.

I don't think Rollins really looked bad throughout.

The fact that he was selling so much didn't do much to hurt him, in my mind. But I think his star power did take a bit of a beating. He's the world champion, but he disappeared into the void at the end of the pay per view last night and we were just supposed to forget about him completely. Undertaker was there so Rollins was no longer important. I think that made him look like a chump. Like they don't really see him as a star.

[KaiserGlider]

I wouldn't be so sure. Lesnar's return to the WWE was lukewarm until he ended the streak. When he was losing matches to Triple H and John Cena, people barely gave a fuck about him. 18 months ago, people did not really consider him one of the best guys in the company, let alone the guy.

I don't know where you're getting that from. He lost one match to John Cena, after completely destroying John the entire match which was unexpected. Then he beat Triple H clean in the main event of Summerslam, (in fact he made HHH tap out) and then lost to HHH in a competitive hardcore match after getting Pedigreed on the steel steps. Those are his only two losses in his current WWE run. He's definitely been booked much better since ending the Streak, but "people barely gave a fuck about him before that" is absurd. Brock Lesnar was always one of the top stars and best workers on the roster. Every time he showed up it felt like a special moment, hardly just another guy. Of course, all of that was increased when he broke the Streak and again when he squashed Cena. No doubt about it. But it's not like he was The Big Show before that.

[Hanley!]

^^ He wasn't a chump before ending the streak, but he wasn't setting the world on fire either. Or ratings/pay per view buys either. I read a whole bunch of reports about how the pay per views he was appearing on weren't doing the business WWE were expecting from him. His Summerslam show against Triple H did pretty bad numbers if I remember correctly. That whole feud was actually pretty flat.

His return was a big deal, but once he lost to Cena the excitement died down pretty quickly. Beating the Undertaker made a huge difference to how fans responded to him. When Lesnar is an indestructible monster, people are really into him. When he's just a former champion that returns for big matches, people like him but not to the same extent.

[Str8Shooter]

I think people overrate how badly a loss affects people in WWE, especially people who are already full established stars. The way WWE books, damn near everybody on the roster loses in or around half their matches anyway. Everybody loses, even the top guys. Once they're on a certain level, they pretty much stay there, even with losses.

Cena lost in convincing fashion last Summerslam, is he any less over now? He lost to Bryan the Summerslam before that clean too and was fine. Undertaker lost clean at Mania to Brock and the crowd went nuts for him last night. Didn't seem to affect him. Brock has already lost to Cena and Triple H and was pretty easily built back into a monster. People lose and the fans are conditioned to WWE's back and forth booking philosophy.

Now that very philosophy works both ways. Guys aren't badly damaged by losses, but the other side of the same coin is that they also benefit less from wins. Because they don't really matter either.

[Hanley!]

I'd argue that the reason that there aren't as many people over in the company in general at the moment, is that everyone trades wins and nobody gets to build any momentum. Wins mattering might not be the company's philosophy at the moment, but I think Lesnar himself is all the proof you need that it does make a difference.

[Str8Shooter]

I'd argue that the reason that there aren't as many people over in the company in general at the moment, is that everyone trades wins and nobody gets to build any momentum. Wins mattering might not be the company's philosophy at the moment, but I think Lesnar himself is all the proof you need that it does make a difference.

I won't argue he's more over now after beating Taker at Mania, but I don't think its that much more over than he was before. Plus beating the Streak is the most massive win you can get, it can't even be fairly measured against a normal win

[Tom]

^^ He wasn't a chump before ending the streak, but he wasn't setting the world on fire either. Or ratings/pay per view buys either. I read a whole bunch of reports about how the pay per views he was appearing on weren't doing the business WWE were expecting from him. His Summerslam show against Triple H did pretty bad numbers if I remember correctly. That whole feud was actually pretty flat.

His return was a big deal, but once he lost to Cena the excitement died down pretty quickly. Beating the Undertaker made a huge difference to how fans responded to him. When Lesnar is an indestructible monster, people are really into him. When he's just a former champion that returns for big matches, people like him but not to the same extent.

I think his ratings numbers haven't really met expectations since he ended the streak either. So if we look at it from a ratings perspective, I don't know if beating Taker made him as massive of a draw as people would like to think.

It's easy to assume that the fans won't be as into Lesnar should he lose to Taker. But the reality is that Lesnar has been theoretically beat on a couple occasions over the past year anyway (Cena & Reigns) only for outside interference or changes within the match. And WWE have done a great job of building him back from that. It's not as if he has been indestructible and nobody has looked like not beating him because superstars have come extremely close to doing so.

The only time I was not interested in Lesnar was during his last two matches with Triple H. And I don't think it was Lesnar's fault. He was put in a needless trilogy with Triple H when their first match didn't do anything to make me excited for the second, and the second for the third etc. It was a bad combination. Breaking Trips and Shawn's arm in the months leading to Summerslam though were awesome moments, and showed how easy it was to get people invested in Brock after a defeat.

Overall, the point is that he has been defeated before and WWE have done a great job of making him look indestructible again. Is Taker my favourite choice to defeat Lesnar clean? No, because there are younger superstars who could have gained by doing it more. With the right booking, Reigns could have done it. But I don't think it's the end of the world, and I do think Brock will be a guy who continues to make everything feel more important when he appears afterwards too. His size, aura and quite frankly his ability to be a badass is too good for him not to be able to do it!

[Kein]

All I hear is people leaving and coming back and leaving and coming back. Maybe people aren't hyped because people don't stay long enough to make a big enough impact for when they actually return...?