WWE Extreme Rules Discussion Thread

[Diluted Dante]

I don't think that there should ever have been any result other than Cena winning. Brock Lesner was brought in to 'bring legitimacy to the WWE'. Which means that if he beats the top star (whatever you think of him, Cena is certainly a top star in the company, and more importantly is a 12 time World Champion), then you're basically saying that everyone in the WWE is rubbish in comparison to Brock.

 

By having Cena win, it legitimises the WWE. Ok sure, Lesnar is a badass. But despite dominating the match, he couldn't beat Cena. Which means that WWE guys are as tough as him, because the top guy took everything Brock had, and it wasn't enough to beat him.

[CiderBag]

Some of you people sure know how to zapp fun out of things.

 

EDIT:

[Sphinx]

Did you already know that nobody died?

 

That's Raw spoilt.

[Mr. Seven]

Gilbert Gottfried cries about Brock/Cena:

 

Cena beats Lesnar

 

By Bryan Alvarez

 

In his first match back for WWE in over eight years, Brock Lesnar lost clean to John Cena in the main event of Sunday's Extreme Rules PPV. It was arguably one of the five dumbest finishes in the history of US pro-wrestling.

 

I guess in hindsight I can't say it was the dumbest. The Hulk Hogan/Kevin Nash fingerpoke of doom spot from WCW and Steve Austin's heel turn and subsequent siding with Vince McMahon following the main event of the 2001 WrestleMania were dumber. The Austin finish was probably the dumbest, because in the case of WCW, while that finish might have sped up the decline, they were already doomed. Austin turning heel led to a collapse in interest from which pro-wrestling has never and probably will never recover. Granted, with the death of ECW and WCW just months earlier, the business was fixing to tank anyway. But a generation of fans grew up with Steve Austin as their hero, and when he turned and drank beer with Vince McMahon, well, that was largely the end of their fandom. To be fair, WWE makes more money in this modern era than at any other point in history, but that's because when you're the only touring big-time pro-wrestling company in the country, there are so many ways to make money that it's not really a fair comparison. I don't think anyone will argue that 2001 was a turning point in the business in terms of fan interest, and today, despite all the money being made, fewer people are interested in professional wrestling than at any time in the past 130 years.

 

Was the Lesnar finish up there with those two? Really, not even close. The aftermath of those finshes were drastic business declines. How much you want to attribute to the finish and how much you want to attribute to the finish also happening to take place at the wrong time is debatable. But that was the immediate aftermath. The difference with this one is that we'll never really know what the finish meant for business, because we'll never know what might have been. It is impossible to really predict. Maybe, in the end, because Vince McMahon will ALWAYS fuck up a golden opportunity without fail, it makes no difference because if he didn't fuck it up at Extreme Rules he'd fuck it up next month, or at SummerSlam, or at Survivor Series or Royal Rumble.

 

But I do know this. We will NEVER know what might have been. Why? Because this was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity that can never be replicated. To me, this was the simplest story to book for maximum revenue. Brock Lesnar destroys John Cena. He destroys someone else at SummerSlam, (Randy Orton perhaps) and wins the title, and then destroys a third person (HHH maybe) at Royal Rumble. This leads to Rock vs. Brock Lesnar for the championship at WrestleMania. Rock beats him and wins the title. After that, you have a four-month build to Rock vs. Cena II at SummerSlam 2013, at which point Cena beats Rock, getting his win back, and also beats the guy who beat Brock Lesnar. If you could talk him into it, you could then do Cena vs. Lesnar II at Mania 2014, give Cena his win back, and everybody is happy and made goddamn boatloads of money.

 

They key is that until at least WrestleMania 2013, the storyline must be WHO CAN BEAT BROCK LESNAR? For maximum impact (and revenue) Brock must be an unbeatable killing machine. People can talk all they want about how wins and losses don't matter, but the reality is that to Vince McMahon they do matter, and they matter a lot, which is why the top guys almost never ever ever ever ever lose clean. There is a reason the biggest gimmick at the biggest show of the year is the fact that Undertaker is putting his undefeated streak on the line. And as much as many people don't want to admit it, it matters to your casual fan too, because as soon as a guy starts losing regularly on TV fans lose interest fast, and sometimes they never become interested in that person again. They key to maximizing revenue (as demonstrated by the fact that every one of Brock's UFC losses was followed by a noticeable decline in PPV revenue, and every time he beat a big name it was followed by a noticeable rise in PPV numbers for the next fight) is that Brock has to be an unbeatable killing machine.

 

And he's already lost.

 

Tell me when in history WWE will ever again raid a former UFC heavyweight champion who also happens to have been the single biggest draw in pro-wrestling or mixed martial arts over the past four years, who also happens to have the look and presence of Brock Lesnar, and who also not only has a pro-wrestling background but was on his way before he left in the mid-2000s to being the best big man to ever step foot inside a wrestling ring. I'll tell you when these stars will align again -- NEVER. If you do things right, you can maybe luck upon another guy like Goldberg, who has the right look and the right presence and gets over huge with a win streak. But you will never ever again have another person come along with everything that Brock Lesnar had when he re-debuted on Raw the night after WrestleMania. Ever. This was once in a lifetime, the chance to take this person, who had a unique combination of features that you'll never see again, and push him as the unbeatable monster leading to what would be, pretty much without question, the biggest money WrestleMania match of all time. Again, we will never know, and people will read this and argue that I'm making too much of this situation, but to me, the amount of money that could have been made with that dynamic is beyond anything that has ever been made for a single one-year run by a person in pro-wrestling history.

 

But he lost to John Cena in his first match. Now, it's no longer about who can beat Brock Lesnar. We know who can beat him. John Cena, and, since Cena has traded wins and losses with most of the top guys, conceivably anyone. At this point, it looks like Brock will be wrestling HHH at SummerSlam. Had Lesnar destroyed Cena, I think most people would presume that Lesnar was beating Hunter in that match. Today, I would bet dollars to donuts that a significant amount of people presume, probably correctly, that Hunter is winning. And to me, HHH vs. Brock means a hell of a lot less with Brock having an 0-1 record than it would had the match been booked following a complete destruction and dominant victory over the company's top babyface.

 

The deal is this. Vince's mindset is that they spent $5 million on Brock Lesnar and it's not about making Brock Lesnar a star. It's about using that $5 million investment to make his guys stars by having them beat Brock Lesnar. Cena getting the win was designed to rehab him from his loss to Rock at Mania and help push him over the top as the company's far and away biggest babyface star. I don't know if Hunter is beating Brock. That makes even less sense than losing to Cena given HHH isn't even a regular character. But it made no sense for non-regular-character HHH to beat CM Punk coming off Punk's hottest-ever period in his entire career and, well, that's what they did. Either way, Brock will probably lose to Randy Orton at some point since that was a proposed match for SummerSlam last week, and then he'll probably beat one guy to win the title and then lose the belt to Rock at Mania if they still decide to go in that direction.

 

He could also quit. They did a worked-shoot scenario backstage Sunday with Brock visibly flipping his lid in front of all the wrestlers. The story is that Cena was supposed to win but go out on a stretcher, but since the show "ran short" Cena did a post-match promo talking about how he might need to take a vacation but he'd be back. Of course, he never ended up taking the vacation because they changed their minds on the direction that night. But Brock had a public flip-out, throwing things around and screaming that Cena had double-crossed him with the promo and was careless during the spot where Brock tried a flying knee and flipped over the top rope and crashed and burned. Apparently, the idea was to convince the other wrestlers that, in fact, it was a smart idea to have Lesnar lose because look, the dude could flip out and quit at any time. This also suggests that Vince McMahon knew full well that everyone in his locker room was going to be baffled by the idea of beating Brock his first night in. They even tried to get the word out to websites like ours that Brock had quit, hoping we'd report it and then look dumb when Brock showed up on Raw, but unfortunately for them word also got out that Brock was backstage and scheduled to work the show, so nobody actually reported on the quitting story. The question I had all day as I listened to people explain that the finish was the right thing to do because now at least someone has beaten Brock in case he ends up quitting, is if WWE was so worried that the guy might flip out and quit, why in the hell did they sign him and pay him $5 million for the year in the first place?

 

Raw opened huge on Monday night coming off the Cena vs. Lesnar match. Lesnar came out, they talked about how he lost, he beat up HHH, and then he was sent home. The rating at that point started to fall, and by the end of the show they'd lost thousands of viewers and the recent trend of the second hour actually doing better than hour one was reversed. Is this a sign that all those new viewers that were intrigued by Lesnar tuned out and won't be back next week? Guess we'll see.

 

I'll say it again. Lesnar vs. HHH at SummerSlam, or whatever Lesnar's next match is, will be very big. He's not going to be "just another guy." He'll always be Brock Lesnar and people will always be intrigued to see him wrestle. But will he be a massive game changer, the type who guarantees an extra 100,000 buys for SummerSlam or an extra 300,000 buys for WrestleMania? No way. That takes a special something, and WWE took that special something away from him on Sunday.

[CleetusVanDamme]

Tell me when in history WWE will ever again raid a former UFC heavyweight champion who also happens to have been the single biggest draw in mixed martial arts over the past four years

 

And David Beckham has sold more t-shirts than everyone in WWE combined over the last 4 years. That means fuck all in the context of the wrestling business, too.

 

You think idiots like this would wait on Lesnar popping a rating, or waiting on the Extreme Rules buyrate* to come out before bitching that WWE have thrown trillions of dollars down the pan.

 

 

* Which would have to do 500,000+ buys for Alvarez' point to stand. And even then, he'll only be right if the next Lesnar ppv after does considerably less.

[andrew "the ref" coyne]

Gilbert Gottfried cries about Brock/Cena:

 

Cena beats Lesnar

 

By Bryan Alvarez

 

But will he be a massive game changer, the type who guarantees an extra 100,000 buys for SummerSlam or an extra 300,000 buys for WrestleMania? No way. That takes a special something, and WWE took that special something away from him on Sunday.

 

So if Summerslam or Mania get an extra 100,000 or 300,000 buys will that make this whinging article null and void?!

 

Although I would of had Lesnar go over I can see what WWE are doing. By having him lose your giving Lesnar (the tv character) more reason to be angry and to lash out. The crowd and other wwe characters have something they can dangle over his head and help provoke fueds. Then if Lesnar goes on to crush loads of people and win the belt, you have the obvious storyline of "Cena, the man who beat Lesnar is BACK" etc etc.

 

Calling it one of the worst endings of all time is daft.

 

[InvertedSmiley]

Tell me when in history WWE will ever again raid a former UFC heavyweight champion who also happens to have been the single biggest draw in mixed martial arts over the past four years

 

And David Beckham has sold more t-shirts than everyone in WWE combined over the last 4 years. That means fuck all in the context of the wrestling business, too.

 

You think idiots like this would wait on Lesnar popping a rating, or waiting on the Extreme Rules buyrate* to come out before bitching that WWE have thrown trillions of dollars down the pan.

 

 

* Which would have to do 500,000+ buys for Alvarez' point to stand. And even then, he'll only be right if the next Lesnar ppv after does considerably less.

Of course, you conveniently edited out the part where the author says that Brock Lesnar has been the single biggest draw in pro-wrestling and mixed martial arts over the past four years, along with the rest of the paragraph which details Brock's pro-wrestling background.

[CleetusVanDamme]

I conveniently left it out because conveniently Brock Lesnar hasn't even been in pro-wrestliing in the last four years, let alone been the biggest draw in the business. Unless I'm forgetting something?

 

Is Georges Saint Pierre the second biggest draw in pro-wrestling over the last few years?

[King Pitcos]

Of course, you conveniently edited out the part where the author says that Brock Lesnar has been the single biggest draw in pro-wrestling and mixed martial arts over the past four years

Well that doesn't even make sense. Lesnar hasn't been the single biggest draw in wrestling over the past four years, has he?

 

Of course, you conveniently edited out the part where the author says that Brock Lesnar has been the single biggest draw in pro-wrestling over the past four years

 

I conveniently left it out because conveniently Brock Lesnar hasn't even been in pro-wrestliing in the last four years, let alone been the biggest draw in the business. Unless I'm forgetting something?

 

Is Georges Saint Pierre the second biggest draw in pro-wrestling over the last few years?

 

Buzz Lightyear is the biggest merch seller in pro-wrestling and animated films.

[CleetusVanDamme]

Manchester United have been the biggest drawing company in football AND pro-wrestling over the last 15 years.

= Manchester United are a bigger wrestling company than WWE.

 

Watch some cheeky bugger quote this and conveniently leave out the "bigger wrestling company than WWE" part.

[DJ Kris]

Cena beats Lesnar

 

By Bryan Alvarez

 

In his first match back for WWE in over eight years, Brock Lesnar lost clean to John Cena in the main event of Sunday's Extreme Rules PPV. It was arguably one of the five dumbest finishes in the history of US pro-wrestling.

This is what I find very irritating and is something that makes Alvarez look pretty stupid. It's one thing to have a negative opinion because you just didn't like something, it's another to base that opinion on a load of bollocks. Cena did not beat Lesner clean, he hit him square in the head with a fucking chain after being destroyed the entire match. In what world has that ever been clean?

 

I read somewhere else someone claim Brock was pissed because Cena got up and cut a promo saying he was all good. He didn't, he did the opposite, he said he couldn't feel his arm and that he'd tasted his own blood, etc and then went on to imply that he was genuinely hurt and may have to go away for a while as a result or perhaps cos he's pissed the boss off.

 

Also the way Alverez goes on about how that match should have been books as though he is some kind of booking expert was really grating. What is his wrestling background exactly? How many successful angles has he booked? Isn't he just a wrestling journalist?

[Mr Tibbs]

Also the way Alverez goes on about how that match should have been books as though he is some kind of booking expert was really grating. What is his wrestling background exactly? How many successful angles has he booked? Isn't he just a wrestling journalist?

 

While I do agree that Alverez can be very annoying at times, I thinks it's unfair to state his opinion is wrong because he hasn't got a booking background in wrestling.

 

Journalists in all sports will give an opinion as how they see a certain event should have gone. "This team should have played these tactics", "Why is a wrestler trying to stand with this guy?" etc, etc. This morning I guarentee you there are people across the country debating what tactics Chelsea should have played last night, but have no professional football experience. That doesn't render their opinion as worthless.

 

I've seen alot of arguments on this topic for and against Lesnar winning/losing on Sunday. Alot make valid points. I will be surprised if 90-95% of those posting have ever booked a wrestling show or drawn money through an angle. Does that render their opinion worthless.

 

Remember that I do agree with most of your argument against Alverez, just not the point that you have to have been a successful booker to have a valid opinion!

[neil's bitch]

Checked it out last night, and must say bar the main event/title matches it kind of seemed like a longer version of Raw/Smackdown.

 

Kane/Orton, was better than i expected although i'm not bothered by this fued at all.

 

The Brodus/Ziggler match was ok, but i am getting worried the i am more looking forward to seeing Zigglers oversell, than seeing him become champion.

 

Divas stuff was a bit "Meh"

 

The Ryback segment was good, my first time seeing him in action, and he seems awesome. To be honest the bigger of the two jobbers sort of half/sold some of his stuff so in turn didnt make it look as powerfull as it should of been, but that might just be my view. The running perfect-plex/Muscle buster/Samoan drop thing wasnt as impressive as i thought it would of been, but again it may of just been this match, will keep my eye out for future stuff from him. He could probably do with destroying some lower - mid card guys to get up the ladder a bit quicker.

 

Jericho/Punk was ok, I personally havent enjoyed the matches these guys have had so far, but it was ok. Although i know it was a street fight, i didnt really see the need to dress in normal clothes, but then to have kickpads over the top, all whislt they didnt really go outside or anything. Just nit picking really, but i would see the best match of the two so far.

 

Bryan/Sheamus was ok, Bryan cam out looking way stronger. He got himself DQ'ed in the first fall to take the second, and it looked like Sheamus had to take the suprise root to win the match.

 

The main event was pure gold. Finish didnt bother me in the slightest, as Brock destroyed him and came out looking stronger regardless really. Plus the sound the chain made when he hit lesner explained everything. I cant really explain, but it was a wrestling match at all, it was Lesner just kicking ten bells out of Cena. I also really got into the little speech in the end.

 

Will be fun to see whats going on with Brock going forward

[Big Rob]

Also the way Alverez goes on about how that match should have been books as though he is some kind of booking expert was really grating. What is his wrestling background exactly? How many successful angles has he booked? Isn't he just a wrestling journalist?

I don't really agree with him on this, but everyone has a right to criticize anything, regardless of whether or not they do that job themselves, or have proven that they could do better. I'm sure the majority of us here who like football have slagged off a pro-team at one point or another, despite the fact that we likely couldn't make that team ourselves. It's the "you've never been in the ring" argument, just from a different angle, and it's a silly one.

[Chris B]

Also the way Alverez goes on about how that match should have been books as though he is some kind of booking expert was really grating. What is his wrestling background exactly? How many successful angles has he booked? Isn't he just a wrestling journalist?

 

He's a former independent wrestler. Been involved in some relatively successful angles on a local basis.

 

Not exciting, and not something that is worth shouting about, but he has got into the ring before now, and didn't disgrace himself by all accounts.