Thread Tools

Stone Hot · 01-06-2013, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ROGERTHAT21

Good idea. But they can't do that because Brock's contract said he could only make 3 PPV appearances. He's already made 2, so if he shows up at the Royal Rumble then he won't show up at Wrestlemania. Tricky Situation, I know. I don't want Rock vs. Brock to be for the WWE Championship either, it should be a pure money match. If not, Brock needs to sign a new oontract. That doesn't seem all that likely.

This, for both quotes.

Hopefully, yeah.

Who cares!? Cena vs. Taker is a much bigger match than Austin vs. Punk. The streak has become Wrestlemania. If they truly want people to think that Cena will end the streak, it'll have to go on last. If he ends the streak in the middle of the show that's all anyone will care about, it'll be Triple H vs. Chris Jericho at WM18 all over again.

The Rock isn't a dick for not letting Austin get a main event spot. If Cena turns heel(hypothetically speaking) and they do Rock vs. Cena 2, it's a bigger match than Austin vs. Punk. The bigger match will go on last, unless they want a repeat of WM18.

If either one of these matches happen at WM29, Austin vs. Punk will be overshadowed. Let them do it at WM 30 or 31 and give them their main event spot, because if Cena vs. Undertaker, Rock vs. Brock, or Rock vs. Heel Cena happens at WM29, Austin vs. Punk will get lost in the shuffle.

Cena is not going to turn heel or end the streak plain and simple and Rock vs Brock has happened already no matter how u put it it happened already. Austin vs Punk will go on last if happens at WM 29 and it will not have a repeat of WM 18 because one its a NY crowed they are always hot during any match and 2 Jericho and HHH were not at the level of what Hogan and Rock were Austin is at a is at that level and so is Punk. So the crowed wont be dead during that match at all. Plus its Austins first match in 10 years it makes more sense to have his return match at WM 29 other then WM 30 and plus if Rock vs Brock happens and is for the wwe title u can rest to sure the fans will be shitting all over that match just like Brock Goldberg because the fans know they will just be leaving after WM 29 again so it wont be smart to have that match last cause the fans would just shit over it

Stone Hot · 01-06-2013, 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GillbergReturns

It goes beyond who goes on last. The bigger issue is money. Will WWE pony up the dough to bring in Austin when they already have Rock, Lesnar, Taker and Triple H available to them?

I think one thing they could do is use Austin as a special guest ref in whoever Punk faces to build a Wrestlemania 30 match.

they would pony up the money cause i believe they want WM 29 to be the biggest WM off all time and Austin has done the guest ref thing so many times its old and they wont do another year build up for Punk vs Austin cause thats happened already with Rock vs Cena

**Riot** · 01-06-2013, 07:05 PM

Vince does know that the WWE Champion needs to be on television every week right? Not just via the titan tron from California, but in person. Brock Vs. Rock doesnt need a championship for people to see it anyhow. I'm already excited for a match between them. What a waste of Punk's streak though...

itssoeasy23 · 01-06-2013, 07:17 PM

Yeahhh, no.

See, I understand that money is what makes the world go around, and this is a huge money match, but come on! What does Lesnar vs. Rock have to do with the future of this company? Wrestlemania use to be where stars were born, legends were made, moments that would last a lifetime. Two part-timers in a main event feud for the WWE Championship is just stupid IMO and adds nothing to the main roster. Just imagine if it's Rock vs. Lesnar for the WWE Championship in the main event of WM 29. Than, 2 day's later their both gone from the company. What did it do exactly in the long term? It gave them alot of money, but that's it.

zama5000 · 01-06-2013, 07:23 PM

rock vs brock is cool but it doesnt deserve the title match

doctor doom · 01-06-2013, 07:24 PM

Third time I'm posting this.

The main event segment for Raw one of these next weeks should be punk/Rock. However I think that heyman and punk should complain about who's officiating the match. Glass shatters and out comes Austin. We get stare downs all around just like the last time everyone saw each other. Somehow Punk should lose his title to the rock at royal rumble due to a mistake by stone cold, perhaps a foot under the rope. Lesnar wins the rumble an we get punk/Austin lesnar/rock and Cena/undertaker

GillbergReturns · 01-06-2013, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stone Hot

they would pony up the money cause i believe they want WM 29 to be the biggest WM off all time and Austin has done the guest ref thing so many times its old and they wont do another year build up for Punk vs Austin cause thats happened already with Rock vs Cena

WWE is corporation and their ultimate goal is to line their pockets. When they say biggest they really mean most profitable.

Last year WM brought in 67 mil and 1.3 million buys and with the talent they already have they can easily clip that. They're not going to bring in Austin unless his presence pays for itself. I'm not saying it won't but I just wouldn't surprise me if WWE held off on an Austin match because they can already achieve the biggest WM of all time without him wrestling.

Stone Hot · 01-06-2013, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by itssoeasy23

Yeahhh, no.

See, I understand that money is what makes the world go around, and this is a huge money match, but come on! What does Lesnar vs. Rock have to do with the future of this company? Wrestlemania use to be where stars were born, legends were made, moments that would last a lifetime. Two part-timers in a main event feud for the WWE Championship is just stupid IMO and adds nothing to the main roster. Just imagine if it's Rock vs. Lesnar for the WWE Championship in the main event of WM 29. Than, 2 day's later their both gone from the company. What did it do exactly in the long term? It gave them alot of money, but that's it.

This is why if this match does happen and its for the title it should not go on last. Because WM 29 is gonna be in a NY NJ crowd a very hardcore wrestling fan town I feel if you put that on last fans are gonna shit all over it just like Goldberg vs Brock from WM 20. Fans knew they were leaving and they shat all of that match and it wasn't even for the title. Rock & Brock we all know are leaving after WM 29 You put Brock vs Rock for the title on last except the fans to shit all over it

Stone Hot · 01-06-2013, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GillbergReturns

WWE is corporation and their ultimate goal is to line their pockets. When they say biggest they really mean most profitable.

Last year WM brought in 67 mil and 1.3 million buys and with the talent they already have they can easily clip that. They're not going to bring in Austin unless his presence pays for itself. I'm not saying it won't but I just wouldn't surprise me if WWE held off on an Austin match because they can already achieve the biggest WM of all time without him wrestling.

If you have Austin vs Punk, Brock vs Rock, and Taker vs Cena happen at WM 29 the WM buyrate from last year will triple

GillbergReturns · 01-06-2013, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by itssoeasy23

Yeahhh, no.

See, I understand that money is what makes the world go around, and this is a huge money match, but come on! What does Lesnar vs. Rock have to do with the future of this company? Wrestlemania use to be where stars were born, legends were made, moments that would last a lifetime. Two part-timers in a main event feud for the WWE Championship is just stupid IMO and adds nothing to the main roster. Just imagine if it's Rock vs. Lesnar for the WWE Championship in the main event of WM 29. Than, 2 day's later their both gone from the company. What did it do exactly in the long term? It gave them alot of money, but that's it.

Welcome to 2013. The fact of the matter is you can't give me a Championship Wrestlemania headlining match without relying on a part timer.

Undertaker vs Punk. Same scenario. Undertaker wins and vacates the title the next day. Punk isn't winning that match under any scenario. They're not flushing away Cena vs Taker.

So really you're left with Rock v Cena 2 or Rock vs Cena vs Punk. They can do that at Backlash or the night after Raw for all I care. I'll take my Wrestlemania match at Wrestlemania.