Lesnar vs Punk II @ Wrestlemania XXXI

Discussion in 'General WWE' started by The GOAT, Oct 4, 2014.

  1. JR talked on his blog recently about the possibility of seeing Lesnar vs Punk II at Wrestlemania 31:
    http://www.wrestlingrumors.net/jim-...ock-lesnar-title-match-wrestlemania-31/29447/

    Obviously the set-up for this match would be Punk returning as a surprise entrant in the Royal Rumble match and winning, and then going on to defeat Brock Lesnar for the WWE World Heavyweight Championship at WM31.

    Even though I expect Punk back at some point (and wouldn't even be shocked if he returned as early as next year), clearly the odds of this particular scenario happening are astronomically low, but a more interesting question is, who would actually PREFER to see this happen over any other alternative? Not saying that I do, but it wouldn't be the worst idea in the world. Giving the rub of defeating Brock Lesnar to a guy who walked out on them because he didn't get his way sounds like a terrible idea, but oh boy, wouldn't that be an ironic thing to complain about seeing as how Brock Lesnar walked out on them in 2004 and yet was given the luxury of ending the Streak as a part-timer a whole ten years later.

    There would at least be an interesting story behind it, what with them being connected to Paul Heyman, and with Heyman being able to say, "You couldn't defeat Brock Lesnar before and Brock even had to go and do what you failed to do the previous year and that was end the Undertaker's streak... what leads you to believe you have even the slightest chance of surviving now?"
     
  2. I'd rather he didn't return vs Brock, Punk needs to be able to cut free and they seem to hate him doing that as a babyface. Plus the story you laid out with Heyman sounds pretty horrible IMO.
     
  3. #3 Prince Bálor, Oct 4, 2014
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2014
    I have a hard time believing that this is gonna happen at WM31. I'd (kinda) like to see it, though, but not reall. lol
    But where does that leave the returning Bryan and Reigns? We've got Cena (sadly), Rollins and Ambrose in that picture, as well...
     
  4. Punk makes for good promo work, particularly as a heel.
    Wrestling is wrestling, but character and the ability to cut a great promo and work the crowd is worth the price of admission.
    I don't see the fascination with Brock Lesnar. He's a loser and you people overrate his presence. He isn't worth two pennies in my book.
    Lesnar can't promote matches and is only interesting because he's a novelty act. The fact I am aware of this turns me off.

    Give me Punk/HHH. This would entertain, especially if the lines of kayfabe were all but eradicated. Wrestling is fake, I may as well get compelling entertainment.
     
  5. His match with Lesnar at SummerSlam last year was awesome, It wouldn't hurt to see it again.
     
  6. Fuck that.


    Then again, I'd be all for it if Lesnar legitimately beats the shit out of Punk.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. What's terrible about it? They have history and there's reason to sell Punk as the underdog. Granted, I can think of at least three people who deserve to defeat Lesnar before Punk, but this backstory makes since if they went the Punk/Brock route.
     
  8. As long as punk get's destroyed, I'd be happy with it.
     
  9. JC hit on it. The money with Punk is with him vs Triple H more so than Lesnar.

    This Brock push needs to end with him putting over the next top face. Anything else is a failure.
     
  10. Punk vs Sheamus I can buy, but he isn't going to be facing a Bork Laser anytime soon.
     
  11. The whole thing doesn't really make sense, it's worded to me like Paul found a new client to replace Punk when that isn't the case obviously. Plus it just sounds like a rushed way in to the story. This puts me off given I'm not interested in the two facing each other again.
     
  12. [​IMG]
     
    • Creative Creative x 1
  13. Marking for the gif! But rolling my eyes at it's uselessness in it's situation, so you enjoy that gray rating! :yay:
     
  14. I just like to throw it out randomly, pretty much whenever it pops up in my head. Enjoy this one, useful Rain.

    You watch this yet?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Nah man, couldn't watch it without having those special features, ya know? ;)
     
  16. The best part by far is the end after credits. I still gots the magic, I still gots it.
     
    • Cool Cool x 1
  17. "There would at least be an interesting story behind it, what with them being connected to Paul Heyman, and with Heyman being able to say, "You couldn't defeat Brock Lesnar before and Brock even had to go and do what you failed to do the previous year and that was end the Undertaker's streak... what leads you to believe you have even the slightest chance of surviving now?"

    I fail to see how that's worded funnily. Do I need to specifically mention that Heyman was managing Brock Lesnar at the time of the Punk/Lesnar match? It's written with the assumption that the reader already knows this. The paragraph as a whole is just me paraphrasing how Heyman would explain to Punk why he wouldn't/shouldn't stand a chance against Lesnar given the latter's credentials.
     
  18. The entire story is Brock did what you didn't isn't it? Yeah that to me sounds like you're bringing it up like Paul needed to upgrade from Punk to Brock which he obviously didn't. Not everyone needs to enjoy every post you make, jeez.
     
  19. The entire story doesn't rest upon that, that's just the material that Heyman would use in order to convince everyone that Punk has no chance against Lesnar. That, and the fact that Brock already defeated Punk once before. The whole point is to make Punk out to be the ultimate underdog who has to dig deep and give the best performance in his entire career to win, which would make his victory look even more triumphant.

    Theoretically, Punk winning the Rumble and going to challenge a huge adversary like Lesnar for the championship at Wrestlemania is the only story there needs to be, but when you factor in the history between all three men as well, that provides more meat to it. It would arguably have more of a backstory to it than probably half of the matches that have headlined Wrestlemania throughout history.
     
  20. I see where both of you are coming from.
    Once Undertaker agreed to job to Lesnar at Wrestlemania it shifted the entire balance of booking for the rest of the year regarding the WWE Championship.
    From that point forward, Paul Heyman essentially became a huge asset in terms of storyline progression.
    In other words, Paul Heyman has to pull something out of his a** on a weekly basis to promote Lesnar's matches.
    On the basis of this, both of you are correct.

    A large reason creativity is extinct is partially due to last minute booking changes garnering a 'rushed' storyline that isn't sexy enough for the intellectual.
     
    • Cool Cool x 1