Discussion in 'RAW' started by Stopspot, Nov 21, 2012.
I like the idea of The Undertaker scenario. But why would he get a championship shot...
Winning the Rumble I guess.
If this means Undertaker winning the Royal Rumble for the second time, then I am on board.
If WWE decided to keep the title on Punk forever, I cant guarantee some of you would be on board for it.
This means Undertaker winning the WWE Title at Wrestlemania, and possibly winning the Rumble as well. No thanks. A Taker/Punk match is fine, but not for the title.
I already figured out on my own that Rock most likely wasn't winning the belt at the Rumble, as it seems too predictable and I doubt they'd have Punk lose his long reign this close to Wrestlemania without it actually being at the big show itself. I also had an earlier prediction that Rock and Cena would fight in a non title match while Ryback was the one who destroyed Punk for the belt... The logic being that Ryback wants Punk in a one on one match ever since HIAC and they drag it out till Wrestlemania, where Ryback earns his shot by winning the Rumble and Punk is forced to fight Ryback and can't run anymore and finally loses the belt to him.
Don't want to see part timers with belts or winning the Rumble.
I reckon they should throw a curveball have Punk retain have DB win the WHC before WM then have Punk vs Bryan at WM to unify the belts.
Then have DB win the belts and unify at WM Punk loses but in a glorious way.
Also I'd quite like DZ vs Rock at WM i know it wont happen but that'd be DZ over permenantly.
Yeah enough with the part timers having a huge impact, want Wade to win the rumble anyway!
Be a pretty poor show if Dwayne wins the title at the rumble just to wait two months to face Cena for it at WM, we will never see the bugger on raw every week!
Nah, I love DZ but I want Rock to be competed with on the mic like he was with Cena last year. Punk/Rock will be gold.
I kno i was jus havin a fantasy booking moment with the titles.
Plus the idea of two of the best sellers in rock an dz jus appealed to me.
Heh... punk rock...
clever girl :vince:
So they make a problem for the title defences at house shows if Rocky would win, but they are sure that Taker will go out there and do house shows every week? Not sure if the man is able to do that.
Also, I'd like to see Taker as WWE champ, it has been a while, but also, if they would give it to Rocky, it would mean money and ratings, which gets Vince hot.
So, I'm not sure how it will work out.
There's something a lot of you seem to be forgetting here: they just said Punk-Undertaker at Mania. They didn't say there were plans for Undertaker to win that match.
A couple of points:
1) Undertaker has never really been a fan of the streak. On three different occasions, he's proposed putting someone over to let the streak end (Angle, Orton, HBK the first time).
2) The only guys Taker has suggested losing to are guys he respects in the ring and as people.
3) According to Michael Hayes in the CM Punk DVD, the PPV match between Punk and Taker a few years back made Taker really respect Punk, both in and out of the ring.
4) Taker's 47 years old (and will be 48 at Wrestlemania) and has been rumbling about retirement for the last few years. As an old-school guy, he's aware of the tradition of putting a guy over on the way out.
5) There is a still-growing belief in the back that Punk is going to be the next truly massive heel in pro wrestling. Beating Taker's streak would cement him as that heel and make him a truly respected force throughout the industry.
I'm not predicting Punk beats Taker at Mania (at least not in November, I'm not), but I'm saying it is a scenario that makes sense from a lot of angles. So, dry your eyes, kids. It's just a show and Taker's streak may be over (whether he ever wrestles another match or not). But, I don't see them putting the WWE Championship on a guy who is basically a part-timer. If it becomes Punk vs. Taker at Mania, I will be predicting a Punk victory.
Also, I don't think Taker wins the Rumble. If this scenario were to go forward, it's not like Taker has to "earn" a title shot. He's the Undertaker. He's a "fist-ballot Hall of Famer". He's earned the shot already. It would be a tremendous honor (on the show and in real life) for Punk to get to defend the title against him at Mania, win or lose. I figure, Sheamus ends up winning the Rumble and challenges for the World Heavyweight Championship if this scenario were to play out.
Sheamus won it last time -.-
Maybe Daniel Bryan will win it.......
I've been saying pretty much a month or two after Ryback debuted that he'd be the ideal person for Punk to lose his title reign to at WrestleMania (as a matter of fact, one of my first post detailed this). Although admittedly I thought they fucked up the chances with that by moving Ryback up to face him earlier but I quickly realized that it was actually for the better if they go this route. I have moderate hope that this is where they'll be going.
Just the first five minutes, Dolph's promo with Mick Foley was the moment I decided that my ideal situation would be for Dolph to [successfully] defend his WHC against The Rock (which again, I detailed in an earlier post). Now I'm not saying Dolph's promos with The Rock will outshine the ones he'll be having with Punk regardless of who Rock faces at Mania or his ones with Cena, but I honestly believe Dolph will be able match Rock.
Then again, I'm someone who didn't really think most of Rock's promos were all that great during his Cena feud as it seemed half of them either jammed in way too much Twitter related content or was just a typical Rock promo where most of what he's saying is catchphrases. Not that some of them weren't great but still.
And furthermore, I'll argue this to death, but I honestly believe that Rock facing Dolph and losing at Mania is legitimately the best business decision they can make. Why? Well, simply put it would solidified him as a main eventer (considering they build him strong enough leading into, and if they were going to have him face The Rock they would). know Dolph vs. Rock wouldn't draw as much as say Rock vs. Punk vs. Cena and that's what most will bring up to me but here's two counterarguments. A) You still have The Rock wrestling (& Brock, & Taker according this build), they're still going to draw big, they really won't be losing all that much. B) Ultimately, it's only one show. In the long run, a really big buyrate isn't going to keep them stable. It's not like getting the biggest buyrate they can for Mania is going to make them money a few years later, or even a few months later (okay, technically it will because of DVD sales but not my point, shut up XD). The Rock's been fishing for them, he's time better suited teaching Dolph to fish.
If you come out of Mania with the Mania I have in mind, you'll pretty much have both Ryback and Dolph Ziggler as solidified stars who'll be able to draw and make more money cumulatively that in hindsight going with the triple threat seems like a ridiculous idea. I mean yeah, WWE will have to continue booking them correctly, but really can you think of a better point in time than right now, with the scenario's presented that will make these guys big lasting stars? Something WWE drastically needs, since they have like what, five people that can actually draw? And that's counting part-timers.
But wait, what was this thread about again? Oh right, the fact that WWE is supposedly thinking of CM Punk defending his WWE Championship against Undertaker at Mania. Has WWE lost it. I mean, I wasn't even sure that still had it to lose but I guess they do because that is just a terrible booking decision. This is the picture perfect example of what I was talking about. Booking a show just so that show draws rather than booking a show to help ensure that futures shows draws.
First, when it comes to ending the streak, no matter which way I look at it, CM Punk just isn't that guy. It would literally do nothing for him, their be no real reason he'd have to do it, no real connection to Taker's character like Kane does that will make it work . . . oh sorry I'm being redundant here. I just discussed this in my last post and have no motivation to rephrase my previous words.
Secondly, let's assume Taker wins. There's no chance he'll be keeping it for more than a day, as he body is too damaged to go past one big Mania match and on the [extreme] off chance that he can he still can't work house shows (unless that rule applies to The Rock). So basically, the culmination of what would be CM Punk's 504 day WWE Championship reign will be one match against a man with literally not a thing to gain in his career, who will then proceed to drop the title and effectively killing pretty much all the momentum that reign had going for it. I mean, you have a chance to make Ryback a star, or hell, even Cena winning it will allow him to ride the high of ending Punk's reign for a little bit. Especially considering how long it's been since Cena last was champion, he does have something to gain from ending Punk's reign. But Taker, with arguably one or two exceptions, there isn't a single person on the roster who will benefit less ending the streak. Pretty much everyone on the roster has more to gain than Taker in winning the title from Punk, mostly because everyone else can stay and keep building momentum.
Nobody can convince me that that would be a smart decision. But I've rambled on long enough, so I'm going to ignore the decision of Rock vs. Cena II at Mania (another possibility I'm really against)) and just stop posting now.