Summerslam Brock Lesnar vs Braun Strowman vs Samoa Joe vs Roman Reigns

Discussion in 'PPV's & Specials' started by Solidus, Jul 26, 2017.

  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. WWE Forums is (probably) closing - Read More
  1. Brock Lesnar

  2. Braun Strowman

  3. Roman Reigns

  4. Samoa Joe

  1. rsz_ssut-min.jpg
    Firstly, what a match this could be...carnage if they allow it.
    Who wins though? Right now, I think Lesnar will retain. Roman will win the title at WrestleMania.
    If not Lesnar, then it has to be Strowman. What do you think?
    • Like Like x 2
  2. Same here.

    The match should be great, though.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. #3 Grievous II, Jul 27, 2017
    Last edited: Jul 31, 2017 is an interesting match to think about and in my opinion there are solid
    reasons for all 4 men to walk about of Summerslam with the sexy red belt.

    (Yes I like the Universal title belt...always have since they introduced it at last
    years Summerslam)

    So...from what I have read/heard the WWE wants the Universal title on
    RAW every week...and Lesnar can't/won't/isn't paid enough to do that.

    So I believe they will put the belt on Joe at Summerslam and have him
    hold it till the Royal Rumble next year when he drops it back to Lesnar.

    Reigns wins the Royal Rumble and Lesnar defeats Joe at their title
    rematch at Fastlane...leaving Reigns vs. Lesnar for Wrestlemania 34.

    Lesnar drops the belt to Reigns and leaves the company which then
    sets up both Joe & Strowman as the "Monsters" looking to take the title
    from Reigns.

    In fact Strowman & Joe could have a match at Wrestlemania 34 to
    decide who gets the first shot so to speak.

    That's how I think it will play out.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Creative Creative x 1
  4. Roman Reigns will win.

    Cena vs Reigns at Wrestlemania
    Lesnar vs Strowman at Wrestlemania
    • Like Like x 1
  5. They'd be fools NOT to allow it if you ask me...

    So I've heard as well and perhaps one of the reasons this Fatal 4-Way was booked in the first place is because it would be the easiest way to have Brock drop the belt looking strong at the same time and not having to be pinned for it.

    Though I have yet to make a decision as to what I think the outcome will be, my initial thought was (and is) that Brock will drop the belt. If we are to still consider that Lesnar vs. Reigns is still the end game for Wrestlemania, then I too feel it has to be either Joe or Strowman, in which case I'd probably give a slight edge to Samoe Joe only for the awesome promo work.

    Considering the Rumble is back in Philly, I'd be shocked if they even consider (let alone go ahead with it) having Reigns win the Rumble. Lord knows how that went last time...

    The way I see it, Roman wouldn't have to win the Rumble in order to have a one on one with Lesnar for the title and, quite frankly, WWE already planted those seeds with Paul Heyman's promo the very night after this years Mania, when he talked about the only two individuals to ever beat Undertaker at Wrestlemania. If you needed a reason, there you have it...

    My little fantasy thinking: WWE go ahead with their plan, the match between Reigns and Lesnar happens, Reigns wins the match, becomes Universal Champion and then, while celebrating...lights out....DONG !!!!.........lights back on...DONG !!!! Undertaker is in the ring....Chokeslam....Badass setup for Summerslam 2018....
    • Like Like x 2
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  6. Braun wins and holds the strap till Mania vs Roman.
  7. Which is why the WWE would consider doing it...

    Vince: "Don't worry everybody...the fans will cheer Roman this time!"

    *The building erupts into a full blown riot*

    Vince: "You see...their upset because Roman didn't look strong enough!"

    Yeah...but I can't see Vince passing up on the opportunity to make
    Roman look strong.

    A cool and dramatic idea...but I don't think the Undertaker's new hips would allow it...
  8. I am still going with Lesnar to retain. He isn't going to lose to Roman Reigns in a fatal fourway. They have been building towards the Reigns and Lesnar definitive encounter ever since Lesnar ended the Streak. Three years of build, having their first encounter end with neither winning, having both defeat the Undertaker at WrestleMania, Lesnar being the most dominant over the Undertaker of anyone with several matches against him, Reigns retiring Undertaker on the same event Lesnar won the Universal title... just to drop the belt to Reigns in a Fatal Fourway at Summerslam... I mean honestly, this would rank as one of the stupidest decisions that WWE would EVER have made in my opinion.

    If Lesnar loses to Reigns, it will be in a one on one match and it will be at WrestleMania. The idea that they would fast track this feud simply because Lesnar might not sign again after WrestleMania is silly. They have him on contract through WrestleMania so he will be at the event. Then, they can do Reigns vs Cena at the next WrestleMania. Why fast track two of the most interesting match ups Reigns could have and piss away all this build by having Roman win at Summerslam?

    Lesnar should retain the belt and they should continue on the path they are on. Now. although I would rather see Strowman or Joe win, I just don't think it will happen. I guess it's possible if they want to have a Universal title match more often and they can give Lesnar the belt back later to lose to Roman, but that's seems unlikely to me.

    And I have no doubt Reigns will not win the Rumble. He doesn't really need to. If Lesnar is still champ, Roman will automatically get the title shot and they will justify it with the whole dominance of the Undertaker thing. This way, they can have another wrestler win the Rumble and challenge for the WWE title. This is the benefit of having the two World titles... they can try to appease two groups of fans. There have been plenty of times during the first brand split the Rumble winner didn't headline WrestleMania, wrestling lower on the card. I feel this is what they will do here.

    And if I am wrong, I won't lose much sleep over it. It's not like WWE hasn't done things that have completely baffled me in the past. I just don't see them messing with this set up. There has been way too much build.
    • Like Like x 4
  9. I didnt know anything about Undertaker Getting Hip Surgery/Replacements. When Did that happen? Didnt he retire? I keep seeing rumer's that he's gonna hv one more match. Is that not true?
  10. The Fatal Fourway is done simply to make sure Roman doesnt look weak in defeat, not to give him a win IMO. I expect Strauwman or Joe to take the pin while Roman is tied up somewhere and just a second too late to break it.

    There will be a Roman vs Brock stand off, and it will all culminate in wrestlemania. Can't say I care much about the storyline/title/WWE at this point in general though :emoji_stuck_out_tongue:
    • Agree Agree x 2
  11. #12 Grievous II, Jul 30, 2017
    Last edited: Jul 31, 2017
    Which do you find more interesting...Universal title "feud" or the World title "feud"?
  12. I have no idea who is going after world title but it cant be worse than UT XD
    • Informative Informative x 1
  13. To me, the Universal title still seems like a consolation prize. Sure, it's a major title but it has no significant title lineage. The WWE World Championship can have it's lineage traced back to the NWA title. Technically it's the title that Vince J McMahon and Toots Mondt created in 1963 just with a different name. The Universal has been around about a year and really doesn't mean much yet, in my view. That's why the whole Roman Reigns/Lesnar thing for the Universal title doesn't bug me as much because in my view, it's the secondary title in WWE.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  14. That's a fair call...

    I'm guessing eventually the Universal title will
    be merged/unified with the World title once this
    brand split is over.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. Agreed. I don't see this as a really long term thing anyway. They are just putting out WAY too much programming right now and having more than one PPV per month, I imagine, is a bit costly... sure they get two gates and merch sales, but they're occasionally putting on two PPV shows a month for $10 because of the Network. This has to eventually catch up with them.

    I mean, I've stuck with WWE through thick and thin. They haven't been my favorite promotion in a LONG time, but I still watch... however even I find myself having trouble watching it all...the two separate rosters for one company is just too much with all the other wrestling out there in the world right now.
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Well...I personally like the brand it gives a lot of different and newer
    performers a chance to shine.

    Alexa Bliss, Braun Strowman, Carmella, Baron Corbin, Elias Samson & Mojo Rawley
    being the most successful.

    It also allowed some more established stars to one again step into the spotlight...
    with The Miz, Dolph Ziggler (for a short time), The Usos, Sheamus & Neville being
    a great example of this.

    I agree there are too many pay per views...and frankly the quality of the pay per
    views has been kind of pathetic.

    I mean most fans seemed to believe the SmackDown after Battleground was
    better than Battleground itself.

    I understand the WWE wants to increase the ratings for RAW & SmackDown...
    but its leading to the them stalling angles with count outs and fucked finishes.

    I point to the finish of the original women's Money in the Bank as the biggest
    example of this.

    I was so angry with that finish that my piss began to boil...but shortly after I
    realized it was done simply to string on the fans and have the match replayed
    on SmackDown in an attempt to increase ratings.

    Less but more important pay per views would be a much needed change.

    1 Pay per view per month...
    4 dual brand...
    4 for RAW...
    4 for SmackDown...
  17. so I recently read that they wanna put the title on someone that's full time for better weekly ratings. Brock is great for PPV ratings but not for weekly ratings. Therefor I picked Reigns as the second biggest star in the match to carry this, still new, world title on his back. Second choice would be Braun if they really wanna go all out for him. I mean, they just recently made Jinder Mahal the 50th WWE champ so they finally achieved the whole "anything is possible" stage in which Strowman could easily walk out of this thing as universal champ.

    As far as what happens afterwards, if (and that's a big IF) Lesnar stays until Mania I could see them letting Lesnar win the rumble and go on to lose to Reigns at Mania. Would be an interesting story because at Mania 31, Reigns won the rumble and Lesnar was the champion. So this time around, the roles are reversed and Reigns is the champ whilst Lesnar is the guy trying to dethrone Roman. Then again, if people already know Lesnar leaving after Mania, they'll crap on this match regardless which is a shame because both of them can put on a really good match. Therefor there's still a huge chance they'll just end the Reigns/Lesnar saga at the rumble and have Cena/Reigns at Mania.
  18. I know this thread isn't about the Undertaker but allow me a few comments in trying to answer these questions:

    First off, the hip surgery happened shortly after Wrestlemania this past April and it was a success too so that itself is awesome news.

    As far his "retiring", they've certainly done a good job of leaving their options open cause while the ending of Wrestlemania did indeed seem to suggest it was the end, neither side have formally announced or confirmed such a thing and it was not long ago when during a RAW broadcast Michael Cole dropped the "possibly retired" line that got the rumors going...

    Recently I came across a report suggesting that Undertaker is looking to start (if not having started already) training and getting into in ring shape being HE WANTS to return. Furthermore, there were a couple of other notes in this report that gave some answers in regards to his run when he initially returned last year.

    If you all remember, when he returned last year, his first appearance was on Smackdown when he dropped the infamous promo about being back "digging holes and collecting souls" and "no longer being defined by Wrestlemania". That first appearance on SD was in fact his only one before then appearing on RAW and entering the Rumble, which was basically part of the setup for his match with Roman Reigns. So, in other words, aside from a brief appearance in the Rumble, his only match after all was at Wrestlemania, practically contradicting his first promo. Accoring to the same report, the original plan was for Undertaker to have a two year run as his final one before eventually retiring and the idea for him was to at least have matches in each of the Big 4 PPV's. Unfortunately his hip was just that bad and that was the reason he only did the match with Roman which, as we all remember, wasn't a good one.

    If all the above is true, I wouldn't be surprised if indeed Undertaker makes a return but I am quite certain he will give it another try....
    • Like Like x 3
    • Informative Informative x 1
  19. Going back on topic, i most definetely agree with Jacob Fox's point in regards to Roman Reigns NOT winning and why he shouldn't anyway...
    • Agree Agree x 2