What wrestlers should beat Lesnar clean?

Discussion in 'General WWE' started by HunterHearstJericho, Oct 8, 2015.

  1. In my opinion fighting Lesnar is kind of destroying wrestlers and making matches very easy to predict, he either wins or looses in a cheap ending but buries his opponent and no sells finishers. In real life, Brok has a huge weakness in his gut from surgery that he had a few years back. Now I think Lesnar can be booked as a beast but they overdue it, he wrestles a few times a year and doesn't sell a whole lot of finishers that other wrestlers sell, thus harming talent. For example, he no sells the curb stomp, AA and the chokeslam, like Big Show, his chokeslam lays out everybody, but Brock who gets up not one but two times. I like Lesnar but he buries more than Triple H.

    Which brings me to my next point, what wrestler(s) should be the one to best Lesnar and beat him clean for once, in my opinion one should be Kane, it'll benefit him a ton to be the "Big Red Machine" that conquers the "Beast Incarnate" and Kane will once again be known as the dominant monster, so if they do face off, Lesnar burying Kane and no selling would be very dangerous as he does with Big Show, Taker and Cena. Another would be Kevin Owens, although Kevin as a heel should get a dirty win stars that are really known to win and do damage to their opponents like Kane and Owens should get a fair match where they aren't buried by Lesnar and his constant Suplexes.
  2. Brock isn't burying people as most of the people he's fought aren't up and coming talent. They're made stars and he beats them.

    Brock does "sell," he just can take more abuse than any other star. When he was choke slammed by show like 2 times in a row... Sure, he sprung up right away, but he was holding his back in agony and nearly defenseless, hence why show kept choke slamming him. Again, he can just take more punishment as he's being pushed as the new phenom.

    Also, the only "burying" I've seen done by Brock is maybe to Seth. But, Seth is "buried" every week on raw so it didn't matter seeing him get dominated by Brock as it was expected.

    Kane is the worst idea ever as Kane is on about big shows level. And seeing that Brock just killed show 2 times... Well, he would and should kill Kane.

    Someone that should beat Brock clean is an up and coming talent, one that can truly benefit from it years down the road. Not Kane, an old man who's had his time and doesn't need a win like that... And isn't on brocks level and may not be wrestling in 2 years.

    if it's going to happen, it needs to happen at mania 32 or 33. It needs to be a Roman reigns, KO, Ambrose, Cesaro, Neville.
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Totally forgot about Cesaro, would love to see Ambrose vs Lesnar in a crazy street fight.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Lesnar doesn't bury people, Cena does.

    As far as who I'd like to beat Lesnar clean goes, Daniel Bryan. DB has said it himself he'd love a match with Lesnar, so... The ultimate David vs the ultimate Goliath would be a match I'd love to see anytime, anywhere. I still wouldn't be mad if DB lost, though.

    Realistically, it'll prolly be Reigns who finally beats Brock in a clean as a sheet fashion.
    • Like Like x 1
  5. #5 Messiah, Oct 8, 2015
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2015
    Yes because Brock has buried guys like Undertaker and John Cena. Are you fo real? Clearly you don't know what that means like most internet fans. Apparently if someone loses a match they're buried nowadays... Nobody should beat Brock clean any time soon.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. The term buried has been thrown around for far too long without the right meaning. To be buried means you're set to lose and look as bad as possible with no rebunk. Which all of Lesnar's opponents have done.
  7. I'm not an "internet fan" I just don't understand how someone who is one of if not the highest paid talent on the roster who works less than 20 times a year comes in, obliterates whoever he goes up against, barely sells finishers that lay others out even those who bare a powerhouse gimmick similar to his. He almost destroyed the WWE World Heavyweight title by holding it and only defending it like five times, must like the Rock when he was the WWE champion. Lesnar is part time if you even call it that, he comes in we know what's going to happen, he's going to suplex people 10-20 times, hit an F5 and walk out, it just doesn't make much sense to me, I'd have no issue with it if he atleast competed actively. His matches are becoming less and less interesting due to the fact that I already know what is going to happen.
  8. Defending the belt rarely isn't destroying the belt tho. That's old school booking for a champion. For example, when Hogan was champion, he wrestled fairly rarely and it went a fair bit of time between every title defense, so that when he defended it, it was important. A champion doesn't have to have 20 defenses to a reign.

    Also Brock is this generations answer to the Undertaker. He's wrestling's final boss. He comes and goes as he pleases but when he shows up, shit goes down.
  9. As you said it was the old school booking, today many say that rare defense's especially with mid card titles devalues the title, even though Hogan didn't defend every time, he still wrestled frequently whereas Lesnar wrestles a few times a year.
  10. You cannot compare a midcard belt to a main event belt. You don't just give main title defenses away. That's stupid. You space them out, make them special, make money off of them. There's a reason the midcard titles are known as "workhorse" titles, they are defended far more regularly. And main event titles are and should be treated more as special events. This is just simple wrestling logic. If you put out weekly title defenses with your main belt, you are either going to run out of challengers that will be interesting for the champion to face fairly quickly, or you are going to give every Brooklyn Brawler on your roster a shot at the belt, which devalues it. You make more money off of a main event belt by putting time between the defenses and building up challengers. This is something that other companies still get and do, for example New Japan pro wrestling have only had 3 matches for their world title this year, with a third penciled in before it turns 2016.

    Same logic applies to Brock. Brock is such a freak, a true and honest phenom, that putting him on TV every single week would eventually devalue him, since the special appeal would ware off. By only having Brock show up a few times per year, McMahon is guaranteeing that there is more money to be made out of Brock long term. He has guys like Cena, Orton, Rollins & Reigns that appear week after week and keep the train running so to speak, so he has the luxury of being able to be picky with when he brings in Brock.
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Ideally, Reigns would be the perfect guy to do it, but he just isn't over enough and I can't envision any scenario where he's gonna be cheered over Lesnar (or cheered by the majority of the audience period) in his current character. Ambrose is my favorite and I believe he has potential to be a huge main event star if they put the machine behind him all the way, so I'd love to see him go over Brock, but I'm 99.9% sure that'll never happen. I'd love to see Kevin Owens get a dirty victory over Brock at some point, but not necessarily a clean one. Not really anyone else I can see (or want to see) beating Lesnar in a clean manner.
  12. The Rock, duh.
  13. Idk and I really don't care tbh, but I would love to see him vs Cesaro or Ambrose some time instead of Big Show (although the match was fine, gotta say).
  14. Brock Lesnar is good where he's at. Tweener's are something that everyone can enjoy.
  15. Sami Zayn has the charisma, the appeal, and the moveset to truly be appealing to this WWE audience in this era.
    He's a great face in peril and knows how to work against a bully. (See: Zayn's rivalry with Owens)
    Zayn is 31, so I wouldn't wait forever to try and get the new audience to warm up to him.

    He's a true babyface and the type of underdog Lesnar would overlook well enough to get caught over guard and get pinned.
    • Like Like x 1
  16. If I remember correctly, the fans booed Reigns on the road to WrestleMania, what do people think of the finish between Lesnar and Taker? Taker tapping and Lesnar passing out.
  17. They did but that was because WWE handled his push poorly and a lot of people felt Bryan wasn't pushed well around that time. Although a great match was made at fast lane between them.

    I think, looking back on it now, the finish was okay. I mean idk how else they could've ended it. The way they did it didn't make Brock look weak and really "lose." It made taker look like the bad guy and become desperate. Thus, leading perfectly into their HIAC match.
    • Like Like x 1
  18. It's really sad that WWE keeps failing on pushes, I personally think that Bryan's push was fair and needed, he had a major injury while WWE champion so they weren't going to invest him into the main event again, and I don't think he minded very much, they actually handled Bryan fine in my opinion, he had another Mania moment and obtained the IC title something he never held. Reign's push was kind of destroyed by having him take the fall at WrestleMania instead of Lesnar, although it gave Rollins heel heat.
    • Zing! Zing! x 1
  19. #19 edge4ever, Oct 10, 2015
    Last edited: Oct 10, 2015
    Considering that Brock draws more $ than reigns and just beat taker in the biggest victory in WWE history, it made sense to have reigns take the fall over Brock. They planned on pushing Brock as a face any way.
  20. Having Reigns eat the pinfall was also a way (on top of trying to preserve Lesnar's "unbeatable" aura) to try and get the fans to start liking him again. Part of the reason people were against Reigns' push is because they knew he was being handed everything on a silver platter, so seeing him take a loss or two might help to severe the heat a bit in their eyes. Same thing with him losing the MITB match as well as a couple other matches.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1