Brock Lesnar

[Stiva]

His 2020 Rumble performance is one of my favourite Rumble runs of all time and I think it speaks to what he’s done so well in his second run; subvert the expected while still delivering the goods. They seemed to use Brock as a vehicle for experimenting with their formula and he, for the most part, made it work.

[Jmare007]

Such an inconsistent case. Brock has really high highs and very low lows that mostly depend on how much he gave a shit when facing someone. He wasn't on my 100 last time, and I'm not sure he'll have enough from 2016 to 2026 to bump him in, maybe on a rewatch without having all the resent him I had for him for that horrible New Japan "run".

I do wonder how his "suplex city" formula will be perceived in the coming years.

[strobogo]

I think the real issue with Brock isn't his skill or talent, which are of course very high, but the corner WWE has booked themselves into with him since 2014 where he's a special attraction with classic special attraction booking, but it also makes no sense for his character to be involved in anything except the title scene, and also he's nigh unbeatable. It'd be like booking Andre to be the champion for most of the 80s so not only is your champion rarely around so the title scene is held hostage, but also anyone who gets over enough to face him is going to get smashed and still have to be on TV every week while Andre doesn't come back for 3 months.

 

Because of this, everything he's involved with is the same and his feuds have benefitted no one, not even Seth/Roman actually beating him (twice in the same year in Seth's case). In fact in almost all cases it has derailed his opponent's momentum (Reigns, Rollins, Strowman, Joe, Ambrose, Balor, Orton, Kofi, Rey, Ricochet (lol how did that even happen)) to the point it took them years to recover or not at all. It doesn't even seem like he's done anything for ratings or ticket sales, either. 

[Matt D]

I'm pretty convinced that if Vince/the agents let Ryback had exactly the same sort of matches that they allowed Brock to have over the last five or six years (ones that broke all the rules), those matches would have been pretty much just as well received and 80% as good.

[Jmare007]

8 minutes ago, Matt D said:

I'm pretty convinced that if Vince/the agents let Ryback had exactly the same sort of matches that they allowed Brock to have over the last five or six years, those matches would have been pretty much just as well received and 80% as good.

Disagree. Those matches worked at the beginning because Brock had

1) An aura that Ryback never did. Even when was undefeated you never thought Ryback could break another wrestler in half if he really wanted to (shit, Ryback struggled with some feats of strength spots) nor create a sense of chaos like Brock 

2) Brock's momentum towards those matches was pretty unique. He ended The Streak at Mania and then obliterated John Cena at Summerslam back to back. Then he wrecked havoc in the title match at the Rumble and then had that really special match with Reigns. That was what basically made WWE/Heyman think "suplex city" was the only way Lesnar could wrestle from that day forward. No fucking way a dude like Ryback would get in a position to not only be able to get that treatment but to have enough respect from the audience to make them work, even at 80% or whatever.

[strobogo]

The near falls when Brock starts actually selling in the run up to the finish always gets the live crowd 100% engaged, no matter how almost exactly the same a sequence it might be to a previous match (Like the AJ/Bryan matches are almost literally the same match outside the first 10 minutes of Bryan being a stalling dickhead). There's a live aura present with Brock that just doesn't exist with other talents outside of perhaps Ronda's run. 

[Microstatistics]

A truly unique entity. Killer offense and a special aura but Lesnar's selling, bumping, psychology, and ring awareness are second to none.

His 2012-2015 is one of the greatest runs ever in terms of high-end output. Even though Suplex City watered down his approach, there is plenty of good stuff in the 2016-2020-time frame. Strong initial WWE run too. Could make my Top 20, despite the sporadicity.

[GlassS0Ldier]

Brock represents the five great B's of WWF/E, alongside Bret, Bryan, Benoit & Backlund. Of those five, Brock is probably either number two or three.

Terrifying big fight presence and intensity unmatched by anyone that's ever come into the company, and an all time great grape-faced seller. Even when the booking makes it painfully obvious that he's going over, he manages to get me sucked in to the possibility of his defeat off his selling alone (matches with AJ, Joe, Bryan the last four years, and those matches were in his less-creative Suplex-City era). Only thing working against him is that he's not a guy who frequently elevates lesser performers, and will occasionally phone it in when the opponent or build doesn't meet his standards. Those low-lows aren't enough to take away from his extraordinary highs. Easily Top 40 for me.

 

[Shrike02]

54 minutes ago, GlassS0Ldier said:

Brock represents the five great B's of WWF/E, alongside Bret, Bryan, Benoit & Backlund. Of those five, Brock is probably either number two or three.

A list of top B's in WWF must include B. Brian Blair.

More seriously, Bruno is right at the top of this category.

[GlassS0Ldier]

7 minutes ago, Shrike02 said:

A list of top B's in WWF must include B. Brian Blair.

More seriously, Bruno is right at the top of this category.

If we're going by legacy, Bruno 100% of course. I was just thinking how my five favorites from the company all happen to be B names.

B. Brian Blair is a hideous oversight, though. Shame on me for forgetting the GOAT.

[Matt D]

Just curious: do people go back and rewatch Brock's matches or do they only work in the moment? It's interesting to think how we consume matches along these lines actually. None of us will have ever seen a Destroyer match live as it was happening, to experience that sort of emotion during it. I remember how I felt during Brock vs Punk, for instance, though, where the end result was in question and that impacts my feelings towards it. I guess that's more of a GME question in most cases, but I think Brock's 2010s runs is much more of a "you had to be watching live" sort of thing. I'll be frustrated with how he does in 2026 probably, but I'll be curious in how people take to him for 2036.

[bennyowens]

I'm keen to go back and watch the TV matches from his first run.

I watched the Mysterio match from 2003 and he was great in it, being a ruthless bully throwing Rey around and shrugging him off, but also knowing when to bump big for him and keep it believable that with the right run of offense Mysterio could take the match. 

I'm sure there must be other hidden gems like this (well hidden to me anyway!)

[Quentin]

When I was doing the preparation for the top 101 matches of the 2010s shows, every Brock match I revisited still felt just as special as it did in the moment. There’s a certain type of shock and awe to a Brock match while you’re watching it unfold in real time but on playback stuff like Brock’s timing, his cut offs, how masterful his near falls are, his all time level selling, keep his work as stuff you want to watch over and over again.

[Marksman]

3 hours ago, Matt D said:

Just curious: do people go back and rewatch Brock's matches or do they only work in the moment? It's interesting to think how we consume matches along these lines actually. None of us will have ever seen a Destroyer match live as it was happening, to experience that sort of emotion during it. I remember how I felt during Brock vs Punk, for instance, though, where the end result was in question and that impacts my feelings towards it. I guess that's more of a GME question in most cases, but I think Brock's 2010s runs is much more of a "you had to be watching live" sort of thing. I'll be frustrated with how he does in 2026 probably, but I'll be curious in how people take to him for 2036.

I wasn't watching for much of Brock's run but I've caught various matches looking back, and I definitely think they hold up. Initially, I was low on him because I'm frustrated that WWE seem to have relied on him so heavily, and I think Strobogo makes a great point that as far as I can tell barely anyone's ended up being elevated by matches with him. But watching the matches, I think he's going to end up pretty high for me because he is SO damn good. He captures my attention in a way virtually no other WWE wrestlers of the last decade have, and (again as Strobogo said) he just has this incredible aura which barely anyone else recently can touch.

[The Man in Blak]

On 4/10/2021 at 3:15 PM, Matt D said:

I'm pretty convinced that if Vince/the agents let Ryback had exactly the same sort of matches that they allowed Brock to have over the last five or six years (ones that broke all the rules), those matches would have been pretty much just as well received and 80% as good.

Brock is one of the biggest crossover stars for the company and arguably the biggest crossover star they've ever had on the wrestling/MMA spectrum - he's a former UFC heavyweight champion that immediately lends any match he's in a sense of legitimacy. He has more leverage over the company than the rest of the full-time roster combined and, not only does he know it, but the fans know it and that lends any of his matches the potential for something unpredictable to happen.

I don't say these things to celebrate Brock as a performer, necessarily, but I do think it's kind of silly to keep comparing him to a guy that's such an unthinkably talented monster that he hasn't even had a match in three years. The WWE machine is powerful and they've certainly shown that they're willing to be stubborn, but I would suggest that even Ryback would quickly reach its limits trying to recreate the Lesnar phenomenon.

[Matt D]

And Goldberg was a totally unknown guy with a good look and some real intensity that they let break the rules, have a bunch of two minute squashes with a winning streak, and got completely behind as a push. Brock was allowed to break even more rules than that. If you're allowed to break all the narrative rules in an environment which is set up so no one's allowed to stand out, you're going to get over and feel incredibly exciting in comparison. It's just going to screw over the rest of the card and every show you're not on because the rules which have been used to create narrative consistency for decades no longer matter.

Brock's immensely talented. Imagine if he was actually able to channel that talent into working actual pro wrestling matches instead of whatever it is he's done for the last ten years.

[strobogo]

I'm 100% positive Brock is going to do whatever it is he feels like doing in the ring. No agents are telling Brock what to do in his matches, and no one in the ring is telling him to do shit he doesn't want to do. 

[Quentin]

Matt how do you feel about Brock’s work when he was abiding by the rules in his first run? I would still argue between the Rock, Undertaker, Cena, Benoit, Rey, Angle, Guerrero matches he still jumped off the page and that work holds up tremendously. Granted it’s only a 2 year run so he didn’t have to face the problems that eventually become of guys who have to adapt to not being a fresh new face anymore and navigating the weekly TV landscape 5-10 years in. And this isn’t a project based off theoretical scenarios but based off the Brock we got in that time frame, I think we’re still talking about an all time level talent if he’s not the Brock we know who completely bucked their structure in the 2nd run. Maybe he’s not as high as people have him now but all the aspects I like most about Brock are very much present in 2002-2004.

[Matt D]

2 minutes ago, Quentin said:

Matt how do you feel about Brock’s work when he was abiding by the rules in his first run? I would still argue between the Rock, Undertaker, Cena, Benoit, Rey, Angle, Guerrero matches he still jumped off the page and that work holds up tremendously. Granted it’s only a 2 year run so he didn’t have to face the problems that eventually become of guys who have to adapt to not being a fresh new face anymore and navigating the weekly TV landscape 5-10 years in. And this isn’t a project based off theoretical scenarios but based off the Brock we got in that time frame, I think we’re still talking about an all time level talent if he’s not the Brock we know who completely bucked their structure in the 2nd run. Maybe he’s not as high as people have him now but all the aspects I like most about Brock are very much present in 2002-2004.

I love it. Plenty of stand out PPV matches. Good TV matches. He developed into a really excellent, multi-faceted heel. I was there live for the cage match vs Taker at MSG and for his Rumble win in Boston. I think he still has a lot of the tools in his tool belt that he had in that run. I just don't buy that he's using them to do anything other than to dress up wildly exciting excrement.

[Childs]

His hit rate was lower in his second run, no question. I'm not a fan of the "straight to finishers" formula he leaned on in the last few years or Vince's booking of him as a brand-choking champion. That said, I've never agreed with Matt's blanket assessment of his later period. He wrestled actual matches - with peril and selling and character beats - against Punk, Bryan, Styles, Reigns, Cena, Balor, Taker and perhaps a few others I'm forgetting. They were splendid in the moment and have held up for me on rewatch. I'm still going to give him credit as a great special attraction (imagine what a roving monster he would have made in the territory days) when I consider his case.

[The Man in Blak]

43 minutes ago, Matt D said:

And Goldberg was a totally unknown guy with a good look and some real intensity that they let break the rules, have a bunch of two minute squashes with a winning streak, and got completely behind as a push. Brock was allowed to break even more rules than that. If you're allowed to break all the narrative rules in an environment which is set up so no one's allowed to stand out, you're going to get over and feel incredibly exciting in comparison. It's just going to screw over the rest of the card and every show you're not on because the rules which have been used to create narrative consistency for decades no longer matter.

Brock's immensely talented. Imagine if he was actually able to channel that talent into working actual pro wrestling matches instead of whatever it is he's done for the last ten years.

Goldberg had multiple seasons in the NFL before coming into WCW, so I wouldn't call him a "totally unknown guy" either, but that's sort of beside the point.

Just as a point of contrast: last time around, I had a lot less enthusiasm for John Cena than other people because I saw him as a "system quarterback" that, with a few exceptions, mostly worked within the carefully mediated confines of the WWE production and agenting machine. I was reluctant to give him full credit for his successes then; I'm not sure how I'll approach them yet for this time around.

With Brock, I think the question cuts the other way - how much blame he should get for his, um, narrow in-ring work in this second run? Once WWE took their receipts for his original departure (i.e. the first Cena match and the Hunter match), they have gone above and beyond to protect him as an Akuma-esque spectre that lords over the rest of the roster, like a demigod that occasionally comes down to play with the mortals. With that lens, I think Brock's video-game matches can make sense, even if they aren't aesthetically pleasing according to the usual traditions of pro wrestling.

But is that lens valuable to the broader project here? Is the subversion of those traditions actually part of the act and, if so, how much credit does Brock actually get for that? If the purpose of a post-2013 Brock match is solely myth-making rather than athletic performance or storytelling, then where does that leave him in contrast to other historically protected workers like Hogan or Undertaker?

[Matt D]

Being able to spam finishers and use German Suplexes like someone else would use punches is the narrative equivalent of being able to use steroids when no one else is allowed to.

Anyway, I was looking back and if you want to see me pinballing up against all the board babyfaces and taking their finishers, there's the Bryan vs Brock real time stuff (I'm pretty consistent here):

 

[DylanZero]

Matt D & Strobogo are totally right about Brock. It feels like people bought into his aura and his push against all real world evidence of what his matches were actually like which is impressive on some level, but doesn't make his matches any better. Also on that Bryan match was exactly as what was said, an almost beat for beat copy of the AJ match and a great example of how some people bought into Brock despite the reality of things as people were claiming it was like the most unique match of the year when really it was the same crap we've seen a zillion times. It's like the people who were believing in Shibata being the ultimate badass in NJPW and can beat anyone on the roster despite spending most of his time in real fights losing miserably.

 

I don't think business matters in GWE so I won't hold it against him but I do agree with what was said about his feuds benefiting nobody and not increasing business in any meaningful way which makes his usage more confusing.

 

His early run was awesome and he looked like he could be the future of the industry, but it never materialized until later and it ended up with far more negatives than positives in nearly every way. I can't imagine NOT finding 100 better workers with more output. Perhaps if you're into "moments" he had some of those and I won't take it away from him but I'm not buying stock into him or his "style" at all and actually think his run was not only not top 100 worthy but actively bad for a variety of reasons.

[Quentin]

For me the issue with 2nd run Brock isn’t the way of the quality of his matches or performances, more often than not Brock usually delivers something I enjoy other than the Braun Strowman egg. The problem is I find his booking totally antithetical to how the basics of storytelling within American wrestling work and because of that, it drastically affects the rest of the product in an overwhelmingly negative way. 
 

Brock isn’t presented as an “ace” in the way that you saw Cena, Backlund and Hogan fending off all comers. He’s a freak athlete bully who does what he wants, with no regard for anyone else. He’s a monster, and basic storytelling shows that you build a monster up so they can be slain by a conquering hero rising up the ranks. But the way Brock is presented and used doesn’t allow for that kind of storytelling to be done on an effective level.

And it’s not like WWE as a company forgot how to do that during his run. They were able to build up Bray Wyatt and Rusev so they could be overcame by Cena. And maybe people enjoy Brock for his push being a subversion of wrestling tropes in terms of style AND booking. Maybe WWE should have changed the way the entire company works to mold around how they used Brock, but when the rest of the show is business as it always has been and then Brock’s credibility isn’t lent as effectively as it could be to to complete other stories, it effects him for me in a way I’m not sure I can detach his work from.  

[NintendoLogic]

I completely disagree that 2010 Brock's matches only work in the moment. That might be true of his lesser outings, but the high-end stuff absolutely holds up to repeated viewings. I'll likely have four matches from that run on my 2021 GME ballot (2012 vs. Cena, 2013 vs. Punk, 2015 vs. Reigns, 2017 vs. Styles), and my favorite of the bunch (the Punk match) is the only one I didn't see live. The other three I liked even more on rewatch than I did on initial viewing. I can see the argument that his booking and match construction broke the rules and hurt the rest of the product, but modern WWE is completely incapable of telling compelling stories to begin with. If anything, they've gotten worse since he left. All I expect from them is the occasional standalone match that holds up as entertaining and fulfilling in a vacuum. On that front, Brock likely delivered better than anyone possibly could.