Gregor Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 Maybe it's because I've never seen Stroman at all, but the idea of Undertaker turning down an opponent for being a big lug who can't carry things in the ring is funny. Luckily for him, Hogan was okay with that kind of opponent back in 1991. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fxnj Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 Sadly, these things require a level of thought that WWE absolutely don't want to put into their shows. I recall seeing quite a few people, including myself on other sites, saying that the WWE part-timer model is unsustainable and they they would need to sacrifice one Wrestlemania to establish new stars. It's funny that circumstances, namely injuries, have basically presented them with a chance to do that and they aren't going to take it. This is already that show where they're sacrificing big matches to build guys up, though. HHH/Reigns is obvious, but Brock/Bray is what Bray needs to stay relevant and Taker/Strowman has the potential to be a star making battle of giants in a way that Taker/Miz or Sheamus couldn't possibly be. You'll also likely have the women positioned in the most prominent spot in Wrestlemania history. I'd say, though, that if there was a place where they needed part-timers it would be here. To fill up 100k seats you need the massive dream matches people have been years for like Taker/Cena, Brock/Austin, and Steph/Rousey, and there's really no combination on their current roster that could match the business of a card with those matches. Hence, the projected card strikes me as them giving up on the dream match model and just trying to build up who they can given the bad circumstances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 Maybe it's because I've never seen Stroman at all, but the idea of Undertaker turning down an opponent for being a big lug who can't carry things in the ring is funny. Luckily for him, Hogan was okay with that kind of opponent back in 1991. Taker in 1991 was way, way better than Braun Strowman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FMKK Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 Sadly, these things require a level of thought that WWE absolutely don't want to put into their shows. I recall seeing quite a few people, including myself on other sites, saying that the WWE part-timer model is unsustainable and they they would need to sacrifice one Wrestlemania to establish new stars. It's funny that circumstances, namely injuries, have basically presented them with a chance to do that and they aren't going to take it. This is already that show where they're sacrificing big matches to build guys up, though. HHH/Reigns is obvious, but Brock/Bray is what Bray needs to stay relevant and Taker/Strowman has the potential to be a star making battle of giants in a way that Taker/Miz or Sheamus couldn't possibly be. You'll also likely have the women positioned in the most prominent spot in Wrestlemania history. I'd say, though, that if there was a place where they needed part-timers it would be here. To fill up 100k seats you need the massive dream matches people have been years for like Taker/Cena, Brock/Austin, and Steph/Rousey, and there's really no combination on their current roster that could match the business of a card with those matches. Hence, the projected card strikes me as them giving up on the dream match model and just trying to build up who they can given the bad circumstances. Jobbing Bray to a bigger star is hardly star building. It hasn't exactly worked for him the last two years. Strowman has barely even worked singles yet and hasn't had much of a push so feeding him to Taker this early on once again can hardly considered to be star building. I can see that match being played mainly to groans from the crowd. And Reigns beating HHH isn't exactly going to solve the myriad of issues with his push, though I will agree that this is the most logical direction currently. They would almost have been better served throwing money at one part-time star to work HHH, Taker or Brock as a tentpole match and put over new stars definitively across the rest of the show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregor Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Taker in 1991 was way, way better than Braun Strowman. That's probably true - I'm not familiar enough with the guy to spell his name correctly, let alone give an opinion on how good he is - but either way I'd be disappointed in Undertaker if he rejected the match for that reason, given how many wrestlers made concessions when working with him. Even now they still have to. Regardless, the chances of the match being bad shouldn't be a reason not to book it. If Strowman's nowhere near over enough for a win over Undertaker to do anything for him (and a loss certainly wouldn't), that's a reason. WWE needs stars a lot more than it needs good matches right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slasher Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 It's more likely that Taker picked Strowman himself. It seems like Taker has the first opportunity to request an opponent and then WWE either accepts or makes a counteroffer. Taker has already beaten Bray Wyatt last year at Mania. It is very possible Taker respects Strowman as a strongman and thinks he has potential to be a monster heel. I doubt he cares about who makes a better match or who makes a dream match. Taker has never really shown an inclination to look out for his own interests moreso than the company's. He is the ultimate company guy who understands now is the time to do the match. People say "Strowman is not ready now. Maybe wait until 2018 to do it!" Well, why? There is no guarantee Taker is wrestling in 2018. Do the match when you have the opportunity to do it, not when the timing is right for one guy. If they operated like that, we'd never see Goldberg vs Rock. They rushed that too because they knew Rock was on his way out again and wanted Goldberg starting off strong. Same shit here. People suggesting the Miz and Sheamus has lost their minds. Really? The Miz??? Sheamus??? Wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
...TG Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 On paper, that Wrestlemania card could be one of the worst I can think of. I don't see how that card sells more than 93,000 tickets. Well no show has sold that much, much less this one. But the show is pretty well sold out already - only standing room and blocked-off viewing seats are available beside the super-expensive tickets. Having said that, if I didn't have friends coming into town I sure wouldn't be going. The event is clearly the selling point now, not the card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomethingSavage Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Come on now. The comparison of relaunching Bill Goldberg in 2003 to launching Braun fucking Strowman in 2016 is a bit of a stretch. And that's being all kinds of generous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Redman Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Yeah, the idea of "sacrificing" a Mania to make new stars is good in theory, but they're also trying to fill up a gigantic stadium. Obviously the name of Mania draws by itself, but at the same time when you're trying to fill close to 100,000 seats, you will go for all the star power you can get. The last thing they want is a stadium with thousands of empty seats, especially when they're trying to claim attendance records. To really follow through on the "sacrifice" they'd need to book a smaller venue (even a smaller football stadium) that they'd be able to sell out on the Mania name in and of itself, so they don't need to worry so much about using new guys to draw. But that's a conscious choice I don't think they'd ever make when there's so much money to be made in going as big as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Most Wrestlemania tickets are going to be sold before a single match is made official. No reason they can't still do it this year except they don't want to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 The damage would be of Wrestlemania as a brand for future years. But they're threatening to damage that with this year's card anyway, so best to get the most out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slasher Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Come on now. The comparison of relaunching Bill Goldberg in 2003 to launching Braun fucking Strowman in 2016 is a bit of a stretch. And that's being all kinds of generous. Is this the only takeaway you got from my post? No I agree Braun Strowman isn't Bill Goldberg. Not even close. What I am saying is people are taking Taker for granted assuming he'd be available years down the line when Strowman "might be ready". On one hand people complain about not making stars, and that is a very valid complaint, the solution is to do Taker vs Miz. I mean, like...wha-? Miz is dead in the water. He is the goldfish floating on top of the tank. Flooding the tank with fish food isn't bringing it back. Miz trolling Taker before getting destroyed might be amusing for a minute and only a minute but then what? The fans aren't gonna get behind Miz going forward. Braun Strowman sucks as a wrestler but he fills a very key role on the roster- the suoer duper monster heel. Who else do they have that can do that? Kane is in his 40s and also stale. Ditto for Big Show. Luke Harper is nearly 40 himself and already damaged. Unless I'm forgetting someone that leaves Erick Rowan and Bray Wyatt (who isn't really a monster). Rowan is never gonna be the guy they want to push in that role and he is only marginally better than Strowman in ability. Bray has already had his Mania match with Taker. No one is thinking Strowman is gonna help put out a 4 star claasic but that isn't the point anyways. Like I said, it could be that Taker chose Strowman himself because he knows the future is going to need a guy like him and he sees the value in giving something back to the business that has treated him so well in the form of elevating this guy. Of course there will be issues of booking Strowman going forward after. Maybe the WWE feeds him too early to WWE champion Roman Reigns and sets him back or something but you can't sit there and try to tell me the fucking Miz deserves the spot over Strowman...or just about anyone else. Same for Sheamus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimmas Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Big E vs Taker might be the best option, as Big E is a guy who should be built up to the top of the company. Plus Xavier and Kofi trolling Taker would rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parties Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 The damage would be of Wrestlemania as a brand for future years. But they're threatening to damage that with this year's card anyway, so best to get the most out of it. Isn't a fifteen match WM7-style show where Heath Slater and Natalya get to do stuff kind of what your average Mania attendee wants? It's a show that draws traveling hardcores, not families waiting to see Cena and then run to their cars to beat traffic. (OK, both factions attend, but the point is they would gain more in the short and long-term from having a big "look at our enormous roster/celebrate the brand/ends in Kevin Owens and Titus singing "If You Only Knew" together" show than pretending that Taker-Strauman is a money match.) They have nothing to lose and so much to gain from making this year a "rising stars" showcase and they're almost certainly not going to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slasher Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Big E vs Taker might be the best option, as Big E is a guy who should be built up to the top of the company. Plus Xavier and Kofi trolling Taker would rule. Now this-I like a lot. New Day is talented, Big E has the size and the fans would actually want to see this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlet-Left Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Am I missing something? I don't understand why they aren't pulling the trigger on Dean Ambrose. They clearly trust him enough to have him, both, main event other pay-per-views and come runner-up in the Rumble. They've got a story there and a big name opponent who can draw the fans (as if, any one performer actually draws, nowadays, as opposed to the WWE/Mania brand itself). As for Undertaker, what about AJ? That's a certifiable dream match. It's certainly better than a throwaway match with Strowman or, God forbid, a rematch with Wyatt. I don't mind Brock facing Bray, but I don't like the idea of Wyatt jobbing to part-timers at Mania twice in a row. You could slot Reigns in with Kevin Owens. Also, here are a bunch of talented guys they could've done something with but didn't; Darren Young, Tyler Breeze, Dolph Ziggler (maybe), Luke Harper (it's not like being in a stable precludes a guy from singles success), Stardust... In fact, what happened to the Rhodes brothers' feud? Goldust is back now, right? Edit: I should mention, I only watch the Sky One (one hour) version of Raw the Sunday after it's aired, so I may have missed some ramping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcmmnx Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 I thought about Taker/AJ, but they would really have to build up Styles over the next several weeks. I think that's the best case scenario for Taker having a good match and coming out healthy, but it's an awfully big/coveted spot to give to a guy that just walked in the door. Anything beats Stroman though who may be the worst guy in either WWE or NXT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMJ Posted February 5, 2016 Report Share Posted February 5, 2016 Come on now. The comparison of relaunching Bill Goldberg in 2003 to launching Braun fucking Strowman in 2016 is a bit of a stretch. And that's being all kinds of generous. Is this the only takeaway you got from my post? No I agree Braun Strowman isn't Bill Goldberg. Not even close. What I am saying is people are taking Taker for granted assuming he'd be available years down the line when Strowman "might be ready". On one hand people complain about not making stars, and that is a very valid complaint, the solution is to do Taker vs Miz. I mean, like...wha-? Miz is dead in the water. He is the goldfish floating on top of the tank. Flooding the tank with fish food isn't bringing it back. Miz trolling Taker before getting destroyed might be amusing for a minute and only a minute but then what? The fans aren't gonna get behind Miz going forward. Braun Strowman sucks as a wrestler but he fills a very key role on the roster- the suoer duper monster heel. Who else do they have that can do that? Kane is in his 40s and also stale. Ditto for Big Show. Luke Harper is nearly 40 himself and already damaged. Unless I'm forgetting someone that leaves Erick Rowan and Bray Wyatt (who isn't really a monster). Rowan is never gonna be the guy they want to push in that role and he is only marginally better than Strowman in ability. Bray has already had his Mania match with Taker. No one is thinking Strowman is gonna help put out a 4 star claasic but that isn't the point anyways. Like I said, it could be that Taker chose Strowman himself because he knows the future is going to need a guy like him and he sees the value in giving something back to the business that has treated him so well in the form of elevating this guy. Of course there will be issues of booking Strowman going forward after. Maybe the WWE feeds him too early to WWE champion Roman Reigns and sets him back or something but you can't sit there and try to tell me the fucking Miz deserves the spot over Strowman...or just about anyone else. Same for Sheamus. What you've outlined, though, is the same line of reasoning that brought us Undertaker vs. Giant Gonzalez, Undertaker vs. Great Khali, Undertaker tagging up with Nathan Jones against Big Show and A-Train, Undertaker vs. Heidenreich - this crazy idea that you take the Undertaker and pair him up with green big men that nobody knows about or cares about and somehow he'll create a new star who will last years and years when, in actuality, what fans really want to see is Undertaker coming in, kicking ass, and rolling his eyes into the back of his skull. I'm not saying Taker didn't help establish Kane or Brock Lesnar or Mankind...but if I was a betting man, I'd wager that Braun Strowman ends up being The Next Great Khali and not the next Brock Lesnar, Mick Foley, or Kane. And on the point about Miz - we gotta agree to disagree there. You say he's dead in the water, I say he still gets heat despite being unfavorably demoted and de-pushed as not even worth the audience's scorn. You say nobody cares about him, I say, last year around now, people were clamoring for a Sandow/Miz match at WM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benbeeach Posted February 5, 2016 Report Share Posted February 5, 2016 Thinking about Mizdow not winning last year's Mania battle royal makes me depressed. Big Show clearly needed that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimmas Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 I think there is a chance we get this, and it would be two million times better. At Fast Lane, Dean wins, (EDIT: Roman) gets pissed and turns heel. Demands Undertaker at Mania to prove himself. WrestleMania 32 Triple H vs Dean Ambrose (World Title)Roman Reigns vs Undertaker Brock Lesnar vs Bray Wyatt AJ Styles vs Chris Jericho Charlotte vs Sasha Banks vs Becky Lynch (Divas Title) etc.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBadMick Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 I assume you mean Reigns turns? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimmas Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 I assume you mean Reigns turns? Yes, will edit now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammerva Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 I can live with Triple H vs Reigns if I knew this would be a period to the Triple H Wrestlemania ego trip but based on the way the company has been booked, the exact same thing will happen next year only instead of replacing Roman Reigns it will be Seth Rollins. I think the odds of Triple H vs Seth Rollins for the title at next year in the same booking format as this year is pretty good. I hope someone starts bringing up in story line the Bray Wyatt anti-streak which is that he never wins at WM. He is obviously losing this year and unless something dramatically changes in the booking he will get a high profiled match and lose that as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JKWebb Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 It seems like they might be moving towards Dean Ambrose vs. Brock Lesnar at Wrestlemania. I could be wrong, but I started to get that feeling watching it last night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parties Posted February 12, 2016 Report Share Posted February 12, 2016 It's unfortunate that they did that Ambrose-Owens LMS for no reason at the Rumble. I mean the reason was that they had absolutely no other meaningful matches booked, but my point is that both guys currently seem to be standing out in the cold for Mania, and if they'd instead done that very same Rumble match at Cowboys Stadium, it would have gotten over huge and maybe even felt like a medium-sized transitional generation moment. I'm tired of hearing myself be so negative about this show's prospects, but it almost can't be overstated how often WWE has done potentially big matches at the wrong moment in the last five years just to fill up time, squandering later opportunities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts