The main event I'm looking forward to least. When they first met, I was happy and the match was OK, I just don't think I need to see it again. I think I'm going to be stretching for pros here...Let's go!
PROS
1. Stipulation included
Call them cliche, but career ending matches work. And at Wrestlemania, they're usual fantastic matches. Savage/Warrior, Flair/HBK and HBK/Taker are all good examples of that. With HHH's career at stake, the match takes on a whole different approach. Will HHH's career end at the hands of Lesnar? It wouldn't really make sense but it gives the match a new kind of tension that make it's different from their match at SummerSlam.
2. Selling point
Triple H and Brock Lesnar sold SummerSlam for many a WWE fans. It was the 2nd most bought WWE PPV of the year which means one thing. If WWE can make money off of it the 1st time, it only makes sense for WWE to do it a 2nd time. It's just a smart business move. That's the whole reason we're getting Rock/Cena II!
CONS
1. REMATCHMANIA
Triple H VS Brock Lesnar has happened before as has the main event for the PPV. That is my main concern for this match. I saw the match at SummerSlam and I didn't want to see a rematch. It was interesting the 1st time but a 2nd time isn't needed at all. It's kind of pointless to me actually.
2. SO many other choices
Triple H and Brock Lesnar are two well established stars. Yes, it makes sense seeing how Wrestlemania is the showcase of the immortals and pairing the two together sells well but come on, the WWE Universe wants to see different matches, especially if the people involved only wrestle once in a blue moon anyway. Triple H could have easily did what he did at WM26. There, he faced Sheamus and made him look good in the process. Why not do that again this year with so many guys who are on the verge of breaking out? A Wade Barrett/Triple H match would have been SO amazing! Cesaro or Ziggler would have done wonders as well. As for Lesnar, a match with Sheamus or the rumored match with Randy Orton for SS 2012 would have been perfect here. The point is, they had the match once and while it made money, I don't know if it was as well received as WWE thinks.
3. No Holds Barred again?
All good Wrestlemania rematches have something in common. The first match is usually one stipulation while the second match has a different stipulation. Notable examples include Rock/Austin having a normal match at WM15 then have a No DQ Match at WM17. How about HBK/Taker having a normal match at WM25 then having a No DQ No Countout match at WM26? I'm guessing Lesnar/HHH didn't get the memo. If you're going to give the people the SAME match from the summer, they could at least change the match type. Why not have the match be a Last Man Standing? Or rather, the match type that would fit the stipulation would be an I Quit match. It just doesn't make any sense to have the SAME MATCH TYPE for the SAME MATCH. Am I the only one bothered by that?
I'm not really looking forward to this match at all. There are better decisions than this. Next up, The Shield make their Wrestlemania debut! Will they go to 4-0?
No comments:
Post a Comment