brock lesnar is mad

http://mmajunkie.com/2014/12/report-wwe-officials-working-under-assumption-brock-lesnar-set-for-ufc-return

The DA,

First;y, when he came in 2002, the company should've been in pretty good shape.

They had:
Austin, The Rock, The Undertaker, HHH
Hogan, Hall, Nash and Ric Flair had come back
They had built more stars like:
Jericho, RVD, Booker T. Kane, Kurt Angle

There was a lot of potential in 2002 and they really messed things up for reasons other than Brock. (Splitting the Raw and Smackdown brands, having 2 world titles, HHH basically dominating RAW etc.)

There really was no need for a new star, they had plenty of options (even if the Rock went to Hollywood and Austin retired due to injuries). They had plenty of options for at least a few interim champion, but they pushed Brock like crazy, he ran through a legendary roster like they weren't even there.

Then in 2003 when his face turn did not really work and he struggled to talk, he ended up turning heel again and lost matches and didn't even look strong in those losses, which kind of made his wins in 2002 seem pointless. Then after all this he basically walked out of the company.

As for not building a new star, WWE still seems to be stuck in 2005 where Cena actually deserved to be the No.1 guy. Now people are sick of him and they had the opportunity in 2011 with Punk or definitely in 2013 onwards with Bryan to have a new No. 1 guy, but for some reason were not willing to take that risk.

But Brock has been very impressive since his comeback and I can totally understand why he's being pushed so much, especially when you have a pretty weak roster. I just don't like the double standards from the fans. If The Rock and Batista are criticised for being pushed whilst they are part time, Brock should be too.

Reading my comment back I phrased things a bit misleadingly (think that's a word?). I don't actually blame WWE for the lack of a star who rivalled Brock's natural aura between 04-12. He was/is just a very unique talent that all the booking in the world can't manufacture. His monster push in 2002 didn't really do anything expect valid the perception fans already had in their heads, the moment he was introduced you just knew instinctively he was different. In many ways his career in the UFC despite making him feel very legitimate among the roster littered with cartoony gimmicks, the tail end of it really humbled his image, before that many fans (myself included) saw him as someone who could destroy any man past or present in the wrestling business at his will.

2002 was a very interesting period looking back on it in hindsight. WWE probably had the best assembly of talent they've ever had that year in terms of great in-ring wrestlers, but HHH & Taker were the only full-time already established megastars. They were spoilt in every division except the main event, so you can see why they stuck the rocket ship up Lesnar backside. And in 2002, the fan base was completely at one with the product, they could afford to push him as they did without fear of the crowds feeling conned by a push. Unfortunately this is no longer the case as Reigns has found out.

It's not a double standard when you take each case in isolation. A big compliant about The Rock's part-time WWE championship reign was the fact he was a blatant transitional champion that was going to go straight into a program where he'd symbolically pass the torch to Cena. The idea of The Rock holding the championship as a part-timer without any strings attached would only detract the fans who believe the champion should appear every week (which is an insignificant percentage in the big picture), nobody else. And Batista's problem was just being subconsciously attached to an era of wrestling many fans thought at the time was finally being phased out, once he turned heel he worked brilliantly.

Where Brock's concerned, his reign works for two main reasons. The fact he did beat the streak (rightly or wrongly) lends credence to him winning the belt shortly after for sheer consistency of push. But more significantly, Brock's entire title reign from the beginning has been a transparent effort to give a full-time baby face a moment at WM this year. It makes his reign practical unlike the perception of Rock's run & Batista's projected run before him

salma hayek and jo aka ali babar,
Brock lesnar is under rated. but thing is that u dislike him without any reason

mike,
Lesnar's physique is ideal. he is medium tall and heavy in weight. he has the agility as well as power,speed. he can over power wrestlers like cena,cm punk,rollins and can also dominate heavy and taller wrestlers like kane,big show and khali.
I await lesnar to feud with Khali. Khali is the one who over powered and dominated every wrestler in wwe(except the undertaker who defeated him 2 out of 3 times).

the devils advocate,
yes Lesnar made a big mistake that he left wwe for eight years. wwe was so interesting with curt angle,undertaker, batista and khali.

I think it's good to let Lesnar go back to MMA.. he's done a good job at WWE, been pushed heavily as the top man, and has done so without having to perform too much and cheapening his brand.

I think reigns would be perfect to defeat him.. a spear to the gut = Lesnar loses, followed by a possible MITB win by Rollins for the title. Just saying

job lesnar to khali at mania

in a punjabi prison match

Digby

Couldn't be worse than Lesnar-Goldberg.