I know that bringing back Brock Lesnar will probably give a boost to PPV buyrates and TV ratings, but at what cost? Less than one month into his return his inner diva has already shown itself through backstage blowups and the open knowledge that his sole reason for returning is a one year and a one paycheck. If you add that to his seemingly dangerous disregard for the safety of other he works with, I ask again, is he really worth the trouble?
Do I think Brock returned for the money? Sure. Do I think he could find that being booked the way that he wants to be booked and working a soft schedule is something he could do for more than a year? Also, yes. Mike Johnson made a great point on an audio recently. If Brock isn't here, who is John Cena programmed with at Extreme Rules? No one that mattered as much as Brock. His first match back, he lost, which I think that is important to consider. Had WWE brought him in and had him beat Cena, then Brock chose to leave, it would be a bad situation. But, he lost. And he is staying. And keep this in mind, even when the world knew he was leaving the company almost a decade ago, he still did the job to Goldberg and took the Stunner from Steve Austin at WrestleMania. I really don't worry about him leaving WWE high and dry in the middle of a program, especially at this point in his life when his other options are as limited as they are. So yes, he was definitely worth the risk in my opinion.
Do you think that after his Summerslam hiatus, will Jericho return as a babyface again? Will he ever be one again? I admit that he is an excellent heel, and that WWE has a lack of real heels, I do however, enjoy his roles of a sarcastic, smartass troublemaker work as a a face too.
I rarely say never in the business. As good as he is as a heel, he got a huge babyface pop upon his return so it wouldn't shock me to see him get a run as a face, especially if he does it in the Shawn Michaels mode as his career is running down.
I am all for neutering anyone that tries to explain away what Benoit did by saying that "he was the best wrestler". BUT, I do think WWE is insulting guys that worked with him by pretending that he didn't exist. Also, I find it terribly hypocritical of them to in one breath pretend that Benoit matches never happened and then in the next induct a felon, Mike Tyson, into their Hall of Fame. How much of this do you think has to do with the tribute show the night after the horrific murder suicide and the embarrassment that followed, and how much of it has to do with, a rather hypocritical, general principle? By no means do I think Benoit belongs anywhere near a Hall of Fame, but given what he has done, neither does Tyson.
I think WWE definitely felt a bit burned by the tribute show, especially as while it was going the truth about what Benoit did was coming out. But I don't think it's a huge factor in them not marketing his matches. As a public company, they are accountable to a lot of people for the moves that they make. If they market matches of a man who killed his family, they come across as being heartless and putting money ahead of everything else, selling a murderer's matches to make a buck. They come across totally unfeeling and open themselves up to considerable criticism from many places. You talk about fairness to the wrestlers. What about fairness to the family of Nancy Benoit? Tyson is a felon, true, but at least in his case they can say he has also worked hard to rehabilitate himself and make amends. Obviously, that is something that Benoit can't do. In this country, our legal system preaches rehabilitation and giving people a second chance. WWE can say that is what they are doing associating with Tyson. There is nothing they can say to explain why they would align themselves with Benoit.
If the "Yes!" chants keep happening every week how long before the WWE ruins everything by turning Daniel Bryan face?
It all really depends on the fans. If enough of them chant "yes" it would make sense to turn him. Anyone that knows anything about the business knows that the guy is a beast in the ring and could definitely carry his end as a babyface that works great matches. It would probably be a good thing for him when you think about it as it would (hopefully) make WWE show what he can do in the ring, which is considerable. With that said, they don't always listen to the fans when they are telling the company what they want so I guess we will just have to wait and see.
Lord Tensai. Brodus Clay. Ryback. Three monsters that have recently re-debuted and have been on a tear ever since. Each has their own unique booking style: Tensai comes out quietly and beats on his opponent until they cannot continue; Clay dances, quickly dispatches his opponent and smiles a lot; Ryback decimates with quickness and power, then acts hungry. All three have similarities (quick wins, strong power) and yet each is presented in a fairly unique manner. Which one do you think will (or should) be given the push to the top? Which one has shown the most growth since their first appearance in a WWE ring?
Well, Tensai left and made a name in Japan, where he definitely improved since his run as Albert. Ryback was green as grass when he debuted years ago but until he works some competitive matches it's too hard to know how much he has developed. The same goes for Clay. Of the three of them, I see Ryback as the one that has the chance to break out the most. He is big and cut up, which the company has always liked. And if they book him as a strong heel, both literally and figuratively, I could see him breaking out more than the other two.
You can send us questions for the PWInsider.com Q&A by clicking here.