A while back, I said that I didn't want Brock Lesnar to return to WWE. Well, I'm now eating my own words, because he did just that. And even though I still don't like him as a person, that doesn't mean I can't enjoy his work, since his match with Cena at Extreme Rules was fantastic. Anyway, my question regards as to his Wrestlemania 29 opponent should be. You guys have been pointing towards the Rock, but I have what I think is a better idea for his Mania opponent: the Undertaker. First, you do remember that confrontation they had at one of Lesnar's last UFC fights, where Taker was being interviewed and Lesnar apparently walked by with a look that Taker didn't like and he told Brock "you wanna do it?" I wonder if some are still hoping for that match. Also, Undertaker is running way low on worthy Mania opponents, and I'd say Lesnar could be one of the few legitimate threats to the streak st this point. Of course, all common sense says that the Undertaker never loses at Mania, and since Lesnar's already done one job in his current WWE run, I'd say he'd agree to job to Taker at Mania. Since Lesnar is in WWE mostly for a big paycheck, he'd better damn well earn it. So what do you think?
I wouldn't be against them doing it, specifically if that Lesnar is only going to stay in WWE through Mania 29. Then he can do the job to Taker and move on. If he is going to stay on past next year though WWE would have to think about where they will be taking him and whether losing to The Undertaker works against that objective.
Is it just me or is Ring Of Honor trying to cash in on CM Punk and Daniel Bryan/Bryan Danielson's current rise in WWE? And how does WWE feel about it?
They absolutely are and I don't blame them a bit. It's footage that they have so why not market it? WWE has done the same thing. I am sure that they understand it since they have done it themselves. Plus, those guys made their names on ROH. ROH has every right to monetize that.
I do not follow the TV shows for WWE as often as I used to 9and a big part of that reason is Michael Cole’s character), but the last couple times I have watched a video (most noticeably Clay vs. Miz), I have noticed that Michael Cole seems to have toned down the heel gimmick. Am I just getting the few moments where he is not as annoying he normally is, or is Cole transitioning into a heel that is a bit more…professional?
WWE has made a conscious effort to tone down the heel aspect of Cole's character of late and Cole has been so much better to listen to because of it. Keep in mind that it's not a Cole thing here. He just do what the boss asks of him.
I have listened to a few interviews with former WWE writers and one thing that stands out is how long they were there for. It seems like the average stay on the creative team is between 9 or 10 months to a year and a half. Do most writers get fired or just move on to other opportunities?
It is a mix of both. Some hate the schedule and/or job while others are incompetent and are let go.
This may sound like a rather idiotic question but I'll ask anyway. Obviously the wrestlers and referees know the outcome of a match before hand but do announcers? I only ask because I remember a comment from JR that he actively insisted that he didn't want to know so he could convey shock and surprise in the appropriate manner when required. This suggests that others have the option to know?
It depends. In some cases, like with Jerry Lawler, the announcers choose not to know what is going to happen so that the can call the show live while others sit in on meetings and know where the matches are going to go. Most of the time, except in the cases of the company keeping something as a major surprise, the announcers can find out what will happen if they wish to know.
Is Yes Daniel Bryan's favorite band?
I like bad jokes and that was certainly, well, bad.
You can send us questions for the PWInsider.com Q&A by clicking here.