As no doubt many other fans thought right after SummerSlam, my initial reaction to Brock Lesnar rolling over John Cena to begin his reign as WWE World Heavyweight Champion was “…but he barely even wrestles part time. How can they carry this off and make Lesnar a credible champion if he never wrestles?”
WWE’s current product has conditioned fans to expect the world champion to appear at every live TV show and every supercard the company presents. So with Lesnar only working 10 or 12 dates a year and wrestling only 3 or 4 actual matches within that deal, how on earth could they justify putting the gold on him? Unless it was just to be a transitional champion for a couple of months at most. At first I thought that maybe he would drop the title back to Cena the following month. Perhaps get dethroned by a hot young prospect like Roman Reigns in shock fashion on an episode of Monday Night Raw before too long? Either of these was possible. After all, up until this point Brock Lesnar was about as part-time a performer as you could get.
But recently I’ve got to thinking that in a less is more kind of way, if the world champion isn’t on every show it could be a smart way of adding a bit of extra shine to the strap. Whilst at the same time allowing one or two other performers on the roster the chance to grow and work their way into the established main event picture. After all, even with Brock as champion, it wouldn’t slow the John Cena merchandise juggernaut. He would still be as visible as ever and with names like Ambrose, Reigns and Rollins coming through and even Daniel Bryan upon his return. There would more than enough muscle to carry the load in the absence of the world champ. Hell, without overexposing the main title, it could even offer the chance to polish up the secondary belts and make them mean something. An issue which has long been in need of remedying.
To draw a comparison, at its 1996-1999 peak, as company figurehead, Hulk Hogan was never expected to work every WCW PPV or episode of Nitro. Sure, they kept his name and face “out there” using the commentators, in recap packages and vignettes etc but no way did he appear live on every show they produced.
And that didn’t in any way devalue the product or leave fans thinking they were watching a second rate show because the champion wasn’t there. Quite the opposite. In keeping the world heavyweight champion from appearing on every live TV show, it creates an aura of that big-time feel when the champ does put in an appearance.
Recently reading that WWE scrapped a Lesnar vs Cena rematch at Hell In The Cell has brought this to my mind. It also made me think that this upcoming event is the perfect show to NOT book the champion on and save him having to defend the strap in a meaningless match. Hell In The Cell is one of the few events that the WWE puts out with its own unique selling point. So why should they need to stage a throwaway title match just because it’s always been that way? We expect the most brutal match on the calendar taking place at this show which should and indeed would be able to sell itself. Whether it was for the world heavyweight title or not.
Look at Shawn Michaels vs The Undertaker or ‘Taker vs Mankind for example; these battles weren’t fought over championship gold. The Hell in the Cell match stipulation is best suited as a feud-ender for battles such as these classic rivalries rather than just a pointless gimmick in a world championship match, so why not capitalise on that? Hell, why not even settle an I.C or U.S Title dispute in the massive cell structure? Sheamus vs Rusev for instance would definitely capture fans attention and would raise the profile of both wrestlers as well as the US strap itself. It would add much needed prestige if these mid-card titles were on the line inside the cell. Think of the other disputes in the WWE landscape that would benefit from the Hell In The Cell treatment. Dean Ambrose vs Seth Rollins comes to mind immediately! (Editor’s note: Indeed this is now the case!)
In the past, you could levy the tag of “B-show PPV” at the shows where the champ doesn’t put in an appearance. But in the current climate with the WWE Network offering fans unbelievable value for money I don’t think this would be too much of a concern. Network subscribers are still getting the show for a ridiculous knock-down price, so in that regard I can’t see too many people put off watching an event just because the World Heavyweight title isn’t defended.
I think its little things like this that the WWE sometimes misses the boat with. The current product is so formulaic and set to such a rigid structure I often wonder if the powers-that-be are capable of thinking outside the box and doing something so simple, but at the same time, so radical as not overexposing a performer or in this case the main championship prize for fear of rocking the boat too much. But in instances like this, by making Lesnar’s limited dates deal work to their own advantage, in the long run it would add so much on many different levels.
