Are WWE going to fail in pulling the trigger on their Wrestlemania Main Event plans for the 3rd year?
 

For the past 3 years, crowds have more represented a smark crowd rather than cheering for who the company wants them to cheer for. It's probably a consequence of WWE getting less popular that the fans left are the hardcore ones, but the last 2 WMs, it's been heavily rumored that the inital plan was hijacked by the crowd:

WM30: A returning face Batista from Hollywood to face his old Evolution partner Orton and take the title. Batista ends up having to turn heel and bryan gets shoved in there to win the title.

WM31: Allegedly supposed to be Romans coming out party, taking down the beast Brock. Seth does the run in with MITB and picks up the win.

So what this year? They don't have a get out of jail free card with MITB and the one guy they've built up enough to be thrust in that spot is Ambrose and he's already booked. Will they risk the winning face that's supposed to be the biggest star being booed as Wrestlemania goes off the air? Will they risk the almost certain boos the Raw after Mania? I don't see them having a get of jail free card this year like they did the past two, so this is going to be great to watch.

Yeah, teh wwe suxx

Do they sux more than Notre Dame?

In this instance it seems pretty deadset

Notre Dame is teh ultimate suxx

Roman should lose via outside interference from Henry Cavill...."There can be only one SuperMan, Ramen"

good cross promotion...

ZOMG NO WAY!!!1111!!!

Seriously, though, I feel like fans are definitely getting screwed over this year and Reigns will win, unless they call an absolutely INSANE last-srcond Hail Mary audible and make Ambrose v. Brock a #1 Contender's match in which the winner is added to the main event and it becomes a triple threat with Ambrose getting a miracle win that way. That's the only way I see it going down at all, and the odds on that are pretty slim.

Honestly hope no audibles are called. I'll be putting on a betting slip accumilator and it will involve Reigns winning. I lost out on a four figure profit last year because of the WILDCARD Seth Rollins. Plus, I want to see if a Wrestlemania can finish with a face being booed.

Well the way I see it there are basically two options.

1. The McMahon way - Roman wins and they force his baby face push to the moon as planned. People boo, but it is what it is and we have 6-7 years of Roman being forced down our throats as THE GUY until he starts to get over just like Cena.

2. Roman turns heel - It's an option. I'd say if it were to happen it would involve Shane McMahon somehow who would have to turn strong heel in the Cell against Taker, and somehow come off like he's screwing Vince.

Either we will be surprised or it's going down the way we all predict. I'm hoping for a surprise. There is a possibility in every main event we could get interference from anyone from Rock, Austin, Cena, Rollins, Vince, even Caesaro. Whatever happens I am hoping Dean gets to go over Brock so that he is positioned as the number one baby face either against a fresh heel Roman or the obvious second to Roman. You can't turn Dean heel right now, that would be a horrible option. He's such a good baby face, I just don't see anyone booing him.

Yes and Yes. Pretty much have to go all in with Reigns ascension at Mania without making the past year or so look like a joke.

Dealing with the crowd is pretty easy since they can just pump the post-celebration music to be louder or dub in cheers for replays. Reigns' mega-star status though is getting in real danger of becoming this gen's Diesel in terms of a huge failure as a top star.

2 outcomes I forsee.

1. The obvious. Roman Reigns wins fair and square. We're all gonna have to deal with it for the long haul.

2. Roman Reigns wins, but the title run is short as he drops it to a returning Seth Rollins. Who never lost it in the first place because he gave it up due to his injury. He's gotta be close to getting back, right?

I'm trying to think of how it would work IF Shane beats The Undertaker and controls Raw.

It seems as though somehow Taker will take the loss and sacrifice his record to stick it to Vince McMahon. But, that would negate any kind of crazy ass match, unless Vince does something during the match that repulses Taker to the point of self sacrifice (possibly by setting himself on fire).

Could see them have HHH win and have him and Rollins for the title after Mania.

That would be awesome.

Problably be a clean win for the Taker but just in case....

Match order

Taker/Shane
Ambrose/Lesnar
HHH/Reigns

Something happens in the Taker/Shane match to give Shane the win and build a Taker match for next year. Maybe Kane. As Shane is the man in charge he inserts the winner of the Lesnar/Ambrose match into the main event. Ambrose wins after taking a Hbk Superkick and a pedigree from Rollins on HHH to "even" things out.
- If Rollins can't do the pedigree just have it so Hbk gets the wrong man and Ambrose capitalizes for the win

So you want a hybrid HiaC AND Inferno match for WM then? Very bold, I like it. :shifty:

Reigns is probably gonna win.

On the off chance Triple H does retain though, I can see Shane winning and then having a match against HHH at Extreme Rules. Title for Raw ownership. Since huge, mega match stipulations in WWE seem to last for about a month, Shane taking over Raw for and then losing it a month later and disappearing again would make sense.

Do we see like an all star roster run in during the Shane Taker match?

Austin, Rock, Foley, HBK, Hogan, etc all run in and beat down Taker? They are sick of today's WWE so they want Shane in charge of RAW? Not the worst idea I have ever had.

There's just no legit, believable, good result coming out of WM at all this year. I may still watch but so far I'm legit not looking forward to it. If I miss it this year, I miss it. Honestly, don't care. Not even sure when (weeks away or the exact date) it is this year.

I can see HHH holding the title until Seth Rollins comes back and beats him

This is some options:

1. ROMAN WINS CLEAN - Roman wins clean. Dean Ambrose comes out much like the Eddie/Rey celebration but Dean turns heel and ends the show getting a mix of heat and stealing his spotlight. The next night on Raw, Ambrose would get a Stone Cold sized pop where he is a cheered heel for taking out the "new face" of the WWE.

2. HHH WINS - HHH wins because of a mid-match Dean heel turn. Dean gets revealed as the next "guy". Since he would be aligned with the bad guys in this situation it would be a little less Stone Cold pop and more of a mix and probably a lot more...meh than woo. And after Roadblock this seems like a very unlikely scenario.

Also remember that Seth Rollins could easily be making a run-in appearance as I've read he is almost done rehabbing.

While, on paper, the main event sucks Chyna sized labias, they could reallly book it well....if Roadblock meant anything it was just that even with Raw level matches, the booking of the matches can really elevate things to make them feel special.

Daniel Bryan winning the title was always the plan (watch the TV for evidence).

Seth Rollins winning the title was always the plan sometime between Mania and the next MITB.

This year's main event has been locked in since November.

What's the main event result the cynick?

Sunday, April 3rd, 2016.

Rollins himself said he didn't know he was winning the title until halfway through WM32.

But Thrilla...... Vince doesn't tell his talent the plans.

CyNick educated me on this. If there's one thing he knows, it's Vince.

Daniel Bryan himself said that him winning the title wasn't the plan until February.

March 34, 2016

I'll agree with that part. But with Seth getting hurt and their seemingly just swapping Seth with Rollins, there hasn't been that proper slow build to make people care about HHH vs ___. If Rollins hadn't gotten injured, I think the year-long build from Authority Fresh Face to Authority Thorn would have been a pretty good example of long term booking and commitment.

Yes, but according to CyNick, Vince doesn't tell talent what the real plans for them are. CyNick clings to this delusion despite the fact that Batista said the plan when he was asked to come back was for Batista to come back as a face, win the Rumble and go on to beat Orton for the title in the WM main event. In addition, Bryan has said he was told the plans for him for WM was a match against Sheamus.

Don't forget CM Punk vs HHH was going to get Bryan into the main event because CM Punk would make HHH agree to a stipulation that if he won, Bryan would get to be in the main event for some reason.

CM Punk, Bryan, Batista, Sheamus, Orton, Billy Kidman and maybe even HHH were all unaware of this plan. Only Vince and CyNick know the truth.

Wait, so for some reason, Bryan was going to face Sheamus, AND HHH was going to face Punk and for some other reason, if Punk won then Bryan would go into the WM main event?

Holy shit snacks does that make no sense whatsoever and is that a way convoluted plan to get Bryan into the main event. Why not just have Bryan win the Rumble or even a #1 contenders match?

Oh yeah, CyNick/Vince logic. :lol:

I said it was planned somewhere between Mania and MITB. they decided to pull the trigger at Mania. Do I know how long that was the plan? No. Does anyone outside Vince's inner circle? No.

Workers working. More at 11.

And then Roman Reigns said he didn't know the finish until 31 weekend. So I guess Roman doesn't read the future scripts that Vince sends out, but Batista and Bryan do. Go with what fits your current argument.

You mean like the way Daniel Bryan hijacked RAW and got into the title mix himself? That exact scenario would have still played out, just with Punk v HHH being the play in match and Sheamus acting as the heavy to injure Bryan "just in case". Plays off Punk wanting to screw over HHH, plays off Sheamus beating Bryan in 10 seconds, and sets up a future Punk v Bryan program where Punk says I put you in that spot.

For the same reason they did what they did.

Batista was positioned as the "Vince pick" to win the Rumble. The fans wanted Bryan. WWE had been telling a story of the Authority screwing and belittling Bryan since Summerslam. They use the "YES Movement" (get your tshirts at WWESHOP now! ) and the whole hijack RAW thing to force The Authority's hand. The whole angle was a way to make the fans feel like they changed something. But if you pay attention to the TV you see it was the plan all along.

For the record, the thing with Punk was just a theory based on how TV was lining up before the Rumble. It's entirely possible Punk and HHH had nothing to do with Bryan, and Sheamus vs Bryan was there to get Bryan into the main event.

If they intend to give the strap to Roman, it would be beneficial to not have them close the night. Then again, I would smh vehemently if Shane McMahon and Undertaker went on last.

Your proof that Bryan winning the main event of WM30 was planned all along (since Summerslam) is that Reigns wasn't told until the day of WM31 about the RESULT of WM31?

Reigns' (1 person's) statement, about a completely unrelated event, somehow carries MORE weight about the plans of WM30 than the statements of (2 people) Bryan and Batista who were actually involved in (WM30) said event?

I'm sure you'll ignore this too because you always fail to address it. You're comparing the communication of the outcome of matches with the communication for the plans to simply have matches. No one has said that Bryan was told of the initial plan for the OUTCOME of his WM30 match ahead of time but that he was told of the initial plan to HAVE the match with Sheamus.

The only person who has said they were told of both the initial plan AND the outcome of their WM30 match is Batista. If you can't see why Vince would tell someone like Batista (who they were basically begging to return) what the initial plans (including his ultimate WM30 match outcome) for him were, and would not tell someone like Reigns (who's not yet really a draw and has no real power backstage yet) what the initial planned OUTCOME (if they even had a plan prior to the day of) for his WM31 match was, then you're helpless and I don't know how you tie your shoes in the mornings.

If recent sheet reports are correct, WWE doesn't even know what the main event plans are going to be for Mania this year.

Big split between WWE title match and the Taker-Shane match going last and people backstage getting worried about Vince's health due to all the stress its causing.

I'm with HHH - it is truthfully the only match on the card that "feels" like a Mania match.

Historically, I have always believed/felt that the WWE Championship matches should go on last and be 1v1 with no fuckery involved where people could "leave it in the ring".

Not really pumped about the title picture right now.

Before the rumble Bryan was a Wyatt and had absolutely nothing to do with Triple H or the Authority. He had finished up his feud with Orton and was then replaced in the anti-authority angle by Big Show and CM Punk respectively. He suddenly returned to feuding with the authority by filling in exactly where CM Punk left off when he quit. Television storylines were in no way pointing to plans of Bryan main eventing Wrestlemania prior to the Royal Rumble, if anything he should have been looking to avenge his clean loss at the hands of Bray Wyatt.

If everyone who was actually involved in the angle and main event of Mania is actually lying, or "working" the audience as you put it, how does it benefit WWE, or any of the individuals involved (bear in mind that only CM Punk harbours ill feelings) to insinuate that the company they work / worked for is out of touch and totally fucking clueless?

Whenever I hear CyNick get owned in an argument, I always imagine Prodigy's "Smack My Bitch Up" playing.

I think they'll just go with Reigns winning clean and hope for some sort of tipping point where his refusal to go away suddenly becomes cool. Like it did for Cena. Remember?

Everything on TV shows that they don't have much faith in Roman on the mic. Apparently part of the reason they have kept the Shield gear on him is because as shredded as he was in his NXT days. Those Samoan boys do have a habit of being big guys.

I just wonder if Reigns is really the guy to bank on as the guy. But Vince can be pretty stubborn.

More and more I'm thinking there might be a plan for Triple H to win and Reigns to sort of use that as impetus for a heel turn.

and reading posts like yours makes me think you live in a world where you really believe 2+2=5. Then you clap like a seal when someone says I'm wrong for saying 2+2=4.

The whole angle was that the audience changed the script by staging a protest. Bryan, Batista, etc are all being good foot soldiers saying Bryan headlining was not the plan. Or they didnt know. Just like Reigns didnt know the finish for his Mania main event well in advance. .

You mean that whole angle that happened post Royal Rumble after Punk quit and HHH had nothing to do at Mania so they gave him Bryan, but then also decided to put Bryan into the main event because Orton / Batista absolutely bombed? Good foresight to know Punk was going to quit. It was a quick fix, they turned it into an angle because what they originally had planned was the shits. Nothing at all was telegraphed with Bryan being anywhere near the main event in the build up to the Royal Rumble. Not a single story beat.

Again, why would you want your guys to lie about it in a way that makes you look incompetent and out of touch? Everyone knows it's not real. If you want your guys to lie you would have them say "yeah this was the plan all along, we are so fucking amazing we fooled everyone into thinking we were clueless". There's absolutely no reason why Vince would keep that to himself and lie to everybody about what they're actually doing until it's one month before the show and everyone's looking at the card thinking "WTF is this, old man's lost it". You keep spinning these what if's and ignoring the facts though, sounding like a real Meltzer dirtsheep tbh.

Let me start by saying I have never once claimed I know these things as 100% fact, it's just my assumption based on what was presented on TV. And also having a solid understanding of how WWE operates.

If WWE had no plans for Bryan in the main event of Mania or shortly thereafter, he would have been beaten on several straight PPVs by Orton to establish his dominance prior tothe Rumble. They did the opposite. They made Bryan look like he should have beat Orton in each of their matches. The fans were always left feeling like Bryan was screwed and hence deserves retribution.

As far as the Rumble goes, it's pretty standard for WWE to keep the top heel and babyface separated around December and January and then great things up when the main event for Mania is clear. Rock fought Foley in early 99. HHH fought Foley in early 2000. Bryan v Wyatt was just there to keep Bryan away from the title picture. Putting Bray over was also typical WWE booking because they knew Bryan would be champ post Mania, so you have a ready made program with a top heel. Unfortunately Bryan's body broke down so they never got there.

As for keeping kayfabe, I think it's a combination of not knowing the full plan and keeping up a gimmick. My guess is its possible Batista was never told the whole plan. And with Bryan his entire YES movement gimmick was based on the crowd forcing the hand of the bookers. Hunter and Steph's promos were all essentially the IWC belief of what WWE (rightfully) looks for in a top guy. Which Bryan is none of. They often talked about how he could be one of the fans. The whole "occupy RAW" deal was meant to be real life playing out on TV. The crowds were chanting YES on every show (which Steph and Hunter would egg on), and so this was the payoff to the fans forcing creative to"change the script". If Bryan went on TV somewhere and said that was the plan all along, it would kill the gimmick. Hunter talks a lot about it being tough to push someone when the crowd knows "the office" is behind the person. This was the genius of how this was set up.

Imagine if WWE started to awknowledge every CM Punk chant, and started playing into it. You would assume Punk is coming back right? But he's not (yet), so it's ignored and not played up on TV. That's how WWE would have handled the YES chants if he wasn't in the plans. Instead they had the top heels react to it, made the babyface look as strong as possible, and pushed merchandise with the chants.

Like I said, i don't know with 100% certainty, but it seems obvious he was in their plans since Summerslam at least.

I know for 100 per cent fact that you are a fuckstick

CyNick, who's gonna win the main event @ WM34?

That's subjective. Some might say 85%.

So HHH had to beat the likes of Sting to stay strong for a Rollins match...

But Bryan did not have to beat Wyatt to stay strong for a potential main event Wrestlemania title match?

It's easy to make excuses and build arguments after the fact, but even then, there needs to be some consistency in what is being said. I don't mind people having a different opinion about the WWE product than me, but it is the wild stretches to defend decisions at any cost which are baffling.

WWE have made some great decisions over the years and deserve praise for how well they run their product, but TV right now is a mess and it is very obvious that Bryan was chosen by the fans and got over in spite of what was happening at the time.

If their booking of Bryan was so genius, why can't they get Reigns over now?

Everyone makes mistakes and the arguments would be much easier to stomach if that fact was conceded.

Vince hasn't confided in me yet.

My guess is Big E.

Why is it good booking to job your next top babyface star out clean to a midcard heel directly leading into a Wrestlemania headline push? That makes sense to you, yet HHH can't lose to Sting because he might have a match with Seth Rollins one year later?

The fans certainly did feel that, however that doesn't equate to WWE going in that direction. They were genuinely not into Bryan being their top guy, so they had him look good but ultimately lose and then moved on after they felt they had "given the fans what they want". They actually tried to give the "yes" chant to Big Show and Alberto Del Rio, so that they could go "well that's just a chant, nothing to do with Daniel Bryan". That's a thing that actually happened. They didn't ignore the chant, they tried to make it something else, hence the "Daniel Bryan" chant. Even then they had announcers try and claim the fans were chanting something else.

Crowd: "Daniel Bryan!"
King: "The fans really getting behind Sheamus here".

The Wyatt feud seemed like they were actually testing if they could turn Bryan heel to get that support to cool, the whole "lol not really been brainwashed" thing was abrupt and seemed like a kneejerk reaction to the "turn" not working. But that is just my opinion. Maybe they wanted to steam through that plot point all along because they are bad at writing.

Your point on face / heel separation is excellently illustrated by this years main event of HHH vs Roman Reigns, not only featuring the guy who won the rumble but a guy who he tossed out, they have also been feuding since November.

You appear to be living in some bizarre world where wrestling is both real and not real simultaneously. Bryan talking in out of character interviews, about his character's storyline, does not ruin the TV storyline. There is no "kayfabe" in 2016, unless you count guys like Kevin Owens or Jericho being dicks on Twitter. It was an audible change of plans, which was a good move on WWE's part, but I'd hardly calling fixing your mistakes in the most obvious manner anything close to genius.

Regarding HHH v Reigns. This isn't a normal build. The program had to be created and executed due to an injury. So it's not going to follow normal booking patterns.

As for the YES chant, Bryan had merch created for him with YES on it. I don't see any evidence of them trying to give the chant to someone else. It was just the popular chant at the time. No different than WHAT being chanted at guys outside Austin's angles. Didn't mean they were trying to give the chant to someone else.

You gotta stop believing everything you read in the dirtsheets. You really do.

I watched it on WWE programming as Big Show came down the ramp as the only one to confront the authority with his iron clad contract, and proceeded to YES. I saw Alberto Del Rio come down the ramp with Ricardo Rodriguez as the pair pointed their arms in the air and chanted "Si! Si! Si!".

The dirtsheets seem to have infiltrated WWE's television. Adorable bluff, but you have nothing.

You're just making stuff up though.

Hulk Hogan said WHATcha Gonna Do? Did that mean WWE was trying to manipulate the crowd to think Hogan was the WHAT chant guy?

Given the storylines, Big Show using the yes motion was meant to annoy The Authority and keep Daniel Bryan front of mind.

As for ADR, I seem to recall the fans just started chanting that because it's funny to say YES in Mexican.

Sounds like you just read that in a newsletter.

I wouldnt be caught dead reading them. Maybe I'll start one myself.

Oh, wait. So you're BFF's with Vince?

Speaking of just making stuff up...

So in your mind WWE wanted fans to pretend YES was started by Big Show?

He didn't say that. He said they tried to have Big Show do the Yes chants to get them away from being a Bryan thing. Nothing about Big Show starting them.

Shutup CyNick.

Thanks for clarifying that for those here who don't have the mental capacity to follow along.