With Brock Lesnar set to answer Triple H's challenge of a one-on-one bout at SummerSlam tonight on Raw, most of the WWE Universe is wondering if Lesnar will, in fact, accept the challenge.
While some may be looking forward to the potential match, you really shouldn't be. In fact, this match should be seen as more of a black eye to the WWE brand, as opposed to it being a golden ticket.
We all know that Vince McMahon loves big names to headline special events. It doesn't get much bigger than having future Hall of Fame Inductee—and his son-in-law, no less—Triple H taking on the global sensation that is Brock Lesnar.
Sure, the match sounds like a dream match in the making. However, for the sake of the company, its fans and their other talent, there are numerous reasons why Brock Lesnar vs. Triple H should not happen at SuperSlam.
Lesnar came back to the WWE with one main goal: take out the posterboy, John Cena.
After weeks of physical abuse against the leader of the Cenation, Lesnar took it to Cena once again in a battle at Extreme Rules. This match saw Cena's head opened up within the opening minutes, with Lesnar asserting his dominance in the process.
Nearly 20 minutes of brutal beating of Cena into the match, Lesnar overestimated himself. He hurled himself off steel steps in the ring, overjumped his target and landed on the outside, giving Cena the opening he needed to take control.
Cena grabbed his neck chain, bashed Lesnar's head and subsequently landed an Attitude Adjustment on those steel steps for the victory.
Certainly, you can make the case that Cena needed the victory after his loss to The Rock at WrestleMania 28 in order to avoid a huge downfall. And yes, the argument can be made that Lesnar still looked like the dominant presence in the match—except, when you think about it, what did Lesnar gain from losing?
Had Lesnar won, we would have known that the "Ass-Kicker" was officially back and that he wasn't all talk and no game. However, that's not the case, is it? Lesnar seems like nothing more than an egomaniac who can't get the job done after losing to Cena.
What makes us think Lesnar has a chance to defeat Triple H? Why should we believe he's capable of pulling off a victory like he was the first time he was in the WWE?
These are just a few of the questions surrounding Brock's presence in the WWE. Having any of these questions is never a good thing in terms of booking. It just doesn't make sense.
Summer 2011 was essentially labeled The Summer of Punk.
CM Punk was finally being given a shot at main event glory. He—almost single-handedly—brought back massive excitement and interest in the WWE product simply by being himself. Punk was on the ride of his life, and then...
Triple H decided to step in and take away the glory.
It wasn't enough that Triple H made CM Punk's victory over John Cena tainted by failing to stop the count when Cena's foot was on the rope, but he had to go ahead and put himself over on Punk at Night of Champions as well.
Not only did Hunter win the match—even though it was after multiple interferences—he hit three pedigrees on Punk. Seems like a little bit of overkill, doesn't it?
The only reason Triple H would be placed into this match is because of Triple H. Whether we like it or not, he's the one calling the majority of the shots in terms of booking. Why else would he be brought back for random matches to go over on emerging talent?
Really, it's just unnecessary to have Triple H go into this match at all. Whether he wins or not, his reputation precedes him and it doesn't look to good for Lesnar.
Which brings me to my next point...
This one is more directed at the WWE as a whole as opposed to the match itself.
Can the WWE honestly say that there's nobody more suited to facing Brock Lesnar than Triple H? Better yet, is there really no better options for the main event slot at the second-biggest pay-per-view show the WWE has to offer?
For the past few years, the WWE roster has gotten slimmer and slimmer, losing stars due to lack of booking interest in them, injuries and retirements. Granted, some of the biggest stars the WWE has to offer are out of action for one reason or another, but most (Randy Orton, Rey Mysterio) should be back in time to build up for the biggest show of the summer.
With other options such as CM Punk, Sheamus, Randy Orton, and possibly, even The Big Show, it would appear as if no other option was even discussed before it was decided Triple H would be the one taking on Lesnar.
Not that Triple H is a bad option for Lesnar, it just doesn't do any good for the rest of the roster if two part-time talents are hogging the spotlight for one of the biggest shows of the year.
Triple H and Brock Lesnar may be an interesting encounter, but adding extra elements such as Vince McMahon and John Laurinaitis into the mix is not needed.
The match could be an instant classic by itself, but adding all these potential extra storylines to it kills the momentum Lesnar and Hunter would gain for themselves.
Just in the last year, we've had at least 10 different instances of "potentially huge change in the company." Some of these include CM Punk walking out with the WWE Championship, Vince McMahon being relieved of his duties, the no-confidence vote against Triple H and Team Johnny vs. Team Teddy at WrestleMania for position of general manager of both Raw and SmackDown.
Looking back at each one of these events, none of them ever lasted, and only CM Punk's had a meaningful impact on the company.
Adding Vince and John into the mix only waters down a potentially great feud. Triple H, Brock Lesnar and even Paul Heyman can hold a feud on their own. There's no need to add in the extra headache to take away from the match.
As most of these slides are, this one is highly debatable. Nonetheless, this is my feeling on the matter.
After watching the Cena-Lesnar bout on several occasions since their encounter, part of me doesn't want to see Lesnar in another WWE ring unless he's willing to go back to wrestling. Not his mixed martial arts work, his former wrestling ability.
When Lesnar first stepped into the ring again, he wore his MMA shorts and gloves, showing that he would be doing no wrestling. He showed that he was ready to fight and planned to do so with the skills he had learned while a member of the UFC.
Throughout the match, Lesnar used some highly physical moves, most of which appeared to have huge potential for injury to Cena. Using his kimura lock and powerful knees to the ribs, Lesnar put Cena in harm's way with each and every move.
This goes to show that Brock was still in the MMA mindset as opposed to a wrestling mindset. While highly entertaining in an Extreme Rules match, unless his match against Triple H has the same sort of stipulations attached, Lesnar needs to come back to reality a bit.
Triple H may be a brawler-type wrestler, but he's not, nor has he ever been, a mixed martial arts expert. Unlike Lesnar—right now, anyway—Triple H has made a career out of great wrestling matches. Some of them have been brutal, but now is not the time for him to engage in another sort of match against Lesnar.
Lesnar and Triple H could engage is a great wrestling match, but part of me can't help but think it would be more physical and brutal than technical. If the match has to happen, make it a wrestling match and make Brock prove he has the ability to protect his opponents in combat rather than going for the kill.
These are a few things the WWE does not need to take part in. Putting their competitors in harm's way, especially with all the injuries already occurring, is not something WWE brass should be doing right now.
WWE is not UFC, nor should it be treated as if it were.
The short answer to this question is the man in the photo. Vince McMahon benefits from this contest taking place.
Other than Vince, who does this benefit?
Brock Lesnar vs. Triple H doesn't benefit either competitor. If Lesnar were to lose, he would be 0-2 in his return, and any other potential main-event match would seem meaningless. If Hunter were to lose, he would have only two wins in the past two years, making his continued in-ring presence obsolete.
Do the fans really benefit from a match with two part-time competitors?
Honestly, no. While it may be nice to see these two do battle, it serves no purpose for an audience that is constantly looking for the next big build, the next big superstar and the next big feud.
These two have had their success, and now, it's time to utilize the stars that are constantly around—not ones looking for the next big payday. Fans don't care how much money you make. We want matches that have some sort of meaning. This would not be one of those matches.
And, as mentioned earlier, it does not benefit the Superstars who bust their hump each and every day for the fans, yet, fall to being second fiddle to two guys who only show up once in a while. It's rather unfair to give the spotlight away to these two. High profile or not, what kind of message does that continue to send to the locker room? Not a very good one.
In the end, this match will have little-to-no impact on the future of the WWE, nor will this match have any meaning to the current WWE product. It's just a bad idea.
Overall, the potential match between Brock Lesnar and Triple H should not happen for the reasons mentioned.
As always, this is always up for debate and would love to hear what you, the readers, have to say about the topic.
Should Triple H vs. Brock Lesnar happen at SummerSlam? Should the match happen at all? Why or why not?
Looking forward to debating the subject.
As always, feel free to follow me on Twitter @gieseflysouth. Also, if you were a fan of my WWE Coursebook article, following me would be a good way to interact as well as get an inside track to the publication date of future installments.