WWE: Why Brock Lesnar Should Return Full Time in 2013
Brock Lesnar's return to the WWE has certainly captivated wrestling fans and even gotten some non-wrestling fans interested as well. There is only so much that he can do in a part-time role, though, so I believe it would behoove him and the company to work out a full-time contract for next year.
Lesnar is signed through WrestleMania and there has been talk that the WWE is interested in re-signing him, but I'm not sure that fans would be interested in yet another part-time run. In order for Lesnar to remain relevant past WrestleMania, most will probably want him to make regular appearances.
Between now and WrestleMania, Lesnar figures to maybe wrestle once at Survivor Series, compete in the Royal Rumble and obviously wrestle on the biggest show of the year. That means that we'll be seeing a decent amount of Lesnar between now and April, but not enough to whet the fans' appetite.
The Rock is constantly under fire for not being a full-time competitor, so it's only a matter of time before the fans start to turn on Lesnar as well. There are only so many ways that the writers can explain Lesnar's disappearances, and if he re-ups, then I'm not sure how they can possibly handle it.
I'm guessing that Lesnar will beat Triple H once again at either Hell in a Cell or Survivor Series and then lose to The Undertaker at WrestleMania, so his options will be limited after that. Facing Cena again is an option, although we've already seen that, and taking on CM Punk is fathomable, but Punk is a heel, so it wouldn't be a great fit.
If Lesnar were to become a full-time superstar rather than a guy who makes periodic appearances, though, then you could rationalize putting him in feuds with the likes of Randy Orton or Sheamus. I doubt that the WWE would waste a part-time Lesnar on lower-end main eventers like Orton or Sheamus, but it could be done if a long-term feud is able to be put in place.
That is the real issue with part-time wrestlers. Aside from Cena and Punk, who are you possibly going to put The Rock against? It seems quite clear that The Rock vs. Punk will happen at the Royal Rumble and then we'll either see a rematch between them at WrestleMania or we'll see Rock vs. Cena II.
The same can be said for Lesnar as Cena, Punk, Triple H and Taker are his only possible opponents. The creative team simply isn't going to give mid-card guys a boost by beating Lesnar if Lesnar is only available for three feuds over the course of a year. The possibilities would be endless otherwise, however.
Should Lesnar sign a full-time contract next year?
The issue, of course, is that Lesnar doesn't seem to have any interest in a full-time schedule. He has said on numerous occasions that the WWE's grueling travel schedule led to him leaving the company to pursue football and mixed martial arts several years back. He also has a family and I'm not sure that he would be willing to change his stance.
Money has been known to change priorities, though, and you never know what Lesnar might say if Vince McMahon were to throw a king's ransom his way. Even if Lesnar isn't willing to do a true full-time schedule with house shows and everything else, a weekly appearance might not be out of the question.
All Lesnar would have to do is appear on RAW every week as well as every pay-per-view, and that could still technically be considered full-time. SmackDown is essentially the "B" show anyway and house shows have no bearing on storylines, so I could see something like that happening.
I doubt it would be ideal for Lesnar from a travel perspective, but he could be with his family for the majority of the week, fly in for RAW and fly back afterwards most weeks. It's something that the WWE and Lesnar should think about because it would be beneficial for the overall product moving forward.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?