Examining WWE's Continued Reliance on Part-Time Superstars

In the second-biggest event of the year, WWE is set to feature the face of the Ruthless Aggression Era in Brock Lesnar against a man who began his career before the dawn of the Attitude Era in Undertaker. It's no wonder that the current era is struggling to form its own identity.

Lesnar vs. Undertaker follows a WrestleMania that featured Undertaker, Sting, the New World Order and Triple H in action, a special event in Tokyo built around a man who has had just four matches in 2015 and the announcement that Steve Austin will grace the cover of WWE 2K16.

Why WWE continues to fill the top of its most significant cards with part-timers is a chicken-or-the-egg scenario. 

Does WWE not have true marquee stars beyond these men because the company relies on past names so much, or does it have to rely on Undertaker and company because there are no true stars to replace them?

The answer, unfortunately, isn't black and white. Both statements are true to an extent. As talented a roster as WWE boasts today, there is no full-time competitor other than John Cena one can truly dub a megastar. Seth Rollins, Kevin Owens, Roman Reigns and Bray Wyatt all deserve loads of acclaim, but no one from that group belongs in the pantheon of greats that houses men such as The Rock and Hulk Hogan.

The thing is, though, a part of that is WWE's own fault.

A key ingredient in the megastar formula is to have the WWE machine truly behind you. Hogan didn't rise to the top organically; Vince McMahon chose to make him the cornerstone of his national expansion. Cena is certainly a major talent, but he wouldn't be where he is today had McMahon not put a crown on his head and started treating him like a king.

That's treatment that hasn't been doled out since.

WWE slipped the world title around Rollins' waist but has spent the majority of his reign making him look like he doesn't deserve the honor. Being cowardly and slippery is key to his character and part of a larger tradition of similar heels, but that hasn't been paired with images of his being a destructive force often enough.

His most heinous acts, from smashing Dean Ambrose's head on cinder blocks to threatening to break Edge's neck, all came pre-title.

Since being champ, he's been positioned as lucky to be in that spot. Cena even went as far as to say on Monday's Raw that he was hurting the prestige of the championship.

Why present Cena as a savior of the U.S. title and Rollins as an anchor to the more significant prize?

And Rollins now has to face the same fate as CM Punk did before him, relenting the main event slot despite being the top champion. Lesnar and Undertaker usurped that spot from him. In many ways, that move is understandable.

WWE has to make use of guys such as Undertaker and Sting before they simply get too old to perform. Drain every bit of drawing power you can before they officially retire. It makes perfect sense.

Folding in nostalgia acts and stars from another era is part of the unique nature of this business. In baseball, past legends may throw out the first pitch, but they don't actually step into the game. In wrestling, one can hold onto stardom longer, and generations can clash in the ring.

But leaning on well-established names is not a real long-term fix.

The night after Battleground, WWE promoted the fact that both Undertaker and Lensar would be on Raw. That would up the level of star power of the show in a major way. It didn't have the drastic effect one might expect.

As James Caldwell points out on Pro Wrestling Torch, "Monday's WWE Raw scored a 2.80 rating." Yes, that's up from the year-low 2.51 rating the show netted at the end of June but not by as much as WWE would surely like. The average rating for 2015 is higher than the Taker-Lesnar showcase at 2.83.

Still, there's clearly a buzz around this matchup. Lesnar is a special attraction unlike any other. And fans certainly haven't stopped going nuts upon seeing The Deadman arrive.

WWE hasn't been using its part-timers to build toward the future, though.

When Sting arrived, to have his first-ever match in WWE, a monumental event, the company paired him up with another part-timer in Triple H. When Undertaker emerged this year to compete in his first SummerSlam in years, he did so against Lesnar rather than an up-and-comer.

Sure, The Phenom faced Wyatt at WrestleMania, but that match has largely been wiped from the WWE narrative.

Undertaker dismissed The Eater of Worlds that night, and little has been said about it since. On the other hand, Undertaker is apparently still fuming about losing to Lesnar a year-and-a-half ago. Undertaker has yet to say how tough a battle that was against Wyatt or anything of the sort.

Yes, Rollins faced Lesnar at Battleground, but that went on for about eight minutes before it became a vehicle for Undertaker and Lesnar to promote their SummerSlam collision.

And for next year's WrestleMania, McMahon is reportedly, according to the Wrestling Observer Newsletter (h/t Wrestling Inc), considering making The Rock vs. Triple H the main event.

Continuing to book matches like that has The Rock, Undertaker and Sting feel like they exist on a higher plane than the everyday Superstars. Why not merge those planes more? 

Having Wyatt make Sting's swan song a mournful one, having Dolph Ziggler put down The Authority by outlasting Triple H or pitting The Rock against Roman Reigns offers the best of both worlds.

The product gets the boost of big names from days gone by. Those battles also work to further the stars looking to follow them into the top reaches of the stratosphere.