WWE Hot Take: Despite Rumors, Bayley vs. Sasha Banks at WrestleMania Must Happen

Bayley needs Sasha Banks. Smackdown—and WWE—needs Bayley vs. Sasha Banks. 

WrestleMania needs it, too. 

Bayley's big heel turn was one of the most memorable moments in recent WWE history, largely because it just never seemed like it would happen. It had a John Cena aura to it. But she's quickly become one of the most prestigious SmackDown women's champs in history. And over that span, one could argue she hasn't had the most noteworthy of feuds. 

It's a little unfortunate, then, that her rumored opponent for WrestleMania is Naomi, which would prolong a ho-hum reign. That rumor comes courtesy of Wrestling Observer Live's Bryan Alvarez (h/t Randall Ortman of Cageside Seats). 

That isn't to knock Naomi—she's one of the best outright Superstars on the planet and more than worthy of a title shot at any pay-per-view, let alone WrestleMania. But, unfortunately, this comes at a time when the titleholder is in the middle of a lengthy reign. It feels like she needs a challenger who is an archrival, or someone who could become Superstar. 

Banks isn't a new face, but she could be quite the foil to Bayley. The Four Horsewomen story writes itself, and unlike a feud with Naomi, the storytelling aspect of the long-running friendship would make for one of the premier stories WrestleMania weekend will tell. 

And for the overthinkers, this doesn't have to be hard. Sure, both Superstars are technically bad guys, but that's not going to stop one from turning on the other.

This doesn't have to be a case of good vs. bad in such a blatant manner. Banks is tired of being the sidekick and wants the title. Boom. Or Bayley just wants to make a point about her reign after sensing how fans feel about it and kicks the tar out of Banks. Boom.

There's the allure of just wanting to see more of Banks, too. It wasn't all that long ago fan speculation ran rampant that she might sign with a competitor like All Elite Wrestling. She eventually popped back up in WWE but hasn't been doing a ton besides a few tag matches here and there. 

And while Banks figures to emerge at some point and get back to action, she's otherwise been making headlines outside of wrestling. Namely, she reportedly has a role in the upcoming season of The Mandalorian, according to Ryan Satin of Pro Wrestling Sheet.

Banks had initially written off her absence as an injury (as this business is wont to do). During an appearance on WWE After The Bell (h/t Jason Ounpraseuth of Wrestling Inc.), she said she was having ankle trouble.

Regardless of the reason for said absence, it would qualify as a dud if Banks returned merely to get into a dull feud of her own on the way to 'Mania. In fact, if there isn't a ton of story there or a consistent, entertaining build, it could even end up as a cut or preshow candidate on what has notoriously become a bloated card over the years. 

Nobody should want that for Banks or Bayley. Especially when the alternative is letting their vast history go to work, telling an unforgettable story in what could be a headliner of a title match. 

WWE should strive for something of that magnitude, too. The women deserve to dominate the 'Mania card. Charlotte Flair vs. Rhea Ripley for the NXT Women's title is going to be a classic. Becky Lynch vs. Shayna Baszler getting bloody and nasty for the Raw Women's title is going to be a stunner. 

Why not elevate the blue brand in a similar manner? After all, those other two women's title matches take an established name and give them a fast-riser. Why not go all-out with a star power matchup between two modern legends in Bayley and Banks? 

WWE has plenty of time to get that on track. That's the luxury afforded to the storytellers in this business—it only takes one moment to plant the seeds of something special, even after changing plans. 

Maybe that's what ultimately happens. Bayley-Banks writes itself, gives the women another can't-miss classic, revives a stagnant reign and gets Banks back in the spotlight. It seems too obvious to pass up, right?