Following the conclusion of Sunday’s WWE SummerSlam pay-per-view, the Los Angeles crowd heavily boo’d John Cena while he was being helped to the back by medics. There were even chants of “thank you Lesnar”, and the “na na na na” song as the fans were filing out of the building.

Triple H posted a photo on Instagram after the show with the new WWE World Heavyweight Champion Brock Lesnar, and his advocate Paul Heyman. The two were also backstage before the show with UFC Women’s Bantamweight Champion Ronda Rousey and the Four Horsewomen MMA group.

http://instagram.com/p/r0tl4oPwIX

Where's Razor to complain about the fans not showing sympathy for Cena

Why sympathy? It's not like he's actually injured.

However, it just makes fans seem more and more hypocritical.

^ you know what's more  hypocritical...

2012: Booo! I can't Believe they made a part timer like The Rock WWE Champion at the Royal Rumble heading into WM! He will rarely appear and that is bad! WWE is so Stupid!


2014: YAY! They made a part timer like Brock Lesnar WWE World Heavyweight Champion at Summerslam! I hope he holds it until WM! Even tho he will rarely appear, This is so Good! WWE is so Smart!

Of course I mentioned that argument when Lesnar ended the streak. Everyone complained and bitched about The Rock (someone who put a lot of work into WWE in the Attitude Era) ending Punk's reign as a part timer, yet a good amount of those same people were completely fine with Lesnar (someone who wrestled 2 years full time, was given 3 titles and one of them was right off the bat, and then left) ending Taker's streak as a part timer. Now he's the WWE champion and he's going to be making less appearances than The Rock. But it's completely fine, almost no one's bitching about that, it's completely fine.

Let's see... what about the fact that the same people that hate on Hogan for being a shitty worker despite being a huge star are now huge fans of Brock? THAT is insanely hypocritical as well. The same people I saw in that (top 7 blunders of Hogan) thread talking down Hogan are giant fans of Brock, who is a MUCH worse worker than Hogan by FAR.

What about the fact that Brock wrestled for TWO years full time, and since returning has only worked a few, minimal dates, yet he gets to end the streak, win 4 titles, job CENA in the MAIN EVENT of SUMMERSLAM, and he gets away with it clean. Yet when Cena works 12 years full time, busts his ass off day in and day out, and wins 15 titles for it, everyone and their mom bitches at him and acts like he's the worst of the worst.

It's a giant hypocrisy. It's fucking retarded.

^ I totally get what you're saying, and I don't disagree. I just wanted to say that before I make an ass out of myself and sound like I'm disagreeing.

Brock's booking this past year is being perceived as a means to build up someone new, most likely Roman Reigns. That's why he's getting a pass, because the more of a monster he is, the bigger the win for whomever takes the strap off him. He's not being built for himself, he's being built because he's the perfect "immovable object" for whichever "irresistible force" he'll be facing (again, most likely Reigns).

When Rock came and won the title, not only was he ending a record-setting reign that most fans didn't want to end just yet, but he did it solely to set up a match with Cena, who these same fans already can't stand. It was ending something they liked in order to promote something they had no interest in seeing. It's the opposite now, because these specific fans had no interest in Cena's fifteenth reign, but are really hot for Roman Reigns right now.

I don't know how many people are actually fans of Brock, so much as they are fans of seeing him built up to be knocked down. Maybe there are people out there who legitimately want Lesnar to hold the title 'till WrestleMania because they like him, but most of the people I know who support the title change are just waiting for Roman to be ready to take the title off him.

Yeah I totally get that, it's the same thing I told my brother and Mack yesterday. They're doing all this as a means to get Roman Reigns (?) over at WM when he finally beats him and takes him out for good. I can totally see what they're doing and why they're doing it.

That said, it still doesn't take away from Lesnar being a part timer and getting to end the streak, doesn't take away from being the only man to ever job Cena, doesn't take away from being someone that dominated a Summerslam main event i a job match, and it doesn't take away that he won 3 titles in his 2 years of wrestling full time.

Like you said, a similar thing can be said about The Rock. He obviously wasn't going to be champ for long, he was intending to drop it to Cena. Now, whether or not Cena needed the boost, it did look good for him to beat The Rock at WM and take the title off him. So in a sense, it's generally the same story.

My main point to everything is that Lesnar is a shit worker, and yet people love him for the same reasons they hate Rock/Cena/Hogan. It doesnt make sense to me.

Lesnar's pretty banged up and can't go like he used to, and it's really obvious. That's unfortunate, but I can't really blame WWE for cashing in on his MMA exposure and general monstrous look. He has to be booked as tough as he looks, otherwise they'd be wasting their money on him (shock of all shocks).

Personally, I view Brock Lesnar as more of a prop than a wrestle, so I don't judge him by the same standards as John Cena, or even The Rock. Lesnar's filling a role that no one else could fill as well as he does, and everyone around him has to carry the dead weight (Heyman on the mic, his opponents in the ring). Lesnar's just there to look scary and sell tickets, nothing else. Being the type of guy he is, he's not going to be in any hurry to do more than that, either.   

That's what I mean when I say I love Lesnar the character but hate Lesnar the person
I hate Lesnar as a person, but the character is awesome. He's the beast incarnate, the most dominant wrestler ever, etc. etc. But at the same time, I don't like hypocrisy. There is no reason why Lesnar SHOULDN'T be judged as harshly as Cena/Rock/Hogan, if not more because at least those three contributed SOMETHING to wrestling.

Lesnar's MMA thing is cool, and the character is great, but he is just a horrible person and it makes no sense to like him while hating Rock/Cena/Hogan for the same reasons.

Like I said, if they want Roman to be the face of the company it has to be him vs Cena at WM 31 for the title imo. Brock vs Reigns can happen later. To make Reigns be the new face he has to beat the old face at the biggest show of them all. But I guess WWE doesn't see it that way.

It can still happen down the line. It doesn't have to happen now.

^^ Beating Cena's not that big of a deal. Lots of people have done that, and they went nowhere because of it. Even at WrestleMania. Beating the guy who beat the streak, at the same event where he beat the streak, is a career-defining victory. I'd say, if anything, Reigns vs. Cena can happen anytime, since Cena still has another good five years in him, if not more, while I'd be surprised to see Lesnar bum around for another two or three.

^^^ I mentioned something to this effect, but I'm not sure how many people actually like Brock the person. I doubt many, if any, do. I certainly don't. Then again, he's playing a heel (unlike the others you mentioned), so him being unlikeable isn't a bad thing. If we were supposed to be cheering Lesnar on against Orton and Triple H, or something, it'd probably be a different story.

^ Most of Cena's WM loses have been to guys Edge, Orton and Rock. And most people who defeat Cena, there is always something screwy happening. Regins defeating Cena 100% Clean at WM would mean something.

But if WM 32 would be Reigns vs Cena, Reigns walks in and out the champion...then maybe I will be ok with Reigns vs Brock at 31. Either way Reigns vs Cena at Happen needs to happen.

I've seen a lot of people, mostly smarks, say that Lesnar is awesome. They're all "YEAH HE BURIED CENA, FUCK CENA! HE CANT WRESTLE! LESNAR DESTROYED HIM IT WAS AWESOME! FUCK YEAH LESNAR ALL DAY! RATINGS UP!" etc.
But yet they turn around and say "Ugh Batista is a part timer, BOOOOO!!! (even though he's not.)" "THE ROCK SHOULDN'T END PUNK'S TITLE REIGN OMG RAGE UGH." "CENA SUX HE WINS TOO MUCH HE CAN'T WRESTLE OMG STOP SHOVING HIM DOWN MY THROAT WWE" "HOGAN IS THE WORST WORKER EVER!"

People hate wrestlers for IRL reasons, which I personally find stupid. For example, Hogan is an awesome character, yet everyone hates him. Not for his character, but because he's a horrible worker. And yet, those SAME PEOPLE cheer on Lesnar and support him. Even though Lesnar's even worse of a worker than Hogan.

Or people hate Cena because he "never puts people over" (which - along with the "4 moves bullshit" - is the stupidest argument I've heard against Cena) and cause he "wins too much", and yet they worship Lesnar.

Or people hate that The Rock is a part timer - even though he's an awesome performer and a great character - and yet he got a free title win. Now, Lesnar gets a free title win and no one cares, it's a great thing now. There is no difference. Brock is dropping to Roman (I think.) and Rock dropped it to Cena. Difference is, Rock dropped it in like 2 months and I assume Brock will be holding it till around WM.

The thing I hate more than anything is the ridiculous hypocrisy. People that worship Lesnar have no right to hate on anything Rock/Cena/Hogan do.

I agree that Roman beating Cena would be big, but him taking the title off Lesnar would be bigger. Lesnar looks dominant as shit right now. He needs to lose to Reigns to make Reigns look super strong.

Batman wrote:

I've seen a lot of people, mostly smarks, say that Lesnar is awesome. They're all "YEAH HE BURIED CENA, FUCK CENA! HE CANT WRESTLE! LESNAR DESTROYED HIM IT WAS AWESOME! FUCK YEAH LESNAR ALL DAY! RATINGS UP!" etc.
But yet they turn around and say "Ugh Batista is a part timer, BOOOOO!!! (even though he's not.)" "THE ROCK SHOULDN'T END PUNK'S TITLE REIGN OMG RAGE UGH." "CENA SUX HE WINS TOO MUCH HE CAN'T WRESTLE OMG STOP SHOVING HIM DOWN MY THROAT WWE" "HOGAN IS THE WORST WORKER EVER!"

People hate wrestlers for IRL reasons, which I personally find stupid. For example, Hogan is an awesome character, yet everyone hates him. Not for his character, but because he's a horrible worker. And yet, those SAME PEOPLE cheer on Lesnar and support him. Even though Lesnar's even worse of a worker than Hogan.

Or people hate Cena because he "never puts people over" (which - along with the "4 moves bullshit" - is the stupidest argument I've heard against Cena) and cause he "wins too much", and yet they worship Lesnar.

Or people hate that The Rock is a part timer - even though he's an awesome performer and a great character - and yet he got a free title win. Now, Lesnar gets a free title win and no one cares, it's a great thing now. There is no difference. Brock is dropping to Roman (I think.) and Rock dropped it to Cena. Difference is, Rock dropped it in like 2 months and I assume Brock will be holding it till around WM.

The thing I hate more than anything is the ridiculous hypocrisy. People that worship Lesnar have no right to hate on anything Rock/Cena/Hogan do.

Also the worship Punk even tho he pretty much as always hated his own fanbase and hates wrestling all together now. Told The fans and WWE to fuck off when he didn't get his way, so he took his ball home. Yet they will shit on Hogan on the fact, even tho he is badly broken, he wants to wrestle again

Difference between Rock and Lesnar, Lesnar has at least competed more then The Rock with in there returns. I still agree it was a waste to give Punks title reign away like that, especially to a person who had only competed in two matches, before being aloud to say "I get wwe title match at rumble." Lesnar least has two to three matches a year. As well as numorous appearances before each match.

Rock has a movie career, Brock sits at home 90% of the time

Rick Rolled wrote:

Difference between Rock and Lesnar, Lesnar has at least competed more then The Rock with in there returns. I still agree it was a waste to give Punks title reign away like that, especially to a person who had only competed in two matches, before being aloud to say "I get wwe title match at rumble." Lesnar least has two to three matches a year. As well as numorous appearances before each match.

And yet...

-The Rock was one of the focal points of the attitude era, and him and Austin are arguably the greatest ever.

-The Rock wrestled more than 2 years to earn his position (something Lesnar can't say)

-The Rock ended Punk's reign, Lesnar ended the Streak. I don't care how big of a Punk fan you are, Punk's reign isn't even 1/10th as big as the Streak.

-Lesnar JOBBED CENA in the main event of SUMMERSLAM. The Rock beat Punk and then lost to Cena.

-Rock actually gives somewhat of a shit about the wrestling business, Lesnar couldn't give half a shit.

-My point wasn't that The Rock is great and off the hook and etc. My point is, it's retarded to hate on the Rock but be completely ok with Lesnar. It's hypocritical. Especially since Lesnar has been given so much more for working so much less (than the Rock).

but Punk's title reign was mostly forgettable

If you're trying to compare Punk's reign with Taker's Streak at WM, anybody would say that it's forgettable compared against the Streak.

I'm talking about the fact nothing really happen when he was champion and it seem to no matter until the final month of it.

Batman wrote:

Rick Rolled wrote:

Difference between Rock and Lesnar, Lesnar has at least competed more then The Rock with in there returns. I still agree it was a waste to give Punks title reign away like that, especially to a person who had only competed in two matches, before being aloud to say "I get wwe title match at rumble." Lesnar least has two to three matches a year. As well as numorous appearances before each match.

And yet...

-The Rock was one of the focal points of the attitude era, and him and Austin are arguably the greatest ever.

-The Rock wrestled more than 2 years to earn his position (something Lesnar can't say)

-The Rock ended Punk's reign, Lesnar ended the Streak. I don't care how big of a Punk fan you are, Punk's reign isn't even 1/10th as big as the Streak.

-Lesnar JOBBED CENA in the main event of SUMMERSLAM. The Rock beat Punk and then lost to Cena.

-Rock actually gives somewhat of a shit about the wrestling business, Lesnar couldn't give half a shit.

-My point wasn't that The Rock is great and off the hook and etc. My point is, it's retarded to hate on the Rock but be completely ok with Lesnar. It's hypocritical. Especially since Lesnar has been given so much more for working so much less (than the Rock).

I agree with most of your points.

I agree that Punks title reign isn't anywhere near Takers streak, however Punk reign was the longest reign in this current era. And so much more could've been done if he'd have kept the belt. We could of seen Title Reign vs Streak, but no, we had to see a rematch of a once in a life time match.

I also get how you don't like Lesnar beating the streak, I don't like it myself, however it doesn't bother me. Takers streak was gonna end sooner or later, might be a bad move, but in the end shit happens.

And yes John Cena pretty much jobbed to Brock, however Lesnar has to look strong. Especially after conquering the streak(which I did like how he did Undertakers sit up thing), but I still think Cena should've been able to give more then what he was aloud. Just be glad Cena's reign wasn't over a year long.

M Night Bullymalan wrote:

I'm talking about the fact nothing really happen when he was champion and it seem to no matter until the final month of it.

It'll be remembered as the longest title reign of the pg era.