Roman Reigns wins the Royal Rumble and Brock Defeats Cena to retain the title.

What Vince should do leading up to their match at Wrestlemania is leak false news to all the dirtsheets that Brock has signed a 3 year deal. Double the money, couple more appearances a year. This gives WM alot more unpredictable.

At Wm, Brock Defeats Roman Reigns after a hard fought battle. Make Reigns looks strong by coming so close and having it taken 5 F-5s to defeat him. Brock is taunting Reigns, kicking him around. Roman gets back up and superman punches Brock. This makes Reigns looks strong, but also relatable to the fans. This can give WWE another year to get Roman Ready for the big spot.

Reigns stands over Brock, he maybe defeated but he had the last laugh. Out of nowhere, a Ring crew member attacks Reigns with the MITB case. The crew member takes off his outfit to show that he is really Seth Rollins. He kicks Roman out of the ring and cashes in his MITB case. He waits for Brock to gets up a little bit and curb stomps him. Goes for the cover and gets the win. Ending Wrestlemania with Seth Rollins as your new WWE world Heavyweight Champion.

5 F-5s

And how many did Undertaker take last WM?

3 is so cliché

So you want Reigns to take 5 F-5s, only to have the strength to effectively KO Lesnar with one Superman punch in the end?

You mean 5 F-5s and 40 German Suplexes.

That's how a Brock match goes.

Chilly wrote:

You mean 5 F-5s and 40 German Suplexes.

That's how a Brock match goes.

don't forget the scream

Im still questioning why you want Lesnar to look incredibly weak at the end. Nobody should be able to KO him with one punch after 5 F-5's....

If Undertaker couldn't kick out after 3 F-5's, I highly doubt on a realistic point of view, that Roman Reigns does a superman punch after 5 F-5's. The way your booking Reigns makes him out to be some super human, which is stupid. Because not even Cena would fight back after 5 F-5s.

If anything I reckon Rollins cashes in at Rumble and wins, then Ambrose and Reigns are the last two, both go over at the same time, leading into the match everyone has been waiting for. Ambrose vs Rollins vs Reigns at WM. That's how you get some solid ratings, not this Brock Lesnar getting his ass kicked after 5 F-5s.

Dead wrote:

Im still questioning why you want Lesnar to look incredibly weak at the end. Nobody should be able to KO him with one punch after 5 F-5's....

Well if he is leaving, might as well boot him in the ass while he walks out the door.

Mr. Money In The Bank wrote:

If Undertaker couldn't kick out after 3 F-5's, I highly doubt on a realistic point of view, that Roman Reigns does a superman punch after 5 F-5's. The way your booking Reigns makes him out to be some super human, which is stupid. Because not even Cena would fight back after 5 F-5s.

If anything I reckon Rollins cashes in at Rumble and wins, then Ambrose and Reigns are the last two, both go over at the same time, leading into the match everyone has been waiting for. Ambrose vs Rollins vs Reigns at WM. That's how you get some solid ratings, not this Brock Lesnar getting his ass kicked after 5 F-5s.

Dude that triple threat won't happen for a long time, if it does happen. They had lesnar hold the belt this long, might as well fucking go all the goddamn well.

Maybe 5 is too much, so maybe 3 would be better even if it has been done to death. Taking a Super punch tho after a long match and tiring match with roman reigns would make him look weak. Make it as close as possible, and Brock barely wins. Hell has Reigns kick out a second too late to make it seem Reigns could still go.

But with the whole Undertaker thing. No matter what you say, Taker is Old. So if it take 3 f5s to put away an old man, then it could be believable that it would take 5 to take down a much younger guy.

^ 'Taker may be old, but he's also a magic zombie or something.

Mr. Money In The Bank wrote:

If Undertaker couldn't kick out after 3 F-5's, I highly doubt on a realistic point of view, that Roman Reigns does a superman punch after 5 F-5's. The way your booking Reigns makes him out to be some super human, which is stupid. Because not even Cena would fight back after 5 F-5s.

If anything I reckon Rollins cashes in at Rumble and wins, then Ambrose and Reigns are the last two, both go over at the same time, leading into the match everyone has been waiting for. Ambrose vs Rollins vs Reigns at WM. That's how you get some solid ratings, not this Brock Lesnar getting his ass kicked after 5 F-5s.

If it's a draw at the Rumble don't they restart it with the two wrestlers? I.E. Cena and Batista that one time (I think it was Cena, might have been someone else)

^
Didn't Hogan and Hart tie in the 90's? They both got a title shot.

It was Hart and Luger.

Yeah, I just looked it up. I was close.

WWE makes up there own rules when they feel like it. Once Lesnar isn't champ any more, you watch a storyline come about indicating the "30 non-compete clause" <_<

And it was Hart and Lex Luger that tied. Luger got the first shot at Mania, then Hart got the second. Batista and Cena restarted and Bastista won. Cena fucked his leg when get eliminated, if I recall.

The Hogan and Hart one was just odd. Hart lost to Yokozuna (I think) and Hogan decided to come out to see if Hart was OK and then Yokozuna challenged him to a title match...and Hogan won