How will Junior Dos Santos handle Brock Lesnars size? JDS fights @ 237ish?

I've gone on record as stating that Brock Lesnar does not belong in today's WWE. This has nothing to do with his skills, believability, or credibility. Or rather, it doesn't state that Lesnar doesn't have the skills or credibility.

But that they just don't FIT in today's WWE. In a (fantasy) land populated by leprechauns, dancing giants, slapstick "foreign" clowns, "friendly" monsters, whatever-the-hell Fandango is, exaggerated stereotypes played for laughs, etc etc, Lesnar is a dose of real. Here is a near 300-pound highly-skilled monster who made a living beating the crap out of other highly-skilled real fighters.

To me at least, Lesnar is a jarring reminder that the WWE IS "fake". His first run, when the WWE had the likes of Angle, Benoit, Holly, and other (real or storyline) "tough guys", Lesnar did fit. We mostly call that time the "ruthless aggression" era, but it's just a marketable phrase for implying the matches were more competitive (read "more believable") than the stuff today fans everywhere complain about being "scripted".

The matches then were "scripted" as much as today but the difference is in the skills and believability of the performers. We agree that the "ruthless aggression" era had more believable matches because of the skills of the performers, whereas today we just...accept that something like Fandango or the Funkasaurus are, uh, competent wrestlers because we find their gimmicks and antics entertaining. A lot of that has to do with Vince continually dumbing-down what he pushes as "wrestling".

With few exceptions a typical WWE match consists of a lot of punching and kicking, a "signature move" or two, and a generic "finisher" oversold by WWE commentators. Basically, one match looks pretty much like any other except for it's "finisher". Soooo, the WWE has to tell a "story" through backstage segments, promos, and "somebody getting screwed by management".

That's not a knock on the WWE; just a statement that Vince knows his audience and gives them what they expect. We know-it-alls on the internet are a different story, but Vince doesn't produce shows for US. As you mentioned, the WWE, it's performers, and it's commentators sell Lesnar as the "biblical wrath of God".

Jeez, look at him! He's nearly 300-pounds of muscle, he moves like a cruiserweight (minus the flying), he's the real deal as far as fighting skills go, AND he made a very public living in the MMA world. Who does the WWE have that could even climb into the same ring and not get slaughtered?

Alberto Del Rio, Barrett, Taker have MMA training, experience, or some kind of real-world "real fighting" to their credit. Supposedly Santino does, but does anybody take him seriously? At all?

Lesnar would step on and squash Santino and not even notice it. Like a giant haul truck running over a "small foreign car". That said, the WWE has been very careful to only match up guys with Lesnar who are comparatively-sized and have any sort of credibility at being able to "take a beating and keep on ticking".

Because of their history and build-up it IS believable that Cena and Triple H can get their @sses kicked but still be able to come back and win against any opponent. In WWE "logic" we can't say that Cena or Triple H beating Lesnar is not possible. If the matches were real contests Lesnar would hook every one of them and make them submit in short order.

But that's not the case. We have to go with storyline or it all falls apart. So Lesnar, Mr MMA, comes in and wants to prove to everybody that he can beat the WWE's best.

He picks out two of the WWE's toughest and kicks their @sses BUT fails to take into account the experience and "resiliency" of the wily WWE stars who've "seen it all" and have the know-how to combat adverse conditions. Some fans complained about Lesnar losing those matches not being believable but this is NOT MMA where there aren't many rules and the fighters fight only once or twice a year. Lesnar called out two of the WWE's biggest stars and came up short at the end.

We can attribute this to over-confidence and even to Lesnar being "rusty" (MMA and pro wrestling have different rules) but for the damage he dealt in those matches Lesnar is still the baddest SOB walking the WWE. He's the real deal. Losing a match or two to the WWE's best in no way made him less dangerous.

I would have had Lesnar be less cavalier about his return to the WWE and lose the "I fight only for money" attitude (the WWE is NOT MMA), but otherwise his return was handled well given that I still don't believe he belongs in today's WWE.

Their letting Heyman do all the talking and Lensar be the beast he sort was during his first stint in the WWE. I think the win/loss record is irrelevant because of his limited schedule. Brock's clear here for PPV buys and big spots.

He doesn't wrestle on RAW and doesn't really need to. I think he'll be champion at the some point a this year. BQ:After HHH I think Lensar should feud with Chris Jericho and here's why.

Jericho would be willing to put him over which would give him another win (record would be 3-2). Which could set a streak for him maybe throw Sheamus, Mark Henry and Ryback his way after that.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.