They shouldn't be able to use it so soon , directly after the pay per view! That's a terrible idea , and the champ shouldn't be so willing to put it on the line. You don't see Floyd Mayweather giving a shot to the person who just lost the night before right away . This is why WWE is so predictable and boring !!!!
I'm Blade brown, the Dopest, ,hypest brotha, on the block!
Yeah, because rematches for the title on the Raw after a PPV are super common...
Why do you watch...?
According to me, yes. I am the person it's usually according to when I'm talking.share
Why would Floyd Mayweather give a re-match when he didn't lose the title? The re-match clause is for champs who just lost their titles and they're allowed a shot to get it back.
There's no rematch clause for a #1 contender to get two shots in a row. That's just pro wrestling doing it to tell a long story.
That's the point Floyd doesn't give rematches if he doesn't want too! In WWE you have no choice that should change !
I'm Blade brown, the Dopest, ,hypest brotha, on the block!
Well see here's the thing...Boxing is real, wrestling is not.
"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius."
It wouldn't hurt them to attempt to make a little sense!
I'm Blade brown, the Dopest, ,hypest brotha, on the block!
Makes perfect sense for the champion to have a shot at his own title. The loss could've been a fluke, luck, or cheating.
You are sin.
Even before the rematch clause was an official thing, the former champ usually was the first to get another shot at the title. This goes back to the NWA even.
'I don't make deals with someone pointing a gun at me.'
'A principle?'
'A Habit.'