3 Reasons why Brock Lesnar vs The Rock should main event Wrestlemania 35 and Rumble reasons it should not

#1 SHOULD NOT: We deserve a full-time champion who defends the title every month

Someone like Drew McIntyre would be great to lead the WWE forward with the Universal Championship.

This is perhaps the most important point in my mind and a lot of fans' minds. And while that may not matter much to the decision makers, we still do have a voice to vent our points of view.

The whole problem of having Brock as Universal Champion and WWE Champion the first time was that he was only a part-time wrestler. He showed up sporadically whenever he wanted to defend the belt, usually at one of the bigger PPVs (Wrestlemania, Royal Rumble, Summerslam).

Him winning the belt for the second time just reopened that can of worms. While he'll probably hold onto the Universal Championship until at least April, the winner of a potential Brock/Rock title match doesn't offer us fans much hope.

A part-timer will still have the title and the cycle continues. Someone like Seth Rollins or Dean Ambrose or Drew McIntyre or Finn Balor should be showcasing the belt every month and every Monday Night. If the Rock wins the title, he'll probably lose it on the next PPV. Just giving him another title reign seems kind of pointless.

If Brock wins and doesn't win the UFC title then a full-time star certainly should be defending the belt. Heck, if the guy defends it three times in three months, it will be more per capita than Lesnar's defences.

The point is that the title should be on Raw every Monday. It's supposed to be the company's top prize and although not having it on the show allows for eyes to be put on other titles, it diminishes the Universal Championship.

Of the five men to hold the belt, two have been part-timers. Let's change that as soon as possible.

---

Send us news tips at [email protected]