Why wouldn't he win, though? WWE wants Reigns to replace John Cena, they had Lesnar beat the Streak and squash Cena, they had Reigns win the rumble...why wouldn't they have Reigns win?

I get that he's not over like rover and it's not an ideal situation, but WWE's made it very clear over the years that they don't mind their babyfaces getting booed. Besides, they probably think Reigns beating Lesnar will get him over. Especially to all the little Cenamaniacs who had to watch their hero get brutalized by Lesnar all year.

This notion that Lesnar will retain keeps popping up and it has no basis in fact other than people like Lesnar more than Reigns, myself included. But Lesnar has to lose clean at Wrestlemania, all monster heels do, and there's nobody else (in and out of kayfabe) that might beat him.

Won't be any of the veterans because they don't need the rub, won't be Rollins because he's a heel and couldn't get the job done at the Rumble anyway, won't be Bryan because WWE had the chance to make that happen and chose not to twice at the Rumble and Fastlane, and it won't be Ambrose because WWE has clearly had no interest in him since Reigns has come back.

So, if Lesnar retains, we're looking at Lesnar likely keeping the title another year (or losing it via cash-in and winning it back because why put the title on him if he doesn't have it when he eventually loses?), another year of Reigns-centric storyline at the expense of building other talent, and Reigns winning back-to-back Royal Rumbles. Lesnar vs. Reigns two years in a row? No thank you. I'd much rather this storyline get over with so we can move on.

Reigns is winning. Then he'll get cashed in on in a few months and probably get booed in the main event next year too. Lesnar, meanwhile, is free to have matches with Orton, Bryan, all the people we've wanted to see him have matches with. And while Reigns is flopping as John Cena 2.0, other talent will have an opportunity to shine. I'm all for that.