Scott,
Do you think Brock Lesnar's rise was timed correctly in 2002? He was still really green, had not had meaningful feuds to establish himself, and didn't benefit from the current UFC badass crossover appeal in 2002. He was an unknown commodity with a ton of potential, but was hardly the surefire badass main eventer of today. Do you think SummerSlam 2002 was the time to put him on top?
As a matter of personal opinion, I think the way to go was for Brock to come in as Kurt Angle's bodyguard (the Diesel to his Shawn Michaels). They can emphasize the NCAA background with Kurt building a team of Brock, Benjamin, and Haas as his "legitimate" wrestling stable. Brock can gain experience through 2002 and build the monster image against a greater variety of opponents. Eventually, Angle becomes TOO reliant on Lesnar's assistance to protect his title (in a prolonged feud with the returning Benoit?) and Brock ends up ditching Angle. Brock does the babyface turn, dominates the Royal Rumble and you put him over Angle (who needed to leave for surgery) at Wrestlemania 19 for his FIRST title. I just think Angle-Lesnar could have had an even more epic build and Brock's rise could have gained more steam with a slower burn (even if it's just prolonged from SummerSlam 2002 to Wrestlemania).
Why prolong it? He was super hot by Summerslam, and people bought the title change. I don't see what the problem was. Failing to pull the trigger on their hot acts is exactly what the problem was 99% of the time, so I'm sure where keeping it off him would help matters.