Answering the question in the title; I give a resounding Yes!
Brock Lesnar ending the Streak was shocking(an understatement,lMO), however, since then, he has been elevated to a level as a Superstar that is beyond even how the Undertaker himself was ever portrayed, and I think that in itself shows why it was such a great idea to have him be the one to dethrone the deadman when he did.
As has been mentioned by a couple of others, there were only a couple realistic options going into Mania 30 that could have handled breaking the Legendary WrestleMania Streak of the Undertaker; Brock Lesnar and John Cena.
John Cena vs the Undertaker would have been lMO, the ultimate streak match given how far apart the two guys have been kept since Cena's elevation to Face of the WWE. However, I believe that WWE not having a legit Cena replacement at the time, meant they couldn't do that match, even though I would say that it would have achieved with a Cena Win v Taker the one thing they failed to do with Brock... that is break the Streak and become the Ultimate Heel.
However, even though Brock ended up becoming a guy super over with the fans, the mere fact that he is portrayed as being the best of the best means that whoever faces him and can go toe to toe with him will get a huge rub, and the one who actually takes him down will go to a whole other level.
As for the notion that a "younger guy" should have done it. I used to think that way also, however, in hindsight I feel that, If a young guy was chosen, he would have had a huge burden on his shoulders and there is no telling if that superstar would have been able to command the crowd over a long term period as Brock Lesnar has clearly been doing.
Ntm, Brock's PT deal has also been a huge key in making his conquering of Taker's Streak be a huge success, lMO. Would a 'young' superstar have been allowed to do appearances as Brock does?
Last edited by L@RISANO : 01-15-2016 at 07:34 PM.