Would Sting vs Taker really be the best idea?

[TheICChampion]

If Sting is healthy enough to compete again by WM 32, is it really such a good idea for him to be facing Undertaker? I know, I know. That's the match we all want to see. But we need to look at it a different way. Such as, since WrestleMania isn't the place for no-contests or DQ/countout victories, who goes over? And how? You'd think it's 'Taker, right? Problem is, all I keep hearing is how Sting hasn't won a match yet since he's joined WWE. So what's the solution? Would you guys be fine with Sting losing to Undertaker as well? Does Sting finally get his first win in WWE? Since Sting has lost to both Triple H and Rollins, isn't the outcome a foregone conclusion? After all, if you had both those guys go over, why would 'Taker not? He's meant a helluva lot more to WWE and Vince than HHH and Rollins combined, despite the fact that one's married to his daughter and the other is the top champion right now. Anyway, that's just one issue.

The second problem is: while it would be awesome to see those two wrestle each other in their final match ever as active competitors, how do we even know they'll be able to pull it off? As I mentioned earlier, right now Sting isn't even sure if he'll be wrestling ever again. Undertaker's going to be in a HiaC match against Lesnar of all people. Is he going to be 100% in time for 'Mania? I think the best bet for both men is to ride off in the sunset after putting over someone who could really benefit from something like a win over either of these greats. Or, if they absolutely HAVE TO face off on the biggest stage, at least put a third or even fourth guy in there to help the match along should either Sting or 'Taker have to take a breather. Maybe a tag match. It would also solve the first problem of who goes over, as whoever is either man's partner could easily take the fall. So, what do you guys think? Does it absolutely have to be one-on-one? Would this scenario work better? If so, who would you choose as the partners for 'Taker and Sting? Or perhaps have them team up against two up-and-comers? Let me know.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Personally, I've always been of the opinion that Taker vs. Sting is one of those situations where a lot of people wanna see it just for the sheer novelty of it without really considering whether the match itself would be any good.

Neither Taker or Sting is what they once were, the wear & tear of the business has caught up to Taker with a vengeance the last 5 or 6 years, it's also catching up with Sting and it's only compounded by the fact that the two men have a combined age of 106. We've seen Taker have great, memorable matches the past several years, though part of that has been due to working with talented wrestlers who know how to compensate for Taker's shortcomings. In Sting's case, the spectacle of his match with Triple H did what it was supposed to do: overshadow Sting's shortcomings inside the ring. Sting, in my opinion, had a great match with Rollins and Rollins' abilities are a big reason of why the match worked but Sting did suffer significant injury that'll make WWE officials reluctant to put him back in the ring. Putting them together in a match might be tempting fate because both men have a lot of pride in what they do and have high standards for themselves; I think they'd put a lot of pressure onto themselves to put on a strong match and that, as a result, they'd take risks that could very well result in injuries to one or both of them.

It's also a situation where I think it's a situation in which WWE would catch criticism no matter what. If they pulled off the match, it was actually great and Sting lost, we'd get "WWE is burying Sting" or "Vince is taking out his hate for WCW out on Sting" threads. If they pulled off the match, it was actually great and Taker lost, we'd probably get "Taker should've gone over Sting because...." or "What's Sting done in WWE to warrant going over Taker?" threads. If they had the match, it sucked and one or both got hurt, they'd catch flack from fans and dirt sheet writers alike playing armchair booker due to WWE risking the safety of both men. No matter what'd happen, someone would bitch WWE out over something, which is business as usual.

I think Taker vs. Sting is one of these nostalgic ideas that sounds a helluva lot better on paper than it actually would be if it happened. They may rise to the occasion and completely surprise everyone by putting on a classic bout, but I think it's more likely that this is a match a lotta people wanna see just for the sake of being able to see it and there'll be tons of criticism about it after the nostalgia wears off and if it wasn't the sort of epic they had fantasized it would be.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

Ignoring the match the feud would be shit. While Sting has been adequate on the mic in the few times he has picked one, what does he have to say that would be beyond, "Respect, icon v icon, we're dark, blah blah blah."
Is Sting going to do stalker videos of Michelle McCool?

The best direction I can see this going at this point is for Sting to interfere in UT's quest to be a vengeishful low blower by getting involved in one of his matches and then call him out for turning in to such a wishy washy pussbag.

But even then I'm not about sure the match quality. It is either a slow snoozefest or an old man coke binge where I sit there the whole time worrying about who will have the heart attack first.

I couldn't care less who wins. Wins and losses rarely mean much and this is probably a time where the win or loss means nothing. Neither of these guys have much career left for it to matter.

 

[dsotm5150]

I think its still too early to speculate on Sting for Wrestlemania. If I had to put my money on it though, I'm going to say that Sting won't be competing, I think NOC was his last.

 

[Just Do It]

I say just do it at this point. You might as well, they have nothing to lose by booking the match, and you know both men would put their all into it. The way WWE editors produce their highlight packages, you just know they would work wonders with this to make people interested also. One thing I will say, Sting would really need a couple of big wins going into the match. Assuming Undertaker loses at HITC, they could also run with the "one last bullet" i nthe chamber direction, which may be quite fitting actually.

 

[enviousdominous]

I really have to channel my inner-mark to feel good in how I address this possibility.

Everyone has some kind of bucket list, whether it be physical or imaginary, literal or figurative. We have things on our minds that haven't occurred, that absolutely must occur to have complete closure before punching our life tickets.

A lot of insane things have happened in the world of pro-wrestling, things that we imagined would never occur. Bret Hart came back and eventually won the US Title, as a stroke survivor mind you. Goldberg fought Brock Lesnar, the real reward in that encounter being that Stone Cold Stunned both of them. Donald Trump participated in a WrestleMania main event. These moments were by no means pretty, but they were still special in that unique pro-wrestling sort of way.

Taker vs. Sting is one of those situations where a lot of people wanna see it just for the sheer novelty of it

Exactly! That novelty -- for me -- far outweighs my desire to see incredible spots during the match itself. The spectacle of the hype and the pageantry of the entrances, those things are what I demand most from this exposition. It's extremely fortunate that in their old age, The Undertaker and Sting have developed characters that don't need to be impressively athletic to take my breath away.

Sting is a cool throwback to the Crow, and in that he's symbolic of a kind of revenant avenger bent on carrying a doomed legacy before being snuffed out by time. The Undertaker has always represented the inevitability of death, the warden of the dead who will stop at nothing to maintain stability with this realm and the nether realm. For me it would be as if The Undertaker is coming to claim Sting's soul as it is the last lingering reminder of WCW's greatness, and it's Sting's nature to make sure that the essence of WCW will be remembered for fighting until the bitter end. THEATER!!

We all pay our $9.99, just let the mark in me have this one. I'll apologize right now to everyone who would have to watch what could possibly be the worst match of all time, just so that I can have closure that Undertaker vs Sting is no longer on my bucket list.

 

[That N Word]

It needs to HAPPEN or what was the point of signing Sting. Yeah everyone wanted to see him in a WWE ring, but not as a jobber. If he faces Taker and it's their final matches then it doesn't have to have a finish. I would have the match go on and at the end of the match the lights go out and when they come back on both are gone and all that's left if the urn and Sting's baseball bat in the ring. Make it a non finish so neither man gets hurt. Taker can afford a loss IMO. Sting can't. But then again this is WrestleMania though, so Taker can't afford another Mania loss.

Only way for it to work is for it to be a non-finish. At Mania, people generally don't agree with non finish nor do they want to see it. But this here is a different case where it should be a non finish.

 

[dsotm5150]

The only issue I would have with Sting vs Undertaker is that neither man is capable of carrying the match, not saying that they can't go, or put on a good match. At this point in their careers they need someone who can carry the match. With Sting's recent injury and with the condition Taker has been in, they're liable to hurt each other. On top of that Sting needs a win and he's just not going to get that against the Undertaker especially at Wrestlemania. I think Sting vs Taker is just going to be one of those "what if moments of wrestling"

 

[Jeff Deliverer of Mail]

If they are to face each other ( I am one of those people who want to see Sting vs Undertaker just for the sheer opera of it ) then they should go the tag team route. Have a big name tag team match at Wrestlemania. Brothers of Destruction vs Sting and John Cena or something like that. Have the Brothers of Destruction go on a very heel like rampage the months heading up to Wrestlemania , attacking Cena , putting him on the shelf for two weeks, attacking Sting. That saves Undertaker and Sting from over working themselves at Mania. And it let's Sting hit Kane with a Scorpion Deathdrop and get a Mania win.

 

[Passing the Torch]

I agree the match wouldn't be the best, but one that everyone would like to see.
The match should be back and forth, for however long that could be, and then both men are down. The ref begins to count and gets to "nine" and the lights go out. When the lights come back on, in one corner is the Undertaker's urn and in the other corner is Sting's bat and trench coat. No winner, no loser. Both men retire.

 

[BringThePain834]

everyone would like to see.

I have no interest in seeing an Undertaker-Sting match because one, WWE bookers obviously can't be trusted to put together matches like Cena vs Rock, Cena vs Austin, Austin vs Lesnar, Hogan vs Cena, etc. And two, for the reason of my first reasoning, I know that the match would suck

 

[BillAlfonsos_Whistle]

Brock vs Rock
Sting vs. Taker


Those two matches WILL happen at Mania if everyone can go.

 

[Mustang Sally]

The second problem is: while it would be awesome to see those two wrestle each other in their final match ever as active competitors, how do we even know they'll be able to pull it off?

Personally, I think they could pull it off if both were 75 and barely able to walk. (Hey! How about 'Wheelchair in a Cell?') These guys are such veterans, they'd know how to put on a match that looked as if they were beating the hell out of each other while actually expending as little energy as possible. They know how to work. Plus, we can't really know for sure who would win, right? That in itself is a guessing game that would make us watch.

Especially if Vince McMahon wants to build the gate and plans to use part-timers to do it, this match would sell. Wouldn't you want to see it......just for name value alone? I would.

One more thing: don't think Vince wasn't aware of the clamoring for these two to tangle a few years ago when everyone was trying to guess who was in that mysterious promo; Sting, Undertaker or someone else.

Even while the match would sell itself, publicity for the event would be fun; the two old gunslingers meeting at sundown, one more time.

Yes, I think Sting-'Taker is the best idea.

 

[WorstWrestlingExcrement]

If Sting is healthy enough to compete again by WM 32, is it really such a good idea for him to be facing Undertaker? I know, I know. That's the match we all want to see. But we need to look at it a different way. Such as, since WrestleMania isn't the place for no-contests or DQ/countout victories, who goes over? And how? You'd think it's 'Taker, right? Problem is, all I keep hearing is how Sting hasn't won a match yet since he's joined WWE. So what's the solution? Would you guys be fine with Sting losing to Undertaker as well? Does Sting finally get his first win in WWE? Since Sting has lost to both Triple H and Rollins, isn't the outcome a foregone conclusion? After all, if you had both those guys go over, why would 'Taker not? He's meant a helluva lot more to WWE and Vince than HHH and Rollins combined, despite the fact that one's married to his daughter and the other is the top champion right now. Anyway, that's just one issue.

The second problem is: while it would be awesome to see those two wrestle each other in their final match ever as active competitors, how do we even know they'll be able to pull it off? As I mentioned earlier, right now Sting isn't even sure if he'll be wrestling ever again. Undertaker's going to be in a HiaC match against Lesnar of all people. Is he going to be 100% in time for 'Mania? I think the best bet for both men is to ride off in the sunset after putting over someone who could really benefit from something like a win over either of these greats. Or, if they absolutely HAVE TO face off on the biggest stage, at least put a third or even fourth guy in there to help the match along should either Sting or 'Taker have to take a breather. Maybe a tag match. It would also solve the first problem of who goes over, as whoever is either man's partner could easily take the fall. So, what do you guys think? Does it absolutely have to be one-on-one? Would this scenario work better? If so, who would you choose as the partners for 'Taker and Sting? Or perhaps have them team up against two up-and-comers? Let me know.

I have been against Steve Borden to enter wwe cause vince will make STING his b*** we he is succeeding and although he hasn t won a match this tarnishing his legacy and ruining his IMAGE! If this dream match ever happens which vince won't allow I would want Steve Borden to defeat underflaker !!!

 

[Messiah]

It would have been a good idea 15 year's ago, not anymore... It probably wouldn't even feel that special if they were in the ring together, time has passed for both men... I'm just not sure how many people still want to see it, if they'll pay big money to see that match.. If that match still draws, then i guess they should still do it.

 

[Really?]

In a word............................................no!!!

People want to see this match only because they want to see the image of Sting circa 1997 taking on the Deadman with his long hair and cloak. Even at that, the match in 1997 would not have been great. Ok, the entrances, in a dark arena might be cool, BUT, Mania takes place in Arlington, Texas on a Spring Sunday, when the match will likely lead off the third hour.....IT'LL BE LIGHT OUT STILL. The effect won't exist in nearly a good enough way to make up for the shight match. Taker, if he is going to work matches, needs to work the hard hitting smash and bash matches like he did with Lesnar. Sting has now been shown to not be able to take bumps as he used to, and was never known for a hard hitting style to begin with. It would be the still birth of matches.....All sorts of excitement and wondering only to end in heartbreak....

 

[LBGetBack]

No. They're both too old. Ship has sailed. Sting is 0-2 in the WWE.....he doesn't need a third loss. And I don't want to see one of them get crippled(or worse) on my screen.

Retire. Stop relying on stars from TWENTY YEARS AGO.

Imagine them bringing back Superstar Billy Graham and Bruno Sammartino for a Mania match in the middle of the Attitude Era.....that's what Sting-Taker is like, age-wise. WWE has been clinging to the past and relying on old stars and not giving enough new guys their time for at least a decade now. Time to move on.

 

[aaronmb]

It shouldve happened at the last wrestlemania, instead of that bullshit match with triple h, with both sting and taker being in next years hof.
No one wanted Triple h vs sting, nor did they want wyatt vs taker.
Not only has Stings run been way underwhelming, it seems they screwed up next years mania.

 

[Navi]

No. They're both too old. Ship has sailed. Sting is 0-2 in the WWE.....he doesn't need a third loss. And I don't want to see one of them get crippled(or worse) on my screen.

Retire. Stop relying on stars from TWENTY YEARS AGO.

Imagine them bringing back Superstar Billy Graham and Bruno Sammartino for a Mania match in the middle of the Attitude Era.....that's what Sting-Taker is like, age-wise. WWE has been clinging to the past and relying on old stars and not giving enough new guys their time for at least a decade now. Time to move on.

I have to agree with this. This match would have been fantastic about 10-15 years ago, but it didn't happen. Watching them now I just can't see it. I'm afraid for the health of both of them, and that alone would put a damper on the match.

And the poster I quoted is correct, start building up new stars, stop trying to set attendance records that you can't possibly attain without bringing in the Rock and others. Wrestlemania is supposed to be either the culmination or the beginning of feuds, not a bunch of part timers doing one night stands.

I'm finding it harder each year to get excited for a 5 hour extravaganza, featuring people who I know won't be there the next night. I want to see the wrestlers on the roster that I watch week and and week out getting somewhere, not all stuck in a battle royal that means shit.

Sorry went on a bit of a rant there, but not feeling this match, and really don't give two shits if it happens.

 

[ckoneagain]

I think having Taker vs Brock and Sting vs Rollins has been as much of a test of the older guys ability to still go as anything else. If they go as hard as they did for those two matches then Sting vs Taker could be and epic clash IMO. The risk is that one of them pushes the other too far and a serious injury occurs or both of them are concerned about the other and the match ends up like Goldberg vs Lesnar, but only time will tell. Personally i hope they do have the match, it will always be a question mark otherwise.

 

[rge2010]

Ive said all a long it would be better to have them tag up first, both get the Mania win and then face off next year at 33 if they are fit and healthy.

Sting & Taker vs Kane & Big Show. History there.

 

[Mustang Sally]

Ive said all a long it would be better to have them tag up first, both get the Mania win and then face off next year at 33 if they are fit and healthy.

That's a good idea. Another might be to have Sting wrestle......and win......a match at the PPV before the one in which he meets Undertaker.

That way, Sting wouldn't be winless in WWE, which is a factor that seems to be bothering many fans. If he doesn't defeat anyone before he meets 'Taker, it would seem a foregone conclusion he'd lose to the dark man. If Sting has a WWE win under his belt, it adds an 'anything goes' element to Sting-Undertaker.

I have a hard time envisioning either one standing victorious over the other, yet WWE surely wouldn't allow this one to finish 'dirty,' would they? Someone has to win and I'd really like to see who.

 

[Jonyboyuk2]

Absolutely not a good idea. Sting needs to come back and have 5-6 big matches between now and his retirement match where he wins cleanly. The young fans don't even remember John Cena's debut so how would they remember Sting as the legend he was? He turned up to WWE and lost his only two matches. It is ridiculous BS booking that makes NO sense!

 

[Kidpolean]

Um...what else would either do at Mania? This is probably the final year for both guys...why not face each other? The streak is broken so Cena vs Taker makes no sense and Sting against ANYBODY other than Taker just doesn't make any sense.

I don't understand how wrestling fans would be against this. Let these two go out and have fun for their final match. They don't need to put over younger talent or anything stupid like that. Imo, it's the only match that makes any sense.

It's either Taker vs Sting or neither of them wrestles at all.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

At this point it's more of a nostalgia trip than anything, something people would watch just to say they've seen it, not necessarily something people would consider good. Sting vs. Taker is probably a lot like it was for me going to see Van Halen a few years back, it was cool that I got to see Van Halen live but when it came down to it wasn't nearly as good as I was expecting (unlike AC/DC which was freaking amazing) and I felt kind of let down when the show ended. Even if Sting and Taker come to Wrestlemania with their game faces on I can't imagine them putting on an amazing match that people would remember, at most it would be a good match that surprised a lot of people.

Even with Taker beating Brock at Summerslam they lost most of their value with him at Wrestlemania 30. Sting at this point hasn't looked good at all since his debut, they've used him to drudge up the old WCW vs. WWF feud, to praise Triple H and to put over Rollins, none of which have done Sting any favors whatsoever. Essentially they've presented Sting as a legend who's nothing special anymore so it's really hard to care about anything he's doing these days, he's just kind of there to remind us that he still exists.

At this point there really isn't any value to Sting vs. Taker outside of simply saying "it would be cool to see them wrestle". Frankly if they were going to do this match it would've been much better if:

A) Sting didn't even show up on WWE TV until it was time to feud with Taker.
B) Sting won his WM31 match against Triple H and they didn't go down the tired WCW vs. WWE route with that storyline (Sting's the dark knight of wrestling and takes a stand against corruption in wrestling, what other reason do you need for him screwing over The Authority than that?)

Neither scenario happened though, they haven't treated Sting as anything special so having him wrestle Taker at Mania is nothing more than a feel good moment for wrestling fans of over 15-20 years.