Could smarter choices have prolonged the Streak?

[gasM]

Now we know the answer to the question of who would break the Undertaker’s streak, the question now becomes “Who could have challenged the streak?” I personally feel that, had Undertaker himself felt physically capable of soldiering on a little longer, the company could have maximised him as an asset to Wrestlemania with smarter choices.
For example after the double bill with Shawn Michaels, Undertaker was booked to work a few months with Kane – the company’s resident “safe hand”. After that, he was ready for Mania, where he worked a highly physical match with Triple H which forced him into hibernation until they were ready for Round II (Round III if we ignore WWE’s revisionist history) where they worked an even more hellacious match which, once again, deprived us of the Deadman once more until the Wrestlemania 29 build (besides one appearance at RAW 1000). However, this match was simply an old-school wrestling match with CM Punk, with the physicality scaled back considerably by comparison. After this, we got to see ‘Taker in a six-man tag on Raw and a short singles match on SmackDown. The following year Brock Lesnar is in the Streak match, and Undertaker ends the night in hospital with a severe concussion.
I would argue then, that smart choices such as Punk for The Deadman could potentially have afforded us a few more Wrestlemania matches before he hung up the boots – or at least, it’s fun to speculate. With that in mind, here a some smart choices that could have minimised to some extent the damage to the Undertaker:
Undertaker vs Dean Ambrose
There was story here with The Shield putting ‘Taker out on SmackDown. Ambrose would be the best pick because he’s arguably the best promo in the group, his wildman character fits well with the Undertaker’s persona, and it would be a less physical match than Reigns or a slower match than Rollins.
Undertaker vs Daniel Bryan
Bryan is arguably the absolute best in-ring performer on the planet right now. Whilst the promos would be average and the face vs face dynamic a bit of a mess, between the ropes these two would have made magic.
Undertaker vs Bray Wyatt
Much like Wyatt’s match with Cena was very much about the story in place of the wrestling, so it would be with Undertaker. Their gimmicks I think would match up well and Wyatt’s promos are always golden, so I think they could have put on a clinic in terms of in-ring psychology without getting too physical on Undertaker.
Undertaker vs Chris Jericho
Not the most exciting or unpredictable program, but Jericho is a big name who is credible enough to get that spot, skilled enough to sell that program and more than capable of producing a high-quality match with Undertaker. Plus it would have been interesting to see him step up and challenge the streak and again, wouldn’t be too punishing an opponent for the Undertaker.

Undertaker vs The Miz
Personally, I would’ve loved to see Miz in full arrogant prick mode putting his “streak” on the line against the Undertaker only to be swatted away by the future Hall Of Famer. It’s a step up from the Battle Royale and would be a massive crowd pleaser plus Miz would be a lighter physical challenge than a Brock Lesnar or a Triple H.
Undertaker vs John Cena
The true dream match – the only man most of us thought was a possible, even likely candidate to end the Streak. We’ve seen Cena produce quality bouts with part timers before, he’s a huge name to pair with the Streak, and the crowd would be hot for it the whole time. He’s the only candidate of them all I would have thought could end the Streak, for sure.

Do you agree that smarter matches could have prolonged the Streak’s existence? What do you think of these smart choices? What would have been yours?

 

[Softcore Holly]

I don't think it was really a opponent issue, father time simply caught up to Taker. The past couple of WMs they did a pretty good job of hiding Taker's age but in WM30 he looked really, really old. Lesnar for the most part didn't do anything all that brutal, if anything he was obviously playing with kid's gloves once they realized something was wrong. I think that even if Taker had a different opponent that night and even if he won that would be his last match.

I loved Taker ever since I was a kid but he stayed in the game longer than he should have and we sadly got to see him do one match too many. I wish he hung up his boots after his great matches against HBK, HHH or Punk, I get that people like the whole "retire on your back" thing but I would've much preferred him going out on top than on a serious low and straight to a hospital.

 

[Tyrant25]

Personally, I don't think we as fans deserve the right to delegate when a wrestler is "supposed" to retire. Wrestlers should consider their health when it comes to retirement, completely understandable, but being a fan doesn't warrant telling a man that he should abandon his craft. Wrestlers put their bodies on the line for our entertainment, and they have the right to retire when they want to. The Undertaker did not stay in the WWE longer than he should have, nor should he feel the need to continue wrestling because it's HIS decision. That being said, I think WWE missed a perfect opportunity to book The Undertaker vs. John Cena at Wrestlemania 30. Cena could've won both the titles at Tables, Ladders and Chairs, Undertaker could've won the Royal Rumble and that could've been it. Cena definitely deserved to end the streak way more than Lesnar did. I think that's the one match that WWE failed to capitalize on and, while it does frustrate me, if Undertaker decides to retire, I'm more than content with what he contributed to the business.

Of course, we wouldn't have gotten the Daniel Bryan "Cinderella story" moment at the end of 'Mania 30, but he still could've ended the show with a win over Triple H instead.

 

[yycmatfan]

I know I'm new here, but I wanted to add my thoughts on this topic.

What should be thought about is the fact Taker wasn't supposed to lose this match. He was hurt early in and barely made it as far as he did. The entire Superdome was shocked as the pin by Lesnar was so unexpected. But once it happened WWE had no choice but to go with it and re-think where things would go. Most of you I'm sure will know, Taker collapsed backstage right after the match and was taken to hospital. That alone says something went horribly wrong during the match.
The way things were slated to take place is Taker would win, go to 22-0 and the next night on RAW come out and talk about his future and likely retirement. At that moment we were to finally see the WWE debut of STING. The 2 would engage in some sort of dialogue which would ultimately lead to Taker coming out of retirement to face Sting somewhere during the year, likely at SummerSlam.
The must anticipated Taker/Cena match would build and highlight WM31 in San Fran, where the streak would finally come to an end.

 

[yycmatfan]

Where in the world did you get the idea that Undertaker wasn't "supposed" to lose?

Oh, I'm sorry. Did I ruin it for you in that it's really not a huge secret that match results are pre-determined.

 

[chicagokmc]

Oh, I'm sorry. Did I ruin it for you in that it's really not a huge secret that match results are pre-determined.

I don't think he was being smart. There were comments in several places that the loss was planned, that Taker hand picked his winner and that all of it was kept secret to generate genuine surprise. Can you substantiate your opinion? The only thing we know as probable fact is that the Taker was hurt during the match. The outcome of Lesnar winning could have still been the outcome all along.

 

[yycmatfan]

I don't think he was being smart. There were comments in several places that the loss was planned, that Taker hand picked his winner and that all of it was kept secret to generate genuine surprise. Can you substantiate your opinion? The only thing we know as probable fact is that the Taker was hurt during the match. The outcome of Lesnar winning could have still been the outcome all along.

It very well could have. There were rumors that Taker wanted to end the streak to Lesnar back at WM26, but the powers that be wouldn't go with that storyline.

 

[SuperTaco]

It very well could have. There were rumors that Taker wanted to end the streak to Lesnar back at WM26, but the powers that be wouldn't go with that storyline.

This bugs me. In your first post you say "Taker wasn't supposed to lose" like it's fact, when it obviously isn't, and in your third post you say it "very well could have" been booked that way all along. How hypocritical can you get?

As far as the topic, yeah an injury or two less during his career may have prolonged it, but that's wrestling. The fact that Taker was able to go this long is an amazing accomplishment considering the hell his body has been through. I honestly think that he sacrificed some of his long term health when he went beyond 20-0. He has aged a lot since then.

 

[blueskyy]

What's the point of prolonging the Streak when the quality of the match cannot be sustained... What's the point of discussing "what could've been" when there's no way of tuning back the hands of time...

 

[jeffrey9800]

I know I'm new here, but I wanted to add my thoughts on this topic.

What should be thought about is the fact Taker wasn't supposed to lose this match. He was hurt early in and barely made it as far as he did. The entire Superdome was shocked as the pin by Lesnar was so unexpected. But once it happened WWE had no choice but to go with it and re-think where things would go. Most of you I'm sure will know, Taker collapsed backstage right after the match and was taken to hospital. That alone says something went horribly wrong during the match.
The way things were slated to take place is Taker would win, go to 22-0 and the next night on RAW come out and talk about his future and likely retirement. At that moment we were to finally see the WWE debut of STING. The 2 would engage in some sort of dialogue which would ultimately lead to Taker coming out of retirement to face Sting somewhere during the year, likely at SummerSlam.
The must anticipated Taker/Cena match would build and highlight WM31 in San Fran, where the streak would finally come to an end.

Lol,

That can't be right, are you really? what? where? How? WHAT?!?!?! Lol, it wasn't planned, sure. He made a sign to the ref, and us millions didn't see it or maybe they used mind communication?

THey changed plans why? LOL if Undertaker was hurt just have him do 1 last tombstone and it's over. Cut the match short, why change the result? Come on man.

I got pissed off when I read an article on the wrestling observer I think that was insinuating that the ref didn't know the finish LOL. It said that the refs are told to continue the count if the shoulders stay on the map. If that's the case well the first and only attribute to be a ref in wrestling is to be a part of a secret society that has the world's best hand-eye coordination lol. Like if the near falls are really near falls, the ref stops last minute because he sees the shoulder get off the mat. Bitch please.

As far as the OP I stopped reading after I saw Undertaker vs Ambrose when the only possible option for Taker in the Shield was Reigns who is portrayed as the Shield's big dog,

Than I jumped to the end to see Taker vs Miz. Dude. I don't hate the guy but dude, come on.......

Undertaker was not in shape, he knew it was his last match. That's it.

Only little twist I would've done the past few years is Taker saying that if the streak dies he dies, meaning he retires if he loses. Would've made the last 5 matches just that much better.

 

[Sundar]

I think the streak ending was the greatest thing from WM30. The shock that it caused is what we will remember about WM30 forever. After a long time I now get the feeling that anything could happen in the WWE. In my opinion HBK or Kurt Angle should have ended the streak but since HBK did not and since Kurt Angle is not in the WWE Lesnar was the best choice. No one else was credible enough to do it.

 

[closet_fan]

The streak ending was supposed to happen. I also don't believe at all that Vince told Taker "You're losing." Taker went to Vince, who I would almost guarantee wanted Lesnar to lose, and said "I can't do it anymore." If it was someone else, Vince would have made a fuss. But it was Taker's right to say whether he wanted to keep going or not. Lesnar quietly thanking him after the pin is why Taker made the call, not Vince.

Back to the topic: Why have the streak continue when the matches would have been less and less fulfilling? Last year's Punk match was the last good match Taker had left. He knew it. This year's match and lead up was god awful.

You want Taker to squeeze out a couple more matches with the streak intact? I don't know why some feel a younger guy ending it would put them in the upper echelon of heel status. It wouldn't. Fans would say "_____ beat a 50+ year old guy." And if that win by this younger guy did nothing for a reaction, the WWE would have screwed up royally. They end a streak and have nothing to show for it.

These fans who wanted the streak to end by a younger guy are the same fans who think the IC or US title will help them. It hasn't.

 

[Mustang Sally]

Do you agree that smarter matches could have prolonged the Streak’s existence?

Yes, but the "smarter" matches suggested against people like The Miz, Bray, and Ambrose essentially eliminate the possibility that the Streak would be broken; does anyone think any of those guys would have a chance to win? One of the selling points of HBK, Triple H and even Punk is that there was a reasonable possibility that these guys could turn the trick. At certain points of the Triple H matches, I honestly felt it might happen.

Years ago, Larry Holmes was the heavyweight champion in boxing who was hoping to hold the title long enough to set a record for longevity. His plan was to select "name" opponents who had the least opportunity of defeating him, thereby extending his streak. This all happened before my time, but in reading about it, I thought it a chickenshit way of holding the championship, rather than defending his belt against the best challengers. It would have been a hollow record and fortunately, he didn't get it, losing to a light heavyweight, Michael Spinks. Tough rocks, Larry.

This is how it would have been had Undertaker been matched only with guys like Dean Ambrose....and given that pro wrestling is a pre-scripted form of sports entertainment, unlike boxing (we hope), streak-extending matches against Dean Ambrose or The Miz wouldn't draw..... and if an Undertaker match at WM can't draw, there's no sense in asking him to keep hauling his ruined body out for WM each year.

But to answer the question.....Yes, the Streak could have been prolonged with different choices.

 

[HatchetMan84]

With no disrespect intended towards taker....i was a fan of the streak but i feel like the last couple of years the streak has been "boring" in the sense that there was no real feeling that Taker was in danger of losing. I remember the 1st HBK match, i thought HBK would win....when he ended up losing, i thought to myself that if anybody was going to end it, Triple H or Shawn Michaels was going to do it....

Brock was a complete surprise because really the last two years the streak was boring in the sense that taker stays gone a whole year, then comes back, and of course will win at Wrestlemania, rinse and repeat, etc.... I really think that no fan saw the streak ever ending as long as taker could physically go.

I think it was the perfect time to end it because it looked like Taker aged 10 years since last WM, could barely go, and is lucky to have escaped (possibly) serious injury.

I hope Taker never wrestles again unless it is one of those "legend" matches where he comes out and squashes someone 4 or 5 years from now on Old School Raw or something....