Could 'Taker v Reigns be the way to go?

[mikeyado]

A lot of conditionals here, I know, but bear with me.

If 'Taker returns at WM31 for another match, he's going to need an opponent. Who?

Sting? There seems to be little or no chatter about a Sting- Taker match at Mania. Good. It'd be awful. Two over fiftys in a match nobody wants to see either of them lose.

Lesnar? I don't see how it could work from a commercial or a kayfabe point of view. Commercially, we all know Lesnar isn't going to be around for long after Mania, if at all. If he beats Taker again (which he must do), WWE is likely to gain very little from it, it comes down to little more than filler. From a Kayfabe point of view, who believes that 'Taker can beat Lesnar now, after last year, another year older? Nobody, it'd be a farce.

Wyatt? Hmmm, maybe. I'm not sure he needs the rub that much, he's getting over just fine by himself.

Enter Roman Reigns. A match with 'Taker at Wrestlemania keeps his momentum going into the biggest show of the year. Then he beats him. Reigns becomes one of only two men to have ever beaten Taker at WM. He's instantly elevated and he'll be around to properly capitalise on the rub it'll give him, unlike Lesnar. PLUS, it keeps a not-quite-ready Reigns away from the title scene, delays his ascent to the mountain top by another year to enable him to develop his gimmick a little more until he's truly ready, this time next year. Taker's lost once, to somebody he seems to have beef with personally, so I doubt he'd have a problem doing a job for Reigns.

The Setup? A number of ways. It's easy. My way- Reigns is doing his now customary Rumble schtick- eliminating people left, right and indeed centre, he looks a lock to win it. 'Taker appears. Takes out Reigns, costs him the match. Next Raw Taker says he had to make an impact, had to show he could still be a main event player and so he took out the hottest wrestler on the scene right know (More props for Reigns). Reigns wants revenge. See? Easy.

Thoughts? Abuse? Praise? Bring it.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

In my opinion, Taker probably shouldn't even have a match at WrestleMania XXXI. The streak is over and the wear & tear, along with numerous nagging old injuries, have caught up to Taker as he's gotten older. As a result, it's highly unlikely that Taker can't put on a competitive match anymore. If Taker does wrestle, it'll have to be against someone who can help carry most of the match in a way as to hide Taker's vulnerabilities if they want the match to be good and I believe that Roman Reigns most certainly ain't that guy.

The more I think about it, the more Roman Reigns kinda puts me in mind of Lex Luger to some degree. When Luger came to Crockett Promotions, he was green, he had a fabulous look but he was green. Management saw money in the guy and they fast tracked him into a major player by making him Ole Anderson's replacement in The Four Horsemen. Compared to Flair, Blanchard & Anderson, Luger was pretty damn weak when it came to in-ring work or promo ability, but those guys were so good in their roles that Luger was protected and elevated by being associated with them. Luger's role was mostly a the big, muscular powerhouse of the group and he did well in that role, which was generally the more limited role. By the time Luger left the group, he was established within the company and was already over with fans. It's sort of the same with Roman Reigns in that he was part of a great group, worked with guys that were FAR more experienced & well rounded, had a somewhat more limited role as the muscle of the group, experienced a lot of success due to the group's consistently strong booking and his shortcomings were hidden by a combination of said booking & being paired with much more talented wrestlers.

Also, as with Luger, now that Reigns is on his own, his shortcomings are obviously more visual as he's no longer part of the group. Luger wasn't all that good on the mic, Reigns isn't all that good on the mic. Luger wasn't all that good in most of his long matches unless it was against someone top notch, Reigns isn't all that good in most long matches unless it's against someone top notch. Luger had a great look, Reigns has a great look.

I'm not saying that Reigns can't or won't improve, I hope he does because I like the guy and think he has potential, but I don't see Reigns as being ready to be WWE World Heavyweight Champion and I don't think he's nearly good enough to help carry a physically feeble Undertaker into a solid match.

 

[hatehabsforever]

Sorry, OP, but in my opinion, that's a horrible idea. For one thing, I cannot imagine that after an extended streak of twenty one victories, Undertaker is going to lose twice in a row, regardless of whoever his opponent is. I'm not totally certain he is even going to be at Wrestlemania this year but if he is, I cannot see him losing to whoever opposes him. He either doesn't return, or he comes back and wins his match, avenging last year's defeat (albeit to a different opponent).

Plus, if he is going to compete this year, it will have to either be against someone who can "carry" him, or someone slow, methodical and plodding like himself. It won't be against a powerful relative novice, who at this stage of the game, doesn't have the "it factor" yet to tell a believable story. Plus, I simply don't feel a reason for this match to occur. It would seem to me to be a match up slapped together for the sake of having a match. And that's not a fitting manner for Taker to conclude his Wrestlemania career.

So where does that leave the Deadman for this year's Wrestlemania? Sting versus the Undertaker on the grandest stage of them all. Taker goes to 22-1, and concludes his Wrestlemania career in victory against an opponent that I still believe many people (myself included) want to see him face. He concludes his WWE career with a rematch against Sting at Survivor Series, going full circle career wise, and Sting emerges victorious this time around. And both men get inducted into the WWE Hall of Fame next year.

With the Undertaker as the headliner, of course,

 

[Richard Blonoff]

Meh, I don't see it. I love Reigns, the guy is a star in the making, but he is rough around the edges. I can see wanting to keep him away from the title scene for a little while, but Taker isn't the way to go.

For one, Taker is pushing 50 and his last few matches at Mania have all been against guys who could carry a match. Reigns isn't that guy yet.

Two, I think a lot of the appeal for Undetaker has worn off now that he lost The Streak. The guy is great, a certified Hall of Famer and one of the best ever, but at this point beating him isn't the accomplishment it was or would have been had the streak been intact.

There are ways to book Reigns like a future star, having him beat up a old worn down man isn't one of them.

 

[Wald]

I wouldn't put Reigns with Taker for a variety of reasons. First off Taker shouldn't come back for anything other than a swansong victory that he can retire on the back of. Reigns really doesn't need to be fed to Taker for that match at this stage of his career and it would be a backwards step for him. Throw in to the mix that they want Reigns to be their next big babyface champion and that Reigns would surely be booed out of the building if he were facing the Undertaker in his final match and it just doesn't make sense. Taker would also need a better worker than Reigns to get a fitting match out of him, someone like John Cena or Randy Orton.

A lot depends on Brock signing with UFC for how the card shapes up to be honest and even more depends on how Vince would react to that news. It would be such a horrible knee jerk decision for McMahon to pull the plug on someone taking the title from Brock at Mania just to spite him on the way out the door. It would also negate Brock ending the Streak and him holding the title since Summerslam if all we get as a pay off is John Cena winning it at Royal Rumble. Because of the Streak being ended to set up this year's Wrestlemania match I fully believe Brock will still be WWE Champion coming out of the Royal Rumble.

That would lead me to think that Reigns will probably will be facing Brock Lesnar for the WWE Title. I know there are concerns that the hardcore fans will turn on him but Brock potentially leaving for UFC after Wrestlemania could help Reigns out with this. Remember the reaction fans gave Lesnar at Wrestlemania last time he was leaving? This would probably be worse. personally though I'd put Brock with Daniel Bryan and have Reigns face and defeat Rusev. I think it would help Reigns in the long run, those matches would make the most storyline sense and if Brock is leaving that Vince can bury Brock on the way out by having him tap out to Daniel Bryan when most eyes are on his product.

As for Taker, well if he comes back, and it's a big if, I think there's only one match for him to have and that's with John Cena. That was the dream match up until last year but it still holds a lot of drawing power, particularly if people believe it to be Undertaker's last match. What helps it is that I really don't see anything else for John Cena to do this year. He could face Rusev I guess but he fought in an upper midcard match at last year's Wrestlemania and I really don't see him doing it again.

 

[Prince Vee]

This is an awful idea. I don't know how do you even get it. So you want Undertaker to turn heel just to put Roman Reigns over? Whats the point in undertaker turning heel? If WWE wants to induct him in the Hall of Fame in 2015 or 2016 they wouldn't want a heel heat on him. And why would undertaker even want to make a point that he can still be a main event player??

 

[George Steele's Barber]

Sting? There seems to be little or no chatter about a Sting- Taker match at Mania.

Huh? What? Sarcasm?

Good. It'd be awful. Two over fiftys in a match nobody wants to see either of them lose.

Probably

Lesnar? I don't see how it could work from a commercial or a kayfabe point of view. Commercially, we all know Lesnar isn't going to be around for long after Mania, if at all. If he beats Taker again (which he must do), WWE is likely to gain very little from it, it comes down to little more than filler. From a Kayfabe point of view, who believes that 'Taker can beat Lesnar now, after last year, another year older? Nobody, it'd be a farce.

After WM 27, where UT escaped by the skin of his teeth, I think we all kind of felt like he had no business getting older and facing HHH again. But that led to WM 28, what may be my favorite match of all time. UT/Lesnar at WM 31 probably would not make the most sense but as much as Vince is all about money he loves that UT character and could very well give him the victory. But I doubt it too.

Wyatt? Hmmm, maybe. I'm not sure he needs the rub that much, he's getting over just fine by himself.

The guy could use the rub. He has lost a ton of steam. I am against it because I am so tired of Wyatt but he could really use something interesting to do.

Enter Roman Reigns. A match with 'Taker at Wrestlemania keeps his momentum going into the biggest show of the year. Then he beats him. Reigns becomes one of only two men to have ever beaten Taker at WM. He's instantly elevated and he'll be around to properly capitalise on the rub it'll give him, unlike Lesnar. PLUS, it keeps a not-quite-ready Reigns away from the title scene, delays his ascent to the mountain top by another year to enable him to develop his gimmick a little more until he's truly ready, this time next year. Taker's lost once, to somebody he seems to have beef with personally, so I doubt he'd have a problem doing a job for Reigns.

The Setup? A number of ways. It's easy. My way- Reigns is doing his now customary Rumble schtick- eliminating people left, right and indeed centre, he looks a lock to win it. 'Taker appears. Takes out Reigns, costs him the match. Next Raw Taker says he had to make an impact, had to show he could still be a main event player and so he took out the hottest wrestler on the scene right know (More props for Reigns). Reigns wants revenge. See? Easy.

Thoughts? Abuse? Praise? Bring it.

Here's the thing. Reigns does not need to beat anyone because he has been booked near unstoppable for two years. He could pin Cena cleanly tonight and no one would bat an eye. The guy has been booked to look like the future for a year. Beating the UT just makes him look like a guy beating up an old man.

 

[JDHale]

Three Quick Points;

1) I don't want to see Reigns vs Taker ~ Sorry for being selfish but Undertaker doesn't deserve another loss and I don't think Reigns is gonna lose at 'Mania so it kinda rules that out of question anyway. Plus the idea of Undertaker turning as mentioned before me would be crazy at this point in his career, and considering Reigns isn't exactly convincing as a face in terms of crowd reactions, he would have to improve this dramatically for the crowd to prefer him over a legend of the business who has a WrestleMania record of 21-1.

2) I hate the idea of Undertaker vs Wyatt ~ Again, sorry for being selfish but I honestly don't feel Wyatt deserves a match with him, let alone a possible victory over him to get the rub of his career. In this moment I am completely off Wyatt. I don't do anything drastic like tune out when he's on the screen but I've been asked to fast forward or change the channel more times when he was cutting a promo than when an Adam Rose segment/match is on. Maybe he is over and I just don't recognize it or maybe my mind is biased in a way but where I live he's constantly referred to as a 'clown' and 'just a crazy farmer'. Also based off his feud with Ambrose this guy is a lot higher up the card then he should be in my opinion, but I hope he changes my thoughts on this in his Ambulance Match tonight and then a better next feud.

3) I don't want another Undertaker match ~ Oh look at me being selfish again, but now the Streak is over it wouldn't be as special anymore. 21-1 looks ridiculous to me as it is and 22-1 or 21-2 looks even worse from my point of view. I just want him to retire now. He's had one of the most successful careers in wrestling history and to see him in a match with most people, not just Reigns and Wyatt, would be more upsetting to me than exciting. Heck I don't even wanna see a Ziggler-Taker match, and that's a statement in itself when you take into account who said it..

 

[Navi]

No, no and again no. The Undertaker shouldn't be back in a ring after last year's performance at Wrestlemania. Let the guy live out the rest of his life in relative comfort. As has been said, the streak is over and there is no need for him to show up again, except for his Hall of Fame induction. Which will be epic.

Considering they want Reigns as the next face of the WWE, having him beat Taker at Mania is not the way to make the fans love him. I can't see this happening and it turning out good for Roman Reigns.

 

[gers09]

no just no Reigns doesn't gain a thing out this all he gets is he beat a 50 year old man who last year who looked horrible last year. I am a big undertaker fan have been since a started watching wrestling early 90s he has always been the man in my eyes but wm 30 last year was awful he too old for this now and too slow.

His last 4/5 years his opponent has carried the match and reigns while i do like him isn't good enough by a long shot to carry a match like that by himself yet he still needs to rely on other guy too. plus they way you have started the feud taker the heel the problem there is taker is one of a few men who have done so much in wrestling he can never be heel again he is respected too much and reigns isn't over enough to be a face against someone the likes of taker.

As for who taker should face that is and this kills me to say but no one as a long time fan i wanna see taker sting but that match 10 years ago would be awesome and match of the decade easy but now both are too old and slow that match imo would now suck so that out. Wyatt that could be a decent match i think. i think wyatt could carry a decent match with him wouldn't be a match of year but a good one none the less there is just no pay off after taker losing to a part timer and yes a legit fighter it would't make sense a year later taker getting the win and would just put wyatt back down and make him look week and a don't think after 21 wins taker will lose 2 in a row and wyatt has same problem as reigns no pay off on beating a beaten down weak man.

 

[WrestlingSmonster]

I personally don't think Reigns could hang in a match with Undertaker. When I say that I mean that he can't tell a story in the ring. If we don't see Taker vs Sting it would be our generations Wrestlemania 8 flair/hogan. I don't care about there age. It's a wrestling match not a mma fight. John Wayne kicked ass till he could barely walk but he did it in movies. My point we know wwe and Hollywood are a show but just want a good story. And Besides saving Reigns for next year gives hhh opportunity to "pass torch to a pretty boy" and get him his main event hhh desperately needs.

 

[kadroan]

Reigns can't afford a loss to Taker and a win against Taker would hurt Reigns as well. Personally, I'd just have Taker take the year off so they can have a full year to promote Sting vs. Taker at WM 32 like they did Rock/Cena for WM 28.

The way Taker looked at WM XXX, I wouldn't take any chances having him wrestle at WM 31, I'd hate to see him get hurt again.

 

[Mustang Sally]

In my opinion, Taker probably shouldn't even have a match at WrestleMania XXXI. The streak is over and the wear & tear, along with numerous nagging old injuries, have caught up to Taker as he's gotten older.

That's logical, but the specter of Mark Calaway finishing his career with a loss just doesn't sit well; he's won (and won again) for so long, I had honestly figured he'd never lose at Wrestlemania....and would retire with that glorious streak intact. Since that concept is dead & gone, I think he'll go to the post one more time.

Of course, going against that idea is the strange fact that we haven't seen nor heard from him since WM30. Given his past, you'd think he would have made a non-violent appearance in a WWE ring to tell us about it, praising Brock Lesnar while either telling us to not yet count him out.....or to announce his retirement. I believe the reason none of that has happened is because he honestly didn't know what he intended to do about wrestling in the future.

But, you know what? Injuries heal and time blunts the memory of pain, allowing a person to remember what he's loved doing for years while forgetting the negatives. I think 'Taker will do it one more time.

If he does, I can't see why his opponent would be Roman Reigns. For one thing, Reigns doesn't need 'Taker to further his career advancement; he's already facing the best of the best ....and when either he or John Cena turn bad, Roman will be in there with him, too.

Further, while we now understand why WWE put 'Taker in with a brute like Brock Lesnar (to advance Brock's march toward the world title), I would think the lessons of that match would cause them to put 'Taker in at WM31 against someone who's expert at working a match smoothly; a man less prone to injuring his opponent......yet a legend in his own right.

If that's what they're looking to do, I would have 'Taker tangle with Triple H or Sting, savvy veterans who know how to make their opponents (and themselves) look good without damaging the other guy. I would think a raw, inexperienced brawler like Roman Reigns would be the last guy they'd want to put in there with Undertaker.

If Reigns' career path needed a victory over Undertaker to keep him viable, it would be one thing. But it doesn't.

 

[LionheartY2J]

It should have been last year. Ending Taker's streak was something huge, bigger than any title. The fact that they gave it to Lesner, knowing that he would never be more than a part timer. This was something that should have been given to an up and comer to put them over the top as the next major superstar.

But now that the streaks over, there's no reason for Undertaker to wrestle another match, unless its some kind of legend vs. Legend match vs. Hogan, HBK, Hart, Sting, etc.