Create a Mega-Heel, Ongoing Storyline and Turn HHH

[George Steele's Barber]

After this week I'm buying in to HHH and UT having a match at WM. I have come up with an idea that I think works but would like to hear other opinions:

Leading up to the match HHH is seen on TV interacting with one particular Superstar (I'll just call him "X"). It should seem inconspicous enough. HHH is management and is expected to have a working relationship with all of the guys.

At WM, X screws over the UT while HHH is unable to pay attention. HHH appears to unknowingly take advantage of this and gets the pin on UT ending the streak.

Following WM, there is an ongoing story centered around, "What did HHH know?" X is hated by everyone for basically ending the streak and won't reveal whether or not HHH was involved.

Eventually we either learn that HHH was involved - he couldn't handle UT beating him again and retiring with such an accomplishment as 20-0, or not involved - the X was just trying to become that much more famous at the UT and his streak's expense.

What do you think of this idea? How would you tweak it? Who would benefit the most as X (Johnny Ace, Miz, Ziggler, McIntyre)? In the end would you turn HHH or give X all the heat?

 

[#hamler]

If Undertaker's streak is ever going to end, it should definitely be clean. What good would this do Triple H? He doesn't need the heat. If he wanted to turn heel, all he'd have to do is dominate the World Title scene with Stephanie at his side. Ending the Undertaker's streak for a cheap five months or so of Triple H being booed only to go off Raw for an extended amount of time isn't worth it. As for Wrestler X, he should work his ass off the following year to gain some type of heat, ask the Undertaker himself for a match a Wrestlemania. That'll do him some good for getting over. I can't help but imagine ending the Undertaker's streak would be something to gloat about but there's no doubt in my mind Wrestler X would lose steam if he doesn't find something to do just as significant as ending the Undertaker's streak; nowadays, there really is nothing bigger than that. 20 years of an unbeatable streak isn't something to experiment with. The Undertaker should just retire with the streak intact. Triple H doesn’t need some big type of complicated angle to turn heel; he’s very good with portraying a character whether heel or face. He’s a professional and one of the WWE’s best.

 

[conrad405]

If Undertaker's streak is ever going to end, it should definitely be clean. What good would this do Triple H? He doesn't need the heat. If he wanted to turn heel, all he'd have to do is dominate the World Title scene with Stephanie at his side. Ending the Undertaker's streak for a cheap five months or so of Triple H being booed only to go off Raw for an extended amount of time isn't worth it. As for Wrestler X, he should work his ass off the following year to gain some type of heat, ask the Undertaker himself for a match a Wrestlemania. That'll do him some good for getting over. I can't help but imagine ending the Undertaker's streak would be something to gloat about but there's no doubt in my mind Wrestler X would lose steam if he doesn't find something to do just as significant as ending the Undertaker's streak; nowadays, there really is nothing bigger than that. 20 years of an unbeatable streak isn't something to experiment with. The Undertaker should just retire with the streak intact. Triple H doesn’t need some big type of complicated angle to turn heel; he’s very good with portraying a character whether heel or face. He’s a professional and one of the WWE’s best.

100 % agree with this guy if UT streak was to ever end (which i think wont ever end and that UT will retire at 20-0 at WM this year) he deserves to have the streak end clean or retire with never having it end. (shouldnt end IMO)

 

[WorldWrestlingDestination]

It is an interesting idea, and a good one kind of, but it really wouldn't benefit anyone too much like the others said on this thread. I mean, also who could come in and pull on over on Undertaker at WM? This guy beat Michaels, twice. Michaels, named the greatest superstar of all time, and lost twice to Undertaker. Taker has beat Kane, Triple H, Big Show, to sum it up, almost everyone. There is no reasonable person that could interfere in a match and take out Taker.

 

[Brahma Bull]

This! Undertaker's streak is too important to do something like turn HHH heal. As others have said, HHH can do that any time he wants. He was one of the most natural heels ever. He doesn't have to end takers streak to do that. I would probably be the biggest waste we have seen on takers streak. HHH beats him on the third match. Nothing spectacular there.

 

[NotoriousMEAT]

I guess I'll be the first to say that I DO think this could work.

Now before everyone jumps on me, I HATE the idea of the streak ending. Undertaker is undoubtedly my favorite wrestler of all time. Every year since I was 10, the streak followed along with my age (which was always just cool for me), and I've never visioned an idea that I'd like to see the streak end.

But I'd accept this (in the long run) for the sole purpose that it wasn't to just get Triple H heel heat for "5 months", but rather set the tone for his reign as the head of WWE for decades to come.

Long explanation short..
Mr. McMahon was born from the Montreal Screw Job.
And Mr. Helmsley could be born from the murder of the streak.

I'd curse Triple H, and forever spit on the ground he walks on. But I guess that's kind of the point. Just my 2 cents.

 

[VinnieSunshine]

If Undertaker's streak is ever going to end, it should definitely be clean. What good would this do Triple H? He doesn't need the heat. If he wanted to turn heel, all he'd have to do is dominate the World Title scene with Stephanie at his side. Ending the Undertaker's streak for a cheap five months or so of Triple H being booed only to go off Raw for an extended amount of time isn't worth it. As for Wrestler X, he should work his ass off the following year to gain some type of heat, ask the Undertaker himself for a match a Wrestlemania. That'll do him some good for getting over. I can't help but imagine ending the Undertaker's streak would be something to gloat about but there's no doubt in my mind Wrestler X would lose steam if he doesn't find something to do just as significant as ending the Undertaker's streak; nowadays, there really is nothing bigger than that. 20 years of an unbeatable streak isn't something to experiment with. The Undertaker should just retire with the streak intact. Triple H doesn’t need some big type of complicated angle to turn heel; he’s very good with portraying a character whether heel or face. He’s a professional and one of the WWE’s best.

Hamler...all I did was read the first sentence of the OP's post. I was going to reply until you said everything I was going to say (DAMN YOU).

Taker, though I think he SHOULD NOT lose, should lose clean if he does. The match is against Triple H and Taker, don't bring someone else in on it. Having it done this way makes Triple H look weak.

I've always said...if WWE should ever end the streak, do it with someone that could be brought up as a future star. Someone like Ziggler or Rhodes that is already established, or just like Sheamus, win the RR and challenge Taker. Whoever should beat Taker needs to be ready to be the next star, as right now beating Taker and ending the streak is made to be a better accomplishment than winning the WHC or WWE title.

WWE is afraid to take chances. We as fans don't want to see the same match 3 times...but WWE looks at it as "well we dont really have anyone ready, and the last one did so well...lets do it again." You can't top the street fight that they had last year.

 

[willross]

I would be ok with this for one reason and one reason only...it is a storyline designed to push someone brand new to the moon as Triple H's Original Chosen One.

Vince McMahon had The Rock so Triple H should have someone. I would be ok with this if it were someone like The Miz or Alberto Del Rio just because there is so much potential in those two to create monster heels because they are so unlikeable to most of the viewers.

This would get them over huge. Then have them attack guys like Punk and Cena leading into Summerslam where we can get the big reveal that HHH was behind it the whole time and let H favor the hell out of the guy until WM where we can get the whole WM15 angle where H will do everything to screw over Punk or Cena but they go over on the chosen one.

By then, the guy should have built up enough steam for over a year of working a feud with main eventers and being a key contributer to the most pretigious record in wrestling history being ended. Who knows, maybe by then, we will love the guy (like The Rock) and he will be forced to turn babyface.

I like the idea. Not something I have thought of before. Now I don't want it to happen because it is officially in my brain as something to expect lmfao

 

[Raiden46]

The Undertaker's streak WILL come to an end one way or another. Nobody is bigger than the business. That includes the Undertaker. Taker is a company guy and he will do the right thing by giving back to the business. The only question is... who will be the one to do the honors of beating him?

As much as it makes me want to throw up in my stomach, the only person I could see it happening with at this point is......gag me now....John Cena.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

Hamler...all I did was read the first sentence of the OP's post. I was going to reply until you said everything I was going to say (DAMN YOU).

Taker, though I think he SHOULD NOT lose, should lose clean if he does. The match is against Triple H and Taker, don't bring someone else in on it. Having it done this way makes Triple H look weak.

Why shouldn't Taker lose? Why is he not expected to do what other guys before him have done and give up what makes him outstanding?

I don't see how this makes HHH look weak, losing clean makes you look weak not winning dirty. And who cares about HHH looking weak? HHH is a part-time wrestler who is also management. His time appears to be done.

I've always said...if WWE should ever end the streak, do it with someone that could be brought up as a future star. Someone like Ziggler or Rhodes that is already established, or just like Sheamus, win the RR and challenge Taker.

But ending the streak clean gets you some respect but using dirty tactics to end the streak and shocking the audience gets you legit heel heat. There are two Holy Grails in wrestling right now: Cena's Boy Scout badges and UT Streak. The assumption is that either Taker will retire undefeated or put over a young guy. Why not take it a step further and infuriate the fans in order to get a guy major recognition.

Whoever should beat Taker needs to be ready to be the next star, as right now beating Taker and ending the streak is made to be a better accomplishment than winning the WHC or WWE title.

I agree that Taker's streak is bigger than the titles. Exactly why WWE should use it to help others. However beating a guy the UT's age with his wear and tear is not as effective to screwing him over when it comes to getting a reaction from your audience.

WWE is afraid to take chances.

Your current world champions are so far from the norm that I feel like I am watching the Indies some of the time. You have a returning star trolling the audience. You put Snooki in a WM match. You announced your main event of WM a year ahead of time. Your investing a ton of money in your own TV network.

WWE is not afraid to take chances. They just don't do what we want them to do sometimes.

We as fans don't want to see the same match 3 times...but WWE looks at it as "well we dont really have anyone ready, and the last one did so well...lets do it again." You can't top the street fight that they had last year.

I think my idea sets you up to think you know what you are going to see (exactly what you decribed above) and then turns that on it's head.

TO EVERYONE ELSE - Let me be clear, this idea is more about getting over another wrestler, not turning HHH heel. HHH doesn't have to turn heel, another just needs to credit for ruining something special.

 

[#hamler]

TO EVERYONE ELSE - Let me be clear, this idea is more about getting over another wrestler, not turning HHH heel. HHH doesn't have to turn heel, another just needs to credit for ruining something special.

Here's the problem I have here. In 2002, Brock Lesnar came into the WWE strong with tons of momentum. Even though the streak wasn't as big as it is now, Brock could have certainly ended it to gain some massive heat. Then he left in 2004 to do other things. Who's to say that doesn't happen here with Wrestler X? Unless WWE is able to offer Wrestler X a lucrative contract consisting of a guaranteed decade of reliance to the WWE, it's not worth it. The only guys who will undoubtedly be with the WWE another decade are Randy Orton and John Cena. If the streak is ever going to end, end it with two superstars you know are going to remain with the WWE for a while. Not the one who will take the Brock Lesnar route and leave after accomplishing so much. 20 years of undefeated streak isn't something to experiment with.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

Oh Hamsandwich Man, I am winning you over. You feel the anger and darkness inside you and that embracing it will only make you stronger. Join me my son.

Here's the problem I have here. In 2002, Brock Lesnar came into the WWE strong with tons of momentum. Even though the streak wasn't as big as it is now, Brock could have certainly ended it to gain some massive heat. Then he left in 2004 to do other things. Who's to say that doesn't happen here with Wrestler X?

This could happen with any wrestler at any time. Why would you invest anything in anyone ever? There is always risk, especially in wrestling. A guy can get hurt, decide he doesn't want to be a wrestler or not succeed. You have to take risks in life in order to get a reward.

Unless WWE is able to offer Wrestler X a lucrative contract consisting of a guaranteed decade of reliance to the WWE, it's not worth it. The only guys who will undoubtedly be with the WWE another decade are Randy Orton and John Cena.

How do you know this?

If the streak is ever going to end, end it with two superstars you know are going to remain with the WWE for a while. Not the one who will take the Brock Lesnar route and leave after accomplishing so much. 20 years of undefeated streak isn't something to experiment with.

I don't have a problem with Orton doing this. However, if you are building your biggest heel, that biggest heel is going to have to eventually face your biggest face which leads us back to Cena vs. Orton. I am not sure people are ready for that again. Cena doesn't fit the idea. I made a post once before saying Cena could take on this role but to me it seems like too much. Like I said before, there are two holy grails in wrestling right now: UT's streak and Cena's Boy Scout Badges. I don't think you want to implode both at once. That may be too much of a risk.

If we have to choose from the current roster, I think Barrett is the best candidate.

 

[BlueLightning]

I get the concept. It would be a great way to elevate an up and comer via the Undertaker's streak, while still allowing two veterans to light up the stage at Mania (HHH and Taker). However, as great as it would be for the guy's career, I don't think anyone wants to see Triple H be the guy that ends The Streak. That would just be horrid.

 

[UFOcalling]

This hypothetical idea reminds me quite a bit of how Goldberg's streak ended in WCW (when he lost the Title to Nash at Starrcade). Scott Hall used a taser or something on Goldberg during the match (seemingly without Nash's knowledge), and that led to Nash setting Goldberg up for the Jack-Knife & the win. A couple of weeks later, Hogan came out of "retirement" for a one-on-one match with Nash. That led to the infamous "finger poke of doom", which "The Rise and Fall of WCW" DVD would have you believe was the beginning of the end for WCW.

I'm not saying that ending the Undertaker's streak would "kill" WWE, as Goldberg was in a different position with WCW than Undertaker is currently with the WWE. Obviously WCW could have gone with a different outcome for this storyline (by NOT turning Nash heel, and giving the belt to Hogan). The storyline could have worked, or at least been done better.

This proposed storyline (Undertaker losing at WM to HHH) could work, but as others have already said -- almost every WWE fan would hate it. I understand it would get someone over as a MEGA heel (including HHH), but I just don't see it really working. Undertaker's legacy is too important to have the streak ended that way. As it's already been said: if Undertaker's WM streak is ever ended, it should have a clean finish. Undertaker (and the wrestling business, for that matter) at least deserves that.

 

[VinnieSunshine]

Why shouldn't Taker lose? Why is he not expected to do what other guys before him have done and give up what makes him outstanding?

I don't see how this makes HHH look weak, losing clean makes you look weak not winning dirty. And who cares about HHH looking weak? HHH is a part-time wrestler who is also management. His time appears to be done.

Because of LOY-AL-TY. Loyalty to the WWE and to Vince. Vince's respect for Mark being loyal should be to have Taker retire undefeated...OR it should be up to Mark to do it or not. Mark has nothing left to prove as Undertaker. The man built this character from a wonky "dead" character into a legend.

It makes him look weak because, he couldn't beat Taker at WM 17, couldn't beat him last year, and now is going to beat him due to...interference? How many times did Miz win as champion due to Alex Riley or DQ and everyone said it made Miz look like a weak champion? Whether you add someone else in or not, Triple H WILL GET BOOED.

Yes, Triple H's time is just about up...so, if you're going to end the streak, why let someone who is about to retire do it? It adds NOTHING to the future of the company.

But ending the streak clean gets you some respect but using dirty tactics to end the streak and shocking the audience gets you legit heel heat. There are two Holy Grails in wrestling right now: Cena's Boy Scout badges and UT Streak. The assumption is that either Taker will retire undefeated or put over a young guy. Why not take it a step further and infuriate the fans in order to get a guy major recognition.

Ending the streak clean DOES get you respect, but doing it dirty means you couldn't do it so you had to take the cheap way out to get it done. It devalues the character. Kinda like a heel cashing in the MITB...you didn't win the title clean, you cashed in a contract on a weak wrestler who just went 20 minutes with someone else.

There is no assumption...IT'S FACT. It can ONLY go 2 ways...Undertaker gets beat or wins. Simple. Wrestlemania is all about giving back. They are not going to turn someone heel at WM against Taker. WHEN he does retire, someone like Rhodes or Ziggler should retire him at another PPV. It's also about money to. You basically have WM sold based on the card. Gain some PPV buys by building 1 final match at another PPV with someone young vs Taker. Look towards the future, not the past.

I agree that Taker's streak is bigger than the titles. Exactly why WWE should use it to help others. However beating a guy the UT's age with his wear and tear is not as effective to screwing him over when it comes to getting a reaction from your audience.

A win is a win. However, if you're going up against Undertaker and you beat him...you didn't beat some broken down man that won't quit the business, you beat a legend. You beat a man that has beat more superstars on the grandest stage than ANYONE has. You beat a man that 2 people, 2 legends faced TWICE and never got the job done. THAT gains you respect. You can forever use that in future promos.

BUT...if Taker were to retire 20-0...you could build someone up, and after a few consecutive wins at Mania, you can now bring the in "X has 5 wins at Wrestlemania. Will HE be able to break Undertakers streak".

Your current world champions are so far from the norm that I feel like I am watching the Indies some of the time. You have a returning star trolling the audience. You put Snooki in a WM match. You announced your main event of WM a year ahead of time. Your investing a ton of money in your own TV network.

WWE is not afraid to take chances. They just don't do what we want them to do sometimes.

Snooki in a match IS NOT taking a chance...that's just inserting a celebrity into WM like years before. Jericho doing what he's doing IS NOT taking a chance...that's just him fucking with the audience. Punk and Bryan as champs IS NOT taking a chance. Punk and Bryan built themselves a career on the indie scene, Punk paid his dues with WWE and built his career. He earned his chance. Investing money in your own network IS NOT taking a chance...that's just branching out your empire. The XFL...THAT was a chance. That was investing into a new market with a different idea from the norm.

I think my idea sets you up to think you know what you are going to see (exactly what you decribed above) and then turns that on it's head.

Your idea brings heat on Triple H, not a new wrestler. It doesn't PUSH a new wrestler, it pushes Triple H. Future stories will be focused on Triple H and how he BEAT Taker with someone else's help. You might as well rebuild a new Evolution then because that's how they ran. Triple H couldn't do anything without their help.

TO EVERYONE ELSE - Let me be clear, this idea is more about getting over another wrestler, not turning HHH heel. HHH doesn't have to turn heel, another just needs to credit for ruining something special.

See above. ALL of the above.

 

[#hamler]

Oh Hamsandwich Man, I am winning you over. You feel the anger and darkness inside you and that embracing it will only make you stronger. Join me my son.

You've won me over a long time ago.

This could happen with any wrestler at any time. Why would you invest anything in anyone ever? There is always risk, especially in wrestling. A guy can get hurt, decide he doesn't want to be a wrestler or not succeed.

No. Pushing someone and ending The Undertaker's streak are two different things. Why push wrestler X, have him end The Undertaker's streak only to have him leave? Ending The Undertaker's streak is arguably the single biggest accomplishment in wrestling. It's slightly different handing someone the title only to walk out a couple months later. The Undertaker's streak will not be done again. 20 years is alot of time to invest in a single project. Why would they risk having someone walk out of their company saying the ending the streak? 20 years of investment, gone. Simply gone. That's not the same as winning the title or even being pushed. Brock Lesnar was even pushed for two years and two years only- the WWE easily recovered.

You have to take risks in life in order to get a reward.

It isn't worth the risk.

How do you know this?

I don't have a source and I don't care enough to look for one. But I remember reading Orton had a WWE contract that extends to 2018 or something like that. Given their position in the WWE, the fact that they're both treated well within the company, it’s safe to bet they will be there for a long time. It isn't fact, but a pretty safe bet.

I don't have a problem with Orton doing this. However, if you are building your biggest heel, that biggest heel is going to have to eventually face your biggest face which leads us back to Cena vs. Orton. I am not sure people are ready for that again. Cena doesn't fit the idea. I made a post once before saying Cena could take on this role but to me it seems like too much. Like I said before, there are two holy grails in wrestling right now: UT's streak and Cena's Boy Scout Badges. I don't think you want to implode both at once. That may be too much of a risk. If we have to choose from the current roster, I think Barrett is the best candidate.

I don't think it needs to end. Barrett has already shown us that he isn't capable of maintaining consistent heat. Remember Nexus? It isn't worth experimenting with something the WWE has invested so many years in. I don't have a problem with fantasy booking, but this is just too much of a risk; a risk that might or might not go over well. The fact that there is even the slightest chance of this not going over well makes it not worth the risk.

 

[TheMizMark]

This is how I feel about 'Taker's streak and it being ended:

If Undertaker's streak is to be ended, I think it needs to mean something for the future of the company. What does Triple H beating Undertaker do for anyone? As far as I'm concerned, it would mean absolutely nothing. Ending the streak with someone who is on the verge of retirement would be awful.

The guy who would be the one to take out 'Taker should be someone who will remain in the company for the next 10 years, who they completely feel could carry the company into the future. It would be the ultimate, all-time rub in the history of wrestling. That person would forever been known as the person that ended 'Taker's streak, but I don't know if there's anyone in the company that could be "that" guy, so I don't think the streak should be ended. That's just my opinion.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

This is how I feel about 'Taker's streak and it being ended:

If Undertaker's streak is to be ended, I think it needs to mean something for the future of the company. What does Triple H beating Undertaker do for anyone? As far as I'm concerned, it would mean absolutely nothing. Ending the streak with someone who is on the verge of retirement would be awful.

For the millionth time, beating an old UT at WM doesn't do much for anyone anymore. WWE has created a mindset that HHH and UT are going to go out there and have the same match as last year with UT coming out on top (similar to his second match with Michaels). While beating the UT doesn't do much anymore, screwing him is a different story. It would create so much heat for a guy (Wrestler X) that audiences would erupt with hatred for years to come. Whether or not HHH turns out to be involved is just a side story.

The guy who would be the one to take out 'Taker should be someone who will remain in the company for the next 10 years, who they completely feel could carry the company into the future. It would be the ultimate, all-time rub in the history of wrestling. That person would forever been known as the person that ended 'Taker's streak, but I don't know if there's anyone in the company that could be "that" guy, so I don't think the streak should be ended. That's just my opinion.

Someone has to be the guy because having UT leave with the streak intact does nothing for the future except maybe sell a few more DVDs.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

You've won me over a long time ago.

No. Pushing someone and ending The Undertaker's streak are two different things. Why push wrestler X, have him end The Undertaker's streak only to have him leave? Ending The Undertaker's streak is arguably the single biggest accomplishment in wrestling. It's slightly different handing someone the title only to walk out a couple months later. The Undertaker's streak will not be done again. 20 years is alot of time to invest in a single project. Why would they risk having someone walk out of their company saying the ending the streak? 20 years of investment, gone. Simply gone. That's not the same as winning the title or even being pushed. Brock Lesnar was even pushed for two years and two years only- the WWE easily recovered.

It isn't worth the risk.

I don't have a source and I don't care enough to look for one. But I remember reading Orton had a WWE contract that extends to 2018 or something like that. Given their position in the WWE, the fact that they're both treated well within the company, it’s safe to bet they will be there for a long time. It isn't fact, but a pretty safe bet.

I don't think it needs to end. Barrett has already shown us that he isn't capable of maintaining consistent heat. Remember Nexus? It isn't worth experimenting with something the WWE has invested so many years in. I don't have a problem with fantasy booking, but this is just too much of a risk; a risk that might or might not go over well. The fact that there is even the slightest chance of this not going over well makes it not worth the risk.

One last question, other than selling some more DVDs and giving UT something to tell his grandcholdren about what does UT retiring with the streak intact do for the future of the WWE?

 

[George Steele's Barber]

Because of LOY-AL-TY. Loyalty to the WWE and to Vince. Vince's respect for Mark being loyal should be to have Taker retire undefeated...OR it should be up to Mark to do it or not. Mark has nothing left to prove as Undertaker. The man built this character from a wonky "dead" character into a legend.

LOY-AL-TY my ass. Vince plucked Calloway from WCW and gave him one of the riskiest and best gimmicks of all time. Vince continued to pay Calloway very well, let him work a lighter schedule and has continued to book him WM victories. Calloway owes Vince as more than Vince owes Calloway.

It makes him look weak because, he couldn't beat Taker at WM 17, couldn't beat him last year, and now is going to beat him due to...interference? How many times did Miz win as champion due to Alex Riley or DQ and everyone said it made Miz look like a weak champion? Whether you add someone else in or not, Triple H WILL GET BOOED.

Don't you listen to Cena? Getting Booed is fine. Pro Wrestling is all about getting an emotional response from the audience. Don't worry about HHH looking weak, he's become a parttimers and he has the title reigns to argue that he is not weak. His legacy will be fine.

Yes, Triple H's time is just about up...so, if you're going to end the streak, why let someone who is about to retire do it? It adds NOTHING to the future of the company

.

I am suggesting that the outside interference ends the streak (brass knuckles, lead pipe, fireball). Just cause HHH gets the pin doesn't mean he is responsible for ending the streak in the fan's minds, it only means he ended it on paper.

Ending the streak clean DOES get you respect, but doing it dirty means you couldn't do it so you had to take the cheap way out to get it done. It devalues the character. Kinda like a heel cashing in the MITB...you didn't win the title clean, you cashed in a contract on a weak wrestler who just went 20 minutes with someone else.

This isn't a real sport, it is pro wrestling, sports entertainment. Doing things cheaply is part of the story and part of why fans are drawn in. I am looking to devalue a character, to the point that he is universally hated and people will shell out their hard earned money to see that person get their head beat in.

There is no assumption...IT'S FACT. It can ONLY go 2 ways...Undertaker gets beat or wins. Simple. Wrestlemania is all about giving back. They are not going to turn someone heel at WM against Taker. WHEN he does retire, someone like Rhodes or Ziggler should retire him at another PPV. It's also about money to. You basically have WM sold based on the card. Gain some PPV buys by building 1 final match at another PPV with someone young vs Taker. Look towards the future, not the past.

Wrestler X can already be a heel. I recommend Barrett to do the job. There is still the history of Barrett helping to bury the UT.

I like the idea of having his retirement match as a selling point of another card, I don't know what it has to do with my idea but I like it.

A win is a win. However, if you're going up against Undertaker and you beat him...you didn't beat some broken down man that won't quit the business, you beat a legend. You beat a man that has beat more superstars on the grandest stage than ANYONE has. You beat a man that 2 people, 2 legends faced TWICE and never got the job done. THAT gains you respect. You can forever use that in future promos.

Hate to break it to you but he is old and battered.

BUT...if Taker were to retire 20-0...you could build someone up, and after a few consecutive wins at Mania, you can now bring the in "X has 5 wins at Wrestlemania. Will HE be able to break Undertakers streak".

You can do that at 20 straight wins or 19.

Snooki in a match IS NOT taking a chance...that's just inserting a celebrity into WM like years before. Jericho doing what he's doing IS NOT taking a chance...that's just him fucking with the audience. Punk and Bryan as champs IS NOT taking a chance. Punk and Bryan built themselves a career on the indie scene, Punk paid his dues with WWE and built his career. He earned his chance. Investing money in your own network IS NOT taking a chance...that's just branching out your empire. The XFL...THAT was a chance. That was investing into a new market with a different idea from the norm.

We can agree to disagree but answer this question, what does UT retiring with the streak intact really do for the future?

Your idea brings heat on Triple H, not a new wrestler. It doesn't PUSH a new wrestler, it pushes Triple H. Future stories will be focused on Triple H and how he BEAT Taker with someone else's help. You might as well rebuild a new Evolution then because that's how they ran. Triple H couldn't do anything without their help.

This is your assumption of the aftermath not my story. My story has the mystery surrounding what HHH knew and Wrestler X being the biggest lowlife heel ever.

 

[#hamler]

One last question, other than selling some more DVDs and giving UT something to tell his grandcholdren about what does UT retiring with the streak intact do for the future of the WWE?

You're absolutely right about that. The Undertaker retiring with the streak really does nothing for the WWE. But what's to gain if Wrestler X jumps and leaves within a couple of years? He already ended the streak, what's the point in trying anymore? Wrestler X has accomplished something far more important than each and every single Superstar on the roster. No ones going to break the streak again. That, is Wrestler X's biggest accomplishment. Undertaker retiring with the streak intact leaves doors open for so many options. Triple H certainly doesn't need it. Every other superstar on the roster isn't worthy of ending the streak. I love the WWE, I really do. But what are the chances that the will fuck up the follow up?

Look, you may not agree, but The Streak has been Undertaker's lifeline throughout his time in the WWE. There's is absolutely no question The Undertaker would have retired a long time ago if the streak wasn't there. 19-1 sounds horrible. 20-0 sounds about right. To have The Undertaker lose at Wrestlemania, you're tarnishing one of the WWE's greatest legacies. Your idea about Triple H and Wrestler X is a little out there for me to accept. Personally, I just can't see anyone breaking the streak in such a dirty but still respectful way.

Here's an idea: A friend of mine had an idea recently. Add a stipulation where The Undertaker must retire if he wins at Wrestlemania this year. This, opens up several questions like what does the streak mean to the Undertaker and does his career mean more? I just see no reason to end it.

EDIT- what's the harm in someone retiring the Undertaker at, say, Survivor Series where the Undertaker made his debut?

 

[gurvinder372]

I think the fear of that wrestler X leaving WWE after defeating Taker in WM ending his streak, could be one hell of a story.

Imagine that wrestler X telling WWE universe that there is nothing more to achieve in WWE so he would like to look for new opportunities and Vince dropping on his knees begging that fellow to not to join any other professional wrestling promotion. Which will make room for a new Hero to arise and save 'WWE's ultimate legacy'. Or, it could lead to Vince praying for Taker return in his phenom avatar to save his own legacy from going out of WWE.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

EDIT- what's the harm in someone retiring the Undertaker at, say, Survivor Series where the Undertaker made his debut?

As long as he is willing to do it, I think it is a great selling point for another card. I don't think a loss at WM would have to mean he retires unless that is what he wants. I would love to see him feud with Wrestler X and put him over in the end.

 

[BizzarroNavarro]

I like that retirement angle you said there hamily guy, its a pretty cool twist. And yeah like you said too about the younger guy beating taker thats always been my big thought too and concern , I think thats why its so hard to choose someone cause you never know if they did give that honor to some young up and comer whos to know if he wont just fizzle out after a year or so or have a falling out with wwe and end up goin somewhere else, thats just so risky it seems. Now I dont really know if id want Taker to lose the streak or not, I mean it is his decision and who knows if he wants it to end or not. But I know im probably in a huge minority here but id be open to HHH ending the streak, cause I think you do get someone I think the wwe can trust and wont turn around and leave to another company. Also too I think it really does create a new icon out of HHH and I think it kinda gives birth to a new Mr. Mcmahon character that HHH can become and be just an inactive wrestler and on screen but that vile evil ceo kinda character that everyone will hate just like they did with Mcmahon after he screwed bret.