Did Brock Lesnar's Departure aid him in Ending the Streak 10 years later?

[fouldsy91]

For people who don't understand what I mean, I will explain.

Ten years ago, Lesnar left the WWE which was big at the time as he had been booked heavily beating The Rock, The Undertaker, Kurt Angle, Big Show etc in his first year with the company, they basically pushed him to the moon.

Now my theory is, since Brock left all those years ago, the WWE has been very cautious with booking talent too quickly incase something similar happens. There is no way to look to the future, and if Roman Reigns beat The Undertaker (a popular choice I've seen to have end the streak) he could have possibly have done a Lesnar and left the company.

So my question is, did Lesnar leaving cause this with no up and comers beating The Undertaker? I mean they had plenty of chances to end it, Orton could have ended it in 2005, Batista a lot of people thought would end it in 2007 etc. What do you think?

 

[Eddie Menuek]

I'm not sure if the Brock Lesnar situation specifically put off WWE from allowing a younger guy to end The Streak. I mean, he's not the only 'prodigy' who has been heavily pushed only to not be with the company shortly after. He's a notable example because nobody has been thrusted into the main event quite that quickly since Lesnar did it, but there have been other 'next big things' since whose careers have panned out quite disastrously in comparison to Lesnar's.

I never thought that The Streak would end but giving a younger up-and-comer that victory always seemed like a high risk strategy. My thinking has always been that if a younger wrestler, like a Roman Reigns, is going to make it, then he'll make it with or without a sole victory over The Undertaker. On the flipside, giving a young talent that sort of win puts even more pressure on him to become a mega star, and if he doesn't make it then you're looking at the single highest profile flop in wrestling history. Nobody wants that sort of tag.

 

[Kris Benwa]

I'm of the belief that if Lesnar hadn't left he would have ended up beating the streak anyway. I would have liked to seen it remain intact or lose it to someone that isn't Orton but Lesnar ended in this timeline and I think if in the alternate timeline where he doesn't leave he would have ended it a few years down the line. What I've heard is that Taker has wanted Lesnar to end it for a long time. I assume that means Lesnar was his first choice but he offered to others (Oton, Angle, etc) and if you remember Taker has never beaten Lesnar in a match. I think in the end it wouldn't matter because if Lesnar left, came back, and ended the streak he surely would have ended it if he would have stayed. So yes I do think Lesnar leaving caused WWE to avoid giving the honor of ending the streak to a young talent because they were afraid it would happen again. With that being said, I think had Lesnar not left he would have ended the streak anyway just probably a lot sooner than 10 years later.

 

[Pérez84]

The MMA background gives Lesnar legitimacy to do it, at least in Taker's eyes, who is the person which could make the decision about who has to end the streak. But in the other hand, with or without MMA background, Lesnar is one of the most legit monsters in the WWE, and probably he'd have ended the streak sooner if he'd have stayed in the WWE.

In fact Lesnar had one advantage (MMA accomplishments) and one disadvantage (the part-timer condition) to be booked to end the streak. Finally he was booked to do it anyway.

So his 8 year-break didn't really help him in the streak case. At least didn't prevent him to end the streak either.

 

[Jericho91]

So my question is, did Lesnar leaving cause this with no up and comers beating The Undertaker? I mean they had plenty of chances to end it, Orton could have ended it in 2005, Batista a lot of people thought would end it in 2007 etc. What do you think?

Absolutely not. Contrary to popular belief, the Undertaker's Streak ending was his personal calling. Not Vince McMahon whether he owned the company or not. Incase you didn't know, Kurt Angle was personally handpicked by The Undertaker to end the streak. Mind you, this was after Brock Lesnar departed from the WWE. The only reason it didn't happen was because Kurt Angle refused to be the guy to do it.

Fast-Forward to 2010 The Undertaker shows up in an MMA Event only to confront Brock Lesnar. That in itself speaks enough volumes and is a clear indication that he chose Brock Lesnar to end his streak. I myself as a Brock Lesnar fan could tell there's no way such a moment would happen in MMA if it wasn't for Undertaker choosing Brock to end his streak. There'd be no reason for him to give Brock that much attention especially in a Non-Related WWE event.