*MERGED* Undertaker's POTENTIAL Wrestlemania Opponents Thread

[nightmare]

not a great idea.

hhh will ultimately face sheamus @ mania & squash him. why on earth would he go after taker & just forget sheamus? hello, he took the man out & is now running around calling himself 'the king'. enter hhh- sheamus is screwed like a sheep in new zealand.

barrett has ties to nexus, which helped kane take the undertaker out. so once again, returning to destroy what took you out of action. kane is gonna be dealt with & barrett\nexus will be next, setting up for mania. gives taker revenge without having to face kane at mania again & further dragging out the fight.

makes more sense to fight wade instead of trying to smush a storyline together & hashing out the 'redemption for hbk' thing. at this point it would make shawn look weak by not being able to get the job done & have hhh run to save the day. hunter fought him at mania already & that was 10 yrs ago when both were in fantastic shape.

 

[The HEEL JuiceLee]

i think the reason Barrett was givin another stable so quick is for them to dominate the smackdown scene oN SmackDown until mania where if Taker faces Barrett at wrestlemaniA he will have the odds against him.Vince realized Barrett was not big on his own so he created "The Core" Stable.Maybe HHH was an idea until Vinny thought of letting Barrett head another stable

!!just 1 guys opinion!!

 

[The Idiot]

not a great idea.

hhh will ultimately face sheamus @ mania & squash him. why on earth would he go after taker & just forget sheamus? hello, he took the man out & is now running around calling himself 'the king'. enter hhh- sheamus is screwed like a sheep in new zealand.

barrett has ties to nexus, which helped kane take the undertaker out. so once again, returning to destroy what took you out of action. kane is gonna be dealt with & barrett\nexus will be next, setting up for mania. gives taker revenge without having to face kane at mania again & further dragging out the fight.

makes more sense to fight wade instead of trying to smush a storyline together & hashing out the 'redemption for hbk' thing. at this point it would make shawn look weak by not being able to get the job done & have hhh run to save the day. hunter fought him at mania already & that was 10 yrs ago when both were in fantastic shape.

HHH vs Taker isn't a great idea, but having HHH vs. Shameus 2 IS? We saw that last year.

If done right...this could be huge. You don't want some guy the WWE fans don't ever think will win. That's what made the last couple years interesting, because we all thought HBK had a chance. Morrison, Shameus and Barrett would be horrible choices. Cena? Why? He has his hands full with the New Nexus and is in a fantastic storyline with CM Punk.

The only idea I don't like is having HBK ref the match, or anywhere near ringside for that matter. They can build this match with HHH wanting revenge for what Taker did to Michaels...but I don't see the need for him to get involved. He's retired.

Another plus is we all know these two can put on a great match. It's Wrestlemania...now's the time to put every ounce of energy you've got into putting on a solid show. We all saw what happened between these two at WM 17. Granted...it's 9 years later and neither guy is the same, but you can bet your ass it'll be good.

 

[rkonextphenom]

not a terrible idea but a bad one nonetheless, barrett vs taker makes sense becuase oh how the nexus helped out kane to bury taker alive. HHH vs taker make no sense and th storyline u described is pointless taking revenge for shawn michales when everyone warned him about challenging taker to a second match??? eh sounds corny
hhh vs sheamus is gonna happen and its set perfectly with sheamus being kor!
i predict taker vs barrett even though it lacks the luster of hbk vs taker
19-0 mos def

 

[Mojorisen]

I like Undertaker v Sheamus or v HHH..Those are interesting matches to me.. That speaks a lot for Sheamus as he has come far very quickly... They better come up with something, because if the Miz is headlining Mania, Its hard for old school fans like myself to fork over $60.00 bux to see that guy...

 

[kozzomozzo]

I thought this about a month ago for a feel noth these guys are set to retire. I also said that it barrett would win the rumble. Thnk about it with the early plans posted on this site cena miz doesn't and orton punk so whos left to win the rumble. Another thing is wouldn't it also make sense if Jericho was gonna be back for mania that he takes out orton at the rumble?.

 

[a member of wwe universe]

HHH does sound good in context from a revenging storyline and match quality perspective. However, its not going to happen since hhh is schduled to face shamemus anyway. Besides a hhh vs taker is not going to that unique atmosphere anyway just because two top star faces each other. They fought one on one already and certainly it is predictable hhh aint gonna be victorious.

Barrette should not even be mentioned to face taker at mania in the first place. HBK set the standard, period. Not ziggler, swagger, kofi, del rio, morrison nor any midcarder. If hbk loses twice in a row to taker than how would i be able to convince myself a midcarder cant ruin the streak.

The only one who is capable to create the unique atmosphere is Cena. The golden boy vs the phenome with the streak. Besides the triple threat at mania 24, cena never lost one on one.

 

[Jacob]

HHH vs Taker isn't a great idea, but having HHH vs. Shameus 2 IS? We saw that last year.

If done right...this could be huge. You don't want some guy the WWE fans don't ever think will win. That's what made the last couple years interesting, because we all thought HBK had a chance. Morrison, Shameus and Barrett would be horrible choices. Cena? Why? He has his hands full with the New Nexus and is in a fantastic storyline with CM Punk.

The only idea I don't like is having HBK ref the match, or anywhere near ringside for that matter. They can build this match with HHH wanting revenge for what Taker did to Michaels...but I don't see the need for him to get involved. He's retired.

Another plus is we all know these two can put on a great match. It's Wrestlemania...now's the time to put every ounce of energy you've got into putting on a solid show. We all saw what happened between these two at WM 17. Granted...it's 9 years later and neither guy is the same, but you can bet your ass it'll be good.

Whoa what a interesting thread first of all. Second, are you serious??? He just took him out a while. Just forget about that? That is plain idiotic! Maybe a match between Barrett would be horrible which I actually agree on but Triple H thee game is just going to forget about Sheamus I don't think so!!!!

 

[hellod245]

What??? You dont want to see HHH vs Taker because it happened in 2001 10 years back???? But you guys are ready to see HHH vs Sheamus that just happened last year?? WOW how hypocrate is that?? You people want to see Morrisson vs Undertaker just because morrison looks like and wrestle like HBK?? What accomplishment Morrison have as a single wrestler. He never won any match at Mania. Hell he never faced anybody one on one at Mania. He is good I agree but is he ready to go against Undertaker at Mania , I dont think so. As someone above said that HBK has set the standard so chosing Wade Barret, Morrison or Debiase would be a slapn on Shawn Micheals face.I agree that Cena should be the ultimate choice for Taker. Cena is the biggest opponent left for Undertaker but as we see the things looks like Cena will go against Miz. So who left to face Taker at Mania. 2nd biggest supertsar as per accomplishments and career wise after Cena is HHH and it makes perfect sense for him to challange Taker and do something what his friend was not able to do in 2 attempts. That will help for even HBk's fans to get involved emotionally. Plus HHH has far better Mic skills than Morrison, Barrett and Sheamus and can easily cut some classic promos on their match while staying a face.

 

[Jacob]

I really believe WWE is in a tough position right now. The aren't even letting ythre Phenom pick his opponet which after his career is pretty selfish and dumb. I mean Taker could definatly put on a great match with Barrett. Hell he could even make Goldust look like Cena.. What about a match with Orton or Maybe A old legend or along those lines. Him having a match with a mid-carder just wouldn't be right. A match with Kane would be stella at best unless they are in their old attire with Masked Kane and purple boots taker. Kane possible gets "killed" Wink Wink by A top heel and Taker reunites with Old Kane and once again kill everyone in their way. And if Taker doesn't decide to put the boots away have his schedule shotened to keep him fresh.

 

[UltimateHitman]

I just wanted to put my 2 cents in on the Wade Barrett side of this discussion. If anybody should be Taker's next opponent it should be him. Why? Because of the history, plain and simple. Why does a guy come back after he's taken out? To get revenge. The stories are already in place for this one, as well as HHH/Sheamus.

Let's just look at the obvious. Why else would they have Barrett leading another stable if it wasn't to build him up for Taker and Mania? Everybody keeps saying that Barrett vs. Taker wouldn't be believable. Let's think about that for a second.

Would you have thought Barrett, fresh in his new role as Nexus leader when they debuted, would be able to face Cena believably? Probably not. He was built up over time to be a believable opponent, and it worked immensely. Everybody was anticipating his beatdown courtesy of Cena. He has this new stable so there's time for them to run roughshod over Smackdown and build up a legitimate match.

Could Barrett show himself believable enough to face Taker over time? Sure he could. And with a new stable, it makes it that much more believable because you have no idea if his guys are going to interfere and cause an underhanded Barrett victory or not. You also, after the types of things a "Nexus" does week in and week out, wouldn't even care when Taker got hold of him as long as Barrett got a beatdown, which is the feeling it's supposed to invoke. He became such a hated heel on Raw, it worked once. I don't see any reason it wouldn't work out again on Smackdown.

On a final side note, does it really matter who Taker's opponent is anyway? I mean, we all know the streak won't end so it's kind of a moot point. As long as they build Barrett up against Taker like they did against Cena, people would be trying to climb the sides of the arena to watch Taker kick the shit out of him. Figuratively speaking, of course...

 

[The Ace of Knaves]

I dont post much threads or replies here unless some really interesting topic provoke my thoughts to be shared. On another wrestling website i just found out that plans for Undertaker's opponent at wrestlemania are going to change in near future. Vince Mcmahon now feels that Wade Barret is not a good choice for being Undertaker's opponent are WM(which I feel is right). Now the opponent being discussed in meeting is HHH(yes, triple H). I surely feel that this is the right match up and makes sense as well. Nothing against wade barret he is good but he is not better that Shawn Micheals. After 2 classic matches against Shawn Micheals at WM people have really raised their expectations from Undertaker's match at WM. I just think wade barrent wont be able to create much interest for the match. Barret has not proved anything in the past. He was never able to beat Cena in one one match. If barret had beat Cena clean in one one match I would definately buy him as a contender to end taker's streak, but if you look at him now he is not worthy enough to be there. HHH's match against Taker makes sense. Undertaker retired HBK, HHH's best friend. Storyline is ready for them. HHH can easily say that he wants to take revenge of what Taker did to his best friend and wants to end Undertaker's streak at Mania and want to pay tribute to his friend. He does not really need to turn heel in the process to create interest. He can be a babyface and fight for his friend's career loss. Everybody loves HBK and we all know that they are best pals in real life so definately people will buy this storyline. With HBK being inducted in Hall of fame this year we know that he will be there in Atlanta. WWE can easily add him in the match as a guest refree or if he does not want that he can simply be in the attandance sittinng ther and cheering for him. With HHH's internal connections with the company we will definately take him as a serious threat to the Undertaker's streak. I was thinking of that idea from few months and I think it will be the right follow up(other than Taker vs Cena) after 2 classic taker's matches at WM 25 and WM 26. Your thoughts?

Personally, I'm no fan of rematches because they will add zero credibility to The Streak and it's hard to outdo the first match (like what happened to Kane and HBK). But this match may be the huge draw WWE need for Wrestlemania 27, seeing how they still got like 40,000 tickets available less than 3 months into the event...which pretty much tells us Taker vs Wade & Miz vs Cena aren't doing much of a draw (no surprise).

And be it another Streak vs Career or not, although I hope it is, if WWE play their card right, this match could be build like Undertaker vs Shawn Michaels at Wrestlemania 25 where Taker & HBK first met again after 11 years. HHH is a legend now unlike 10 years ago, so with the right build up this can be another once in a lifetime experience IMO. And HHH is in a dire need of another Wrestlemania classic. I mean come on, the last time he got a WM classic was at WM 20. That was ages ago when dinosaurs were still roaming around.

This possible match is definitely far far far far far better than lame possible matches like Taker vs Wade or Taker vs Jackson. I don't hate it.

If this match is done right, it can even rival any of The Undertaker's two Wrestlemania matches with Shawn Michaels. Mark my words.

 

[The Eighties]

I suggested Triple H a few pages back, I think the angle is built in with the way Taker retired HBK and it being the 10 year anniversary of their first Mania match.

There's no reason Taker can't beat Barret and Triple H beat Sheamus at the EC PPV and then move on to each other for Wrestlemania, that's as much build as the first Mania match between HBK & Taker had.

 

[The Ace of Knaves]

I suggested Triple H a few pages back, I think the angle is built in with the way Taker retired HBK and it being the 10 year anniversary of their first Mania match.

There's no reason Taker can't beat Barret and Triple H beat Sheamus at the EC PPV and then move on to each other for Wrestlemania, that's as much build as the first Mania match between HBK & Taker had.

Pronto, my man. But if we're going to see some closure at EC, it's more than likely we're going to see Taker/Kane & HHH/Sheamus than Taker/Wade & HHH/Gaymus. I think the feud with Wade will be delayed until after Wrestlemania (as it should be).

With the right build up, Taker vs HHH can definitely rival Taker vs HBK as another once in a lifetime match.

 

[HBKistheHOF]

If the rumors are true, why would taker pick Barrett as his wrestlemania opponent?? With all the guys taker hasnt face at mania (ex. stone cold, rock, cena, goldberg, sting, punk, lesnar, jericho, etc. just to name a few) why would taker or whoever pick a mid-carder with not much reputation and only his first wrestlemania on the horizon to face?? Does anyone actually expect Barrett to win and end the streak?? NO! i kinda liked the idea about the whole Corre facing him, cause that would cause more a threat, but if taker can beat A-Train and Big Show in his "American Badasss" persona then why would adding slater and gabriel make a difference?! And Why has on one thought about Kane vs Taker 3 for the world title at mania?? Kane buried Taker alive, in dont think a feud like that can just end by eliminating kane from the rumble or chamber. Also Ive wanted to see Taker vs HHH for a world title for the last several years, but I think the simple fact is Taker needs a new BUT established opponent, ESPECIALLY if these are gonna be his last 2 manias. personally i think he should face jericho this year and cena next years to finish off the streak.

 

[TakerDakSide]

If the rumors are true, why would taker pick Barrett as his wrestlemania opponent?? With all the guys taker hasnt face at mania (ex. stone cold, rock, cena, goldberg, sting, punk, lesnar, jericho, etc. just to name a few) why would taker or whoever pick a mid-carder with not much reputation and only his first wrestlemania on the horizon to face?? Does anyone actually expect Barrett to win and end the streak?? NO! i kinda liked the idea about the whole Corre facing him, cause that would cause more a threat, but if taker can beat A-Train and Big Show in his "American Badasss" persona then why would adding slater and gabriel make a difference?! And Why has on one thought about Kane vs Taker 3 for the world title at mania?? Kane buried Taker alive, in dont think a feud like that can just end by eliminating kane from the rumble or chamber. Also Ive wanted to see Taker vs HHH for a world title for the last several years, but I think the simple fact is Taker needs a new BUT established opponent, ESPECIALLY if these are gonna be his last 2 manias. personally i think he should face jericho this year and cena next years to finish off the streak.

1. For one having another Brother vs Brother feud at one more Wrestlemania would be as annoying as hell. As someone mentioned a few posts ago the fans wouldn't really be into it considering the feud from last year wasn't as popular as their during the Attitude era so fans won't ride along with it. Ya' Feel Me

2. True he should've been facing Superstars such as Cena, Jericho etc. However we should thank Mr. McMahon for holding this back from us with wasteful giants such Big Slow, Mark Henry, King Kong Bundy etc. None of them even matched the level Undertaker did. As I mentioned before when they did have the time the should have made a Undertaker vs Kurt Angle in '06.

 

[osborne79]

so i was just reading another thread with the issue of does the undertaker still have enough in him to wrestle the main event of wrestlemania against wade barret, and i thought since taker may not be 100% healed he could still have a match in a triple threat which is less demanding on body and can give him rest during the match and allow him to pull off some high spots as well,
so my questions are
would you like to see undertaker in a triple threat match at wrestlemania?
who would you put in it?

for me the logic would be to put wade barret and kane in it , but then again kane is definately not going within a mile of the main event, so i would think they could book an undertaker vs wade barret vs john cena for wrestlemanias main event

they could start it off with cena challenging taker for streak at mania, with taker denying and wanting revenge against barret for burying him alive, thus forcing cena to go heel and attacking taker after he beats down barret leading to a triple threat match, possibly for the world title if barret wins it at the elimination chamber

 

[mayankeagle]

I'm sorry I disagree. Even if Taker is not a 100%, he can still put a splendid match at Mania because he reserves everything in him for Mania and gives it his all - he did the same last year with HBK at Mania 26, in which both men were not 100%. So I don't wanna see him in a triple threat.

Secondly, if the WWE has the balls to book a blockbuster match as big as Taker vs cena at Mania, which will be the biggest match possible as of now looking at the current roster, then it would be a waste to throw a nobody like Wade Barrett in between them and reduce the credibility of the big match. Taker vs cena singles' match will be much bigger and will draw a lot.

 

[Tugboat77]

If he's not 100%, I'd rather him not be at Wrestlemania at all. At least not in a match. UNLESS they are going to end the "streak". I personally think it would suck seeing him continue the streak and defeat another wrestler who is deserving of a push when we all know he isn't 100%. That would be nothing but backstage politics and, in my opinion at least, would taint the infamous streak.

If the Undertaker's streak didn't exist, this wouldn't be an issue at all for me. Like the poster above stated, he can still have an awesome match when he isn't 100%.

 

[osborne79]

but what if in this triple threat taker did not get pinned and cena pinned barret leading to a match at next years mania between cena and taker

 

[The Suplexer Perfecter]

to the guy who said taker should never be beat i agree with you on some but him never to lose at mania isnt one them i agree it shouldnt be a new guy who might get fired. but we all know taker is wrestling less and less every year and he barely makes it to mania, so why shouldnt someone else get the push of their career by ending the streak.

im sorry but i like taker as a wrestler but the guy rarely does more than 2 months a year of wrestling now i dont see why he should still get to continue his streak we all know he is going into the hall of fame nothing will sop that. but their are alot of people who can legitimately end his streak that can do great for wwe such as 1 chris jericho, 2 edge, 3 christian, 4 randy orton, 5 the miz , 6 big show. and alot more who deserve it more than the undertaker. dont get me wrong he is geat but wwe is gonna have to decide whts gonna happen in about 3 years whn undertaker will only be able to wrestle at mania and i wont want to see him put down more deserving wrestlers.

Why shouldn't they? Because it doesn't matter, and the Streak is a draw for wrestlemania. As I said before, you can still push the guy even by losing to Undertaker. Look at Orton. And if it's a good match, who the hell cares? He doesn't just squash the guy anyway either.

Who is "deserving" in the internet's eyes does NOT matter. And what do you mean by "deserving"? Deserving of a win at the event?

The Streak is an attraction, as it should be until he stops wrestling.

 

[osborne79]

the reason i posted this thread was not to argue about if taker should lose the streak as that is purely up to him and vince , but i was reading mick foleys book and when he was physically drained at a summerslam they changed it to a triple threat and it turned out to be one of his best matches as he could have breaks during the match and then come in with a high spot for the crowd

 

[The Suplexer Perfecter]

If he's not 100%, I'd rather him not be at Wrestlemania at all. At least not in a match. UNLESS they are going to end the "streak". I personally think it would suck seeing him continue the streak and defeat another wrestler who is deserving of a push when we all know he isn't 100%. That would be nothing but backstage politics and, in my opinion at least, would taint the infamous streak.

If the Undertaker's streak didn't exist, this wouldn't be an issue at all for me. Like the poster above stated, he can still have an awesome match when he isn't 100%.

He wasn't 100% last year or the year before either. And so what if he wins and isn't 100%? It's FAKE remember? It's a show. Plenty of other wrestlers have beaten others when being injured to a degree in real life. So what?

Deserving of a push doesn't mean they have to beat Taker at Mania. Orton lost to Taker at Mania and was he thus buried? No he was made to look like he belonged in the ring with him.

And you don't want someone who is "up and coming" to beat him. What if WWE gets rid of him? That would be pointless.

No one EVER should beat Undertaker at wrestlemania.

 

[Cookie14]

How many more 'Lets turn Cena heel to challenge the Streak' threads am I going to see on here???

Cena has more than enough to do building up to WM fighting Punk and the rest of Nexus to even consider looking at Taker.

If Taker is fit for Mania then it should just be in a 1-1 match, otherwise he could technically lose the streak by not getting pinned if one of his opponents defeated the other

 

[barclayteo]

to the guy who said taker should never be beat i agree with you on some but him never to lose at mania isnt one them i agree it shouldnt be a new guy who might get fired. but we all know taker is wrestling less and less every year and he barely makes it to mania, so why shouldnt someone else get the push of their career by ending the streak.

im sorry but i like taker as a wrestler but the guy rarely does more than 2 months a year of wrestling now i dont see why he should still get to continue his streak we all know he is going into the hall of fame nothing will sop that. but their are alot of people who can legitimately end his streak that can do great for wwe such as 1 chris jericho, 2 edge, 3 christian, 4 randy orton, 5 the miz , 6 big show. and alot more who deserve it more than the undertaker. dont get me wrong he is geat but wwe is gonna have to decide whts gonna happen in about 3 years whn undertaker will only be able to wrestle at mania and i wont want to see him put down more deserving wrestlers.