Saving Undertaker's Legacy?

[khrissr10]

I can't seem to find any proper logic on how WWE do things in the last few years.

They have messed up many careers in the span of 4 years. This year, I can definitely say that Undertaker's Legacy will be destroyed.

Undertaker vs. Brock Lesnar

being a fan of those guys, I know their history. Undertaker never defeated Brock Lesnar in a one on one match but he did pinned him twice in 2003 ina Triple Threat Match with Big Show and a handicap match against Lesnar and Big Show. Brock Lesnar never defeated Undertaker in a clean match until Wrestlemania 30.

Now, Brock is considered the most dominant force in the WWE because he is the guy who broke the streak of The Phenom, if ever he gets pin in a match and defeated "clean", 100% Undertaker is destroyed in my eyes.

IF Roman Reigns defeat Brock Lesnar at WM31, he will be considered as the BEAST SLAYER and the "new generation" of fans will think that Roman Reigns is way better than Cena, Rollins, Triple, The Rock, CM Punk and even Undertaker because they can't get the job done.

I can strongly suggest that Roman Reigns should lose to Brock WM31 to avoid any further damage to WWE. Brock should either leave WWE with the championship or throw it to a garbage can ala Madusa in the 90's.

For the last part, I think Undertaker should retire now and stop having matches at WM because of the following things

1. Undertaker vs. Bray Wyatt - if Undertaker loses this match, his legacy will be destroyed beyond repair or if he wins Wyatt is buried unless he will be like Triple H at WM27.

2. Undertaker vs. Sting - either way, their legacy's will suffer.

So do you have any plans in mind to save his legacy?

 

[OYDK]

IF Roman Reigns defeat Brock Lesnar at WM31, he will be considered as the BEAST SLAYER and the "new generation" of fans will think that Roman Reigns is way better than Cena, Rollins, Triple, The Rock, CM Punk and even Undertaker because they can't get the job done.

This is exactly what the WWE wants man... Why would the WWE want the fans to believe that C.M Punk, HHH, The Rock, Taker etc. are better than their new number one guy? They want Roman Reigns to be seen as the best RIGHT NOW, and beating Brock Lesnar does exactly that. It's like when Lesnar debuted and beat The Rock, Hogan, Taker, Flair, etc. WWE wanted the fans to believe that he is "way" better than these guys, and it worked. That's the whole point of the business, no?

1. Undertaker vs. Bray Wyatt - if Undertaker loses this match, his legacy will be destroyed beyond repair or if he wins Wyatt is buried unless he will be like Triple H at WM27.

2. Undertaker vs. Sting - either way, their legacy's will suffer.

So do you have any plans in mind to save his legacy?

I really hope the majority of people don't think this way because if they did it would make me very sad... I've said it numerous times before, one match does not make or break somebody who has been in the business for almost 25 years. Taker is one of the GOAT and two losses at Mania does not denote ANY of that... His legacy will never be destroyed because it can't. Nothing will erase what Taker has done in the WWE.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Taker's legacy doesn't need saving, it's long since been carved in stone. The fact that he lost to Brock Lesnar at WrestleMania XXX doesn't somehow invalidate everything he's ever done, all the great feuds & matches he's had, all the big moments he's delivered and the accomplishments he's had. Some of the expectations and premiums some fans place on single matches or happenings is are borderline psychotic. Also, just because of one negative happening taking place in someone's career, even if it's one that generates tremendous buzz, doesn't magically undo all the great things they've done or been part of. It's extremely sad that that there are fans who actually think the fact that Taker's streak is over somehow undermines and obliterates his entire legacy, that one single match can undo near a quarter century of greatness.

 

[Wrestlingaholic]

Undertaker debuted at the 1990 Survivor Series. 24 and a bit years ago. Until the last few years, and with the exception of just TWO of those preceding years, he was pretty much full time. He is MORE than just the streak. He's had more than 22 Wrestlemania matches. His legacy goes far beyond that.

To think that his legacy could be tarnished if anyone beats Lesnar is preposterous. Undertaker lost his first match against the Great Khali. If that didn't tarnish his legacy (and it didn't, he's too big for that), then Lesnar losing to Reigns certainly won't.

As for his retirement, it's pretty much a guarantee that he will close out Wrestlemania 32 in his home state in Dallas.

 

[hatehabsforever]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the legacy of the Undertaker, and it's borderline foolish to suggest his legacy requires saving.

Brock Lesnar is not considered to be the most dominant force in WWE simply because he ended the undefeated Wrestlemania streak of the Deadman. Sure that's part of it, but it's also because he has annihilated everyone who has stood in his path. He's the most dominant force because he threw John Cena, of all people, all around the ring like a rag doll, suplexing him repeatedly like he was Zack Ryder or someone like that. He's dominant because he's been beating Cena in a convincing fashion repeatedly. And he's also throwing the "future of the company" around the ring like he's insignificant too. Combine all of this with his history, WWE and otherwise, and this is why he's considered the most dominant force in WWE these days.

If Roman Reigns were to beat Lesnat at WM31, that would not necessarily mean he is better than all of those who were unable to get the job done against Taker. It would simply mean that WWE is posturing him, rightly or wrongly, to become a significant piece of their future, and there's nothing wrong with that. There are tons of people on here begging to see new blood in the WWE. People are tired of the Authority, of Cena, of Orton, etc., Having Reigns beat Lesnar would just be an example of WWE trying to move forward to find a new face of the company.

If Undertaker were to lose to Bray Wyatt (which will never happen in a million years, especially in back to back Weestlemanias), it still would not ruin his legacy. His legacy is carved in stone and there's basically nothing that could happen inside the WWE ring to change that. If Wyatt were to lose to Taker, he would be just fine too. Everyone not named Brock loses to Taker at WM, and none of them were destroyed in the process, so why would Wyatt be any different? Plus, Wyatt loses to pretty much everyone anyway, yet he keeps on rambling on with his incessant promos anyway. I don't see that changing any time soon.

Sting losing to Undertaker at WM (which he will if it ever happens) would not hurt Sting's legacy whatsoever. Again, when you have a resume as extensive as the Icon, one loss does not ruin or tarnish that legacy. There's no reason to think that Sting could not be a great foe for Taker who puts up a valiant battle, but comes up slightly short, and probably beats him in a rematch at some other time such as Summerslam or Survivor Series. Taker losing to Sting (when pigs fly) would not hurt him either for all of the above reasons.


So I have no plans to save the Undertaker's legacy, because it simply doesn't need saving. Have Undertaker beat Sting at Wrestlemania 31, Sting win the rematch at Survivor Series, after which both men retire. And both get inducted into the WWE Hall of Fame the night before WM32. In Texas (I think). Too easy, and all legacies fully intact. And both men get the send off they so richly deserve.

 

[khrissr10]

Thanks for the enlightenment guys! Being a fan of Undertaker for so many years and being hooked in his legacy and the streak took a toll.

I just remembered Chris Jericho while reading your comments and I've remembered that even though he is jobbing to put the new stars over, his legacy and career is not shaking or being destroyed as one of the all time greats.

I just want a proper send off and ending to Undertaker's career. I really thought that ending it last year is like a dead end to the WWE.

 

[Mustang Sally]

I agree that Undertaker's legacy doesn't need saving. It's just that after so many years of winning at Wrestlemania, it would be a good thing to see him do it one more time. In many ways, it doesn't matter who he beats....as long as it's a wrestler deemed good enough to be in the ring with him (tomato cans need not apply), but the chief idea is to have 'Taker win and allow the fans cheers to wash over him, giving them the chance to say goodbye in winning a match that was pre-advertised as his last one.

For most of this past year, I figured he'd be avenging his defeat to Brock Lesnar, a man who would probably be leaving anyway by WM31. After all, if Brock was finished with pro wrestling at that point, what would he care if he loses?

Even before that, I figured Sting's last (perhaps only) WWE match would be to come in and job to Undertaker. In some ways, I still hope they can find a way to make this happen, as I'm not convinced that Sting should have any reason to be fighting Triple H. No, 'Taker vs. Sting wouldn't be a great match....but as an event, it would be terrific.

But while Undertaker can stay retired if he chooses, nothing is damaging his legacy.....I just feel it proper for him to grace us with his presence one more time......and as long as we're not seeing something along the lines of Undertaker vs. Zack Ryder, it would be just fine to watch him in action one more time.

 

[stonecoldhell]

Never.

Undertaker was no one special before the streak, he was just an old Golden Era Star. Even if he's from beginning of the 90's.

Taker wanted so bad to be a top player, but he was NEVER the face of the company. He's overrated becuase of the streak.

Streak of what? He have been beat many many many times over and over again, but they booked him to have a streak on wrestlemania event.

That doesn't make anyone great. It's like saying a football team lose, lose and lose, but 1 time per year, they win.

Undertaker is so overrated, and was just jealous because he stood in Austins shadow in Attitude Era, every single day.

Undertaker never won clean over Austin on all these 7 years.

Undertaker should just retire, he looks like old as shit these days anyway.

 

[chuckmdubya]

I don't think Taker's legacy is in any danger of being damaged or even tarnished. His legacy was firmly established at 20-0. Other than very young fans, we all understand that that time takes a toll on everyone, and he just isn't as athletic as he was in his youth. We understand that the ending of the streak was to put Lesnar over as the super heel of 2014.

As far as I'm concerned they could have him lose to the bunny in a career casket match and I would view him as one of the most enduring, dominant, and entertaining wrestlers in history.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

Utter Tosh...

Taker's legacy is not the Streak... if it was, it would NEVER have ended. His legacy is that he is the most storied, celebrated and consistant performer in wrestling history. He did it better, for longer with a wide variety of opponents. Legacy does not mean that you never lose or don't put people over on the way out. Mark Calloway knows that better than anyone, he's known Windham Rotunda since he was a kid through knowing his Uncle and Father... both of whom helped him on the way up. If he's gonna put someone over it'd be someone like Bray who will not only benefit from him but help repay those favours back in the day... That is also his legacy... he is the one true class act in wrestling history, and will remain so.

 

[BillAlfonsos_Whistle]

The only thing the Undertaker could do to harm his legacy is wrestle more.
He should never step foot in a ring again. He can't go. That's just what it is.
Incredible HOF top 10 all time career. Just let it go.

 

[wwesux]

I can't seem to find any proper logic on how WWE do things in the last few years.

They have messed up many careers in the span of 4 years. This year, I can definitely say that Undertaker's Legacy will be destroyed.

Undertaker vs. Brock Lesnar

being a fan of those guys, I know their history. Undertaker never defeated Brock Lesnar in a one on one match but he did pinned him twice in 2003 ina Triple Threat Match with Big Show and a handicap match against Lesnar and Big Show. Brock Lesnar never defeated Undertaker in a clean match until Wrestlemania 30.

Now, Brock is considered the most dominant force in the WWE because he is the guy who broke the streak of The Phenom, if ever he gets pin in a match and defeated "clean", 100% Undertaker is destroyed in my eyes.

IF Roman Reigns defeat Brock Lesnar at WM31, he will be considered as the BEAST SLAYER and the "new generation" of fans will think that Roman Reigns is way better than Cena, Rollins, Triple, The Rock, CM Punk and even Undertaker because they can't get the job done.

I can strongly suggest that Roman Reigns should lose to Brock WM31 to avoid any further damage to WWE. Brock should either leave WWE with the championship or throw it to a garbage can ala Madusa in the 90's.
LOL I totally agree with you that Brock should beat Reigns all the fans jeered at him at the RR as he is not ready for the title and the fans are not ready for him either! Lesner will keep the title at Fast Lane and defend it against one opponent that deserves that title back RANDY ORTON!

For the last part, I think Undertaker should retire now and stop having matches at WM because of the following things

1. Undertaker vs. Bray Wyatt - if Undertaker loses this match, his legacy will be destroyed beyond repair or if he wins Wyatt is buried unless he will be like Triple H at WM27.

underfaker has to lose matches now cause his streak has no meaning and many fans dislike him he is not good anymore and it's time for him to put opponents over as Y2JObber has been doing for a decade now
Bray Wyatt will win over underfaker cause they need to replace Lesner's victory!
2. Undertaker vs. Sting - either way, their legacy's will suffer.

So do you have any plans in mind to save his legacy?

STING will be buried when he will job to HHH enough said he should wrestle Y2Jobber at WM31 and save this match for Fast Lane with HHH

 

[wwesux]

The only thing the Undertaker could do to harm his legacy is wrestle more.
He should never step foot in a ring again. He can't go. That's just what it is.
Incredible HOF top 10 all time career. Just let it go.

the beer belly flabbin, leather claddin mascara wearin needs to put opponents over now as Y2JObber has been doing to further others careers he lost so his streak is over which is the lowest streak ever compared to GOLDBERG and CRIMSON IN TNA

 

[MoRtAnDaD]

Takers 25+ career, full of awesome and historic matches, thats his legacy. Probably in the top 5 of the greatest performers of all time.

This guy never needed the streak, or whatever. He is his own legacy, everything he did on the ring.

He reinvented himself time and time again, and alwas stayed relevant. He didnt need a belt to be the highlight of the night or the must see match. He was the attraction.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

I don't understand this logic. The only way Undertaker's legacy is tarnished is if he murders his wife and kid then hangs himself.

Nothing needs to be saved. Maybe give him this year off, then Sting/Taker next year and call it a career. Losing to Lesnar is no shame to anyone.

 

[shalliin]

This is exactly what the WWE wants man... Why would the WWE want the fans to believe that C.M Punk, HHH, The Rock, Taker etc. are better than their new number one guy? They want Roman Reigns to be seen as the best RIGHT NOW, and beating Brock Lesnar does exactly that. It's like when Lesnar debuted and beat The Rock, Hogan, Taker, Flair, etc. WWE wanted the fans to believe that he is "way" better than these guys, and it worked. That's the whole point of the business, no?





I really hope the majority of people don't think this way because if they did it would make me very sad... I've said it numerous times before, one match does not make or break somebody who has been in the business for almost 25 years. Taker is one of the GOAT and two losses at Mania does not denote ANY of that... His legacy will never be destroyed because it can't. Nothing will erase what Taker has done in the WWE.

Good answer, but you're only thinking of his WWE career. He had 5 years or so between the Texas/Memphis areas before going to WCW for a while before moving to WWF at the time. Look up his early matches in those territories and you see more semblance to his last 5 years then his first 10 with WWE. Much larger move-sets, pulling off everything from drop kicks to head scissors. Showing he was a much better 'wrestler' then he was allowed to portray due to the restrictions of the Undertaker character until post 2002. For me this enhances his legacy as it shows that he got to his spot on a strictly reduced move list and character restrictions.