The problem isn't now whether they could... it's whether they should.
Warrior changes everything in WWE going forward... just as it would have changed had Jerry passed from his heart attack. Medical screening is going to go more intense on any issues and age is again a factor. Warrior didn't wrestle, but he was on their TV - in a semi-physical role, he was shaking ropes and the like. For years there has been talk of an in-ring age cap and this might make it happen... but the reason is Taker, not Warrior...
Taker after that match on Sunday was terrifying, if anyone thought Warrior was "off" or looked ill then Taker was clearly in a medical situation after that match. He tried and failed to stand 3 times and, out of respect for him and his gimmick and not wanting to perhaps fuel any conspiracy theories of a screwjob no one intervened. That he then collapsed as soon as he got backstage was a major mistake on the WWE's part... Taker could have collaped in the ring or walking back... it could have "looked" awful on WWE... but they got away with only the story getting out.
Then the Warrior stuff... it all means that concussion stuff will be far more difficult for them to ignore and they will only go harder with the impact tests and medical clearence. Christian is done... 3 concussions in a year, he's gone no one can risk him... Ziggler get's another, he's gone... in Taker's case the issue is how may did he get in the 23 years since his debut or the 5 years prior when they weren't screening and managing them properly? Taker leaving that hotel looked as bad as Warrior likely did leaving his... both could have ended the same...
Sorry but this changes everything, even for someone like Sting who hasn't wrestled for them yet... he may never get that singles match now. It may bring an age cap of 47-48... even guys like Triple H, Kane, Jericho may find they are sucked into this... Warrior clearly failed the physical... they would have had him wrestle, even win the Battle Royal... indeed the whole build seem to be towards he and Sheamus being the last 2 until they shifted focus quickly to Big Show...
As for how they handle Taker and Sting... if and it's a big IF they do have a match, it won't be one on one... and to be honest now probably not against each other... Mania next year could see them in the same ring, but it's logical that it be a tag team match or a 6 man with Kane... Put them with The Shield or the Wyatts, the former can take the "loss" and it be their split... but the torch would be passed from all 3 guys...
In my eyes even if Taker can do "one more match" he shouldn't... this was one too many for me.
To be fair, Warrior's death really changes absolutely nothing, just like Lawler dying would've changed nothing. There have been far too many deaths far too similar to Warrior's, many of them at a younger age than Warrior. Just because Warrior is more well known than most, and because he was actually under a WWE contract unlike most, that's no reason to think it'll have more of an impact, which it won't.
Clearly, Warrior was never going to wrestle. They never had any plans to put him in the Battle Royal, and he didn't pass a physical because he didn't take one. He had no desire whatsoever to wrestle, obviously considering he didn't even run to the ring for his Raw promo, and they definitely had no desire to let him wrestle. They were more likely to put Bruno in that match than Warrior. So, with that in mind, it makes no sense to think this would bring about any changes for people who actually can wrestle, let alone an age cap. Macho Man's death didn't bring an age cap. Eddie Guerrero's death didn't bring an age cap. Test's death didn't bring an age cap. The list goes on and on, and most people on that list are much younger than Warrior. The only way Warrior's death would be any different is if he wrestled or did something physical that lead to his death, and obviously his appearances had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with his death.
As for Undertaker, I'm not sure why he's mentioned in the same post as Warrior. Warrior had a heart attack, Undertaker had a concussion. Those are two completely different, unrelated issues. It makes no sense whatsoever to compare Undertaker's appearances to Warrior's for that very reason. Aside from the fact that we obviously have no idea what Warrior looked like in the moments before his death, obviously just because two people might look similar that in no way whatsoever means they're going to have the same result. Undertaker was never going to have a heart attack and die because he had a concussion. That makes no sense whatsoever. While we have no idea how much he was legitimately rattled and unable to stand up, we do know that since it was his last time in the ring he probably wanted to walk out alone, although I was surprised nobody really checked on him, even though saying it would've fueled conspiracy theories makes no sense whatsoever on any level considering officials help wrestlers all the time and I have no idea how the hell that would make people think it was a screw job, I mean if anything the lack of help would indicate a screw job...ok, I'm getting off track, there's just so many things in this most that just make no sense whatsoever.
Even if Undertaker had collapsed, people would have thought it was part of the show, I'm not sure how that would have looked awful, so I don't get that one either. And considering the story about his collapse "leaked" with Heyman announcing it on Raw, and who knows if it was true or not, I'm not sure how they "got away" with that happening.
As for how Undertaker looked leaving his hotel compared to Warrior, again, we're talking a concussion compared to a heart attack. It makes no sense to think that Undertaker could've had a heart attack and died just because he looked bad due to a concussion. I've looked 100x worse than that when I had the flu, obviously I was never in any danger of collapsing and dying from a heart attack just because I might've looked like somebody who later had a heart attack. That just defies all logic, to be honest.
Also, I have no idea what Warrior has to do with the concussion stuff, since he had a heart attack, not a concussion, and the two could not be more unrelated. Concussions are already taken very seriously, but obviously Warrior's death will have nothing to do with them being taken more seriously. It almost seems like you're acting like Warrior wrestled, got a concussion, and that's why he died. None of those things are true, so I don't get it. Even Undertaker ended up fine, so his concussion is unlikely to bring about any changes.
And am I reading this right? The OP suggested Undertaker and Sting go out on top, which I assume means win, against Orton and Batista? And nobody's crying about how they would be burying them? Can you imagine the reaction if Cena and Triple H beat Orton and Batista? Again, the double standard...
Anyway, Undertaker is clearly done. The OP said he and Sting have one more match left in them, well Undertaker has negative one match left in him. He clearly had zero matches left in him before his match with Brock, so he's obviously never wrestling again, singles or tag. As for Sting, we knows if he's even going to sign with the WWE(I'll believe Meltzer when Punk 100% shows up on Raw in Chicago), let alone appear on WWE TV, let alone get involved in storylines let alone have a match. Personally, I doubt it. But even if he does, clearly it's not going to involve Undertaker since he's done...plus I think it's safe to assume Sting would do a singles match. Like I said in the other thread, it'd probably be against Triple H. But it could be someone like Orton, sure. The only thing we know is it won't be against Undertaker, since he's done, and we know that it's far from a sure thing, since as far as we know he hasn't even signed with the WWE yet. So anything could happen.
