The storylines they can't now use for the Streak!

[d_henderson1810]

I had an idea how they could have made Undertaker WM matches more exciting, and bring different ways to tease the Streak ending, but WWE can't do these now, because they instead chose to bow before Lord Lesnar, and be Brock's bitch instead.

1) Have someone actually pin the Undertaker at WM, and believe that they have won, and the Streak has ended, only for it to be that they used brass-knuckles or a handpull of tights to pin the Deadman.

Then, Vince McMahon comes out, says that he saw what happened, says that the Streak won't end that way, and orders for the match to be restarted. Taker than recovers and makes his opponent tap to the "Hells-Gates" and wins the restart, meaning that Taker was pinned at WM, but didn't officially lose the Streak.

2) A tag-team challenge the Brothers Of Destruction to a tag-team match at WM, and say that they will beat the Streak. When Taker scoffs at this, they say that they will do it by beating the weak link on their team-KANE! The Brothers are reminded that if one of them loses, they are both counted as losing, even if Taker isn't the one pinned.

Kane says that he is not the weak link, but loses every match until WM. This makes Taker worry that his Streak could go because Kane might get pinned. However, at WM, not only do the Brothers win, and Taker keeps his Streak, but Kane gets the pins, making him a winner again.

3) The Shield challenge the Undertaker at WM, and it will be a 1 v 3 Handicap,. The Shield are all in the ring at the same time. Despite this, Taker still wins, but only after a ton of punishment from all three members of the Shield.

4) Taker fights an opponent in a 2/3 Falls Match. So, Taker loses one of the falls, meaning he has been "pinned" at WM, but wins the deciding fall, meaning that he wins the match and keeps the Streak, while putting over his opponent by giving him one fall over the Undertaker at WM.

They could have done some cool scenarios like this, and made Taker look like a real chance of losing, but maintains the Streak in new and interesting ways.

 

[tehblogger]

all your scenarios 1, 2, and 3 would be incredibly crap in reality. Particularly no.3. You want to completely destroy the credibility of 3 of WWE's brightest young stars on the biggest stage? Great plan, nice booking, well played sir.

The 2/3 Falls match would be fine, but whatever, they made the decision based on Taker's condition. We may very well not see him again and if so he went out the right way.

 

[Jonyboyuk2]

Some good ideas in theory, but not so sure in practice. If I was booking the Undertaker I wouldn't have had him lose to Brock who works very little dates and gains nothing from the win. The streak being ended would have been perfect to launch a Cena heel turn. One could story line could have been that the Shield were destroying the Authority and Undertaker helped them out in the Summer. The Authority tumbles and Vince comes back and says that the Undertaker will lose his streak and announces the Winner of Royal Rumble will have a shot at the streak (leaving the Elimination Chamber open for the NO#1 contenders match). Cena gets pinned by the Wyatts at Summerslam, then pinned and destroyed by Big E (or someone else) at Survivor Series and takes time off til Royal Rumble. He dumps big E out to win the Rumble and heads to WM to have a shot at the Streak. At Elimination Chamber, Cena loses again. He comes out on Raw, everyone is doubting him and he goes to WM but cannot beat Taker no matter what and then somehow he cheats and wins and turns heel. Undertaker; who can't believe that Cena took a shortcut; tries to stand up and is in shock but Cena attacks and beats him viciously. The next night - Cena could come out and begin putting together a faction from experienced WWE stars and some newer ones. maybe - 6 of them. Thus creating a new stable and new storylines. They could still technically do it but put Takers Career on the line and not the streak.

 

[Wald]

All terrible ideas that would have tainted the Streak far worse than just losing it to Brock.

1) He was still pinned at Wrestlemania. Who cares that Vince ordered a rematch as we see people cheat to win all the time in the WWE and nothing ever comes of it. Kayfabe it would come off like Vince just allowing Undertaker a do over.

2) Undertaker in a tag team is a waste of the Undertaker and a waste of the Streak

3) Why would you have him destroy one of the hottest acts they've produced in the past 10 years? Fans would boo the hell out of the Undertaker for this too.

4) Undertaker still got pinned at Wrestlemania, which is what the guarding of the Streak was all about. So you'd have him lose that but still not fully put over a wrestler.

Brock was the right choice to win it, you'll see that next year when the Undertaker goes out with a fitting farewell match

 

[Jack-Hammer]

all your scenarios 1, 2, and 3 would be incredibly crap in reality. Particularly no.3. You want to completely destroy the credibility of 3 of WWE's brightest young stars on the biggest stage? Great plan, nice booking, well played sir.

The 2/3 Falls match would be fine, but whatever, they made the decision based on Taker's condition. We may very well not see him again and if so he went out the right way.

That's pretty much the way I see it.

For option #1, and this is only my opinion, that would render the streak completely ineffectual. There have been innumerable times in wrestling history in which big matches have been won or lost, championships changed hands and careers have been ended all due to someone cheating to come out on top. As great as the streak was, it shouldn't merit such an extraordinary level of special treatment.

As far as option #2 goes, I'm doubt anyone would buy into it. The notion of Kane being a "weak link" isn't something that many people are gonna buy into. While most people will agree that Kane is and will be viewed as inferior to Taker when it's all said and done, convincing people to really buy into the notion that the streak would end via someone else losing would be an almost impossible uphill battle. The streak always was won or lost based on Taker's own guts, guile, determination and ability. Is it simplistic? Absolutely, but that's one reason why it worked so well. We've seen any number of surprise endings, swerves and screwjobs, but the simplistic nature of two men going at it with the better one coming out with the win feels special in the sometimes overly complicated attempts at epic booking we see today.

For option #3, it's just anti-climatic all around. Even if Taker lost the first fall, it'd be almost a given that he'd win the next two. If Taker lost any fall, then it'd reduce the streak in the eyes of a lot of people. When it's all said and done, I don't think most people would care that Taker maintained the streak via a technicality revolving around the 2/3 falls stipulation because something would've happened that hadn't happened before: he was pinned, disqualified, forced to submit or counted out at WrestleMania. Also, as tehblogger alluded to, why bury 3 of the most talented guys on the roster with a single individual, even if it's Taker, taking them down when no other single person on the roster has been able to? It would almost be akin to the travesty of John Cena essentially overcoming all 3 members of The Wyatt Family at Extreme Rules and only failing to do so because of the "shock" of some kid singing Wyatt's song. The only thing that kept that from being a complete and utter tragedy was Wyatt actually winning, though it still did damage.

We all saw Taker at WrestleMania XXX and he was most definitely not in the same physical condition he was 5 years ago, nowhere close. Hell, he wasn't even in the same shape as last year. He tried his best during the match, but it was obvious that he just didn't have it that night. Just a guess on my part, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if Taker himself thought the same. Every report I've read over the past several years have said that Taker's ability to put on a good match was of supreme importance to him and that he'd walk away if he felt he was no longer up to being able to deliver. If that's true, then WrestleMania XXX was the time he chose. It might not have been to the wrestler that many of us thought it would be or have even preferred but, like the old Rolling Stones song says, you can't always get what you want.

 

[HeenanGorilla]

I was fine with the Streak ending, as all these "give a young guy a rub" theories were awful. Wyatt, Reigns, Ambrose--terrible ideas.
I had said before WMXXX, it would be like a young kid beating Michael Jordan today one-on-one. Does that make him the best? No. Jordan is too old to compete, just as Taker is too old to give anyone any momentum by beating him.

So, I was fine with the streak ending and shocking all of you people way too involved in a stretch of pre-determined outcomes.

I am even MORE ok with it now, as it prevented any and all of the OP's awful ideas from coming to fruition. Ugh...

Thank God the Streak is over. Taker's legacy is just as strong as it ever was and we are hopefully towards the end of awful, awful Streak ideas like the ones listed above.

Terrible!

 

[tom9422]

No need for any of this, the streak ended great.

Do you remember the silence when Taker lost? The confusion? The utter disbelief, even from an audience that is well aware that outcomes are determined? The angry and upset reactions of people who didn't want to see Taker lose?

Man, they accomplished all of it. There was no more dramatic way to end it, no more surprising way either.

 

[JoeFromTomsRiver]

No need for any of this, the streak ended great.

Do you remember the silence when Taker lost? The confusion? The utter disbelief, even from an audience that is well aware that outcomes are determined? The angry and upset reactions of people who didn't want to see Taker lose?

Man, they accomplished all of it. There was no more dramatic way to end it, no more surprising way either.

Totally agree

The best way for the streak to end was the way that it did. When NOBODY expected it.

Any scenarios where ending the streak would "make sense" and where it went to someone who "deserved it", wouldn't have had the same impact as it did when Lesnar won.

Nothing is shocking in wrestling in today's climate. But somehow, IN this climate, they managed to shock EVERY single person who was watching WM.

I loved it when it happened, and as time passes, I like it even more that it did happen that way.

 

[Reflection]

all your scenarios 1, 2, and 3 would be incredibly crap in reality. Particularly no.3. You want to completely destroy the credibility of 3 of WWE's brightest young stars on the biggest stage? Great plan, nice booking, well played sir.

A few months ago, The Shield were losing 3-on-1 matches against CM Punk on a regular basis, so its not as if it will be the first time. Agreed, that was not the smartest of ideas by creative... But if Bray Wyatt losing to John Cena didn't "destroy" his credibility, then The Shield losing to Undertaker- the baddest wrestler ever, the man that has never been defeated on that night- wouldn't destroy their credibility either. Getting to face The Undertaker at Wrestlemania is a privilege in itself that very few have the opportunity to earn, and win or lose, one-on-one or three-on-one, you walk out a bigger star than you walked in.

 

[BestWrestlingOpinions]

1, 2 and 3 are really bad.

1. Someone one said "it's not cheating if you don't get caught". The guy used whatever to his advantage, ref didn't see it, that's it. Taker got pinned, end of the streak.

2. Why insert Kane to the Undertaker's streak? Last time I checked, it was a solo streak, not a team streak. The point would be to elevate Kane? They could use other ways.

3. Taker beats three other guys in the ring AT THE SAME TIME? I don't think I even need to comment on that.

4. 2 out of 3 falls seems decent and it should have been used as a warning to the Undertaker. Taker wins, but gets pinned once, and that is the threat that we want to see. If anything, since HBK and HHH had two chances, either one of their first match should be 2 out of 3 falls, thus a rematch making some sense, seeing as they already got a pin in last year. It would certainly be way more believeable.

The big missed opportunity was last year, Punk vs Taker streak vs streak. It was self explanatory, really, and the WWE missed a huge opportunity on that. They created an epic moment at WM30 with Bryan's glory road / Lesnar breaking the streak. They could have certainly done an epic streak vs streak match last year.

 

[d_henderson1810]

all your scenarios 1, 2, and 3 would be incredibly crap in reality. Particularly no.3. You want to completely destroy the credibility of 3 of WWE's brightest young stars on the biggest stage? Great plan, nice booking, well played sir.

The 2/3 Falls match would be fine, but whatever, they made the decision based on Taker's condition. We may very well not see him again and if so he went out the right way.

Hell, the Shield have been dominant for two years. How many more years do they have to go without loss before their credibility isn't destroyed by the loss?

So, in your reality, old guys can never beat young guys, EVER! So, the Shield must keep winning for years, until they are veterans, and then they must always lose to the up-and-comers.

It's a wonder anyone ever gets over with you.

For me, the Shield are at the stage now where they can take a loss like that. Only one of them needs to be pinned. Maybe the other two can even turn on the one pinned, and kick him out of the Shield, breaking up the Shield.

If the Shield are "buried" on one loss like this, then they won't ever be superstars, if even one loss derails them.

 

[d_henderson1810]

All terrible ideas that would have tainted the Streak far worse than just losing it to Brock.

1) He was still pinned at Wrestlemania. Who cares that Vince ordered a rematch as we see people cheat to win all the time in the WWE and nothing ever comes of it. Kayfabe it would come off like Vince just allowing Undertaker a do over.

2) Undertaker in a tag team is a waste of the Undertaker and a waste of the Streak

3) Why would you have him destroy one of the hottest acts they've produced in the past 10 years? Fans would boo the hell out of the Undertaker for this too.

4) Undertaker still got pinned at Wrestlemania, which is what the guarding of the Streak was all about. So you'd have him lose that but still not fully put over a wrestler.

Brock was the right choice to win it, you'll see that next year when the Undertaker goes out with a fitting farewell match

1) Getting pinned wouldn't be the same. Hey, the Rock won the World Title on a restart at RR '13, and I didn't hear anyone complaining about that.

2) But it creates a scenario where the Streak is out of Taker's hands, and he must rely on another to keep his Streak intact. It creates some interesting possibilities.

3) Like I said, if the Shield are "destroyed" by this, two years in of dominating everyone, then they aren't worthy of superstardom. True stars can overcome this, and fans will care about them, even after one loss.

4) Again, a pinfall in this scenario is not the same, as the Streak is based on never losing a match (not a fall). A 2/3 Falls match is won by someone who wins 2 falls, meaning that Taker still wins.

But, you're right, let's not think outside the box. Just keep doing the same boring scenario where someone says that they will beat the Streak, Taker says they won't, and Taker wins in the end- again. A slightly different storyline might be refreshing to telling the same old story, again and again.

 

[d_henderson1810]

No need for any of this, the streak ended great.

Do you remember the silence when Taker lost? The confusion? The utter disbelief, even from an audience that is well aware that outcomes are determined? The angry and upset reactions of people who didn't want to see Taker lose?

Man, they accomplished all of it. There was no more dramatic way to end it, no more surprising way either.

Except the fact that it was to a piece of crap like Brock Lesnar, the least deserving person to do it.

 

[d_henderson1810]

Another scenario that I thought actually happened initially at WM XXX. I thought that the ref screwed the count, and Taker's shoulder was up on the three.

This would work, since Taker was never actually pinned, but the ref screwed up, and it wiil have to be resolved at the following year's WM.

I would love to see some of the ideas that some of you have. Don't criticise unless you can do better yourself.

 

[BestWrestlingOpinions]

To general streak discussion:
After all, when we look back to WM30 like 10-15 years later, we will be there to say that the streak ended in the hands of Brock Lesnar. Imagine that. The only guy who could beat the Undertaker was a legit fighter. Not some random Superstar who you don't even know if he will last. I think the same can ba said for many great things done in the past, which at that time seemed stupid, but now they are called iconic moments.

 

[d_henderson1810]

To general streak discussion:
After all, when we look back to WM30 like 10-15 years later, we will be there to say that the streak ended in the hands of Brock Lesnar. Imagine that. The only guy who could beat the Undertaker was a legit fighter. Not some random Superstar who you don't even know if he will last. I think the same can ba said for many great things done in the past, which at that time seemed stupid, but now they are called iconic moments.

In some ways, that makes it worse.

Having a former UFC fighter beat the most iconic wrestler in WWE history, and the biggest achievement in wrestling, spits in the face of professional wrestling.

Brock Lesnar should not be pushed, but buried. In fact, Vince shouldn't have re-signed him.

Brock left UFC with his tail between his legs after getting beaten badly in his last match. He would never have come back to WWE if UFC was still an option. So, Brock NEEDED WWE as much as they needed him. Vince should have used this, to demand that Brock is "all-in, or not at all". That means, Brock is full-time, or he can go back to UFC (which was no longer an option). Vince had stroke, he should have used it.

Having Brock win not only makes those who work full-time look like they were toiling for nothing, it also makes it look like UFC is better than WWE, if Brock can take down their most iconic Legend on its biggest stage.

 

[GameOver]

In some ways, that makes it worse.

Having a former UFC fighter beat the most iconic wrestler in WWE history, and the biggest achievement in wrestling, spits in the face of professional wrestling.

Brock Lesnar should not be pushed, but buried. In fact, Vince shouldn't have re-signed him.

Brock left UFC with his tail between his legs after getting beaten badly in his last match. He would never have come back to WWE if UFC was still an option. So, Brock NEEDED WWE as much as they needed him. Vince should have used this, to demand that Brock is "all-in, or not at all". That means, Brock is full-time, or he can go back to UFC (which was no longer an option). Vince had stroke, he should have used it.

Having Brock win not only makes those who work full-time look like they were toiling for nothing, it also makes it look like UFC is better than WWE, if Brock can take down their most iconic Legend on its biggest stage.

For one thing Brock was WWF before he went to UFC and he was the youngest WWE champion in history and was gonna be the face of the company for years to come til he decided to leave, hell he even beat the Undertaker in a HIAC Takers own match so it's not like he's never done it before, and how does that make it worse that someone who has a history with Taker and has beaten him before and is a legit "fighter" someone that was considered the best pure striker, not wrestler, striker (aka fighter) in the business plus it wsa Taker in a weakened stake so it doesn't even diminish his career by losing cause it took the baddest man to beat him down when he mother nature had already done it's fare share to cripple him.

If an up and comer had done it while great for there credibility, it would be worse IMO, would make Taker look even more pathetic the fact that he survived legend after legend that pushed him beyond the limit then a relative noob comes along and does it? please....

The Streak is the biggest achievement in wrestling? biggest achievement on 1 night only maybe but not in wrestling period. Life will go on and has gone on before the streak started and after it ended, that was just the longest running storyline post 1980's sad as it is it had to end one way or another. Not happy with the match that ended it cause it wasn't epic it sucked and the way he just walks out and nothing since isn't stupid IMO but it is what it is and if anyone who's left would've done it legit it would've been Brock Lesnar.