The Undertaker and Randy Orton

[punk is gold]

Now i'm sure alot of us have heard the original plan for their wrestlemania match was for rko to go over the deadman until randy vetoed the idea.Now i'm wondering if Orton would have won at wm 21 how do you guys think this would have altered their present careers and future legacies.

 

[Ruthless-RKO]

Well..the more years takers is undefeated at mania, the stronger that builds...if orton had won, it woud have changed everything, because he would be known as the first ever wrestler to have defeated taker at wrestlemania and end that streak... i heard that the original plan for the casket match was for mark henry to get the win..imagine what that win would have done for him...

but talking about orton...im not too sure where he would be know, i know that a win against taker at mania doesn't mean you'll get more title reigns..but he could have possibly been the face of wwe right now...who knows?

As for the undertaker...losing the streak won't affect his legacy...he is a great wrestler with or without the streak...

 

[Harkus]

Orton deserves great thanks for vetoing this idea. Takers streak should never go IMO, but back on the topic, I don't necessarily (sp) think Orton would be any different. Cena would still be the face of the company for his kid friendly style, and huge amounts of sales, Orton's pretty much there 2nd behind Cena anyway.
I do believe the Legend Killer gimmick would have lasted even longer, obv with good reason, and it was far superior to the viper gimmick, which may therefore not have been a bad thing, but pleased it aint the case, and had it happened, I wouldn't see too much difference in either mans career paths or legacy.

 

[ckoneagain]

I think the fact that Orton Vetoed the idea shows his level of maturity and responsibility and also showed the WWE back then that he was intending to be here for some time to come. IF he'd have won at Wrestlemania i don't think his career would have been all that different. I mean he's a main eventer, a fantastic heel and now a badass face i think this would have all happened with or without the win. Noboby NEEDS to win against taker at mania to make a name for themselves, the mere fact that they have been entrusted to perform in the match means that the company thinks a lot of them. If anyone ever ends the streak they'll instantly go over as a massive heel and a dominant force (so long as they don't cheat to achieve it of course which would suck) and i don't think Orton needed this win to progress his career. In fact that is the chance that that kind of huge push could cripple a career in the long run as where do you go from there? I mean loads of people win world titles but only one person can ever end the streak

 

[nightmare]

orton would have jumped to legendary staus far earlier than he is now. but people, despite what you kids like to say online.... taker will retire w\ the streak intact. yes things are teased around w\ but taker losing the streak will never happen. vince is known for doing alot of dirty politics when it comes to certian things\people, but one that he wont cross is the streak. taker never even blinked when wcw was scooping up talent and nitro was stomping raw in ratings. taker was one of the few who stayed and kept fighting. mark is loyal to this company and wwe hasnt\ or will screw his legacy with them. if they do, fans will freak out & they will lose a large fan base just for trying to push someone over taker at wm for cred.

 

[GameOver]

I don't think so.

Rumours were also that Vince doesn't want the streak to end which makes more sense.
Noone "needs" to beat him at Mania, there are ample other opportunities to get over, and winning one match isn't going to do it in the long term.

Ruthless who told you that Henry was going to get the nod LOL. that would've been career suicide for WWE, he was never any good

PS Just cause it's printed on the web by the IWC doesn't mean it's fact. Anyone can say anything and release a "spoiler" as to why something happened

It's called logical conclusions, doesn't mean it's fact.

 

[punk is gold]

Now i'm not saying that Randy shoud've ended the streak but what people tend to forget is after W.M. 21 he was in a huge career rut until late 2006 when rated-rko was formed if he would have won at wrestlemania if would have done wonders for his career at the time,however his decision I think was good in the long run,I think the streak is more important to Undertaker's legacy because after he's long and gone it will probably be the first thing people think of when they hear his name.

 

[CuddleBuns84]

It would of been diasterous, because 1.) Orton got injuried the very next night on RAW. His legendary push, would of been all for nothing.

2.) Orton's character has developed in a good way over the years. Instead we would of had a very stale face Orton, who yes was over, but would of been very bland. He didn't have a great catch phrase at the time, so he wouldn't of caught on that well.

3.) We talk about streaks, and history of wrestling, and nothing is more sacred, then the Undertaker's Wrestlemania streak. One of the few guarantees in the this business. A guarantee we much enjoy. You hear how people retire, and then come back a few months later, making a career vs. career match not even worth a damn. Other stipulation matches that change months after the result. But, it's a sacred event, The Undertaker's streak. A meaningful entity that the industry sure stay true too.

 

[punk is gold]

If he would have won he might have had different plans for that monday night and this was after his short stint as a face so the legend killer gimmick would have continued and gained more steam

 

[TheAnimal]

I think HBKs send off would have been a lot different for one.
It may have altered other Mania matches, such as Taker V Batista and Edge.
Ortons injury would have made it a terrible decision. Things like that cant be planned for, but it would have been the worst possible thing that could have happened in that scenario.
I think it may have even had an adverse effect on Mania because we all love to debate/see Undertakers match, whether its obvious if he'll win or not. We all love the speculation and the will they/wont they end the streak. That is a huge part of Mania and its history and even its future too

 

[Drunken Aviator]

it would have made a differance back then but Orton would probably be in the same place as he is now but UnderTaker would not be as important at WrestleMania and who knows Orton may have ends HBK'S career .
Who knows?

 

[billm75]

I'm so tired of hearing who should've/could've/would've ended Taker's streak. It seems obvious to me, that the WWE is trying to keep this streak going as long as they can, period. It's un-matched in the history of the company and it doesn't need to end by a loss to someone.

Let Taker at least go out with his streak in tact. For all he's given the business and especially the fans, that's the last the company can do for him. I'm sure he had plenty of offers to go elsewhere over the years and make big cash for a period of time, but he stayed loyal to the 'E'. They can stay loyal to him by leaving his streak in tact and unmatched.

Orton, Cena, Triple H, Kane, you name 'em, NOBODY "DESERVES" to end that streak.

 

[wushady]

If Orton had won it would of been just another notch to his legend killer gimmick. I don't think it would have meant as much to Orton's career in the long run. However it would have not necessarily hurt Takers career, but definitely would have weakened the build up to his last five Wrestlemania matches.

Each year the streak is one of the biggest draws to Wrestlemania if they took that away. His matches wouldn't mean as much, and I think HBK's career may have ended differently.

 

[maar130]

It would of been diasterous, because 1.) Orton got injuried the very next night on RAW. His legendary push, would of been all for nothing.

2.) Orton's character has developed in a good way over the years. Instead we would of had a very stale face Orton, who yes was over, but would of been very bland. He didn't have a great catch phrase at the time, so he wouldn't of caught on that well.

3.) We talk about streaks, and history of wrestling, and nothing is more sacred, then the Undertaker's Wrestlemania streak. One of the few guarantees in the this business. A guarantee we much enjoy. You hear how people retire, and then come back a few months later, making a career vs. career match not even worth a damn. Other stipulation matches that change months after the result. But, it's a sacred event, The Undertaker's streak. A meaningful entity that the industry sure stay true too.

Well Randy was already injured and the match the next night was a way to write him off the storylines, that was why the feud with Taker took so long to end actually.

Also, is not only a question for you but for the OP and everyone else, Where did you heard Randy vetoed the idea of go over? from what was posted the original plan was for Orton to go over (which was discussed over and over since Vince didn't wanted the streak to end like someone else said) but his injured shoulder (2nd itme) was the big factor for it not to happen.

At the time Randy was known as a headache backstage (you can check it up on the archives of any wrestling site) that not even Triple HHH could stand (and they were suposed to be very good friens at the time).

Also Mark Henry over Taker at Mania? for real? that would have made the world crumble, that is for sure.

 

[The Mark of Zur-En-Arrh]

They'd be exactly where they are now, except Taker wouldn't have wrestled HBK two Mania's in a row and probably wouldn't have ended his career either. Nor would it have been mandatory for Taker to win the strap off of both Batista and Edge, as for Orton, he'd have become the biggest heel on the roster for months, maybe even years to come, and would probably have to do more than simply beat up his stable-mates to achieve a face turn.