The Undertaker, WM30 and the World Heavyweight Championship

[MCMG]

As we know, John Cena won the World Heavyweight Championship at Hell in a Cell AND he defeated Damien Sandow meaning he is effectively on the home straight to Wrestlemania. Presuming he would only lose the title on PPV, he basically has 4 events to navigate if he is to walk into WM30 as champ.

The Undertaker, as we know, has to defend his streak and there are very few credible options. A match with Brock is currently the most likely but I don't think it will be as effective given how, lets say, fragile The Undertaker currently is. While a match with The Rock would be awesome for many reasons - I am sceptical about it being of high quality. Although, it would be fantastic for buyrates so who really cares.

Ryback/Bray Wyatt seem to be alternatives but both are a waste of Taker's one appearance a year, especially when there is money making matches such as Brock, Rock or Cena. The ONLY way either of these two should wrestle Taker is if they are going to end the streak and neither seem worthy.

I don't think there is an obvious name to take the belt off Cena and I, nor the WWE, would be against him holding the belt going into Mania. Cena/Taker would be a fantastic match and if they put the World Title on the line it would be a perfect way to end The Deadman's career. Obviously, there is no suggestion that he is going to retire but the fact he working such a light schedule and its WM30, I think it would be a good place to stop. Having him win the World Title at WM30 would be a very interesting option. Firstly, it would be a great way to end his career - with the belt that he has had many great feuds over.

Thereafter, they have two options for the WHC. 1) They simply retire the belt which is something many are longing for. The Undertaker would be the last ever champion and that would be its legacy. Fewer belts, the WHC becoming a mid-card belt and all that. However, it would probably be a waste of putting the belt on Cena in the first place.

2) Is they have a tournament to crown a new champion. Whether it be for main-eventers or guys who have never won a World Title that could be a great opportunity for the WWE. Thinking ahead, guys like Punk, Sheamus, Orton could all be without anything significant so chasing the World Heavyweight Championship would be a great start to the new season. On the other side; maybe someone like Ambrose, Rollins, Reigns, Rhodes, Bray Wyatt, Wade Barrett or Damien Sandow could win their first World Title.

I only see three credible options for Cena at WM; Taker, Punk and Brock and I really can't see him losing the WHC from now and then. Moreover, I think Taker's best option for WM30 is Cena. Ending his career by winning a World Title would be perfect and would be good for the overall title picture in the WWE.

 

[JabroniBeater81]

Had the same idea a few weeks back, except only with the fantasy idea of someone like Wyatt or Ambrose cashing in a Money in the Bank contract, beating Taker, becoming champion and ending the streak.

 

[Ziirox]

Undertaker is bigger than any championship in the WWE right now. He doesn't need it. Really hasn't for the last 5 years or so. The Streak is the biggest thing in the WWE. It's become the main spectacle of Wrestlemania. People pay money to watch Undertaker wrestle and see if the one lucky person facing this living (or non-living) legend can end this remarkable record set. Adding a title to this match will not only devalue the title, but it wouldn't make sense for Undertaker to challenge because wrestling a match or two a year has been his thing for the last few years. Everyone would know he wouldn't hold onto it long.

I like Undertaker vs John Cena at Wrestlemania. I think it's a match that should happen at some point. Cena has done everything BUT face Taker at Wrestlemania. John Cena has held numerous championships, beaten just about everyone in the company, won Royal Rumbles, and a MITB match. The only thing left to do at this point is to go for the ultimate prize: Beating the Undertaker at Wrestlemania. However, it's not going to be this year. Brock Lesnar vs Undertaker will happen. I guarantee it. I like Undertaker vs John Cena to happen at Wrestlemania 31 though. It won't be for a championship either. The Streak is better than any belt the WWE can throw on a superstar.

 

[Aquaman6686]

Had the same idea a few weeks back, except only with the fantasy idea of someone like Wyatt or Ambrose cashing in a Money in the Bank contract, beating Taker, becoming champion and ending the streak.

Why is that so many people want to see some nobody end The Streak? Doing that would ruin Undertaker's entire career, for what purpose? To give some young guy who hasn't earned it a huge rub? Get real.

 

[Dagger Dias]

Undertaker doesn't need the World Heavyweight Championship to further generate interest in his Wrestlemania 30 match. The streak is above the titles at this point. As of this year he is 21-0 at Wrestlemania. More than two decades of being undefeated at the biggest show of the year is unheard of and the odds of it ever being replicated in WWE are next to nothing. The fact that the legendary streak is on the line at Wrestlemania is enough to sell the feud. No titles are needed. They didn't need it for the Edge feud for Wrestlemania 24 or for the Batista feud the year before that.

That being said, if Cena put the World Heavyweight Championship up for grabs (assuming he is still holding the belt by that point, which he should) while Taker puts his streak on the line.... Title VS Streak would sell. Heck, Cena VS Taker AT ALL would sell. The title would be icing on the cake and a bit of an afterthought, but it would still benefit from being a part of the match considering the fact that the biggest star in wrestling in the past decade is trying to end the legendary undefeated streak. Cena VS Taker for the World Heavyweight Championship would be a monster of a match and absolutely, without a shadow of a doubt, would HAVE to close the show.

Some inevitably would whine saying they do not want to see Cena facing Taker. Who else could they have face him who legitimately has a shot at ending the streak at this point? It's also a much better option than a Punk rematch or a Lesnar VS Taker match. I'm not interested in Taker VS Lesnar in the slightest and Punk doesn't need a rematch. Ryback and Wyatt are still too new in my opinion. Taker should face someone this year who has not had a shot at the streak before, but someone who can believable end the streak. Cena and Sheamus are the only names that come to mind. Jericho could also be a good opponent, although we all know he'd have no chance of actually winning. The belt badly needs a huge match to make it matter again, this is the best way to do that. Cena VS Taker for a world title (regardless of which of the two it is) at Wrestlemania is the biggest possible match left that has not been done with today's roster. It simply doesn't get any bigger than that.

 

[justinept]

Why is that so many people want to see some nobody end The Streak? Doing that would ruin Undertaker's entire career, for what purpose? To give some young guy who hasn't earned it a huge rub? Get real.

It really irritates me when people say (insert promising young guy) should get the "rub" by going over The Undertaker at WrestleMania. It's lazy fantasy booking at it's best - and it's simply erroneous to think that someone like Bray Wyatt, Dean Ambrose or Ryback would catapult to stardom simply by ending The Streak.

Consider the "rub" Chris Jericho got from defeating both The Rock and Steve Austin in the same night to become the first Undisputed WWE Champion. It's perhaps the biggest "rub" for any WWE superstar in the past 15 years - perhaps second in all pro wrestling during the past 20 years with only Goldberg going over Hogan topping it. It was a "rub" so great that Jericho was still bragging about it during his most recent heel run. But as great as that "rub" was - as popular as Jericho already was at the time - all it did was ascend him to main event status. It didn't put him on the level of a Hogan, Rock, Austin or Cena. He never came close to sniffing that level.

For someone to end The Streak, the WWE has to be 100% positive that that wrestler would ascend to the Hogan, Rock, Austin Cena level or else it's a waste. This guy can't just be another main event player. He has to become The Guy, the reason people buy a ticket and purchase pay-per views otherwise the monetary value of his ending The Streak doesn't equal the revenue lost by his killing The Streak.

So ask yourself, what is the monetary value of The Streak? Well, the WWE uses it to sell WrestleMania, DVDs and t-shirts. For the past few years, The Streak is the only reason we've even seen The Undertaker at all. If you kill The Streak, you lose a main event attraction at WrestleMania, you lose any merchandising opportunities centered on The Streak, and you likely lose any future appearances from The Undertaker. I don't have facts and figures in front of me, but I'd be floored if Jericho's independent monetary value to the WWE over the past 10 years surpassed the independent monetary value of The Streak. And if that's the case, then it would mean whoever were to end The Streak would have to surpass the value of Chris Jericho. Is anyone willing to guarantee that, over the next 10 years, Wyatt, Ryback or Ambrose will surpass Jericho's value from 2002-13? I'm not. Hell, outside Cena, I'm not sure there's a guy on this roster that could surpass Jericho's value over the next 10 years.

And since that guy isn't on the roster, the safest financial bet for the WWE is to simply increase the value of The Streak. Keep feeding The Undertaker established stars - guys like The Rock, Cena, Lesnar, Punk - until he's ready to hang it up. And when he's ready to hang it up for good, the OPs idea of letting him win the WHC at WrestleMania only to retire with the belt would be the perfect final chapter for the brand.

 

[#1Dobz92]

I would rather they used Cena to bring up the prestige of the World Heavyweight Championship and have an up-and-comer beat Cena for the title in a few months to give them a big rub and then maintain the strong booking of the WHC with said person as champion.

 

[LoudClearVoice]

It really irritates me when people say (insert promising young guy) should get the "rub" by going over The Undertaker at WrestleMania. It's lazy fantasy booking at it's best - and it's simply erroneous to think that someone like Bray Wyatt, Dean Ambrose or Ryback would catapult to stardom simply by ending The Streak.

Consider the "rub" Chris Jericho got from defeating both The Rock and Steve Austin in the same night to become the first Undisputed WWE Champion. It's perhaps the biggest "rub" for any WWE superstar in the past 15 years - perhaps second in all pro wrestling during the past 20 years with only Goldberg going over Hogan topping it. It was a "rub" so great that Jericho was still bragging about it during his most recent heel run. But as great as that "rub" was - as popular as Jericho already was at the time - all it did was ascend him to main event status. It didn't put him on the level of a Hogan, Rock, Austin or Cena. He never came close to sniffing that level.

For someone to end The Streak, the WWE has to be 100% positive that that wrestler would ascend to the Hogan, Rock, Austin Cena level or else it's a waste. This guy can't just be another main event player. He has to become The Guy, the reason people buy a ticket and purchase pay-per views otherwise the monetary value of his ending The Streak doesn't equal the revenue lost by his killing The Streak.

So ask yourself, what is the monetary value of The Streak? Well, the WWE uses it to sell WrestleMania, DVDs and t-shirts. For the past few years, The Streak is the only reason we've even seen The Undertaker at all. If you kill The Streak, you lose a main event attraction at WrestleMania, you lose any merchandising opportunities centered on The Streak, and you likely lose any future appearances from The Undertaker. I don't have facts and figures in front of me, but I'd be floored if Jericho's independent monetary value to the WWE over the past 10 years surpassed the independent monetary value of The Streak. And if that's the case, then it would mean whoever were to end The Streak would have to surpass the value of Chris Jericho. Is anyone willing to guarantee that, over the next 10 years, Wyatt, Ryback or Ambrose will surpass Jericho's value from 2002-13? I'm not. Hell, outside Cena, I'm not sure there's a guy on this roster that could surpass Jericho's value over the next 10 years.

And since that guy isn't on the roster, the safest financial bet for the WWE is to simply increase the value of The Streak. Keep feeding The Undertaker established stars - guys like The Rock, Cena, Lesnar, Punk - until he's ready to hang it up. And when he's ready to hang it up for good, the OPs idea of letting him win the WHC at WrestleMania only to retire with the belt would be the perfect final chapter for the brand.

You summed it up perfectly here. It seems like a lot of fans and the IWC want that short-term reward of their next indy-workhorse to end the streak but these people don't understand the business end of it. You are absolutely right when you say that WWE has to be 100% sure that the guy will not only be a main eventer, but be THE GUY. Simply beating Undertaker isn't enough, this guy would have to have longevity, 3-4 years after he ends the streak, not one year later. There's simply no one on the roster at this point that fits that bill, and it doesn't appear there will be while Taker can still wrestle.

The streak is far more valuable than having some bozo end it. If Undertaker retires undefeated, they can market the hell out of that with DVDs, T-shirts, books, etc.

 

[Mustang Sally]

The fact that the legendary streak is on the line at Wrestlemania is enough to sell the feud. No titles are needed.

That's true. The streak has become a phenomena in itself; not through promotion, but through years and years of annual matches. In the first years, no one was thinking of building a streak; Undertaker was just always in the right position to win at Wrestlemania.

For the same reasons, only the biggest match against the biggest name will suffice now. Undertaker isn't fighting Ryback, Bray Wyatt or Dean Ambrose (!) at WM. Who would pay to see that? Yes, the streak is important, but 'Taker by himself doesn't make the streak......he needs the best opposition in there with him.

I haven't given up on Sting. While Steve Borden admits negotiations were taking place with WWE, I wonder if anyone figured that the reason the deal never happened (yet) was because WWE wanted Sting to lose to Undertaker.......and he didn't want to. Ever consider that? But if an outside legend is going to enter WWE just to fight 'Taker at WM, he has to know he'll be scheduled to lose. If Sting ever agrees with the main provision, we may yet see the match. It would be immense.

Of course, there's John Cena. It would be a match worthy of an Undertaker streak match at WM, for sure. Plus, Cena proved (against the Rock at WM28) that he would agree to lose cleanly, although that willingness on his part might actually hurt the gate at WM30 because people would figure 'Taker will win. Then again, did anyone actually think CM Punk was gonna end 'Taker's streak?

But I think it comes down to Brock Lesnar vs. Undertaker. I worry about Mark Calaway's fragile bones since Brock doesn't seem to know how to watch out for his opponent. Against rugged guys like Triple H and Cena, it didn't matter much, but only Punk can tell us how he was feeling after facing off against Brock.

So, for WM30, I'm figuring on 'Taker-Brock, unless Sting can be persuaded to job. John Cena will be saved for 'Taker's last match ever.....whenever that might be.


One caveat: If Cena executes his long-awaited heel turn.....that could bring 'Taker-Cena at WM. Personally, I'd love to see that one.

 

[bioshock]

The Undertaker, as we know, has to defend his streak and there are very few credible options. A match with Brock is currently the most likely but I don't think it will be as effective given how, lets say, fragile The Undertaker currently is. While a match with The Rock would be awesome for many reasons - I am sceptical about it being of high quality. Although, it would be fantastic for buyrates so who really cares.

I just cannot stand it when people put this in any thread about the Undertaker, calling him fragile, weak, hurting, what ever you want to say. The guy is old, but he's in great shape still, and he isn't fragile, fragile for what? The only way Undertaker can hurt himself in a match would be his dive over the ropes, besides doing that Undertaker could most likely wrestle 20 to 30 times a year if he liked.

If Sting could do it so can Undertaker, if Nash could do it, so can Undertaker.

Considering he has only been in a handfull of matches in the past 3 years, he can def go one on one with anyone.

As for the OP, I really don't see the Undertaker having anything to do with the world title. Now consider this: WWE has wanted to get rid of the world title, so that WWE is the only major belt, or join them both. What if its Cena vs Undertaker for the world title, and Undertaker wins the belt. Thus its the end of the belt, and its retired with Undertaker being the last "world champion" I think not only is it a good way to defunk the belt, but its a nice way to put Undertaker over at WM30. Sort of like how Triple H was the last to hold the WWF attitiude era winged eagle belt, and to hold the WCW, version world title, or how Hogan was the last to hold the old WWF championship while Andre was the first to be seen with the new winged eagle belt, or how HBK/Austin were the last to hold the winged eagle belt.

Over the years in WWE its always been important being the first or last to hold a belt. What better way to retire the world championship belt from WWE?