Unanswered issues with the undertaker?

[danny_the_legend_killer]

So we all know that on 2/21/11 we saw the big return of the undertaker after weeks of ominous promos and the possibility of sting coming to the wwe which didn't happen and the undertaker returned but was interrupted by a returning triple h which resulted in a feud over the streak, and once wrestlemania was done with they both went away again.

But the point of this thread is too ask why when the undertaker returned did he not address the fact that kane had firstly left him in "a vegetative state" as he never did get any payback on kane or the face that Paul Bearer had double crossed him and cost him the world title or the fact that the nexus or even Wade Barrett who was likely to be behind the attack as he was the leader?

or did i miss any of the above mentioned things or did the wwe just forget about the whole and book taker vs hhh the make mania look better?

 

[Trill Co$by]

The way I think of it is like this, Kane and Taker fought for three PPVs and Taker tried so hard to prove that he was stronger than his little brother. And for three straight Pay Per Views, Kane put Undertaker on the losing end. So thinking of it that way, maybe Taker just figured that maybe his little brother was finally no longer his little brother and it was time to show Kane more respect and treat Kane like an equal.

Or maybe the fact that Kane no longer held Taker's title made Taker no longer care... or maybe that's what he was GOING to address when he first came out until Triple H interrupted him. Idk, I just tend to go with the first scenario.

 

[Mr. Artistic guy]

Aye, and I saw many people just fobbing this off as being insignificant. If HHH addressed his fling with Sheamus, albeit in a monstrously detrimental manner, Taker should have at least had the opportunity to do something of a similar magnitude to Kane. Think about it. Three consecutive PPVs, that's almost unfathomable a task for anybody. But against The Undertaker? In this Era?

Look, if we want a solution it isn't going to come in the form of Televised consolation, that much is almost certain at this point. The only way I can explain it is that if there is anyone; the Undertaker, or rather his streak, is the exception to any and every rule. His match at Wrestlemania is allowed to transcend all previous squabbling, as it is viewed in the eyes of that occasion, for the benefit of itself. The story cut short is the answer to that question, because it just wasn't important enough to bother writing into a story they needed to build far bigger.

I suppose if you like you can suggest that Undertaker was going to address that issue before HHH came out, as Sitch said. It's the only way your going to get any solace in what actually happened.

 

[poppycock]

I am sure if the two ever get into a feud again or have any interaction with eachother all this will be addressed and cleared up for us. Kane beating The Undertaker three PPVs in a row was interesting..I was liking where the story was going and it made it a little fresher than it has been in recent years.

 

[Uncle Sam]

The way I like to think about it is this; fuck that feud. Fuck that feud in the eye socket until it goes blind and stumbles into traffic. I feel I'm in a consensus with, ooh, let's just say everyone that Undertaker/Kane was one of those things that make you even more embarrassed to be a wrestling fan than usual. I mean, promos with background music, arguing over who the devil's favourite demon was - just painful.

As for the Nexus stuff, that was just another symptom of the writers not knowing what the fuck they were doing from week to week. Maybe it was part of that "higher purpose" that kept getting mentioned but the highly paid writers weren't smart enough to ever explain.

Undertaker's burial (and that's what, his nineteenth?) was just a massive knot of shitty, confused writing. The less it's mentioned and the sooner it disappears from our collective consciousness, the better. May it never be mentioned again.

 

[reddevil69]

I think the Taker/Kane angle was so poorly received that they just decided to drop it and not make any reference to it at all. Paul Bearer was brought back, they obviously had big plans for that angle or else why have him return?

Taker put Kane over three PPV's in a row and from what I understand he was supposed to beat Kane at Survivor Series to mark the 20th anniversary of his debut in the WWF.

The matches were not very good, the reaction was poor and the general feeling was that it was the worst match quality of all the matches the two of them have had.

This coupled with Taker's rotator cuff getting worse at that time, I believe lead to the angle and match at SS being scrapped...Taker was then buried so he could leave and go have surgery on his arm.

Paul Bearer was reduced to a joke, being Edges play thing and Nexus was busted up, Barrett was pushed down the card....Vince probably figured to leave it alone, nobody really cares anyways....I think that angle is dead and I don't expect we'll see any closure to it, other than what we've already seen.

 

[Highspeed]

I personally don't see any closure to the Taker/Kane storyline unless Taker returns and has a program with him prior to Wrestlemania which I don't see happening because Taker's body doesn't like him anymore and obviously they want to keep him 100% for the big show. And I really dont think they would go for Taker/Kane 3 next year. Shame really I would have liked closure to it but in a way this last feud said what it needed to say.

 

[poppycock]

It is one of my alltime favourite WWE storylines and way back when it started was as good as any hollywood horror movie as far as creativity goes. As the years have gone on and the characters have changed and grown older things have got stale and nowhere near as effective as they once were. I hold the limits in which the WWE allows it's wrestlers to push nowdays to be part of this but even before the Pg Era it was nowhere near as entertaining as back in the days of the Attitude Era.

I don't really see the body restrictions nowdays as much of a problem as far as later day matches between the two go seeing as unlike with Mankind and others I never felt kane and Undertaker feuds were inhanced by in ring performances. I do however feel that if they do have some story to bring an end to the saga then it should take place outside not inside the ring as both can still do good promos.

 

[GrandSword]

WWE's ability to start something usually is done very well.. however their way of ending it has been quite poor for a while now. Nexus's introduction was the greatest thing I had seen in years and yet it's current stae is just a joke. The same can be said for the way Cena won the belt back from Miz (in a 3 way...really??) and of course the Undertaker's storylines.

I can even add one OP, remmeber when Vince McMahon was screwing Taker out of wins, he had Teddy Long overturn decsions and CM Punk won by submission etc. where did that end up? Exactly in the toilet like the other's you've mentioned. It something that continues to be a problem with WWE programming (and wrestling in general to be honest) and probbaly will never be fixed, fans are taught to just except that if it didn't happen a month ago, it didn't happen...

 

[berlinbrawler]

In the good old days the angle between Undertaker and Kane would have continued until Taker finally manages to come up on top.
But now, with the Undertaker being pretty much retired, there simply is no room to continue this feud. Good for Kane. I think this is the first time he ultimately won a feud against the Undertaker.

I think we will only see the Undertaker wrestle at Wrestlemania anymore. If he does get some payback on Kane it will be in a similar matter to how Triple H got payback on Sheamus - a quick beatdown on RAW. The end.
The other option is having Kane face Undertaker at Wrestlemania. But Kane is not a big enough name for the 20-0, I'm fairly certain it will be Triple H again. If there ever will be the ever more unlikely 21-0, it could be Kane.