Undertaker & HHH vs Punk & Lesnar

[George Steele's Barber]

"Fine" is exactly how I'd describe a bunch or rematches and a hastily thrown together Undertaker/Punk match.

I don't understand this "rematch" attitude. Rematches happen in rivalries in pro wrestling and sports. Do you only watch original movies and completely avoid sequels? If that is the case I'd like you to go find a way to watch Godfather II and The Empire Strikes Back. In sports rematches/rivalries can be great: boxing, football, tennis, MMA. Was HHH/UT at WM 28 a letdown for you? How about UT/Michaels at WM 26?

Again #5 from my first post. We still are a month from Mania. Punk and UT can put together a terrific program. How is this tag match any better thrown together?

I believe most things WWE have shown us. Namely that Undertaker isn't the force he used to be. It's approaching three years, when Kane destroyed him after his return at SummerSlam, that WWE have promoting him as a spent force.

97% of the public don't remember that. They remember the last four Manias. Plus I'm not really sure what your point is with this any more.

A match in which Undertaker is dominated yet snatches victory from the jaws of defeat wouldn't be anything new.

Neither would a Cena match like that but it blew the roof off of Dallas on Monday. We are suckers for that kind of stuff, it works.

Plus I am not convinced Punk is going to lose (if UT competes at all).

Yes, last year would've been the perfect ending for him. However he's apparently having another match. One with no real reason for happening.

What purpose does the tag match have? And again, WWE hasn't even started the Punk/UT program. It has no reason until WWE gives it a reason. That may come tonight, give it a chance.

So what happens this year? Does Punk beating him down for a prolonged amount of time work? Should it be a very even a straight forward match? Or should Undertaker dominate Punk?

This is not my problem. Any direction probably works with two great performers like Punk and UT.

Yes. Why wouldn't they? Despite his age, Undertaker has proven that he can still go.

So why waste him on a tag match? Why do you keep talking about how run down he is and then say he can still go?

Triple & Lesnar have put on entertaining matches in the few they've had in recent times

So why waste that talent and ability on a tag match when you concede that they can put on an entertaining match? If you thought SS sucked I might understand where you are coming from.

and Punk has consistently been one of WWE's best workers for years now.

Again, so why waste him on a tag match. He deserves better.

The way I see it is that this tag match would be the 2nd biggest match on the card and possibly more anticipated that Cena/Rock. A singles match between the Undertaker & Punk would likely be the third biggest match on the card due to their being less history/less build than Cena/Rock & HHH/Lesnar.

Punk/UT would be my biggest. Not WWE's but definitely mine. What is the point of you comment though? Third highest compared to second highest isn't that big of a deal. I will say that two singles matches gives you more big matches than one tag match.

More big matches equals more money generally. Seems simple, am I wrong in this case?

I'm basing everything on how Undertaker has been promoted in his previous two matches and his feud with Kane. I think The Undertaker has the ability to make in to 25-0 should he chose.

With your logic he could win number 25 by being the non-wrestling captain of Team UT vs Team Ryder at WM 33 in a 14 man tag and it would mean something to The Streak.

Nobody should end The Streak.

Then you fail to maximize it's potential without giving another guy the rub. You also fail to give The UT his proper burial of sorts. 20 years is still a great accomplishment and will sell a lot of DVDs. If the UT is ready to walk away, he does not get to take The Streak with him. Do champions get to take the belt with them when they walk away?

Those examples are lost on me, but I respect The Streak. I apprecaite that it's a massive WrestleMania draw and that it's an eagerly anticipated part of the show. However people get too precious about it.

Says the guy who says it should never be broken.

People think that for some reason the streak can't be defended in a tag match. That's despite one match ending in a DQ and one being a handicap match.

Your first really good point but not that great. The Streak is by no means pure. Even last year's win had it's clusterfuck moments. But UT is still a solitary character and his demise or continuation should not fall in any way to the wrestling ability of HHH unless HHH is his opponent. It's too cheap.

Hey, the outcome ofhe match is never in doubt. The only thing WWE can do each year is try to promote the biggest match they can, the match that should be of the highest quality possible and one that almost makes you think that the Undertaker might lose.

I agree with this and I believe that a man who just took John Cena to the limit, held the title for over a year, and has many good years left has created doubt in my mind. A man who can take that victory and make it another accolade for him to generate heat from fans who believe The Streak should never end.

I don't see what a singles match against the Undertaker does for him. He won't be harmed by the loss, but becoming another Undertaker victim won't elevate him. Subsequent matches against 'Taker in which Punk could gain some measure of revenge might, but as a one-on-one match in which the outcome won't be in doubt, it doesn't benefit him.

Why are you so confident that Punk will lose? Even if he loses, like you said he won't be harmed. Regardless of wins and losses, a singles match will be more entertaining than a tag.

Can't think of one.

So why start now?

But WWE has had thrown together main events before that've worked. WWE had a great 2000 despite a hastily thrown together 4-Way main event, The Rock/Hogan only happened because Austin didn't want the match, I don't think HBK was originally intended to be in the main event of Mania XX.

These may be facts but don't change anything that we have been arguing.

Also in recent years WWE have presented multi-man matches involving their biggest stars, in world title matches, that basically meant nothing. Cena vs. Edge vs. Big Show & Cena vs. Orton vs. HHH spring to mind.

I don't love triple threats or fourways but they are better than tag matches when you have your top guys invloved.

I'd propose that the Undertaker's first match in a year will make money anyway.

But not as much.

I'd also propose that a match involving Lesnar, with the possibility that he could lose The Streak would make it an even bigger draw.

Then have him go one on one with Lesnar. I still like him against Punk better but facing Lesnar would be more than acceptable.

And how does this tag match make you think The Streak is going to end any more than a singles match? I don't see the logic therefore I don't see the additional drawing capavility.

That would be a very successful edition of Smackdown.

I am glad we can find something to agree on.

 

[The Eighties]

My preference for this match is purely personal as I just do not want to see Triple H vs Lesnar, however it is not happening as Taker wouldn't come back to do a tag match, despite his noticeable gut hangover he must feel he can deliver a singles match that wont tarnish his legacy.

If this were to somehow happen though it certainly wouldn't be a regular tag match, I imagine they'd do something like a buried alive or HIAC match. To be honest ever since the Rock 'n' Sock Connection wrestled Big Show and Taker in a Buried Alive match on Smackdown back in 99 I've always wanted to see another tag team Buried Alive match, that thing was wild.... However, given it's 14 years since that match I am guessing no one else does.

 

[gk11973]

Not a good idea. From a business and fan perspective this is a huge letdown compared to the prospect of the rumored singles matches. This would be a cool Raw main event but people expect more from WM. Some reasons this is a bad idea:

1. The Streak - are we really supposed to excited for a The Streak match if The UT is going to be standing around for it? If he wins, it doesn't feel right and if he loses it seems cheap. Especially if HHH is involved in the pinfall.

2. Chemistry - you can't tell me these guys are going to compete together like The Hardys or Road Warriors. Are we really going to have HHH get beat down for 10 minutes and make a hot tag to The UT? He's not exactly going to be able to keep up the momentum that is meant to be created by a hot tag.

3. Storyline - I know The UT is Mr. Backstage leader but I don't see him coming to HHH's aid in order to defend McMahon's honor. That's hardly The UT's character. And Punk and Lesnar are supposed to be some type of cohesive unit. Two ego maniacs agree to team. Punk goes from "long reigning champ" to "wrestling God" to "part of Team Heyman". I'm not a huge Punk fan and I think it's a huge insult to him and especially his character.

4. Money - this is going to turn people off. Rock/Cena II is already pissing some people off. This may turn them away.

5. The Unknown - WM is still a month away. You really don't know how well HHH/Lesnar will build or The UT's condition (or even if Punk/UT is going to be on the card). Give it some time.

Dear Vince McMahon,

I know you read this website constantly while downloading Asian scat porn. If you book this match I promise that I won't watch WM. If The UT can't go in a singles bout he should stay off the card.

Hugs and Kisses,
George Steele's Barber

Your little letter to Vince is just rude and condescending. You can express your opinion without resorting to childish behavior like that.

You would prefer to see two singles matches. Fine, you expressed your opinion. If you think that cena/rock II is pissing people off, why do you think they would be excited for HHH/Lesnar II?? Punk and UT is going to feel thrown together no matter what they do. UT has gotten old and really slowed down. It is clear that even in one match per year, he struggles to turn in a great performance. Placing him a tag match allows him to still perform but not have to carry the load and get a breather here and there. It does not detract from his legacy at all. Let's be honest, the streak is not going to end. Period. The downside is that it makes it hard to be excited for a UT match because the outcome is never really in doubt. Even in a tag match, the streak will not end. But the storyline of a tag match would have a lot more underlying elements that would make it far more interesting than a pair of singles matches would. The history of the UT and HH at Mania would add a level of drama and emotional investment that will be lacking. Can they get along and team up for one night? Not to mention it would be a great way to plant some seeds of dissension between Lesnar and Punk for a possible future feud. The long term potential here is far more interesting than seeing HHH beat Lesnar, (yawn) and UT beat Punk individually.

 

[AhSpicyDrop]

The streak being on the line in a tag match is a stupid idea... Also they've really made no connection to Lesnar and Punk as being cohesive aside from the fact that Lesnar and Punk are both managed by Heyman.

Triple H vs. Lesnar is going to be awesome the second time around because it's going to be a gimmick match which will help hide both guys weaknesses. People complaining about this match are going to be singing a different tune after Mania when this match easily steals the show. I don't give a damn about either guy in the grand scheme of things but H's gimmick matches are always good for fun. If last Monday night is any indication of what we can expect at Mania from these two then everyone should be excited.

The main reason this idea shouldn't happen is because Punk deserves his own starring role in the show and that should be against the Undertaker. Punk is more than capable of carrying Taker even if he's injured, and that's the match they should go with if they aren't going to let him be apart of the Main Event. In a tag match both feuds will eventually get overshadowed by the Streak anyway.

 

[Dilligaf]

seeing as Taker is likely to wrestle CM Punk ... I think you'll need to get that tattoo touched up

Ive already had my wife saying to me now taker has decided to defend the streak, my tattoo means nothing & it was a total waste of money, even though she knows what my tattoo means to me.

 

[King Patrick Star]

In my opinion, on paper, a new match will always be better than a rematch. It’s fresh. You can’t beat fresh. Two examples of where my opinion may be wrong is Goldberg vs. Brock Lesnar, where the match just sucked and Stone Cold Steve Austin vs. The Rock 2 and 3, where the matches were better and better every time.

In this specific case, I think it would be better for this to be a Tag Team match and would really play up the Triple H and Undertaker feud turned friendship. Like I said in the post above, there are really no negatives about this match. No “same old” rematch for Lesnar and HHH is a good thing. Taker not having to work as much as he would in a singles match is a good thing. Vince and Heyman involved in WM in 2013 is a good thing. Extra space for an Intercontinental / United States Championship match is a good thing. The WM Streak in a new match type is a good thing.

The New Dangerous Alliance (CM Punk and Brock Lesnar) w / Paul Heyman vs. The Old Corporate Ministry (The Undertaker and Triple H) w / Vince McMahon

It’s a good thing and because it’s a good thing, it’s not going to happen. HAHA!!

 

[rerun406]

Don't be so hard on yourself man. As much as I question the point/purpose of tattoos

I find it pretty bold that you paid tribute to Taker like that.

 

[Spinebreaker]

You were at 'Mania to see it, you enjoyed it. You're a Taker fan.

It's a cool tattoo, You think so, I think so. I'd hve money on Mr. Calloway thinking it's cool too.

Anyone who thinks different, tell 'em to piss off; it's your arm.

Obviously, a more polite version for the wife... ;-)

 

[Dilligaf]

Don't be so hard on yourself man. As much as I question the point/purpose of tattoos

I find it pretty bold that you paid tribute to Taker like that.

You were at 'Mania to see it, you enjoyed it. You're a Taker fan.

It's a cool tattoo, You think so, I think so. I'd hve money on Mr. Calloway thinking it's cool too.

Anyone who thinks different, tell 'em to piss off; it's your arm.

Obviously, a more polite version for the wife... ;-)

Cheers guys, all my mates have all said the same.

It would have been nice to have had it done at Miami Ink, but Yoji wanted $500 (£300), so I had it done at an awesome tattoo shop that one of my mates dad owns for £100 ($149)