Undertaker vs Austin Wrestlemania, Why didn't this happen?

[Twiztid Rodimus]

They faced each other in 98, At Summerslam that year. And Austin faced HBK that year.

So, for obvious reasons it didn't happen then. Steve got the Rock twice, and Scott Hall once, and so on.

The thing that gets me, is that this match didn't happen at Mania. Taker/Austin could have had a hell of a lead up. The match they had at SS, some say was not amazing, I found it entertaining, and they just needed to work together more.

What are your thoughts on this idea?

 

[frostbite2819]

rock vs austin was just too big a locomotive to stop the momentum of once it got rolling.
not only that, but 'insert name here' vs taker at wrestlemania just didnt have the aura to it then that it has now. i think honestly UT vs hhh I was his coming out party for really good wrestlemania matches and that was what 2001?
by then austin was just banged up but thankfully at least we got the last one in 03 vs rocky and im just happy austin had the great career that he did.
no regrets.
on a side note, the build up to that match (highway to hell) at SS 98 was one of my favorite buildups to any feud ever. however the match was a little disappointing. not bad, but not great.

 

[Mr. HD]

I honestly think it was supposed to happen at WrestleMania 2000, but unfortunately both men were injured which paved the way with probably the most unique WrestleMania Main Event with the Fatal 4 Way and a McMahon in each corner.

But yeah, I think if both men are healthy, I think we have Austin vs Taker at WrestleMania 2000. Because honestly, around late 1999, Rock was getting bigger pops than Austin and his feud with Triple H was getting hotter and hotter and once Austin went down with that neck injury, Rocky was the top man. I don't think they would've taken that momentum away from him.

 

[shooter_mcgavin]

Considering the hype they had at Summerslam 1998, there's no way they could have hyped their WM bout any better than SS and it would have looked second rate. Add that to the fact that Austin and Taker already faced each other at the December PPV.

Rock vs. Austin was the best way to go to further the Austin/McMahon feud w/o having McMahon in the Match.

As for The Undertaker ... yeah he got the short end of the stick at WMXV. Considering the guys the The Corporation had at the time such as Ken Shamrock or The Big Show, its even a wonder why they went with The Bossman.

Shamrock was probably the best choice ... a lot of people may not have liked it but I enjoyed their match at Backlash and how they put Shamrock over as the only few superstars that have inflicted pain on Undertaker.

 

[rokuma]

I think it's because the Undertaker rarely faces off against "top-level stars" at Wrestlemania...for whatever reason. He's always faced guys that were just slightly below him...probably the closest to him are Edge and Orton, who weren't quite at their peak. Then he faced Triple H in 2001 (not quite at his peak) and Flair (way past his prime), Diesel on his way out in 1996, HBK consecutive years (during his era of putting guys over). I think you could make the argument that if Undertaker were ever to face Cena at Wrestlemania, it would be his biggest WM match of all time. He just hasn't faced the best of the best in that year...it's always been somebody just a notch below him. I think that's part of the reason you've never seen Taker/Austin or Taker/Rock at Wrestlemania (or even Taker/Bret Hart)

 

[DeathClutch]

The same reason, HHH/Austin, HHH/Rock, Undertaker/Rock, Undertaker/Austin and so on never happened at Mania. Because timing never premitted, thou we could say that match could of happened at this Mania and that Mania so matches just aren't meant to happen like Undertaker/Cena @ Mania (thou 30 would be my guess).

People miss the point on Wrestlemania. It's once per year.
Wrestlemania is only ONE show, what about the other PPV's like SummerSlam or Survivor Series, King of the Ring or the Royal Rumble?

They've all had matches on that have been better than WrestleMania matches in that calander year, matches shouldn't be defined by Wrestlemania, they happened on x PPV and should be enjoyed not asked why they didn't happen on the biggest show of the year.

Rock/Austin was too big NOT to happen 3x.
And that possibly hurt a lot of the matches you'd of liked to have seen, like Austin/Undertaker or Austin/HHH or Undertaker/Rock.

 

[Jokers_Wild]

Because it happened on every other ppv.......

 

[X]

The real reasons are pretty simple and uncontroversial. The schedules simply never matched up well enough for them to book it, and also because they booked Austin against Undertaker many, many, MANY times during the rest of the year's PPVs not entitled Wrestlemania. So much so that people got really freakin' tired of them by around 2001.

Austin didn't become a main eventer on the Undertaker's level until late 96, early 97 and during that time Undertaker was finishing up with the Mankind feud and starting his first "real" World title run in 1997 (not counting the short 1991 reign before he was knocked back down the card to the novelty status of "the zombie who fights big fat foreign guys"). At the same time Austin was in the middle of the brilliant feud with Bret Hart, and he would feud with Hart and the Hart Foundation for most of 1997 as well. Still, they found the time to work one title match on the "Cold Day in Hell" In Your House PPV in May of 97 (good little match too IIRC) because they knew those two wrestling was going to be a money match in the future.

Cut to late 1997 when Undertaker's world title main event run is running down and Austin's feud with the Hart Foundation is finally dying, here comes the newly introduced Kane to work the brilliant feud and angle he did with his kayfabe brother the Undertaker through out late 1997 to mid 1998, when they temporarily blew the feud off after Wrestlemania 14 and even had them sort of "bury the hatchet" soon enough and become allies. Now during this same time Austin had just won his first world title and was out there working a great program with Mick Foley as Dude Love because they knew they couldn't match Undertaker and Austin up right after 'Mania and blow a big time match like that on a B-show PPV that wasn't one of the "Big 5" of the time (Rumble, Mania, KOTR, Summerslam, Survivor Series). So they waited and then built an awesome feud for months between Austin and Undertaker finally and they had it culminate in a classic match at Summerslam 1998, which scored them a very big buyrate based mainly on that match. The feud cooled down in the later months of 1998 while Austin took some time off and dropped the title before returning to again temporarily blow the feud off with Undertaker in that Buried Alive match back at the Rock Bottom PPV in December of 1998. Average match there unfortunately.

After that they had to continue the Austin/McMahon feud because that was where the big money was, and when they introduced The Rock as the corporate champion he got over so hugely that they knew the best match to book was Austin vs. Rock, while Undertaker languished away in a crappy feud in the midcard with the Corporation and the Big Bossman. After the Austin/Rock feud when Rock had been turned face because of just how over he had gotten in that feud, again the Austin and Undertaker met up. They traded the world title and finally blew off the feud for good for awhile with a great First Blood match at Fully Loaded in July 1999, a match which also blew off the Austin/McMahon rivalry finally as well. From there the Undertaker took nearly 8 months off to heal up and Austin took even longer, nearly a year off to finally rest after working so hard with a bad neck for the last year or two. The company shifted it's focus onto The Rock and Triple H while Austin and Undertaker, the two guys who had basically carried the company the last few years, finally got some deserved rest to heal up. Because of that, they both wound up missing Wrestlemania 2000.

The rest of the year Austin was busy getting revenge for the whole "Austin got hit by a car" angle against Triple H and others while the Undertaker became more of an upper-midcard act along with his brother Kane for the summer working a program 2001 against a still red-hot heel Triple H. During that same time Austin had returned and the big money match again for them was Austin vs. Rock, so they had to book that at Wrestlemania 17 and thank God they did because everyone remembers that as an all-time classic show and match. The rest of 2001 was focused on Austin being heel because he'd finally started to become stale as a babyface while the Undertaker dispatched of one WCW/ECW guy after another during the whole lambasted Invasion angle of the summer after WCW and ECW fell.

Now, 2002 I guess you could argue that they could have booked Undertaker vs. Austin at 'Mania. The schedules lined up for once and neither man was involved in a big-money match at that year's show with Undertaker facing Ric Flair and Austin taking on Scott Hall of all people. But like I said in my opening to this lengthy post, people had become sick of Austin vs. Undertaker by 2002. They had feuded on and off from 1997-2001 basically and wrestled each other on a staggering 7 main-event matches on WWF PPVs during that period of time. That's a lot of PPV matches man. As good as some of them were, it got stale after a while, so people weren't interested in seeing that again in 2002.

Finally by the time 2003 came around they had to work that one last big money match with Austin and Rock at 'Mania, so Undertaker was out of the picture again. And as we all know, Austin would be retired by next year's time while Undertaker would completely re-tool his character, so there was no longer a chance for them to ever work a Wrestlemania program. And really, there's nothing wrong with that. They had plenty of big-time matches on big-time shows during the Attitude Era, and I don't think anyone who watched the product at that time would say that they didn't see enough of Undertaker vs. Austin. They'd probably say they saw too much of Undertaker vs. Austin in fact.

So yeah, there's a very lengthy and in-depth near-essay response to your question OP. Happy trails.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

It just never matched up and worked, and besides Austin or Taker always had bigger and more important fish to fry at the grandest stage of them all.

Lets just do all of Austin's WM's 1 by 1 as taker was in all of them.

1) WM 12 - Austin vs. Savio Vega/Taker vs. Diesel. Austin just had his name change to SCSA, just came into the WWF a few months earlier and was still the Million Dollar Champion. At this point he had no track record so a match with Taker seemed implausible. Taker was in a main event program with Big Daddy Cool as they cost each other the title at RR96 and In your House respectively. Diesel was leaving for WCW and one of his last duties was to put over Taker, their biggest star outside of Bret Hart and HBK (who were the main event at WM12).

2) WM13 - Austin/Bret Hart Taker/Sid - Now this is the one that was most important for Austin. He was a star on the rise (not champion material yet but close) and needed a solid feud to get pushed up the ladder and Bret was the perfect choice. They both had a great contrast in styles and personalities, both thought they were the best and it just worked wonders for all parties. Undertaker was the logical choice to be champ at the time, Sid wasn't a great champ and Undertaker was the hottest guy in the company at the time. Bret and Austin needed to happen and without it, Austin wouldn't have become what he did.

3) WM14 - Austin/HBK Taker/Kane - Now Austin beating HBK was a great way to go because it put Austin against the odds better. He had to beat HBK, HHH, Chyna and Mike Tyson to become champion and DX was the hottest thing in the WWE at the time. It was a perfect way for Austin to become champ and ring in the Attitude Era (really who says attitude more than HBK and Austin?). Taker was in a feud with Kane that NEEDED to have a WM match because of the way it was built. Taker HAD to face Kane at Mania and doing it beforehand would have been foolish.

4)WM15 - Austin/Rock Taker/ Boss Man - At this point taker wasn't as relevant as he was the year before and Austin was in a year long feud with McMahon, who better for Austin to face at WM than the WWF champion and McMahon's #1 hand picked corporate champion in the Rock. The Rock was the perfect challenger at the time as it wasn't just Austin vs. Rock, it was Austin vs. McMahon the feud that had been driving the WWF for the past year.

5)WM17 - Austin/Rock Taker/HHH - Taker became a completely different character at this point and it was more logical for him to face HHH than Austin. Austin facing the Rock always makes sense as it draws money and was a good way for Austin to turn heel (although that was a dumb decision). The Rock was with McMahon and it gave a better story than if he turned on Taker. The Rock was their top baby face and turning on the top babyface is a great way to go when turning someone heel.

6)WM18 - Taker/Flair Austin/Hall - the nWo just came in and were threatening to destroy the WWF. Austin and the Rock were the 2 biggest names in the WWF so they were the ones to face the nWo of course. Rock faced Hogan and Austin took Hall and Nash, made perfect sense. Also Taker just turned heel and was in a feud with Flair at the time even before the nWo came in.

7) WM19 - Taker/ Show and A-Train Austin/Rock - this one was simple, both Austin and Taker were babyfaces by this point and it was Austin's last match, for his last match he should have went out against the guy he headlined 2 wrestlemanias with, The Rock. It was the perfect way for Austin to retire. Taker's streak was the big thing with him at WM19 so Show and A-Train seemed like a giant threat towards Taker. They were obviously trying to make it seem impossible for Taker to win so they went that route.

All in all the timing just wasn't there for both guys. The closest their schedules came together was at WM14 but like I said Kane and Taker had to go down. If Kane wasn't there than Taker would have been a good option but not as good as HBK, but could have went that way since in January Michael's blew out a disc in his back. Other than that it never would have meshed well.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

The main reason in later years was that Austin couldn't take many of Taker's big moves... The Tombstone, Last Ride would have both caused him massive problems and the match, without those spots would be worthless to a WM main event.

Also, Taker always takes on either Monsters or those who have really wronged him, Austin never fell into either category enough to make it work at Mania.

 

[Hitman-HBK United Inc.]

It seems to me anyway, that the role of the Austin/Taker feud was to pop buys of the other PPV's besides Wrestlemania. Summerslam from what I understand drew an astronomical number in 1998, and their subsequent matches at IYH: Breakdown (which included Kane), did well, and IYH: Rock Bottom did ok too. They had a match at the tragic even known as "Over the Edge" (and if any "how dare you bring up that show" comments come my way, I'm gonna blatantly get reprimanded for my reply), and it drew a big number!

They were also utilized well on TV, as they still hold the record for most watched wrestling match on Cable TV.

The feud itself was at the forefront so often, that putting it in Wrestlemania wouldnt've made much sense, even in the later years, there's just no way those two could've pulled something magic off, with reasons that people have alreaday stated.

 

[GrandSword]

It's interesting to see the breakdown over the years... and funny how the collapse of WCW and the integration of their talent and how it effected storylines and top matches.

Hogan vs. Rock was a blockbuster, but Taker and Austin that year I think suffered and maybe the introduction of the nWo did more harm storyline wise, as Austin/Rock/HHH would have been an amazing Wrestlemania main event title match that year.

 

[GameOver]

I think it's because the Undertaker rarely faces off against "top-level stars" at Wrestlemania...for whatever reason. He's always faced guys that were just slightly below him...probably the closest to him are Edge and Orton, who weren't quite at their peak. Then he faced Triple H in 2001 (not quite at his peak) and Flair (way past his prime), Diesel on his way out in 1996, HBK consecutive years (during his era of putting guys over). I think you could make the argument that if Undertaker were ever to face Cena at Wrestlemania, it would be his biggest WM match of all time. He just hasn't faced the best of the best in that year...it's always been somebody just a notch below him. I think that's part of the reason you've never seen Taker/Austin or Taker/Rock at Wrestlemania (or even Taker/Bret Hart)

Slightly below him? are you friggin serious. All those guys you mentioned were Top level main eventers and multi time world champs at the very least. how is that "below" him. You're talking like Undertaker is the best there ever was and will be which is far from the case. and no, Cena facing Taker now would be a dissapointment. would it draw? hell yes but Taker is way past it. now if it had been back when Cena was only the face of the company for a few years then yes that woulda been huge, but hardly the biggest mania match of all time. Way to overrate things.

Diesel was on his way out of the company but he was hardly "Over the hill", He'd just come off of being the longest reigning champ since Hogan, Flair may have been over the hill but he could still put on a good match despite being way past it. Triple H was ontop of his game, and if anything carried the match and HBK just did the job? seems that's what you are hinting at, well ofcourse he did, they weren't gonna drop the Streak and HBK was leaving anyway but who carried the match? answer HBK

I'll grant you other then the afformentioned names, Taker only faced upper midcarders at best, but that's all about booking and Taker's matches are more or less a, we have nothing for this guy to do match and Taker needs an opponent.

So to your statement i say those people were well above Taker, the fact he beat them was a way to give him props/respect for him being so dedicated and it's the longest running storyline in WWE history and always sells and the majority want to see him win.

Back to the OQ, IMO simple reasons,
A) It woulda been hard to book Austin to lose since he always had Taker's number
B) They had battled so many times already with Austin winning most of the matches
C) The perfect time for it to happen, ergo both guys were out of the title picture, they were both out injured too.