Undertaker's Retirement - 20 years or 20 - 0?

[Phoenix]

Hey Guys,
I was having a think about this a while ago and I was thinking about how soon would we see the final match of the Deadman, the longest serving wrestler in WWE. He's been with the company since November 1990 and unless a major injury comes up, I could see his career ending on a nice round number, but which do you think it could be?

Currently, he's over a year and a half away from being in the WWE for 20 years, with his age increasing, as well as his injury risk, it could be the likeliness his end could come there, either at Survivor Series or Wrestlemania 27 in 2011.

The other would be ending on the streak at 20-0, with the streak always being put up and not many other superstars who could take that away (at this time, unless you're a bitter Hunter Hurst Helmsley), if Taker wins again this year, his streak goes up to 17-0, meaning three years left and finishing at Wrestlemania 28 in 2012.

Which could you see being the most likely ending for the Deadman? Or do you feel another twist in the bag coming? Opinions open!

 

[TheGreatSPAMbino]

Well im hoping he jobs the streak off to somebody otherwise the entire streak was pretty pointless to begin with. As to who it would be i have no idea. Maybe it could be Cena down the line when they want to pull the trigger on his heel turn. Otherwise it would be s new rising star.
Ive thought about the idea that in like 2011 they could run buildup packages for a new debuting superstar, he would be dark and evil like the undertaker and his debut would kind of work like chris jerichos. But instead of a countdown to the new millenium he would have a countdown to the apocalypse which supposedly will happen in 2012. Obviosuly he would debut at the armageddon pay per view at the end of 2011 right before the start of 2012 and the "real armageddon". That would work PERFECTLY and be the sickest debut ever for a new star. This guy could go one to feud with the undertaker and then at wrestlemania 28 in 2012 he would beat him and end the streak. That would be fucking badass.

 

[timmy872]

I think that perhaps he will be a constant at Wrestlemania's even if its just a cameo. I can't see Wrestlemania without the Undertaker. He might have one match a year after he retires from wrestling after 20 years? The Undertaker's streak shouldn't end either, if it does it is just to weird, and you will expect it to be a REAL moment in history, but like most the WWE try to create now, they never work. Plus who really can legitamately spit on The Undertaker's entire legacy of nearly 20 years and if not more? The Undertaker's legacy is solidified, there isn't anyone reliable enough, in this age to end the streak. Plus imagine if they had the steak end to whoever the next Brock Lesnar or Rock or John Cena is, two out of three of those WWE would of been "house hold names" have left and don't even associate themselves with the company. Ending the steak would be like transfering Taker's legacy onto a new superstar giving them instant credibilty. To be honest, I'm not sure that ending the Taker streak has even been discussed, because of the Undertakers, complete and utter devotion to Vince and his product, give that man a real sense of accomplishment when he ends his career and/or life. Within the bowels of WWE i don't believe it is ethical to end Taker's streak. Sorry I keep going off on tangents tonight haha.

 

[Phoenix]

It's ok Timmy, we've certainly been discussing thoroughly together. I did read on a website, possibly was WZ, back in the summer, that each year they discuss whether Taker's streak should end or not. One idea is that they pass it onto someone like Ted Dibiase, a rising star who would benefit from beating Taker, or Triple H moaning it should be him after jobbing to him at WM X-Seven. As if Taker would pass up that to Triple H!

 

[hArdyPUNKmArk]

Well im hoping he jobs the streak off to somebody otherwise the entire streak was pretty pointless to begin with. As to who it would be i have no idea. Maybe it could be Cena down the line when they want to pull the trigger on his heel turn. Otherwise it would be s new rising star.
Ive thought about the idea that in like 2011 they could run buildup packages for a new debuting superstar, he would be dark and evil like the undertaker and his debut would kind of work like chris jerichos. But instead of a countdown to the new millenium he would have a countdown to the apocalypse which supposedly will happen in 2012. Obviosuly he would debut at the armageddon pay per view at the end of 2011 right before the start of 2012 and the "real armageddon". That would work PERFECTLY and be the sickest debut ever for a new star. This guy could go one to feud with the undertaker and then at wrestlemania 28 in 2012 he would beat him and end the streak. That would be fucking badass.

I really like this idea for the streak to end (if it has to). The Undertaker sort of passing the torch to another undertaker style character would be pretty cool and would put over the new guy straight away, beating the Deadman at WM would do that to anyone.


I think Undertaker might end after 20yrs with the company if he wants to end on a nice round number but it really could end anytime, take in injury, personal life and his body and we really couldnt speculate a retirement time for him but i would say 20yrs, WM 2011, new star to take his reigns would be a good way to end it.

 

[timmy872]

See, I think there are few chances to put young stars over, really and legitamately. Triple H, will never face Taker at Wrestlemania again, because it's done and dusted, Taker won. Plus putting him up against someone he already beat at a previous 'Mania is another bad idea, but I guess it worked with The Rock and Austin? Taker and Trips don't get along for obvious reasons and the idea of them doing Mania again is pointless.

As aforementioned, putting over young stars is good, but I think it has to be done in a new and/or unique way in order for it to be successful. No one else is undefeated at Wrestlemania, except for those who haven't competed, or at least no one is billed and has one of their greatest accolades as being undefeated there. If The Undertaker retires without his steak, what does he really have? A career compareable with The Rock, is that all Taker deserves really?

 

[DeadmanInc.]

I think 20-0 is better than 20 years simply because Taker is known for his Wrestlemania streak. It completely overshadows the fact that he debuted at Survivor Series.

His streak should never end simply because it's unparallel to any other streak in the business. If he does go to 20 wins, it will represent 20 years worth of Wrestlemanias. It seems foolish to throw it away for some rising star that may not even make half the impact that Taker has made on this business. What if they pull a "Brock Lesnar" or "The Rock" and leave to greater endeavors soon after ending Taker's streak? It would be a complete waste of the greatest streak in wrestling.

I still wonder how Taker will retire though when that time comes. Is he going to get a Ric Flair send off or will he be like Austin only making rare appearances?

 

[klunderbunker]

I'd say 20-0. He's incredibly close already and believe me, that record will never be touched. It's not like it takes a lot to hype a Taker match. One of his signature promos and the light show and we all get hyped for it. Love it or hate it, there's no need to ever end the streak. It would make absolutely no sense at this point. The person that gets it might get a rub, but they'll also be seen as the man that killed one of the greatest things in wrestling history. Let him hit 20, then go from there, if he wants to of course.

 

[Blade]

The streak has become huge, JBL and HBK are actually fighting over it to see who'll get the chance to end it. It's become absolutely legendary and to end his career at a streak milestone would be more suitable.

Lots of guys have wrestled for long periods of time. Flair, Hogan, Sting. But only the Undertaker has the Wrestlemania streak, so that's what should be the focus point on his retirement.

 

[The Mark of Zur-En-Arrh]

Obviosuly he would debut at the armageddon pay per view at the end of 2011 right before the start of 2012 and the "real armageddon". That would work PERFECTLY and be the sickest debut ever for a new star. This guy could go one to feud with the undertaker and then at wrestlemania 28 in 2012 he would beat him and end the streak. That would be fucking badass.

Undertaker end his winning streak to a 4 month rookie? LMFAO! We're talking about the Undertaker's legendary undefeated streak at the showcase of the Immortals, not capturing the ECW title!

I'd personally say that i'd want it to go on til at least 20-0, but WWE have got to allow Taker to take time off and not put him in so many high risk gimmick matches. Do not put him in HIAC 2009 Vince, do NOT put him in another TLC match either. It isn't necessary to have him in First Blood Matches, the second match into a fued fgs.

It's not fair to say that the streak is his ONLY accomplishment either. This is a guy who's been in more 'firsts' than any other guy in the company EVER. THAT's anachievement on it's own. They created 3 gimmick matches based purely on his character alone. People thing of Taker and only remember the streak, when there's so much more to the Phenom's Legacy than that.

 

[The Rob]

Undertaker's undefeated should never be broken or taken away in my opinion. Taker won't be remembered for having an insane number of title reigns like Flair or Triple H, he will be remembered for being undefeated through-out his entire, legendary career on Wrestling's grandest stage, which is probably as impressive as winning 10+ titles. As for the way he retires... definatally 20-0. His character could say every year untill then that his final goal is to become 20-0 at Wrestlemania.

 

[TheGreatSPAMbino]

Undertaker end his winning streak to a 4 month rookie? LMFAO! We're talking about the Undertaker's legendary undefeated streak at the showcase of the Immortals, not capturing the ECW

K dont have him job at wrestlemania 28 make the feud between him in the new guy start later on and he can job at wrestlemania 29 after the new guy has more experience and his reliability is tested. Theres absolutely no point in having a streak if its not ended by someone.

 

[twiztid_lestat]

The streak has become huge, JBL and HBK are actually fighting over it to see who'll get the chance to end it. It's become absolutely legendary and to end his career at a streak milestone would be more suitable.

Lots of guys have wrestled for long periods of time. Flair, Hogan, Sting. But only the Undertaker has the Wrestlemania streak, so that's what should be the focus point on his retirement.

Exactly, He hasnt made a HUGE grudge about titles in his storied career. His whole deal is being the one person NEVER beaten at WM, And that should NOT be taken from him. Theres certain streaks that were interesting before they were taken

Triple H's Hell in a cell streak (Though people hardly mentioned the 6-man armageddon one he lost, due to him not being pinned)

Edge TLC: (Though people neglected to mention the match when Benoit/Jericho won)

But those cant hold a candle to not being beaten on the Super bowl of sports entertainment.

I have thought this over many, Many times over the years. Orton could have been that young wrestler that toppled the deadman, BUT he didnt need it to push him to the next level in his career, What hes doing now is a testament to how great Orton is supposed to be anyway. WITHOUT the takers streak

HHH would be a FOOL to try and ruin it, when even in his prime he lost to the taker at wm17

Kane tried twice, and failed twice, and he doesnt feel he deserved to take the streak anyway, even if Taker tried to allow it.

Jbl, Pfft...Yeah right. Beyond some good promos, and being in the buisness as long as he has, he is far beneath worthy of this.

Hbk, Debatable. I assume they are going to blow the roof off of WM 25 if they do it right. But beating taker, He wouldnt gain anything from it. So whats the point.

All in all, Leave the streak alone, tease a lose, but they should never take that from him. Especially since his title reigns are ALWAYS transitional and never truely stamp his legacy like the streak will

 

[DeadMan5000]

I say Maven ends the streak! LOL In all seriousness, the streak I don't think will ever end. Going 17-0 this April! What I would like to see would be a 10 month reign of destruction as champion, go into WrestleMania 26 as the champion, win, go 18-0, and retire at WrestleMania with the Championship. That would be awesome!

 

[Vintage Nick]

I Hope he lose this year,Undertaker's Streak is just plain boring IMO.

I don't know how you can say that with a straight face. The Streak is one of the most legendary and hardest accomplishments for anyone, yet Taker is THE ONE. Vince could have chosen anyone like Trips or Cena or even Hulk, but it seems Taker's the man for the job. It just fits with his character.

 

[Deadman]

I Hope he lose this year,Undertaker's Streak is just plain boring IMO.

IMO you just said the stupidest thing I have ever seen on this forum. Undertaker streak is the one thing that is guaranteed to be fresh and amazing at WM. Every match IMO has been 4 stars are over. They push talent even though they lose they are part of the 17 that have had a remarkable match at WM against the company's top face. So, IMO you are terribly wrong and need a history lesson before you say things like the post you made.

 

[SK]

IMO you just said the stupidest thing I have ever seen on this forum. Undertaker streak is the one thing that is guaranteed to be fresh and amazing at WM. Every match IMO has been 4 stars are over. They push talent even though they lose they are part of the 17 that have had a remarkable match at WM against the company's top face. So, IMO you are terribly wrong and need a history lesson before you say things like the post you made.

Whilst i do disagree with the other guy, i have to disagree with you.
The streak is good and interesting to see how it will pan out, it is definitely not fresh and amazing as nowadays you can be 99% sure that taker will win.
I also have to disagree that every match has been 4 stars or over i mean did you see the big bossman match. =/.

Anyways back on topic I think that taker should go 20-0 then leave for good, Taker losing would not really benefit anyone, and they would forever be negatively associated with ending the streak. Besides the streak has now become such a big part of every wrestlemania for the past decade, i dont think i would like to see it ended, especially not by the next brock lesnar. And DEFINITLY do not want to see it ended by HHH.

 

[Hacksaw Highway]

I really don't want the streak to end. There's no point giving that win to an established star, and if some rookie does it, yeah it'll be a big boost, but 2 years later it won't be mentioned anymore and all that will have happened is Taker's legacy being tarnished. That said, I love to see matches where you're uncertain if he will win or not, I seriously thought Batista would win at 23 and that was the most on the dge of my my seat I've been for a match in years.

 

[BigLeagueG26]

Taker is my guy I'm 27 years old now.And Taker has been doing his thing since Survivor Series 90,almost 19 years cousin,I'm a true fan of his,I don't wanna see him go but the legacy of the dead man will never die.20-0 or 20 years I'm down for either one.R.I.P

 

[Starchild]

I think this all depends how much Taker has left in the tank, based on his own opinion and no one else's. If he doesn't feel that he can even make it to Survivor Series 2010 and get to 20 years, then he shouldn't feel obligated. And with 20-0 still being a good ways off, the same goes for that. If he feels he can, then he should if not..then oh well, he's the guy doing it not us.

Now, from a wrestling fan's perspective..I'd love to see him get to 20-0 and ride off into the sunset. What a hallowed record that would be. I would deem it comparable to Flair's (or maybe Triple H's) record for world titles. He didn't need the title to get over..hence only having 6 reigns, most of which were fairly short. That's not to say he needs to keep the streak, but it definitely is part of his legacy and something that should not be taken away from him. I know he said he's open to it if the opportunity came along (say against Cena in the next couple years) but like a couple people said, what's the point now? No one will ever come close to touching this record. You might never have anyone in WWE for this long ever again, so might as well capitalize on the opportunity and let it set in the record books where it belongs.