What if The Undertaker turns heel?

[TheOneAndOnlyGOAT]

In my opinion, the crowd needs to wise up to the Streak this year.

The Streak match always consists of the same old $#!t, one thousand finishers and multiple false finishes.

They will never get the story behind the match that The Undertaker vs Shawn Michaels matches had.


They're trying to capture lightning in a bottle and can't do it because we all know Taker will beat Lesnar.



Now what if The Undertaker turns heel?

What if they switch that?

What if instead of people paying to see The Undertaker defend The Streak every year, now they pay to see someone step up and end it?

It would be a genius idea.



The IWC Universe mentioned 5 names they'd like to see face The Undertaker at Wrestlemania: John Cena, Sting, The Rock, Roman Reigns and Daniel Bryan.


What do these 5 guys have in common? They're all babyface meaning someone must be a heel in their feud and the perfect guy for it is The Undertaker.


As much as people have respect for Taker, they know he is only going to be there for a couple of appearances a year and would much rather support the stars of today and the future, guys that wrestle 300+ days a year, guys like Daniel Bryan, guys like Roman Reigns, etc.


Seeing those guys step up and challenge The Streak would be interesting.




Fans are becoming smarter, they know Brock Lesnar has ZERO chance at ending The Streak.

Hopefully fans at Wrestlemania show disinterest to the Streak match so we can get something new next year instead of the exact same storyline with the exact same ending for the fifth consecutive year.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

You're a broken record.

The Streak is over. It'd ne nigh on impossible to get people to boo The Undertaker. It wouldn't achieve a thing and you don't need to mess with legendary characters.

Now maybe you'll suggest him facing The Rock because that would get people against The Undertaker. OOnly you'd be wrong, The Undertaker is way more beloved than The Rock.

 

[chicagokmc]

Love or hate him I think many people are interested in the streak ending, just to give him that hellacious final send off. Besides he was heel for parts of the streak already. And most importantly as long as Taker's opponent has Heyman in his corner, Taker would never be boo'd no matter what he does to Lesnar.

 

[Kris Benwa]

I don't see how they'd get a Taker heel turn to work honestly. He's one of the most universally loved characters and no matter who he beats up he'd be cheered just because of the respect factor alone if anything. Also just because Taker is a face doesn't mean he has to go against a heel. 09 and 10 him and Michaels were both faces and at this point because he no longer wrestles full time he can wrestle heels or faces just because it would logically makes sense because the streak is something EVERYONE ON THE ROSTER in kayfabe would want to break. Taker is a face for the rest of his career and I'm not sure if after this he'll go against any heels before his career is over unless they turn Cena before WM 32 if that goes down which would be very possible by then IMO.

 

[@smarkmouth]

Okay, dude, we get it. You dislike the streak. Can we move on?

I'm not knocking you for the sake of it. Unlike what many of the posts on any wrestling forum suggest, wrestling taste is entirely subjective. We probably have different tastes in cereal, as well(Cheerios, by the way). It just seems that every other post of yours I come across is linked to the streak.

If we are entertaining your thesis, though, Undertaker as a heel at this stage of his career would be as successful as Batista as a baby face. It's a shame, too, because Undertaker makes a bad ass heel, but the streak is something fans don't want to see broken. If Undertaker played the heel, fans would still want to cheer him on because the streak is almost more important to fans than The Undertaker himself.

I know you're always jeering on predictability, but as much as I love wrestling, it is not an overly complex art form. Often, the predictable outcome is the right decision. We all knew that Randy Orton was cashing in at SummerSlam, but it certainly didn't ruin the main event. You can make arguments with that example that the Triple H turn was unexpected, but we definitely knew Orton would cash in following some high jinks of sorts. I love a good swerve, but you can't involve a swerve in everything. Just ask M. Night Shamalan.

Turning Taker could make sense, but it would just sully the tail end of his legacy as it would be ultimately rejected by the audience. The five names you bring up of potential challengers are baby face, true. So were Triple H and HBK, and between those two you have four extremely involved audiences. Baby face vs baby face works in the streaks favor, and has shown zero evidence of slowing.

 

[DarksideEric]

Fans are becoming smarter

And yet you've failed to follow this trait it seems.

There would be absolutely zero point in turning the Undertaker heel at this point in his legendary career. There's nothing for him to gain from it. The Undertaker and the Streak has risen to a level where him being good or evil actually has little meaning. He's the neutral yard stick.

 

[Zycho32]

In my opinion, the crowd needs to wise up to the Streak this year.

The Streak match always consists of the same old $#!t, one thousand finishers and multiple false finishes.

They will never get the story behind the match that The Undertaker vs Shawn Michaels matches had.


They're trying to capture lightning in a bottle and can't do it because we all know Taker will beat Lesnar.



Now what if The Undertaker turns heel?

What if they switch that?

What if instead of people paying to see The Undertaker defend The Streak every year, now they pay to see someone step up and end it?

It would be a genius idea.



The IWC Universe mentioned 5 names they'd like to see face The Undertaker at Wrestlemania: John Cena, Sting, The Rock, Roman Reigns and Daniel Bryan.


What do these 5 guys have in common? They're all babyface meaning someone must be a heel in their feud and the perfect guy for it is The Undertaker.


As much as people have respect for Taker, they know he is only going to be there for a couple of appearances a year and would much rather support the stars of today and the future, guys that wrestle 300+ days a year, guys like Daniel Bryan, guys like Roman Reigns, etc.


Seeing those guys step up and challenge The Streak would be interesting.




Fans are becoming smarter, they know Brock Lesnar has ZERO chance at ending The Streak.

Hopefully fans at Wrestlemania show disinterest to the Streak match so we can get something new next year instead of the exact same storyline with the exact same ending for the fifth consecutive year.

...lot of Broken people in this forum...

But honestly, here are the following reasons why Undertaker turning Heel is a futile gesture;

1. He no longer wrestles enough to put in the man hours required to sustain any character/alignment change, due to his deteriorating body.
2. At this point in the eyes of most fans, Taker's popularity is literally a coating of teflon that protects him from any changes that could be inflicted upon him anyways. Turn him heel and they'll cheer him for sticking it to the WWE and they'll STILL think of him as a babyface.

Honestly, the last time anyone thought of him as a genuine Heel was over a decade ago. He's been a Babyface longer than JOHN FREAKING CENA. And unlike Cena, people are mostly not bored with the guy, not even when he was still full-time.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

As others have said, it'd be extremely difficult to turn Taker heel. Fans love the character and they respect Mark Callaway for his work ethic, his old school view of things & mentality and the fact that he can still deliver.

I get that some aren't into the streak or Taker being back, that's all well and good, but those fans are a pretty small minority. The streak is very over, has genuinely delivered a number of legit WrestleMania classic matches, it's proven to be a significant draw for WrestleMania, especially over the past 5 or 6 years, and a lot of fans want to see it. Even if WWE managed to find a way to turn Taker heel, there's no particularly good reason why they should. The formula that's used for the streak helps WWE make a lot of money during WrestleMania; if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

 

[TheOneAndOnlyGOAT]

As others have said, it'd be extremely difficult to turn Taker heel. Fans love the character and they respect Mark Callaway for his work ethic, his old school view of things & mentality and the fact that he can still deliver.

I get that some aren't into the streak or Taker being back, that's all well and good, but those fans are a pretty small minority. The streak is very over, has genuinely delivered a number of legit WrestleMania classic matches, it's proven to be a significant draw for WrestleMania, especially over the past 5 or 6 years, and a lot of fans want to see it. Even if WWE managed to find a way to turn Taker heel, there's no particularly good reason why they should. The formula that's used for the streak helps WWE make a lot of money during WrestleMania; if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

The Streak isn't a draw.

Taker vs Michaels Streak vs Career didn't even draw 1 million buyrate.


I'm pretty sure Cesaro can steal the show if he just got the time used for Taker's long WM entrance.


A couple of years ago, I would've said I'd rather see Taker over anyone on the roster. Now? The opposite.

I'd rather see any full timer over The Undertaker.


It's the same story with the same predictable ending for the last four years and it's not going to stop now, it will keep going.

People are already talking about Taker Sting next year, it's just ridiculous.



You said people who are annoyed of Taker or The Streak are a small minority which is true and which is why I'm making all these threads, to save the unwashed masses.

 

[DarksideEric]

The Streak isn't a draw.

Taker vs Michaels Streak vs Career didn't even draw 1 million buyrate.


I'm pretty sure Cesaro can steal the show if he just got the time used for Taker's long WM entrance.


A couple of years ago, I would've said I'd rather see Taker over anyone on the roster. Now? The opposite.

I'd rather see any full timer over The Undertaker.


It's the same story with the same predictable ending for the last four years and it's not going to stop now, it will keep going.

People are already talking about Taker Sting next year, it's just ridiculous.



You said people who are annoyed of Taker or The Streak are a small minority which is true and which is why I'm making all these threads, to save the unwashed masses.

Taker vs Michaels Streak vs Career didn't even draw 1 million buyrate.

[citation needed]

It's the same story with the same predictable ending for the last four years and it's not going to stop now, it will keep going.

Because we all couldn't predict what the Rock was going to do when he came back, right? We had no idea who was going to win the Punk vs. Rock match, right? Or who was going to win the Rock vs. Cena match, right?

People are already talking about Taker Sting next year, it's just ridiculous.

You're talking about Taker turning heel and the Rock doing one more full time run.

it's just ridiculous.

 

[ProWrestlingFan]

Undertaker wrestles once a year. Whats the point? Even if they did turn him heel people will still cheer for him.

But I do agree that the streak has become too predictable. Taker should retire after Wrestlemania 30.

 

[TheOneAndOnlyGOAT]

Because we all couldn't predict what the Rock was going to do when he came back, right? We had no idea who was going to win the Punk vs. Rock match, right? Or who was going to win the Rock vs. Cena match, right?

Wait a second, what does Rock have to do with this?

The Rock came back to lose to a guy who has been begging for him to come back for years, Cena has talked to Vince, The Rock's mother, everyone to try to get him back.


The Rock PUT OVER John Cena in the biggest match of his career.

Rock came back to put over Cena, Taker comes back every year to put himself over.



Also, you act like Rock didn't receive any backlash, Rock got booed many times in his last run and every time his name got mentioned.


You delusi0nal Taker fanb0ys w0rship him, you can't get the idea that hating on him is acceptable.

To you guys, he's a god or something, hating on him is apparently taboo smh.

 

[Spidey Revivey]

The Undertaker is a novelty. Why do people feel compelled to change him up in any way whatsoever? He wrestles 1/365 days a year, and has a gimmick that will still be cool in the next 50. What would a heel change accomplish if he's only around for one pay per view? Serious question.

Not to mention it would take some serious and very horrible shit to get a crowd to boo him at this point of his career. No.

 

[DarksideEric]

Wait a second, what does Rock have to do with this?

The Rock came back to lose to a guy who has been begging for him to come back for years, Cena has talked to Vince, The Rock's mother, everyone to try to get him back.


The Rock PUT OVER John Cena in the biggest match of his career.

Rock came back to put over Cena, Taker comes back every year to put himself over.



Also, you act like Rock didn't receive any backlash, Rock got booed many times in his last run and every time his name got mentioned.


You delusional Taker fanboys worship him, you can't get the idea that hating on him is acceptable.

To you guys, he's a god or something, hating on him is apparently taboo smh.

"You delusional Taker fanboys."

Says the Rock fanboy. And the anti-Taker fanboy.

Let me explain the point that you were unable to catch:

Things in wrestling can be fucking predictable because there's only so many original core stories you can do.

"Undertaker's Streak is predictable." It's no less predictable than when the Rock returned. Let me pause for a second so you can ingest this, the point, into your mind.

Undertaker isn't putting himself over by winning. Undertaker is facing people who really don't need to be put over anymore to begin with. The Undertaker, as I said, is the "neutral yardstick." He's beyond titles. He's beyond good and evil. He faces people now who have reached the complete top. How have you not caught on to this?

HBK beats him: ...okay, and? What does that actually do for HBK's career, a person who has already reached iconic status within the company?

Triple H beats him: ...okay, and? What does that actually do for Triple H's career, a person who has already reached iconic status within the company?

Brokc beats him: ...okay, and? What does that actually do for Brock's career, a person who is already looked at as a: not staying and b: an apex level monster?

This is Creative Writing 101.

 

[MC_Live]

Undertaker heel turn just won't work. The fans are getting smarter, correct. And they're too smart to know better than boo the guy who is one of, if not the, hardest working individuals in all of wrestling. He's respected way too much to get boos. That's what happened to Ric Flair. Taker is the only guy to have been signed to one company for over 20 years. He's almost at his 25th anniversary. Nobody does that in wrestling, and it's all because the fans respect him, and want him around. And to say the Streak isn't a draw solely because of a lower buy rate is ludicrous. There was an entire other card that night that can help share that blame. And wrestling isn't about predictability, it's about heat's right for the story. And predictable can still be right. Just look at Vince Russo. When he went swerve crazy, the product looked like hell. So as long as Undertaker is around, people will pay to see the streak at WrestleMania, regardless of it being ended or not. You can say that The Streak has been match of the night, or even match of the year, since 2009, and was up there in 07 and 08. We may always know the ending, but it still delivers to be a fantastic match. And I think a majority of wrestling fans don't want the streak to end. So yes, it's predictable, but most fans seem to brush that aside just because they get to watch the Undertaker. And as long as he can still give a top notch performance, they're going to keep him around, as a face, and keep the streak alive. The face vs. face matches have been magic, and the crowds have loved every second of it. And if you've been paying attention at all to the pops Undertaker has been getting, you would know there's no chance in hell that the WrestleMania crowd is going to show a lack of interest in the match. The people will always cheer the Undertaker until the last time we see him, and they will always love the streak. Why, because, that's just how wrestling works.

 

[JoeFromTomsRiver]

This is conversation just for the sake of stupid conversation. There is no point to Taker turning heel, there is nothing to gain, it just makes no sense whatsoever. He wrestles once a year. You expect people to boo him when he comes back? The OP is a lost cause.

 

[tak161]

Wait a second, what does Rock have to do with this?

The Rock came back to lose to a guy who has been begging for him to come back for years, Cena has talked to Vince, The Rock's mother, everyone to try to get him back.


The Rock PUT OVER John Cena in the biggest match of his career.

Rock came back to put over Cena, Taker comes back every year to put himself over.



Also, you act like Rock didn't receive any backlash, Rock got booed many times in his last run and every time his name got mentioned.


You delusi0nal Taker fanb0ys w0rship him, you can't get the idea that hating on him is acceptable.

To you guys, he's a god or something, hating on him is apparently taboo smh.

This coming from someone who thinks that The Rock is the be all end all. You act as if Rock is a god and get defensive when anyone says anything about him. You talk about how Rock drew this, and Rock did that. Well I've got news for you, there was someone standing across the ring from Rock each time. Rock did not draw all these things you say he did on his own. Cena drew many of those buys when he faced Rock, as did Austin.

Undertaker is a big part of that buyrate as well for Wrestlemania. People want to see Taker defend the Streak. It is a spectacle to see Undertaker, and when he appears it means something. You would be hard pressed to find anyone that is more respected and admired than Mark Calloway and the Undertaker character. And your favorite Rock is nowhere near that conversation.

To even suggest that Taker turn heel is ridiculous. There is no way that the crowds would accept him as a heel, he would be cheered regardless, much in the same way that Sting or Stone Cold are. They are guys that no matter what will get cheered, regardless of what happens.

 

[JJ15776]

The Streak isn't a draw.

Taker vs Michaels Streak vs Career didn't even draw 1 million buyrate.


I'm pretty sure Cesaro can steal the show if he just got the time used for Taker's long WM entrance.


A couple of years ago, I would've said I'd rather see Taker over anyone on the roster. Now? The opposite.

I'd rather see any full timer over The Undertaker.


It's the same story with the same predictable ending for the last four years and it's not going to stop now, it will keep going.

People are already talking about Taker Sting next year, it's just ridiculous.



You said people who are annoyed of Taker or The Streak are a small minority which is true and which is why I'm making all these threads, to save the unwashed masses.

...wait, which one is it? You said The a Streak isn't a draw, then you said everybody's talking about it and admitted those who are annoyed are a small minority...which, obviously, would make it a draw...so which one is it? Is it a draw or not?

You delusi0nal Taker fanb0ys w0rship him, you can't get the idea that hating on him is acceptable.

To you guys, he's a god or something, hating on him is apparently taboo smh.

Huh? How does pointing out the idiocy behind the notion they turn him heel make anybody delusional? How does it make them fanboys? How is that worshipping him? And what does that have to do with hating on him being unacceptable or taboo? Who is even hating on him in the first place? All you said was they should turn him heel...how is that hating on him? Even people that want his streak to end will tell you how ridiculous it is to suggest he turns heel.

You came up with a moronic idea, everybody here pointed out how stupid it was, and your only response is that they're all delusional fanboys? Not one attempt to defend your foolish suggestion, or refute any of the arguments made against it? What the hell is this?

EDIT: I realize that everyone has pretty well addressed how dumb the thread topic is, and covered it from pretty much every angle, so I'll just point out one thing I didn't see anyone bring up. The reason people mention those five people is because they're five of the most over wrestlers who haven't faced him at Mania yet, it has nothing to do with them being faces. To that point, it's funny how you left out the sixth name that gets mentioned just as much as those five...Bray Wyatt. But he's a heel, and that would defeat your whole argument before it even got started.

 

[TheOneAndOnlyGOAT]

"Undertaker's Streak is predictable." It's no less predictable than when the Rock returned. Let me pause for a second so you can ingest this, the point, into your mind.

Undertaker isn't putting himself over by winning. Undertaker is facing people who really don't need to be put over anymore to begin with. The Undertaker, as I said, is the "neutral yardstick." He's beyond titles. He's beyond good and evil. He faces people now who have reached the complete top. How have you not caught on to this?

HBK beats him: ...okay, and? What does that actually do for HBK's career, a person who has already reached iconic status within the company?

Triple H beats him: ...okay, and? What does that actually do for Triple H's career, a person who has already reached iconic status within the company?

Brokc beats him: ...okay, and? What does that actually do for Brock's career, a person who is already looked at as a: not staying and b: an apex level monster?

This is Creative Writing 101.

Exactly.

Just like Rock was booed, Taker should as well be booed.

At least Rock only did one predictable run not 4 consecutive predictable runs.


Taker isn't hurting anyone's career but he isn't helping anyone either. Sheamus vs Taker would've been better this year or Bray vs Taker.


I wouldn't call taking 40 minutes (10 for entrance) at wrestlemania "neutral".

He's taking the spotlight from guys like Cesaro.

 

[DarksideEric]

Exactly.

Just like Rock was booed, Taker should as well be booed.

At least Rock only did one predictable run not 4 consecutive predictable runs.


Taker isn't hurting anyone's career but he isn't helping anyone either. Sheamus vs Taker would've been better this year or Bray vs Taker.


I wouldn't call taking 40 minutes (10 for entrance) at wrestlemania "neutral".

He's taking the spotlight from guys like Cesaro.

Neutral

not aligned with or supporting any side or position in a controversy

Lawful Neutral

A Lawful Neutral character typically believes strongly in Lawful concepts such as honor, order, rules and tradition, and often follows a personal code. A Lawful Neutral society would typically enforce strict laws to maintain social order, and place a high value on traditions and historical precedent. Examples of Lawful Neutral characters might include a soldier who always follows orders, a judge or enforcer that adheres mercilessly to the word of the law, and a disciplined monk.

Characters of this alignment are neutral with regard to good and evil. This does not mean that Lawful Neutral characters are amoral or immoral, or do not have a moral compass, but simply that their moral considerations come a distant second to what their code, tradition, or law dictates. They typically have a strong ethical code, but it is primarily guided by their system of belief, not by a commitment to good or evil.

James Bond, Odysseus, and Sanjuro from Yojimbo are considered by Complete Scoundrel as Lawful Neutral.[9] Three exemplars of Lawful Neutral outsiders exist. These are the Formians, the Inevitables and the Modrons.[citation needed]
Neutral

A Neutral character represents Neutral on both axes, and tends not to feel strongly towards any alignment. A farmer whose primary overriding concern is to feed his family is of this alignment. Most animals, lacking the capacity for moral judgment, are of this alignment since they are guided by instinct rather than conscious decision. Many roguish characters who play all sides to suit themselves are also of this alignment (such as a weapon merchant with no qualms selling his wares to both sides of a war for a profit).

Some Neutral characters, rather than feeling undecided, are committed to a balance between the alignments. They may see good, evil, law and chaos as simply prejudices and dangerous extremes. Mordenkainen is one such character who takes this concept to the extreme, dedicating himself to a detached philosophy of neutrality to ensure that no one alignment or power takes control of the Flanaess.

Druids frequently follow this True Neutral dedication to balance, and under Advanced Dungeons & Dragons rules were required to be this alignment. In an example given in the 2nd Edition Player's Handbook, a typical druid might fight against a band of marauding gnolls, only to switch sides to save the gnolls' clan from being totally exterminated.[10]

Lara Croft, Lucy Westenra from Dracula and Han Solo in his early Star Wars appearance are neutral.[9] The true neutral outsiders are known as the Rilmani.[citation needed]
Chaotic Neutral

A Chaotic Neutral character is an individualist who follows his or her own heart, and generally shirks rules and traditions. Although they promote the ideals of freedom, it is their own freedom that comes first. Good and Evil come second to their need to be free, and the only reliable thing about them is how totally unreliable they are. Chaotic Neutral characters are free-spirited and do not enjoy the unnecessary suffering of others, but if they join a team, it is because that team's goals happen to coincide with their own at the moment. They invariably resent taking orders and can be very selfish in their pursuit of personal goals. A Chaotic Neutral character does not have to be an aimless wanderer; they may have a specific goal in mind, but their methods of achieving that goal are often disorganized, unorthodox, or entirely unpredictable.

A subset of Chaotic Neutral is: "strongly Chaotic Neutral"; describing a character who behaves chaotically to the point of appearing insane. Characters of this type may regularly change their appearance and attitudes for the sake of change and intentionally disrupt organizations for the sole reason of disrupting a lawful institution. Characters of this type include the Xaositects from the Planescape setting, and Hennet from the third edition Player's Handbook. In Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, Chaotic Neutral was mistakenly assumed to refer to this subset.

Captain Jack Sparrow, Al Swearengen from the TV series Deadwood, and Snake Plissken from Escape from New York are Chaotic Neutral characters according to Complete Scoundrel (3.5e).[9] Slaadi represent pure chaos outsiders.[citation needed]

Because you have no idea what "neutral" seems to mean, I've given you some information in terms of how "neutral" is being used in the context of this conversation.

What the hell does his entrance and match length have to do with him being a neutral character?

The Undertaker character has been elevated through the work of various means, including booking, the professional's ability, fan reaction, etc, to be beyond the alignments of "heel" and "face." He is a neutrally aligned yard stick. He's the "grand master" who everyone wants to face and see if they are actually good enough to defeat.

What part of "he is taking on people who are at the top" do you not understand?

Sheamus still has the mountain to climb. Sheamus is not HBK, HHH or Punk.

Bray still has the mountain to climb. Bray is not HBK, HHH or Punk.

A predictable run is a predictable run.

And taking the spotlight from Cesaro? I'm sorry, I wasn't aware that Cesaro was on the same level as HBK, HHH or Punk and he should be in a match with them at Wrestlemania in a main event.

Your "logic":

 

[TheOneAndOnlyGOAT]

Neutral





Because you have no idea what "neutral" seems to mean, I've given you some information in terms of how "neutral" is being used in the context of this conversation.

What the hell does his entrance and match length have to do with him being a neutral character?

The Undertaker character has been elevated through the work of various means, including booking, the professional's ability, fan reaction, etc, to be beyond the alignments of "heel" and "face." He is a neutrally aligned yard stick. He's the "grand master" who everyone wants to face and see if they are actually good enough to defeat.

What part of "he is taking on people who are at the top" do you not understand?

Sheamus still has the mountain to climb. Sheamus is not HBK, HHH or Punk.

Bray still has the mountain to climb. Bray is not HBK, HHH or Punk.

A predictable run is a predictable run.

And taking the spotlight from Cesaro? I'm sorry, I wasn't aware that Cesaro was on the same level as HBK, HHH or Punk and he should be in a match with them at Wrestlemania in a main event.

Your "logic":

Ok sure whatever, Taker is the greatest.

Now leave me alone please.

Did you hear the great news?


http://wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/201...and-steve-austin-making-cameo-appearances-at/

OOOOOOOH HELLLLLLLL YEAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!

I'm going to be there!! There's only a couple of days left!!

Can't wait!!!!!!

 

[DarksideEric]

Ok sure whatever, Taker is the greatest.

Now leave me alone please.

Awww, did I hurt your anti-fanboy mindset enough that you're attempting to derail your own thread?

That's a first for me, perhaps I warrant to pat myself on the back.

No where did I state "Taker is the greatest." It is not my fault, however, that you seem to don't know Creative Writing 101. Maybe you've not taken it in high school or college yet, who knows.

"Leave you alone."

 

[Zycho32]

I just thought of a more genuine way to generate a better push for The Streak.

Okay, picture this; it's the Raw after Wrestlemania, and for whatever contrived damn reason, you've got about eight to sixteen wrestlers in the ring. Young guys. Low Card, Mid Card, Upper Card... essentially the Young Bucks of the WWE. Guys who are due for a push. Guys who are considered the potential future of the Brand. Guys who would benefit GREATLY from this kind of exposure.

GONG

Taker stalks his way to the ring, as dark and foreboding as ever. The Young Guys are probably about to shit their trunks wholesale, but that's to be expected. The lights go up, Taker steps into the ring, looks disdainfully upon the collection of men gathered before him. Then he lifts his mic to his face.

"Come next year, at Wrestlemania 31, one of you will be chosen to face me, to challenge for the Streak. But it will not be given. That right will not be granted to you. It must be earned. You will have one year to prove yourselves, and by the end, the best of you will be chosen for the right to face me. To try and take the Streak. To Rest. In. Peace."

GONG

Melodramatic to the Nth(I'm a fucking Vince Russo wannabe), but instead of a month-long buildup, you now have a YEAR-Long buildup with the heavy load carried by a group of wrestlers who actually have a meaty drama to sink their teeth into. This grants them additional exposure while they work their way through the card, adds a lower level storyline that helps out Creative, and maybe by the time Taker starts working out with the young man in question, WWE will know which of those young guns is the most trustworthy to put in the ring with Taker.

 

[L@RISANO]

I just thought of a more genuine way to generate a better push for The Streak.

Okay, picture this; it's the Raw after Wrestlemania, and for whatever contrived damn reason, you've got about eight to sixteen wrestlers in the ring. Young guys. Low Card, Mid Card, Upper Card... essentially the Young Bucks of the WWE. Guys who are due for a push. Guys who are considered the potential future of the Brand. Guys who would benefit GREATLY from this kind of exposure.

GONG

Taker stalks his way to the ring, as dark and foreboding as ever. The Young Guys are probably about to shit their trunks wholesale, but that's to be expected. The lights go up, Taker steps into the ring, looks disdainfully upon the collection of men gathered before him. Then he lifts his mic to his face.

"Come next year, at Wrestlemania 31, one of you will be chosen to face me, to challenge for the Streak. But it will not be given. That right will not be granted to you. It must be earned. You will have one year to prove yourselves, and by the end, the best of you will be chosen for the right to face me. To try and take the Streak. To Rest. In. Peace."

GONG

Melodramatic to the Nth(I'm a fucking Vince Russo wannabe), but instead of a month-long buildup, you now have a YEAR-Long buildup with the heavy load carried by a group of wrestlers who actually have a meaty drama to sink their teeth into. This grants them additional exposure while they work their way through the card, adds a lower level storyline that helps out Creative, and maybe by the time Taker starts working out with the young man in question, WWE will know which of those young guns is the most trustworthy to put in the ring with Taker.

Great Idea,tbh.

Would only have 6 of the brightest talents,however, can't trust WWE to do it right with so many guys.

It would also serve as a wonderful anticipated 'back/side-story' that would come to the fore around Royal Rumble time.

Only thing is, whoever is chosen has to really shine so that by the time Mania comes around, the fans would take them seriously in a way that the Streak is in danger.

Cheers, Nice idea.

 

[whoopin' ass]

Why would he need to turn heel? Anyone could challenge him and say they think they can end the streak, it is a personal challenge, whatever and have the match. For a guy who wrestles 1 match a year to turn heel would be a waste and pretty much impossible to sell to the audience without a huge buildup and considering how the buildup a have been over the last few years, it wouldn't happen.