what if.....undertaker bleeds at wm?

[leemurf]

hey everyone this is my first thread so dont be to hard on me

I don't know how this got into my head but since wwe banned blood when a superstar started bleeding during a match the offical would stop the match and fix the wound or the match would end faster than normal.
So what if the undertaker started bleeding at the next (or future) wrestlemania what do you think they should do because it would look bad if the undertaker was getting treated because of his character and they wouldnt end the match quicker because its the biggest ppv and it is the undertakers ppv.
so if it would happen do you think they'd:
1) fix the undertakers wound and damage his character
2) end the match quicker and ruin one of takers wrestlemania's or
3) let taker finish the match with the blood pouring down his face and break the rules
so what would you do???

 

[Kiefer-Zeus]

I remember at the Rumble when Rey busted Taker's nose they left it and at the end the referee gave him a towel to which Taker threw it away. I think Taker would personally continue the match busted and give us the classic match we all have come to love him for on the grandest stage of them all.

 

[Rulk25]

Ultimately I think some of the point may be mute. Linda's campaign win or lose will be over by November so they can choose to be a little more loose then especially at WM

 

[Avrusha92]

first off: that has to be the STUPIDEST question I heard, no offense....


Look, WWE WOULD NOT[/] ruin his character if he gets bloody during the match at Mania. They know Mania is Taker's grandest stage....thats his playground... thats where he performs the BEST. They wont get doctors, they wont make the match shorter, nor they wont ruin his character.

It happened a few times, at Royal Rumble, and if i recall Wrestlemania 26...against HBK.
Look, the kids aint that stupid to not know that Taker was the American Badass at one point...unless they really are young.

PS: Today, a 12 year old fan at my store NEVER knew Taker was the American Badass...LOL

 

[minionofdarkness]

This is where WWE may be hurting. Since the PG concept and the no blood, their ratings are not what they once were. I remember him bleeding it WM15 for most of the match, and still won in Taker fashion. A re-evaluation of the no blood rule is in order. It would be like Lex Luger losing to Ric Flair at the Bash in 1988 back when the NWA was popular. That stupid Maryland State Athletic Commission angle where they said if there was blood they would stop the match. Taker has done way too much to have something as petty as this to determine the streak. There is nobody and I mean nobody that is in the WWE that should end the streak, not even HHH. And I am a big HHH fan.

 

[Ruthless-RKO]

Taker isn't one that gives up anyway...he finished his fight against Reya t Royal Rumble, he still put on the full match at EC despite being burned etc..This is taker..he will obviously finish the match, he takes his character and the business very seriously..

And also not the best question in the world, but hey, I answered it!!

 

[ckoneagain]

I've seen a couple of times in the last few weeks, a superstar get bloodied and the ref's not rush out so quickly, what happened instead was they showed the clip in black and white so the blood was harder to see, most noticeable was a clip of John Cena after a Nexus beatdown, they showed that clip loads and it was jut in black and white but he was visibly bloody. So to answer your question, im pretty sure they'd just run with it.

 

[newc868]

I think it's a good question but 'Taker wouldn't even give the medics time to get down the ramp and just carry on with the match.

I think when you're talking Wrestlemaina no amount of blood should be enough to stop the match.

 

[brainsuks1234]

Break the rules.
Undertakers been in wwe too be able to do what ever he wants. I doubt blood would stop him from ending a match considiring most of the time he's been in wwe he ends up bleeding

 

[Sean Valjean]

This topic is....different

In short, no they wouldn't stop the match. Simply because Taker has bled before since they've banned blood and his matches have never been stopped to patch him up. This is probably because it would humanize his character, which is a big no-no with his gimmick.

That's all there is to it.

 

[brighamosity]

This is where WWE may be hurting. Since the PG concept and the no blood, their ratings are not what they once were.

Actually, from a ratings stand-point, the PG era hasn't hurt them. I was looking at the Raw and Smackdown ratings awhile back and WWE was on a slow but steady decline in ratings for most of the decade, with the low point being around 2008. It's actually improved a little since then, if I remember correctly. Say what you want about the PG era, but it has not hurt their ratings.

But back to the topic subject. I don't think they'd do anything if Undertaker started bleeding. While raw and smackdown target a younger demographic, who is the one buying the pay-per-views? I never got to see pay-per-views when I was a kid. But I see them fairly regularly as an adult at sports bars and small parties. I think WWE knows that the adults are the ones buying the pay-per-views, so I think they are a little more geared towards adults than Raw or Smackdown, where any kid with cable can watch it. WWE gets their kid money through ad revenue and merchandise. But I think the pay-per-views have and always will target the adults.

 

[RiVaLGaMeR]

This is the worst post ive seen since ive been here. So what if he bleeds. The Undertaker has shed blood tons of times, i believe he lost the first blood match he was last in. If you had a reason why your bringing this up and why we would care would be easier.

 

[Vintage]

first off: that has to be the STUPIDEST question I heard, no offense....


Look, WWE WOULD NOT[/] ruin his character if he gets bloody during the match at Mania. They know Mania is Taker's grandest stage....thats his playground... thats where he performs the BEST. They wont get doctors, they wont make the match shorter, nor they wont ruin his character.


PS: Today, a 12 year old fan at my store NEVER knew Taker was the American Badass...LOL

Interesting topic, I see where you're coming from. You're going to have a hard time getting a straight answer from the WWE universe zombies though, it's hard to separate fact from fiction when you are marking out about takers WM win streak.


I hate to break it to you but the WWE of today would do exactly what you said they wouldn't. Here is a quote directly from Wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TV_Parental_Guidelines#TV-PG

"TV-PG

(Parental guidance suggested)


This rating signifies that the program may be unsuitable for younger children without the guidance of a parent. Many parents may want to watch it with their younger children. Various game shows and most reality shows are rated TV-PG for their suggestive dialog, suggestive humor, and/or coarse language. Since 2008, all WWE programmings (including its Pay-Per-Views), are rated PG (they were previously TV-14, but the rating was changed to attract more of a family audience and bigger TV sponsors)".


It doesn't matter who it is, what PPV we're talking about but during a live telecast but they have a pg rating to maintain. Blood is NOT on their list. If taker bleeds and they can't stop it, he's not able to wrestle any more. Incidentially, the guidelines themselves have no legal force, and does not apply to news or sports programming. The WWE markets itself as a weekly episodic soap opera and not a sporting event.The WWE could in theory choose to ignore the blood, but their advertisers would disown them and dollars > Blood.

 

[pessimism101]

Whether or not the match would stop due to blood loss and entirely up to Undertaker. He's been in the WWE for 20 years and if he doesn't want a match stopped because he's bleeding, then it won't stop. I do feel sorry for the poor sap whose job it is to stop matches to clean up bloody wounds. What I would love to see is for the medic to try and stop it only to eat a Tombstone. That would be classic.

In addition, it's WrestleMania and I don't think the WWE would dare piss off those who have shelled out anywhere from $50-$80 to watch the event. I can only see a match stopped due to blood loss if it's an excessive amount.

 

[wushady]

There's no way they would stop the match. Yes they do usually stop a match now when someone bleeds. Due to the PG rating, but they break that rule for Undertaker because of his character. He's bled on at least two PPV's this year alone with no stoppage.

The rules are a little different for TV and PPV no mater what someone posted on wikipedia. Even if isn't PG they're not going to care as much about upsetting a small amount people that saw blood. As they would care about ruining a 20+ year legacy that Undertaker has built. The crowd will totally shit all over them stopping a Undertaker Wrestlemania match for the Deadman bleeding.

 

[kanebaby1]

I think given Taker's stature in the WWE and being a locker room leader, if he bleeds at WM, the match would continue. Vince might be an a** at times but he does have respect for the superstars that have given alot of themselves for the company. Vince wouldn't do anything to tarnish Taker's WM image and legacy...so if there is blood...I don't see where anything would happen except Taker claiming another victim at a WM.

 

[FutureChamp328]

It's Taker so obviously it wouldn't effect the match at all. Taker is too well respected for them to try any of that. At his point he is the oldest veteran out there and what proves that is that with HBK gone he is the only one allowed to do promos with no script. Also on a side note if you see any interview with him out of character (yes they do exist) you will see that the American Badass wasn't just a gimmick thats how he really is, trust me I've met the man. He wouldn't give a rats ass if he was bleeding or not.