What if...

[crazymike0907]

Chris Benoit was one of the Undertaker's defeated opponents at WrestleMania?


I've been wondering lately what they would of done in this situation since WWE doesn't like to mention Benoit anymore. I know this wont open much of a discussion, but i'm just wondering what other people thought. Would they just act like Taker didn't compete at that Wrestlemania and he would instead be 15-0 heading into this years WrestleMania? Or would they just say he is 16-0 but not make any mention of the 16th person? Or would WWE just go ahead & mention Benoit in the highlight reels for Taker's Wrestlemania past? I'm just curious what everybody else thinks.

I think they would still claim him as being 16-0, but would just not make any mention of Benoit. Maybe just show him standing in the ring with that years Wrestlemania logo behind him or something. What do you all think?

 

[Slyfox696]

Chris Benoit was one of the Undertaker's defeated opponents at WrestleMania?


I've been wondering lately what they would of done in this situation since WWE doesn't like to mention Benoit anymore. I know this wont open much of a discussion, but i'm just wondering what other people thought. Would they just act like Taker didn't compete at that Wrestlemania and he would instead be 15-0 heading into this years WrestleMania? Or would they just say he is 16-0 but not make any mention of the 16th person? Or would WWE just go ahead & mention Benoit in the highlight reels for Taker's Wrestlemania past? I'm just curious what everybody else thinks.

I think they would still claim him as being 16-0, but would just not make any mention of Benoit. Maybe just show him standing in the ring with that years Wrestlemania logo behind him or something. What do you all think?

Well, it's not like they talk about Superfly Snuka as an Undertaker opponent, or Sid Vicious, or Giant Gonzalez.

I really don't think it would be an issue. They just say 16-0 and go on.

 

[48.7 is Approximately 49 Times Better Than You]

As Slyfox said, they don't make much of a mention of any of his other opponents. For a video package, I doubt he'd be shown. No, they wouldn't say 15-0. They don't pretend Benoit didn't win a rumble.

A better question to ask would be: What if Chris Benoit had ended the Undertaker's streak?

 

[Reverend Truth]

I don't think it's an issue. They continue to speak of the 16-0 record, but don't really mention the past opponents. Now, on RAW last week, there was a video shown of Undertaker's victims at WM. If you saw it and you don't remember seeing Benoit, then he probably wasn't shown. I'd say they just had 'taker standing in the ring by the sign. Something to look up on You tube, I guess.

 

[The Brain]

I'm sure WWE would still credit Taker with being 16-0, but not mention Benoit. It really annoys me that WWE insists upon erasing Benoit from it's history. Obviously what he did to his family is inexcusable, but the man existed. He worked for the company for seven years. He had several great matches. I saw them with my own eyes and despite WWE's best efforts I'm not going to forget them. I'm not saying promote him or make more action figures and dvds, just don't pretend like he was never there. Acknowledging Benoit's history with the company does not mean you excuse or forgive what he did.

 

[hArdyPUNKmArk]

I don't think it would be that big of a deal. As the other guys have said they don't mention all the guys Taker has beaten, they would still say 16-0 they just probably wouldnt show Benoit in any videos. Sad really as TheBrian said above me, he shouldnt be erased from history.

 

[crazymike0907]

I totally agree. it'd be mentioned but just not with Benoit as being one of his beaten foes. and also, it is stupid to completely erase Benoit from the history. again, like The Brain said, don't make any figures or whatever of him, but he should still get mentioned here & there.

And as for is Benoit was the one that ended Taker's streak, i have no idea what they would do there lol.

 

[ronbot09]

I think I saw him on the video they played on Raw I could be mistakin but I'm pretty sure I did...I don't think they are trying to erase him from their history they just might be waiting untill enough time has passed to start maybe showing highlights and stuff like that or it could be a legal or family issue since, when that all happend everyone was pointing fingers at the WWE saying it was their fault for the pressure he was under. So it could be a matter of time.

If he ended Taker's streak...I honestly believe with the way they are acting when it comes to him (Benoit) that they would just kind of try and push all those wins and him beating the streak into the shadows if that makes since....just not mention how many times Taker went undefeated like they did with Goldberg after his undefeated streak was broken

 

[Khalifa]

As Slyfox said, they don't make much of a mention of any of his other opponents. For a video package, I doubt he'd be shown. No, they wouldn't say 15-0. They don't pretend Benoit didn't win a rumble.

A better question to ask would be: What if Chris Benoit had ended the Undertaker's streak?

No a better question would be: Would Benoit have beaten the Undertaker at wrestlemania 24/25/26 if they had of had a match.

Anyways on topic. I would hvae to say it have made no difference if Benoit would have fought him. They would still say he is 16-0 instead of saying Undertaker as beaten Batista,Edge, Benoit at mania etc etc.

 

[Jay12345]

Wtf Does Benoit Have To Do With Takers Streak...

R.I.P Benoit

 

[Budro5454]

They would just mention his name and then change the subject. We all know that McMahon likes to play things off like they never happened... for as smart as the guy is, thats the only shit he does that just flat out bugs me because it makes no sence. The Benoit situation obviously hurt their business but did what in the hell did they think the media's thoughts were on the wrestling business before Benoit's double murder suicide? A 2 hour family show for all ages?? It had a bad rap since 94 and by deleting Benoit from history, did that make it any better for them? They would do the same thing as they do with Savage... mention his name and then immediately change the subject. They know what the fans want and yet his name is never spoke of or even put on a video game... guess that will make us forget right??

Bottom line, it doesn't have anything to do with Taker's streak but if it did, then thats the approach they would take... something stupid.

 

[Shockwave]

Along with most, i don't remember taker EVER facing or being anywhere near benoit at a wrestlemania. I believe that since benoit debuted for WWE in late 1999/early 2000, takers opponents have consisted of Triple H, Ric Flair, Big Show & A-Train, Kane, Randy Orton, Mark Henry, Batista and Edge!!!

 

[The Brain]

Along with most, i don't remember taker EVER facing or being anywhere near benoit at a wrestlemania. I believe that since benoit debuted for WWE in late 1999/early 2000, takers opponents have consisted of Triple H, Ric Flair, Big Show & A-Train, Kane, Randy Orton, Mark Henry, Batista and Edge!!!

We all know Benoit never actually wrestled Taker at mania. The point is WWE always talks about Taker's streak and his opponents. They never mention Benoit at all about anything. Had Benoit been one of Taker's opponents would they mention him by name?

 

[ThePeoplesChampion]

that is a great great question....i think like everyone has been sayin they would say taker is 16-0 and not mention beniot....the better question is if he ended takers streak...then they would have to acknoledge it.