when was the Undertaker's streak in more jeopardy?

[pepentorresHHH]

So now that Mania is over, and we can reflect on it I have a doubt in my mind....all thorughout the Taker HHH program they kept saying how the streak was in more jeopardy than ever.....is this true?
The question is strictly from a fan's perpective (please no one says the streak has never been in jeopardy because taker will never lose) who has gotten the closest or made you think that the streak was gonna end?
Debate away (ill give my pick later)

 

[Nate DaMac]

Don't be one of those guys, just type out the fucking name. UT sounds like something to do with a tract infection.

Anyway, this past Mania match was one of the few times I really bought into him possibly losing. HHH dished out all kinds of offense, and the kickouts were astounding. I actually thought Hunter was going to pull some egotistical bullshit and put himself over.

The only other time I bought someone as being a legit threat though was when he took on Batista. He was a guy who I could see getting the nod to end it. Luckily, they didn't go that route.

 

[avi01]

I guess it was before it became the steak, so probably till 99. But recently I do remember some heavy rumors when he had to face Batista and many fans were angry at that to the point of willing to boycott the PPV.

 

[pepentorresHHH]

As for me...the UNDERTAKER's opponent that came the closest was Triple H.... He gave the undertaker all he had and a momment of "doubt" was all it took to the undertaker to capitalize and lock that gogoplata, the randy came pretty close too, when he countered that chokeslam into an rko I raised from my seat, I really thought for a minute there that the streak was over! Ands then of course shawn..... He came that close but he wasn't able to get the job done!

 

[MoRtAnDaD]

from a logical point of view, i had to go with the handicap match against Big Show and A-train. 2 Big guys against one big guy.

from a fan point, career vs streak match, wm 26. Even when i knew shawn was ready to hang the boots, i wasnt sure if that was the time already.

 

[reynolsg]

For me, it was Randy Orton at Wrestlemania 21. The WWE machine was firmly behind Orton and getting him to "that" level and there was quite a bit of IWC anger that Taker got the win in the end - tough to imagine that in 2011!

 

[Dan E. Inferno]

I pretty much have to agree with F.A.T's post above. Depending on you look at it, it's either Batista at WM23 or HHH at WM27.

Batista was pretty much dominant on Smackdown from 2005 onwards. The only time he wasn't involved in the title scene is when he was injured, and I thought there was a realistic chance that Batista could break the streak going into the match. However, at no point during the match did I think Taker was in danger, and that's including the Batista Bomb.

However, for a few seconds at WM27 after HHH hit the tombstone piledriver, I genuinely thought the streak was over. That was an insane feeling, considering I had given HHH no chance in hell before the match had started. So, to answer the original question, I'd have to say WM27 was when the streak was in most jeopardy.

 

[AntiChristDeicide]

I was sure that Undertaker was going to lose at wrestlemania 27. When HBK was in the ring the last raw before the match, i said to myself "HBK will superkick Undertaker and HHH will win". Why you ask? Well, we all know that HBK and HHH are friends in real life, and that Undertaker retired HBK. So from a revenge perspective it made sense.

 

[TheMaskedNewton]

I, like a casual fan, thought that the streak was in jeopardy many a times.

Right from the time Randy Orton challenged him to a match.

But the most near I thought, from a booking point of view, was Shawn Michaels' 2nd match with the Undertaker. I can see that this was not the belief of many others as no one has posted his name. I had a reasoning behind this.

No one that Undertaker had beaten in his long long streak was at the time of the match, as huge a star or as huge a icon as Shawn Michaels was during his 1st match. So I was shocked to see him lose. When they met again, in the next Wrestlemania, I thought it was given that Shawn Michaels will win. Because I felt that HBK had agreed to lose to 'Taker in the first place, only if he was going to get a win over Taker in their next match. Just my opinion.

I was not in the 'IWC' at that time. Most of the IWC knew that HBK was gonna lose in his retirement match or believed so, I didn't.

 

[akrassikauda]

The closest anyone has or will come close to stopping the streak has to have a Quick Strike Finisher. And the closest was not HBK it was Randy Orton. During the build up to that match Orton started to hit the RKO much faster thus making it more believable that he could beat Taker because of all the guys Taker faced had stationary finishers. When he hit the RKO I thought it was over really over. Randy Orton was oh so close just because of his finisher

 

[Rip]

The last time I ever thought it was in jeopardy (and the time it would've made the most sense for him to lose) was agianst Randy Orton. His "Legend Killer" gimmick was in full swing and who better to receive the massive rub than this young up-and-coming superstar? When he lost, I never had any doubt since then that the steak would never end. The Taker/Streak/Wrestlemania phenomenon has never been interesting or something I look forward to ever since then, because the outcome is a forgone conclusion.

 

[SomeAreSet]

Well I personally thought Wrestlemania 26 was when Undertaker's streak was in the most jeopardy,but mainly because I didn't want Shawn Michaels to retire.

During the lead-up to the match (from 2-21-11 til the go-home show) I didn't really feel that Undertaker's streak was in jeopardy.I only started thinking that Undertaker was going to lose during the match,when he was stumbling about trying to stand up and Triple H was just standing there watching,and Hunter wasn't even fazed when Undertaker grabbed him by the throat.I thought it was all over when Triple H gave him the third Pedigree.

 

[Ytoojae]

I'll rank them in order;

1. Shawn Michaels, Wrestlemania XXVI

I didn't see Shawn retiring at all. He's one of those guys that I saw going on forever or at least certainly until Triple H and he took up prominent backstage positions. I thought the program was going to end with them splitting a pair of Wrestlemania's and then Taker demanding revenge at Wrestlemania XXVII and winning the series 2-1.

2. Triple H, Wrestlemania XXVII

Until the promo on the RAW prior to Wrestlemania I had no doubt in my mind that Taker was going to win. That promo did an amazing job of painting Triple H as the winner with Shawn Michaels potentially saving Taker as his way out to retain the streak. Everything that Triple H had said about it being the time to retire painted an accurate picture of how I view Taker. He's beat up and as hard as he tries he truly is a shadow of his former self. It made sense. While it's true that you could say that Triple H was speaking about himself in a non-kayfabe perspective it fed into the match brilliantly. Then when he hit the tombstone during the match for a split second I was thinking "What a fitting send off, losing to his tombstone and trademark taunt..... HOLY SHIT THAT WAS CLOSE!" so yeah it had me going.

3. Randy Orton, Wrestlemania XXI

As others have said Randy at this point was quite clearly the chosen one. It was also relatively early on into them building the streak up as something important at Wrestlemania. If there was ever a right option for Taker to drop the streak to it was Orton at XXI. Orton fit most of the criteria that most people generally give when talking about who Taker should give up the streak to. He was very young, over as hell, was going to be a 10+ year main event star and the rub that he would have gotten from defeating Taker at Mania would have elevated him to that status so much quicker. The perfect choice.

I'm laughing at how many thought Taker's streak was in jeopardy against Batista. In all honesty Bats was one of his more blatant "Taker's going over" Wrestlemania opponents - perhaps even more so than the handicap match was. He didn't fit the criteria that we have at all. People see him as coming into the company at about the same time as Orton but fail to consider how much older he is. No way he was going over Taker - not nearly enough longevity to it.

 

[It'sMyYard]

Vs Batista, WM 23.
There were rumors flying around. And seeing as how Batista had been dominating, I genuinely thought Taker was going to loose. I now know that rumors are just that... rumors.

 

[Dimice121976]

While all of those make valid arguments, the 1 time he was poised to lose at WrestleMania was WM12 vs Diesel. I've said this in a few threads, if Kevin Nash was not going to WCW, he would of beaten 'Taker at WM12. HBK was gonna win the title from Brett, and then Nash and HBK were going to head into a feud over the belt. Nash was gonna build on the official heel turn at MSG by beating 'Taker and destroying HBK all spring and summer of 96. However, Nash goes to WCW and 'Taker goes over at WM.

 

[deadelviX]

I was sure that Undertaker was going to lose at wrestlemania 27. When HBK was in the ring the last raw before the match, i said to myself "HBK will superkick Undertaker and HHH will win". Why you ask? Well, we all know that HBK and HHH are friends in real life, and that Undertaker retired HBK. So from a revenge perspective it made sense.

that hysterical... cause i thought the exact opposite. I thought for sure that HBK was going to get involved at the end of the match and superkick HHH because he wouldn't be able to live with his best friend breaking the streak while he failed twice! either way would've worked...but i'm glad that it Undertaker went over clean. great ending.

 

[Bobholly39]

WM 26, no doubt

I just didn't see HBK losing to Taker 2 times in a row...everyone was praising WM25 as one of the best matches of ALL TIME, and you KNEW those 2 guys were going to put on a repeat performance...so if ever there was a way to go out with a bang, against a fellow legend, after wrestling 2 5 star matches...it was WM26

I honnestly had no idea HBK was serious about retiring. When he lost the match, and did his farewell tour up the ramp afterwards i was shocked.


I never felt HHH had a chance this year. And I also don't think anyone honnestly bought into HHH ending the streak up until the actual match itself maybe...where HHH was dominating. They really told a very, very compelling story to manage to convince viewers that Taker had a chance of losing during the match. Hats off to them.


Finally...please no one go answering to this question anywhere before WM 17 or so...before that point, it wasn't even a streak. They easilly could have booked Snukka over Taker the first time...no streak then. It's only around WM17 that these matches started counting as streak matches.

 

[Dimice121976]

WM 26, no doubt


Finally...please no one go answering to this question anywhere before WM 17 or so...before that point, it wasn't even a streak. They easilly could have booked Snukka over Taker the first time...no streak then. It's only around WM17 that these matches started counting as streak matches.

Well without those matches the "streak" would never materialize to what it is today. Snuka, Jake, Gonzalez, Bundy never had a shot, however Nash (before the jump), Sid (was the WWF Champion) were seen as possible guys to go over 'Taker. Kane in 98, and Bossman in 99 were not looked at as threats. But to disregard anything pre X7 is not a fair call, especially since one of them was about 95% ready to go the other way.

 

[Orton Pose \__0_/]

FWM21 - The whole buildup especially when 'Taker didn't get up from an RKO on Smackdown before WM, I believed it would end then, and I definitely thought it was over when Randy countered the chokeslam into the RKO during the match

 

[yur_momma]

wow good thread. i like the question and the responses. there is no right or wrong answer on this one.

i would say the time it was most in jeopardy in my opinion was: (it doesnt make sense to leave out those before WM 17 so im ignoring that. once it became a streak i never thought it was in jeopardy; which for me was about 2000-ish)

Wrestlemania 8 Undertaker Vs. Jake The Snake Roberts (Win #2)
ok at this point there was no streak, taker had only won last years WM match so he didnt have the aura of invincibility at the big event yet. jake roberts was in some big programs in the year or more before with martel, warrior, savage (epic!) and now taker who had just turned face on jake by saving elizabeth.
taker was in bigger programs in the previous year with hogan, warrior, a sort of alliance with the newly arrived ric flair, etc. but he won the world title and then lost in two days later and got stuck in a fued with savage and an attack at a wedding...then he saved elizabeth and it didnt seem like taker was gonna be same. i couldnt imagine a good-guy taker and i thought it was done just to put over jake roberts who still had mega-heat from slapping elizabeth.
i thought jake was on his way to a world title run and i really thought he would win this one. taker 1-1.
(ps im speaking all from memory so if i missed a fued or got something wrong thats why)

 

[Dimice121976]

Wrestlemania 8 Undertaker Vs. Jake The Snake Roberts (Win #2)
ok at this point there was no streak, taker had only won last years WM match so he didnt have the aura of invincibility at the big event yet. jake roberts was in some big programs in the year or more before with martel, warrior, savage (epic!) and now taker who had just turned face on jake by saving elizabeth.
taker was in bigger programs in the previous year with hogan, warrior, a sort of alliance with the newly arrived ric flair, etc. but he won the world title and then lost in two days later and got stuck in a fued with savage and an attack at a wedding...then he saved elizabeth and it didnt seem like taker was gonna be same. i couldnt imagine a good-guy taker and i thought it was done just to put over jake roberts who still had mega-heat from slapping elizabeth.
i thought jake was on his way to a world title run and i really thought he would win this one. taker 1-1.
(ps im speaking all from memory so if i missed a fued or got something wrong thats why)

Jake was never a threat because I believe it was known he was heading to WCW. However I see your point about where their characters were headed at the time. Since we are talking about WM 8, if the original card happens (Hogan/Flair, Sid/'Taker, Savage/Jake) there is a very good chance Sid would of went over 'Taker. And just like with the Diesel match, no streak.

 

[Bobholly39]

Well without those matches the "streak" would never materialize to what it is today. Snuka, Jake, Gonzalez, Bundy never had a shot, however Nash (before the jump), Sid (was the WWF Champion) were seen as possible guys to go over 'Taker. Kane in 98, and Bossman in 99 were not looked at as threats. But to disregard anything pre X7 is not a fair call, especially since one of them was about 95% ready to go the other way.

Reason why i was saying to disregard them is because they're meanginless imo.

It's like if....imagine next year at Mania Miz loses the WWE title to Morrisson. Is *ANYONE* going to remember that "omg Miz had a 2-0 streak, he could have gone on to challenge Taker for 20-0 if it wasn't for that 1 match" 20 years from now?

If Taker had lost to Nash (which may have been very possible at the time, and even the likely scenario), the word "Streak" never would have come to fruition. It's only once people actually realised there was a streak (around X-7) that it started meaning anything. Any match that happened before that was just a random match with Taker...that more often than not Taker was favorite to win, because he rarely loses.

 

[CenaSux4Life78]

For me, Undertakers greatest threat was a tie between HHH and Edge. Of course Edge/Taker from Mania a few years ago is my personal favorite match. The way that went, counter for counter move for move. It was increadible. I was on my feet jumping up and down when I realized Edge was about to spear Taker, and end the match. I was both excited and nervous at the sametime. Then Taker somehow got him into Hells Gate and won.

 

[Dimice121976]

Reason why i was saying to disregard them is because they're meanginless imo.

It's like if....imagine next year at Mania Miz loses the WWE title to Morrisson. Is *ANYONE* going to remember that "omg Miz had a 2-0 streak, he could have gone on to challenge Taker for 20-0 if it wasn't for that 1 match" 20 years from now?

If Taker had lost to Nash (which may have been very possible at the time, and even the likely scenario), the word "Streak" never would have come to fruition. It's only once people actually realised there was a streak (around X-7) that it started meaning anything. Any match that happened before that was just a random match with Taker...that more often than not Taker was favorite to win, because he rarely loses.

Yeah but those "random matches" were the ground foundation for the streak. They cannot be ignored because without them, what you started at WM X-7 would never have been there to be noticed. Sure they started keeping record of it around X-7, but the streak itself did not become an actual part of his matches until 21 when Orton made mention of it. The potential loss in 96, should not be ignored. The streak should never be broken IMO, but it did dodge some early bullets to be the staple it is today.

 

[KoC417]

Simple. When UT took on BIG DADDY COOL!
GO back and watch that match. To me up until UT made a major comeback it was a SQUASH match. Big Daddy Cool had Taker beat with the powerbomb but HE himself pulled him up. That right there could have been the END of the streak