I agree also. I think Cody is better than Ted. I really don't see why everyone is so big on how Ted will be more success than Cody. I think Cody has just as much of a chance.
Sweet Mother Of God NOOOOOOOOOO
- Thread starter Kaedon
- Start date
-
Welcome to "The New" Wrestling Smarks Forum!
I see that you are not currently registered on our forum. It only takes a second, and you can even login with your Facebook! If you would like to register now, pease click here: Register
Once registered please introduce yourself in our introduction thread which can be found here: Introduction Board
I agree also. I think Cody is better than Ted. I really don't see why everyone is so big on how Ted will be more success than Cody. I think Cody has just as much of a chance.
That's exactly WWE's problem though. They were so reluctant on pushing younger guys cause they thought they would take the Lesnar/Lashley route. They should be hesitant, but not this hesitant.
On topic, I say leave the Streak alone. As some said, this is Taker's legacy. When he gone, which seems to be coming up real soon, he wont be remembered for his title reigns, he'll be remembered as the guy that struck fear in his oppenents hearts. The master of the Hell in a Cell, The man that has the most "insert word here that I can't think of" in sports entertainment (says WWE anyway), going. If WWE wants to keep that intact, keep the streak going. But if they were going to have someone beat Taker, it should be a young person, someone who would capitalize on it more. If an older guy does it, say HBK, within a year or 2 he'll be out the door as well. It should a younger guy, someone who still has years left in them, and more than likely someone they expect to keep heel for a long long time.
Nation
Guest
Well Cody could use a solid finisher. Crossroads is good but so many people have used it. Ted definitely has the better finisher with Dream Street.
noumenon
Guest
noumenon
Guest
phantomgerald
Guest
This isn't like MMA where you go undefeated and can keep that record in the record books forever. This is where the team decides year after year to have this man, no doubt a good wrestler, win. Just because he was one of the better wrestlers in this generation doesn't mean he deserves a record which would most likely last forever. There will be many more wrestlers in the future who will probably be as good or even better than the Undertaker. But everytime any of them mounts some sort of streak in WM, people will just say it's nothing compared to Taker. Putting a loss at the end at least opens the possibility that somebody will eventually beat his record.
They need to let him get to 20-0 and then retire him. That needs to be *HIS* record, plain and simple. Someday when I'm an old grandpa, maybe we'll see someone good enough to beat the streak. I just dont want to see a loss on the end of that streak. He needs to stay undefeated.
Soulpower
Guest
CenaMark54
Guest
Wrestling isn't about title reigns or streaks. Just ask HBK. Wrestlers are rarely remembered for their title reigns or streaks. They are remembered for the moments they produced. Legends are remembered for the matches they participated in, win or lose. Look at Michaels, he will be most likely be remembered for 3 matches, The first ladder match, the match against Taker, and the match against Flair. He lost 2 of those. Take Austin, he will be remembered for losing to Hart and his fued with McMahon, not for how many title reigns he had.
Winning streaks and title reigns are for the sole purpose of putting wrestlers over. When a wrestler has reached a certain level, they drop belts and lose their streaks because, number one, they don't need them anymore and, number two, they can help elevate others.
Trust me, Taker losing at Mania will not damage his Legacy whatsoever. People will remember the fact that he went undefeated at Mania for 16 years, not that he lost his last match.
Flairs retirement was a bit different. Much like Mick Foley, a win over Flair wasn't going to get anyone over anymore because he had become a comedy act. It got to the point were a win over Flair meant next to nothing.
People like DiBiase because they see a lot of potential in him. Much like Orton 5 years ago. Its wouldn't be insane to say that DiBiase will be a midcarder for life. It also isn't insane to say that Dibiase could become the next Orton or Cena. Personally, I wouldn't mind a newcomer like DiBiase stepping up to take on Taker at Mania, if he is given a good push with wins over some Main eventers like HBK or HHH. People are always bitching and moaning about "new blood" and "creating new stars" Here is a chance to try it out. He may drop the ball, he may run with it. There is always risk involved when you are looking for a high return. Thats just the way the world works.
phantomgerald
Guest
You know the problem? If he goes 20-0, if anybody ever wants to beat that, it won't be because that wrestler was the best. it would be because since his first wrestlemania, he must be groomed to beat that. He would then have to be fit for every single Wrestlemania. He would have to stay at the company more than 20 years. Pretty damn impossible.
Great One
Guest
What..? How does that even make sense? One has to be in the company as the long as the other to beat them? Lmao.
Anyways, Dibiase won't end his streak, this report is just bullshit and being overspeculated. Honestly, if Randy Orton couldn't end it WM21, no one probably will. And that's the way it should be, imo.
Anyways, Dibiase won't end his streak, this report is just bullshit and being overspeculated. Honestly, if Randy Orton couldn't end it WM21, no one probably will. And that's the way it should be, imo.
Im all for keeping the streak TBH. I think Taker should bow out with the streak intact. The problem i have with someoone breaking it to go over is They make a mistake with the wrong guy and that would be a shitter IMO.