WrestleMania HIAC Stipulation

  • 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


Mr. Roman Empire

Mr. Roman Empire

The Game
Main Eventer
Joined
Oct 5, 2015
Messages
11,635
Reaction score
2,227
Points
0
Age
32
Location
HELL
What do you think about the stipulation added to Shane vs Taker? If Taker loses than he must retire. To me it makes sense for the storyline to give Taker more of a motive to win. But in reality we all know for sure that's there's no way in hell that Takers career will be ended by Shane McMahon. I think Taker would want to give someone will more long gevity and a solid wrestling career the honors. Plus I'm pretty sure Taker is doing a whole European tour after Mania. So that pretty much ruins the whole outcome of the HIAC match.
 
alexb

alexb

The Lunatic Fringe
Joined
Mar 4, 2014
Messages
628
Reaction score
678
Points
0
Age
48
Completely forgot to comment on this on my RAW rating post but given the oportunity in this thread I'll say this:

While I can understand how this may add to the storyline as stonecoldadams mentions above, giving Taker an actual reason to want to participate in this match, at the same time it could be the dumbest stipulation ever. I mean, if Shane were to actually win, he gains full control of Monday Night Raw, right? If that's the case, wouldn't he be able to just...rehire Taker?

Once more, WWE at it's best....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom