I dont think this question has been asked

[Danielson]

Dun Dun Dun

The topic: The Undertakers WM streak

The question: Many, including myself don't believe Brock Lesnar deserved to break the streak. My reasoning is that I wanted it to be to a career WWE guy. A guy that never wavered. Who, if anyone, do you think would have deserved that honor?


My opinion: I think Triple H (as much as I dislike the majority of his career, specifically the steph date rape stuff) would have been great to end it. Say taker won that first Mania, then HHH the second. Now you have a third bout which Taker could have won, remain realitivly healthy, and retire on a win.

HBK would have been another guy I wouldnt have mind to break. You could apply the same HHH scenerio here, but it seemed 20 was the goal to get to, so who knows

John Cena: Fans would have hated it but to be fair Cena has never wavered from the WWE. He could have maybe even used an epic heel turn ala attitude era to achieve the ONE thing no one has done. I think that would have launched Cena to HollyWood Hogan status of a heel. My only issue is then John Cena would undoubtably go down as the highest decorated superstar off all time ( Isnt he tied or one away from Flairs record?)

Lastly, maybe a up and comer that you could gurantee would be in the buisness. The guys Im thinking wouldve been Bray, or Rollins.

Either way, something about Lesnar doing it will never sit well with me given the fact he left, its not his true passion, and the fact we will probably not hear from him (in the E) soon for awhile, if ever (until HOF or some random rock RR thing)

I def dont think the rock because, well, PT after.

So, what do you think or say?

 

[RedDwarfTechy]

Kinda wanted it to be Bray or Rollins. Brock was definitely not my choice but credit to WWE they used the momentum and turned Brock into a formidable beast. (remember RR 2014 where Brock was facing Big Show? and Had to go all 'dirty' to get the win. Far cry from the Brock we see today)

 

[Green Jesus]

At the time it seemed stupid, in hindsight it was brilliant.

WWE could never make a monster quite like brock lesnar without the streak. He was an extremely beliavable person to actually break the streak, but no one really did give it thought because of how smarky even the casual fans can be.

If the undertaker was defeated by a young guy, this could end the guy's carreer. One little misreading of the crowd by wwe and boom, eternal outrage. If even a rumble elimination could make things so desperate this year, imagine how disgraced the fans would feel if they thought the guy to defeat taker was a nobody?

Lesnar worked pretty much like a voltage stabilizer to prevent the future stars to be damaged by the massive rub of the undertaker. I doubt anyone that beats Brock Lesnar will risk getting outrage, like they would with taker. But being in the ring with lesnar is still a great, great rub, without any considerable risk.

 

[CM Punk]

I'd rather it not be broken at all if we're being honest. I don't even think Bray would deserve it just for his size and build.
Great talker, but I don't think that means he should break the streak.

 

[Dolph'sZiggler]

Brock was fine.

 

[The GOAT]

Brock was the most believable choice to end it, but I still didn't care to see arguably the biggest rub in modern-day wrestling be handed to an already established part-timer. Also, it didn't do anything for Brock. He isn't innately any different than the Brock he was before, it's just that they've gotten their heads out of their asses and stopped treating him as someone who actually needs Heyman's help to get the job done (against Punk), or as some "monster of the week" for guys like Cena and HHH to overcome. They didn't need to give him the Streak to accomplish that.

In the interest of fairness, though, I'm sort of content with it only because Taker was getting up there in age and it's still better to give the Streak to someone like Brock than to give it to no one at all and let a historical moment go to waste (although I don't know about that; I would have really loved to have seen how big a Cena vs Undertaker with the Streak on the line would have been, but I've complained about that enough in the past, so I'll move on.) McMahon even echoed similar comments on the podcast with Austin, where he said he felt the time was right to end it and Lesnar was the best option on the roster to grant with the task. And as long as they do their best to make a new star out of someone (Reigns) conquering the 1 in 21-1, I guess I can live with it.

 

[Prince Bálor]

Should've retired when he was 20-0, after that, well, I couldn't give a toss what would happen to the Streak.

So yeah, I don't mind Lesnar breaking it.

 

[Prince Bálor]

Kinda wanted it to be Bray or Rollins. Brock was definitely not my choice but credit to WWE they used the momentum and turned Brock into a formidable beast. (remember RR 2014 where Brock was facing Big Show? and Had to go all 'dirty' to get the win. Far cry from the Brock we see today)

Brock had to go 'dirty' and the match lasted about 2 minutes because Show was injured. I think his hand was broken or whatever it was.

 

[Red Rain]

Daniel Bryan - If he was never going to be A+ then this rub may have been the fans may have settled for.

Vince McMahon - For the poetic justice of it all. It wouldn't make sense now, yet so wonderfully masterful looking back in hindsight.

 

[Bort]

The Streak should've never been broken, and Taker's last win and retirement match should've been against Sting.

 

[Koko B.]

I could see taker's last match being against Kane...outcome both retire. One drags the other to hell.

 

[Prince Bálor]

I could see taker's last match being against Kane...outcome both retire. One drags the other to hell.

Hopefully.

 

[The GOAT]

I could see taker's last match being against Kane...outcome both retire. One drags the other to hell.

I swear I'll rip my fucking hair out if I have to ever watch these two wrestle again. I think these two have probably had more matches with one another than anybody else on the current roster has. Hell, I think they're only #2 behind Cena vs Orton (who have a total of ten) as far as the most singles matches on PPV itself goes.

 

[Jacob Fox]

I've never been a huge Undertaker fan. It's weird but I guess around the time he debuted I really hated the way he supposedly had "powers" and the whole urn thing. I had my fill of him in 1994 when they had that idiotic urn gushing green smoke and the horrid Undertaker vs Undertaker match at Summerslam (which was the first PPV I attended live).

Although I came to respect his ability later, I still never became a big fan. I was always rooting against the streak. I think that made me enjoy the streak matches more though. I always had stake in them.

That being said, I think my reaction when it happened was "Holy fucking shit" or close to that. Lesnar was the first guy ever that I actually did not want to break the streak. It was the very first streak match in which I cheered for Taker. By that time, I had decided I wanted Undertaker to retire with it intact.

But I agree with a before mentioned post. It had to ve an established guy because I think breaking the streak would have killed the career of a younger guy because he would 1. Always be booed and 2. Would have that monkey on his back forever. Can't you just hear Michael Cole:

"Hard to believe that the man who ended the Undertaker's streak at Wrestlemania couldn't defeat [insert name]."

Followed by Lawler's :

"Well he may have beat the Undertaker's Streak but he couldn't beat [insert name]."

 

[Red Rain]

But I agree with a before mentioned post. It had to ve an established guy because I think breaking the streak would have killed the career of a younger guy because he would 1. Always be booed and 2. Would have that monkey on his back forever. Can't you just hear Michael Cole:

"Hard to believe that the man who ended the Undertaker's streak at Wrestlemania couldn't defeat [insert name]."

Followed by Lawler's :

"Well he may have beat the Undertaker's Streak but he couldn't beat [insert name]."

I'm hard pressed to believe WWE would allow the breaker of the streak to backslide like that.
Even if that individual did job out, I doubt the announce team would make light of it on national TV.
For example, Jericho defeated Austin and Rock in one night, but the announce team never degrades his accomplishment by mentioning he lost to Fandango.

Assuming a heel broke the streak, the announce team could make a d*ck move and bury somebody for losing matches but isn't it human nature to lose anyway?
Had Barrett broken the streak how long would be an acceptable stretch of time before he could lose again? One year?
Would WWE allow the breaker of the streak to lose a consecutive streak of matches so soon after? Even if they did (which I doubt), what business is it of ours?
Everybody loses eventually otherwise everything becomes redundant. A 'payoff' only fails if the person was sh*t to begin with and nobody is implying that the streak breaker be a sh*thead.

For the record, I gave Jacob Fox a positive rating. I just reject the notion of an invisible rule that said the breaker of the streak better not end up a failure.