My point is that he didn't blame the Undertaker then. You are the one that had a problem with that premise. If you believe that this was planned since then, then okay. Personally I believe that they didn't bring it up because they weren't planning it, and then they thought it up while Triple H was out. If you think otherwise, that's your prerogative, but it strikes me as an awfully forced attempt at being epic. They're trying to recreate the magic of HBK vs Undertaker, and thus far it is falling flat. Granted, we are only one week in. But if others can be excited about a match before any buildup as occured, then I can certainly be unexcited by it.
It reminds me of an attempt to make a third movie after two successful ones. Only, for the third, the same actors don't want to do it, but the producers go through with it anyway for a money grab. Think of Home Alone. The first two are classic. But when they wanted a third, Culkin was out. They went through with it anyway, and, while it may have been okay (I never saw it, so I don't know), it wasn't a classic, because it wasn't the same players.
I am not saying that Triple H vs Undertaker will be bad. In fact, it will likely be good. But we already have people believing it will be a classic of epic proportions. For that to happen, the stars just have to be aligned, like they were the last two years. Those stars are not aligned this year, and an attempt by the WWE to make this seem like an epic encounter is bound to fall short, Home Alone 3-style.