|
|
Post by LtD73 on Feb 6, 2014 8:35:26 GMT -5
Say if Undertaker didn't have the streak and was defeated early on at Wrestlemania, do you think Undertaker would still be wrestling today, if not when do you think he would have retired?
A lot of people say he should've retired at WM28 at 20-0 but if he didn't have the streak would it still seem as important as that was built up since WM25 because of the streak.
|
|
|
|
Post by BrIaNMeRcY on Feb 6, 2014 8:54:42 GMT -5
I will say the streak has added to the aura and mystic of The Undertaker. Without the streak, who knows what 'Taker would be doing today. You do pose a very good point had 'Taker lost one of his earlier WrestleMania matches. In hindsight, while the streak wasn't planned to happen, The Undertaker being undefeated at WrestleMania is one of those "accidents" that was meant to happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by speaktomeworriers on Feb 6, 2014 9:11:36 GMT -5
Very Good Question..One can only Imagine what would have been, but no matter what we all know he would have retired LONG ago if it wasnt for the streak....Speaking of the streak, I for one think he should retire with the streak intact, i am pretty tired of this "Who is going to end the streak?" Should be no one, and at this stage of his career, if they decide to end his streak, will that person really benefit from it? Taker isnt who he was so many years ago, he is sore and hurt and getting old... whatever young pup they have beat him, Who really cares? I am sure WWE will make that person a jobber after a few months anyways, so it will totally discredit the streak anyways....So just keep the streak, Retire, and leave us with a hell of a memory
|
|
|
|
Post by Terrys Wrestling Figures on Feb 6, 2014 9:14:12 GMT -5
- i think Taker would still be around today, when you think about it the first time i really remember the streak being talked about was after he defeated Flair at 18. That was number 10,
|
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Feb 6, 2014 10:12:46 GMT -5
If not for the Streak I'd bet the farm he would have been gone long ago. I mean he only comes back once a year to pad his stats, so it's pretty safe to assume he wouldn't.
|
|
|
|
Post by T R W on Feb 6, 2014 10:17:09 GMT -5
Even with the streak, he should have retired a few years ago. I enjoy his matches as much as anyone, but it hurts the rest of their stars to keep bringing him back, especially when it is against the likes of HBK and HHH who get nothing from it. I hope this is his last one.
|
|
|
|
Post by ~ Cymru ~ on Feb 6, 2014 10:23:50 GMT -5
Even with the streak, he should have retired a few years ago. I enjoy his matches as much as anyone, but it hurts the rest of their stars to keep bringing him back, especially when it is against the likes of HBK and HHH who get nothing from it. I hope this is his last one. I disagree, I think the fact he's wrestled guys like HHH and HBK the last few years is a good thing BECAUSE they dont get anything from it. Its just a straight up good match, that wresltemania needs, a lot of the matches at mania aren't that good its just a star power draw match. Taker's match is for the hardcore fans who want to see a great match. The other matches seem more aimed at the casual fan who'll only watch if someone like Cena or The Rock is in it. |
|
|
|
Post by HVMMONS on Feb 6, 2014 11:22:47 GMT -5
I think he should've retired at 20-0. 20-0 sounds a lot better than 21-0 or 22-0.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 24, 2024 17:57:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2014 11:29:41 GMT -5
It's something I've often wondereded. I think he probably would, it just wouldn't be as big a deal when he did defend his streak at Wrestlemania.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 24, 2024 17:57:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2014 12:31:01 GMT -5
If not for the Streak I'd bet the farm he would have been gone long ago. I mean he only comes back once a year to pad his stats, so it's pretty safe to assume he wouldn't. I think so too man. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 24, 2024 17:57:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2014 0:35:30 GMT -5
He would be retired.
Keeping the streak going is the only reason he's still around as he really only wrestles one big match per year anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nivro™ on Feb 7, 2014 0:38:57 GMT -5
Not only would he have been gone long ago, he wouldnt be seen (currently) as big of a star as he is. Many fans try to put him in the same sentence as guys like Sammartino, Hogan & Austin. Taker is a notch or possibly 2 below those guys.
|
|
hammer
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jun 12, 2009 2:30:31 GMT -5
Posts: 2,619
|
Post by hammer on Feb 7, 2014 5:58:55 GMT -5
the funny thing is... everything in this thread is absolutely true. he probably would be retired, he almost certainly wouldn't be viewed in the same light/class as he is... and yet, at 40whatever years old he is, hes been involved in the best match at wrestlemania every year since/including the year he fought batista. batista, edge, michaels x 2, hhh x 2 and punk. ill include 21 vs orton too, which is the only match amongst them that had any doubt about it... but you had that dreadful wm22 match vs henry, so i didnt put it in the list.
you may have a preference at a specific show, for a specific match... but year in, year out... he delivers. you may have liked cena/michaels at 23 better than the batista match, you may have liked hbk/flair better at 24... nothing was better at 25... you may have liked mysterio/punk at 26 better, and so on and so forth down the line... but you cannot deny that undertaker delivers every wrestlemania throughout that grouping. and this is a guy, who was downright awful [in the ring] for his first 10-12 years in the wwe. he was an awful worker as the deadman that no sold everything, and he was fat and out of shape as the satanic taker and biker taker.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 24, 2024 17:57:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2014 6:16:06 GMT -5
the funny thing is... everything in this thread is absolutely true. he probably would be retired, he almost certainly wouldn't be viewed in the same light/class as he is... and yet, at 40whatever years old he is, hes been involved in the best match at wrestlemania every year since/including the year he fought batista. batista, edge, michaels x 2, hhh x 2 and punk. ill include 21 vs orton too, which is the only match amongst them that had any doubt about it... but you had that dreadful wm22 match vs henry, so i didnt put it in the list. you may have a preference at a specific show, for a specific match... but year in, year out... he delivers. you may have liked cena/michaels at 23 better than the batista match, you may have liked hbk/flair better at 24... nothing was better at 25... you may have liked mysterio/punk at 26 better, and so on and so forth down the line... but you cannot deny that undertaker delivers every wrestlemania throughout that grouping. and this is a guy, who was downright awful [in the ring] for his first 10-12 years in the wwe. he was an awful worker as the deadman that no sold everything, and he was fat and out of shape as the satanic taker and biker taker. He also had the best match on the WM12 card by FAR. |
|
hammer
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jun 12, 2009 2:30:31 GMT -5
Posts: 2,619
|
Post by hammer on Feb 7, 2014 6:29:37 GMT -5
the funny thing is... everything in this thread is absolutely true. he probably would be retired, he almost certainly wouldn't be viewed in the same light/class as he is... and yet, at 40whatever years old he is, hes been involved in the best match at wrestlemania every year since/including the year he fought batista. batista, edge, michaels x 2, hhh x 2 and punk. ill include 21 vs orton too, which is the only match amongst them that had any doubt about it... but you had that dreadful wm22 match vs henry, so i didnt put it in the list. you may have a preference at a specific show, for a specific match... but year in, year out... he delivers. you may have liked cena/michaels at 23 better than the batista match, you may have liked hbk/flair better at 24... nothing was better at 25... you may have liked mysterio/punk at 26 better, and so on and so forth down the line... but you cannot deny that undertaker delivers every wrestlemania throughout that grouping. and this is a guy, who was downright awful [in the ring] for his first 10-12 years in the wwe. he was an awful worker as the deadman that no sold everything, and he was fat and out of shape as the satanic taker and biker taker. He also had the best match on the WM12 card by FAR. i dont know if id go by far... since taker/diesel was solid, but nothing spectacular. but yea, id rather watch that match again than the first 45-50 minutes of hbk-bret. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 24, 2024 17:57:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2014 6:31:39 GMT -5
He also had the best match on the WM12 card by FAR. i dont know if id go by far... since taker/diesel was solid, but nothing spectacular. but yea, id rather watch that match again than the first 45-50 minutes of hbk-bret. The last few minutes of Bret/Shawn are OK. But the majority of it is rather hard to watch. I'd definitely say the Diesel/Taker match is the best one on the card, IMO it's the first truly great match that The Undertaker ever had. I actually like most of the WM12 undercard, the 6 man tag is good, the Warrior squash is a satisfying moment, and backlot brawl is intense. I'm not keen on the FFA or the Austin/Savio Vego matches though. |
|
HalfBlackRazorback
Superstar
Im calling it tonight Bray Wyatt beats Bryan and the IWC explodes
Joined on: Dec 28, 2013 8:43:18 GMT -5
Posts: 710 
|
Post by HalfBlackRazorback on Feb 7, 2014 13:54:02 GMT -5
i dont know if id go by far... since taker/diesel was solid, but nothing spectacular. but yea, id rather watch that match again than the first 45-50 minutes of hbk-bret. The last few minutes of Bret/Shawn are OK. But the majority of it is rather hard to watch. I'd definitely say the Diesel/Taker match is the best one on the card, IMO it's the first truly great match that The Undertaker ever had. I actually like most of the WM12 undercard, the 6 man tag is good, the Warrior squash is a satisfying moment, and backlot brawl is intense. I'm not keen on the FFA or the Austin/Savio Vego matches though. Best match on WM12 by a mile was the backlot brawl. It was beautifully intense |
|
|
|
Post by Mike Giggs' Munchies on Feb 7, 2014 16:22:16 GMT -5
He'd definitely be retired. If you ask me he'll go for 25 - 22 this year vs. Lesnar, 23 vs. Sting, 24 vs. someone who will have attained ME status (Shield member perhaps?) and 25 vs. Cena in the last match of both their careers. TBF you could argue making it Cena's last match would make it less interesting as it would be more obvious that he's losing than in most other scenarios (as nothing to gain), but its a possibility. Nothing could follow Cena-'Taker at WM though, except maybe a match against Rock or Austin, but even then it wouldn't have the same suspense, only name value.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 24, 2024 17:57:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2014 16:28:34 GMT -5
I think he should've retired at 20-0. 20-0 sounds a lot better than 21-0 or 22-0. 25-0. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 24, 2024 17:57:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2014 19:31:51 GMT -5
I genuinely think it should be him vs Cena @ this WM or definitely the next.
then?he retires.
I have NO interest in Lesnar vs Taker. had Lesnar been booked to destroy Show properly? yeah.but they decided to protect the disposable Show.....and now Lesnar looks like a pissant coward who needs a chair to defeat the guy Orton beat at Survivor Series. He is clearly no threat to Taker. Unless they have him rip Show a new one again.
YAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN.
|
|
