What Qualities Would Taker's Streak Ender Have?

[Zen411]

So, just hypothetical here....

I don't want to see Taker's streak end... ever. I don't see anyone who deserves that kind of rub after all these years. But if there was a young, deserving superstar who could really benefit from a pass the torch moment from Taker, what qualities should they have?

I would be afraid of giving it to someone who is too green. Many stars have come along through the years and been groomed to be a main eventer only to take off. (Lesnar, Lashley, etc.) It would be terrible to give that once in a lifetime win to someone only to see them leave WWE for one reason or another or to an injury.

It would have to be someone they could see main eventing for years as a hell or a face.

It would have to be someone who has demonstrated a respect for the business and the history of the business.

It should be someone who has some kind of similarity to the Taker. Like a kindred spirit of sorts like Kane has been. Not just some random guy.

This is a tall order which makes me think it will never happen... Your thoughts?

[Robbymac]

For starters he needs to wear jean shorts, and have a previous gimmick as a rapper.

[The Doctor]

John Cena or Triple-H.

But I don't think it should end. Undertaker deserves an accolade all of his own.

[randomranter]

Simple. "The Streak Ender" doesn't exist. Taker should retire with the streak intact.

You can't give it to someone who's "in need of the rub" or is otherwise too green. You risk the possibility of that wrestler being the next Lashley/Lesnar. Or you risk that wrestler simply not taking off and ending up going nowhere. You need to make sure they're experienced, over, ready, and able to capitalize on that rub. You only get one shot.

And by the time they're at that point, they don't need the rub any more.

What good would 'Taker losing the streak to Cena/HBK/HHH do for any of them?

[Bobeddy]

Vince, you wanna tell everyone again?





'If you want this choice position
Have a cheery disposition
Rosy cheeks, no warts!
Play games, all sort

You must be kind, you must be witty
Very sweet and fairly pretty
Take us on outings, give us treats
Sing songs, bring sweets'

[Loki]

Jan 30, 2009 11:56:46 GMT -5 randomranter said:

Simple. "The Streak Ender" doesn't exist. Taker should retire with the streak intact.

You can't give it to someone who's "in need of the rub" or is otherwise too green. You risk the possibility of that wrestler being the next Lashley/Lesnar. Or you risk that wrestler simply not taking off and ending up going nowhere. You need to make sure they're experienced, over, ready, and able to capitalize on that rub. You only get one shot.

And by the time they're at that point, they don't need the rub any more.

What good would 'Taker losing the streak to Cena/HBK/HHH do for any of them?

And not surprisingly, I agree with you...

I think after Lesnar, WWE learnt a valuable lesson. You give too much too soon to a guy of unproven layalty, it'll eventually backfire. [Not to mention Ultimate Warrior I, II and III should have been a bit of a wake-up call already...]

On the other hand, sacrificing the streak to the benefit of a Superstar who's already over and established as a Top Guy is a waste of an angle.

The one and only who could end Taker's streak should be Kane, to wrap it up the long long story they've had together.

Allowing Taker to retire undefeated would be too much of an honour IMO. All the best in the business have a "black spot" on their resumè, be it a controversial wins or losses, backstage behaviour issues, generic ego problems, ups-and-downs, personal demons...

Me, I don't see a valid reason for Taker going home with the ball. Not for some sort of "justice" but because no wrestler should be albe to claim an undefeated streak of any kind.

[Jared Jammer]

I don't think the undefeated streak will ever be broken. It adds more value to the Undertaker's legacy than it would to anyone who ended it. There have been lots of multi-time world champions in wrestling history - yet there's only one man who went 16-0 at Wrestlemania. That's one hell of a feather in his cap.

If someone on the current roster did end the streak, my money is on Jack Swagger next year.

Fact of the Day - Undertaker's first Wrestlemania, VII, was held on his birthday (March 24th).

[bubbles]

^ If Swagger ends the streak I will give you my house and life savings, bookmark it if you want because I'm not lying.

I don't think it should end, if it did it will be by Cena or Orton but it's the thing that defines Taker's career.

[Big Daddy Bad Booking]

Not even Bruno Sammartino or Hulk Hogan could end it. Undertaker should be left alone (not in conjunction with Ric Flair).

[blef]

Jan 30, 2009 12:16:55 GMT -5 Jared Jammer said:

Fact of the Day - Undertaker's first Wrestlemania, VII, was held on his birthday (March 24th).

....so does this mean if the streak ends, he.......dies?

[The Peoples Elbow]

There would be no quality at all. It would be an disservice to all the man has done for the industry. It would suck worse than anything...EVAR.

[Loki]

The man didn't do that for free, out of sheer love for the industry...

And anyway

If Hogan accepted to drop the belt to Ultimate Warrior, CLEANLY, without resorting to a transitional Champion;
If Hugan accepted to do the job, emphatically, to Brock Lesnar, passing away in the bear-hug as if he was a random jobber on Superstars
If Bret got screwed, as some sort of pre-emptive act of "self-preservation", and many think it was an understandable choice
If Triple H has lost, clean, in the last 4 straight WrestleManias
If Ric f'n Flair, I reapeat, RIC FLAIR, has jobbed to everybody and their mom
If EVERY Main Eventer/Champion in the last decade has dropped the belt/lost on the big stage to EVERY other fellow Main Eventer, and even to some quasi-Main Eventers...

then I think we can accept Taker retiring with a __-1 WrestleMania record.

[Porky's Butthole]

Jan 30, 2009 12:47:51 GMT -5 Loki said:

The man didn't do that for free, out of sheer love for the industry...

And anyway

If Hogan accepted to drop the belt to Ultimate Warrior, CLEANLY, without resorting to a transitional Champion;
If Hugan accepted to do the job, emphatically, to Brock Lesnar, passing away in the bear-hug as if he was a random jobber on Superstars
If Bret got screwed, as some sort of pre-emptive act of "self-preservation", and many think it was an understandable choice
If Triple H has lost, clean, in the last 4 straight WrestleManias
If Ric f'n Flair, I reapeat, RIC FLAIR, has jobbed to everybody and their mom
If EVERY Main Eventer/Champion in the last decade has dropped the belt/lost on the big stage to EVERY other fellow Main Eventer, and even to some quasi-Main Eventers...

then I think we can accept Taker retiring with a __-1 WrestleMania record.

Outside of Flair and maybe Bret, Taker is more respected backstage than anyone else you listed there because of his lack of ego problems.

Hogan agreeing to cleanly drop the title?! There shouldn't have been an issue where he would HAVE to agree to it. He should have been told the finish and said 'yes sir' and that's that. He was leaving to film a movie any damned way, so that don't even factor into it. And about him putting Lensar over, two things: He didn't have creative control. If he did and he pushed hard enough, Lesnar woulda sold the LEG OF DOOM like it was a MAC truck. Second, Lesnar didn't really pan out for WWE, did he? So truly what good did it do in the long run? I'll tell ya, about the same amount it would do for someone to end UT's streak.

Flair putting everyone and their mom over? That's because he's a businessman. He knows what's what. Furthermore, he was told to and he did the job(pun totally intended). Has Taker been TOLD to lose at WM and outright refuse? Didn't think so. As I recall, he offered to lose the streak to Kane and Vince put the kibosh on it.

So yeah, Taker shouldn't ever lose the streak. Call it severance pay for having all those horrible angles and all those fat guys he had to fight.

[nerdinitupagain]

If someone is going to end it... Randy Orton will be the one probably.

However, I'm sure there will be some involvement of Kane and Paul Bearer.

[Hiroshi Hase]

Jan 30, 2009 13:03:26 GMT -5 Porky's Butthole said:

Jan 30, 2009 12:47:51 GMT -5 Loki said:

The man didn't do that for free, out of sheer love for the industry...

And anyway

If Hogan accepted to drop the belt to Ultimate Warrior, CLEANLY, without resorting to a transitional Champion;
If Hugan accepted to do the job, emphatically, to Brock Lesnar, passing away in the bear-hug as if he was a random jobber on Superstars
If Bret got screwed, as some sort of pre-emptive act of "self-preservation", and many think it was an understandable choice
If Triple H has lost, clean, in the last 4 straight WrestleManias
If Ric f'n Flair, I reapeat, RIC FLAIR, has jobbed to everybody and their mom
If EVERY Main Eventer/Champion in the last decade has dropped the belt/lost on the big stage to EVERY other fellow Main Eventer, and even to some quasi-Main Eventers...

then I think we can accept Taker retiring with a __-1 WrestleMania record.

Outside of Flair and maybe Bret, Taker is more respected backstage than anyone else you listed there because of his lack of ego problems.

Hogan agreeing to cleanly drop the title?! There shouldn't have been an issue where he would HAVE to agree to it. He should have been told the finish and said 'yes sir' and that's that. He was leaving to film a movie any damned way, so that don't even factor into it. And about him putting Lensar over, two things: He didn't have creative control. If he did and he pushed hard enough, Lesnar woulda sold the LEG OF DOOM like it was a MAC truck. Second, Lesnar didn't really pan out for WWE, did he? So truly what good did it do in the long run? I'll tell ya, about the same amount it would do for someone to end UT's streak.

Flair putting everyone and their mom over? That's because he's a businessman. He knows what's what. Furthermore, he was told to and he did the job(pun totally intended). Has Taker been TOLD to lose at WM and outright refuse? Didn't think so. As I recall, he offered to lose the streak to Kane and Vince put the kibosh on it.

So yeah, Taker shouldn't ever lose the streak. Call it severance pay for having all those horrible angles and all those fat guys he had to fight.

As for Hogan, if he really didn't want to job to Lesnar, he could've walked out like Austin did. So clearly it wasn't that big of an issue to him.

[mattperiolat]

Speaking for myself, The Streak is something that no one will equal, so my vote goes for it something that no one should break. I mean, at this point, what purpose would it serve even Kane to break it?

No, it will stand as a marker for people to just look in awe at. I mean hell, Taker is this generation's Andre, bar none.

[Secret Clown]

If they wanted to end it, Randy Orton should have done it at WM21 but know I think he should keep it.

[thuschongswing]

Jan 30, 2009 13:31:52 GMT -5 Secret Clown said:

If they wanted to end it, Randy Orton should have done it at WM21 but know I think he should keep it.

Didn't the NEWZ reports say that Randy Orton was given the opportunity to end Taker's streak, but didn't out of sheer respect?

If so, then I agree. Taker's streak should NEVER be ended IMO. Just too much history there, even if half of his victories weren't that impressive.

[randomranter]

Jan 30, 2009 12:47:51 GMT -5 Loki said:

The man didn't do that for free, out of sheer love for the industry...

And anyway

If Hogan accepted to drop the belt to Ultimate Warrior, CLEANLY, without resorting to a transitional Champion;

Hogan thought it was a mistake, and had his reservations about dropping the belt to the Warrior, thinking that he was a flash in the pan. He ended up being right.

If Hogan accepted to do the job, emphatically, to Brock Lesnar, passing away in the bear-hug as if he was a random jobber on Superstars

A lot of people thought Lesnar really was the next big thing, and would carry the WWE to the next golden age. He had the look, talent, etc. Look how well that worked out.

If Bret got screwed, as some sort of pre-emptive act of "self-preservation", and many think it was an understandable choice

I can't see how the Montreal Screwjob has anything to do with 'Taker losing his streak.

If Triple H has lost, clean, in the last 4 straight WrestleManias

All things considered, HHH isn't the greatest example.

If Ric f'n Flair, I reapeat, RIC FLAIR, has jobbed to everybody and their mom

And a lot of people believe that he did it WAY too much, and ended up damaging his career in the process.

If EVERY Main Eventer/Champion in the last decade has dropped the belt/lost on the big stage to EVERY other fellow Main Eventer, and even to some quasi-Main Eventers...

But none of them had a 16-0 winning streak. If HBK had the same record as the Undertaker, I'd say that he should retire with the streak intact, too.

then I think we can accept Taker retiring with a __-1 WrestleMania record.

I agree with you that Kane is the only person who could pull it off, but...

....Would he want it? He likes to keep a relatively low profile, and prefers his JTTS role.

.... Would you want to see ANOTHER Taker/Kane feud? They've done every variant of the feud they possibly could, including two past Wrestlemanias.

.... What would Kane do with it? As I said, he likes his JTTS role, and it's not like he'd need it to move back into the main event scene. He's over and established enough on his own.

IMO........the "streak" developed accidentally. I seriously doubt that Vince hired the undertaker with the thought of having him be undefeated at WM nearly 20 years later. Once they realized that they had given him a long undefeated streak, they turned it into a successful marketing tool for Wrestlemania. Once he loses, that tool is gone forever, which means it would have to be his last wrestlemania appearace, if not his last match entirely.

IMO, he shouldn't lose it at all. The guy has been a company man for 20 years now. He took what was supposed to be a temporary gimmick until they found something better for him, turned it into 24k gold, and managed to keep it relevant for two decades. He's one of the biggest merchandise sellers in the company. He's a top money draw. He's drawn watchable matches out of some of the worst workers EVER in the company. He did the job S.D. Jones-style for Khali. He's never had a title reign that's lasted more than a month or two, and outside of a couple of brief runs with the tag belts, he's stayed away from the secondary belts entirely. He's put COUNTLESS people over, including many who didn't deserve it. He's been in some of the most memorable angles, matches, and entrances in the company's history.

To me, letting him retire with the streak intact would be a wonderful way of saying "thank you" for 20 years of dedicated service.

[DSR]

He's never had a title reign that's lasted more than a month or two, and outside of a couple of brief runs with the tag belts, he's stayed away from the secondary belts entirely.

You've got a couple of minor inaccuracies in there:

-Taker's reign in 1997 lasted from Wrestlemania to Summerslam. Not a super-long reign, but there IS a difference between a 5 month reign and a 1 month reign.
-Taker did have a run with the Hardcore title, which was a secondary belt.