How many more Manias will have Attitude era guys wrestling?

[mcstoklasa]

This isn't a criticism of Attitude era guys competing, just a question. Basically, nearly every year, we get guys who are basically retired, competing at Wrestlemania:

Undertaker is the most obvious example of this. Wrestlemania 32 is probably his last match.

Triple H is another good example, he's basically no longer on the active roster, but every year he gets into a Wrestlmania feud and goes on the card. Sometimes it can be great (Daniel Bryan), sometimes... not. He's in his mid forties, I could see this going on for at least another five years.

Rock will probably wrestle once or twice more. He's only a little past forty and is a huge star. However, he is very successful in movies and does not need to risk injury.

Austin will never wrestle again.

Sting, who knows? I really don't think he is wrestling Undertaker next year.

Kane and Big Show are not big attractions like the above, and will probably remain somewhere on the Mania card opening matches for a few years yet.

Others that could be possibilities could be for example, New Age Outlaws or even The Dudleys.

As for Lesnar, he is a part timer, but he's post attitude era, only 37, a big attraction and will be a huge star, wrestling far more often than any of the above. In other words, he's relevant.

When will we see a year with no stars from this specific era on the card? (not including Bork)

I think they will be on the card until Wrestlemania 35 at least, still with sporadic performances after that.

The only one I'd be interested in seeing would be Austin next year, but it's not going to happen, and if/when he does not wrestle next year then all hope of that is gone forever.

[mcstoklasa]

A Mania 32 card with

Austin Lesnar

HHH Rock

Taker Sting

to me would be a bad, bad idea. Where are the current stars, aside from Bork? I think WWE should only do one of those matches at most. Yes I know, Lesnar/Austin is only fantasy.

I have no idea whatsoever why we would need Rock/HHH? We've seen that. We don't need it again, just like we don't need Rock/Austin, Austin/Taker (they never had chemistry anyway) or Austin/HHH.

Taker/Sting, okay, I don't think it'll happen but it is big.

[Push R Truth]

I'm not convinced we are 100% done yet with Rock and Wrestling guys having matches at Wrestlemania.

[Deleted]

I don't understand it myself. We saw these guys at their best. If we want to see them again or younger fans hear about them and want to be educated on them, there are DVDs and the Network. I understand the need for star power on the show, but they should instead be focused on making some of the current guys pop culture icons themselves.

[mcstoklasa]

I go back and forth on this cos I'd mark for an Austin match.

But really, Rock wrestling HHH in 2015? What's the point? Goldberg, for example, coming back? No, bugger off. Austin? Okay but not happening anyway. Rock wrestling anyone? Not really interested, he's not as good as he was. HHH on the card? Not too interested. Taker? He should be done now. Sting? It was cool this year till HHH won. I not think he will wrestle again. Sting vs Taker? It won't be a good match but I'd watch it.

[EoE: Well There's Your Problem]

I feel like there's been a little bit of a glacial shift towards the newer guys. You know how we put so much emphasis on the final shot? WrestleMania XXX was actually the first time in seven years that a guy within five years of his WWE debut closed out WrestleMania and got that final shot as the main focus of attention, that guy being Daniel Bryan. Then they did it again at XXXI this year with Seth Rollins.

XXIII: Cena (debuted in 2002 - five years)
XXIV: Undertaker (1990 - 18.5 years)
XXV: Triple H (1995 - 14 years)
XXVI: Michaels (1988 - 22 years)
XXVII: Rock (1996 - 14.5 years)
XXVIII: Rock (1996 - 15.5 years)
XXIX: Cena (2002 - 11 years)
XXX: Bryan (2010 - four years)
XXXI: Rollins (2012 - two and a half years)

Read into that what you will, but all I know for sure is that there's going to be a time sooner rather than later that these newer guys are going to have to carry a WrestleMania on their own, and I hope that they get given the opportunities for it to be successful.

[Bo Rida]

Jun 10, 2015 7:34:38 GMT -5 Push R Truth said:

I'm not convinced we are 100% done yet with Rock and Wrestling guys having matches at Wrestlemania.

Just what I was thinking, especially as it's easy to slot old guys into the Andre Battle Royal.

Jericho faced Steamboat, Piper at Snuka 24 years after WM1.

So if we take WM17 as the end of the attitude era then we should see them up until least least WM42.

(42 really is the answer to everything)

[mcstoklasa]

I have said it before, but during Austin/Rock's run on top from 96/97 till 2003 or so, how many of those Wrestlemanias were clogged up once a year by "legends" not on the active roster?

2002? Had Hogan and Hall wrestling, but at least Hulk was a regular performer in 02, wrestling every week. (Didn't Vince even make 50 year old Hogan wrestle house shows every week in 02?)

[mcstoklasa]

Jun 10, 2015 8:37:37 GMT -5 EoE: Well There's Your Problem said:

I feel like there's been a little bit of a glacial shift towards the newer guys. You know how we put so much emphasis on the final shot? WrestleMania XXX was actually the first time in seven years that a guy within five years of his WWE debut closed out WrestleMania and got that final shot as the main focus of attention, that guy being Daniel Bryan. Then they did it again at XXXI this year with Seth Rollins.

XXIII: Cena (debuted in 2002 - five years)
XXIV: Undertaker (1990 - 18.5 years)
XXV: Triple H (1995 - 14 years)
XXVI: Michaels (1988 - 22 years)
XXVII: Rock (1996 - 14.5 years)
XXVIII: Rock (1996 - 15.5 years)
XXIX: Cena (2002 - 11 years)
XXX: Bryan (2010 - four years)
XXXI: Rollins (2012 - two and a half years)

Read into that what you will, but all I know for sure is that there's going to be a time sooner rather than later that these newer guys are going to have to carry a WrestleMania on their own, and I hope that they get given the opportunities for it to be successful.

I think next year will be the Shield boys closing the show.

[Push R Truth]

Jun 10, 2015 8:42:32 GMT -5 mcstoklasa said:

I have said it before, but during Austin/Rock's run on top from 96/97 till 2003 or so, how many of those Wrestlemanias were clogged up once a year by "legends" not on the active roster?

2002? Had Hogan and Hall wrestling, but at least Hulk was a regular performer in 02, wrestling every week. (Didn't Vince even make 50 year old Hogan wrestle house shows every week in 02?)

The landscape was different.

You couldn't have any popular guys from the 80's in 1998 because 97% of them were employed by WCW

[Deleted]

All I know is that I'm sick of NostalgiaMania.

[Deleted]

A long time. I won't be surprised we will see a 60 year old HHH still wrestling at Wrestlemania's. I also bet a 100 year old Vince will be booked on the card even if he's in a wheelchair because dammit a 100 year old man wrestling has never been done before!

[keezy]

I think the usual suspects will be gone soon, but I can see Kurt Angle and The Hardys eventually having a Mania match and maybe a guy like X-Pac, Rhyno or Scotty 2 Hotty in a battle royal.

[Kay Faban]

Triple H could wrestle at Mania 40 or beyond. Think of how old Vince was when he wrestled.

[Ruthless Pessimism]

I will never complain about seeing Rock, Triple H, Lesnar or Taker competing at Mania. Those four are awesome, even now.

I do think they should replace the Andre Battle Royal with a gimmick battle royal, so they can give people that blast of nostalgia each year without dragging out the exact same guys. Then you can run 1-2 matches involving any of the four guys I mentioned above (Taker being out of that lineup after next Mania, of course).

[SUPES]

I see Show and HHH eventually on the current Taker schedule in several years.

[Dave the Dave]

As long as HHH can...he will.

[mcstoklasa]

Jun 10, 2015 15:46:00 GMT -5 Ruthless Pessimism said:

I will never complain about seeing Rock, Triple H, Lesnar or Taker competing at Mania. Those four are awesome, even now.

I do think they should replace the Andre Battle Royal with a gimmick battle royal, so they can give people that blast of nostalgia each year without dragging out the exact same guys. Then you can run 1-2 matches involving any of the four guys I mentioned above (Taker being out of that lineup after next Mania, of course).

Lesnar is seperate to them. Younger, still at the top of his game, and relevant. Also wrestles way more (even for Lesnar).

[tms]

The biggest problem lies with old farts fighting/putting over other old farts or going over younger talent.

A wrestler that has talent but absolutely no direction like Jack Swagger desperately needs credibility and would be perfect for someone like Triple H to put over instead of feuding with Rock. Bray definitely should have won against Taker last year. If they wanted Taker to go out strong, then you could have done the dream match with him against Cena, with Taker going over in his home state at WM32 as his retirement match. But now Bray's kayfabe credibility is as low as it's ever been.

Under no circumstances do I want to see Sting face Taker if it involves Sting losing, especially after the farce that was his "feud" with Triple H.

[metylerca]

Attitude Era? Iron Shiek still has a match at WrestleMania 38.