Should've Taker/Batista been on last at Mania?

[Johnny D]

I think so, personally. Undertaker keeping his illustrious streak was much more important than the crapfests which followed it IMHO.

[Arturo Classico]

Yeah I agree.

[Phoenix]

Well sonce there was a title involved. YES

[THE Dinobot]

Not sure as to why.
It's nice to have a huge main event in the middle of the card, complete with the change. It kept the show alive. Also, it was pretty obvious that going in, Michaels/Cena was going to have more 'heat' during the whole course of the match, and that might have been the better crowd atmosphere to leave with in their opinion.

[KingPopper]

I dont know how it went on tv. But being there live, I would say that there was a lot more excitement for the HBK/Cena match, but they could have been switched. I would say Cena winning sucked the air out of some fans. At least with Taker going on last, the people could go home happy. Plus the HBK/Cena ended the same way the HHH/Cena match ended the year before, and that was just crap.

[Lenny: Smooth like Keith Stone]

Yes, I absolutely think Batista/Undertaker should have been last. I know WWE has a hardon for Cena and feels he should be the top guy and in the main event, but in Detroit on that night, the Undertaker was the most over guy in the building. Not only was the crowd completely behind Taker, but Taker winning the match and championship totally got the crowd pumped and made them happy.

Keep in mind that people started heading for the exits while Cena and HBK was still going on. I'm not sure if that was picked up on TV or not, but they were. People were leaving before the match was over. A lot of people didn't actually leave the building though... they basically just left their seats and hung around the concourse just to see if HBK won. Once Cena won, tons of people kinda just rolled their eyes and frantically ran for the exits trying to beat the crowd. Nevermind the fact that Cena posed in the ring for about 5 minutes, and had that handshake thing with HBK. Few people cared. If Taker was on last, people would have stayed and watched the Taker theatrics, and people wouldn't have started leaving until the show was actually over.

[The Jeebus]

Without a doubt.

15 WrestleMania win-streak + Undertaker + World Title + Better match (!) + Positive crowd heat > Cena no-selling leg injury.

Dumb, dumb, dumb.

[Red 'n' Black Reggie]

yep.

[tommyvercetti]

Yeah...but noone knew how god that match would be before the show..and everyone assumed having HBK with Cena would at least be a better match.

I remember all the naysayers right before Mania talking about how Taker/Batista was going to be a dud...well maybe WWE thought so too and THATS why it didnt go last.

Hindsight is always 20/20.

[The Jeebus]

Good point.

[boiledewokthe3rd]

Taker wanted to watch The Apprentice, he said he would quit if he couldn't. That's why.

[EvilShadow76]

It should have if for nothing else than the Rumble winner is supposed to be the main event at the big show. That and it would have looked a hell of a lot better to have a babyface closing the show to cheers than a chorus of BOOS like Cena.

That's the 2nd year in a row that's happened. It should be a small hint that something is wrong here

[Hiroshi Hase]

Even before the PPV aired,I would've liked to have seen Taker/Batista go on last. Send the fans home on a high note as it did seem likely that Cena would retain (and did).

[Dynamite Kid]

F**K THE STREAK. WHO GIVES A SH*T ABOUT THE STREAK.

I don't give a damn about the streak, the point is that TAKER WON THE RUMBLE and as such he should have HEADLINED WRESTLE-F**KIN-MANIA. gdasgasghsafhahaha

It turned out to be one of the night's better matches anyway. Best match I've seen Batista give.

[Andrew is Good]

It should have been definitely. It's not like John Cena is a bigger star then The Undertaker, because he's not (though I consider Shawn Michaels and The Undertaker to be on the same level).

I think it would have been a great way to end the night though. The past few years, the crowd has left disappointed in Cena winning. With Taker being on last, the fans would have been pumped and would have enjoyed Undertaker winning the belt.

[Legion]

lenny said:

Yes, I absolutely think Batista/Undertaker should have been last. I know WWE has a hardon for Cena and feels he should be the top guy and in the main event, but in Detroit on that night, the Undertaker was the most over guy in the building. Not only was the crowd completely behind Taker, but Taker winning the match and championship totally got the crowd pumped and made them happy.

Keep in mind that people started heading for the exits while Cena and HBK was still going on. I'm not sure if that was picked up on TV or not, but they were. People were leaving before the match was over. A lot of people didn't actually leave the building though... they basically just left their seats and hung around the concourse just to see if HBK won. Once Cena won, tons of people kinda just rolled their eyes and frantically ran for the exits trying to beat the crowd. Nevermind the fact that Cena posed in the ring for about 5 minutes, and had that handshake thing with HBK. Few people cared. If Taker was on last, people would have stayed and watched the Taker theatrics, and people wouldn't have started leaving until the show was actually over.

But you've hit the nail on the head in what you're saying. Vince or whoever decides on this sort of thing knew full well that the Undertaker was safe bet to be the most over guy on the night, same as he is every night. I also believe that, even if they want Cena to be top draw they also know full well that alot of people might bo him, especially against HBK.

You put 'Taker/Batista on half way to pump the crowd because they knew that the vast majority of the of the crowd would love to see an Undertaker win.......had the crowd witnessed a Cena win half way, the next match on would have had a half pissed crowd.