• Alternate Timelines: Who Should Have Ended The Streak?

    Most were displeased with Brock Lesnar ending The Streak of Undertaker’s undefeated Wrestlemania matches. I take a look at all the other realistic possibilities and if they would have been better.

    MyClientBrockLesnarConqueredTheStreak

    With the talk of wrestling still partially being about The Undertaker’s Streak as recently heard on The Ross Report with Shawn Michaels discussing it and having enough time to fully process in reliving the moment numerous times, I decided to think who else aside from Brock Lesnar could have realistically ended The Streak. Looking at the pros and cons, I come to the conclusion of who should have been the one to end The Streak.

    Feel free to follow me on Twitter: @JoeySplashwater

    Roman Reigns

    Why:

    One of the most popular choices of someone many pundits think would have been the best option. Roman Reigns is probably the best prospect to be a mega superstar in WWE since John Cena. WWE clearly wants to make him a big babyface so why not give him the biggest win possible and put the rocket to his back launching him on the biggest stage possible?

    Why not:

    We’ve never really seen what Roman Reigns can do as a singles star. Sure, he has cool matches but it’s under the umbrella of The Shield. Once that ends, his gear will be different, he’ll have to cut promos on his own, he’ll basically have to prove himself all over again with more pressure. What if he cracks? You can’t risk that with someone ending The Streak.

    Should he have ended The Streak:

    alternateNO

    John Cena

    Why:

    The biggest star, the face of the company, the most credible person to go over Undertaker. When Brock Lesnar conquered The Streak, my biggest disappointment was knowing we never got the Cena vs. Undertaker dream match at Wrestlemania with Taker undefeated. If I had to predict, I think ‘Taker will wrestle one more match likely defeating Cena at Wrestlemania 32 but it won’t be the same without The Streak.

    Why not:

    Cena is as big as he can possibly be. There’s nothing for him to gain from ending The Streak aside from getting a little more heat which he never needs as he is the king of crowd reaction for 8 years now.

    Should he have ended The Streak:

    alternateNO

    Daniel Bryan

    Why:

    The most beloved star in WWE in quite some time, you’re guaranteed a great match. WWE didn’t have Bryan in the title picture until fans rebelled against the idea of an Orton vs. Batista title match. Much like CM Punk last year, perhaps you could have given Bryan that match and be the one to end The Streak as a way to placate the fans and elevate Bryan more than the title would have.

    Why not:

    Daniel Bryan got over by appealing to all sects of the fanbase and you’re risking them resenting him for ending The Streak. As you see with Paul Heyman and Brock Lesnar, the heat is nuclear for being the one to finally take down Undertaker so you’re sacrificing the biggest asset that Daniel Bryan gives you, a genuine love from the fans who celebrate him with a fun chant. You’re killing that if Bryan ended The Streak.

    Should he have ended The Streak:

    alternateNO

    Bray Wyatt

    Why:

    One of the hotter young acts to catch on in WWE and a bit of the eerie aura that is comparable to The Undertaker, many wanted to see Bray Wyatt become the one to end The Streak. At only 26 and a world of potential, Bray Wyatt would have benefited a lot.

    Why not:

    Bray Wyatt is a little more credible now in terms of stature than he was at the time of “Wrestlemania season” due to feuding with John Cena, regardless the way the feud has gone. Also, you never know how someone will pan out. A few years ago, Sheamus looked like a can’t miss, sure-fire main eventer for the next five years and look where he is now. Same can be said on smaller scales for Dolph Ziggler and The Miz. The Wyatt Family is still a relatively new gimmick and you’ll never know if they’ll have long term success or just hither away as a “flavor of the year” act from an often fickle fan base. Can’t say the risk is worth the reward when it comes to ending ‘Taker’s streak.

    Should he have ended The Streak:

    alternateNO

    CM Punk

    Why:

    CM Punk’s fans were left upset after Wrestlemania 30 giving the logic that if you knew you wanted to eventually end The Streak, why not CM Punk over Brock Lesnar? Punk was a full timer so it gives you more than Brock would have. Many also believe that if CM Punk was given such an honor, it would have convinced him to stay getting that “RESPECT” he always wanted.

    Why not:

    CM Punk seems to be a moody fella and for a few years, there have been rumors floating around about Punk wanting to leave. As you obviously know, he finally said he was done and left WWE early this year. Punk is a free spirit who only ultimately answers to himself. That unpredictability is a no-no in today’s WWE environment. The same can be said for Lesnar but money is a bigger factor in his outlook of things than it is Puk. Also, CM Punk is only a year younger than Brock Lesnar with much more wear and tear on him.

    Should he have ended The Streak:

    alternateNO

    The Rock

    Why:

    The Rock is one of the biggest stars in the world right now with many hit movies. His return helped sell three Wrestlemania events in a row so he still brings in a ton of eyes. Rock going over Undertaker would probably provide the biggest reaction outside of the wrestling bubble. This match never happened at a Wrestlemania so it also falls under the dream match umbrella.

    Why not:

    The Rock can’t appear very much due to his hectic schedule so there’s nothing to build off of aside from fans seeing footage or hearing about it then tuning in to see Rock to no avail.

    Should he have ended The Streak:

    alternateNO

    Batista

    Why:

    Newly returned, had a great match in the past with ‘Taker at Wrestlemania 22 and WWE put a lot of money into bringing him back to be more than what he became.

    Why not:

    Batista is a B+ player at best.

    Should he have ended The Streak:

    alternateNO

    Triple H

    Why:

    The man who has failed to conquer The Streak the most times with three Wrestlemania losses to Undertaker, it could have been a way to get Hunter nuclear heat as he continues to become the top heel authority figure Vince McMahon used to be.

    Why not:

    Triple H really doesn’t need the help getting heat not to mention the in-company aftermath of the 2nd most powerful person in WWE being booked to end The Streak would have been resentful to say the least.

    Should he have ended The Streak:

    alternateNO

    Shawn Michaels

    Why:

    Undertaker’s greatest Wrestlemania match was vs. Shawn Michaels and ‘Taker ended HBK’s career at WM 26. Perhaps do a one match return stipulation and have Michaels end Undertaker’s career & streak at WM 30?

    Why not:

    Someone returning after a Loser Retires stipulation to be involved in another Loser Retires match is too convoluted, even for WWE.

    Should he have ended The Streak:

    alternateNO

    Kane

    Why:

    The history between the Brothers of Destruction and rumors of Undertaker wanting his final match to be against Kane.

    Why not:

    Common sense.

    Should he have ended The Streak:

    alternateNO

    Sheamus

    Why:

    Sheamus once had very high stock but has been falling more and more as time goes on. As recent as a year or two ago, the hot rumor was for Sheamus to get a match vs. Undertaker at Wrestlemania.

    Why not:

    Poor Sheamus has fallen way too low to be seen as a credible person to end The Streak.

    Should he have ended The Streak:

    alternateNO

    The Miz

    Why:

    Miz was 4-0 going at Wrestlemania going into Wrestlemania 30. Also, life sucks and then you die.

    Why not:

    Humanity

    Should he have ended The Streak:

    michaelscott

    No one

    Why:

    The most popular belief I’ve read when it comes to discussing The Undertaker’s Streak is that he should have retired with it undefeated. The reasoning for this would be that he walks out with a happy ending giving fans the ultimate conclusion to a character they spent almost 25 years watching. While Austin, Rock, Hogan and Cena are the Mount Rushmore of stars in WWE, Undertaker was the soul and conscience of the WWE and him walking out with The Streak would have been what many wish for his legacy to end on.

    Why not:

    I personally was very anti the idea of The Streak never ending. My reasoning is that the idea of Taker retiring with The Streak would not add that much than it will whenever he has his grand send off, whether next Wrestlemania or Hall of Fame. Fans and wrestlers will always look at him the same way and he’ll celebrated for his entire career but definitely the Wrestlemania record, regardless of his loss vs. Lesnar.

    Another facet I think is under-appreciated is that the magic of a streak is seeing if/when/how it eventually ends. WWE had the key of the ability to dictate and end it and if you didn’t do it, you’re leaving “money on the table.” The sheer shock and surprise from Wrestlemania 30 and reaction in mainstream media platforms showed you the short term upside of it ending.

    Should The Streak have lasted forever:

    alternateNO

    Brock Lesnar

    Why:

    Brock Lesnar was not too long ago the biggest star in all of PPV, even above the current king Floyd Mayweather, when Lesnar was a part of the UFC. While his value has diminished since his return, the win vs. Undertaker made that all forgotten. It gave him the role of the new “top attraction” that ‘Taker used to be and has made me excited to see who exactly gets to face Brock at Wrestlemania next year. Lesnar is one of the few people legit enough and where the hate from fans will be a positive to his career going forward. I think he was the right guy.

    The other positive is that it gives Paul Heyman “the rub” in the greatest form. As seen with Heyman’s association with Cesaro, he gets to go on as if he broke the streak and it has benefited at least three people on the roster and we’re barely a month past it.

    Why not:

    The argument against this is that Brock Lesnar is a part time act who will do 2-3 matches per year so it’s not like we’ll see instant success with the scenario that took place at Wrestlemania 30 when it comes to Brock’s future.

    Did WWE make the right call:

    alternateYES

    2 thoughts on “Alternate Timelines: Who Should Have Ended The Streak?

    1. themosayat

      the idea of lesnar ending the monster that is the streak, sacrificing himself instead of any other rising star who would’ve been hated forever and “absorbing” the heat and taking it away on his extended vacation certainly has a base for it. but it wouldn’t have worked as well if taker himself didn’t just collapse and produce the worst mania match he was involved in in almost a decade that people were both: uninterested in him continuing with the streak (to kinda accept it ending) and shocked by the result that much more.

      although I personally would’ve loved seeing what heyman is doing now by working that into all his promos but with cm punk, who I wished ended the streak at 20-1, and not 21-1 as it is now, and stayed there to talk about it every week for life!

      1. themosayat

        also, I wonder if we’re going to wish Wyatt actually done it like 2 years from now when he’s such a big star (hopefully) and is carrying WWE on his back along with the next generation as the new undertaker, or something…

    Comments are closed.