All The King’s Men 02.08.12: Week 6 – Do You Want to See Undertaker vs. Triple H at WrestleMania 28?
Posted by Larry Csonka on 02.08.2012
The Undertaker is back on WWE TV and he wants a rematch with Triple H at WrestleMania 28, which has led to both excitement and criticism. Do we want to see Triple H vs. The Undertaker III at WrestleMania 28? The 411 staff takes a look and provides their thoughts!
ALL THE KING's MEN!
The Concept
The concept of the column is simple. As the "King" of the 411 Roundtable, I will pick a topic for discussion. The staff, or "Knights" of the old roundtable will then have the opportunity to state of they are FOR or AGAINST the week's topic, and then will have the chance to defend their position. Lets get to it…
Do You Want to See Undertaker vs. Triple H at WrestleMania 28?
The Undertaker is back on WWE TV and he wants a rematch with Triple H at WrestleMania 28, which has led to both excitement and criticism. You want to see the Undertaker vs. Triple H at WrestleMania 28.
Larry Csonka - AGREE: This is a match that has been rumored for some time, essentially since last year's WrestleMania ended, and since then, the wrestling fans have been split. And I don't mean that kind of, "we'll agree to disagree" style of thing, I mean some want it and some hate it, and if your opinion is different than anyone else's, fuck off. Opinion is a beautiful thing, isn't it? First of all I want to say this, if you disagree with me and have no desire to see this match, I can understand and I fully respect your opinion. Share your thoughts in the comments and let me know exactly why, because I would love to see some constructive thoughts. Now, onto why I want to see this match. First of all, I am a sucker for a good "trilogy" of matches and or fights. I loved the Rock vs. Austin WM matches, and I have no problem with WrestleMania rematches. Secondly, I was a big fan of both matches. I think that the WM 17 match gets completely overlooked and forgotten due to Austin vs. Rock II. I also really enjoyed last year's match, which some days I feel in the minority in doing so, but I dug it. Next, I liked how the WM matches with Shawn Michaels led to his retirement, I liked the angles and the matches were great. I really feel that Triple H is looking to retire and move into full time Corporate H mode, which is fine. Finally, I really do not see any other matches involving these guys and other opponents that I would really like to see, considering the current roster and booking. Sure Undertaker vs. Jericho could have been something special, but then what with Triple H? Yes LAST YEAR they could have went with Wade or someone else, and done what they did with Triple H and it would have been great for the young guy, but they refused to do that. To me this makes sense, and I honestly like the match and think that these guys will do their best to deliver. And after the promo and video packages on Monday, I am all in. Thanks for reading.
Wes Kirk - DISAGREE: I don't think any of the ATKM articles have been easier for me to make a decision on than this one considering the very last thing I want to see is Undertaker and HHH wrestle for a third time at an event where Undertaker is one win away from being 20-0 and setting a record that will likely never be bested. I really don't like HHH. As a performer he's serviceable, he can have some great promos when he's funny and not trying to be the most serious guy in the room, but he's not a very good human being. He badmouths his fellow wrestlers, he uses his influence in the company to effect business decisions based on personal feelings, he wormed his way into his job thanks to dating and marrying Stephanie McMahon and frankly he's more concerned for his own gigantic ego than good business. You can thank the incompetence of HHH for having Sin Cara pushed down your throats when the man was a danger to himself and others in the WWE ring for months, and you can thank HHH for making himself the priority when it comes to the Undertaker at Wrestlemania. Simply put, what is there left for HHH to prove? He lost twice already and last year was by submission! I'm not really sure why Undertaker would want to challenge him again considering he's trounced him and made him tap out, although of course HHH got in his little verbal gaffe that said he ended the streak during one RAW. Undertaker is getting older and he's been able to put on one or two really good matches in the past few years but it is obvious the years of wrestling competition and his mounting injuries are forcing him to retire soon, as this isn't your normal 9-to-5 job where you can handle it for decades without significant difficulty. UT is rumored to have had many different surgeries, and even a hip replacement, which means him providing a quality match will be hard although he has shown he can do it. HHH is a selfish man and would want Undertaker to probably job out to him, or maybe want Undertaker to beat him one last time just to claim he was the final victim before the man retired which really isn't something to brag about. Hunter's obsession with thinking he "earned" anything in this sport is laughable as if it wasn't for being picked for a McMahon pet project gimmick from the start and working with the Kliq he would never have hit the main events and after marrying Stephanie he was guaranteed anything he wanted. I said many times before he's the smartest man in wrestling for getting away with all of this but the fact of the matter is nothing good can come of this match! Undertaker has won twice, if he loses his streak is gone and you can't just replace that but if he wins what did he really prove since he won twice before? Neither man is able to go in the ring like they did in 2000 or 1995, neither man needs the victory, and frankly UT would be better served to go over somebody in a quick match and take his deserved twenty victories and call it a career than to wrestle HHH for the third time at WrestleMania. Undertaker is my favorite currently active wrestler and to see his legacy tarnished with a loss or to see him struggle through a mediocre match in pain because of the ego of a guy who slept his way to the top makes me sick to my stomach, and I hope this match never happens or HHH loses quickly because there is no real other way to go here.
Robert S. Leighty Jr - AGREE: This one was kind of tough for me, but I am going with agree for several reason. I have been in the crowd for the last three WrestleManias, which means I saw the two Shawn/Taker classics, and last year's Taker/HHH brawl. In all 3 cases the crowd was into the match, but of the three nothing could touch what we experienced and saw at WrestleMania XXV. The rematch had a reason for happening as Shawn became obsessed with wanting to defeat the Undertaker at WrestleMania, and the subsequent story with Taker refusing was brilliant. In this case, even with the loss, HHH is justifying that he ended the streak Taker had to be carried out following their match in the Georgia Dome. HHH made that point and with his character's ego it's pretty reasonable to believe that in his mind he could take credit for "ending" the streak. Now it's the Undertaker he wants the rematch because he doesn't want the lasting image in his feud with HHH being that he was carried out at WrestleMania. This gives HHH the chance to play the role Taker did the year heading to Mania XXVI against Shawn. So from a storyline standpoint this match does make sense. The story makes even more sense if the WWE gets Shawn Michaels involved again and he is there at WrestleMania in some regard: special ref for the match, in HHH's corner, outside enforcer, whatever.
The other point is that Taker is going for 20-0 and I think he needs to go against someone that puts doubt in the fan's minds as to if he will win or lose. At this point there aren't many people in the WWE that the fans will reasonably buy as having a hope in hell against Taker at WrestleMania XXVII. The one name that the fans would buy is John Cena and he's had his match for WrestleMania booked for the last year. There have been some who wanted Kane to get another crack, but then you run into the same thing as it would be Kane/Taker III, and if given the choice I would rather have HHH/Taker III just from stand point that it means a better match. Outside of Cena the only other person I could see the fans buying as having a chance against Taker is Randy Orton, but I think WWE has plans for him involving the World Title.
Many also worry that a 3rd installment of HHH/Taker means that HHH will be the one to end the streak. Most feel the streak should never end and rest seem to think it needs to be a younger guy to give him the rub. I don't hate HHH as much as most in the IWC do, so I do believe that for the 3rd time he will once again do what everyone else has done when facing Taker at WrestleMania: lose. HHH is a smart man, and I believe the WWE knows that Taker doesn't have many WrestleMania matches left and I believe they are doing what they can to stretch things before doing Cena/Taker at WrestleMania XXX or whenever they get to Cowboy Stadium (Cena vs Streak would be more than enough to help fill that Stadium).
Finally, as I mentioned I was there in the Georgia Dome last year and the crowd more than loved the match between the two. I do think they are more than capable of giving us a very solid match again this year. Taker is a yearly worker as it is, and I don't think he would go out there on the biggest stage if he wasn't capable of delivering. In the end both men needed a match at WrestleMania, and with neither being very active members of the roster it's best to pair them together again instead of involving either in a Title Match (where both men would want to be considering their stature) or having them crush someone on the undercard. For me it is the best decision and frankly I am looking forward to seeing if they can outdo what they did in Atlanta and what role, if any, Shawn Michaels will play in the Undertaker/HHH III.
Chad Nevett - AGREE: At this point, it is obvious that the Undertaker's Streak will not end. This was a possibility years ago, but, since defeating Edge at WrestleMania XIV, the chances of it happening have slipped to nil. And, honestly, Edge wasn't even a good bet to end the Streak. Despite what others think, there is no rub to be gained at this point in facing the Undertaker. No upside. Whoever he faces is simply a victim, a predetermined loser. Especially with this being the year where the Undertaker will reach 20-0, there's an even stronger downside to losing: whoever loses will always be #20 -- and, possibly, the final victim of the Streak.
With that the case, the Undertaker needs to face an opponent who won't be buried by that fact. People talk a lot about Wade Barrett or Cody Rhodes or any other younger superstar being a better choice than Triple H to face the Undertaker this year, but this sort of loss could overshadow everything else in their burgeoning careers. What has Wade Barrett accomplished that is more memorable than being #20 would be? Nothing. This would become the defining moment of his career and could kill any momentum he has in the WWE. To lose here makes you the biggest, most visible loser that the WWE could produce right now.
Triple H is a smart choice, because he's already lost to the Undertaker at WrestleMania twice and because his career has so many highlights and accomplishments that this loss won't matter as much -- it won't be a giant stain on his career that will follow him around.
Besides that, the Undertaker is not in peak physical condition. He needs an experienced opponent that will make sure he's taken care of during the match. A younger opponent is more likely to push things to prove themselves. Triple H knows how to do that in a safe way, in a way that will look spectacular and painful without destroying the Undertaker in the process.
Mostly, I just enjoyed the hell out of their match last year and I think they can deliver another great one. There's a proven track record to these two that isn't there with other people. We know that they will deliver and that's what we all want for the big 20th WrestleMania victory for the Undertaker. We want a guaranteed spectacle -- and like or dislike Triple H, he will provide that.
Gavin Napier - AGREE: I'm torn on this. Significantly torn. Why? Because both are right answers. Undertaker vs. Triple H is both the right booking decision and the wrong booking decision here. I'm saying "agree" to this, because I think it's the most realistic booking decision they can make.
What would I rather see, what would make me disagree with this? I'd like to see Sheamus vs. The Undertaker. I've seen this opinion floating around other forums on the 'net, so I know I'm not the only one. It's been stated time and again that if and when the streak ends, it should be used to firmly establish a young guy that's just on the cusp of greatness. If the powers that be in WWE believe in Sheamus like we think they do, he's the perfect guy to do it. He's certainly more suited to the role than Wade Barrett, Dolph Ziggler, Jack Swagger, Cody Rhodes, or anybody else on the roster. He's in a better position to do it than anybody since Batista - and he would be a better choice than Batista due to Dave's age.
Sheamus taking on Punk or Bryan doesn't seem like a "natural" match. I'm not sure what they're going to do with Bryan and the WHC, but Sheamus vs. Bryan doesn't excite me. Sheamus using his Rumble win to demand a shot at ending the streak would further emphasize how important The Streak is not just to Undertaker, but also in the WWE Universe in general. As a face/face matchup, it could be the ultimate show of respect. And the way they've painted Sheamus as a bruiser, almost a force of nature, would work in the match. Dropping Brogue Kick after Brogue Kick into 'Taker's skull until he just can't get up and finally finishing the Dead Man would establish Sheamus for years to come.
But that's not going to happen. And because it's not going to happen, Trips is the right call. The Undertaker matches, since focusing on The Streak, have taken on an epic feel. Triple H can match that and not feel underwhelming. While he's not my first choice, he's the only logical choice if it's not going to be Sheamus.
As I believe Larry pointed out shortly before or after last year's Wrestlemania, the HHH vs. Undertaker story is just a continuation of Shawn Michaels vs. Undertaker. The fourth and final chapter is the logical conclusion to a story that's been being written since the Road To Wrestlemania 25. After this Monday's RAW, it's clear that HHH is going to make Undertaker beg for his rematch just as Shawn had to beg for his second shot at Taker. It's a nice symmetry - and don't forget that we've got HBK as a special guest coming up soon on RAW - to end things.
It's the right decision because it will deliver the required "big match" feel, and puts two of WWE's biggest names on the card without bogging down or necessarily burying any of the younger, rising talent on the card. And because they're not going to do the Sheamus thing unless there's a major swerve coming that I don't see.
James Wright - DISAGREE: I probably should come up with a better reason than 'We all know who is going to win' since that will most likely be the unanimous opinion here. What's more the counter argument of Triple H being so egotistical that he might pull a fast one doesn't even help as Triple H winning would mean nothing. Wrestling isn't all about wins or losses, but it is about the win or loss having a meaning, which is why so many people get angry when stipulations are just ignored, like Jericho being fired from Raw twice for instance and coming back like nothing happened. The bottom line is that last year's match meant nothing and this year's means even less.
Now maybe if in the coming weeks it becomes 'If Triple H loses he can never wrestle again' then at least that would be something, and it would make sense if he is going to legitimately take the reigns as the on-screen authority figure of the company. Having a stipulation like that hanging over his head would mean he could avoid things like what happened with Punk and Nash from happening again, of course whether the WWE want this or not is another question, I think it would be for the best though.
Then again even with that stipulation going ahead, and the possible addition of Shawn Michaels as the special guest referee, the match will be nothing but a footnote. If the Undertaker's streak is such a big deal then every match should be monumental. The only problem is that this year I can't see anyone who would be a bigger opponent. If Barrett had got the push he deserved last year, won the title off Orton, lost it in the Chamber and then faced Undertaker as it was rumored then that would have worked, but this year Barrett is nowhere near credible enough to take on the Deadman believably, so he's out. Orton is someone who I could see going up against Taker again in a couple of years, in a more compelling version of what Triple H and Taker tried to do last year. The now matured Viper going against the man who put a rest to his 'Legend Killer' gimmick when he was an up-and-comer, but not this year. Jericho has Punk, Cena has the Rock, Sheamus is too green and Sting is still hanging around in TNA for god knows why.
So I suppose what I'm trying to say is that while I'm not exactly excited to see the match, there is little else that the WWE could have done at this point if they wanted a 'Taker match at 'Mania. Of course they could have planned things a little differently or more in advance or just given the guy a year off, but whatever...Brodus Clay? Meh.
Ryan Byers - AGREE: I watched Wrestlemania last year, and, honestly, I came out of it feeling like I didn't get my fifty-five dollars worth. Aside from the slick presentation, the ONLY thing that felt like it was worthy of the biggest show of the year was HHH vs. Undertaker, a match I would easily put at above the **** mark. Given that this year's show will also feature Rock/Cena and is rumored to feature Shaq/Big Show, I doubt that HHH/UT will be the only match that feels worthy of the card again this year, but it's a match that is guaranteed to be worthy and a match that is guaranteed to be good if not great, so I have a hard time saying that I don't want to see it on the show.
I see some people saying they don't want HHH/UT because the streak has gotten boring because they "know" who is going to win. I take real issue with those comments, because they demonstrate a blatant misunderstanding of what promoting professional wrestling is supposed to be about. The whole point of the business is supposed to be getting fans excited about a particular result, giving them an event at which they are highly likely to see that result occur, and then having them pay for that event to see the result they're anticipating. That's how wrestling has worked for generations, and people who want things to be unpredictable just don't "get it." It's like the movie Die Hard. You should know going in that Bruce Willis is going to win at the end, but being uncertain about the result isn't why you see the movie. You see the movie to see HOW he wins and because, even though you know the ultimate outcome, a good movie will still make you feel for the protagonist when he's in danger.
The other complaint that I see about the match is that booking it makes it all the less likely that the streak will be broken by an up-and-comer on his way to the main event. That doesn't bother me for two reasons. The first is that I would be perfectly happy if the streak never ended. I've watched almost all of Taker's career, and he's given me and scores of other fans tons of memorable moments, but he's never been rewarded with a legendary title reign the likes of which were enjoyed by Hulk Hogan, Steve Austin, and Bruno Sammartino. I see the streak being Taker's award in lieu of that title reign. The second reason I am fine with the streak not being ended by a young guy is that I don't think WWE has any young guys in the right position to do it. Miz, Swagger, Del Rio, Barrett . . . they're all portrayed as midcard geeks who lose as much as they win, which is not the kind of upward trajectory that somebody needs to be in a position to beat Taker at WM, and that is not something that can be reversed in the time left before the PPV.
The other reason that I want to see HHH/UT at Mania is related a lot more to Monday Night Raw than it is to the PPV. In my opinion, Raw has not been a good show over the last several months. There is too much focus on comedy (Ryder) and nonsensical storylines (Cena/Kane), and too few people are being portrayed as superstars. If Taker and Hunter have a program against each other, you can rest assured that there will be no BS, it will make sense, and they won't be treated like clowns. So, we're not just dealing with a situation in which this will give us a good match. We're dealing with a situation in which this is going to give us a couple of awesome months of pro wrestling television leading up to the match.
Tony Acero - AGREE: Yes please! Okay, look, last year's match may be best remembered for being a snoozefest, but it still had a lot of great moments, and at the very least they were telling a story...it just wasn't the greatest story. My fandom for Taker is no secret, and although some may say that he being gone for a year spells a broken body, I'm thinking (hoping?) that it's the opposite. A year off should be able to heel the man if he's stayed active and kept his health in check. People seem to think that Taker is as old as dust, when he's really not. The dude is like 47, I believe. True, he's not a fucking spring chicken, but he's still relatively young in terms of age. He's just been around for a long time. This may be blind hope, but I feel that both men know what happened last year and are aware that there were a few moments they could have upped the action. I feel that because of this, they're going to bring on the goodness here, and with the added fold of HBK possibly being involved, it's going to be one hell of a spectacle. We also have to applaud the length at which this storyline has been going on. They've not put much effort into it but they haven't really needed to. From Flair to HBK to HHH, Taker has bested them all, and rightfully so. But these matches have all been linked in some way, and that's amazing! If this is Taker's last match, then I'm ok with it being Triple H, so long as he wins. As of this point, it's nothing more than a special attraction, so why feed a young guy to him, when we could use Triple H as fodder for the win?
Am I excited to see this match? Hell yes. Am I worried that it will suck? Well, not as much as you may think. At the end of the day, this is a throwback match for an old school fan who is holding on to the glory days. And ya know what, maybe come Wrestlemania time, that's just what I am...
Noooo...I don't want to see this again. This will be the third time that Undertaker will fight Triple H at Wrestlemania....YAWN
Posted By: Jon (Guest) on February 07, 2012 at 11:03 PM
I can't believe most are agreeing. Undertaker probably only has two more Manias left in him. Why not give it to a new guy that could use the boost, like Ziggler? I don't think Taker has ever faced Ziggler, and at this rate, he never will.
I don't even know why Taker is seeking vegeance. Why didn't he want to seek vengeance against Wade for burying him alive?
I miss the days with Taker could say he's faced number-of-men and the numbers actually matched.
Posted By: Guest#6948 (Guest) on February 07, 2012 at 11:03 PM
Disagree. I'll still buy WM if it happens. I just hope Taker Pedigrees HHH.
Posted By: Ryan Haseldine (Guest) on February 07, 2012 at 11:03 PM
Last year was so boring because it was just a lap around the arena taking turns using weapons on each other followed by like 4 of each guys finisher, not because of lack of story. A couple of u had a great idea with sheamus and the request for wm, id fucking love that match. Plus taker has irish blood so maybe he can be persuaded.
Posted By: Guest#5100 (Guest) on February 07, 2012 at 11:09 PM
Well put Tony! I'm a little kid again when it comes WrestleMania time.
I was worried about last years match not being up to WrestleMania like standards, especially after the pair of HBK/Taker matches we were privileged to the years before. But when those two were staring each other down I got chills. The match may not hold up on second veiwing but it was quite the colossal match up first go around. And I'm all for them adding HBK to the mix. HBK makes everything better!!
Posted By: Andre the Midget (Guest) on February 07, 2012 at 11:26 PM
I don't mind another UT-HHH. As long as you don't slaughter the fatted calf (in this case, UT's winning streak)on a guy who doesn't need the rub and is exiting the business himself. Have UT go over again, giving him 20-0 (key number because it's a number people recognize for significance ie in anniversaries) and then have him served up to a young guy like Sheamus (who apparently is HHH's favorite now) or a returning Lesnar to re-establish his credibility (which, in hindsight, doesn't really need that much re-establishing considering he's a real life badass). Just not Cena.
Posted By: Bleh (Guest) on February 07, 2012 at 11:29 PM
It's a moot point since the build up has already begun but why not entertain the notion while we still can? Now, with all due respect, I ask two questions to the people who are pro 'Taker/HHH III:
1) Have you rewatched the match? I get it. Live, it was a thrilling affair. On TV it was still pretty decent even though the winner was never in doubt (at least to me.) But upon repeat viewing do you still enjoy it? Or do you notice that the bulk of the match is two guys laying around and just hitting finishing/signature moves?
I believe that all 'Taker/HHH brought to the table last year was the thrill of seeing if 'Taker could lose. That's the sort of thrill you can get putting any top guy against 'Taker. Cena. Orton. They could both get the same result now since they're both so damned huge. Trading finishers? Again, it only takes a minor level of competence. So I wonder if you liked the match or if you liked the moment? If HBK/'Taker was so great at 25 and a let down at 26 then what makes you think HHH/'Taker at 28 won't be just a pale retread of 27?
2) You ask what else there is for Triple H to do. I ask why there needs to be something else for Triple H to do? If he doesn't have a singles match that eats up a lot of time then that makes room for guys like Ziggler, Rhodes, etc. to have solid midcard matches or possibly give more time to a MitB match.
Every year since WM has expanded to 4 hours it seems, ironically enough, that matches are getting less time. How much time was wasted last year carting 'Taker off that should have gone to the 3 minutes each dedicated to the tag matches?
Hunter is at the point where he's starting to run the company and it should stay that way. I get that WM is for the big names but with Rock/Cena and Punk/Jericho in the mix do we really need Trips?
Overall, I don't necessarily hate the idea of another 'Taker/HHH match but when there are so many better alternatives out there doesn't it make sense to jump on them?
Posted By: Ron Mexico (Guest) on February 07, 2012 at 11:30 PM
I'm not a huge Triple H fan, but I'm so sick of people saying, the ONLY reason why he has stayed a main eventer for so long is because he married the bosses daughter. That's bullshit. Look at 1999 and early 2000. The reason he has stayed in the main event since is because he could cut great promos, get heat, and work great matches. Now since, sure his match quality may have declined from where it was in 2000, but he is still really over and can cut a promo and is established. Would he be booked AS strong as he is had he dated someone else? Probably not, but the fact is he GOT his spot by being one of the best wrestlers in the world in 2000 and getting heat. He KEPT his spot in part due to who he married, but don't forget that back in 2000, his matches and feuds were top notch.
My opinion on a potential Triple H-Undertaker III? I like the way they are building it up with Undertaker demanding the match. There are other matches I'd like to see, but with Undertaker and Triple H, I know that they are gonna do everything in their power to ensure that their match does not suck. They have the talent to have a great match, and that's all I want.
Posted By: Guest#5369 (Guest) on February 07, 2012 at 11:37 PM
lol wes kirk is a moron
Posted By: Guest#2285 (Guest) on February 07, 2012 at 11:39 PM
no. it will be hhh vs taker with hbk as ref.
Posted By: Guest#9913 (Guest) on February 07, 2012 at 11:42 PM
Less of the potty mouth.
Posted By: Guest#3238 (Guest) on February 07, 2012 at 11:44 PM
Finally, members of the IWC that try to understand logic. Taker vs HHH 3 may not be the best booking decision but it is not exactly the worst
Posted By: Kash (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 12:05 AM
I disagree it doesn't need to happen and there are other stars that would get a boost from a EPIC match with the Deadman Wade Barret could use the push so could a few others it takes care of 2 things at one UT gets a win and the match lifts a superstar even with a loss
Posted By: Guest (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 12:12 AM
Wes Kirk....Triple H serviceable in the ring. Your a fuckwit. Now you might mean over the past year or so but you didnt failed to mention it. Also you said nothing about The Undertaker being serviceable so Im taking it as you think Triple H has only been serviceable over his entire career. Thats the worst statement Ive heard in my life. It actually makes me sick. Your a straight out fuckwit. Just an arse. Triple H selfish, maybe so but you have to give him respect for some of the matches he has had. I bet your a big Hulk Hogan fan ay? Who is by far the worst wrestler ive seen in my life. Wes Kirk can we fight? I would love to pound your face in. Some of the stuff you have written makes me think your mentally challenged. Wes Kirk I hate you, die dickhead. Please die.
Posted By: John (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 12:56 AM
Cant believe some many of you want to see this match. Might even take a piss break during it. I cant think of a single way it would be worth seeing, unless it's a blood heavy Hell in a Cell, which it wont be.
Posted By: Guest#7131 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 01:16 AM
Only if they don't retread last year and actually wrestle...AND 'Taker has another year left in him.
However, even having said that, The one guy I'd have end the streak right now (with it being plausible that someone could AND who could really benifit from it) is Sheamus as this would push him through the roof as the next big fish in the pond. But I feel that by this time next year he's going to be too well established to need it any longer and I don't see anyone else on the roster right now that has a chance of reaching the level Sheamus has by this time next year where either (A) being the man to end the streak would be plausible or (B) is going to be over enough already that ending the streak would effectively make them viable in the fans eyes as taking Undertaker's spot in the roster.
Posted By: RockerDropper (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 01:44 AM
Yo, I don't want to see this match either. The buildup for this match will be great, but the Wrestlemania 28 match won't be anything we haven't seen before.
Posted By: TK03000 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 01:44 AM
Uuuhhh no, another 'Taker vs.HHH means that HHH will end his streak and I dont like that idea. 'Taker has only a few more great matches left, they shouldnt make him waste his time with HHH.
Posted By: TheR (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 01:55 AM
Disagree. I don't know who I would want HHH to fight at WM so I kinda want them to face each other, but overall no. I just hope they don't have a 25+ min match.
Robert made the best argument.
Posted By: Still Guest#8287 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 02:18 AM
I would just rather see Undertaker face ANYBODY else other than Triple H.
Posted By: Guest#2472 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 03:16 AM
As long as next year Hogan ends the streak, who cares about this year.
Posted By: MTL (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 04:01 AM
Short answer: NO!
Long answer: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!
Posted By: Guest#7608 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 04:38 AM
Unless it's in a cage or HIAC, or some sort of stip where they can hide they're age and ring rust then I'm not interested.
I really don't see the point in setting aside 30 mins (probably more when you take into account intros) for something that will in effect be roughly a 3 star match.
There's nothing these guys can deliver that we haven't seen before and if the WWE think that this match is for the old timers think again...
No thanks. I'm out.
Posted By: dj_bollocks (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 04:56 AM
Taker sucks and HHH sucks even more, they can just have their boring slugfest who cares, I will just change the channel. There match last year was terrible, just laying around the whole ring, like they were resting in their beds, storytelling? who needs that kind of story telling, two 40 year olds resting in their warm beds? If they got up just immediatedly after hitting their finishers on each other, the match would have been better and fast paced. They should have bounced around the ring, like a bunch of spot monkeys, under selling every move throughout the whole match with no psychology and storytelling, that stuff is meaningless to us smarks, and that would make a great wrestling match (Now don't tell me that sounced like pure circus, this is pure wrestling is you idiot).
Also I must say CM Punk and Jericho are the best in the world, they are good on the mic, they are good in the ring, and they draw more than Cena and Rock, all the other wrestlers are just boring, Punk and Jericho are God. All hail Punk and Jericho. I can't wait till ROH takes over the wrestling world and Jericho joins them and runs wwe out of business, because
ROH is true wrestling and millions of people watch it every week unlike WWE or even TNA, if you disagree then you have a VA...... I think you got my point.
Posted By: Smarky Smark (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 05:58 AM
"What has Wade Barrett accomplished that is more memorable than being #20 would be? Nothing. This would become the defining moment of his career and could kill any momentum he has in the WWE." - Chad Nevitt, 'professional' wrestling writer
Yeah, just like that Austin kid. He never accomplished anything after being buried at Wrestlemania 13, albeit in a CLASSIC, CAREER-DEFINING MATCH.
Posted By: mr_wishart (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 06:15 AM
wow... alot of u guys 'AGREE' ... more than i thought u would..
Posted By: wylun (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 07:05 AM
wes kirk's comment makes sense for the first time ever. although i don't know why he hates triple h so much? triple h started dating steph in 2001-02. triple h was already a 4 time wwe champion and an estabished main eventer by that point.
Posted By: Guest#9827 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 07:11 AM
I want these two to go away and never comeback. Their time is over, they can't wrestle at level they once was and looks like 2 old broken faded carriages in a garage full of modern cars.
Posted By: ermacermac (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 07:29 AM
They've had 2 good Wrestlemania matches but I don't want to see a 3rd at Wrestlemania. These guys should be working with the young guys, showing them how it's done and giving us a fresh match up.
Posted By: Guest#8713 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 07:51 AM
at fisrt i said no. i wanted the barrett barrage to take on the streak. then thanks to the wwe hype machine. i have to admit. they got me interested.
that video package did it for me.
Posted By: rey (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 08:00 AM
I do NOT want to see HHH vs. Taker III. While I appreciate Csonka's appreciation for trilogy matches, for me, it all depends on the participants and MOST IMPORTANTLY, the outcome. In Austin v. Rock II, no one knew who was going to win. In Austin vs. Rock III, you still didn't know. What kills this match (HHH/Taker III) for me is that the outcome is never in doubt. While I know that Taker will never lose at WM, I still want to have a bit of doubt. I had that with WM25, more so with WM26, but never with WM27 and I certainly won't with WM28. At its simplicity, the best pro wrestling matches are the ones where you have NO IDEA who is going to win (i.e. Punk/Cena MITB). If I'm going to have to watch a match where I have ZERO doubt that Taker will win, at least give me one against someone that I haven't seen him wrestle at the event twice already (Jericho, Punk come to mind)
Posted By: Guy (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 08:04 AM
Disagree. I can't stand the Undertaker. May be the stupidest gimmick of all time, that has endured. Especially with the Biker Bad ass gimmick change. Then by the Powers of Greyskull he is the dead man again. I actually used to dislike HHH worse in years past, but I have come to appreciate him as a performer. If the Undertaker loses and goes away. I will be Happy. Unfortunately we all know, that it will not happen.
Posted By: Chris (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 08:46 AM
Taker v HHH??
NO THANK YOU
Not interested even one bit. I would rather see Taker v Kane 3 than that match.
Hell I would rather see Taker v "the funkasaurus" than Taker v HHH.
Posted By: Guest#7680 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 08:53 AM
NO. I DON'T WANT TO SE THE UNDERTAKER EVER AGAIN! #EndTheStreak
Posted By: BRAIN (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 09:09 AM
Taker needs to put over Triple H clean in the middle. While he's good, he never remotely achieved that top level status of Hulk Hogan (but to be fair, who could? no one). It's time for the Undertaker to go, and go out on his back. 1-2-3. Enough of this cartoon act.
Posted By: Jon Caplan of Jenkintown PA (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 09:12 AM
They should bring in Hogan to end the streak. Enough of this guy, already.
Posted By: Jon Caplan of Jenkintown PA (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 09:14 AM
Wes Kirk....Triple H serviceable in the ring. Your a fuckwit. Now you might mean over the past year or so but you didnt failed to mention it. Also you said nothing about The Undertaker being serviceable so Im taking it as you think Triple H has only been serviceable over his entire career. Thats the worst statement Ive heard in my life. It actually makes me sick. Your a straight out fuckwit. Just an arse. Triple H selfish, maybe so but you have to give him respect for some of the matches he has had. I bet your a big Hulk Hogan fan ay? Who is by far the worst wrestler ive seen in my life. Wes Kirk can we fight? I would love to pound your face in. Some of the stuff you have written makes me think your mentally challenged. Wes Kirk I hate you, die dickhead. Please die.
Posted By: John (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 12:56 AM
Do you know how fcuking stupid you just made yourself look? You bash Wes for having an opinion on HHH and then your ignorant ass turns around and gives your opinion on what you think of HH. You're saying you can bash one wrestler, but its a freaking sin if someone else does it? Some of you idiot are the biggest hypocrites and just to blind to see it
Posted By: Guest#2486 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 09:19 AM
Nobody wants to see HHH/UT 3 boring and lazy booking.
Posted By: HHH EGO (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 09:21 AM
UT's final match should really be against Kane. And they need to get Paul Bearer again for that too. And it should really be soon, as UT really doesn't have much left in him.
Maybe Kane can take out HHH and then challenge UT. And then Kane-UT is some sort of new gimmick match.
Posted By: Guest#0939 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 09:22 AM
It should be Undertaker vs. DX in a tag-handicapped match at Wrestlemania 28 since neither HHH or HBK could get the job done individually. Give the deadman one last good run for his money....
Posted By: BONES (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 09:32 AM
Completely disagree. Undertaker has already beaten HHH so it will mean nothing when he does it again. And if HHH wins, it will mean nothing except we will know whose ego is bigger. HHH just had to be the one to finally end the streak.
Frankly, I'm bored with a wrestler that is only able to appear 2 months a year and wrestle one match. If you aren't able or willing to wrestle a semi-full schedule, then it is just time to retire, Undie. Take this 20-0 and ride off into the sunset.
Posted By: Comment Board Poster (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 09:33 AM
Smarky Smark (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 05:58 AM
You mt friend are delusional. In their prime UT and H were two of the very best in the game. From a promo and story telling stand point it didn't get much better than those two. Neither man is anywhere near their prime and neither man could work even half of the required schedule in The E but one thing is for certain .. they will deliver at Mania. Taker always has. H always trys. Put the two together and you will see a match better than almost any other match wrestled all years long. Wes Krik .. You baffle me and I don't feel your opinion belongs anywhere near this round table ... Let me guess, you are a Bret Hart fan that hasn't been able to let the past go. H was on top of the world before he and Steff ever thought about getting together. He progressed leaps in bounds from his days in WCW to the point he took over DX from a promo standpoint, in ring work rate ad story telling. It is obvious to anyone that knows wrestling that he worked his ass off to excel. This match makes sense from one standpoint and that is Taker couldn't leave the ring on his own accord last year. That alone makes H the closest to breaking the streak of th other opponents he has had. Losing to taker this year will not give a rub to a new guy and the streak isn;t going to end. So throw these two back in the ring together, they both are as healthy as they are going to be having been off unlike last year. Add Shawn to the mix and let them have a fun brawl that will entertain. I for one look forward to seeing UT put H down at Mania ... hoping that bpoth men are smart enough to call it a career. Thank them both for keeping the E alive when WCW was beating down the door, thank them for the memories and let them go out on the biggest stage of all. Most people may not be interested in this match as it will be a brawl but I assure you any match they have will be a better "Match" than anything The Rock and Cena throw together.
Posted By: Cthantos (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 09:55 AM
I actually hate that so many people are saying that someone young and upcoming should face Undertaker to end the streak.
Who? Cody? Barrett? Dolph? Sheamus? Bryan? You'd have to be so damn high to even think that ANY wrestler who hasn't been in WWE main event for AT LEAST 3 years has a chance in hell of winning. Hell, it's not even the winning part, it's just inconcievable to pick any of these people as legitimate contenders. They'd be great and better matches probably, but the storyline would lack the drama of an established relationship between characters unlike most of Takers recent opponents (Kane as family, Orton as legend killer, Edge and Batista for title, HBK and HHH for personal glory).
So, who WOULD be a good pick? Obviously Cena is the prime choice, but that's not possible this year. He'll probably be the last one to have a shot.
Jericho would have been great, but that program should have started way earlier to make any sense (Jericho goading him into a match ala Dean Malenko in WCW). Also, best in the world gimmick.
Orton with his new Apex Predator gimmick would be interesting too.
Taker buried Punk two years ago over a whole summer, so I don't buy him as a threat.
That's it. So given those options, Taker either retires this year, or next, depending on how this fued unfolds.
Posted By: Banz (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 10:04 AM
Count me as another fan who wants to see Sheamus go up against Undertaker and end the streak.
It could even be done this year. They could have HHH continue to refuse to fight The Undertaker, resulting in the Undertaking beating up HHH and taking him off TV. In this scenario, Sheamus would step up, saying that HHH was his mentor and that, rather than use The Royal Rumble win to get a championship shot, he's using it to get a shot at the Undertaker.
Alternately, The Undertaker could insert himself in The Elimination Chamber (maybe he beats up Khali before the match) and wins a championship as a means of enticing HHH. Instead, Sheamus screws up The Undertaker's plans by choosing to go for the title that The Undertaker just won.
Or -- while I wouldn't like it -- it could be a three-way between The Undertaker, Sheamus, and HHH with Sheamus winning by pinning HHH. The Undertaker's streak would end, but he still never would have been pinned. I don't like that option, but it could be done.
Posted By: CDL (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 10:16 AM
i dont want to see this match again 2x's is enough, 3x's is too much. give UT a quick squash match and let him get to 20-0.
Posted By: ronny (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 10:25 AM
Goddamn... I can't believe I agreed with that idiot Wes Kirk... So, I'll just say I agreed with James Wright...
Posted By: Doc (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 10:30 AM
Disagree.
What was one of CM Punk's mantras during the past summer - "Same shit, different day." And here is another example of the same guys getting the same spot on the biggest card of the year, having done nothing to deserve their spot. Look what WM already has in place: Cena vs. Rock (Rock has been out of the business for years, but has a guaranteed spot at the top of the card one year in advance?). And again, UT vs. HHH will be one of the most hype matches. UT - who has done nothing in the past year, and HHH who has done next to nothing in the past year. With the exception of Cena, there are 3 other guys who are not full-time wrestlers, who have not busted their asses in the ring for the past year, who will be getting big paydays and big spots at WM.
You know who would be pissed off about this? "8-months-ago" CM Punk. Too bad they wussed him up since then. He could have easily been the challenger this year. He would be railing against HHH once again hogging the spotlight. Hey, if the Taker wants another match, give me a shot at him. He's obviously on his last legs, etc...
One other option which I would like to see them possibly do is an old attitude era angle. Have a bunch of wrestlers start to complain about how HHH is once again putting himself against the UT at WM and that some of the younger guys should get a shot. Have both the heels and faces start to complain (perhaps at the urging of Johnny Ace). Then a few weeks before WM, have some "unknown assailant" attack the UT and basically take him out of WM (since he may not actually be ready to return). Let the identity sit out there for next year, making it a mystery until this time next year. And for the rest of 2012-13, you get a chance to build up a fresh "victim" for the UT rather than having him face HHH again. And much like this year's WM, you will have another storyline to build over the year in advance of next year's WM. And make that the "feature" story next year, UT's final match, his pursuit of 20-0. He prevented Taker from his 20th straight WM, but can he prevent the Taker from winning his 20th straight match at WM?
Posted By: SpankyHamm (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 10:37 AM
disagree!!!
why the hell do all of you want to see this match??
the 1st was good, but... that was like 10 years ago... and last years was average at best!!!
the only way id want to see this match is if they do it in HELL IN A CELL!!!
other than that, id rather have a different opponent!!!
Posted By: Guest#3628 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 11:08 AM
So I guess Ryan Byers knew that Bruce Willis was dead the whole time in the Sixth Sense, but still enjoyed it? And he also knew who would die in The Departed. And The Dark Knight. Need I go on? Please you clown, while there may be good movies with a predictable outcome, that is hardly a universal truth.
Posted By: Guy (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 11:16 AM
Disagree. It's been done twice already and neither were that fantastic. If its not going to be Sheamus, Ziggler, or Bryan taking on the Dead Man then I really don't care if he even competes at Mania.
Posted By: Mr.Fuji (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 11:20 AM
HHH "I need to take 5 Tombstones before you can even attempt to pin me okay?"
Taker "Sounds good, but only after I get Pedigreed 7 times onto a steel chair."
HHH "All we are going to do is 12 moves and lay around for 95% of the match, its gonna be so classic!"
Taker "Well don't forget that our entrances will take 12 minutes apiece."
HHH "Yeah, who cares if we screw over the younger talent and they get put in dark matches, my dad owns this place!"
Posted By: Mr.Fuji (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 11:26 AM
I don't. Last years was boring. It basically was one guy hits a move and rests for five minutes. Than the other guy hits a move and rests for five minutes and rinse and repeat.
Posted By: Michael (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 11:56 AM
Let me try and explain this to those of you who keep thinking this is about HHH and Wrestlemania. IT IS NOT! This is about THE UNDERTAKER and Wrestlemania.
If there is even a REMOTE chance Taker will be able to compete at Mania, HE WILL HAVE A MATCH!!! Now the question is, what match? As some of the columnists tried to explain to you, HHH is the SAFE bet this year. The bottom line is this - it isn't Wrestlemania without The Undertaker(as long as he is able and willing to compete)!!!
It had a ready made storyline - Taker needs redemption for being made to look weak and helpless and HHH can't help but want one more shot at the glory of breaking the streak.
HHH is the most seasoned wrestler besides Undertaker they have and will do whatever it takes to ensure a safe match. Also, The Undertaker(one of the GOAT even outside of Mania) absolutely SHINES at WM. HHH is a great wrestler in his own right.
I will be honest, I wanted Cena to be Taker's 20th victim. I would much rather see Taker/Cena than Rock/Cena. Kane would be an acceptable alternative as well. In the end, HHH is the safest bet as far as the match itself goes. Regardless, The Streak NEVER should be broken. The columnists have the common sense, and their views are in line with the VAST majority of the actual WWE fans. I will be watching and cheering Undertaker to 20-0!
Posted By: I Mark For Undertaker! (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 12:05 PM
So, the majority of "analysts" think its cool to see the Taker wrestle two wrestlers in 4 years with back to back matches at the same friggin event!??! Fuck off is right Csonka. Move on, HHH part timing it only to show up for one of Wrestlemania's marquee matches will only be relevant if its his retirement match. I understand Cena vs Taker can't happen this year...though you have to wonder who Taker will lose the streak to or lose to in a retirement match. But CM Punk would've been a better choice...something fresh that also would have the hint of maybe Taker's not going to go for the prolific 20-0 and wants to shock the world by putting over even more one of the WWE's legacy carriers...and b/c HHH vs Taker has been seen way to many times already.
Posted By: Todd (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 12:13 PM
call me crazy, but i still think there's a tiny chance that hhh ends the streak.
for as much crap as you "experts" give hhh about having too much power and sleeping with the boss' daughter, can you honestly say with 100% certainty that he is going to accept losing to the same guy 3 times at wrestlemania???
if there's anyone with the clout to end the streak and cement his legacy as one of the best ever, it's hhh.
Posted By: memphis b-rad (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 12:19 PM
I love how the young kids forget some very simple aspects of being a Pro-Wrestler...Look...Both Taker and Triple H's time is coming to a close. Taker even more imminently.
The guy is knocking on 50, he has put his body through hell, he has a hard time walking without hunching over, yet he REFUSES to half ass it in the ring. He only works once a year, but you KNOW that match is going to be quality.
This MAY VERY WELL be his last match. If not, I expect him to hang it up at WM30. Meaning most likely, just two more matches in his career. Guess what, kids? The business IS NOT all about "Pushing" new guys. It's also about taking care of your bread and butter. It's also about match quality.
Taker and Triple H are THE LAST of their era. Do you think Taker REALLY wants to close out his career with a guy who isn't on the same level? FUCK NO! He wants to close it out with a classic rival, an old friend, a guy who will take care of him in the ring, a fellow old timer from his era, and a guy who GETS the business the way he does. Above all...A guy who he can do his ABSOLUTE best work with. Triple H is the only choice.
I like Rhodes, Ziggler, Sheamus, etc...But they ARE NOT Triple H. They may be younger, they may be faster and more athletic, but they ARE NOT better workers and they DO NOT have that "Old School" mentality. They don't even grasp the concepts that Triple H and Taker use in their matches. Everything is "Spot, Spot, Go, Go, Big Move, Big Move, Finish", There's little if any story telling or psychology.
Taker and Triple is THE ONLY choice given the circumstances. Would I rather see Taker and Lesnar? Yes. Would I rather see Taker and Sting? Yes. Would I rather see Taker and Austin? Yes. Would I rather see Taker and Michaels again? Yes. But where are they? Exactly. Taker and Triple H is the only choice...
Posted By: RobMinion (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 12:21 PM
I LOVE Gavin Napier's suggestion for Sheamus/Taker. I had the exact same idea and feel like it would be brilliant. At the same time, I love how this WM story really goes all the way back to HBK/Flair, and in a way I appreciate that Trips/Taker continues that. What I'd like to see is Taker finish off Triple H's career, especially since it's more or less been established that at this point Taker's career is on the line every time, as he has nothing left to accomplish outside of The Streak.
The only people aside from Sheamus that I would even consider to end The Streak are Punk and, if they really want to make him the biggest heel of ALL TIME, Cena. Beyond that, I feel like Austin/Punk to headline WM 29 and then Taker/Cena for 30 sounds awesome.
Posted By: Guest#9386 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 12:34 PM
Disagree, totally disagree. Last year's match was horrible, and this one won't be any better.
Posted By: Guest#8645 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 12:49 PM
Based on the headline, "Do You Want to See Undertaker vs. Triple H at WrestleMania 28?"
This article could have been the shortest post ever on 411...
"HELL NO WE DON'T"
Posted By: Guest#2786 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 12:53 PM
It's a moot point since the build up has already begun but why not entertain the notion while we still can? Now, with all due respect, I ask two questions to the people who are pro 'Taker/HHH III:
1) Have you rewatched the match? I get it. Live, it was a thrilling affair. On TV it was still pretty decent even though the winner was never in doubt (at least to me.) But upon repeat viewing do you still enjoy it? Or do you notice that the bulk of the match is two guys laying around and just hitting finishing/signature moves?
I believe that all 'Taker/HHH brought to the table last year was the thrill of seeing if 'Taker could lose. That's the sort of thrill you can get putting any top guy against 'Taker. Cena. Orton. They could both get the same result now since they're both so damned huge. Trading finishers? Again, it only takes a minor level of competence. So I wonder if you liked the match or if you liked the moment? If HBK/'Taker was so great at 25 and a let down at 26 then what makes you think HHH/'Taker at 28 won't be just a pale retread of 27?
2) You ask what else there is for Triple H to do. I ask why there needs to be something else for Triple H to do? If he doesn't have a singles match that eats up a lot of time then that makes room for guys like Ziggler, Rhodes, etc. to have solid midcard matches or possibly give more time to a MitB match.
Every year since WM has expanded to 4 hours it seems, ironically enough, that matches are getting less time. How much time was wasted last year carting 'Taker off that should have gone to the 3 minutes each dedicated to the tag matches?
Hunter is at the point where he's starting to run the company and it should stay that way. I get that WM is for the big names but with Rock/Cena and Punk/Jericho in the mix do we really need Trips?
Overall, I don't necessarily hate the idea of another 'Taker/HHH match but when there are so many better alternatives out there doesn't it make sense to jump on them?
Posted By: Ron Mexico (Guest) on February 07, 2012 at 11:30 PM
DAMIT Ron, I used to hate your ass but after that post I can only say two things...
Ditto, and I'd buy you a freaking beer!
Kudos
Posted By: Used to make gay ref about Ron (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 12:56 PM
Never remotely achieved that top level status of Hulk Hogan (but to be fair, who could? no one).
Posted By: Jon Caplan of Jenkintown PA (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 09:12 AM
-----------------------------------
Uh dude, Stone Cold Steve Austin and The Rock both say "Hi"
Austin wiped the floor with Hogan from merchandising and ticket sales figures and The Rock at least equalled him and was far more succesful in Hollywood.
Whilst I don't like Hogan I won't disrepect him as a draw because he WAS the biggest draw in the 1980's But he HAS been equalled AND surpassed..sorry!
Posted By: RockerDropper (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 01:33 PM
Wrestlemania 28: Undertaker vs. Degeneration-X ... BOOK IT!
Posted By: BONES (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 01:45 PM
The reason Triple H is fighting Taker is because WWE has no built anybody up who can end the streak, but that is HHH wants. No one to steal the spotlight off of him. This match is a joke, the storyline is sad, and if you disagree with me, then your a dumbass!!!
Posted By: awsome69 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 01:50 PM
Only if the 'Cerebral Assassin' smashes Undertaker in the head with 20-odd chairshots without covering him. ~ONE FOR THE AGES!
Posted By: Guest#0513 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 01:58 PM
Eh, don't really care for this. UT's streak is important and all but last year's match was dull and porrly wrestled. They'd just hit big moves, then lie around. If both are too old to go, why put them out there against each other? HHH is just using this to massage his ego. And even though UT is a legend and this will 20-0, with him maybe even retiring along with the Game, I'd rather the spot go to a young guy to build him up. This will important for historical reasons but sloppy inside the actual ring. Plus it has no bearings whatsoever on other, more relevant storylines. If you're going to do a trilogy, at least go with Kane, who seems more logical a return opponent. Their match at X-Seven was the best to me.
Posted By: Guest#0087 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 02:11 PM
I would think it's difficult to book the Undertaker, especially at WM. On one hand, he elevates his opponent by association. On the other hand, the opponent must already be a dominant force to qualify as a threat to the Undertaker.
If this is the Taker's last match, I'd go with a triple threat or fatal fourway. It can be hyped as his greatest WM challenge and it will mask his limited abilities. Stick him in the ring with a certified main eventer and a couple younger guys who need the push.
For example - Taker vs Triple H vs Barrett vs Sheamus.
Sheamus could come out and talk about his dream of wrestling for the title at WM. He could mention how his match last year was shoved off TV. But there's one title he wants more. He wants to be known as the man who broke the Streak.
Posted By: Guest#8130 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 02:18 PM
Best thing they could do with taker is give him 20-0 and let it sit for a year or two and then let a new main eventer take him down. The streak @ mania really gives Taker the same aura of unstoppableness that Andre had going into WM3, unfortunately there is nobody (not even Cena) who can Hogan Up and make it as huge as it could be(yeah I said Hogan Up not Hulk Up).... MAYBE CM Punk
Posted By: Guest#8481 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 03:08 PM
Kane will be part of this story... trust me... where does he go once Cena focuses on Rock? They actually brought masked Kane back for that trilogy match...
Posted By: Dan (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 03:14 PM
Brock or Goldberg.
Posted By: Guest#3189 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 03:18 PM
Remaining Taker Opponents:
Lesnar
Sting
Cena
Maybe Orton part II
None of which would have worked for this year.
Unfortunately, Barrett, Sheamus, and Ziggler aren't big enough yet to be credible.
Posted By: Tim Haught (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 03:25 PM
People need to relax. The complaining that this is the third time they've met at Wrestlemania needs to end. They haven't even met at Wrestlemania 3 times in the last decade. They both have evolved since their original match, so it's hardly a rerun.
To add to that, both of these guys, whether you like it or not, are still more popular and interesting than 90% of the roster and will draw better too. As long as they can still put on a decent match, why shouldn't they be allowed to? At least they're facing each other, which means they're not burying talent instead.
Also, I actually think there's a small possibility that Triple H ends the streak this year. It has been a recent tradition for a retiring wrestler who has served the company well to be retired by the next guy in the company. Shawn Michaels retired Ric Flair. Undertaker retired Shawn Michaels. It's only fitting that Triple H retires Undertaker. I know we all believe that the streak will live on, and maybe it will, but if there's any chance Undertaker wants to go out like everyone else, he should end the streak.
Either way, I just think the complaining is stupid. It's one match, and it will be just fine and we all know it, everyone's just finding something to complain about.
Posted By: Guest#1029 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 03:27 PM
Wow... So if we don't want to see HHH/Taker again, then we're stuck agreeing with Wes? Rock and a hard place.
Let us see someone else take on Taker. Give us someone who can carry people to a better match, not two aging injury riddled wrestlers. Orton could have carried Taker, maybe Miz or Ziggler, definitely Jericho or Punk. Just cause HHH is the only one not doing something going into mania, doesn't make him a good choice.
Posted By: Carlos (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 03:27 PM
"Yeah, just like that Austin kid. He never accomplished anything after being buried at Wrestlemania 13, albeit in a CLASSIC, CAREER-DEFINING MATCH.
Posted By: mr_wishart (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 06:15 AM"
lolwut? Austin I'm pretty sure faced Bret Hart wt WM13 while Taker faced Sycho Sid. Austin didn't face Undertaker until In Your House: A Cold Day In Hell.
So... what does Austin losing to Bret have to do with HHH/Taker III?
Posted By: Guest#4406 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 03:38 PM
I agree with Wes Kirk here, word for word.
Posted By: Guest Guest (Guest) (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 03:53 PM
Undertaker vs. HHH really doesn't help WWE at all in the long term, that's what people aren't considering. Will HHH and Taker deliver a Mania worthy match? Probably. People seemed to enjoy their spot-rest-rest-rest-spot match from last year, as inexplicable as that is to me, so why not? The problem is (and this has been the problem for some time), nobody benefits from this. Neither UT nor HHH need the rub of beating the other at this point in their career.
Undertaker's streak will likely not be broken, so why not use that as a safety net to boost a young guy? People say that a loss to Taker would damage someone like Rhodes or Barrett. I disagree. It's a forgone conclusion that Taker will win at Mania, so in a sense, anybody who faces him is bulletproof. Everybody jobs to Taker at Mania, no big deal. The real opportunity lies in the chance to showcase your talent in a high profile match with WWE's most legendary active wrestler. A ****+ performance from Ziggler or someone would do a lot to boost their stock. Ideally, WWE eventually gets the balls to put one of these young guys over, because I disagree that keeping Taker's streak alive is smart business. That is a ticket to 'credibility forever' that needs to be given to a future draw.
The old guard has done a terrible job of building to the future. Flair lost his career to HBK, who lost HIS career to Taker. Now the rumor is that HHH will be retired by Taker as well, who will then ride off into the sunset without putting anybody over. Huh? Who does that help? The truth is, none of those men needed that rub. Kennedy, MVP, Morrison, Miz, etc. all would have benefited greatly from retiring one of those legends. We're facing a situation where Taker and HHH don't have much time left to put someone over, and once they're gone, we'll be left with Cena, Orton and a bunch of jobbers who weren't worthy enough to face let alone beat a near crippled 50-something Taker. And they wonder why buyrates and ratings are stagnant/dropping.
Posted By: The TradeMark Experience (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 04:28 PM
The problem with a third UT/HHH match at Mania is that unlike the previous two matches this match would likely imply that the outcome would be different. Most people like myself don't want to see the Undertaker loose at Mania ever. If he is going to retire after this match we want to see him retire with a perfect record at WM.
What I see happening is next week on Raw Shawn Micheals will be there, HHH for some reason or another won't. The UT who is also not scheduled to be there will come out and attack Micheals forcing HHH to challenge him to a match at Mania.
Instead of just HHH and UT wrestling at Mania for a third time I'd rather see a triple threat match with UT,HHH, Shawn Micheals coming back for one last match.
That way Micheals and HHH could fight over which one will be credited for pinning the Undertaker at Mania and the Undertaker could pick up the win by pinning either one of the two men.
That match would steal the show easily.
Posted By: Nostradumbass (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 04:51 PM
Remaining Taker Opponents:
Lesnar
Sting
Cena
Maybe Orton part II
None of which would have worked for this year.
Posted By: Tim Haught (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 03:25 PM
Wow, so Cena would fight the Rock and Taker? Try thinking before you hit send.
Posted By: Guest#2262 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 05:28 PM
Do WE want to see it happen? No, most of us would rather Taker vs. someone else. Problem is TRIPLE H wants to see it happen, so ego wins. Again.
Posted By: REALITY (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 06:00 PM
There is nobody on the roster who can carry Taker to a Wrestlemania match besides The Game.
Posted By: TylerMorganWPG (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 06:21 PM
At this point, Undertaker's once in six months appearances don't have that appeal. He's so over at this point that he needs to lose to put superstars over. And having him wrestle only at mania defeats that purpose. Storylinewise, there's nothing left for him to give. I think he should just have a 5 star classic with Daniel Bryan at WM, win the world title and retire on that note!
Posted By: Aditya (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 06:41 PM
I'm kinda tossed up on this match, on one hand you have triple H Undertaker For the third time. on the other hand the last 2 times they wrestled at WM brought the house down. But do you really want to see two guys over 40/ one of them close to 50 that only wrestle once a year.As much as it pains me to say it I think Taker needs to retire. He hasn't had an injury free year since i don't know when. It will be a sad day when he does retire the last of a generation but i think its time for him to hang them up
Posted By: rogwolf736 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 06:54 PM
Kane will be part of this story... trust me... where does he go once Cena focuses on Rock? They actually brought masked Kane back for that trilogy match...
Posted By: Dan (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 03:14 PM
He goes against Ryder, who is returning for his revenge. Kane will play little or no part in this, aside from maybe a one-off speech being the devil's advocate for the match (as he is with Cena). You're kind of a silly bunny.
Posted By: Guest#2837 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 07:19 PM
The only way I want to see this match is if Taker crushes HHH from the get-go... an absolute, thorough, and CLEAN ass-kicking that ends with HHH on a stretcher getting carried out of the arena.
Posted By: Guest#0225 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 07:33 PM
Why can't HHH just feed Taker to his good buddy Nash? He was happy to insert Nash to ruin the Summer of Punk, why not go all the way.
Posted By: Oh! Lymping Hero (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 08:09 PM
Bring on The Brock.
Posted By: Guest#5931 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 08:13 PM
HHH/Undertaker in their turd WM match.
Posted By: Guest#8243 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 08:20 PM
Remaining Taker Opponents:
Lesnar
Sting
Cena
Maybe Orton part II
None of which would have worked for this year.
Posted By: Tim Haught (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 03:25 PM
Wow, so Cena would fight the Rock and Taker? Try thinking before you hit send.
Posted By: Guest#2262 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 05:28 PM
Did you read the part where he said 'None of which would have worked for this year?' Try reading before you hit send.
Posted By: The TradeMark Experience (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 08:34 PM
It was boring as hell the first time. It can only be worse the second time.
Posted By: Guest#9055 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 08:45 PM
This is like a tna match, a couple of old farts fighting one another..great
Posted By: Guest#1115 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 09:15 PM
it'sa better than the undertaker vs. kane fued
Posted By: aJs (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 09:34 PM
no
Posted By: Guest#2513 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 10:44 PM
Wes Kirk....Triple H serviceable in the ring. Your a fuckwit. Now you might mean over the past year or so but you didnt failed to mention it. Also you said nothing about The Undertaker being serviceable so Im taking it as you think Triple H has only been serviceable over his entire career. Thats the worst statement Ive heard in my life. It actually makes me sick. Your a straight out fuckwit. Just an arse. Triple H selfish, maybe so but you have to give him respect for some of the matches he has had. I bet your a big Hulk Hogan fan ay? Who is by far the worst wrestler ive seen in my life. Wes Kirk can we fight? I would love to pound your face in. Some of the stuff you have written makes me think your mentally challenged. Wes Kirk I hate you, die dickhead. Please die.
Posted By: John (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 12:56 AM
Dude, you need to get laid, NOW! Getting sick and want to fight over comments another posted here shows you have NO LIFE!
Posted By: Guest#4141 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 10:52 PM
Sorry but this fight looks like shit and you really have to be a blind fool WWE-tard to look forward to this match...and btw, this is from a WWE fan. I think putting this fight on the card that will waste a good 30 minutes(10 minutes for intros alone) could make me NOT watch Wrestlemania.
Posted By: Guest#4959 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 11:04 PM
God no. I HATE that WWE is wasting Taker's 20th win on fucking Triple H for the THIRD FUCKING TIME
If they are going to rematch route why no Randy Orton who is much more of a bad ass then he was 7 years ago and is a believeable foe that would go toe-to-toe with Taker and after the year he had last year there'd be no doubt it would be an awesome match
Posted By: Guest#9425 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 11:12 PM
one thing is that the "IWC" just poops on everything HHH does. i would ask the people who know better business than Vince Mcmahon, to come forward and suggest a opponent for UT at WM????
The so called "IWC" whine and puss about anything and everything that does not involve there darlings.
Posted By: sssssss (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 11:13 PM
where are punk and cena bitching bout Taker coming back for one big payday at WM when he sat out the whole year collecting a seven figure contract for nothing. Just another guy past his prime keeping money and a spot from a young guy. I say nooooo to a third match out of principle.
Posted By: Guest#4140 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 11:17 PM
I disagree, and I do not want to see this match. Main reason being that the match itself will suck like the last one. Took up nearly an hour on the card and was nothing more than 6 months of object spots. Can't have chairs or anything else 99% of the time... in a failed attempt to make it "matter" when two washed up future Hall of Famers can have an excuse for the big payday. Tables, chairs, double chairs, finishers onto chairs. Oh finishers..
I guess in an hour long debacle, a 2 minute submission hold... isn't so bad... especially since Taker puts it on like a dickhead. 50 year old dude failing at pretend MMA makes for the worst finish in so long.
And what wasn't the worst finish in so long??? The Cole Mine. Cole finally gets his, Taker/Trips brawl through the Cole Mine destroying it, great closure. Then it reappears for a couple more weeks before just going into the ether. No more great closure. Way to do less than nothing.
Anywho. Back to the match, it was literally nothing but highspots and finishers. If they so much as threw a dozen punches apiece I'd be surprised. The match in 10 seconds?
table plancha table chokeslam
they sorta wrestle till
chair pedigree Last Ride Tombstone
DDT onto chair pedigree pedigree
chairs,chairs,chairs old school
chair HHH tombstone(!) sortaplata
FIN
LAME
Posted By: Guest#0787 (Guest) on February 09, 2012 at 01:53 AM
Disagree. Theres a good enough story there. HHH wants to believe he has what it takes to end the streak, but deep down he knows hes not sure. Undertaker aint goin out like that. Throw Shawn Michaels in the mix... Itll be good enough. But the reason I disagree is theres another match I would rather see. If I could re-write the last 8 months or so, Id have it revealed just before or after RR that HHH was the guy trying to keep the belt off Punk all along. And Johnny Ace was just a stooge. Then do Punk v. HHH at WrestleMania with Punk getting his 'job' back. That would leave Undertaker w/... I dont know. It seems at this point like his WrestleMania matches have to mean something more than the streak. So it has to be w/ someone important or meaningful. I guess that leaves Randy Orton, Kane, or Chris Jericho. Jerichos probably the best bet of the three. Randy Orton gets nothing from jobbing to Undertaker. The Kane matches havent been that good. I guess its Jericho.
Posted By: Mark of Excellence (Guest) on February 09, 2012 at 05:17 AM
"Yeah, just like that Austin kid. He never accomplished anything after being buried at Wrestlemania 13, albeit in a CLASSIC, CAREER-DEFINING MATCH.
Posted By: mr_wishart (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 06:15 AM"
lolwut? Austin I'm pretty sure faced Bret Hart wt WM13 while Taker faced Sycho Sid. Austin didn't face Undertaker until In Your House: A Cold Day In Hell.
So... what does Austin losing to Bret have to do with HHH/Taker III?
Posted By: Guest#4406 (Guest) on February 08, 2012 at 03:38 PM
If you had put in the quote I took from Chad, he said that a loss to the Undertaker would spoil a wrestler's career. I pointed out that it's a stupid argument, based on the fact the Austin lost to Bret Hart and became a bigger star because of it.
If any other wrestler was given the same 30 minute blow-job match HHH and Taker had last year they would emerge as a big star post-Wrestlemania.
Posted By: mr_wishart (Guest) on February 09, 2012 at 02:48 PM
So...
Someone wants to FIGHT Wes Kirk because he has his own opinion about a WRESTLING match. Let me say that again...someone wants to PHYSICALLY FIGHT Wes Kirk for his opinions on WRESTLING...
I really hope you are still in your teens making a statement like that. If you are older than that, I feel very bad for you. There are people you can talk to about your issues and you should seriously look into them.
I do disagree with Wes and his opinion of HHH though. When HHH first started his rise he was dating Chyna and got his BIG push also during that time when he won his first couple titles in 1999-2000.
As for the match..yeah, I'd like to see it again, but I am an 80's-90's fan of WWE and not a current fan (outside Punk) so my views are swayed that way. Basically, if it sells tickets and pops the crowd while its LIVE, its a success. HHH vs. Taker would do that.
Posted By: Pittsburgh (Guest) on February 10, 2012 at 11:39 AM
CM Punk is the best choice for the ending match.
1)He is practically wellness proof by definition.
2) It would be the shine that makes him a legend, and that would I believe please smarks and marks alike.
3) Both guys have martial arts training. I think the martial arts/wrestling work they could prove would be very interesting and fresh.
4) I think by passing the torch to Punk, we would see a signalling a new era in wrestling, a final banishment of the previous three eras, and maybe even a jumping off point for a return to something as exciting as the attitude days. They got the guys I think in place, so make that changeup!
Posted By: reasoning (Guest) on February 10, 2012 at 05:55 PM
Copyright (c) 2011 411mania.com, LLC. All rights reserved.
Click here for our privacy policy. Please help us serve you better, fill out our survey.
Use of this site signifies your agreement to our terms of use.
Larry Csonka - AGREE: This is a match that has been rumored for some time, essentially since last year's WrestleMania ended, and since then, the wrestling fans have been split. And I don't mean that kind of, "we'll agree to disagree" style of thing, I mean some want it and some hate it, and if your opinion is different than anyone else's, fuck off. Opinion is a beautiful thing, isn't it? First of all I want to say this, if you disagree with me and have no desire to see this match, I can understand and I fully respect your opinion. Share your thoughts in the comments and let me know exactly why, because I would love to see some constructive thoughts. Now, onto why I want to see this match. First of all, I am a sucker for a good "trilogy" of matches and or fights. I loved the Rock vs. Austin WM matches, and I have no problem with WrestleMania rematches. Secondly, I was a big fan of both matches. I think that the WM 17 match gets completely overlooked and forgotten due to Austin vs. Rock II. I also really enjoyed last year's match, which some days I feel in the minority in doing so, but I dug it. Next, I liked how the WM matches with Shawn Michaels led to his retirement, I liked the angles and the matches were great. I really feel that Triple H is looking to retire and move into full time Corporate H mode, which is fine. Finally, I really do not see any other matches involving these guys and other opponents that I would really like to see, considering the current roster and booking. Sure Undertaker vs. Jericho could have been something special, but then what with Triple H? Yes LAST YEAR they could have went with Wade or someone else, and done what they did with Triple H and it would have been great for the young guy, but they refused to do that. To me this makes sense, and I honestly like the match and think that these guys will do their best to deliver. And after the promo and video packages on Monday, I am all in. Thanks for reading.
Wes Kirk - DISAGREE: I don't think any of the ATKM articles have been easier for me to make a decision on than this one considering the very last thing I want to see is Undertaker and HHH wrestle for a third time at an event where Undertaker is one win away from being 20-0 and setting a record that will likely never be bested. I really don't like HHH. As a performer he's serviceable, he can have some great promos when he's funny and not trying to be the most serious guy in the room, but he's not a very good human being. He badmouths his fellow wrestlers, he uses his influence in the company to effect business decisions based on personal feelings, he wormed his way into his job thanks to dating and marrying Stephanie McMahon and frankly he's more concerned for his own gigantic ego than good business. You can thank the incompetence of HHH for having Sin Cara pushed down your throats when the man was a danger to himself and others in the WWE ring for months, and you can thank HHH for making himself the priority when it comes to the Undertaker at Wrestlemania. Simply put, what is there left for HHH to prove? He lost twice already and last year was by submission! I'm not really sure why Undertaker would want to challenge him again considering he's trounced him and made him tap out, although of course HHH got in his little verbal gaffe that said he ended the streak during one RAW. Undertaker is getting older and he's been able to put on one or two really good matches in the past few years but it is obvious the years of wrestling competition and his mounting injuries are forcing him to retire soon, as this isn't your normal 9-to-5 job where you can handle it for decades without significant difficulty. UT is rumored to have had many different surgeries, and even a hip replacement, which means him providing a quality match will be hard although he has shown he can do it. HHH is a selfish man and would want Undertaker to probably job out to him, or maybe want Undertaker to beat him one last time just to claim he was the final victim before the man retired which really isn't something to brag about. Hunter's obsession with thinking he "earned" anything in this sport is laughable as if it wasn't for being picked for a McMahon pet project gimmick from the start and working with the Kliq he would never have hit the main events and after marrying Stephanie he was guaranteed anything he wanted. I said many times before he's the smartest man in wrestling for getting away with all of this but the fact of the matter is nothing good can come of this match! Undertaker has won twice, if he loses his streak is gone and you can't just replace that but if he wins what did he really prove since he won twice before? Neither man is able to go in the ring like they did in 2000 or 1995, neither man needs the victory, and frankly UT would be better served to go over somebody in a quick match and take his deserved twenty victories and call it a career than to wrestle HHH for the third time at WrestleMania. Undertaker is my favorite currently active wrestler and to see his legacy tarnished with a loss or to see him struggle through a mediocre match in pain because of the ego of a guy who slept his way to the top makes me sick to my stomach, and I hope this match never happens or HHH loses quickly because there is no real other way to go here.
Robert S. Leighty Jr - AGREE: This one was kind of tough for me, but I am going with agree for several reason. I have been in the crowd for the last three WrestleManias, which means I saw the two Shawn/Taker classics, and last year's Taker/HHH brawl. In all 3 cases the crowd was into the match, but of the three nothing could touch what we experienced and saw at WrestleMania XXV. The rematch had a reason for happening as Shawn became obsessed with wanting to defeat the Undertaker at WrestleMania, and the subsequent story with Taker refusing was brilliant. In this case, even with the loss, HHH is justifying that he ended the streak Taker had to be carried out following their match in the Georgia Dome. HHH made that point and with his character's ego it's pretty reasonable to believe that in his mind he could take credit for "ending" the streak. Now it's the Undertaker he wants the rematch because he doesn't want the lasting image in his feud with HHH being that he was carried out at WrestleMania. This gives HHH the chance to play the role Taker did the year heading to Mania XXVI against Shawn. So from a storyline standpoint this match does make sense. The story makes even more sense if the WWE gets Shawn Michaels involved again and he is there at WrestleMania in some regard: special ref for the match, in HHH's corner, outside enforcer, whatever.
Chad Nevett - AGREE: At this point, it is obvious that the Undertaker's Streak will not end. This was a possibility years ago, but, since defeating Edge at WrestleMania XIV, the chances of it happening have slipped to nil. And, honestly, Edge wasn't even a good bet to end the Streak. Despite what others think, there is no rub to be gained at this point in facing the Undertaker. No upside. Whoever he faces is simply a victim, a predetermined loser. Especially with this being the year where the Undertaker will reach 20-0, there's an even stronger downside to losing: whoever loses will always be #20 -- and, possibly, the final victim of the Streak.
Gavin Napier - AGREE: I'm torn on this. Significantly torn. Why? Because both are right answers. Undertaker vs. Triple H is both the right booking decision and the wrong booking decision here. I'm saying "agree" to this, because I think it's the most realistic booking decision they can make.
James Wright - DISAGREE: I probably should come up with a better reason than 'We all know who is going to win' since that will most likely be the unanimous opinion here. What's more the counter argument of Triple H being so egotistical that he might pull a fast one doesn't even help as Triple H winning would mean nothing. Wrestling isn't all about wins or losses, but it is about the win or loss having a meaning, which is why so many people get angry when stipulations are just ignored, like Jericho being fired from Raw twice for instance and coming back like nothing happened. The bottom line is that last year's match meant nothing and this year's means even less.
Ryan Byers - AGREE: I watched Wrestlemania last year, and, honestly, I came out of it feeling like I didn't get my fifty-five dollars worth. Aside from the slick presentation, the ONLY thing that felt like it was worthy of the biggest show of the year was HHH vs. Undertaker, a match I would easily put at above the **** mark. Given that this year's show will also feature Rock/Cena and is rumored to feature Shaq/Big Show, I doubt that HHH/UT will be the only match that feels worthy of the card again this year, but it's a match that is guaranteed to be worthy and a match that is guaranteed to be good if not great, so I have a hard time saying that I don't want to see it on the show.
Tony Acero - AGREE: Yes please! Okay, look, last year's match may be best remembered for being a snoozefest, but it still had a lot of great moments, and at the very least they were telling a story...it just wasn't the greatest story. My fandom for Taker is no secret, and although some may say that he being gone for a year spells a broken body, I'm thinking (hoping?) that it's the opposite. A year off should be able to heel the man if he's stayed active and kept his health in check. People seem to think that Taker is as old as dust, when he's really not. The dude is like 47, I believe. True, he's not a fucking spring chicken, but he's still relatively young in terms of age. He's just been around for a long time. This may be blind hope, but I feel that both men know what happened last year and are aware that there were a few moments they could have upped the action. I feel that because of this, they're going to bring on the goodness here, and with the added fold of HBK possibly being involved, it's going to be one hell of a spectacle. We also have to applaud the length at which this storyline has been going on. They've not put much effort into it but they haven't really needed to. From Flair to HBK to HHH, Taker has bested them all, and rightfully so. But these matches have all been linked in some way, and that's amazing! If this is Taker's last match, then I'm ok with it being Triple H, so long as he wins. As of this point, it's nothing more than a special attraction, so why feed a young guy to him, when we could use Triple H as fodder for the win?
