It's the question the comes up once a year in WWE, just as WrestleMania is coming into view: Should Undertaker's Streak end before he retires? Jim Ross, in his humble opinion, doesn't think so.
In pro wrestling, those two words strung together means one thing and one thing only, and that's Undertaker's unprecedented string of victories at WrestleMania. He began his WWE career all the way back in 1990, and had his first WrestleMania match the very next year. Since then, he's missed just two 'Mania events, 10 and 16, and currently sits at 20-0 at "The Grand Daddy of Them All."
By the time the next WrestleMania rolls around, "The Deadman" will be 48-years-old. With each year that goes by it becomes increasingly less clear how much longer he'll continue his storied career.
And that always raises the question: should "The Streak" ever end?
In a recent blog post, legendary announcer Jim Ross emphatically came down on one side of the argument:
"Many are asking about the return of the Undertaker as mentioned by HHH Monday Night on Raw. 'Not seeing the last of the Deadman' can mean a variety of things, one can assume. In my perfect world it would be Taker vs _________ at WrestleMania 29 where 'The Streak' would extend to 21-0. For some Twitter followers who are seemingly hell bent on Taker losing at WrestleMania, I'd be reluctant for them to handle my taxes. It makes zero sense for 'The Streak' to ever die, in my humble opinion."
That flies in the face of the longstanding tradition in pro wrestling, that a departing wrestler lose his last match, putting his final opponent over on the way out. Under Ross's scenario, that wouldn't be the case.
But maybe "The Streak" dictates making an exception?
What do you think, Cagesiders? Should it ever be broken?
Should Undertaker's WrestleMania Streak ever be broken?
Yes. (99 votes)
No. (429 votes)
Only if it's to Dean Ambrose. (39 votes)
MARKS! (9 votes)
576 total votes