clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Undertaker's WrestleMania streak must end ... eventually

New, comments

There is absolutely no good reason for Undertaker to retire with it still intact.

Gernot Weiss at Wikimedia Commons

Earlier today, you Cagesiders were asked to respond to the following "Yes or No" question: Should Undertaker's WrestleMania streak be broken? As of this writing, 364 votes were cast for NO (57-percent) while 280 votes were cast for YES (43-percent).

That's incredible.

The ensuing discussion in the comments section is well worth the read, so go check it out by clicking here. A great comment from TJ_UK summed up the two competing sides (sic):

From what I can tell, these are the general arguments from the majority on both sides with some other points coming up here and there from both groups.

For (with most saying it should be Taker's last match or at least his last Mania)
- It'd put someone over big time as the new person to carry the company like DB or Reigns or a mega heel like Deam Ambrose of Bray Wyatt
- Taker is old school and will want to go out on his back
- Once Taker retires there is zero commercial benefit of having the streak in tact as you can get buys from a Streak match anymore.
- Is there anyone who'd really benefit from it? Insert Daniel Bryan YESing gif here
- It'd be stupid to not break it to end Taker's career.

Against
- The Streak is so massive that the guy who beats it will never be able to top that moment as will a WWE Title really compare to being the only man who could beat the Undertaker at Mania where the likes of HBK, Flair and Triple H failed.
- The Streak is unique and deserves to be preserved as that, let him lose his final match at another PPV.
- Once the Streak is broken, there is zero commercial benefit as you can't release a DVD called The Streak with all Taker's Mania matches after he retires.
- Is there anyone who'd really benefit from it? Insert Dean ‘Nope' gif here
- It'd be stupid to break it to end Taker's career.

Impressive how much the two views contradict each other. Also it suggests that WWE might be a similar boat in terms of discussion and that whatever they do, unless they handle it amazingly well, there's going to be some backlash.

Like others have said, it's probably going to be the Taker's call and if he says he wants to be beaten clean by someone then management will probably tell creative to come up with something for that but equally if Taker says he'd prefer to lose his final match at say Survivor Series then that's what creative will probably be told to arrange.

This writer falls strongly on the side of breaking the streak for what, to me, are obvious reasons. Some have referenced Undertaker's streak as "an accomplishment", and while it took a certain amount of work to get him to a point where he would be booked this strongly, strictly speaking, he did not accomplish anything.

Let's separate kayfabe from reality here.

That's the key, really. When "The Deadman" retires, there's no longer any need for him to keep kayfabe alive. He's off to Texas to raise his kids with the lovely Michelle McCool while riding bikes and listening to Limp Bizkit or, you know, whatever the hell it is he does with his time. The streak is kayfabe and its use is only relevant in that world, one he will soon no longer inhabit.

It would be criminal not to get the most out of it before that happens.

Yes, that means breaking the streak. Sure, you could argue it will be next to impossible to find someone "worthy" of doing so, but remember, they're only as worthy as they're made out to be. It's up to WWE to book a wrestler strong enough to become a legend by taking down Undertaker.

Your fear that the creative powers will screw it up after is irrelevant and should not act as a deterrent in making the decision.

For my money, Roman Reigns could very well fill this role. He's been protected better than any wrestler on the roster since he made his debut in late 2012 and beyond that, he's been put over strong at nearly every turn by nearly every star on the roster, from CM Punk to John Cena.

That includes Undertaker.

But maybe he's not the guy, and that's okay; he doesn't have to be. There does have to be someone to fill that role, however, because the streak is only worth something while Undertaker is still active. Retiring with it intact helps no one and in this industry, it's all about putting someone over on your way out.

Let's hope that's what happens. It's what's best for business.