boshealecta Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 So I was thinking about wrestling far too in depth as I normally do and realised that if Taker had wrestled at every single Wrestlemania he would of been 20-0 at Wrestlemania XXVI against Shawn Michaels. I was thinking about it as there is a lot of debate as to who he should of faced to go 20-0 Â This is because he missed two Wrestlemanias I believe down to injury, that being Wrestlemania X (storyline was Yokozuna put him in the casket and he went to be reborn) and Wrestlemania 2000 (Vince McMahon fired Taker for not facing Triple H) Â So in storyline terms, if Taker had of been at those two Wrestlemanias, who would you have put him with, who would he have faced at Wrestlemania X and 2000 and if this then meant he went 20-0 two years ago, would you still have had him face HBK for the second time? Â At Wrestlemania X I think the two options would have been to put him against Bigelow instead of Bam Bam facing Doink the Clown, or a great match would have been against Macho Man, maybe instead of Macho vs Crush because Crush was angry Savage didnt save him against Yoko, make it Macho who had lost to Yoko and then turned and took it out on Taker. Â At Wrestlemania 2000 I think the best thing to have done would have been to put him with Kane when they faced off against DX, instead of Kane and Rikishi. Â I probably would have kept his match against Michaels as the career vs 20-0 streak would have been fine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted February 16, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted February 16, 2012 Undertaker could have worked WrestleMania X and WrestleMania 2000, if they wanted him to. He was taking a break in 1994 and for 2000 he had nagging injuries, but if they werent so sure of WrestleMania 2000 breaking the PPV record, he'd have been brought back. He had a slight setback but he could have worked the show. He just wasnt needed and back in 2000 they kept you back until they knew your comeback would have maximum impact. Judgment Day was the best time for him to return. Â SKY TEXT told me he was returning with a New Ministry which would include Mike Tyson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Jaffa Posted February 17, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted February 17, 2012 Undertaker could have worked WrestleMania X and WrestleMania 2000, if they wanted him to. He was taking a break in 1994 and for 2000 he had nagging injuries, but if they werent so sure of WrestleMania 2000 breaking the PPV record, he'd have been brought back. He had a slight setback but he could have worked the show. He just wasnt needed and back in 2000 they kept you back until they knew your comeback would have maximum impact. Judgment Day was the best time for him to return. SKY TEXT told me he was returning with a New Ministry which would include Mike Tyson. I've read somewhere that Undertaker was meant to return at Royal Rumble 2000, but tore a muscle in the gym about 8 hours before the show began. You know the score on these sorts of things Ian, any idea if it's true or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ratedrpoed Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 WM 22 should have been vs kurt angle & not mark henry, was very pissed off at the time that match didn't happen. Â WM 19 should have been vs benoit & not big show/a-train. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members PunkStep Posted February 17, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted February 17, 2012 VS Big Show at Mania 16 for me, they could've kept their tag going until an eventual split and at Mania the two would have a big man match. Probably would've been crap, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm29195 Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Undertaker could have worked WrestleMania X and WrestleMania 2000, if they wanted him to. He was taking a break in 1994 and for 2000 he had nagging injuries, but if they werent so sure of WrestleMania 2000 breaking the PPV record, he'd have been brought back. He had a slight setback but he could have worked the show. He just wasnt needed and back in 2000 they kept you back until they knew your comeback would have maximum impact. Judgment Day was the best time for him to return. SKY TEXT told me he was returning with a New Ministry which would include Mike Tyson. I've read somewhere that Undertaker was meant to return at Royal Rumble 2000, but tore a muscle in the gym about 8 hours before the show began. You know the score on these sorts of things Ian, any idea if it's true or not?   I think the news at the time was that he tore his bicep working out with Bryan Adams the day before Rumble 2000... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators PowerButchi Posted February 18, 2012 Moderators Share Posted February 18, 2012 SKY TEXT told me he was returning with a New Ministry which would include Mike Tyson. Â That's nothing. Page 662 told me The Fog is debuting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killjoy_Gee Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 I can't say who I would have had 'Taker face at the 2 'mania's he missed as I didn't watch wrestling then, though watching Wrestlemania 2000, I like the idea someone said about substituting Rikishi for 'Taker. That could make sense. What I can say is I would definately have kept Undertaker vs HBK as 20, simply because of how incredible the match was Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members PunkStep Posted February 18, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted February 18, 2012 Actually that would make a sense, then Rikishi could replace Chyna to team with Too Cool vs The Radicalz- which makes even more sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members air_raid Posted February 18, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted February 18, 2012 If we're going to mess with the Mania 16 card to get Undertaker onto it, I would simply tear it to pieces and start again. I can't believe they didnt build any feuds up strongly enough to deserve a singles blow off at "the big one" apart from Rock VS HHH, and we didnt even get that. It was bollocks. The only thing I'd have kept was the three way ladder match car wreck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted February 18, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted February 18, 2012 Yeah, even at the time it was a really strange WrestleMania. WWF had never been hotter and PPV quality had never (and hasn't since if you look at their roster in 2000) been at a higher standard as far as delivering quality bouts. WrestleMania 2000 was so different from the usual PPVs at the time. There was no singles matches on the card (apart from the Kat vs Terri match). If you think they are desperate to get people on the show these days, you need to check this PPV out. Probably all the active roster are featured in six man matches, multi-man hardcore matches, tag matches, three way dances, the lot. It really brought the quality down. Â Backlash should have been WrestleMania 2000. An Austin return would have been incredible at a WrestleMania and would still be talked about today. Instead, nobody talks about Backlash. Which is a shame because its one of the best PPVs they've ever done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ShortOrderCook Posted February 18, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted February 18, 2012 People do talk about it Ian because as you rightly mention, it's one of their finest efforts of a ppv ever. I agree with you though, that main event and the payoff was just magic and had it been at WrestleMania that would likely have amplified it. Those moments definitely belonged at 'Mania. As great as Backlash was though, i'm not sure i'd switch much else. It was a bit overkill with no singles matches whatsoever but, it also featured some great novel concepts for the first time ever. The Tag Title Triple Threat and the IC + Euro title double fall triple threat were both tremendous features worthy of the WrestleMania debuts of those talents. Same sort of deal with the Hardcore match. It's the shitty tag matches being shoehorned in that let it down really. Â Had all that remained and Taker was being squeezed in somewhere too...i don't know, if you take Rikishi out of the tag and put him in the six man instead of Chyna, have Chyna in Too Cool and Kishs corner and having her turn take place here rather than the following night, making it two years on the trot for her and then stick Undertaker in (another) triple threat land of the giants with Big Show and Kane, keeping the no singles matches theme going maybe, with a #1 contenders stip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members PunkStep Posted February 18, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted February 18, 2012 To be honest, WM15 was pretty shit by their standards too. For me 15 & 16 are two of the worst Manias and they were both while the promotion was at it's hottest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ShortOrderCook Posted February 18, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted February 18, 2012 I don't know, few Manias are shit-hot all the way through. The good ones are those that have those really big special, standout moments. I like elements of XV and it was of its time. I like my WrestleManias to have significant moments. New stars arriving, shining or big events occuring like a twist or turn that turns out to be significant. And here, i really liked the Triple H/Chyna/Kane/X-Pac story and double turn and it did kick start Triple Hs rise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators PowerButchi Posted February 18, 2012 Moderators Share Posted February 18, 2012 Wrestlemania X7 was pretty sharp from start to finish I felt. It's certainly not as bad as Wrestlemania IV which I think is still going on now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.