topcenter

WRESTLING COLUMNS

THE UNDERTAKER SHOULD LOSE AT WM21
~~~~~~~~~~That's Right, I Said It~~~~~~~~~~

March 22, 2005 by Dave Hanson


It's that time of year again. WrestleMania is just around the corner, and that means that Mark Callaway, the man they call "The Undertaker," is going to be putting his unbeaten streak on the line for the thirteenth time. This year, he will be facing "The Legend Killer," Randy Orton. The Undertaker's twelve wins and zero losses at WrestleMania is probably one of the most impressive feats in the history of pro-wrestling, considering all the ups and downs most wrestlers go through in their careers, and the way most everybody falls in and out of favor with Vince McMahon almost cyclically. Hulk Hogan is 8-3-1 at WrestleMania. Shawn Michaels has a losing record, at 4-5-2. The Rock is dead even at 4-4. As we draw nearer to the biggest event of the year on the pro wrestling calendar, there is something that needs to be said, at the risk of me being beaten to death by angry wrestling fans: it is time that the Dead Man's WrestleMania streak came to an end, and Randy Orton is just the man to end it.

Let me start by first saying that I am by no means anti-Undertaker in any way. I have been watching wrestling since I was a little boy in the 80s, and I have nothing but respect for everything he has accomplished.

First off, in my opinion, the whole "Dead Man" angle has run its course. It's the same angle every time-some heel comes out and goes on and on about how he's not afraid of the Undertaker, how the dead man is going to be the one to "rest in peace" instead of him. Usually it is at this point when the lights go out in the arena, Undertaker's music kicks in, smoke fills the arena, Taker makes his "even longer than Triple H's ring entrance" ring entrance, and the heel starts wetting his pants with fear. This promo is repeated several times until Taker beats the heel at the next pay-per-view. The only variations on the "standard Undertaker feud" I just described, are the Undertaker's feuds with his "brother," Kane, which have already been done to death (their last match at WrestleMania was the most anticlimactic wrestling match I have ever seen). There is really nothing left to do with the Undertaker, and WWE is already ruining his character by putting him up in a series of rivalries against guys like Heidenreich (please fire that guy immediately!!) and Luther Reigns. If Taker is going to put any of the young guys over, it should at least be someone with some talent, like Randy Orton.

Randy Orton's family is tied to the business, just like Bret Hart's was; both his father and his grandfather were professional wrestlers--so you know he's in it for the long haul. He's not just a Goldberg or a Zeus, or some other flash-in-the-pan who will be forgotten in a month. Despite the fan backlash he has been receiving lately as a result of being over-pushed (or at least, pushed too soon), Orton has proved himself as one of the most talented, if not the most talented, of the current new generation of wrestlers. His one-on-one match with Christian on RAW a few weeks ago was, in my opinion, the best match of the year so far.

Now, the obvious argument in favor of the Undertaker keeping his unbeaten streak intact at WrestleMania 21 is just that: keeping his unbeaten streak intact. The streak is something that gets talked about every time WrestleMania comes around, although it has never been quite the central focus of an angle, as it has been this year with Taker and Orton. That fact alone was one of my initial reasons for believing that Orton will win this match. It's akin to the "Will the boyhood dream finally come true"!" angle that was used to build up Shawn Michaels going into the legendary 60-Minute Iron Man match at WrestleMania 12, where he beat Bret Hart to win the WWF Championship for the first time. In this case, the hype-question being blared all over RAW and SmackDown! is, "will the Undertaker's win streak finally come to an end"!" That's what leads me to believe Undertaker WILL lose, but I am out to argue why Undertaker SHOULD lose. To counter the argument that no one should tarnish the Undertaker's sacred undefeated streak, I will simply state this: 12-1 would still the best record in WrestleMania history. The only person in the entire WWE who is even close to a threat to Undertaker's streak is Edge, whose WrestleMania record is 3-0. That, in itself, could provide for an interesting angle at next year's WrestleMania, if Undertaker loses to Orton and Edge wins that six-man ladder match that's also on the card at WrestleMania this year. Edge could stay heel and start bragging about being the NEW man with the unbeaten streak, at 4-0 (providing he wins the ladder match this year), inciting the Undertaker to shut Edge's mouth and end the streak before it gets going, at WrestleMania 22. That, however, is a different column entirely.

Knowing Vince McMahon, it is possible that Taker's win streak has been an angle in itself. Vince could have been planning for the streak to end all along, waiting for a time when he would use it to put over a worthy young up-and-comer as "the man who ended the streak." It couldn't be more appropriate to have the streak ended by a man who has been given the nickname of "The Legend Killer."

This brings us to Randy Orton's role in all of this. What is it that makes Randy Orton the logical choice to be the man who ends Undertaker's unbeaten streak" At 24 years old, Orton has already carved out quite a niche for himself, setting the record as the youngest World Heavyweight Champion of all time, breaking the record set by Brock Lesnar, who in turn had broken the record set by The Rock. His "Legend Killer" angle has provided for some entertaining feuds and matches, with names like Mick Foley, Shawn Michaels, and Ric Flair. Orton has never lost a pay-per-view match with a "legend," which makes it all the more credible that Orton might be the guy to topple the Undertaker. Orton's character has been lacking for a new direction since losing the title to Triple H, and especially since the fans seem to have turned on him (being in attendance at this year's Royal Rumble, I couldn't help but feel sorry for poor Orton as the "RANDY SUCKS!" chants rang out. It's always awkward when babyfaces get booed). Since then, the WWE has been going back to the angle they started him with: The Legend Killer. That's been his calling card since coming over to RAW. If Orton can't "kill the legend" of the Undertaker's unbeaten streak at WrestleMania, then it pretty much makes Orton's character pointless.

Who else in the WWE would be a good choice to end Undertaker's WrestleMania streak" Kane" As I stated earlier, the Kane-Undertaker story has been done to death. They have fought each other way too many times, and I also think the character of Kane has run its course WWE as well. Triple H" PLEASE, NO! It's bad enough he's had his father-in-law Vince McMahon give him the belt 10 times. I don't want him to ask to end Taker's win streak as a Christmas present. Not to mention the fact that they have the two longest ring entrances in the history of pro-wrestling. WrestleMania would be over by the time both men had entered the ring for the opening bell! I don't mean to say that Triple H sucks, but still, we'll always wonder how many times he'd have gotten the belt if he wasn't married to Stephanie McMahon. The Undertaker's streak is legendary. Randy Orton has been "The Legend Killer" since coming to RAW; they didn't just create that nickname for this angle. It's a perfect fit.

In my opinion, if you're going to end Undertaker's streak, it should be used to put over a worthy-up-and-comer. Having Taker lose at WrestleMania to an established WWE veteran who doesn't need the accolade to be put over with the fans, accomplishes nothing. The whole thing, to me, fits perfectly with Orton's character, and I think it would work well. And, at the very least, it's better Randy Orton now than Heidenreich later. I will agree with the sentiments expressed by many, that WWE should have spent more time building up this feud, but I'm not writing about how WWE should better manage its angles. Also, that's the main problem with the WWE these days anyway--too much talent on the roster, not enough TV time for them all. I am genuinely excited about WrestleMania 21, more so than I was last year about WrestleMania 20 when the only match worth buying the PPV for was the Triple H/Chris Benoit/Shawn Michaels Triple Threat match for the World Heavyweight Title. Randy Orton vs. The Undertaker has the potential to be the sleeper match of the night, on a card where we already have two guaranteed-entertaining matches in Shawn Michaels vs. Kurt Angle, and the six-man-ladder match. Go Orton!!!

*Thanks to Kirsty Quested for encouraging me to write this column, and thanks to the OnlineWorldofWrestling.com people in general for providing all the PPV statistics.

by Dave Hanson ..


John Knott wrote:
I agree on the fact that taker should lose to a up and coming super star such as Randy Orton or (in my opinion) Gene Snitsky but just dont do it at wrestlemania. Because otherwise it will just completely make the winning streak pointless. If taker is to lose to Orton at a PPV then it should be at survivor series because of the fact that takers career in the WWE started at survivor series it would make 10 times more sence!
Laurens Fuchs wrote:
Let me start out with saying that I really enjoyed reading your column.... it 's very well written and I must say some excellent points were made.

I wholeheartedly agree with you saying that the Undertaker vs. Orton Match has the potential of being a really great match at WM21.... it's one of the matches I'm definitely looking forward to, just like HBK vs. Angle (which should be the best match IMO), the 6-Man-Ladder-Match.... I'm excited about HHH vs. Batista and JBL vs. Cena also, despite the fact that a lotta people say that those two won't be too good.... I don't think so, but that's another story.

Back to Orton and The Undertaker. --- I have to agree with you saying that Orton has everything that is needed to become THE next huge superstar in the WWE.... he's the only guy next to Cena that I'll give that to, those two are IMO the Total Package. Orton is very talented, very charismatic and entertaining, and I really appreciate his matches. For such a young guy he's really great and he has lots of time to improve and get better in certain departments. The Undertaker on the other hand has pretty much done everything in his career.... he's put on some astounding matches, delivered some of the most memorable moments in WWF/E history and I appreciated his performances from day one. But then one has to face the truth and that is that he's not getting any younger and one has to wonder how many more years he's left in him or he's willing to compete before retiring.... since not knowing what his plans are - if intends to continue for 3-5 more years or if he's done maybe around WM22 - I think the question if he's going to continue his streak at WM is even harder to answer as I feel that these two topics are directly linked to each other.... so let me split this up for you:

Scenario 1: The Undertaker continues a few more years until lets say WMXXV as his last WrestleMania and therefore I do not see him losing to Randy Orton and ending his streak with about 4-5 WrestleManias left for him..... he continues his streak and either loses at his last WrestleMania and puts someone over or maybe ends his career without ever losing at WM..... since his WM streak is always being brought up by the WWE and since it's become a topic at every WrestleMania in recent years and now a storyline in itself, I just don't see the streak being ended by the WWE just yet only to put Orton over.... that is if the Undertaker continues a few more years as I said....

Scenario 2: This is what I'd like to see.... The Undertaker has his WM streak ended by the Legend Killer, this will put Orton over big time and give him something to brag about over the next few years..... this also could give the Undertaker a new direction and a final interesting storyline (as you said the one thing we never need to see again is Undertaker vs. Kane), The Undertaker could become all-evil and stuff and turn heel after Mania (over the fact that Orton has ended his WM streak) and this could provide for some interesting matches with a face Orton for some time after WrestleMania.... because Orton is fresh talent and to be honest the Undertaker has feuded with practically everybody on the roster that's worth mentioning or let's say that's above midcard-status so far..... Orton vs. Taker is something new while everything else has pretty much been done before, that's my point.
Finally I'd like to see the Undertaker retire before or at WM22, because as much as he has done and as great as he's been, he's just not that interesting anymore (for me personally).... ever since going back from the AmBadAss Gimmick to the Vintage Undertaker Gimmick it's been kinda weird.... on the one hand it was cool to see his old entrance (which is loooong, I agree with you there), and his old character of being sorta invincible/supernatural and everything, but on the other hand I feel that it was a step backwards from the "Real-Life Undertaker/Mark Callaway" which was portrayed quite well by the AmBadAss Gimmick.... and since for me it's all about evolution and taking steps forward I wasn't too excited about it despite what most fans say.... I mean the biker thing may have been kinda weird to most people (including me) at first, but after sometime I appreciated the new approach to Mark's character and the fact that it's been more "real-life"..... now going back to the old stuff (especially bringing back Paul Bearer again) didn't sit too well with me since I feel it's like Hulk Hogan becoming red and yellow again at end just to please the fans of the old days.... as you can see, nostalgic and retro are two things I'm not..... I love to watch classic Undertaker matches from the mid 90's, there's nothing finer, let me make that perfectly clear .....
Back to Orton: if he beats the Undertaker and ends his streak it'll be a huge thing and as I said it'll be mentioned forever, but if he doesn't pull it off it's not gonna hurt him too much.... at least not in the long run. He has all the potential in the world, and while a victory at Mania over the Undertaker would be a great addition and help to his Legend Killer Gimmick right now, a loss isn't gonna be too bad, because I'm absolutely sure that Randy Orton won't spend too much time as the "Legend Killer" anymore no matter how things will turn out..... he'll move on and become an all-time great, and by the time he's really up and running and a top guy for himself he simply won't need the Legend Killer Gimmick anymore.... that's the way I see it for young Randy Orton right now. And he can always go back to the "roots" and call himself "Legend Killer" again when he's beyond the 40, just like Hogan became red and yellow again and just like The Undertaker returned to the dark side.... what's important for Randy Orton is to put on a good match with The Undertaker in which he holds his own.... to deliver a great performance it one thing he has to do, because let's face it. You don't have to beat The Undertaker to become famous and to make people recognize and respect you, simply because it's The Undertaker.... he can put guys over without even being beaten by them in first place.... a strong match/performance against Taker is worth more than a victory over some of the other top guys today, at least IMO....
Erkka Järvinen wrote:
Hey, Luther Reigns is not a talentless guy, match he had with Taker at NoWayOut was enjoyable unlike the match with Christian and Randy. If Randy is a third generation star, what that makes him" A guy who haven't done half as much as guys like Jericho, Benoit or Eddie did to get to WWE, not a succesful. It's so wrong that they push a guy like Randy only because their father or grandfather were so called "legends" which they were not. "The Legend Killer" is a ridicilous gimmick and it is not usen like before anymore, beating 60-70 grandfathers who used to be legends aint really accomplishment now is it" How you can make it look believeble that Randy is gonna beat Taker. Let me guess, he is gonna hit his DEVASTATING big time face buster to beat Taker" Ehm...ye... Randy Orton is never bringing enjoyable moments or matches because his ANNOYING baby face egoism which you can smell from miles away that his ego is a face and is used as a gimmick. His matches are horrible to watch, i am not gonna give you the usual excuse that "there is so few of the moves he uses" but the quality of his moves and the guy himself is soooooo boring. Again, one more fool to complain about thing he doesnt know anything, triple h and his reigns as heavyweight champion. I don't want to go on rant about defending HHH cause its getting boring to do it everytime. Don't make damn excuses all the time about politics! HHH is what he is and that is, the game!
Michael Coello wrote:
I have mixed feeling about the whole thing. In one opinion, I want Undertaker to win and go 13-0. This is because of the need for Taker to stay a main eventer after WM21. If he loses, what does Taker have left" Even if he's 12-1, It's 12-1, an imperfect record. On the other hand, you sacrifice a veteran for a rookie in need of a push and beating Taker at WM would really push you over the top as a top player. However, seeing as how Triple H practically runs RAW, where Randy is, this push would be wasted due to backstage politics. It would be like Jericho and the Undisputed Champion situation. I'm just saying that Orton beating Taker at WM21 is good on paper, but can cause problems due the history of people not getting pushed on RAW cause of Triple H and wanting to stay on top. That's why Taker should win at WM. I do believe that Undertaker should lose his streak to a worthy up-and-coming star, but one who won't be hindered by backstage politics.
Antonio Figueroa wrote:
Not to be contrary here, but I think you are missing one colossal fact in this argument, and that is the fact that Undertaker's entire career depends on him winning this match. Let's say for the sake of argument that he loses. What, then, was the purpose of his career" Yes, he is a 3-Time WWE Champion. A lot of people have had the belt more times than him. Yes, he is a former Undisputed Champion. But he lost that title to man whom, in my humble opinion, did not deserve it, the Rock, due to backstage politics. Yes, he has held the World Tag Team Championship on 8 occasions, if I remember correctly. Edge has held the title 10 times, as well as 1 WWE Tag Team title reign. Taker's run with the Hardcore Championship was nothing more than a way to keep him from complaining as other athletes stole the spotlight. So really, what else does he have in his career" Yes, a win over Taker would cement Orton's "Legend Killer" status. But an Undertaker victory over the "Legend Killer", at Wrestlemania, would prove a more important fact: There is one legend NO ONE can kill. Again I want to let you know that these are just my opinions, and although I certainly respect yours, I just feel that this must be taken into consideration for this debate. Thank you.
Rhey Higgins wrote:
will you please SHUT THE HELL UP!!!!!! What the hell, may I ask, are you smoking"! There is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY The Undertaker should ever, EVEEEER lose at Wrestlemania, especially to a gooey piece of shit like Orton. The Deadman's undefeated streak is possibly the greatest accomplishment in WWF/E history (aside from Flair's 17 World Heavyweight Championships), and to end that would be a slap in the face of 'Taker, especially since it's probably (even though I SINCERELY hope it's not) his final Wrestlemania appearance. Of course, you seem to have no problem slapping him in the face for claiming not to be an anti-Undertaker fan ("his longer-than-Triple H-entrance"...what the HELL is your problem). I'm not even gonna' touch on the whole"'Taker and Kane's gimmicks are as good as done" crap. All in all, you sound like a total Orton mark...and most of the Orton marks are horny teenage girls.
Thomas Daley wrote:
Randy Orton does an excellent job playing the arrogant punk on television and I would agree that he should be the "heel" to beat The Undertaker if not for one major problem.

Randy Orton is an arrogant punk in real life!

A lot of people back stage on Raw, are getting sick of his antic's. Rumour's are flying that he will be traded to Smackdown (unique how they kinda use that as punishment) following WrestleMania. Why you ask" Well ladies, sorry to break this to you but, it just so happen's that Mr. Orton like's to use women's luggage as a bathroom. That's right, on a recent tour he crapped in one or these new Diva's bag's.

Now, I know these new Diva's probably don't deserve to be in WWE. However, they certainly don't deserve to be treated like that. Also rumour has it he has little respect for fan's. On one such occasion he refused to sign kid's autograph's. Now, I'm a big fan of "Kayfabe" and protecting your gimmack, but Orton was "susposed" to be a face or fan favourite at the time. Plus he lack's the respect for other's in the bussiness. ( the agent's, past wrestler's. etc.) Finally, I've read several time's that he is becoming an major egomaniac. That's the last thing the show need's. After all Raw already has one of those. {Ahem! Triple H! Ahem!}

So with that said, I don't think it would be a good idea for Undertaker to beat Orton. If anything Undertaker need's to maybe "teach" him a lesson, shall I say.

And who better to do that, than someone who know's what respect is all about.

{P.S: Even Ric Flair like's the Undertaker! And from what I've read in his book he hate's everybody!}
Tayljew wrote:
You say the Undertaker must lose" Well one thing i think that wrestling fans in general and especially the boys in the office don't take into account is that UT did a lot for the WWE and has given them now over 10 years of great performances, has his respect in the back and unlike some people (cough Triple H..cough) he doesn't use his position with the boss to get what he wants. See everybody likes a new young guy coming in, but what people avoid to note is that even if Randy does stop UT's streak will it really do much for him outside of the fact that he has one more thing to talk about on RAW for one week and then it's forgotten" At this point if he beats UT there is nowhere to go for Randy outside another clash with Evolution towards a title, the problem with Randy is that they pushed him too hard, too fast and to the point where the guy had such a rise in one year that you can come up with the argument that he has nothing to gain as I have done here. Randy has done more in his tenure in WWE than some guys will ever get. When taker came along there was no Triple H causing hell for the wrestlers in the back and as long as it's what Triple H wants then of course it will happen. Bottom line the WWE has no respect for a veteran or their career and if UT was respected as he SHOULD be he would be on raw, but no that takes the thunder from Evolution and outside of Evolution and H who really gets a chance to shine anymore" Ever notice that top guys that Triple H doesn't want to job to that can SHOW HIM UP in the ring as well as guys like Randy and yes Batista are on Smackdown" Undertaker is one of them so after 10 years in the business, packing arenas he can't have just ONE thing that he can have to stay solid in his career after giving so much to the fans. F**K the legend killer, he doesn't kill anything but my hopes of seeing a wrestling program that is worth watching and UT deserves to go over. If the WWE looked back and said THANKS UT for all you did then perhaps people will begin to see, this is not what wrestling should be. There is nothing wrong with pushing a younger man but lets not push him just because you want to make somebody else look bad and especially when it violates a tradition of seeing one guy who WILL give you all he has every time he gets in that ring and be satisified in that. Randy will be around long after UT hangs it up, so why not have him go out in style and let him go out with something that he can be proud of" I get so tired of people with short memories, wrestlemania without Taker is kind of like trying to live without air, you won't live and when Taker is gone you are going to say you miss him like hell. Orton isn't doing that much for wrestling except giving teens something to gawk at and yes, he is good in the ring but let's not forget who built that spectacle of wrestlemania in the first damn place that gives guys like Randy a chance to shine. Taker will remain on SD until he does retire and they have no intentions of taking this fued with him any further and I have a sickening feeling that UT will lose all because of Triple H's bs backstage and if he can ruin somebody else's career he will. He's a cold, unfeeling mongrel who wants no career to look better than he. That is why taker will lose, Triple H never did what Taker has done and never will. That bothers him and while guys like Orton have to suck up to H I bet in Ortons mind he doesn't want to take Taker out at WM and more than likely he will. Tradition and respect means nothing anymore and if you can't respect those that got you there then what do you really have outside of a hollow shell that WAS wrestling. Taker is one of the last few guys out there that makes you remember that hard work pays off, not marrying the boss's daughter and pushing people just because it is what you want to see, the hell with the fans. I doubt Taker would ever see what I am typing but bro, we know when you lose at Wrestlemania it won't be because you were over the hill it will be because they forgot what you gave them and they forgot all you did and it d
Kirsty Quested, OWW Editor, wrote:
Can I just say that while I disagree with Dave's assertion that Taker should lose at WrestleMania 21, I am also symbolically standing up to applaud him for having the stones to write this piece, and written so eloquently too. The very fact that Dave's article generated this many responses in such a short space of time is testament to a) the controversy of the topic and b) how well he presented it. Rhey, for god's sake laddie! You of all people should be applauding Dave, not telling him to shut up. You SPECIALISE in controversial articles that push people's buttons! Come on - be a man, give credit where credit is due, rather than resorting to unsubstantiated rumours and speculation about Orton. If you disagree with him, that's one thing, it's entirely another to ask what he's smoking, or to give him crap about being an Orton fan. You can do better than this Rhey, I know you can. I realise this article has touched a nerve, but since you start out every piece for us with that specific intention in mind, I really feel you should have your hat off to someone who does it just as well.

I encouraged Dave to write this article. It began as just an email to me, but it smelled like a great topic and well, sh*t house mouse I LOVE to follow a hunch. Dave, this is fantastic. You rose to the occasion magnificently. To everyone who responded (so far) to this article intelligently (and that's most of you), my sincere respect and thanks.
jerry sturm wrote:
it's a tough choice on whether Undertaker should lose at Wrestlemania. on one hand, it would really help build up the next big superstar. but, considering that "next big star" is Randy freakin' Orton, I must insist on Taker winning. -- do we remember Foley trying to put Orton over" didn't work as well as WWE thinks. most people I know still thinks that Orton is pathetic.....even with the Foley feud. therefore, beating Undertaker won't help him. -- in fact, it'll do more harm to make Taker lose. I can only pray that WWE is smart enough to make Orton lose.
George Salloum wrote:
I think some of you are missing the real point here. The Undertaker's streak may be something great, but it is also something to look at the other side of. 12-0" That meams by the time he became a veteran, he put down more than half of his opponents instead of putting them over.

It is the year 2005 people! With Orton's ego aside, The Undertaker should be putting him over for one sole purpose, the same purpose that he should be doing every year till he retires....PUTTING YOUNG TALENT OVER!!!

It is time for The Undertaker to prove he is a legend by doing something HHH and HBk seem to refuse to do, and that is put young talent over to help the business. The business has given so much to these guys and it's about time Taker gave back to it.

The reason wrestling is dying is because there are no new stars...well how do you think you make stars" How do you think legends become legends" They put young talent over for the better of the business. Those 3 names are a part of the problem with the WWE because they are not helping the young talent.

Look at Mick Foley and The Rock...they volunteer to put over young talent and they do. Foley put over Orton CLEAN TWICE!

It's time for the WWE and The Undertaker to forget about numbers and do what's right for business.
Curtis McLean wrote:
I'm not sure how to add my comment to the coloumn, this is how it looks like it works though...so here I go anyway!

From the persective of a fan who like WRESTLING, not entertaining. I don't want to see promo's that last more than a few minutes, I don't like the Undertaker or Randy Orton. I don't want to watch WMXXI anymore, I did at first but HHH vs Batista will not be good, I cheer for Batista because he's not Triple H, and he's kinda cool...but not one of my faves, not even close. I thin JBL is a hel of a lot better than Cena, I hate Cena more than any other wrestler...besides HBK. My gods of the ring are Paul London, Petey Williams (don't you dare say it's because of the Destroyer, I was marking for him for almost 2 months before I first saw it, then my jow dropped), Frankie Kazarian, Gran Apolo and Psicosis, they are my top 5, so now you know where I stand.

So, we have the up-and-comer Randy Orton and the 12-0 Undertaker. Here's my problem, too much talk...Orton plans to end the streak, Taker beats up people for little reason, he touched Carlito, that I cannot forgive! His sacrafice is going to be...actually I won't spoil it, but someone who makes no sense and means nothing in the end. Orton has done what" RKO'd an old coke head and a chick" Plus his list of other legends, he spit in the face of Harley Race...the rest are employeed by WWE, Slaughter, Moolah, Flair, Rock at the time and Foley multiple times. But does the WWE not notice what happens when Orton enteres, huge pop, then the crowd dies so fast, people just can't care about the guy for more than a few seconds. Some people praise him about how good he is, but its the same people who go all crazy for "Vintage HBK", which happens EVERY MATCH! Here's my beef, people want Taker to put over "The Legend Killer", but only a few get mad when HBK won't put over Rob Conway, and trust my folks, Conway is a better wrestler and more charismatic than Dorkboy. I have been watching Wrestling since '92, and I've gone back and watched the older stuff, I know who the legends are, I know what they've done, most people now, the Orton backers don't, and they don't care, Orton spits in their faces and does the most over-used, over-rated finisher of all time. I mean look at the list of people that have used it just on the big stage, Johnny Ace, Steve Austin, DDP, Glen Gilberti, Marc Mero, Matt Hardy and Jeff Hardy, that's all I can think of, but I know there are more. I never understood the move, its not an end-all move, it's not a finisher I can accept, its out right terrible, right next to the F-U as the worst finisher this era.

Taker is 12-0, that is some impressive ass-kissing he does, I don't think he deserves it or anything, his character is meant to make his opponent look terrible! It is the most ridiculous thing they could do in this era of pro wrestling, but it's vintage, so its good" I can't think of anyone Taker has ever put over that meant something, Cena...nobody cares now, they never talk about it. So Orton beating him at WMXXI would give us one thing, more Orton, and I don't want that, he will talk and talk about how he beat Taker, blah blah blah, can I see some damn wrestling now" The "E" has done everything they can think of (which sadly...isn't saying much) to get this guy over, it has worked, but he's not main event worthy, the fact that he has held the World Title makes me want to puke, especially since he beat Benoit! That was unacceptable and I will not forgive Vince for that, it's not fair that Benoit has to suffer from Vince's mistake and Vince's EGO, but he's Canadian so Vince doesn't care. Here is the thing though, Orton FLOPPED as a face, and not in the good Eric Young kind of way (If you don't know who that is, find out, the bump GOD of 2004-5, he flops better than Flair). Who'se fault was that" The "E" for rushing it, or Orton for sucking" A little of both if you ask me, so now this is my problem, Orton does not make a good face, so he will have to be a heel his entire career, or attempt to go face, suck, then go back, ala Triple H!

The more I think about this, the harder it is for me to pick, on the one hand, Taker needs to put over young talent, on the other hand...Dorkboy sucks and doesn't deserve that "throphy". If Taker is going to be around for a while, and if he puts people over WM after WM, then his legacy means nothing. Putting someone over on the way out is the right thing to do, and I don't see him leaving this year. I saw take a different path, a different one, Orton is in the same trend as all the "victims" before him, he can't win. He's not different, he's a woman-beating failure. Hell Bob Orton does not deserve to be near the HoF, another bad attempt to get the guy over, what about the REAL 3rd generation star, the guy who's grand-father was THE man in his time, and his dad was also an actual great...the sad part is some people probably don't know who I'm talking about. Come on, he's in the WWE! Still don't know" He's on Smackdown...still nothing...he's holding a title...that's right! Rey Mysterio! A guy really deserving of a grand push, his family left a legacy in the world of wrestling. Here the kicker though...so guys, don't get mad at me, it's not actually Rey-Rey. For those who believed it, shame on you!

Back to the point! Taker should win, not because of my intense hate for Orton, it's just that Orton...isn't the next big thing, he's turning into a Brock Lesnar in record time, except he can't even wrestle, remember that concussion angle" That died fast, cuz he sucked at it. I just find it sad they had to go back to "The Legend Killer" so quickly...that's how terrible the guy is. As for Taker and his streak...lose it...to someone deserving...someone like...Paul London, the perfect angle would be someone actually not afraid of Taker and beats him, or someone scared shitless of him and pulls off a clean up-set, shocking even himself. London would be perfect for the later as I know he has the ability and skill to pull it of.
Laurens Fuchs wrote (towards Curtis McLean):
I just cannot believe what I'm reading here.... I hardly didn't make it through all of your childish and hateful rants, but after I did I feel like making some comments to what you wrote.... first of all I don't know what your problem is. You obviously seem to have some issues with the WWE or life in general, I don't know.... you HATE Orton, you HATE Cena, hell you even HATE Shawn Michaels.... which tells me that something must be totally wrong with you. Now, I'm not the world's biggest HBK fan, but even I can clearly see that he's one of the greatest performers to ever step into the ring, and that's a fact. Everybody will have to agree to that, even if HBK isn't their favorite wrestler.

Besides "hating" Cena and bashing Orton more than anyone has ever done before, I gotta say you sound like a complete mark.... you really seem to hate these guys so intensely, so therefore I will say this: GET A LIFE! And this: WRESTLING ISN'T REAL!

I can't understand people like you, and I find it pretty sad that guys like you are allowed to call themselves "wrestling fans".... I'm very passionate about wrestling since 1990 and I still am today, but even as a 9 year old boy I wasn't that stupid.... to actually hate guys, performers, wrestlers on TV who I knew were there to entertain me and all of the other fans and delivering great - and sometimes not so great - performances. I loved my favorite wrestler win and I was happy when the bad guy lost and everything was good again - excuse me talking about my 9 year old self here for a moment. I've clearly evolved since that and so has my view on the wrestling world, so today I sometimes love it when the bad guy knocks out the good guy or whatever.... but something that has also evolved is that I can appreciate the individual performances today even more and I'm wiser than I was 15 years ago..... seeing as you claim to be all about wrestling since 1992 - that'd make it 13 years this year - I guess you should be around my age.... the difference between you and me however is that I sound like a intelligent adult (at least I hope I do) and you sound like a 4 year old who didn't get the toy it wanted so badly.

So much about your ramblings, I just felt like giving you a view on how you sound to other people/me, maybe that'll help you express your views in a less childish manner next time around. I've been here some time now reading and appreciating the columns section (props to everybody who's writing and commenting to keep things interesting) but I can definitely say that from everbody ever posting something here you should be the last to call Randy Orton "Dorkboy"..... that simply shows your lack of knowledge, appreciation and respect for what wrestling or sports-entertainment is about. And let me say this also: I'm not an Orton fanboy, mark or whatever and I'm definitely no chick who's into Orton for his looks or something.

Then one last thing, the only thing you seemingly have realized and your only valid point is that Paul London is a great wrestler.... on the other hand your call for the Undertaker to put London over is just ridiculous, because by time London would be built up and be ready for a credible feud with the Undertaker, the Undertaker will have retired (at least I hope so) so this won't....and I'm not even getting into things like weight and height here and how Paul is a Cruiserweight which would be another issue.... and if you or anybody thinks a "feud" between London and the Undertaker would do anything for any of those guys now let me remind you of Rey Mysterio toppling the Big Show a few times..... that was kinda funny to watch a few times but in the end it didn't do anything for Mysterio and it sure as hell didn't do anything for the Big Show.... oh, you can replace the Big Show with Kurt Angle in my example, same result.... only for those of you who feel that Big Show is kinda unworthy of being compared to the Undertaker.... Angle is a better comparison performance-wise, Big Show just came to my mind because of the size similarities with the Undertaker. And let's not forget how Mysterio got squashed in the end of that..... I say that Paul London would be a worthy Cruiserweight Champion in my eyes and he should spent some time with that and eventually be elevated onto the IC-level in the future, but there's time for that.
Michael Reed wrote:
OK...I am new to responding to these articles, but I felt I wanted to with this one! I have great respect for others opinions, so I will say great writing, interesting information, well thought out, and all-around fantastic feedback (maybe a couple are a bit over-reactive). I am not a die-hard wrestling fan, and even losing interest lately, but I do like the UT character, and like to see his entrance, his character moves, and his aura!! I read one article that pretty well summed it up for me...last week at the 'contract' signing...what was UT's response" If you can't remember it is because he did not say one word the entire time, yet got the biggest pop of the night....Orton did not come close with his speech AND actions!! Is that a successful character or what" I hope the WWE has UT win...everyone is correct in stating he is almost done, and he has done a tremendous amount for WWE (possibly the most loyal (big names running to WCW ring a bell"), he has been a consistent player, and is possibly the most successful character ever developed in WWE!! As for putting over new talent....he has done that (remember Cena, Rock") to a few, it worked at times, but not at others (not his fault) basically he does job when needed, so that is not a valid argument either!! So I have to ask....why not give him the streak" At least that!!!

two more things: one...kudos to Kirsty Quested for encouraging a friend to do what he wants in writing the article, and then to support and defend him after....nice to see! ====== and lastly.....Can you think of any more appropriate character to achieve a winning streak of (and think of the UT character with this number).....13!!!!!!!!!! (nuff' said)
spaceacejd wrote:
First let me say it was a great column. It was very insightful.

Now, on to business. I think they may squeeze one more year out of this streak, if this is not the last Wrestlemania for The Undertaker. It would be fitting for him to be 13-0. A lose for Orton may not be a bad thing with him possibly being out after Wrestlemania with his shoulder injury because you know if The Undertaker is going to lose, they would attempt to set up a re-match. A lose would push Orton to his breaking point because he "would have nothing left." When he came back, he could make his return by attacking The Undertaker and joining Smackdown! I just don't think The Undertaker's streak will end up broken. In what's been a illustrious career, not to mention one of loyalty, I don't think they will take this away from him. They never let him win the Rumble and he never even got a wiff at King of the Ring. It would just fit better with his character to have him win this year so if he is around next year, you could have him lose and start with an unlucky 13 gimmick. Anyway it shakes out, I agree that this really has the potential to be the match of the night, if not the year. They haven't put The Undertaker up against someone who really can bring out the best of him in a while. This is both men's opportunity to shine. I just hope Orton, if he is as injured as I've been hearing, can perform up to the potential we all know he has.
HBK 33 wrote:
This was a good article my hat goes off to you Dave Hanson for not only having the guts to post something so controversial, but to actually pull it off, and I must admit i was rather convinced while listening. But as convincing as that was I still believe that Undertaker should win at Wrestlemania for two main reasons:

1) What the hell would be the point in losing the greatest acheivement in WWE history"! If Triple H can marry his way into 10 title reigns then I'm damn sure that after all the hard work that Undertaker has done for WWE for over 10 years, he deserves to keep that. Nobody, AT ALL deserves a push like that, and the Undertaker certainly doesn't deserve the slap in the face that he would be given if he lost his winning streak.

2) Orton is already over enough for now. He shouldn't have been brought up from the Intercontinental Championship rankings that he belongs in until he's ready. Edge is the next up and coming superstar thats overlooked on Raw, and due to Triple H's hogging he isn't going to get the push that he deserves and has been waiting for, same with Christian and other superstars. And I think that the young or overlooked superstars should be drafted over to Smackdown and leave Triple H on the (what would be) inferior show with just him Spike, Snitsky and Heidenreich. What would be best for WWE on a whole would be to get rid of Triple H and then maybe they could improve their shows and finally be a challenge for TNA, because at the moment TNA is superior to WWE despite the potential WWE and most superstars have. I mean Mick Foley tried to get Orton over twice, if that didn't work, then neither will this, if anything people will get annoyed and either Orton's career or WwE's ratings will suffer, because in my opinion it would be nearly the same as the Montreal Screwjob.

In regards to what George said earlier about Mick Foley and The Rock putting people over, well yeah Foley does it and Ric Flair is probably best for it. The Rock doesn't put anyone over, the only person he put over in over in a year was Randy Orton and Batista in the Wrestlemania XX Handicap match where he didn't really put anyone over because whenever he was in he dominated until the numbers game began. And someone said that Shawn Michaels doesn't put anyone over, are we forgetting Edge" He is one of the only stars to actually put over Edge, and Edge should be the next big thing on Raw, not Orton. Edge needs to win the ladder match at Wrestlemania and then win the World Title, then Batista can be the top face on Raw and Edge the top heel. Orton can be top heel in the IC rankings for a bit until he is ready for the big time and then he can join the WHC rankings, Jericho should also turn heel and then have a rivalry with Beniot before winning the WHC. Sure, HBK doesn't put over many but at least he puts over some, HBK was another person in the list of people who have put Orton over. Unforgiven 2003" Orton beat Michaels. The list of people who tried to put over Randy Orton consists of: Shawn Michaels, Ric Flair, Mick Foley, The Rock, Stone Cold, Eric Bischoff, Mae Young,Harley Racem Jake the Snake, Beniot, Sergeant Slaughter, Kane, hell, even Stacy Kiebler!! If this isn't enough, he'll never get over. Now don't get me wong, I'm a fan of the heel Randy Orton, but I don't believe that ANYONE should EVER end the greatest record to date.
Esther T. 18 wrote:
Firstly I'd like to commend the entire oww community and the writer of this column. I don't agree with you're point of view but it takes guts to write an article like that.

I've been watching wwf/e since i was born. My whole family has. We're african but were living in sweden at that time and wrestling was the only thing we could identify with in a foreign country. Anyway, i was lucky enough to witness the first appearence in the wwf made by the undertaker. I have never seen an athlete in wrestling with that much presence. I have to give credit to Vince for coming up with such a great gimmick but most of the credit should go to Mark Callaway (undertaker).

The undertaker has given everything to the wwe and the undertaker character. He's worked hard despite injuries and has remained loyal even in the wake of so many wrestlers going "hollywood" (the rock,triple h, hogan). Most importantly he's managed to sustain a huge fanbase over the past fifteen years. No one has done that.

The way i see it, if Orton and Taker give a good, classic fight at wrestlemania 21, then Orton losing to taker would do more for his career than winning. I know Vince will never read this but please don't take the streak away from Taker. He deserves it and more importantly he's earned it.
TwistedArachnid wrote:
Very nice column, very nicely written, however, I feel Undertaker should keep his streak. Not only has he carried the company a few times, but he always continued to entertain no matter what. Taker always busted out the highflying moves, he always got into character and he played his character well. To have him lose to Randy Orton, would kill him. First of all, Taker took a long long journey to become respected. Mark even said in his first match, he got the crap kicked out of him to make sure he seriously want to be a wrestler. He was a face in his early career, then pushed himself to be a heel when he needed to be. He always put on a show for people. Orton on the other hand...I hear he's getting super egotistical backstage. Refusing to sign autographs, insulting fans, ignoring fans...Is this someone you want to lead the WWE and defeat Taker who as far as I know has been nice to his fans" Orton hasn't paid his dues yet either. As soon as he stepped into the WWE he started getting a push. He was thrown into WWE Raws biggest stable, put in matches where legends put him over, and won the belt at 24. Orton still has a long way left in his career, so let him build up something, but don't take away from Taker when he stayed loyal and carried the company many times. In fact when wCw had the NWO, the only reason I flipped the channel to WWF was for Taker. Also, on a random note...I say to finish Taker's career is at Survivor Series against someone (not Orton) in a Casket match. Have him lose and and maybe have a video of him saying he can finally rest in peace or something, but for God's sake to take away his Mania streak would be stupid. Especially to a whiney stuck up punk like Orton
RuthlessGattman wrote:
Ok, I read a few comments and I'd actually like to give my own thoughts.

First off, to that guy a few spaces above who complains about everything in wrestling, but worships Paul London.. I got two words for ya.. "seek help."

Now to the real topic. I'm not a huge Orton fan, but I don't hate him. I just never liked him as a wrestler. It was probably how he somehow became champion after breaking from Evolution and afte rlosing it, hasn't been at it since. I'm a total Benoit mark, but I understand the win-job situations in wrestling. I just thought they could do much better with Orton than what they did. As for Undertaker, I've always been a fan of his.

I may not be a long time fan like in the early 90s, but I have been able to read histories, see videos etc. I've been into wrestling since 1997 so the "attitude" era was in the making. I was fortunate to witness the prime of Undertaker's career (minus the Mankind feuds, like Boiler Room Brawl and Buried Alive.)

As for my opinion of who should win at WM21.. Undertaker. Not because of my dislike of Orton, but because, I feel that WWE should allow Undertaker to keep his streak after so many years of loyalty. His time is almost up, but not in a few weeks. Undertaker has plenty left in him for a more interesting feud, why waist his entire legacy on one guy who will probably daze out in a few years. Here's my analogy. Randy Orton is like a flame on a cigarette, when lit, he brings instant excitment. But eventually, the cigarette is burnt out and tossed away. Undertaker, however, is more like an Olympic torch. Lit for thousands of years and will most likely stay lit for a much longer time. Rather than having Undertaker bring his career to 12-1 for WMs and have people look back and go.. "well.. what happened at that one"" Lets keep his record maybe 14-0 or maybe 15-0 if he has enough in him and let people look back and go, "wow.. now there's a man who deserves his place in wrestling history."

Also.. I've been up for 23 hours now so if my article doesn't make since.. blame my insomnia.
Daniel Morrison wrote:
I for one would like to point out that any true wrestling fan should recognize that The Undertaker must not lose to Orton at Wrestlemania. If you look at all that the Undertaker has done for the WWE, to have him lose to Randy Orton would be a huge mistake. Randy Orton, who I admit has had some great ,matches against Shawn Michaels, Ric Flair and Mick Foley, but let's look at it this way" Who couldn't have a great match against these competitors. Michaels carried Sid and Diesel, Flair carried Sting and Foley carried anyone that could swing a chair, and all three carried Orton. If you ask me Orton is relatively overrated compared to wrestlers such as Matt Hardy, Shelton Benjamin and especially, Christian. To prove my point if you look back about a year and a half ago you had two wrestlers who were playing cocky mid-card heels, Orton and Christian. Both were very good at their roles, however, Orton went on to be world champion while Captain Charisma is still "lost in the shuffle". And why did Orton advance" (Hopefully this will prove how much some of you are contradicting yourselves) Because Triple H likes him. Personally I like Trips, say what you want but he makes the show better and is one of the best wrestlers, but he is the main reason Orton is where he is. By the way even HHH lost to Taker at Wrestlemania. So to blemish Undertakers record with a loss to a young lion who is already showing signs of age would be a huge mistake. Also, just because Orton is a third generation star doesn't mean he's commited, it just means it was easier to get his foot in the door, (what happened to Prince Iukea" He was third generation) A sign of commitment is when you are willing to lose every week and still be entertaining, Orton has lost maybe 2 matches since he went to Raw. Anyway thanks for letting me speak what is on my mind, ultimately it doesn't make a lick of difference but it was fun to write anyway.
Theddious Mayes Jr. wrote:
First of all let me state that there are alot of Taker fans as well as Orton fans. I myself don't like Orton for alot of reasons. Look at his ring preformance and his devilish acts backstage. Orton's in ring talent is boring. Punch, punch, punch, dropkick, backbreaker, RKO and thats it. Backstage Orton is a immature child. Taking dumps in Diva bags, "Forcing himself sexually on Amy Weber", Being to cocky backstage. Yet Orton is still on Raw talking mess. WWE wrestlers themselives have gone on to say that if it was them they would have been FIRED. This alone states that the only reason Orton is there is because of his Gradfather and Father.

Undertaker has been the most loyal person in the Backstage area. Other wrestlers look up to him for advice, and etc. Undertaker actually choice to go to Smackdown to help build up future wrestler but not let them run over him. Vince has NEVER had a problem out of UT. Yet they use him in very little ways. UT should not lose at Mania 21 cause it would be a slap in the face of UT and the fans. Look at the HBK and Razor Roman ladder match. Even though Razor Roman won people still praised HBK even though he LOST. Yes Orton can get pushed but that doesn't mean he has to win.
Luis Malave [pronounced Lou-is Ma-la-vay) wrote:
Now, quite frankly, I don't normally post replies to other people's articles, but, after seeing as many replies to this topic as I have, I decided to give my two cents on the piece.

My first statement that I am going to make is that I am an Undertaker mark. Yes, I said it. So I should be jumping to the rescue to the Undertaker's streak, shouldn't I" Well, if you thought that, for the most part, you're right.

Undertaker has the unbelieveable record of winning his first twelve matches at WrestleManias. In my opinion, that is a streak that no one should be allowed to touch. 12-0; it's just amazing for someone to reach that type of plateau. He is definitely a future WWE Hall of Famer, and truly one of the Top Ten Wrestling Personas of all time.

Moving onto Orton, I too shall sing his praises. He is the youngest WWE Champion of all time. He had been the longest reigning WWE Intercontinental Champion, if I am not mistaken, in the last 7 or so years. He is a third generation athelte with all the potential to rule the squared circle {ya know, I always wondered why they called it the squared circle, but...*shakes head*...not why we are here} for years to come.

So why must he right now be pushed"

Now alot of people I have spoken with have said, "Undertaker is like Hogan. They continue to try and put themself over by holding the younger guys back." But I ask you, wasn't it Hogan who dropped the World Championship to the Ultimate Warrior a few WrestleManias back" Wasn't it the Undertaker who was the main reason for Brock Lesnar's legitamacy as champion, after Brock beat 'Taker in that Hell in a Cell Match" Wasn't it Hulk Hogan who tried to elevate Billy Kidman back in the old WCW" Or what about the Undertaker helping put Kurt Angle over by allowing himself to get beat for the title at a Survior Series ["] not to many years back" That's what I thought. Nothing to be said. Undertaker has put people over, and I am sure he will put people over again. Having to lose his streak at WrestleMania is not needed. That's part of the Undertaker's legacy- just as winning the World Championship 17 times is Ric Flair's. There are plenty of other Pay-Per-Views Undertaker can lose to put someone over. And besides, Undertaker's WrestleMania streak is not only important to the legacy of the Undertaker, but to the legacy of WrestleMania itself. No other feat or streak is talked about as much as Undertaker's. The only one that I can even think of that is close is the Ironman Match at WrestleMainia 12 between Bret Hart [another one of my favorites] and Shawn Michaels.

Another thing I found iffy is the number of people responding with, "If Randy Orton beats the Undertaker, then these two can continue their feud and it is going to be interesting." No. I am sorry to say but, if I am not mistaken, isn't Randy Orton on RAW and the Undertaker on Smackdown!" How can a feud be managed between these two on different shows" Unless everyone knows something I don't know, where one or the other is jumping ship, this feud has the least likely of chances to last.

But anyway...to end this rant I have going on, I will say this: As much as I think the Undertaker shouldn't lose, I believe he shall [see, I told you you was partially right about thinking I was jumping to the rescue of the Undertaker's streak]. The WWE will continue pushing and molding the young guys they have, which, I have no problem with. I just wish this would be one streak that doesn't end [unlike Goldberg's, who I wished to end since it got popular].
Brian Betrrand wrote:
This column was actually awesome. My girlfriend and I are huge fans of the Dead Man (even though I'm a bigger fan than her :P) and at least you have brought it all out into perspective. I think the true reason why the Undertaker should lose is that he's getting a little bit old. But here's the thing - when The Undertaker decides to retire (which, by my estimate, isn't that far away) he should pass the torch the same way that Stone Cold, Hulk Hogan, and Mick Foley have done in the past. I think with the success that Randy Orton has had, he would be the perfect candidate for it. However, this article to me sounded like a very long Randy Orton promo. Sure you have all the respect for Taker but then you say he should lose. I don't know, I just don't like repitition. I believe if Undertaker doesn't pass the torch, he's going straight up to 20-0 before retiring. Now this may not seem possible but I think that he can do it.
Daniel Ameri wrote:
I think the reason randy should loose is the attitude very very cocky besides his not the right guy to finish undertaker there is someonelse first of all randy already is getting WAY to much push and dont get me wrong his great worker but he already achived alot and it doesnt kill him to loose besides he wins this its gonna be brock lesnar ALL OVER AGAIN his gonna get crazy thing larger then life and he might make outragous proposal such as more money less travling like brock lesnar and i tink the right guy in my opinion is mordecia HOPEFULLY he has improved and make a comeback and in few years when his a household name he beats undertaker and he takes his place as the new undertaker the pale rider mordecia there for now we have a new worker a new character
Ronevsorg wrote:
Frankly the Undertaker wrestles the same match since arriving in the WWF/E (with the exception of AmBadAss) so the only point of doing this is to A)re-introduce Randy as a Heel..or B) Orton wins and turns the Undertaker heel...AGAIN..BTW...Randy ain't the youngest world champion ever..are we forgetting about Tommy Rich's brief NWA rein at the age of 21"..or Lou Thesz also at the age of 21 winning on12/29/37 (That belt was simply called "The World Heavyweight Title"and He went on to unify title after title up to 1949) thats as bad as JR saying Shawn M. was the first triple crown winner.
Vijay Simon wrote:
Nice Article. But incorrectly named.. It should be "Randy needs a push". Back up the UT's losing at WM.

According to me, Randy is a mid carder whose been given too much of a push already, and he's really not lived up to the hype. That aweful finisher ( Diamond cutter rip off) is simply not convnicing enough to hold down taker.

Also Taker is a legend, he's done enough and deserves to hold his undefeated streak at WM. When all wrestlers were shuffling interpromotion TAKERS carried WWE, why the F*** should he lose at WM"" Just because its come to your notice that the streak is 12-0 Now thankfully 13-0.

I'm a avid Taker fan, but not baised though. Taker shall lose one day at WM but it would not be to a mid carder Orton who does not deserve what he's got till now.

His victory over HHH to win the title was simply to Erase Brock's Record ( we all know the history between WWE and Brock).

I know ur asking now then how would taker lose" Simple !! Taker takes a heel turn.

WWE can really push some top talent in logger heads with taker and build up the fued for atleast 6 months culminating at WM where taker loses. Taker disappears from sight for a few months returns back again as a face. I know this sounds kinda familiar, but there are always some formulas that always work and appeals to the fans.

Seriously if Austin was still on the active roster would you be convinced of Orton beating Austin "" Never...

Randy really needs a lot a polishing, the arrogant brat that he plays can never become a top carder. He needs to become a MAN and some persona change shall be needed. Then Orton shall be ready to really become the biggest dog in the yard.

And yes to end with TAKER shall always be a legend. God Bless you all.
XBrooklynnroseX wrote:
Noway Taker should lose at WM..He should be able to retire with No losses at WM..what would be the sense of him winning them all then losing the last one..and to cena" lmao.. not! He should have the title one more time before he retires..being a fan of his for over 15 yrs. I will be VERY sad to see him go..I wish flair and some of these other oldies would follow...

If you have any comments, reactions, rebuttles or thoughts on this column, feel free to send them to the email below,
If your email is intelligently written, they will be posted underneath this messege..
We at OnlineWorldofWrestling want to promote all points of view, and that includes YOURS.




© 2007, Black Pants, Inc. All other trademarks are property of their respective holders.

[ CHAT ROOM | FLASH | SEARCH | FORUMS | DOWNLOADS | TAPES | WRESTLINKS | GUESTBOOK | THANK YOU | CONTACT ]