PDA

View Full Version : WrestleMania Without The Undertaker



kiddstudd
01-26-2011, 10:01 PM
This kinda saddens me when I think about it, but I was wondering, what wrestlemania will be like after The Undertaker finally retires?

WoodenBulldozer
01-26-2011, 11:11 PM
The undefeated Cena streak begins

Saiga
01-26-2011, 11:20 PM
Before Undertaker was part of WrestleMania, WWE was had large crowds from 80,000 - 90,000 people because they had all the big stars in their prime. They were doing good business. Nowadays with UFC stealing wrestling fans, it won't help the numbers of audience participation once the Deadman retires ...

Perhaps they may bring back Mordecai and make him undefeated at WrestleMania ;) ;)

As for Cena's undefeated streak, his short Mania streak ended @ WrestleMania 24 and I popped a bottle of champagne afterwards to celebrate :)

evilgenius780
01-27-2011, 12:33 AM
Mr T!!! 2-0 so far

The Brown One
01-27-2011, 12:39 AM
Like Saiga said, the old WMs before Taker could draw big(if its true, because I recall them not getting bigger arenas than 5000 people) since the favorite superstars were in their prime. The same thing will happen again, with the current midcarders in their prime soon, and that will draw.

ToWhomItConcerns.
01-27-2011, 12:51 AM
WM without Taker = me not watching...especially since Shawn is gone.

i could do w/o 1 of them but both? nope.

peppermill25
01-27-2011, 01:57 AM
I agree, it wouldnt be the same. I think another streak would be cool, but nobody will ever match Taker. Nobody fits the bill eather. They also watered down WM by making a Money in the bank PPV. WTF

The Brown One
01-27-2011, 02:00 AM
Its expected Taker will be at WM this year, so no worries ToWhomItConcerns.

Lowki
01-27-2011, 05:31 AM
Like Saiga said, the old WMs before Taker could draw big(if its true, because I recall them not getting bigger arenas than 5000 people) since the favorite superstars were in their prime. The same thing will happen again, with the current midcarders in their prime soon, and that will draw.

WM1-19,121
WM2-40,085 (combined) over three arenas.
WM3-93,173
wm4-18,165
WM5-18,946
WM6-67,678

Streak Begins:
WM7-16,158
WM8-62,167
WM9-16,891

No undertaker:
WM10-18,065

Returns:
WM11-16,305
WM12-18,853
WM13-18,197 (co main event)
WM14-19,028
WM15-20,276

No undertaker:
WM16-19,776

Returned again:
WM17-67,925
WM18-68,237
WM19-54,097
WM20-20,000(co main event)
WM21-20,193
WM22-17,159
WM23-80,103(comain event)
WM24-74,635(comain event)
WM25-72,744
WM26-72,219(comain event)

The biggest reason for constant 60+ attendences now is that they are in bigger arenas. They haven't always been a billion dollar company so back in the day they had to use smaller arenas. All were over 15,000 though.

The Brown One
01-27-2011, 06:40 AM
WM1-19,121
WM2-40,085 (combined) over three arenas.
WM3-93,173
wm4-18,165
WM5-18,946
WM6-67,678

Streak Begins:
WM7-16,158
WM8-62,167
WM9-16,891

No undertaker:
WM10-18,065

Returns:
WM11-16,305
WM12-18,853
WM13-18,197 (co main event)
WM14-19,028
WM15-20,276

No undertaker:
WM16-19,776

Returned again:
WM17-67,925
WM18-68,237
WM19-54,097
WM20-20,000(co main event)
WM21-20,193
WM22-17,159
WM23-80,103(comain event)
WM24-74,635(comain event)
WM25-72,744
WM26-72,219(comain event)

The biggest reason for constant 60+ attendences now is that they are in bigger arenas. They haven't always been a billion dollar company so back in the day they had to use smaller arenas. All were over 15,000 though.

Thankyou for taking the time to do research. I appreciate it. I do have a feeling though, that WM's current success is due partly to Taker's streak being on the line. If WWE doesn't have a Taker match(lets just assume they don't for a second), then they must pull out something big out of their ass, like they do every year, to not disappoint fans.

C0ptje
01-27-2011, 06:45 AM
WM without Taker = me not watching...especially since Shawn is gone.

i could do w/o 1 of them but both? nope.

I will still watch Wm ;D
i agree it will be different if Undertaker wont be there, but there are still great talents...

Goldust22
01-27-2011, 08:52 AM
Hell be at Mania even if he beats someone in a squash match (id argue tht would be Miz if he has dropped the belt by then because of his comments about being underfeated at Mania). I still say 2011 rumble winner will be Undertaker.

Spear-O-Matic
01-27-2011, 12:03 PM
Hell be at Mania even if he beats someone in a squash match (id argue tht would be Miz if he has dropped the belt by then because of his comments about being underfeated at Mania). I still say 2011 rumble winner will be Undertaker.

Hate to burst your bubble, but RR winner is going to be Punk because they want a Punk v. Orton WM Main Event, and Punk winning is the only way to set him up for that. But Mania without Taker? I could live with it, especially when I understand that many wrestlers retire younger than the Taker, so get ready because the streak probably will only go to 20 and then he'll disappear just as myseriously as he appeared.

CobraNightviper
01-27-2011, 12:15 PM
taker will be part of wrestlemania for a long time even if he's not wrestling just a cameo or whatever but if this is going to be the case then some one does need to start a new streak.

SaberToothTigerz
01-27-2011, 12:50 PM
taker will be part of wrestlemania for a long time even if he's not wrestling just a cameo or whatever but if this is going to be the case then some one does need to start a new streak.

is it rly needed?
no one has the right to take taker's spot
this isnt like jack swagger and kurt angle
the undertaker can be immitated by a few but never duplicated

el gabo
01-27-2011, 01:33 PM
Taker or no Taker, Wrestlemania is still the Mac Daddy of them all. People will watch regardless. Does the streak draw? Other than Shawn, no one else really had a chance. So the streak doesn't draw, its Undertaker and his performance.

el gabo
01-27-2011, 01:37 PM
By the way, has anyone noticed that is says Super Memember instead of member?????

HeelTurn
01-27-2011, 01:40 PM
By the way, has anyone noticed that is says Super Memember instead of member?????

Yeah I noticed that, must have us confused with keyboard playing cats.

el gabo
01-27-2011, 01:47 PM
Yeah I noticed that, must have us confused with keyboard playing cats.

Great sig. Would be even greater if it were the WHC.

K2Jelly
01-27-2011, 01:52 PM
I'd prefer not to see Taker at Wrestlemania this year and it's not because of how lackluster his performance will be just coming back from injury. It's because I don't think there's enough time for him to start a feud with anyone in the WWE right now no matter how logical it is. The most logical in my opinion is Wade Barrett and although I would like to see a Corre vs Taker feud, I would want it to be after Wrestlemania so the feud doesn't have to be rushed.

el gabo
01-27-2011, 02:18 PM
I'd prefer not to see Taker at Wrestlemania this year and it's not because of how lackluster his performance will be just coming back from injury. It's because I don't think there's enough time for him to start a feud with anyone in the WWE right now no matter how logical it is. The most logical in my opinion is Wade Barrett and although I would like to see a Corre vs Taker feud, I would want it to be after Wrestlemania so the feud doesn't have to be rushed.

You make a great point. First of all, his injuries have affected his in-ring ability greatly, simply put: he doesn't move as well as he used to. Second, there may not be enough time to build up a feud. The whole Kane story got really boring (and they fucked it up even more with Paul Bearer) and Wade Barrett would be the other option and I think he's already in a program with Big Show. The best reason to have Taker in WM would be to put over a newbie like Barrett.