[JoseBxNYC]

Every big star has won it twice or more

Hulk Hogan- 1990, 1991
Shawn Michaels- 1995, 1996
Stone Cold- 1997, 1998, 2001

The Rock has won it once and so has Cena. One of them will win it and it will The Rock since Cena will have plenty of chances in the future.

[GillbergReturns]

Originally Posted by Starbuck

No. I'm sorry but no lol. After everything that has happened these past 4 years and especially after the vicious nature of the 27 and 28 matches, to have a normal wrestling match after that would be so stupid. There is no different type of match. It won't work. Taker can't lose to a Rock Bottom after wrestling a nice little match after kicking out of sledgehammer shots, a million chair shots, countless Pedigress, countless SCM, a fucking Tombstone. It doesn't work like that and they can't just wipe the slate clean like that either. Lesnar vs. Taker will continue the story that you literally have to kill the Undertaker at Wrestlemania to beat him. The standard has been set over the past 4 years. Rock vs. Taker is the absolute wrong call. Brock and Cena are the only 2 matches Taker has left at Mania. They should keep Rock away from him. He isn't needed for that spot and quite honestly, he doesn't fit in either. Keep him with the Cena's/Punk's/whoevers where he can work the type of match he's expected to work with this return. The big entertainment once in a lifetime style main events that suit him down to the ground. Throwing him in there with the streak would do more harm than good.

And this is off topic but since we're talking about Rock lol, I was justing catching up on The Newsroom there and was pleasantly surprised to see both Rock and Triple H get a name drop. It was about Bin Laden getting killed and one of the characters thought Rock's tweet was about him coming back to 'lay the Smackdown on Triple H!' I lol'd, ha.

It was a Hell in the Cell match. I get that Brock Lesnar can create the illusion that the streak is in jeopardy more so than ever and do that without 20 chair shots, and a shot with a sledgehammer but after him nobody else can accomplish that. Not Austin, not Rock, not Cena, not Triple H or anybody else. Point being things are going to have to be taken down a notch because in a regular matches you just can't do the things that are allowed in No DQ or Hell in the Cell match unless the ref is down for a half hour. There will come a time when things have to go back to a more traditional match should the streak go past Lesnar.

By what means is Cena more aggressive than the Rock. Perhaps if he turned heel by the time he faces Taker maybe you have a point but as a face he's very close to a straight up match as well. I can see that they might have him go Piper against Bret Hart and have him struggling with just how far he'll go to obtain this victory but it is going to be alot closer to a traditional match than 20 chair shots and kicking out of a sledgehammer shot.

[Hazzard]

Originally Posted by Rock316AE

That was amazing

[#Mark]

Anyone else excited for that Rock/Cena special tonight?

[shawnmichaelsisgod]

Originally Posted by Rock316AE

Wow this is awesome

I never really wanted this match to happen or as much as thought about it happening for WM29 or WM30.
But after that i think im changing my mind

[bme]

- Rock/Punk at RR
- Rock beats Punk
- Cena wins rumble (the rumble winner needs to main event WM)
- Cena/Rock 2

Seriously, Cena needs to turn heel either before RR or before WM.
The only problem with Cena turning heel is that it leaves Punk as the top babyface, and if they go with Cena(heel)/Taker for WM30 Punk damn sure ain't main eventing.

[Starbuck]

Originally Posted by Rock316AE

Nobody said that it's needs to be a normal wrestling match, but it also doesn't need to be a brawl, that's wrestling, you're not working a years of long term booking unless it's the same guys, now with HHH out of the picture, you got a different opponent, an opponent that can be better than HHH, more effective than him with a bigger chance to beat and match Taker's style, I'm not talking about Rock or Brock or any specific person. Just the context, from what you said, HHH and HBK are the best of all time and because Taker beat them in that type of match, nobody else can do it. Let's take this for example, because we're mostly talking in the borders of kayfabe land here, Chael Sonnen took arguably the GOAT in MMA Anderson Silva to the limit like nobody did before him, just killing him for 4 and half rounds, in a desperate move Silva was able to win the fight via Submission, now if another fighter, with different style and better skills, say Jon Jones, goes in and beat Silva in 2 rounds, does that mean that Silva was unbeatable because he fought one person for 4 rounds? no. Just means that he fought different styles and different caliber of opponent. Same thing with wrestling if you want the story to be fresh and exciting and not the same brawl every year with the predictable nearfalls and kickouts, nobody is more credible than The Rock today, a guy who beat Cena clean after 8 years. Don't get me wrong, I can get your view on this subject and personally I would much rather watch Rock/Brock than Rock/Taker, but that doesn't mean Taker suddenly became a repetitive one style guy. You're not giving these workers enough credit for their tremendous mind and ability to lay out a match IMO.

It's not about the opponents/previous opponents being the GOAT or anything even remotely close to that. It's about how much further things have to be taken every year in order to get Taker to stay down. It's character based. It's all character based because the character of the opponent is linked to their credibility. HBK is a performer/wrestler etc etc. He tried to wrestle Taker twice and failed. HHH is a fighter/brawler. He tried it his way and failed twice. Both HHH and HBK are 2 of the best in their respective fields not to mention their legend and all their accolades. If Shawn Michaels can't beat The Undertaker at Wrestlemania in a wrestling match, The Rock/Cena/Brock sure as hell won't be able to do it. If Triple H can't beat The Undertaker at Wrestlemania in a brutal fight, well, he may have failed but to your point, that leaves the door open for somebody else to come along and try their hand at being even more brutal than HHH was willing to be in order to get the job done. Enter Brock Lesnar. The common thread between the HHH/HBK/Taker story arc was respect. The closing image on them as brothers in arms is a powerful one. Brock Lesnar doesn't have that same respect. HHH is ruthless but even he showed signs of mercy in both matches. Brock Lesnar won't. He's he perfect opponent.

It's also not about Taker or anybody else becoming a one style guy. The evolution of the streak matches is all you have to look at. I don't see how you can say that reverting back to a less brutal type of match makes sense tbh. It doesn't. Rock beating Cena gives him credibility, that along with the fact that he's The Rock. But streak matches aren't just any matches. You have to have that element of believability that the opponent has the tools to end the streak and can then go on and end it. It would be fine for them to continue the less brutal type of match had 27 and 28 not gone down the way they did. But after those matches the message is clear. You must literally KILL the Undertaker to beat him at Wrestlemania. Not outwrestle him. Not outsmart him. Not out-entertain him. Not any of that because he simply will not die unless somebody ends up pulling the trigger for him. That's the story of the streak matches now. To change that would be to undo all the tremendous work of the last 4 years and to put quite the dent in one of the best story arcs WWE has probably ever constructed. For that reason, Brock/Taker is the way to go with Cena/Taker at Mania 30. Rock isn't even a part of the equation. Unless he's willing to change from his current legend/icon/entertainer persona into a vicious merciless fighter, something that he's never been btw, then it won't and can't work.

[The-Rock-Says]

When the hell has Cena ever been a merciless fighter? You're confusing me with this stance on Cena. When I look at Cena and his matches, I never think "Fighter/brawler".

[bme]

Agree with Starbuck.


"You have only one thing left and it's the streak's and When it dies, you die"
"and if i can't end it, then i'll die trying"

Triple H became the measuring stick, he was thought of as the man who was cold and vicious enough to end the streak.

When Triple H accepted the rematch he knew he'd have to end the career of the Undertaker to defeat him, something he wasn't willing to do the year prior.
Triple H showed compassion and it cost him once, that wasn't gonna happen a second time.

Taker barely scrapped by Triple H at WM 27, only to come back stronger than ever and soundly defeat him.
Taker's next opponent better come with what Triple H had and more.

[Clique]

What Starbuck is saying about Lesnar fitting into the story after HHH and HBK makes complete sense to the brutality level that has been raised in Undertaker's last few WrestleMania matches. With Lesnar physically dominating Shawn and Hunter they may call in the reinforcements (aka The Undertaker) to handle the beast.

What I don't see is how Cena is more of a fighter than The Rock. Rock has shown in the past that he can brawl with the best of them - Austin, HHH, Foley, etc. He can be brutal as evidence shows in the "I Quit" match with Mankind. Rock can bring that kick ass edge if he needed to. A feud with Undertaker could and I think it would prompt Rock to change his attitude to be more serious and aggressive because now his character wants more than anything to prove that he is the GOAT. The intensity Rock brought in the promos with Cena looked like he wanted to chop Cena's head off at times. He can bring that same intensity to the obstacle that is The Streak.

btw, I'd take Rock, Cena, or Lesnar vs. Undertaker. I'm sure each option would be a fantastic main event for a WrestleMania.