Wrestling Forum banner

1 - 20 of 42 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
314 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Taker won the Royal Rumble that year so its easy to set up just had him say he going after the WWE Championship instead.

Taker/Cena at that Mania woulda had been huge cause thats back in the peak of the super Cena days and fans would saw him a legit threat to the streak. coule have booked it as Title vs Streak.

as for Taker/Batista that was a great match but you could have always do that match later on but the right choice would had been doing Taker/Cena at that Mania its the biggest match they could have done.
 

·
The Fastest of the Fastest of Jamaican Sprinters
Joined
·
4,418 Posts
The timing wasn't right in 2007, because WWE was still solidifying Cena as the undisputed top guy. That's why he was fed the parade of veterans and reliable workers (Jericho, Angle, HHH, Edge, Michaels) between 2005 and 2007. Losing to Undertaker would have sent things a bit sideways.

Now, the match still should have happened before their non-match in 2018.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
314 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
The timing wasn't right in 2007, because WWE was still solidifying Cena as the undisputed top guy. That's why he was fed the parade of veterans and reliable workers (Jericho, Angle, HHH, Edge, Michaels) between 2005 and 2007. Losing to Undertaker would have sent things a bit sideways.

Now, the match still should have happened before their non-match in 2018.
they still could had Taker gone over and do the rematch at Summerslam where Cena wins.that way taker keeps the streak and Cena goes over at a later date could of worked.
 

·
The Babyface of WF
Joined
·
14,162 Posts
No it made more sense for Cena to work through HBK who has been at the top before and had a legendary status of his own, Cena got the rub from Hunter the year prior so it was fitting HBK would follow suit then after.

Taker/Batista was hyped and more or less this was more about The Deadman winning the World Championship again for the first time since 2002 why would anyone rush the FOTC to end the streak at a premature time?

Cena peaked in the PG era actually, 2007 by then he was still growing as a performer.
 

·
The Fastest of the Fastest of Jamaican Sprinters
Joined
·
4,418 Posts
they still could had Taker gone over and do the rematch at Summerslam where Cena wins.that way taker keeps the streak and Cena goes over at a later date could of worked.
Again, that does not align with their goals in 2007. They were hell-bent on turning Cena into their next Hogan and wanted to protect him at all costs. Hogan went six years before finally losing at WrestleMania; it wasn't time for Cena's run as the unstoppable new face to be derailed, which losing to Undertaker would have been.
 

·
Harvester of Sorrow
Joined
·
12,411 Posts
Looking at it now, Undertaker Vs. John Cena at Wrestlemania was just never meant to be. Between Undertaker wrestling Shawn Michaels and Triple H twice, and John Cena wrestling The Rock twice. The two of them just never seemed to have the chance to do it. Perhaps they could have saved it for one of the other big Four PPVs but I guess they always just thought of it as a Wrestlemania feud.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
From 2006 to 2008 they were really trying to get the STF over as a legitimate finishing move. Taker tapping out is a big NO.
 

·
Waiting for Kawato
Joined
·
1,096 Posts
Too early. Beating Cena at that point would have been a bad decision, and the streak was only really just beginning to become a thing so ending it at that point would have meant far less.
 

·
Is a Snit Head
Joined
·
22,215 Posts
It would have been a huge match but it would have been a match where WWE wouldn't let either guy lose. Which is the only reason they didn't book it I think.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,973 Posts
The best time to do it was at WM30 imo, but they obviously went with Taker/Lesnar.

At WM30 you could have had Cena/Taker for the streak, Orton/HHH/Bryan for the WWE Title and Lesnar/Batista, and Wyatts/Shield and you'd still have a good WM with a strong Yes movement story going alongside Cena/Taker as well as a dream match with Lesnar/Batista and a Shield/Wyatts match that was on fans wishlist at the time (yes they had the EC match but a six men tag at WM was deserving imo).

I believe they were planning it at WM32 (without the streak) but then Cena got injured and they brought in Shane.

WM33 is another place they could have done it but obviously without the streak, which made it less exciting and big but I would if still preferred it to the match with Reigns tbh.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
475 Posts
The timing wasn't right in 2007, because WWE was still solidifying Cena as the undisputed top guy. That's why he was fed the parade of veterans and reliable workers (Jericho, Angle, HHH, Edge, Michaels) between 2005 and 2007. Losing to Undertaker would have sent things a bit sideways.

Now, the match still should have happened before their non-match in 2018.
How long does it take them, really? He had already ran through JBL, Jericho, Angle, Edge, Triple H clean in 05 and 06.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,527 Posts
It would have been huge but Vince wanted Michaels to give Cena a Wrestlemania classic match Mr Wrestlemania style. And while WM23 is not Shawn Michaels best Wrestlemania match, I would argue that it's the best in ring match Cena ever had at Wrestlemania. So legacy wise I think WM 23 was still important for Cena and I don't think Cena/Taker could have had a better quality match than Cena/HBK in 2007.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
804 Posts
Nah, he had match of the year with Batista that mania also Batista was as big deal as Cena at that time. He had regained his WHC title that he never lost so the steaks were higher too there as Batista have never lost a world title match prior.

The feud between the two was great too. Two big tattooed alpha males going at it at mania.

the only thing that should have been different was that the match should have been the main event .

Cena- HBK was nowhere as good feud especially when HBK lost. Only if HBK was going to go over it made sence for that match to main event
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,962 Posts
Undertaker never liked Cena. This match was never going to happen. Aside from Cena's earlier run, Undertaker never actually gave him any rub. Cena is salty about that. Undertaker didn't respect him or so I heard. Why do you think Taker squashed him? It was awesome. Loved watching Cena get shit on.
 

·
Used to be a Dreamer, Dreamin' of a Fire
Joined
·
6,547 Posts
Undertaker never liked Cena. This match was never going to happen. Aside from Cena's earlier run, Undertaker never actually gave him any rub. Cena is salty about that. Undertaker didn't respect him or so I heard. Why do you think Taker squashed him? It was awesome. Loved watching Cena get shit on.
I've never heard of Undertaker not respecting Cena and I seriously doubt this.

1. Undertaker respects almost all of the top guys. He's a wrestlers wrestler. If he sees a guy work hard, get into a top spot and be a reliable and loyal WWE Company man while selling tickets and doing business then 9 times out of 10 Taker respects that guy

2. I just don't see any way Undertaker would have worked with a young Cena and given him that decent of a feud early in his career if he didn't like Cena.

3. Some might say politics soured Taker on Cena but Taker used politics and pulled rank often enough himself

Yeah doubt on these rumors, which is also the first time I'm hearing them
 
1 - 20 of 42 Posts
Top