Page 1 of 2
Maybe Wade Barrett is the man to end the streak ...
Ok, maybe it's the blind British patriotism coming through in me, but Wade Barrett as a man to end The Undertaker's unbeaten Wrestlemania streak isn't the worst idea I've ever heard.
I'm sure many of you reading this will be shaking your head in disgust, a few of you may be reaching to the 'back' button in your internet browser, but let's give this a bit of thought. Yes, there is a rather large argument to be said for Taker's streak to be left intact, to cement his legacy. But as Vince McMahon I'm sure knows better than anyone – a legacy isn't going to make much money in the long term.
Undertaker's recent spate of injuries has backed WWE creatively into a corner. Heck, there's a chance he may not even make it. Even if he does, this is probably his penultimate, if not his last Wrestlemania. If the rumours about a Barrett vs Taker showdown are true, it's a little surprising since a match against Cena at the biggest night of the year has never been done before. Maybe the fact that they aren't doing it suggests their doubts about Taker making it – to build to a Cena vs Taker dream feud before one (if not both) missing out due to injury would be near suicidal. So in the sense of a safe option, a match against Barrett makes sense because it's not going to be the draw like the Michaels match was last year. If Taker can't make it – the show can still go on.
But what for Barrett. The question you're all asking is how can Wade Barrett beat The Undertaker? Well, on paper, he can't. But isn't that the point? A match against Cena would be great – but one in which neither gain anything by winning. Undertaker wins – he's still unbeaten, Cena wins – he's still unstoppable. Nothing changes. If Barrett wins – he's elevated beyond measure. You would be using the streak to elevate someone else – as I said before, a legacy won't sell. But Barrett off the back of a win against Undertaker at Wrestlemania – is a megastar. Within 18 months of his debut too.