Wrestlemania 28: Why the Undertaker's Streak Must End in Order to Truly Retire
There are some thing's in life that you can count on. You're going to pay taxes, you're going to die, and The Undertaker's undefeated streak at Wrestlemania will not be stopped.
Not even Mr. McMahon's over-inflated ego would let this happen. It's simply too legendary. Only an immortal man could go 19 Wrestlemania's without a loss.
But the problem is this, The Undertaker is looking more mortal by the days. The WWE Universe isn't stupid. If you're out as consistently as The Undertaker, even the kids can put two and two together.
The WWE has even publicly stated that The Undertaker is injured. But wait, he's a DEADMAN, he's IMMORTAL. Dead men don't get hurt, they just come back for some more right?
The problem with The Undertaker always winning at Wrestlemania is that he can't just retire right after winning, he has to come back, he just buried his opponent, he is still alive, and strong.
At least according to the WWE Universe's thinking.
We may know that he is injured, but from a story-line point of view, it wouldn't make sense to keep him off TV forever.
Everybody is expecting him to come back, because he just won at Wrestlemania, the deadman hasn't been buried yet, and how do you bury a deadman anyways?
Now look at it this way, what if he lost at Wrestlemania?
I know it's a thought that nobody wants to think, but really, it's the only logical (or not so logical) way of ending his career.
If The Undertaker lost at Wrestlemania, he would have been "buried" by somebody, he would REST IN PEACE, in the words of his opponents.
Sure it may not be as impressive, but c'mon, what other options does he have? He is just going to have keep on going and going till he finally loses anyways. Besides, from a business point of view, it makes sense.
Whoever defeats The Undertaker, pending the WWE doesn't screw up, will be an immediate main-eventer. It's a rare luxury the WWE has right now, a free pass to make a new solidified main eventer.
Obviously this is just wrong on so many levels, but when you think about it, it really is the only idea that makes sense.
The Undertaker retires, which he really needs, and the WWE just got themselves a new main-eventer.
And if you lose respect for The Undertaker because of one loss at Wrestlemania, then you are not a real fan. Because the Undertaker has given so much to this business, and he should not be remembered for one match he lost.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?