If you could change the outcome of one match what would it be & why.....?

First topic message reminder :

Thought about this a few times & I've always thought of The Montreal Screwjob but today I'd probably say Michaels vs Taker @ Mania 26 for the simple fact that Michaels would still be active wrestler today....

See, I disagree that Taker wouldnt go against someone who wasnt top name, I think hes one of the few who would be happy to do business with a guy who he could give some rub too, especially if the rumours of it being offered to Orton a few years back are true. It would obviously have to be really well done to work, and it falls down there as you cant trust the WWE to pull of a good story all the time.

Especially as its fighting for defeat. Its guys who can be propelled to the next level, and ones that have been around a little to prove some longevity of interest and potential to move up and stay there. Whereas ADR came in too quick, and no forethought was used at all, Bryan is only improving and has had good feuds at various different levels and different types of wrestler. His popularity levels have been strong in various roles, and a big feud like that could make him, break him through to the top top level.

Similarly, Ziggler. Theres a way of writing a feud that makes sense, and maybe that feeling Taker might lose is more likely to be there if you think its someone WWE want to put over as a new massive star, rather than a Lesnar or Cena who don't need the Streak. Like Orton back then, I think just having a feud with someone like Taker is a massive boost. Plus Ziggler and Bryan have the energy and selling ability to make it an easy match for Taker. Im not saying its the only way to make it interesting, those marquee matches are still fantastic and easy money for the WWE, but it would be interesting, and the kind of thing WWE could do if they were interested in building the next generations of actual superstars.

The Sting rumour is up with strength again, Sting does seem to talk like he really wants it to happen, and hes clearly not the only one. Could see that being the one he retires on.

I don't think Taker would have any problem putting the streak on the line against someone like Daniel Bryan Danielson or Dolph Ziggler but I can't see WWE booking someone like that in one of the biggest matches at Wrestlemania. They're looking for marquee matches that will help deliver 7 figure pay per view buyrates, therefore however many more Wrestlemania matches the Undertaker has in him will be against a major name.


I'd love to see Sting face Taker at Wrestlemania, the match itself would be secondary to the lead up and the spectacle of two absolute legends facing off on the grand stage. I'm just not sure if Sting will ever join WWE.

Oh 100%, buyrates win the battle of why WWE does what, and Lesnar v Taker sells more than Bryan v Taker.

But how would a casual fan find it believable that someone like Ziggler or Bryan could possibly end the streak when iconic superstars like Michaels and HHH couldnt get the job done? Ziggler and Bryan would have to be built to such a strong level where the casual fan would see them as a genuine threat to ending the streak. The thing with Orton is that when he faced Taker at Mania, Taker hadnt really faced anyone of any real significance. Orton was the Legend Killer, this hot as hell kid who was the youngest World Champion of all time. Did he need the rub? Turns out he didnt do too badly without it. But facing Taker at Mania definately wasnt the making of Orton. Since Orton he faced Edge and Batista who were both World Champions at the time, and HBK and HHH. All of these guys made the streak match the focal point of Mania so to go back to facing a midcarder now would be a huge step back in terms of being a draw, and in terms of being a believable, evenly matched bout.

I'd agree with that, business decisions over it would be won by the legends and the money of casual fans.

I think it would be worth it for an upper midcarder if they invested into really telling a story and made it worthwhile, which of course they dont do as often. It could be built to be believable.

I'm just saying that for the sake of the product it would be a very good way to get over these new stars, not new in terms of just making steps but new to being real stars. I think it would be better long term TV, and have more long term effects than just putting Taker vs a Lesnar or similar because they can. But im an invested fan, not a casual fan who will just watch 'Mania, so I want different things from it.

And to a certain extent Taker will always bring in people with The Streak gimmick/thing, and its not at a stage where hes the main event and only draw for casual fans. What with Cena, The Rock, Lesnar, HHH and possibly Stone Cold all likely to be around Mania's for the next few years then Taker versus isnt the only draw, and as such could be a little less of a high profile name against him.

Just look at it now. I bet a casual fan could believe Ryback could end it, yet hes no HBK or HHH. Its all about selling the story.

I definitely agree with your point, dont get me wrong, the money for Taker v 'Marquee Name' is easy and a massive draw, a moneymaker. But it would just be interesting to see them threaten a new guy could take it, that there was strength in the current roster as well as the legends, and build someone up with such a big story. It would do them no harm in defeat. Think its just a touch of long term thinking rather than short term.

Could WWE be trusted to put together a long term, well thought out storyline to push an upper mid-carder into a position worthy of challenging for the streak? More than likely they'd botch it entirely.

Exactly Y2D2, its all good and well giving someone a massive push but what happens if they take the streak then 2 years later being FE'd and ending up in TNA. 20 years of the streak is then tarnished by being broken by a guy who didnt go on to be anything special. Which is exactly why im against a youngster taking it, its too much of a risk. Id much prefer it to go to someone already established, it'd be more legendary. A bit like how no one could beat Ivan Drago until the great Rocky Balboa took him down!

Who's the wrestling equivalent of Rocky Balboa then?

I dont want the guy to win it, just to get the rub from the feud! And like I said, it would depend on WWE writing a good story, which we know is a task for them.

Is there a man who can take it? Punk? Ryback could be your man if he is still hot in one or two years, whilst Orton could come again into the big time. The only other full time guy is Cena, at least in WWE's eyes

theundisputedY2D2 wrote:
Who's the wrestling equivalent of Rocky Balboa then?

I'd say someone like Mick Foley
Long time mid-carder, could take a beating like no one else, and then (almost) outta nowhere beats The Rock for the title.

theundisputedY2D2 wrote:
Who's the wrestling equivalent of Rocky Balboa then?

I'd say Shawn Michaels, not the biggest but both had the hearts of lions

Rocky could beat anyone because of that punch, Shawn could beat anyone because of that kick

Retired Rocky fought his one time protege Tommy Gunn in a street fight, retired Shawn Michaels fought his one time protege Triple H in a street fight

For the record, a match I'd have changed the outcome of...

Hulk Hogan vs Roddy Piper at the War to Settle the score, this was the set up for the first WrestleMania, they did an absolutely fantastic job, Piper attacking Lauper and Mr T getting involved and all the interviews after it, check it out on YouTube, its in 4 parts but its awesome.

I know things where different in those days and Titles didn't change hands but after how vile Piper was to Mr T and Cyndi Lauper I always felt what would make WrestleMania perfect would have been if Hogan beat Piper to reclaim his WWF Championship

The initial match at The War to Settle the Score ended in DQ before Piper attacked everyone, like I say it was done well but the emotions which where highly charged in MSG would have been through the roof if Piper had actually took the belt from the Hulkster, I also feel it would have been a huge Mania moment even way back then if Hogan finally overcame Piper and all his croanies, with Superfly and Mr T on the otherside there would still have been need for Ali to be the special enforcer

This angle really kick started the Rock n Wrestling era, this wasn't a failure, infact it was one of the best and most important angles the WWF/E ever did so its not like changing it could have had a hugely positive effect on the business, that happened, I'm just musing how much grander it could have been should Hogan have taken the belt off Piper in the Main Event of WrestleMania

Mine would have been the one where Cena got fired after not assisting Barrett beat Orton.
I'd have liked to have seen him turn at that point and fully join the Nexus or the actual firing storyline have more legs and WWE show some balls in keeping him off air for a few weeks, unfortunately though they panicked at the thought of the Cena fans turning off and brought him back immediately.

I'd have liked to have seen Cena help Barrett too, I'd not have turned Cena fully fledged heel at that point but as a man of his word he'd have been compelled to stick to the deal he agreed to and helped Barrett, then over the next few months we could have seen him conflicted with his decision making, his moral compass, then he could have either broke away from Barrett after finding a loophole or could have turned fully fledged heel after making It look like he was finally going to break free

I'd change the outcome of Kurt Angle's open challenge on Smackdown in June 2002 and have somebody, anybody other than John Cena answer it.

good choice that man!!!

What would the WWE have been like Cena-less

Kay Fabe wrote: good choice that man!!!

What would the WWE have been like Cena-less

What a fantastic question!
Create that thread!

I actually think Cena was alright at that point, he was good in the feud with JBL, he started getting boring in 2006-7 and hasn't really covered since then when he started getting the superman push.

I would change the outcome of the Punk-Cena match at MITB 2011 just to see what the Chicago crowd would have done...

RVD winning at ECWs ONS probably would've been a better example