Guest RetroRob215 Posted March 3, 2002 Report Posted March 3, 2002 Remember during the Undertaker-HHH feud leading to their match at WrestleMania, everyone (WWF included) was pretty much plugging that as Taker's last Mania? Wasn't the reason Taker went over because it was supposed to be his last Mania? Just wondering...
Guest Repo Man jr Posted March 3, 2002 Report Posted March 3, 2002 No you were just wanting it to be at the time and got confused!
Guest The Vanilla Midget Posted March 3, 2002 Report Posted March 3, 2002 i dont think they played it off as his last mania, though they *definitely* reminded us of his impressive legacy at mania and his streak. what will be really interesting this year though is if taker or flair go over, because the fued really has no point, if taker wins it does nothing really for him, as flair is old, and flair gains nothing by beating taker. im just afraid this will lead to the return of david flair or something else similarly stupid.
Guest Kahran Ramsus Posted March 3, 2002 Report Posted March 3, 2002 "Remember during the Undertaker-HHH feud leading to their match at WrestleMania, everyone (WWF included) was pretty much plugging that as Taker's last Mania? Wasn't the reason Taker went over because it was supposed to be his last Mania? Just wondering... " I thought the same thing.
Guest Tony149 Posted March 3, 2002 Report Posted March 3, 2002 I have no idea. Like Midget said. They made a big deal out of Taker's recored. If Flair beats UT, it will add another star that Flair has beaten. Although it does nothing for either man.
Guest The Vanilla Midget Posted March 3, 2002 Report Posted March 3, 2002 exactly, flair doesnt need the elevation of breaking taker's streak, taker needs to put a young guy over with that, and taker winning over flair doesnt make any sense and doesnt really go anywhere.
Guest The Vanilla Midget Posted March 3, 2002 Report Posted March 3, 2002 exactly, use the legacy to put somebody over. booker t would be another in that frame, though now it seems they wont use taker to put *anybody* over, so hopefully he just disappears.
Guest goodhelmet Posted March 3, 2002 Report Posted March 3, 2002 "so hopefully he just disappears" Exactly! or maybe a Montreal-esque screwjob to vanquish him out of the company.
Guest The Vanilla Midget Posted March 3, 2002 Report Posted March 3, 2002 no, nobody deserves that, especially somebody like taker who for all his faults has contributed a lot to the wwf. of course bret was in the same situation, but that was a regrettable incident, and nobody deserves that.
Guest Redhawk Posted March 3, 2002 Report Posted March 3, 2002 If anyone is big-time enough to end Taker's streak, it's Flair. I doubt Taker would agree to have someone like Test, Albert, or Booker T -- i.e., people who can use the rub -- end his streak. The only people who are on that level are Flair, Austin, Rock, HHH and Hogan. The latter four all are involved in the nWo angle, so Flair is as good a choice as anyone.
Guest Army Eye Posted March 3, 2002 Report Posted March 3, 2002 Well, you may be right, but if he's only willing to end the streak to one of those four, then I'd rather he beat Flair and just retire with the streak intact. Having Flair end it would be a waste..
Guest Kahran Ramsus Posted March 3, 2002 Report Posted March 3, 2002 Exactly. There is no way that Flair should win this match.
Guest X-Factor Corperation Posted March 3, 2002 Report Posted March 3, 2002 I don't think they did. And boy do I hope Undertaker defeats Flair. Him losing to Flair is a bad idea.
Guest cobainwasmurdered Posted March 3, 2002 Report Posted March 3, 2002 fuck the whole angle is a bad idea. if undertaker no sells the figure four get ready for a smark rebellion.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now