PDA

View Full Version : Why wasn't Taker vs. Batista the last match at WrestleMania?


The Naitch
04-06-2007, 08:28 PM
:wtf:

El Fangel
04-06-2007, 08:29 PM
Cena's is far more entertaining :roll:

hb2k
04-06-2007, 08:41 PM
Cena/Michaels was the right match to headline with.

BigDaddyCool
04-06-2007, 08:44 PM
Cause Batista sucks. You will also notice that Bats, while being the champion in the match, came out first. WWE knows he sucks and treating him as such.

M-A-G
04-06-2007, 08:58 PM
They figured on Cena and Michaels being the better match and the one that generated the most interest. While I can understand that line of thinking why the hell would you put the other world title match so far down the card?

The Naitch
04-06-2007, 09:02 PM
what was the WM card order?

I figure Taker would be upset that his huge win wasn't the show closer

M-A-G
04-06-2007, 09:03 PM
Money in the Bank
Khali vs. Kane
Benoit vs. MVP
Batista vs. Undertaker
New Breed vs. Originals
Lashley vs. Umaga
Melina vs. Ashley
Cena vs. Michaels

Pardeep 619
04-06-2007, 11:06 PM
Cena/HBK did not deserve to main-event. Batista and 'Taker got the best reactions of the night. Both HBK and Cena got booed a lot during their entrances

Theo Dious
04-06-2007, 11:13 PM
Me: That's cause they were both faces.

Offscreen voice: So where Batista and Taker!

Me: SHUT THE HELL UP!!!

James Steele
04-06-2007, 11:27 PM
It shouldn't have gone on that early, but Cena/HBK was the main feud and had more interest in it as a culmination of a feud. Undertaker/Batista only had the "Taker's streak" thing going for it.

El Fangel
04-06-2007, 11:30 PM
Taker's streak WAS more interesting then that feud though.

311
04-07-2007, 08:45 AM
It's Wrestlemania. It's the Raw title. It's Cena. Cena is the flagship for the company now, whether we like it or not. :y:

Russenmafia
04-07-2007, 10:17 AM
The main reason of winning the Royal Rumble is to main event Wrestlemania and fight for the world title. Taker wins the match and ends up in the fourth match. While HBK who didn't win the Royal Rumble, wins a triple threat match to main event Mania.

So basically, the Royal Rumble means nothing no more. If you want to be in the last match at Mania, win a triple threat match on RAW.

Londoner
04-07-2007, 10:24 AM
^ Guess they didn't think of it that way eh? Yet another reason why the roster split must end for good.

IC Champion
04-07-2007, 10:55 AM
Be Glad the main event was a title match, unlike Wrestlemania 10 which didnt even consist for 2 wrestlers.

Mercury Bullet
04-07-2007, 11:07 AM
I don't think it should've been in the middle, closer to the end maybe, but not main event. That match was a load of fecal matter and so is Batista. And deep down in their heart of hearts the WWE knows it sucked, and knows Batista sucks, and couldn't allow themselves to put that shit on last.

RGWhat316
04-07-2007, 02:25 PM
I guess if you want any more proof that Cena is the golden boy, they are willing to break WM traditions just to make him look good. Wrestlemania is supposed to be the show where the guy who had the title for a long time is supposed to lose it. But 2 years in a row, they have Cena retain, even after he has held it for most of the previous year.

So even though Cena/HBK was probably the better match. Taker/Batista should have been just for the title change. And it certaintly shouldn't have been so low down on the card it was.

Russenmafia
04-07-2007, 06:10 PM
I don't think it should've been in the middle, closer to the end maybe, but not main event. That match was a load of fecal matter and so is Batista. And deep down in their heart of hearts the WWE knows it sucked, and knows Batista sucks, and couldn't allow themselves to put that shit on last.

tbh I thought the Bats vs Taker match was allright. Was a lot better than what I expected it to be.

hb2k
04-07-2007, 07:12 PM
Cena/HBK did not deserve to main-event. Batista and 'Taker got the best reactions of the night

The most crowd heat was for the Cena/Michaels match. The reason Batista/Taker came off so good was because it was perfectly positioned (not the only reason, but bear with me here) - if they had to go on after that Cena/Michaels match and after Austin, they'd have a harder time getting the fans into it than they ended up having by putting it earlier. Taker/Batista had way less steam as a feud going in and Batista hardly has a great career record of having awesome PPV matches. They made the right move, and it worked out perfectly. Cena/Michaels was right to close.

Innovator
04-07-2007, 07:38 PM
When Taker and Batista were told they weren't the last match, both were legit pissed.

Taker and Batista were lobbying for final match since their match gave the crowd what they wanted, with Undertaker winning the title. At best Cena and Michaels would have a 50/50 split for Cena.

The One
04-07-2007, 07:56 PM
My opinion, in kayfabe logic (as if there was such a thing anymore) Batista/Undertaker should have gone on last. But we live in the real world, and Cena was going over in THE Main Event. End of story.

Bo
04-08-2007, 10:33 PM
I think another point to be brought up, was that it done even before the womens title match.

The Naitch
04-08-2007, 11:41 PM
then again The Rock vs Hogan was done before Trish vs Lita at X8

the crowd is spent after Rock/Hogan so they have to rest before going to the main event (Jericho/HHH)

darkpower
04-09-2007, 05:50 AM
Hmm...maybe Vince still wants to bury anything that ever lives on SmackDown still?