It's not like Lesnar has set the world on fire anyway. He's got 5 years left on his contract so that's plenty of time to re-establish his character which for some reason people are afraid is looking weak. I have more fingers than he has jobs so it's not like his credibility's been shot to all hell. Lesnar can suck it for all I care cause he's just gotten tiring and boring really fast but this is reflective of Austin causing a ruckus back 2002. On the subject of the Undertaker feud, I like to think that the whole point of the return of the original character is a blow-off feud with Kane cause it, you know, makes sense. Outside of Kane, the mystique of the character at this point in time is kind of dwindled and stupid considering this era where characters like that are a thing of the past. If it were just for the WM match with Kane I'd have no problem with it but as it's looking, since it's in for the long haul, I see no point in the resurrection of the character. But have we forgotten that Taker still didn't sell for shit or job even as the biker character? I hardly see that big of a difference.

Heres how it should go down IMO. Lesnar vs Taker. Taker has some powerful offense, Brock sells. Lasner has some powerful offense, Taker does slight selling, gradually increasing. eventually, F5! the fatigue sets in, both men are down for an 8 count. then taker sits up. goes for a tombstone, brock counters, goes for F5, taker counters, tombstone, 1, 2, no! another tombstone, no! third tombstone, brock kicks out just after the 3 to show he was only just beaten, just like kane did at WM14. this keeps undertakers push going and keeps brocks credibility.

I just want The Undertaker to beat kane and say that he has no other purpose there and now he can Rest in Peace.

a one time match is the best thing to do in my opinion.

Like CyNick mentioned, Bret Hart had a 30 day creative control clause. He refused to do jobs before and I agreed with some decisions and disagreed with others (agreed he should have dropped the WWF title to Bob Backlund when he first refused and disagreed he should have done a clean job to HHH weeks before Survivor Series because he was world champion and without a rematch, it makes the belt weak). I didn't like Hulk Hogan for not helping make stars but I always defended him when it came to doing jobs in WCW because he had a legal right to refuse to do them. When you give someone that right, it's your own fault. I went against McMahon and Russo because they agreed on finishes and then back tracked on them during the match and that's more unprofessional than anything.

Taker would translate this to mean not selling at all, gradually increasing to a possible flinch after the F5 is administered 16 times. Wait. I take that back. Taker thinks that the definition of selling is allowing his opponent to swing his arms and make the motions of any sort of offense. Actually moving in accordance to these movements is a whole different word that Mark has yet to research in the reference section of the library.

POSSIBLY let him kick out of one tombstone, 2 would just be stupid, i can see where it made sense with kane but they had that whole panormal bs thing in place back then.