Spoiler: When will Taker lose the belt?
 

Wrestling Observer Newsletter

The Undertaker has been told this will be the first long-term title run of his career. Vince told him he wanted to give him a long-run but needed a commitment to a full-time schedule in return. It remains to be seen just how long Undertaker can keep up the schedule as he is in need of a hip replacement. The idea of Undertaker/Batista was first pitched last August by Dusty Rhodes and Alex Greenfield. Vince approved it in September but said no decision on the finish would be made at that time, prompting many to think he wanted Batista to end the streak. As time came close, taking the title from Batista had become a popular move internally. In truth, Vince doesn't want the streak to end and so it probably never will.

Good news for Taker, good news for fans of the streak (myself being one), and good news for SmackDown.

I concur. They should really built his reign to be a long one so that someone can get a great rub from taking the title from him. Preferably in the fall.

So he has to go out for a while for a hip replacement huh? Who else senses a Buried Alive this October to end that long reign in a Halloween season gimmick match?

He gets buried, dissapears off tv for 6 months, heals up just in time for a Wrestlemania Return/Reinventing/Grudge match/Streak continuance/buyrate draw. (not main event though since he did that this year)

Probably not though, seems to make a boatload of sense.

Only problem i see, is that the "deadman" character is very one-dimensional. He barely even speaks ffs. As I said in the headlines, heel biker taker would have been more suitable for a long title reign, as he was amazing in that role.

Taker doesn't really need to speak. And he can speak just fine in his current gimmick, they just haven't done it much. Some of his ministry promos were great, there's no reason why he can't just pick that up and remain in his current old school style Taker mode too.

It's better for heel challengers to do all the talking and the Taker to only respond with actions and mind games, with maybe one or two promos per fued.

I also wonder, what is a long term title fued nowadays? Long term as in his 97 reign til Summerslam? or longer?
Seems like long term in current WWE means LONG term, seeing as other than RVD and Edge, epic reigns have been commonplace since Triple H, JBL, Cena and Batista were booked as lengthy champions.
Even Rey and Booker held onto the belt for decent lengths in what could be considered short reigns compared to Cena and Batistas chokehold on the title scene

He'd better have still have it by the rumble cause I plan on being there.

Give Taker a Samartino-esque run with the belt...I say let him keep it for like 7 years. Who the hell cares at this point? He can defend the title while recovering from the hip replacement by having Paul Bearer wheel him to ringside every week and shooting down his opponents with lightening bolts.

Argh. I can understand why they wouldn't have him drop it at Backlash, but a LONG title reign? I personally think he should drop it to King Booker at Vengeance (make it the second time Taker has lost there). That way, Booker can get in some big defences before he drops the World Title to Rey Mysterio, the guy he originally won it from.

Also, The Undertaker's streak should end. If not next year, then at WrestleMania 25. This is a fixed sport, what good is a streak if it isn't broken?

You know, since JBL is supposed to be coming back by the end of the year, maybe he could win it and have another great heel run. He seems to want a toned-down schedule, and his first run wasn't exactly speckled with high-impact matches. Give him a "cabinet" again and he can work maybe 1 high profile match per month, hiding behind his crowd the rest of the time.

This is a fixed sport, what good is a streak if it isn't broken?

Well said.

I Love DarthTeedious.

Taker deserves a long reign but I hope its not a reign of defending against shitty opponents. I can defo see a Mark Henry feud in the pipeline.

Kennedy should be the one to take the title from him at Survivor Series or The Rumble

also The One and Darth Teedious JBL shouldnt win the title as it should go to someone who needs the win

I don't think JBL shouldn't end 'Taker's streak, but winning a title from him is different.

<font color=white>Ken Kennedy. Later in the year.</font>

Year.

Is it too much to ask that they do a Halloween Havoc this year?

yes, they've alreadynamed all the ppv's for this year...
sorry

Probably later this year, maybe Summerslam onwards, Taker will successfully defend the title headlining a PPV, and then suddenly over the PA "KENNEEEDDYYYYY!!!!!!" and Mr Kennedy comes down and finishes Taker off for the Championship.

I'd mark out big time, like jumping around the room.

I really hope that Mr. Kennedy takes the title from Cena instead of Undertaker, and that he goes on to feud with Carlito over it.

I was just about to say the same thing. Sure, it's early into his tenure as Mr. Money in the Bank, but can you imagine it at Backlash: John Cena has just pinned Randy Orton in a Fatal Fourway to retain the WWE Championship. All four men have put each other through Hell, and Cena can barely stand. "KENNEDY!" :D

I would mark out like a little bitch. Kennedy seems to fit the WWE Championship more than the World Heavyweight Championship, anyway.

I stand by my statement that King Booker should win the belt when he returns. He and Taker can work a feud, and then Rey Mysterio can move up to challenge.

That's great, as long as you don't mind throwing out the program they've set up with Taker.

And that's sloppy booking. That's WWE, "I suffer from Attention Deficit...HEY! A KITTY!" Booking, and it's rather shite.

Otherwise, I quite like the idea.

Then again, sans Michaels being a born again pussy, and Triple H spending more time stroking his ego, and the fact that they were always te dominant side, I liked the idea of DX 2K6, too.

Fact is, the idea didn't work out in reality, and it never would.

I don't think this one would, either.

I LOVE this idea. Taker deserves it, his carrer is amazi ng and he is in the best ring shape of his life. I would love to see him hang onto the title a year or so, maybe more that would just be awesome. As to who takes it off of him, and when? Perhaps a rematch with Batista at WM 24.

I never thought of that scenario, that's much better especially as Taker and Kennedy have already had a decent lengthed feud.

Here's hoping Mr Money In The Bank steals one from Mr Superman.

Were you speaking in reference to Kennedy taking the belt off Cena? I just ask because I couldn't make sense of it.

If it is in relation to Cena vs. Kennedy instead of Taker vs. Kennedy, I ask where this program between Kennedy and Taker is. Sure they were feuding last year, but since then the only "tension" between them has been that one is a top face and the other is a top heel.

The whole purpose of MITB isn't to build to a feud. It's a ticket to something exciting and unpredictable. A title change that protects the guy losing the belt, which is something the WWE needs in its new Superman-breeding ground environment.

Have you...Actually WATCHED Smackdown in the last couple of months?

I only ask because several of the forumites have drawn identical conclusions that they're pushing towards Kennedy/Taker, and this started well before he was Mister Money in the Bank. The number of separate people who have said similar things makes it hard for me to believe there is nothing going on, as you assert.

I think the Kennedy/Taker tension is all in people's heads, because they assumed Taker would win the belt, and they assumed Kennedy would win MITB. It's like Benoit and Brock "feuding" in 2004, only that one would have made a little more sense, because Benoit was feuding with Paul Heyman, who was the "evil" General Manager at the time. For him to jump to RAW after winning the Royal Rumble didn't give that a climatic payoff.

The Undertaker and Mr. Kennedy really have nothing to payoff, though. They fought at Armageddon, where Taker won his feud with Kennedy. Since then Kennedy has been feuding with Batista and Bobby Lashley (in that order).

It's alright if you want to see Kennedy face Taker, that's your opinion and all, but if we're going back to 2006 to justify "unfinished business", I might as well bring up Kennedy's promo after he won the United States Title, where he mocked John Cena. I might as well go back to the angle that commenced Kennedy's program with The Undertaker, for that matter. Kennedy was going to jump to RAW, but Theodore Long kept him there and stuck him in matches against The Undertaker.

Now he has the means, it would make perfect sense for Kennedy to jump over to RAW. I'm not saying that Kennedy challenging The Undertaker doesn't make sense, but Kennedy choosing Cena wouldn't be as nonsensical from a kayfabe point of view as you make it seem.

I understand why you'd think Kennedy was still feuding with The Undertaker, though. Batista, Undertaker and Bobby Lashley can be so boring that sometimes they blend together.

i hope taker retires with his streak intact. I'd lik to see him put kennedy over. Im a like tired of Booker and certainly don't want to see Rey with the belt.