Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox
Sheamus would not be seen as any kind of a threat to the Undertaker's WM undefeated streak, and therefore would not pose any kind of threat to Undertaker's Undisputed Title victory. The idea of both of those things should be that there is at least a question of who is going to walk out with the Undisputed Title/Taker's streak - this match would eliminate both of those things.
They'll probably do it.
|
If Sheamus can hold on to the Belt until Wrestlemania, he will have held the belt for 11 out of 15 months (and 9 months straight since Fatal 4 Way) since he first won at TLC back in 2009. They could totally hype him as being the most dominant champion in recent WWE history. He will have beaten Cena/Orton/Jericho/Edge and possibly (and most importantly) HHH and whoever else they can come up with. So you obviously have Sheamus beating everyone RAW has to offer and wanting a challenge, what better than vs Taker at Wrestlemania?
They should totally eliminate the predictability factor by having both champions wrestle twice like WM X and Vengance 2001, especially since the Winner of the Royal Rumble needs to get a title match. So it ends up being a mini 1 night tourney. Sheamus beats, lets say HHH and Taker beats..um..whoever..most people would probably figure on HHH would beat Sheamus like he did last year. Sheamus winning would instantly get the "OMG could he be the one?" reaction from the crowd. Taker also has to win two matches in the same night which would be even more epic for his streak.
Of course they'll fuck this up and have HHH beat Sheamus when he comes back.