[Mr. Nerfect]

I was pretty excited for Wade Barrett vs. The Undertaker at WrestleMania 27. I mean, after the Nexus attacked The Undertaker at Bragging Rights 2010 and helped Kane win Buried Alive, that had to be where they were heading, right? Barrett was a good talker, with some size to him, and had been the biggest part of the hottest angle in quite some time. And here they were giving the young lion a big shot against the old dragon -- an opportunity to mix metaphors on the grandest daddy of them all.

I've honestly never really cared for The Undertaker. I respect his longevity in wrestling, but I think he gets overrated when it comes to the quality of his work, as your trial against him proved. There have been long periods of time where good matches from Undertaker are the notable exception and not the rule. I also think his loyalty to Vince and the WWE is completely overplayed when you consider that The Undertaker gimmick belongs to Titan. This is pure speculation, but I like to imagine the reason Taker was such a joy-kill to the WCW guys in the Invasion angle was because there were periods of time where he thought he would genuinely have to go down with the WWF ship.

Barrett probably would have lost if he got that match against Taker, but the threat of the Nexus being on hand to aid Barrett would have added some legitimate drama. It's rare that I would have been able to say I had something resembling emotional investment in an Undertaker match. Well, at least piqued interest. We might have been forced to see Barrett as an emerging full-time main event star. But what did we actually get? The plan. The Same. The King of Status Quos. The Cerebral Asswipe, son. I had ZERO interest in Undertaker vs. Triple H at WrestleMania. Okay, I get it -- Taker beat his buddy and now there is alleged drama in Triple H going after what Shawn Michaels couldn't; but it hurt feelings I didn't know I had when they compared Triple H to HBK. It was like an insult to my intelligence that didn't really make sense -- like if someone called you a "slutty virgin cocksucking frigid no-cock wanker" in school. But of course you can't deviate from "the plan."

I'm not going to say that Taker/Triple H from Mania 28 was shit. It had a pretty cool false finish and I remember that melodramatic ending. But I do think that this is an interesting exhibit in how the streak could possibly be considered detrimental. Guys like Triple H feel that they have to be a part of it, and as a result, fresher stars are kept back to allow for an Attitude era ego-fest. You can't count money left on the table, but if they had put Undertaker against younger stars and possibly ended the streak a lot earlier, maybe the business would be in overall healthier shape today? It's easy to call something a draw or an attraction when you get to write the dominant history, and create a timeline in which the streak is the biggest thing they have because they've killed off everything around it.

And Triple H would go on to wrestle Undertaker again, becoming the only three-time opponent of Taker at WrestleMania. "End of an Era," right? Fuuuuuuuuck.