JR Makes A Great Point In Regards To Undertaker’s Wrestlemania Streak

I don’t know about you but I love Jim Ross’ prospective on the wrestling business. In a new blog posted on Monday on his official website, he made the following point when discussing the possible outcome of CM Punk vs. The Undertaker at Wrestlemania 29:

So, does Taker being 20-1 at WrestleMania’s adversely affect his legacy? Not in my view. However, does beating the Undertaker at WrestleMania essentially make Punk even more special? Absolutely.

A Punk win at WM29 would essentially punch Punk’s WWE HOF ticket and whether the outspoken Punk would admit it or not, being inducted into the WWE HOF is an amazing honor even for the most devout of individuals.

This is my point exactly. Undertaker has nothing left to gain but Punk is in a position to become the “face of WWE.” This is a truly unique opportunity that won’t come around again. You can read JR’s latest in its entirety at this link.

Connect With WNW

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Google+ and LinkedIn!

  • matt

    agreed.

  • Dangerous Lee

    I’m guessing most people will now agree with this point of view now that JR said it.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/3GELHSGASCJYIWXCMKPUTAJ5HM Win

      JR didn’t actually say the streak should end. He speculated the benefits Punk would receive, but he actually didn’t say Taker should take an L. I’ve read better arguments opposing Taker losing at Wrestlemania on this site, but Richard being the opportunist I’ve come to know him as, makes a weak effort to try and legitimize his stance on the issue, by using JR’s comments, and ignoring the counterpoints that have constantly been made on this site. The same Richard who has said on several occasions the streak should never end. The same Richard who says the Hall of Fame isn’t legit, which makes JR’s 2nd point a non-factor. For those of us who consistently read the WNW blogs and Ask WNW, must be feeling like they’ve wasted their time or have been completely lied too by and owner who changes his mind depending on the direction the wind blows!!!

      • dani

        let punk get his fame on his own not ride undertakers back taker fought hard for what he has 2 have guy come get famous on wat he has created

  • Razmos

    Its not going to happen, Undertaker will retire with the streak intact, thats his legacy something that will stand out in his HOF induction, why spend over 20 years in the business building that legacy to have it taken away right at the end? Punk already has the longest title reign in the modern era. If that didnt make him number 1 then nothing will, also the guy goes under to The Rock (twice) and Cena to then go on to Mania and end the streak?? Wouldnt make sence

    • CJROB

      I agree with you whole heartedly that Punk’s booking as of late doesn’t warrent him ending the streak. And if the plan was for Taker to lose, then the build for this match should have been something better than Vickie giving four different guys a shot

  • StraightEdgeForLife

    I’m a HUGE Punk supporter, and i also love Taker and his undefeated streak. JR is bingo bango though. I wouldn’t be disappointed if Punk beat him at WM29 as i don’t feel Punk is just having a ‘lucky streak’ or will one day become a mid carder. I think he’s at the top, and at the top to stay!

  • chris

    Don’t really agree, Richard. First of all, it Would hurt Undertaker because when the streak ends, there is no more streak and the mystique is gone from an essential part of his career. I am Not saying it’s the most important part of his career, but think about it… When Undertaker goes in to the HOF and they mention the 20-0 winstreak, it’s still gonna be overshadowed by the fact that he didnt retire WM undefeated, and Punk broke it. And why would CM Punk’s ‘hall of fame ticket’ need to rely on the expense from a legend like the Undertaker? I want to remember Punk for his outstanding work, not for ending the streak. It’s not even a ‘passing of the torch’ ordeal because Punk already has reached the top of the business.

    • Snap

      As much as I am in favour of the streak continuing and Taker never being defeated at WrestleMania, I think this really illustrates how the streak is actually bad for Taker.

      While on one hand, it’s an amazing accomplishment which will never be repeated, on the other it has essentially become THE selling point for Taker. Why I think it is bad for Taker in the long run is because if his 20-0 streak would be overshadowed by a single loss at the end of his career, it’s a bit of an insult to Taker.

      When it comes to CM Punk, I think what he really needs isn’t a WrestleMania win against Taker, but a win again Cena as he’s the glass ceiling that every WWE superstar needs to break through in order to be number one.

  • John

    Breaking the streak would wreck Undertakers legacy.. They would never do it!

  • Nick

    Would love to see Punk as the face.. Him beating the Undertaker at WM, makes more sense then him beating SCSA.

  • k! ng

    Undertaker has a legacy with or without the streak. Think about it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/scott.davies.391 Scott Davies

    Guy’s Undertaker is already a legend. Ending the streak will not hurt him & would go into the HOF regardless. If the Undertakers streak does end then to me that is when Taker will retire

  • Frenchfry

    Well maybe from WWE perspective Punk should win so they can have a new 1A, but we are fans here and there probably isnt a person on here that isnt a fan of the Undertaker, so I see no point in convincing us that one of our favorites should lose

    • Gary Robert

      I’m a fan of The Undertaker and I think he should 100% lose. You pass the torch. That’s part of what this business is about.

      • EricDraven86

        Agree 100%. I have been a fan of Taker’s since 1994 and I think he should go under to Punk. The loss ultimately would not hurt his legacy. Winning at WM 20 straight times is a feat that will never be duplicated. The business was built on guys passing the torch. Bret Hart even mentioned a conversation he had in his early days with Lou Thesz(I think) that Pro Wrestling became scripted because one of the big stars from the 1920′s (Ed “The Strangler” Lewis I believe) could not be beaten, and wanted to retire. He and the promoter set the match up for him to lose and pass the torch to the next top guy.

        • Yung

          U do realise the Bret was the man that refused to go under to Shawn Michaels in Montreal right?

      • Frenchfry

        If youre watching based on “the business” rather than just wanting your favorite wrestlers to win then I think youre doing it wrong

        • http://www.facebook.com/james.larochelle.5 James Larochelle

          My favorite wrestlers don’t need to win for me to enjoy the product. I need to be entertained and intrigued. Part of that intrigue (for me) is trying to understand how the wins and losses help the business.

          On the other hand, I’d like for CM Punk to win in part because he’s currently one of my favorite wrestlers, while Undertaker has NEVER been one of my favorite wrestlers. To me, he’s always been the Boba Fett of the wrestling world.

      • Don

        You pass the torch to a new guy that needs it, punk doesn’t. That analogy doesn’t apply here.

        • http://www.facebook.com/james.larochelle.5 James Larochelle

          Punk can still benefit from a passing of the torch, which gives the rub value. Triple H and Shawn Michaels were never going to get any bigger than they were, so they didn’t need the win. They helped the streak actually matter and they helped ensure that if someone beats Undertaker at Wrestlemania, it means more than beating the guy who beat the Giant Gonzalezes of the world 20 times.

          Does retiring undefeated at Wrestlemania benefit anyone other than the Undertaker? He went over the likes of Ric Flair, Shawn Michaels and Triple H. Coming back for wins over guys like CM Punk (in likely his (Undertaker’s) only real match of the year) just seems selfish in my opinion. If he didn’t want to lose a match at Wrestlemania, he should have retired after his match with Triple H last year. It was a fitting ending. He got to 20-0, what does 21-0 actually add?

      • dani

        yea pass the torch to someone who needs it cm punk is already up there

  • f_caus

    I would only have Punk go over Taker if this was indeed Undertaker’s last WrestleMania ever. No point defending the “streak” if there is no streak, and it would put Punk WAY over if he were the guy to end the streak as well as Undertaker’s career. One can dream…

  • http://www.facebook.com/justinneerajlal Justin Lal

    I have to give you credit Richard for your persistence in this.

  • Kenneth

    Ryder to end the streak and the Wrestlemania after this one…

  • Assassinno1

    The thing is I *want* to see Wrestlemania this year. I actually want to order it just for this match. Certainly not Rock/ Cena 2 or Brock/ Triple H 2 cause I couldn’t care less who wins those. This really is once in a lifetime and I want to see it so job done wwe.

  • Shane

    No matter what happens I’m glad that we are actually talking about the possibility of the streak ending and this match is not the forgone conclusion that I expected Undertakers wrestlemania match to be.

  • opie

    Is the same IWC who says WWE is screwing up by pushing part-time past stars over younger up-and-comers really saying that a part-time past star should beat a guy on the brink of legendary status? The rub ALWAYS means more to the business than arbitrary win-loss records. Triple H and Shawn Michaels put Cena over at WM to make him number one. Beating Stone Cold and The Rock to become Undisputed Champion put Jericho’s career into the stratosphere (granted, that wasn’t at WM, but the point remains). Undertaker has never put anyone over at WM because the streak was a good storyline. Ending the streak would transform Punk into an all-time, legendary heel. How did Taker EARN the right to retire undefeated at WM? By being booked to win his first 20? He didn’t EARN that. That’s how Vince decided to book him. Hogan MADE Wrestlemania, and that didn’t earn him the right to retire undefeated there. Ending the streak is better for the business moving forward.

  • Cubed56

    I completely respect the undertaker and what he’s done, but its time to give back to the business that’s given you soooo much. All the money he’s made, and after the bitching and moaning about wanting top dollar for a once a year match at WM, which wwe gave him, he needs to give back. If he goes over, I will lose a ton of respect for taker and instead of viewing him as a legend with a streak, I’ll look at him as the selfish guy who only thought about himself and didn’t give a damn about the others career. I only say this cause Punk is the only guy in the last 6-8 WM matches that actually can gain something and take the wwe to bigger and better things with a win.

    • Don

      He has given more than he needs to give, which is FAR more than most wrestlers will ever give to the business.

  • IlyasG

    I just don’t see any other WWE wrestler going 20-0 at Wrestlemania, be it now or in the coming decades. While I understand Richard and JR’s point of view about the uniqueness of the situation, I feel it is even more unique to have such a statistic remain intact, and this is coming from a CM Punk fan

  • http://twitter.com/Avalanchian71 Avalanchian

    Last time I checked the undefeated season by the Miami Dolphins has made them eternally remembered til someone else can do it. Undertaker getting 1 loss means he won 20 straight, but ended up a loser in the end. Kind of like the Patriots did against the Giants.

    • Glen

      Great analogy. I agree fully.

    • http://www.facebook.com/james.larochelle.5 James Larochelle

      The difference being that the Patriots lost the one game that mattered more than the 18 games before them combined, the Super Bowl. In Undertaker’s case, he’s won 20 Super Bowls in a row. Nobody says Brady is a terrible quarterback because he didn’t win every Super Bowl he was in and nobody will say that Undertaker sucks because he lost one Wrestlemania match.

      I think it’s also important to remember that the reason he’s 20-0 is because it was scripted for him to win those matches. Undertaker’s win-loss record isn’t his legacy, it’s the performances he put on during those wins. If he loses in a match-for-the-ages, he can still leave with his head held high and Punk gets an amazing rub.

  • Yung

    IMO if Undertaker loses his streak than his 20 wins with be worthless, everyone will only remember his last match where he lost. But i love the fact that this match is possibly the only unpredictable match on the card so far.

    • http://www.facebook.com/james.larochelle.5 James Larochelle

      Honestly, are you saying his wins against Giant Gonzalez, King Kong Bundy, Big Boss Man, A-Train and Mark Henry have any worth? They’re worthless matches that only pad a statistic that’s scripted to begin with. Barring an injury mid-match, a loss to Punk should it happen, will most likely be a match-of-the-year contender which will mean more than any of those five wins.

    • dani

      winning a man twice his age would not make him the man in my book

  • Rybotch

    All i see is a bunch of Internet CM Punk marks saying Taker should go under to Punk. No way!!! Undertaker is one of the most iconic names in Wrestling history he’s built up a 20 year streak in his legacy. Most of the stars on the current roster don’t even make it to 10 years in WWE. A legacy like Takers will never come again. I refuse to believe that Undertaker will put on one of the best matches in WWE history at Wm25 by beating an all time great like Shawn Michaels, to come down and lose to a kid that made it because of the Internet, a kid that lost to the Rock, lost to Cena. Punk is good and is one of the best in the business today but he’s not on the level of Undertaker and Shawn Michaels yet. Punk only just started seeing the main event picture like 2 years ago. Undertaker has been maineventing since WWF days.

  • Dave L

    Would WWE want undertaker to lose at WM29 or save it for the 30 year anniversary of WM?

    • http://www.facebook.com/james.larochelle.5 James Larochelle

      Do they think he’ll be able to compete at a level where it matters, next year? It’s not JUST the fact that somebody beats Undertaker at Wrestlemania that will give that person the rub. It also has to be a good match.

      I mean, if they carted out Undertaker at Wrestlemania 50 to get pinned, it wouldn’t give much a rub to whoever pins him because there’s no way he could put on a match that matters.

  • Glen

    I really believe that Punk get too big a push. His persona it played out. He hasn’t changed it since before his before he came to the WWE. I will also stop watching if Vince decides to ruin a great story with Punk.

  • http://www.facebook.com/PhilT81 Philip Thompson

    Punk’s HOF ticket is already stamped.

  • The GameBreaker

    Richard, it makes it really hard to read quotes. It’s gray text on white background. Can you change that ?