The Shame Event?

The following was originally posted on February 23rd, and is copied in here to provide context for the next post.

So, The Undertaker against Triple H looks to be on at Wrestlemania 27. It should be a tremendous match. You've got two of the biggest names and best performers of the last two decades making their long awaited returns. So why don't I want to see it?

It comes down to, as ever, the rumours circulating about Triple H. If they are to be believed, he's wanting to call it a day. Whilst I absolutely think it's the wrong decision if he wants to call it a day, then I can't really argue. He'd be going out, much like his longtime friend Shawn Michaels on top of his game, if you'll excuse the pun. Which is clearly better than continuing long after you have anything to offer, as another friend of his, Scott Hall has done.

However if he's leaving, a retirement match against the Undertaker (note, this isn't set in stone, it's simply rumour at this stage) is a short sighted decision. Whilst they were good matches, Ric Flair and Shawn Michaels should have put someone over on the way out, passing the torch. Triple H is said to have one of the best understandings of the business of any active wrestler, so I hope he'd not be so myopic as to go for the short term gains.

If the honour of retiring The Game were to be given to a upcoming superstar, for example John Morrison, it could be the thing to elevate them to the main event permanently, or you could let someone like Jack Swagger cheat to win, giving them incredible amounts of heat. Going out to The Undertaker seems, in comparison, a huge waste. Especially since in the last year WWE has managed to create some new stars, it would seem an incredibly backwards looking decision.

Worse though, if the WWE goes the other way, and lets Triple H end the streak, then you're throwing away an even bigger star making opportunity. The end of the streak, should it ever happen, should not be given to someone at the end of their career. The Undertakers Wrestlemania matches should really be against opponents who need the push, someone who could be at the top of the company for the next 20 years. Otherwise the result is too obvious, and as a result, the match less interesting to those considering buying the pay per view.

Still, if the stipulation isn't career vs streak, the match would be the exception to prove the rule. As mentioned both have been out of action for a while, almost a year in the case of Triple H, and you've got avenging Michaels retirement at the hands of The Undertaker as the perfectly logical reason for the match taking place.

We'll find out more in the coming weeks, given that this weeks Raw told us nothing, beyond that there will be a match. That isn't a criticism either. It was perfectly pitched, without either man uttering a word, we were told everything we needed to know. An example that sometimes, less is more. Whatever ends up happening, WWE got the return of both men spot on. Are you watching Eric Bichoff?