30 Months Later Did WWE Make The Right Choice on the Streak?

NORTH OLMSTED, Ohio – It has been 30 months since the epic and shocking ending to the Undertakers streak at Wrestlemania 30. It has been much disputed, debated and questioned ever since.

Threw the perfect 20/20 vision of looking back 30 months later, let’s see just how good or bad that decision was by breaking down each person on that card, that could have been chosen instead of Brock.

But before we do that, let’s look back on why they chose Brock and how that worked out. Brock was chosen because they wanted someone believable to beat him. He was the only one on the card that they thought would have the believability to beat him. It worked, since then, his already great career reached a new level no one saw coming.

He went on to dominate everyone in his path, winning the WWE World Heavyweight Title and not losing it for a long time. In fact, no one even came close to beating him and he hasn’t lost cleanly since.
Brock Lesnar could have done all of those same things even without the win over Taker at Mania, but the win certainly helped. It also led to a slow burn epic rematch against Taker at Summerslam in 2015. Had Lesnar signed with UFC full time and left WWE, then it would have back fired, but he didn’t.

As for the other top men on the card, lets take a look on why or why not they wouldn’t have worked out.

Cesaro – He won the Andre The Giant Battle Royal that night, which should have given him all the push he needed. He has doesn’t nothing but squander numerous chances since. Had he beaten the Undertaker, it still wouldn’t have worked as he simply can’t get completely over.

Bray Wyatt – This should have been it. He would have been the perfect man to do it. He was white hot and the crowd was behind him. He had the aura, he had the talent, he had the look, he had it all. It would have been the ideal move to blast him to the next stratosphere. To win the big one in his initial Wrestelmania match.

But, as it is, it didn’t happen and he has been squashed in three straight manias instead, by Cena, by Taker (one year too late) and then last year by the Rock. They have shown faith in him by having him wrestle 3 straight legends at Mania, but still not what it could have been.

Any member of the Shield – Each one of them has gone on to a World Title and main event status without the win. But, looking at it, could you imagine if Reigns won it back then? People hate him now, but had they let him win that one in a stunner, then he’d have the respect the WWE wants him to have so badly now. They messed that up. Should have been Reigns.

John Cena – As a 14 time world champion (at the time) he didn’t need that push. However, it would have cemented any legacy status some still feel he hasn’t earned.

HHH – Already lost 3 times to Taker at Mania, would have been very diluted if he won.

Daniel Bryan – It was his time to win the World Title. Nothing else would have worked or made sense for him that night.

Big Show – That would have worked too if you let he be a monster and simply use his size finally. Just let him loose as a monster.

In the end, I still feel they made the right choice. Looking back at it, it all makes sense now.

What do you think they next major league Wrestlemania shock will be? Perhaps a CM Punk comeback?

You can follow Vince McKee on twitter at VinceTheAuthor