Eric Bischoff would have left The Undertaker’s WrestleMania streak alone and does not accept that Brock Lesnar needed it.
The streak ended at WrestleMania 30 in April 2014, when Lesnar beat The Undertaker after 21 straight wins going back to 1991. Bischoff was asked about it on 83 Weeks.
“I would have left the streak intact. I was disappointed. It was a golden opportunity to create Babe Ruth, a character that lives forever.”
He said the streak was the only thing that made The Undertaker unique among a group of people who will all be remembered anyway.
“Not that Hulk won’t, or when the time comes, Ric Flair or Steve Austin, so many of the real legends. The guys that were on top for a long time, in main events for a long time. We’re not talking about professional mid-carders that had a 20-year mid-card career. We’re talking about main eventers in pay-per-views that have been doing it for years and years.”
“All of those guys will be remembered for generations, but only one could have been remembered for being undefeated, and I just wouldn’t have given that up for a match.”
He does not think the win moved Lesnar.
“Brock didn’t need it. Why did Brock need to be the guy? Brock was already so over. He was at 100 percent of his maximum overness. He wasn’t going to get any more over by defeating Undertaker and breaking the streak.”
He said the ongoing relationship makes it worse.
“Especially knowing that you’re going to be working with The Undertaker in the future, not as The Undertaker in the ring necessarily, but as the guy that played that character. He’s very active in WWE, so Hall of Fame is one thing, but an undefeated streak in the Hall of Fame, that’s a conversation piece.”
“That’s old school. That’s just country boy bulls***. That’s the way the business used to be. And if you’re going to operate in today’s world the way the business used to be, good luck with that.”
He does accept there was a commercial case for it. WWE launched its network two months before WrestleMania 30 and needed the show to deliver.
“He was hedging his bet. So it was a financially driven decision. And look, you can criticize that all you want, but this is a business. It’s about making money.”
“Strategically, it made a great deal of sense in the short term because of launching the WWE Network, needing to make a big bang, and establishing your new network as big as you can right out of the chute. I get that strategy, and it was probably a smart one.”
His objection is what it cost against what it bought.
“From a fan perspective, and a long-term perspective, I think there would have been more long-term value in Mark Calaway’s or Undertaker’s undefeated streak than the short-term gain that may or may not have been realized.”
Paul Heyman, who was in the ring for it as Lesnar’s advocate, has taken the opposite view. Speaking on The Undertaker’s own podcast this month, Heyman said the moment is what his generation will remember the way earlier ones remember Hulk Hogan slamming André the Giant.
“You feel the rumble in the crowd, like, oh my God, this is really, we’re witnessing something that we thought we’d never get to witness,” Heyman said. “It’s not about everything. It’s about the moment that people remember.”
The Undertaker suffered a concussion during the match and was taken to hospital before the show finished. He has said he has never recovered any memory of it. Lesnar confirmed his retirement this month after losing to Oba Femi at SummerSlam.
