That’s a good blog with good points of opinion but i have to say once again, Taker/Show+Train wasn’t all that bad. It was bad at the time, seeing as what could’ve happened.
If they had an Undertaker/Show match at Mania, if they had been billing Show as a top level wrestler like he CAN be if he tries, he can put on a Great match, but at the time he was fat and lazy now he’s lost some weight and can wrestle well, but i see your points now.
Mark Henry needed a push and Vince gave it too him.
It annoys me how people say Taker never pushes people, but a push isn’t necessarily a win.
Taker pushed all those giants at Mania by at least TRYING to make a good match, except those lazy faggots thought that Taker can carry an entire match with a 180kg fatass.
Nobody could do that.
There are lots of people he could’ve feuded with but Vince didn’t make it.
He probably thinks the likes of Rock/Austin and, sadly, Cena (idk) are too good for the list.

Does it matter? I’d prefer Taker having 6 title reigns with one long reign than have him win only 7 short reigns.

LOL, I somewhat agree with you.

I don’t see another reason why he was made to win the belt while he was still healing from injury, then he was allowed to retain the title by having a relaxed schedule and tag-team/ triple threat/ fatal four way matches. If they wanted him to lose the belt after that, why would they make him win it in the first place?

More than likely, to add the number of his reign.

Mark Henry probably just wanted to be in the spotlight ;-) Taker did a favour to him by doing a match against him at Mania. And I think it was made a casket match to make it a little interesting – if it was a regular wrestling match, it would’ve sucked more. I think the WWE were not sure as to what to do with Taker in 2006, that is why they did those stupid rivalries with Henry and Khali (more to bring the latter 2 in the spotlight) and so they started 2007 as a fresh year planned for him very well with a Rumble win and a long title reign – but then the injuries caught up. What else will happen if they give him so many gimmick matches? Hopefully they have realized their mistake this time and that is why they gave him the title almost immediately after returning, rather than making him run around for it like he normally does. That’s what makes me feel he will hold it for longer.

I agree bout the last line, but we’ll have to wait n c.

Well, the feuds will look significant only if they result in Mania matches because that is the stage where the stakes are high and where it matters the most. Taker was always more about story-telling and intense feuds more than anything else in his early career, so if you had to do matches with the Bret Harts of that generation, then you needed significant time to build the story too. That’s perhaps why it didn’t happen. It looked to me more like Taker’s job was to keep these giants in existence – tell me, which other “face” wrestler could they have feuded with? It had to be either Hogan or Taker. They couldn’t have feuded with Bret or Michaels as they couldn’t have lasted in the ring with them. After Hogan was gone, it was only Taker. Its only during the attitude era that Vince realized that the giants are useless ;-) and the only worthwhile giants in the WWE were Taker and Kane. Folks – some of the comments on this page are too long because they contain earlier comments “quoted”. While quoting, please ensure that you keep only the part of the text you are replying to, rather than the whole long comment – so that the page size does not become too long.

Hm, I think it was after the big time failure against Mark Henry at Wrestlemania 22 that giants are useless. That’s why Taker got three main eventers in his last three Wrestlemania matches.

And thanks for mentioning the quote part (^^).

Folks – some of the comments on this page are too long because they contain earlier comments “quoted”. While quoting, please ensure that you keep only the part of the text you are replying to, rather than the whole long comment – so that the page size does not become too long.

I think it was necessary to do the feuds with the giants to make Taker look strong and to sell his dead-man gimmick, that he cannot be hurt as he is already dead. Taker getting up after a sweet chin music would not have the same effect as Taker getting up after 3 or 4 slams from Yokozuna or Mabel – the latter would make him look more strong and dominant, and the audience would believe more that he is indeed dead and impervious to pain. Frankly speaking I don’t regret much in Taker’s career except that he was made to look weak in front of Austin and Rock way too much during the attitude era, and his loss to Brock Lesnar at HIAC (though it was a way of bringing back the dead-man, because his loss was one of the reasons why Kane chose to bury him, saying that Taker was not a monster anymore but he had weaknesses).

It was necessary to do the feuds with giants, but was it necessary to give him 6 different talentless giants in five different occasions at The Grandest Stage of Them All? If that doesn’t explain Vince’s unending blind love for giants, nothing does.