Should The Undertaker Have Retired After Brock Lesnar Broke His Undefeated WrestleMania Streak?

Ever since Brock Lesnar ended The Undertaker's undefeated streak at WrestleMania XXX in 2014, wrestling fans have debated over whether or not the decision to book the ending of the streak was a good idea. But even with that result, The Undertaker has continued to work for WWE on a part-time basis. And while the 55-year-old future Hall of Famer still brings the same star power he had in his prime, the in-ring results of been noticeably mixed. So much so that his WrestleMania 36 feud with AJ Styles has been centered around the idea that he's possibly stuck around for too long.

So let's ask the question — should The Undertaker have retired after his streak ended? Or has his career since then been solid? Give us your thoughts in the comments, and check out what the ComicBook wrestling writers think below!

Connor Casey: I want to preface this by saying I absolutely love The Undertaker. I think he's one of the best to ever step inside of a wrestling ring and his character is the greatest gimmick Vince McMahon ever created. That being said, I really wish he had stopped after losing to Brock.

I'm not saying that he's hurt his overall legacy — nothing can touch that — but I fear people are going to look back at his post-Streak run and think, "Yeah, he stuck around for too long and it wasn't pretty at the end." His WrestleMania match with AJ will be his 15th televised match since WrestleMania XXX, none of which live up to the standard he was at back in the late 2000s and only a couple that can be considered "okay." He's been caught in some strange booking decisions (that SummerSlam finish with Brock, his non-feud with Cena) and found himself in some truly god-awful matches (hello Saudi Arabia). Now whenever he comes out to the ring I don't see the unstoppable demonic force, I just see the years on the road wearing down on him. And each time they announce his next match the question isn't "What crazy thing will he do this time," it's "Will he be able to get through the match without anyone getting hurt?" To be blunt, that sucks.

In a perfect world, Taker would've taken on the Shawn Michaels after the streak ended — make a few TV appearances every year, hit a few chokeslams and Tombstones, then pose for the cameras. I think if they felt they had to do one last match, that bout with Reigns at WrestleMania 33 was suitable enough. But a big part of me wishes he stopped in 2014.

Ryan Droste: Right after WrestleMania XXX, I think he still had reason to keep his career going. There was the built-in story of The Undertaker trying to regain his glory. Now, one could definitely make the argument that he hasn't been the same in the ring since that moment in time, but I'd have to disagree.

Certainly a lot of the performances have been underwhelming (some of them outright bad), but he did also have a really good Hell In A Cell match against Lesnar at 2015's Hell In A Cell PPV event (4 1/4 stars in the Observer), and their match at SummerSlam that year was also very good (4 stars) so they followed up on what happened at WrestleMania XXX in a big way. I think the real moment in time where he probably should have hung up his tights was after the match at 2017's WrestleMania 33 against Roman Reigns where they really symbolized his career was over with him leaving his gear in the ring under the spotlight at the conclusion.

At the time, most of us thought that was it for his career. I have no problem with the man coming back on the rare occasions that he does, and those returns are still quite rare (he only worked two matches last year, five in 2018, and twice in 2017). The Undertaker is one of the greatest characters in wrestling history and, frankly, he can make a lot of money by returning here and there so who can fault him? But I think from a creative sense, 33 was the right time. It was the main event of the show and he had the perfect send-off.

Matt Aguilar: This is easy for me, and the answer is yes, but with a slight twist. Here's the thing, I don't mind that Undertaker came back after the streak ended. My issue is that he comes back so often that there's no mystique anymore, and the matches he's had after the Lesnar match have been mostly forgettable or boring at best, and that isn't something you should say about the Undertaker. Coming back for one of those matches would have been fine, like the Goldberg match, something that every mark at some point in time wanted to see. That match ended up being one of the worst offenders of all ironically, but the premise was sound. Wrestling against Shane McMahon, Rusev, or teaming up Kane for the 30th time are not sound premises, and as such his legacy would've been better preserved if he'd just retired after Brock.

Evan Valentine: Absolutely 100% yes, but I have a unique spin on how the ending should have happened differently from what we saw. Understandably, this match wasn't just one of the biggest of both Undertaker's and Brock Lesnar's career but it represented a pivotal moment for both wrestlers and their rivalry. So with that being said, I would have loved to see Lesnar officially become the spiritual successor to the 'Taker by once again diving into the "weird side" of wrestling. No one else could be the Undertaker, let's get that out of the way, but giving Lesnar a mythos, or perhaps even a supernatural one in a similar vein to "The Deadman" and Kane, would have been amazing. If Taker can still get in the ring, let him wrestle, but I personally would have loved to see his career end on the highest of notes and the spirit of the Undertaker continue through the WWE in different ways.