|
|
Post by Irish Wrestling Entertainment on Mar 27, 2011 12:29:23 GMT -5
One man can carry another to a good match. But one man cannot carry another to a legendary match. Undertaker was as pivotal to the WM matches with HBK as Shawn was.
And I agree with Brain Busters - Undertaker was never 'the' draw. Austin, Rock, Hogan and even Triple H to an extent during the McMahon-Helmsley era; were 'the' draws at their respective times. Undertaker has never been 'the' draw in any period.
|
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Mar 27, 2011 13:41:47 GMT -5
It all comes down to the fact that Taker has never been the #1 guy in the company. Sure, he has been world champ before, but he was never the main draw. When he first showed up, Hogan was at the end of his main run. Then Bret Hart took over the #1 spot, and a few years later it was Shawn Michaels. Austin showed up after Shawn, and then Rocky. Triple H, Kurt Angle, and Brock Lesnar then followed. And most recently, it was Batista and Cena, w/ Cena today still being the #1 guy. It's not a knock against Taker. It's just that he was never pushed as THE MAN.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rule 30 on Mar 27, 2011 13:48:56 GMT -5
Also, Undertaker is always out for like over half the year nowadays, so he just kinda fades away until he makes his big return for a few months.
|
|
gravedigger3
Main Eventer
Empire Wrestling Federation
Joined on: Apr 7, 2006 21:17:04 GMT -5
Posts: 3,434
|
Post by gravedigger3 on Mar 27, 2011 14:21:34 GMT -5
I get laughed at evertime i say this but Undertaker is one of the most under rated superstars of all time
|
|
|
|
Post by The Sexy Psychotic on Mar 27, 2011 14:29:27 GMT -5
I feel the HIAC will always be Foley's match, its the match that made him Mick Foley, not Mankind or Cactus or Dude, it made Mick Foley a wrestling legend. The WM matches against HBK were IMO, both more HBK matches more than anything. Taker was well past his prime, HBK was just coming down from his second 'peak'. And the second WM match between the two was again a pure HBK match, it could have been anyone that faced HBK that night, and it really wouldn't have changed anything.Those matches are just as much 'Taker's as they are his opponents. And I absolutely disagree wholeheartedly on the bolded part.. Lets look at an example of say Austin, his match with Bret at WM13 will always be the match that made Austin, and why, because it could only take place between the two, only Austin and Bret could get that reaction, and wrestle that match, if you put say Austin Vs. Patriot in the match, same build up and everything, it wouldn't have been as good. The thing is, that fued wasn't the Main fued, and it wasn't the mid-card fued, that was NOD/DX, therefore IMO it just seemed as filler, plus again, it was being used to get Kane over as a legit superstar. |
|
Conor
Main Eventer
Joined on: Dec 18, 2008 17:27:35 GMT -5
Posts: 1,199
|
Post by Conor on Mar 27, 2011 14:52:13 GMT -5
people who don't watch wrestling usually name rey mysterio and undertaker to me but maybe thats just me
|
|
|
|
Post by jerichoisback on Mar 27, 2011 15:23:17 GMT -5
Undertaker his ring skills are brutal.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kanenite on Mar 27, 2011 15:27:49 GMT -5
I'm actually really surprised at these responses. Whenever I mention wrestling to people who don't watch it themselves, Undertaker is always one of the first names to pop up. Like seriously, I'd honestly say people I've met can identify him over Shawn Michaels, Bret Hart, John Cena etc. etc. I think of Rock, Austin, Triple H and Undertaker as the 'Big 4', even today. Maybe it's just my generation? Same here! People who don't watch around here say they know The Rock, Austin, Hogan, Taker, and Cena. Sometimes they say Mysterio and Triple H too. |
|
|
|
Post by kazoosandstreamers on Mar 27, 2011 15:50:46 GMT -5
Austin, Rock, HBK, etc. are all great, but I have always put Taker before them.
The guy came along when I was like 4 and I have been hooked ever since.
Truly, the best.
|
|
|
|
Post by k5 on Mar 27, 2011 16:07:46 GMT -5
easily because the company never put everything on taker. sure, he had his title matches, but he was basically one of vince's stupid gimmicks that actually ended up working and sticking. he was never 'the guy' in the company so to speak.
|
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on Mar 27, 2011 16:16:10 GMT -5
I agree with the people who have said Taker was never "the guy." As has been said, Rock, Austin, Cena, Hogan, HBK, Bret, have all been "the guy," and Taker never really got that type of standing within the company.
I know it's probably not a popular opinion, but I think Undertaker is insanely over rated. I think he had arguably the greatest gimmick of all time and is riding it out until the very end. He got a super push before he could even work a match and is essentially glorified because he has been a main eventer for such an extended period of time. I have all the respect in the world for the guy because he has given so much to the business but from a personal standpoint I just don't think he is very good. Smite away I guess, but it is just how I have always felt about his matches and entertainment value. I am pretty sure he has drawn more eye-rolling reactions over the course of the last few years than any other wrestler I can name. Additionally, he hasn't put very many guys over in the past few years either when this is the stage of his career when he should be able to get young talent over in a massive way.
|
|
Da Iceman
Mid-Carder
Joined on: Oct 24, 2010 3:28:12 GMT -5
Posts: 129
|
Post by Da Iceman on Mar 27, 2011 17:50:35 GMT -5
It's funny, while Taker was never labeled "The Guy" in terms of being told to carry the company on a day to day basis in the ring, it is well known to just about everyone that Taker is the most respected of the boys and has always been the go to guy in the locker room.
I will always feel bad that most of Taker's prime was completely wasted on garbage opponents, which really doesn't help his standing in the "greatest of all-time" list. I don't want to anyone to see this as a bash on Taker, it clearly wasn't his fault but when Hart headlining WM, Taker was battling Giant Gonzalez and when Austin was battling the Rock, Taker was hanging the Big Boss Man.
Taker had other big matches and some defining moments but unfortunately, he will go down as the best company man ever and as a wrestler who could carry the load for a short time, could be seen as a legitimate champion and finally, as a wrestler who could work with just about anyone smaller then him (Austin, HBK, Hart, The Rock) and neither would lose any credibility in a loss, which is tough to do. Taker will just never been seen as "The Guy" in any specific era.
|
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Mar 27, 2011 18:41:24 GMT -5
To be fair, HBK didn't put many guys over either towards the end of his career either. In 2007, Orton was champ, but since he didn't defeat Cena, he looked weak. HBK could have made Orton look strong, yet Orton never got a clean win over him and looked ever weaker after the feud(Taker put over Orton a few times during 2005). In 2008/2009, Kozlov was on an undefeated streak, and Taker put him over cleanly, only for HBK to defeat Kozlov a few days later. I can count more young guys that Taker put over than most other veterans over the last 10 years.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 17, 2024 10:14:38 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2011 18:57:51 GMT -5
Everyone I speak to about wrestling (that aren't fans) have at least heard of The Undertaker...so while he may not be the biggest name out there, people do know who he is...
|
|
Ohtimate Wahriah
Main Eventer
WF 10 Year Member
Joined on: Jul 1, 2008 12:35:07 GMT -5
Posts: 2,527
|
Post by Ohtimate Wahriah on Mar 27, 2011 19:36:04 GMT -5
I talk about this with my brother all the time and I agree with TC, He is overlooked. The reason "to me" why Taker isnt as big as Hogan and Austin is because hes hard to market. Even as a good guy you really dont see many people walking around with Purple and Black shirts. Iv been a fan of Takers since the early 90's, Hes never once come out with a shirt I liked or bought.
Another reason is he is a staple of WWE, He has ALWAYS been there so you dont long for the Undertaker like you do the other guys because hes always there. Sadley hes taken for granted which isnt done on purpose, But he is. If Taker would have taken a break in say 99 when the Ministry ended and we havnt seen him since, He would be the most wanted return in wrestling, I believe that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Phantom on Mar 27, 2011 19:46:17 GMT -5
From a wrestling standpoint I always put Taker in the the top 3.
|
|
fearofdread
Superstar
Joined on: Nov 18, 2010 12:40:53 GMT -5
Posts: 560
|
Post by fearofdread on Mar 27, 2011 20:36:04 GMT -5
One thing taker doesn't have is crossover appeal. He never went on SNL, movies, sit-coms. He was and always will be a wrestler.
Think about Hogan, Rock, Austin, Andre. All were in movies (some huge, some not). Heck HHH and Cena are also in in films. Macho did Slim Jim commercials, Mick Foley and HBK have books. Jericho has "best week ever", "I love...", 2 books, and now dancing with the stars.
I can't think of anything the Undertaker has done outside of WWF/E. Heck, even Big Show and Kane have done other projects.
|
|
|
|
Post by T R W on Mar 27, 2011 21:53:36 GMT -5
Mostly because the deadman gimmick is silly.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnnypoopypants on Mar 27, 2011 22:13:50 GMT -5
Mostly because the deadman gimmick is silly. I think that's actually why he's as well known as he is. The Undertaker is pretty much the quintessential silly wrestling gimmick. |
|
|
|
Post by comintogetcha on Mar 27, 2011 22:19:48 GMT -5
The obvious answer is that Austin and Hogan were on top during Pro Wrestling's two huge boom periods, when it was at the peak of it's popularity with the general public. Undertaker has always been a secondary player, no matter what position he's been in. He has never been the top draw, never been the face of the company, and while he has had some very good matches, he's not anywhere in Austin league as far as wrestling ability goes, nor is he anywhere near Hogan as far as charisma and personality.
|
|
