|
|
Post by HandsomeHollywood on Jun 10, 2019 21:45:05 GMT -5
Thought of a bit of a "what if" scenario here for you classics lovers.
Had The Undertaker retired in 1999-2000 like he was originally thinking of doing, what do you think his legacy would be at that point, and how would he have been viewed by the company, the industry and fans thereafter?
|
|
2sweeeeet
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jun 7, 2017 22:08:25 GMT -5
Posts: 2,089
|
Post by 2sweeeeet on Jun 10, 2019 23:48:55 GMT -5
I would have pretty much loved his entire career then. Pretty much anything pre-MoD for me was awesome and anything starting with MoD to present has been kind of meh for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by hbkbigdaddycool on Jun 11, 2019 13:26:32 GMT -5
We would have missed out on some classic matches with the likes of Orton, Batista, Triple H, HBK and Angle.
I do remember the talk of Taker retiring then, but he was so beat up, I mean the man took off September '99 to May 2000 to rest up and fix some nagging injuries.
I do wonder though if WCW had stayed up and running if Undertaker would have taken as much time off and worked that lesser schedule that we got to see him do from 2003 - now.
|
|
|
|
Post by LA Times on Jun 11, 2019 13:40:12 GMT -5
We wouldve missed his great run in the Ruthless Aggression Era where he incorporated MMA maneuvers and got it over with the audience.
|
|
|
|
Post by HandsomeHollywood on Jun 11, 2019 15:38:20 GMT -5
I think he'd be considered a bit of a "what if". He'd be out on a low note, that's for sure. We'd have last seen him doing such things as hanging Bossman as well as teaming with Big Show. Quite the concept to think that Amish beard Undertaker might have been the last Undertaker we'd seen.
I think he'd have been celebrated quite a bit, especially considering that he's a Vince creation.
|
|
|
|
Post by keegandimitrijevic01 on Jun 12, 2019 13:14:16 GMT -5
I think he's the greatest of all time. Had he retired in 2000, he would've missed the great portion of his career. He was great in the 90s, but he was even better between 40-50 years old (that's where all of his best matches took place). Had he retired in 2000, he would've been in the top 5 of all time, but no the best ever.
|
|
|
|
Post by JC Motors on Jun 16, 2019 9:37:02 GMT -5
WWE wouldn't have been the same if he retired early
|
|
|
|
Post by Darkhawk on Jun 17, 2019 2:07:36 GMT -5
He would have missed a great portion of his career if he didn't continue past 2000.
|
|
|
|
Post by Turnbuckle Zealot(Phil) on Jun 26, 2019 21:40:32 GMT -5
His most meaningful matches were built on his dominance of the 90s, on the legend of the man who had endured what WWE often portrays as their greatest decade. His matches with Michaels are often called the closest matches to being perfect of any matches in our lifetime. I think of generations of wrestling fans being closer together than the proper idea of generation, and the fans who grew up in the mid 2000s and our latest decade would have missed out on the aura and majesty of the Undertaker.
I feel like Undertaker should have retired at WrestleMania 30 or they shouldn't have ended the streak at all. It was perfect and the fact that FOR ONCE they had something all the fans could agree on and they just had to squander it. The moment will last forever, but the streak was destined to do that even more so.
|
|
