Jump to content

Undertaker/Sting discussion thread, inc 14/02 *Raw Spoilers*


danchilton

Recommended Posts

  • Paid Members
Vader is probably the most notorious - plenty of fire, but by a lot of accounts was not stiff.

Vader wasnt stiff? Hulk Hogan in WCW and Vince McMahon in the WWF were responsable for making sure he never touched his opponents. Shawn Michaels threated to get Vader fired midway through a match at SummerSlam 96. The reason Vader wasnt known as being stiff (after years of abusing jobbers and taking liberties with his opponents) was because the head brass at the WCW and the WWF made sure he wasnt stiff or he was out the door. And Vader wasnt the same. Actually Vaders situation heightens my point even more.

 

That's getting off the point now. I'm saying WWE COULD have marketed him, not that they would have marketed him. We're talking about, effectively, about whether or not he had anything they could work with, and I'm saying he did. Look is important in WWE, but they've proven time and time again they can make any look work, from Earthquake to Daniel Bryan to Mick Foley to Big Daddy V (IMO the best fat monster since 'Quake) to even Colin What's-His-Face before they released him.

All of those wrestlers (apart from Mable, but at least he could speak the language and was tall) was that they had other qualities the WWF and McMahon loved. Earthquake was made for the WWF. He was big, could move, was loved by Hogan and was light as a feather. Foley had charisma out the arse and could bump like nobodies business. Daniel Bryan is a termendous worker and is actually a good onscreen performer. The original point was that he could "make it" in the WWF. If that skinny bloke called Colin who knocked about with Tommy Dreamer is considered "making it", then WWF would have probably loved to have had Hashimoto on the roster just to laugh at the sheets about how they are "burying him".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 744
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Paid Members

Enjoying the discussion, and will post later, but am on my mobile at the moment and will be off to go clubbing later, so most likely will get back to you tomorrow with responses. Enjoy your Saturday night, man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

The Observer are saying that these videos were made specifically for The Undertaker & that Sting coming in would be unlikely. He's available, but at the end of the day, if the vieos have been made for Taker, I wouldn't be holding my breath on seeing Sting. I'm pretty disappointed by that, as it was Sting I thought of first when I saw the videos. If I'd thought of Taker first then maybe I wouldn't have gotten my hopes up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
According to a very reliable backstage source, there has been absolutely no contact between Steve "Sting" Borden and World Wrestling Entertainment officials.

 

This story was way overblown by many fans due to a New York Daily News report claiming Sting had signed a one-year deal with WWE.

 

Source: The Wrestling Observer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to a very reliable backstage source, there has been absolutely no contact between Steve "Sting" Borden and World Wrestling Entertainment officials.

 

This story was way overblown by many fans due to a New York Daily News report claiming Sting had signed a one-year deal with WWE.

 

Source: The Wrestling Observer

 

That's a shame.

 

Vince has made offers to Sting in the past surely? Whenever Sting is mentioned in the WWE, on DVD's or whatever, he always gets put over as a legend and a great wrestler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

Hey Ian - enjoyed the discussion, but am just too tired now. Will probably regret not continuing, as it's been fun, but will concede the argument. Thanks.

 

 

 

 

On-topic, I still maintain that if we do see Sting ever in WWE against 'Taker, I'd rather it not be at 'Mania, simply because the outcome's just far too obvious, and whilst Sting's great, I don't think he's as good a worker as Michaels to be able to make us believe, even for a second, that he might win at any point. Also, never really understood why 'Taker's the natural opponent for him - I've always wanted to see him against Trips, HBK or The Rock. Unfortunately only one of those can happen now, but I think it'd be good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, never really understood why 'Taker's the natural opponent for him

Really? I've never ever had it as a dream match either, but I can see why other people do. It's the proximity of the gimmicks, as is evident from this hype video that could be for either one of them. They're the two most famous goth wrestlers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it is Taker, i think i'll just give wrestling a miss for 6 months. Honestly the most into WWE i have been in years has been Diesel's cameo at RR. WWE for me is in desperate need of a new Hogan, Rock or Austin. Everyone barring CM punk just screams generic at me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sting-Taker would also be a babyface match - I'm sure it'd still work though and at this point I think its the best match they can do with Sting.

 

Those videos were a bit of a tease though, weren't they? The music was definitely Stinger-esque.

 

As a fan I'm always hoping that they could still bring Sting in as a true surprise and were just working us by saying it's Taker. However these days they don't try and cover anything up at all. I was thinking that about Nash and Booker at the Rumble, even if you hadn't read it on here it'd would've been tough to stay spoiler free as the airport videos were all over the net. All they'd have to do would be to fly them into another airport and drive them to the arena from another city. Even if it added two or three hours to the journey wouldn't it be worth it for the surprise payoff?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...