Jump to content

Old Lives Matter


tiger_rick

Recommended Posts

  • Paid Members

Rick nailed it in his OP about Taker fans. I’ve got a mate who swears he’s the top guy ever, when in reality he’s never even really been the top guy at any given time. The closest he’s ever been to being positioned as “the man” was getting a good run while most of us were arguing “Bret or Shawn” and the two of them being too distracted by each other or injured to go for the belt properly. He had a “streak” as a USP which came about largely by accident, was initially full of duds and only started being “a thing” when he’d already made it to ten, then largely became an excuse to push him as a bigger deal than he was, and extend his career as a marquee attraction by (fittingly) an unnatural length of time.

I think “favourite” comes into it a lot, as plenty of fans in my age bracket have been following it long enough that Undertaker would have been their first favourite and unlike the rest of us who gravitated to Hogan, Warrior, Bret or Bulldog for instance who’ve seen their favourites leave, retire and even die, Taker stayed around. Lots of kids who loved Undertaker saw him become a company mainstay and once smartened to the business the “locker room leader” stuff combined with his preferential booking (especially around Mania) has created a facade that he’s THE star just by virtue of remaining A star while Hulk Hogan, Steve Austin and John Cena all had their spells as company figurehead.

Company rhetoric possibly has something to do with it too, but while it’s no doubt he had longevity, I’m not sure how much of it could be deemed “successful” from a kayfabe point of view, and from a body of work point of view I’m not sure how many years of top quality matches you might say he clocked up in a 30 year career, unless he was your guy. It’s a little contradictory when I think of the number of guys he had at least one match with which I definitely enjoy revisiting : Bret, Shawn, Mankind, Vader, Austin, Angle, RVD, Jeff Hardy, Lesnar, Cena, Orton, Batista, Triple H, Rey, Punk. Probably others. But these were the exception, not the rule. 

Most of his early stuff was beige as you like until Mankind got the best out him, 98-99 was a write-off excluding Foley’s one man stunt show, the only stuff from 2000-01 I’d consider worth watching had at least 3 other men in the matches or his big return in which he didn’t actually wrestle. After 2003 I’d say there are long periods where his resume shows about one decent match per calendar year if we’re lucky, excluding shortcuts like multi-mans/Elimination Chamber, and my favourite character stuff usually being the Placebo video, the silent challenge for Mania 27 with HHH, and other bits and pieces separate to his actual matches. Once the “streak” was over the bloom was very much off the rose (TM @Liam O'Rourke) for his remaining mystique as a character and we had to suffer some stinkers as a consequence. Bray Wyatt being permitted to kick out of a Tombstone in a match he didn’t win and that ultimately did nothing for him was pretty ridiculous, and I think the Reigns match is still going on today. At least the SummerSlam rematch with Lesnar was pretty good as a spectacle but even that I remember enjoying the hype video more than the match. For most of a 20 year period of his 30 year run, I consider the bad to heavily outweigh the good.

By means of final conclusion, the guys had tremendous longevity in a competitive industry and deserves a lot of credit for reinventing himself so often to keep up with the times and stay relevant. But then, people say that about Madonna and she’s been mostly shit since the 90s too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
1 hour ago, FlushFunk said:

He told the truth. Unbelievable how fickle you guys are. Shitting on a 30+ year career & unarguably one of the greatest ever in the business because he doesn’t like video game in the locker room & thinks talent need to toughen up.

Would he be incorrect if he turned around & said this era is the worst in the history of the business? No, he wouldn’t.

Internet ‘Rasslin fans offended by everything

This is really poor stuff. This wouldn't even have raised a single hackle in 2010. Come on, move on to the cucks and the commies and the keyboard warriors and the snowflakes, it's 2021!

Edited by Devon Malcolm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
3 minutes ago, IronSheik said:

He was a top guy for a very long period in a tough cut throat business which deserves immense respect and he became an attraction that didn't need the belt. 

 

Was it that he didn't need the belt or that he was never a big enough draw that he was worth putting the belt on and building the company around?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, LaGoosh said:

Was it that he didn't need the belt or that he was never a big enough draw that he was worth putting the belt on and building the company around?

I genuinely believe it was that Vince considered him a special attraction. 

There's a Kurt Angle shoot interview where Kurt says something along the lines of "Vince told me I didn't need a belt as I had become a special attraction, like Taker. And I could draw without needing the belt".

Now this could have been Vince working both guys to avoid telling them straight why they aren't having a run with the strap but I believe Taker reached that enviable position of being a legendary special attraction that people wanted to see. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
40 minutes ago, FlushFunk said:

He told the truth. Unbelievable how fickle you guys are. Shitting on a 30+ year career & unarguably one of the greatest ever in the business because he doesn’t like video game in the locker room & thinks talent need to toughen up.

Would he be incorrect if he turned around & said this era is the worst in the history of the business? No, he wouldn’t.

Internet ‘Rasslin fans offended by everything

Sure he would. It's the worst era WWE's ever had creatively but - COVID aside - other companies are doing pretty well. I probably watch more wrestling now than at any other point in my life.

That aside, his point is demonstrably bollocks. WWE is so fucked creatively that in the past year we've seen Bray Wyatt burned to death and Rey Mysterio have his eyeball ripped out. That's pure "Fonzie jumping the shark" shit but instead of asking questions about that, Taker is blaming "The Boys" for not being fucked up drug addicts who'll likely be dead by 40.

I mean, are you seriously suggesting that there's anybody in WWE who would be improved by a drug addiction?

We're also talking about a guy who used to travel with Gary Michael Cappetta in WCW. Why? Because he wanted nothing to do with the crusty old fucks he seems to miss now.

'Taker's an all time great, no question but that doesn't make stupid opinions less stupid. I love Sid too but he thinks the Paige/Brad Maddox videos were broadcast on RAW. Should I respect his opinion too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

Another really good post @air_raid

I think that he was lucky to have his mystique and reputation intact as long as he did because for the last ten years or so of that run he wasn't working anything like a full schedule. That meant he wasn't subjected to the same scrutiny and judgement of his character, matches and declining ability. So while there were quite a few stinkers in there latterly, there could have been dozens of not hundreds more. 

Undertaker is one of those whom we tend to view through rose tinted glasses for whatever reason. Taking the specs off and looking objectively at his career, it's average at best. Yes he had some good matches. Yes he kept what is a fundamentally ridiculous and unbelievable gimmick alive for thirty years when today's talent can't keep there's going for thirty days without audiences losing interest. 

He will not be spoken of as one of the greats, he wouldn't feature on the Mt. Rushmore of wrestling and he didn't have any memorable title runs to speak of. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, King Coconut said:

  

We've known since the dawn of the internet that we shouldn't rise to the deliberately obtuse, yet we persist. If I was boss of the internet I'd get the feeders up against the wall, not the trolls.

Wow what a horrible turn of phrase, I guess it's a good thing you're not then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
33 minutes ago, LaGoosh said:

Was it that he didn't need the belt or that he was never a big enough draw that he was worth putting the belt on and building the company around?

I concur. The 97 run might have persuaded Vince he didn’t need to roll the dice on Steve Austin if Taker had won one weeks ratings against Nitro as WWF Champion. He didn’t, Vince rolled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, FlushFunk said:

I can’t disagree with anything he said.

Wrestling has changed. It is soft. The content isn’t as good, it’s not as fun to watch.

The ratings alone tell you this & I can’t see how it can be argued with.

In general right now it’s the drizzling shits at the top level.

His political views are not important to me although I’m happy to hear he’s a Trump supporter & supports cops, shows class & sense.

You sign up to a wrestling forum just to complain about how shit wrestling is? Then go on to say how supporting Trump shows class and sense.

If you're going to troll, at least be a bit less obvious about it. You're not very good at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...