jester 0 Report post Posted July 9, 2004 Fuck when he retires. How about Taker putting people over NOW? Too funny. Seriously, if WM 21 was Taker's last appearance I believe Orton killing the legend of the streak would be awesome. I honestly think that Orton should have just come out of the blue and done that at WMXX. Orton's legend killer gimmick never worked for me because he didn't actually kill any legends. But if he'd cost Take that, THEN he'd have something to brag about, which would have made him extra hated. Plus Kane would finally have a win over Taker. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
King Cucaracha 0 Report post Posted July 9, 2004 Paul London. Or CM Punk, coz he is cool~! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
razazteca 0 Report post Posted July 9, 2004 AJ Styles Bryan Danielson Paul London Jamie Noble Eddie Guerrero If Randy Orton ever got his hand on "the torch" he would get 3rd degree burns. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spaceman Spiff 0 Report post Posted July 9, 2004 I don't see the reasoning behind Taker putting over Kane. Kane's already established, and really isn't going to get any more over than he has already gotten, so Taker jobbing to him on his way out doesn't do anything for anyone. Sure, maybe history-wise, it'd make sense, but it really wouldn't help anyone. Taker would have to put over a guy on the cusp of superstardom. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iggymcfly 0 Report post Posted July 9, 2004 A character alone won't get you over (at least not over like Taker is). Look no further than Kane for proof. When he first came in he was billed as an unstoppable monster and basically mirrored Taker's character. Once he started losing he was no longer seen as a main eventer. Sure he was still over, but never to the same level as Taker. With the characters being so similar and both men being similar workers, the reason must be because Taker did so few jobs. Actually, Kane overcame losses to people like X-Pac fine. When he really started losing his heat was when they did that stupid shit with his character where they completely denied his whole backstory, and just said he was some guy who killed his girlfriend in a drunk driving accident. Apparently, he decided he was burned from a childhood fire when he was about 18, and started wearing a mask. They took a perfectly good story, and buried it for a stupid one. The people tried to give it a pass anyway when Kane got his monster push, but then he started magically overcoming fire, and wrestling ridiculous matches with Shane, and they finally just had to give up. At least the stupid shit in Undertaker's character is more alluded to. It's not completely contradictory. For instance, when they say that Paul Bearer was the only person who mattered to him, he could be divorced from Sara or something, and in a place where he feels that way. It's not ridiculous. Kane's character has so many plot holes that people who watch regularly just can't take it seriously. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Quik Report post Posted July 10, 2004 Whoever said Nunzio, I agree. But Nunzio has to kill and crucify the Undertaker after match, maybe embalm him too. I would so mark out for that. Imagine Michael Cole's comentary... "My God, he's CRUCIFYING the UNDERTAKER! He could get stuck on that nail! Wait, he DID get STUCK on that NAIL!" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
razazteca 0 Report post Posted July 10, 2004 The FBI would have to put a "hit" on Undertaker...........or bring in Big Sal to sit on him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Australian Pride 0 Report post Posted July 10, 2004 In terms of people the Undertaker buried then the top choice would be DDP (and Kanyon). Since DDP's retired it's not going to happen. How about Undertaker vs Mick Foley, Hell in a Cell part 2, only this time we have Foley going over. Other than that you Kane (who deserves a PPV win), or HHH may pull out the card for his WM17 job and ask for the favour to be returned. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Fook Report post Posted July 10, 2004 There's no reason for any of those guys to go over Taker now. It should be a young up-and-comer who retires Taker so they can make a name for themselves. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Australian Pride 0 Report post Posted July 10, 2004 There's no reason for any of those guys to go over Taker now. It should be a young up-and-comer who retires Taker so they can make a name for themselves. You're right, it should be. But do you really see it happening? A UT match against either HHH/Foley/Kane, which is billed as his last match, would draw some bucks. In the end that's all Vince and family care about. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Your Olympic Hero Report post Posted July 11, 2004 Tajiri Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Copper Feel 0 Report post Posted July 11, 2004 this young up and comer! just using wwe logic. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
k thx 0 Report post Posted July 11, 2004 I like the idea of Taker retiring. Who was the last major wrestler to retire of their own choice while still in the majors? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
