So what do you think about The Undertaker?

[CBright7831 0]

So w/ Taker returning this Sunday in what may be his last run in I thought I would ask what everyone's opinion on the guy is. I became a fan of his in 1991 when I saw him face off against Hulk Hogan. He's one of the few superstars who has got better as he 's aged. He has had so many great matches. Taker's match w/ HBK in HIAC was my favorite match of the 199. Taker also had one of my favorite matches in 2002 against Brock Lesnar in the HIAC match. Earlier that year, instead of Rock/Hogan, Taker/Flair was my favorite match at WM 18. I can't hate the guy except for how he acted during the Invasion angle. Besides that, I find it hard to not like The Undertaker.

 

Discuss.

[Obi Chris Kenobi 0]

In terms of variation and moves he's always been pretty weak, however, he's a great storyteller and his character has carried him through the years. He has had great matches, but they were more to do with the story behind them (and at times the gimmick they involved). When I think about the Undertaker, I don't so much as think of the 'great matches' he's had, but rather the promos and vignettes.

 

I didn't like him as much during his 'American Badass' period, though I guess something was needed to freshen him up.

[King Cucaracha 0]

When I think about the Undertaker, I don't so much as think of the 'great matches' he's had, but rather the promos and vignettes.

 

I do agree. But the thing is, for a lot of his career, he was either restricted by his character in the beginning when he was really slow, deliberately, or paired up with whatever big guy they could find month in and month out (particularly his first face run), so he didn't have the chance to have great matches even if he could.

 

Whenever he's been given a capable opponent, he's more often than not produced good to great matches. Hell, he's got a pretty damn impressive back catalogue of matches, considering some of the stiffs he's been stuck with over the years. Granted I'm a big Taker mark but I really don't think he gets the credit he deserves sometimes, for whatever reason (the sports entertainmenty gimmick, the opponents he's been lumbered with, OMG teh politks!)

 

 

The only problem I have nowadays is the reliance on the same old "Nobody has ever dominated The Undertaker like -GENERIC BIG MAN OF THE MONTH- just did!" storyline and the same old routine of everybody having to be scared of The Undertaker, which ruins a lot of promising feuds, like with Orton or even Batista.

[Frosty 0]

I think Taker is awesome and I for one would love to see another feud with HHH. With both getting older I think this could be a great chance to have one last run with both of them against each other. Just have them go all out at each other and it could be one of the best matches in years.

[TheSSNintendo 0]

I do agree. But the thing is, for a lot of his career, he was either restricted by his character in the beginning when he was really slow, deliberately, or paired up with whatever big guy they could find month in and month out (particularly his first face run), so he didn't have the chance to have great matches even if he could.

 

That never stopped him from breaking out a leapfrog, drop toe hold, and a dropkick in a match against Samu on Raw in '93.

 

 

 

[Dobbs 3K 0]

The Undertaker is probably one of the best big man wrestlers in North America in the last 15+ years easily (let's not get into a debate about who is better). He's going to go down as one of the true legends of WWF/WWE.

 

That said...I kind of hope this run is basically his last. I'd like to see him put someone over in a final match, and then retire into the sunset and enjoy a well earned retirement.

[Prophet of Mike Zagurski 0]

I can't ever see the Undertaker retiring. I wouldn't know how Vince would book that.

The Undertaker has gotten better over time. His matches with Hogan were awful. His match with Diesel at WM 12 was pretty good.

There isn't much for him to do now.

[Scroby 0]

I'd always buy a ticket to a wrestling show if the Undertaker was schduled to be on it.

[theintensifier 0]

Never been a huge fan of the Undertaker. He rarely loses cleanly, his gimmick has changed far too many times over the years, he's not that spectacular in the ring (never has been), he always wins handicap matches, he's worse than HHH about protecting his image and his career, cannot forget his standing in the locker room.

[Aero 0]

He's one of my favorites of all time. When he returned in 2000 as the American Bad Ass, he was tolerable, but not as cool as he was. It wasn't until he turned heel in late 2001 that I really started liking him again. In fact, by the time WWE decided to have him go deadman again in late 2003, I was wishing he wouldn't so he didn't have to be limited by the zombie gimmick again. Lately, he's been good. He can have good matches here and there, and great matches with certain people. The only reason I'm not overly excited for his return is because of the Khali feud, which we know is on the horizon after he finishes with Henry.

[The Metal Maniac 0]

Undertaker was my absolute favourite wrestler since I started watching wrestling in about 93, until somewhere around 2001 or so, maybe. Not that I ever stopped liking him, but I just started liking others more. But back in the day, anyone who was wrestling Undertaker was instantly my most-hated wrestler. I DESPISED Yokozuna for the longest time, because of that Casket match.

 

I'd say he does need to actually like, put people over, but I still think he's not as bad as some people - he may win virtually all his feuds, but at least they're rarely title feuds. He's only been champ what, 5 times now, in 17 years of being a main eventer? Could be worse. And he still seems capable of entertaining people, so I see no harm in giving him one last title run.

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

Never been a huge fan of the Undertaker. He rarely loses cleanly, his gimmick has changed far too many times over the years, he's not that spectacular in the ring (never has been), he always wins handicap matches, he's worse than HHH about protecting his image and his career, cannot forget his standing in the locker room.

 

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

So what do you think about The Undertaker?

I'm not feeling it. Maybe next month.

[Hawk 34 0]

So what do you think about The Undertaker?

I'm not feeling it. Maybe next month.

 

One of the most overused internet jokes. So, fuck him for bringing that around.

[Lil' Bitch 0]

I've always been an Undertaker fan except for the biker years, but he was great on the mic during that. I miss him cutting promos. There's some stuff I disagree with him doing (the Palumbo / O'Haire crap, not putting Brock over initially, being involved in too many shitty feuds). I wish he would have been world champion more. He's been in for like 17 years now and has had only 5 title runs, most of them being ridiculously short?

[Brocklock 0]

I agree that Taker's aged greatly. I thought his character was great around the early years, but the matches were terrible. Around 96/97 he busted his ass, and showed that he could be a great big man when necessary. From 98-02, his promos were good, but his matches were lacking. In particular I remember a great yet weird promo around 99 about Big Show being left in a desert somewhere. Out of nowhere, he also had a great 2003. He's been ruling 2006/2007 as well, so I hope he continues being really good. He shockingly carried Khali to a couple of decent matches by bumping like a madman, and had some of the best matches of Batista and Kennedy's career's so far.

[Guest Floridian Cool]

He does way more in the ring than "The Man of 1,000 Stomps" Ken Kennedy.

[HollywoodSpikeJenkins 0]

Can we stop using "I'm not feeling it" in a negative manner? It's been how many years and for the love of God, it was a throw-away PPV and he ended up making up for it by putting Brock over the very next month in HIAC.

[King Cucaracha 0]

Shh! If we can't use these kind of things to determine who not to like, how else are we supposed to decide exactly!?

 

Besides, you can't let these things just blow over. It's not like Meltzer publishes a "Who you should hate this week" list or something. (Not an official one, anyway.)

[UseTheSledgehammerUh 0]

He's hit or miss, depending on how big of an event he's on and who he is in the ring with. Taker is not capable of carrying anyone, but certainly could hang with quicker, more talented guys like Bret, Angle, and Michaels (a shame we never got a Benoit/Taker PPV bout) and has had decent matches with bigger guys like Batista, but these were miracles.

 

Wasn't a fun of the formulatic "pound on zombie taker, big comeback with the tombstone" era from 91-96, once he became human and starting taking losses in the feud with Mankind in '96, he became more likeable to me, but was still rather dull at times.

 

Favorite Taker Runs: Summer of 1997 and Corporate Ministry, just for the character going satanic.

[theintensifier 0]

Well of course he can hang with those kinds of talent. Taker has some ability.

 

Tonight is the reason why I dislike the Undertaker. He gets his huge, five figured, elaborate return. A huge entrance like that, is wasted on a run of the mill pay per view, against Mark Henry, and the match is only 12 minutes long.

[Diamonddust 0]

Where as I've never been just a huge Undertaker fan, I've always been entertained by the character. The whole presentation worked for me - the music, the lighting, the ring attire (Well, when he was dressing like an old fashioned Undertaker), the body bag, etc. I'll also give him credit for being one of the more mobile big men in the business and willing to bust out some high risk moves for a man his size.

 

Still, I prefer the early Undertaker to the one today, although his stretch from '97 to around '99 was pretty entertaining (The feud with Shawn Michaels that gave us Hell in the Cell 1, and the feud with Austin in '98).

[normam 0]

The Undertaker is probably one of the best big man wrestlers in North America in the last 15+ years easily (let's not get into a debate about who is better). He's going to go down as one of the true legends of WWF/WWE.

 

That said...I kind of hope this run is basically his last. I'd like to see him put someone over in a final match, and then retire into the sunset and enjoy a well earned retirement.

 

Personally, i cant see the undertaker retiring from wwf/wwe altogether, maybe from the active roster in a year/2 years time sure, but im sure he will be doing something behind the scenes, maybe as a trainer or something.

[Guest Kliqster]

He's hit or miss, depending on how big of an event he's on and who he is in the ring with. Taker is not capable of carrying anyone, but certainly could hang with quicker, more talented guys like Bret, Angle, and Michaels (a shame we never got a Benoit/Taker PPV bout)

 

We did, Rebellion 2000.

[luke-o 0]

I've always been an Undertaker mark, and probably always will be. My only problem since his WMXX return is that this run of the "deadman" gimmick seems like a really half assed attempt at it. I mean he's wearing the same ring gear he was when he was "biker taker", only with longer hair and eye make up. Note to Mark Calloway, wearing eye make up does not make you look dead.

 

And every fued he has now is exactly the same. Heel claims he's not afraid of the dead man, Taker does some "spooky" stuff to scare heel, leads to match, Taker wins. Repeat.

[Boxer 0]

I've always been an Undertaker mark, and probably always will be. My only problem since his WMXX return is that this run of the "deadman" gimmick seems like a really half assed attempt at it. I mean he's wearing the same ring gear he was when he was "biker taker", only with longer hair and eye make up. Note to Mark Calloway, wearing eye make up does not make you look dead.

 

And every fued he has now is exactly the same. Heel claims he's not afraid of the dead man, Taker does some "spooky" stuff to scare heel, leads to match, Taker wins. Repeat.

 

The only match that was ever really "different" was Angle vs. Taker from No Way Out. Every other match has kinda had the same formula and same style.

[Toxxic 0]

I've never been sure what the point of the eyeliner is, either. Jeff Hardy, sure. CM Punk, fine. It just looks mildly alarming on someone like Taker.

 

In terms of my opinion of him, I think it's fair to say that Undertaker can work well when he wants to, but put him in a match with a big guy and his offence is mainly limited to punches and headbutts, and even when he's not he sometimes relies too much on his character to tell the story of the match. And the only surprising finish I've seen to a match of his recently (i.e. since the Deadman return) was when Khali beat him by kicking him in the face. Otherwise you know that either the heel will win to set up the Undertaker's vengeance, or the heel is dead, and you know which before the match starts. Which isn't his fault, that's the booking committee.

[Guest the_last_rites]

I would expect this from a lot of 'wrestlingforum' guys but atleast here at TSM I thought people wouldnt be quick to jump to conclusions. Since when does someone have to lose to a wrestler to put that wrestler over? Let me ask you something Taker lost cleanly to Santana but did that put him over? Aww heck no. Taker has done enough when it comes to putting people over. Sure he was no Rock when it came to selling your opponent. But let me ask you which big man in the history of wrestling has ever had to sell/put over all guys who deserve a main event rub like that? It just doesnt work like that. I'm sure Taker may have had his say in not putting particular people over but I think after 17 years of busting your ass in a company like WWE you're entitled to atleast that amount of creative control. Moreover I've never seen Taker bury anyone of consequence in the course of going over them. To me that signifies a man who doesnt take liberties in the ring as well as backstage.

[Toxxic 0]

Well, you never actually BEAT Taker. You just put off losing to him for a while. Even if someone beats him once, he always wins the money match. From what I recall since I started watching again in 2000, anyway. No-one ever beats him, and that's the end of story and they both move on to different feuds with the other guy being elevated.

[Lil' Bitch 0]

vs. Stone Cold Steve Austin, RAW following King of The Ring 1999

vs. Brock Lesnar, Hell in a Cell, No Mercy 2002

vs. Triple H, Insurrection 2002

vs. Kurt Angle, No Way Out 2006

vs. Khali, Judgement Day 2006

 

Are there any other times where The Undertaker has lost clean?