Undertakers lackluster WM opponents

[ManureTheBear]

Things like those matches mentioned serve to remind us that most people don't start at the top.

If you love to watch a certain guy and he isn't pushed to the moon, just be patient and cross your fingers. That's what I take from those weird 'Taker matches.

[MCMG]

The WM XIX match is the one that annoys me the most. A-train and the Big Show vs the Undertaker.

Look at this card and see the talent on display. Rock/Austin Lesnar/Angle HHH/Booker T HBK/Y2J. Hell even Matt Hardy/Rey Mysterio is a good combination. There are two ways to look at this card. 1) It was so good that there was no space for a big-name Taker match. 2) There is so much talent - How the f**k did they not do better with the Undertaker.
I think 2. This is obvious when you think that as well as the aforementioned matches both Eddie Guerrero and Chris Benoit were in a triple threat tag-team match. Eddie teamed with Chavo and Benoit teamed with Rhyno. Yes. Rhyno. Would Benoit/Taker be better than handicap match? Of course it would. Two greats of the ring and it would be one of his best at Mania.

Mark Henry was another poor choice. Did anyone actually believe that he would end the streak. He is simply not worthy of facing the Undertaker at Wresltmania.

I loved the match but Taker/HHH part 3 was just overkill. Match of the night. Match of the year. Just before and after the match it feels like they could have done something different. There are other options that this for the third time. However, i did love this match and glad it happened.

[THTRobtaylor]

Taker WAS pushed to the moon though and DID start at the top- his first match he took out Dusty Rhodes and Koko B Ware via Ted DiBiase... Push didn't get bigger for a debut at that time and one year later he was tombstoneing Hogan for the title. They throttled back on that push the moment he got the belt - not sure why to this day, maybe Hogan balked at it, maybe they just didn't quite have enough faith in Taker at that time or just felt Flair was the better guy but a 3 day 1st title reign a year to your debut is even now not a common occurrence. From then they put Taker with whoever was bigger than him, every time - all it really did was show that for a "physical specimen" which he is, he wasn't that special or rare...

My suggestions would have meant he was a main event worker off the bat - what we got was something else, a replacement for Andre. It worked... but had they shown proper faith with Taker at the time and used a path similar to what I suggested, the 95 lull might not have happened... he could have easily put WCW to the sword.

[FlairFan2003]

Taker's 1st title run was just a short surprise to throw off and shock the audience.

When you look at Taker's opponents you have to consider where he was on the card over all and who was ahead of him and why. No doubt WWE saw Taker as a great gimmick but saw more long term value in more realistic wrestlers such as Hart, HBK, Nash, Luger, & Yokozuna from 93-95. In the late 90s he was a bigger part of the show but the hoopla was generated by the the surprising rise to prominence of Austin & Rock.

Certainly as Taker's legend grew (plus the abscences of Austin & Rock) there is no doubt the matches gained higher profile and had more importance.

Ultimately, I understand the booking of Most of Taker's early WM bouts, especially in light of where he was on the roster vs Hart, Yoko, HBK, et all. Could WWE have utilized him better during those years ? Sure. WCW definately misused Flair & Hart and Goldberg during the Monday Night Wars. WWE could have mined more from Ted DiBiase after his feud vs Savage in 1988. Hindsight is 20/20. Ultimately the sum and length of The Streak along with high profile wins over Flair, Triple H, HBK (especially The Streak vs Retirement Match), Batista, Edge, etc really make it one of the most impressive things we've seen in the last 30 years of pro wrestling.

[Robert86]

Ironically, I always thought that The Undertaker vs Hulk Hogan at WM6 should have taken place instead of The Ultimate Warrior. That would have been the true passing the torch moment. The Undertaker began his Streak at WM7. Taker has been undefeated at WrestleMania for 22 years now and the cornerstone of WWE ever since he started with them

Ultimate Warrior was just a waste of space, time, & money.

Originally Posted by Headman

The Ultimate Warrior would have ended his streak before it even got started. You should be glad he didn't face Warrior at that time for that reason alone. You are right about Gonzales though. Taker eventually got a clean win over him, but his WM effort looked quite pathetic. I do understand that the WWF still had plans for the rivalry, but Taker looked weak on the grandest stage of them all. I still don't mind Gonzales as an opponent for Taker at WM and didn't expect a wrestling classic, but the way the match was booked just wasn't very favorable for Taker. Actually the only opponents on your list that I would have changed would be The Big Boss Man (Awful match) and Albert/Big Show. It should have been Taker vs Show one on one. I also would have changed Mark Henry because no one on planet earth thought Mark Henry stood a shot in hell at that time.

[The Eighties]

I always thought Boss Man vs Taker could have been better as Boss Man was a good worker and if the match wasn't booked to reflect their position on the card I think they could have had a great match even if it was an odd one as both were heels in the storyline. The only other viable opponent that year was Shamrock.

The match with Gonzalez was the drizzling shits but the only other option that year was Bam Bam Bigelow and I think back to Rumble 93, the arrival of Gonzalez with Wippleman during the Rumble match, even with the goofy fur pads and muscle suit nothing could dilute the visual awe of a man standing head and shoulders over The Undertaker, you simply wouldn't get that with Bigelow. So it was the right match IMO and I'm not sure there was any way to make it better as at the time Taker was working as a slow zombie and Gonzalez couldn't do anything well, those that place him and Khali together do Khali a disservice.

Mania 19 certainly should have been Taker vs Show in a singles match instead of the crappy tag match that was actually a handicap match for the most part.

The choice of Mark Henry at Mania 22 was a bit baffling as well since he wasn't the destroyer he is now. Looking at the card that night JBL would have been a viable option as I don't think Taker had beaten him at that point as he always escaped in their title matches. The most interesting option would have been a heel turned Benoit vs Taker. This is really the only one of the choices where I think there were viable other options, the rest of his opponents were the right choices at the time.

[THTRobtaylor]

That was what I never understood though - you have a guy who was 6ft 10" billed - towered over the roster and they, year on year tried to make him small and the underdog by bringing in chumps like Gonzales. Rather than building him and his skills early so he could be the legit new Hogan level worker - they just repeatedly put him with bigger, shitter workers. I don't buy it was a "surprise" to tease the fans, I think they pulled the trigger but Hogan was flip-flopping on staying/going/working with Flair - Taker v Hogan at Mania 8 was probably their original back up. It's kinda telling that almost immediately after that Tuesday in Texas clusterfuck - Taker was a face, they panicked when Sid didn't deliver in that role and moved him over, thus setting the pattern for his booking for the next 5 years. It's odd that Hogan would bring in Taker, but not seem to want to work him at Mania, choosing Sid instead.

I get they always had Andre till that point, but they didn't need to replace him in that way. Taker was never a roid freak so they didn't need to worry about that side of things.

For the guy who said Mania 6 for Taker, he didn't sign for them till after then, as Hogan met him while shooting Suburban Commando and recommended him at that point. Like I said earlier, it's hard to criticize because in the end they got more than they may have done out of the character otherwise - but come 95 - WWF was the shits and Taker was fighting Mabel and Kama rather than being the star of the show he could have been beginning a face run after being heel for those first 4 years.

[FlairFan2003]

[quote=THTRobtaylor;4355697]That was what I never understood though - you have a guy who was 6ft 10" billed - towered over the roster and they, year on year tried to make him small and the underdog by bringing in chumps like Gonzales. Rather than building him and his skills early so he could be the legit new Hogan level worker - they just repeatedly put him with bigger, shitter workers. I don't buy it was a "surprise" to tease the fans, I think they pulled the trigger but Hogan was flip-flopping on staying/going/working with Flair - Taker v Hogan at Mania 8 was probably their original back up. It's kinda telling that almost immediately after that Tuesday in Texas clusterfuck - Taker was a face, they panicked when Sid didn't deliver in that role and moved him over, thus setting the pattern for his booking for the next 5 years. It's odd that Hogan would bring in Taker, but not seem to want to work him at Mania, choosing Sid instead.

QUOTE]

Yes Taker got a nice push coming in but if he would have faced either Ultimate Warrior or Hogan early on he almost certainly would have been booked to lose. He was young, fairly unknown, WWE saw potential in the gimmick and liked his athleticism but you dont book the brand new guy against the superstar at a premium event and think A.) Average fans will watch (they wont, too much belief the SuperStar will win, no drama) B.) The company would be foolish enough to put so much bank so soon behind such a newcomer. How many years did it take Randy Savage, who was more established in the wrestling industry under his gimmick, to be a WM headliner ? Brett Hart was a well known commodity as a tag wrestler but still needed a full two plus years as a singles star before he was consistent headliner ? Rare exceptions were guys like DiBiase (very well known, very experienced, great gimmick) and Flair (the 2nd biggest star nationwide in the 80s behind Hogan, definately the biggest non WWE star) but their experience and audience recognition made them different.

With regards to WrestleMania 8 the long held story was that WWE wanted a Sid vs Hogan match originally but started tinkering with the plans when Flair became available. The Federal Steroid Investigation started heating up in late 91/early 92 which lead WWE over the next year to start purging wrestlers with drug issues (Marty Jannetty, Kerry Von Erich) and any involvement in the case. Hogan & Piper, two prinicpals in the investigation, suddenly had to disappear. At the start of 92 WWE wasnt looking for Hogan to leave. Furthermore, once it became apparent that it was in everyone's best interest for Hogan to take time off it made no sense to book him to win the World Title off Flair if he wasnt going to stick around for subsequent house shows and a final blow off match. They certainly werent going to book Hogan to lose in that sitiuation with no time table for win (or if) he would come back and get revenge. Hogan needed an opponent who was credible, established, and who wouldnt be harmed significantly by losing clean in what was to be billed his "Final Match" - Flair or Savage could have filled that bill but again Flair was champ and it made no sense to have him lose to Hogan if Hogan was leaving. Savage was a fan favorite at the time. Taker was not established enough with the audience to be seen as a credible threat to Hogan (most people I know didnt think Taker would beat Jake Roberts on the show, although back in those days backstage info like Roberts pending departure were not known). Sid fit that bill.

If WWE had seen Taker's potential as a legit main event attraction and not just a gimmick then maybe he would have been booked in a more significant way during the 93-96 years when WWE clearly wasnt settled on Hart but chose to challenge him for the top spot in the company with a revolving door of HBK, YokoZuna, Kevin Nash, etc. Again, hindsight is 20/20.

Taker is then rare wrestler who's charisma and performance ability got him so over with fans that even when he was booked poorly, underutilized, or made to look weak he STILL remained way over with those fans. Not many guys have that ability. I would say Austin & Flair had it, maybe Savage, but there just arent many guys who can be underutilized like that and still remain huge. Taker has, it's a big part of what really makes him a legend in the business.