Nope. I just have a knack for thinking and not speaking as some deluded smarky fanboy. Kindly analyse before choosing your words.@The Killjoy : You are what the people refer to as fanboy.
Oh. Wow. And I'm a fanboy. Wrestling has always revolved around CHARACTERS. It's what brings fans in. Aside from how you clearly never saw 'Takers early work, wrestlers makes characters that are above the norm to grab a fan's attention and imagination. Sting chose to emulate The Joker, because just like how The Crow was popular in the 90's The Joker is today (and technically always). As such, he reaches into a fan's (as in a mark who enjoys the show and doesn't give a damn about stupid details like yourself) imagination and gives him something to relate to.Undertaker is a zombie. Yes he is, but does he look like a fucking zombie to you? As far as I can remember zombies are supposed to have rotten skin, torn clothes and have craving for a fresh brain. I don't remember Undertaker ever having rotten skin, wearing torn clothes, or wanting to eat people's brain. He could have gone a similar route of copying a zombie look but decided to "reinvent" the zombie character.
I'm still the fanboy here. Stings just as big a name as The Undertaker. Learn to deal with it. History isn't gonna re-write itself to favor your ignorance.I don't see how Vince Mcmahon would ever want to put his top guy like the Undertaker against an overrated "A con" Sting.
Yup. Because 'Taker is not wrestling. Thank you Sherlock.I think we can finally say that Undertaker vs Sting will now officially never ever happen.