Does the Undertaker Bury Talent?

[Andy G]

In a way I see the main point of what the thread maker is talking about. I know The Undertaker is a beyond huge name, but his special appearances in my opinion isnt fair to the others that just get squashed by him. I am as big of a Undertaker fan as anyone else, but I too think that he buries careers.

 

[Milto]

I can see what u mean but I don't think the Undertaker bury talent. He only really fights against other big names. If he fights anyone with a lesser name it's usually a one off and you have to expect him to win that, as would every other big name in wrestling. Other than that whe he has fueds with others it still relatively back and forth. Undertaker might win more then the other guy but he;s earned that right to do so. You can;t build a character into something as big as the Undertaker and not have him win at a high percentage.
And you can;t really pick out the Undertaker or even HHH as theres a few who win most of their matches, there always will be.

 

[reddevil69]

Taker does not bury anyone...he is the most popular wrestler in the company and is the main star of smackdown for a reason...most people want to see him and they do not want to see him lose to his opponent....Edge is not an idiot...he knows he has a damn good job and that it's his job to enetertain the fans...if the majority of the fans want Taker to win at mania, then that is edges job, to put Taker over at Mania....there are always going to be top guys in a wrestling promotion that are going to win 90% of the time...that's how the business has worked for the last 80 years....Taker has earned that spot and everyone on the roster knows it....he's had 5 world titles in 17 years compared to HHH's 11 titles in 11 years (which is even more ridiculous when you consider he's won all 11 in the last 8 years)...every shoot interview or non-wwe magazine interview with any wrestler, or book i've ever read has been only positive regarding taker...he is the locker room leader and the most
respected member of the roster...his peers would not hold him in that regard if he was a backstabbing politician who tries to bury peoples careers....i think that is alot of horseshit that the dirtsheets and IWC manufacture in order to sell newsletters....and let's not forget that, before anyone knew what to make of Khali, and what kind of a worker he would turn out to be, Taker lay down for him at Judgement day 2006, and let him himself be pinned with one foot....i'd like to see HHH,HBK, or Hogan or even Austin do that....

 

[mtuphill]

If the undertaker buries anyone it is because he normaly gets given rubbish opponts.
I mean remember heidenright or kahlia

 

[mabuza]

Taker has only been champ 4 times because he's not long-term worldchamp material.He should have put over Orton at WM21,but didnt.HHH is gets the worst rep in wrestling for no good reason IMO.My feeling is that while he has used his influence backstage,he's always put the company 1st.I dare anyone to give me an example of a decision he made that cost the WWE big time.People complain about him putting his buds over a few years back.Hmmm,HHH& Orton,who also happen to be the world champs in the WWE right now.
HHH jobs like noone else ver would.He's got the worst WM mainevent record in history because he was willing to put other guys over.And at No Mercy the guy wrestled 3 matches in one night.Thats f*ng committment.

 

[reddevil69]

Taker has only been champ 4 times because he's not long-term worldchamp material.He should have put over Orton at WM21,but didnt.HHH is gets the worst rep in wrestling for no good reason IMO.My feeling is that while he has used his influence backstage,he's always put the company 1st.I dare anyone to give me an example of a decision he made that cost the WWE big time.People complain about him putting his buds over a few years back.Hmmm,HHH& Orton,who also happen to be the world champs in the WWE right now.
HHH jobs like noone else ver would.He's got the worst WM mainevent record in history because he was willing to put other guys over.And at No Mercy the guy wrestled 3 matches in one night.Thats f*ng committment.

yeah he wrestled 3 times in one night and made Umaga look like a joke by 'hulking out' after taking a shit kicking from a guy that Cena, who was the the champ for a year and beat HHH twice on ppv, barely was able to defeat at the rumble this year....no, HHH doesn't hurt the business at all....and i got news for ya, Taker is a bigger draw than H and was about to get title for close to a year because he is long term champ material...and if you think HHH doesn't use his relationship and influence to hurt other people's careers, i suggest you read the latest interview with Booker on this site and you should also talk to Jericho and Angle and while you are at it Goldberg...HHH had an opportunity to draw huge money with him in 2003 and instead politicked his way to killing Goldbergs heat and bringing the ratings and buy rates down to a new low in the summer and fall of 2003......NO ONE that has ever walked through the doors of WWE, has ever said a bad word about Taker...he is a universally respected locker room leader, held in the highest regard by his peers....i don't recall ever hearing HHH regarded in those terms....instead of putting Booker over at Mania in 2003, which was supposed to be the plan, the finish was changed a week before the event so HHH could go on to have a five star program over the next two months with the greatest athlete to ever grace the ring Kevin Nash.....if you think that Hunter was not trying to help his friend(Nash) collect a few more ppv payoffs before his contract expired , suprise suprise, a month and a half after the Badd Blood ppv that year then i have a nice piece of swamp land i'd like to sell you...instead of putting the best interest of the fans and business first and giving us a great feud with a great opponent like Booker, we got to see a shitty cell match with HHH and a guy that was past his prime 10 years ago and the worst drawing WWF champ in history...oh but Taker is not long term champ material and Nash is?.....the simple truth is that Taker is one of the rare performers who does not need a title to draw money and is not an ego maniac like HHH who needs to constantly be featured in the main events and in 7 segments a night on Raw....i'd like to see HHH work with guys like Heidenreich, Henry,A-Train and Khali....oh why would he do that?...they're beneath him, after all he is the self proclaimed king of kings....as i've said before, before anyone knew what kind of worker Khali was Taker lay down for him and was pinned with one foot on his chest....Hunter single handedly cut Umagas legs out from under him at No Mercy after the promotion spent the last year and a half building him up as destructive monster.....i guess now that he as a handle bar moustache, HHH thinks he's Hogan.....

 

[xwave7000]

This is a frickin joke - all I see in this column is people bitching about Triple H and how he uses 'politics' to get people over - first off, this is a thread about Taker - so stop bringing him up.
Now I've got that off my chest - Undertaker has been the most dedicated WWE Superstar in the last near 20 years, and most of that time has drawn more than most superstars combined - there is no way in HELL that his streak should ever end. I seem to remember reading this site a few months back before Wrestlemania and how everyone said how they'd be disgusted if Batista ended the streak - and for you people to turn around now and say that he should have lost he streak to Orton??? Bullshit! If Taker wants to keep his streak, I say let him - he's damn well earned it!
As others have said, Taker has absolutley no problem putting over stars who less talent than Taker has in his little finger - Khali, Henry, Heidenreich... I could go on. How many stars has he put over in those same fueds?? He deserves a damn long title reign, and while I see it as being a long shot - pray to GOD that he takes the title on Sunday, who would you guys prefer as champion - seriously.

 

[Dastardly1]

Hunter is and always will be involved in politics. He buries people’s careers and uses his marriage to stay on top which is whatever to me but he doesn’t have good matches any more. Its so sad because I remember a time maybe 2000 or so when he was having great matches with everyone from Taka to Tazz , Devil hit the nail right on the head with the people that he's squashed. I also must bring up one more that in my mind was the worst ...Big Poppa Pump... I mean god dam he got punked out every week on raw and the ppv's were no different. I also agree with wave and this is about Taker and we should shift our gears to him. I Feel Taker is a legend who has done it all, gained respect of everyone and put people over left and right. The new monster that comes in who does he feud with and get put over by??? You guess it Marky Boy and if he don't want to job at mania he shouldn’t have to (There was a report that he would lose to Kane but Glen said no out of respect). With that being said although in a different stage in his career, Ric Flair should go out on his own terms like taker should. Now flair doesn’t have a streak to keep but I think we all would like to see him get one more title run. Theses guys are legends, bigger than wrestling to a degree and should be able to leave the ring and giving us a great last memory in the process.

 

[elijah]

They are legends indeed. The problem is the WWE is beginning to look like the old WCW in 1999 where they would constantly push the old has beens instead of focusing on the up and coming talent.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Undertaker, Hunter and HBK are the best legends in the business today. But the WWE cannot use these guys forever as they will soon be old and gray.

I would like to see more of CM Punk and Ken Kennedy on the boob tube.

 

[simonhirst]

Does Taker bury talent? My answer would be not as such. He lets his opponents get over. Mark Henry laid him out after a cage match with batista, Kane put him out after buryin him alive as well as dominate him in late 97, Mankind, who had one of the legendary feuds of the 90's (who on a side note, would much prefer to be on the Smackdown Vs Raw games as opposed to the one who wears a shirt n tie) Hiendereich who cost Taker the title in a Last ride match, theres loads more, Khali pinned him with one foot on his chest!
My only arguement would be is whilst Taker lets them get a number on him, when was the last time he didn't come out on top. When did his opponent last win the war? It's always the similiar story with Taker, someone attacks him, he gets laid out, then makes a comeback and wins the feud. Only when the titles been involved has this not happned. Id like them to try something compeltely different, let someone have takers number, someone he just cant get past (obviously it would need to be believeable) How shocked would every1 have been had Taker lost on his return against Kane at Mania 20? My point being its a bit predictable.
I dnt wish to bury taker in this, he is a phenomenal athlete and is a locker room leader in the back. Hes the ultimate professional in the ring (even despite the Masters incident which was reported as common i think) and has a reputation of looking after his opponent, id love to see him have a memorable title reign facing no1 but the best challengers. I still think a john cena vs the undertaker match at mania would have been better suited. that would have got sum draws.
going back to the original question, does taker bury his opponents? No, but he'll always end up on top which in my view, is too predictable. and to xwave7000, i didnt mention HHH once! damn i just did!

 

[elijah]

Unfortunately, Cena's out for 7 to 12. But with the current atorylines, it looks as if the Undertaker will chase the belt until Mania and the WWE may give him another shot at that long title run he suppose to have this year. Whether he faces Edge or Batista at the Big Show remains to be seen.

 

[Skullz Crack'Em]

yeah he wrestled 3 times in one night and made Umaga look like a joke by 'hulking out' after taking a shit kicking from a guy that Cena, who was the the champ for a year and beat HHH twice on ppv, barely was able to defeat at the rumble this year....no, HHH doesn't hurt the business at all....and i got news for ya, Taker is a bigger draw than H and was about to get title for close to a year because he is long term champ material...and if you think HHH doesn't use his relationship and influence to hurt other people's careers, i suggest you read the latest interview with Booker on this site and you should also talk to Jericho and Angle and while you are at it Goldberg...HHH had an opportunity to draw huge money with him in 2003 and instead politicked his way to killing Goldbergs heat and bringing the ratings and buy rates down to a new low in the summer and fall of 2003......NO ONE that has ever walked through the doors of WWE, has ever said a bad word about Taker...he is a universally respected locker room leader, held in the highest regard by his peers....i don't recall ever hearing HHH regarded in those terms....instead of putting Booker over at Mania in 2003, which was supposed to be the plan, the finish was changed a week before the event so HHH could go on to have a five star program over the next two months with the greatest athlete to ever grace the ring Kevin Nash.....if you think that Hunter was not trying to help his friend(Nash) collect a few more ppv payoffs before his contract expired , suprise suprise, a month and a half after the Badd Blood ppv that year then i have a nice piece of swamp land i'd like to sell you...instead of putting the best interest of the fans and business first and giving us a great feud with a great opponent like Booker, we got to see a shitty cell match with HHH and a guy that was past his prime 10 years ago and the worst drawing WWF champ in history...oh but Taker is not long term champ material and Nash is?.....the simple truth is that Taker is one of the rare performers who does not need a title to draw money and is not an ego maniac like HHH who needs to constantly be featured in the main events and in 7 segments a night on Raw....i'd like to see HHH work with guys like Heidenreich, Henry,A-Train and Khali....oh why would he do that?...they're beneath him, after all he is the self proclaimed king of kings....as i've said before, before anyone knew what kind of worker Khali was Taker lay down for him and was pinned with one foot on his chest....Hunter single handedly cut Umagas legs out from under him at No Mercy after the promotion spent the last year and a half building him up as destructive monster.....i guess now that he as a handle bar moustache, HHH thinks he's Hogan.....

This is a perfect example of why I created this thread. Reddevil, you are hating on HHH for something Taker has done as well. What is the big deal about Umaga? He was sort of a big deal when he was undefeated, but Cena took that away by defeating him two PPVs in a row(NYR and RR), then Bobby Lashley had his way with him, Santino defeated him, and Jeff Hardy defeated him for the I.C. title. Believe me, whatever credibility Umaga had is long gone by now, the fans don't care about him. Why didn't you complain about Taker beating Mark Henry? Sure, Umaga is a better athlete than Henry, but Vince only cares about the reaction a superstar gets and these two are on the same level. Do you know what Umaga and Henry's jobs in the company are? This is their job: To squash countless jobbers/mid carders only to get fed to the top stars. HHH beating Umaga is no different than Taker beating Henry.

Do you remember reading here on WZ that Vince is high on a Umaga vs Taker feud? Hmmmmmmmm, I wonder who is going to win that feud? Umaga? Nah! Taker will bury him as well and then you will be saying something along the lines of "Well Umaga was a shit wrestler anyway so it doesn't matter if Taker beats him", I call bullshit. Umaga might get one victory over Taker, but we all know that Taker is a master at getting the last win in a feud to prove that he is ultimately better than his opponent(thus making their first victory meaningless). Prime examples include: Khali beating Taker---Taker beating Big Show(suppose to be Khali) in a Punjabi Prison Match, Kennedy beating Taker in a First Blood Match---Taker beating Kennedy in a Last Ride Match, Randy Orton(with help from his old man) beating Taker in a Casket Match---Taker beating Orton in a Hell In a Cell Match, etc. Undertaker's feuds always follow that format, very rarely will you see somebody get the last win in a Taker feud, the only one that comes to my mind at the moment is Brock Lesnar.

 

[spideymrw]

Taker does not bury talent. He has been involved with everyone. He doesn't just wrestle main eventers and be in main events. He has only been in two main events at wrestlemania. He gets involved with the new guys all the time. He tried to make Orlando Jones and Maven stars for goodness sake. Taker does what he needs to do to help the wrestlers. HHH always put himself over. Booker T in a new interview said that politics on Raw made him leave the company. He said it was so different from Smackdown. He said that he should have fought Jerry Lawler at Summerslam instead of HHH. He said it would have made more sense and been a better story but HHH's politics came into play. Think about how many careers Taker has made or tried to make. I mean remember Nathan Jones. He tried to make him a star. Taker isn't afraid to lose a match or go through some punishment. Remember when he let both Kane and Orton set his caskets on fire? And look at what he id for Mankind. Look at some of his wrestlemania opponents. He even tried to make two giants into stars. I think people forget the wrestlers taker has fought. They haven't all been main eventers and even if they were Taker usually let them get over for more impact. Stone Cold, Rock at the time were the up and coming stars and Taker usually let them get over.

 

[prtzelby]

It is a solid argument but I think you have a loss of objectivity. While the Undertaker does tend to not allow a tremendous amount of people to "get over" just remember what he also does for the company and this is the strongest point to state he does it without insisting of being champ. I mean think of all the memorable matches UT has had and how many times was the title even in the picture. 11 title runs to 4 and how much longer has the UT been around? Even now is there any doubt who will be in the main event at Wrestlemania going for(and most likely winning) the title. You talk about 15-0 and how it should end but can't this guy who has been an MVP for the company leave with something that is his? You hear the phrase "The Legend of the Undertaker", are you going to tell me that doesn't get hurt for all time if all of a sudden there is a blemish on that record?

 

[reddevil69]

This is a perfect example of why I created this thread. Reddevil, you are hating on HHH for something Taker has done as well. What is the big deal about Umaga? He was sort of a big deal when he was undefeated, but Cena took that away by defeating him two PPVs in a row(NYR and RR), then Bobby Lashley had his way with him, Santino defeated him, and Jeff Hardy defeated him for the I.C. title. Believe me, whatever credibility Umaga had is long gone by now, the fans don't care about him. Why didn't you complain about Taker beating Mark Henry? Sure, Umaga is a better athlete than Henry, but Vince only cares about the reaction a superstar gets and these two are on the same level. Do you know what Umaga and Henry's jobs in the company are? This is their job: To squash countless jobbers/mid carders only to get fed to the top stars. HHH beating Umaga is no different than Taker beating Henry.

Do you remember reading here on WZ that Vince is high on a Umaga vs Taker feud? Hmmmmmmmm, I wonder who is going to win that feud? Umaga? Nah! Taker will bury him as well and then you will be saying something along the lines of "Well Umaga was a shit wrestler anyway so it doesn't matter if Taker beats him", I call bullshit. Umaga might get one victory over Taker, but we all know that Taker is a master at getting the last win in a feud to prove that he is ultimately better than his opponent(thus making their first victory meaningless). Prime examples include: Khali beating Taker---Taker beating Big Show(suppose to be Khali) in a Punjabi Prison Match, Kennedy beating Taker in a First Blood Match---Taker beating Kennedy in a Last Ride Match, Randy Orton(with help from his old man) beating Taker in a Casket Match---Taker beating Orton in a Hell In a Cell Match, etc. Undertaker's feuds always follow that format, very rarely will you see somebody get the last win in a Taker feud, the only one that comes to my mind at the moment is Brock Lesnar.

first off i'm sorry to mention HHH again , secondly don't proceed to tell me what i will be saying about anything that has not yet happened and third , you're missing the point....it's not just about Umaga credibility....the point is that by HHH having the fucking earth dropped on his head followed by a laser beam from Umaga, and within 20 seconds turning it around miraculously, makes Cena, the longest reigning champ in 18 years look like a chump because he barely was able to escape with his belt at the rumble match with the same opponent earlier this year yet he's beat HHH twice in a row....and now because of that, who the hell really gives a shit about a Taker/Umaga feud now any way?.....if he's been squashed by HHH, then obviously he's no match for the Deadman right?...this is the kind of lame shit that the WWE refuses to follow up on with their continuity and the reason why the ratings and buy rates are in the toilet......and Umaga was way more over than Henry ever was when he was being booked properly, how can you say they're on the same level....and Taker is better than all of those opponents you've mentioned and is a bigger draw, of course he's going to come out on top, that's ultimately what the fans want....not an asshole like HHH coming out on tv and telling Cena that he's not a good wrestler and then expecting people to get excited over the fact that he's facing an opponent that obviously sucks 'cuz he "can't wrestle"... great way to get people to order your ppv.....Taker also does not positon himself at the centre of all the major angles, take up 5-7 segments a week on Raw and always works with midcarders, something HHH almost never does.....he is a huge draw and the majority of fans want to see him victorious in his feuds and want his streak left intact....there is a reason that his Tombstone dvd is now the highest selling non-wrestlemania dvd ever produced....Taker has given back plenty to the business and all the wrestlers he's worked with...

 

[zeus3007]

Taker doesn't bury opponents. He is one of the top guys, so he does not lose often, but take a look at the past couple of years. Khali dominated Taker in a feud. Edge beat Taker, Mr. Kennedy beat Taker. Sure, he doesn't lose to low card guys, but that is beause it simply would not believe otherwise, and it would destroy Taker's character. I also agree that HHH isn't as bad as he once was for burying guys. Booker, Carlito and Umaga are not top level draws, so why have a top level guy lose to a guy who isn't going to be one of the top guys? It wouldn't make sense. I do think the the D-X/ Rated RKO was getting too one sided, but we never got to see where WWE was going with it. Maybe Rated RKO would have ended up winning the feud, who knows for sure?

 

[mabuza]

yeah he wrestled 3 times in one night and made Umaga look like a joke by 'hulking out' after taking a shit kicking from a guy that Cena, who was the the champ for a year and beat HHH twice on ppv, barely was able to defeat at the rumble this year....no, HHH doesn't hurt the business at all....and i got news for ya, Taker is a bigger draw than H and was about to get title for close to a year because he is long term champ material...and if you think HHH doesn't use his relationship and influence to hurt other people's careers, i suggest you read the latest interview with Booker on this site and you should also talk to Jericho and Angle and while you are at it Goldberg...HHH had an opportunity to draw huge money with him in 2003 and instead politicked his way to killing Goldbergs heat and bringing the ratings and buy rates down to a new low in the summer and fall of 2003......NO ONE that has ever walked through the doors of WWE, has ever said a bad word about Taker...he is a universally respected locker room leader, held in the highest regard by his peers....i don't recall ever hearing HHH regarded in those terms....instead of putting Booker over at Mania in 2003, which was supposed to be the plan, the finish was changed a week before the event so HHH could go on to have a five star program over the next two months with the greatest athlete to ever grace the ring Kevin Nash.....if you think that Hunter was not trying to help his friend(Nash) collect a few more ppv payoffs before his contract expired , suprise suprise, a month and a half after the Badd Blood ppv that year then i have a nice piece of swamp land i'd like to sell you...instead of putting the best interest of the fans and business first and giving us a great feud with a great opponent like Booker, we got to see a shitty cell match with HHH and a guy that was past his prime 10 years ago and the worst drawing WWF champ in history...oh but Taker is not long term champ material and Nash is?.....the simple truth is that Taker is one of the rare performers who does not need a title to draw money and is not an ego maniac like HHH who needs to constantly be featured in the main events and in 7 segments a night on Raw....i'd like to see HHH work with guys like Heidenreich, Henry,A-Train and Khali....oh why would he do that?...they're beneath him, after all he is the self proclaimed king of kings....as i've said before, before anyone knew what kind of worker Khali was Taker lay down for him and was pinned with one foot on his chest....Hunter single handedly cut Umagas legs out from under him at No Mercy after the promotion spent the last year and a half building him up as destructive monster.....i guess now that he as a handle bar moustache, HHH thinks he's Hogan.....

I suggest you listen to HHH's interview with Paul Belfi from late 2004(P.W.I) The fact of the matter is that HHH will never do anything tht will permanently f*ckup the business.The low ratings in '03 were as a result of the Rock/Austin exodus.The Goldberg hype machine killed itself that summer,with the same old Bill Goldberg juggernaut crap.People want to get all pissed that he beat Umaga,but the same people turn around and say that Umaga's overrated& shouldnt be in mainevents.What about the straight job Mark Henry was subjected to at Unforgiven& even worse 2weeks later on SD! and the hands of the "Immortal" Undertaker.Taker/Khali was way different than HHH/Umaga.Khali was new& he was clearly being put over as unstoppable& indestructable.If he even jobbed to Taker in the slightest,it would have killed his hype.And if I remember correctly,Taker put down the "monster" in a L.M.S match.
Umaga has been in the WWE for 2 years(that's if you discount his days as Jamal in 3 Minute Warning) He's already had his "monster" run in '06.He's been beat by Cena,Lashley and JEFF HARDY.He's hardly and unstoppable monster anymore.
All the guys like Atrain& Heidenreich never amounted to squat.Khali World title had very little to do with Taker's rub.Even Cena can take more credit for putting Khali over than Taker.On the other hand,Batista & Orton are the world champs whose rise to greatness(especially Dave) can be linked to HHH.Even guys like Beniot,Goldberg& HBK victories got a "boost" by the fact that it was HHH who they beat for the world title.
Yes Taker's respected,but so is Bob Holly.I dont see you crying about him not getting a legit push.Taker doesnt need a title to be a draw,but that doesnt necessarily mean that it should ever be on him in the 1st place.Right now on SD!, its Batista& Mysterio that are bringing fans in.Taker's peek-a-boo crap where he disappears for months( whether it be personal or injury related) has never hurt the show,because they dont really need him.
The only reason that he was going to get a long term title reign was because of they felt he "deserved" it (which he technically does) but mainly because of the heat Batista had backstage.They didnt want him to be champ for personality reasons.

 

[reddevil69]

I suggest you listen to HHH's interview with Paul Belfi from late 2004(P.W.I) The fact of the matter is that HHH will never do anything tht will permanently f*ckup the business.The low ratings in '03 were as a result of the Rock/Austin exodus.The Goldberg hype machine killed itself that summer,with the same old Bill Goldberg juggernaut crap.People want to get all pissed that he beat Umaga,but the same people turn around and say that Umaga's overrated& shouldnt be in mainevents.What about the straight job Mark Henry was subjected to at Unforgiven& even worse 2weeks later on SD! and the hands of the "Immortal" Undertaker.Taker/Khali was way different than HHH/Umaga.Khali was new& he was clearly being put over as unstoppable& indestructable.If he even jobbed to Taker in the slightest,it would have killed his hype.And if I remember correctly,Taker put down the "monster" in a L.M.S match.
Umaga has been in the WWE for 2 years(that's if you discount his days as Jamal in 3 Minute Warning) He's already had his "monster" run in '06.He's been beat by Cena,Lashley and JEFF HARDY.He's hardly and unstoppable monster anymore.
All the guys like Atrain& Heidenreich never amounted to squat.Khali World title had very little to do with Taker's rub.Even Cena can take more credit for putting Khali over than Taker.On the other hand,Batista & Orton are the world champs whose rise to greatness(especially Dave) can be linked to HHH.Even guys like Beniot,Goldberg& HBK victories got a "boost" by the fact that it was HHH who they beat for the world title.
Yes Taker's respected,but so is Bob Holly.I dont see you crying about him not getting a legit push.Taker doesnt need a title to be a draw,but that doesnt necessarily mean that it should ever be on him in the 1st place.Right now on SD!, its Batista& Mysterio that are bringing fans in.Taker's peek-a-boo crap where he disappears for months( whether it be personal or injury related) has never hurt the show,because they dont really need him.
The only reason that he was going to get a long term title reign was because of they felt he "deserved" it (which he technically does) but mainly because of the heat Batista had backstage.They didnt want him to be champ for personality reasons.

Undertaker was to get the title because he is the most over star on the brand and sells more merchandise than anyone on smackdown at the moment...HE MAKES MONEY FOR VINCE....vince is going to milk him at the top of the card while he is still physically able to deliver....what do you not understand about Tombstone: History of Undertaker being the highest selling non-WM dvd the company has released?....the man has more die hard loyal fans than any other performer in the company right now....i was at ford Field for mania and nobody got a louder ovation than taker that night....not Cena, not HBK, not austin...NO ONE....even the host of the syndicated radio show Live Audio Wrestling Dan Lovranski,who has repeatedly bashed Taker for the last 5 years called in that night from the event and stated that Undertaker had sold more shirts that night than anyone and has also been praising Taker for his effort and caliber of matches he's had this past year and a half........don't hand us this "he's only getting the title 'cuz he's got personal attachments with the office'' crap....Taker has sold more merch on a consistent basis and drawn more money than HHH,HBK, or Edge ever have or ever will....he's at the top because he still can get it done....what the fuck does Holly have to do with anything?.....he's never drawn flies to shit...he has a job because he's a good worker and they need jobbers....he also probably makes the bare minimum guarantee and is happy to be working at a job he enjoys.....and he is not universally repected like Taker....i can send you a slew of interviews to disprove that bullshit...and as far as your ratings argument.... why don't you look up the ratings for the episode of smack down where Taker came back for the first time in 5 months....1 week after Unforgiven...he was advertised all week long and the ratings did spike...BECAUSE OF TAKER being in the main event....and you didn't think that when Henry kicked the shit outta taker after his cage match with Batista on smackdown last may was not going to lead to a return match with Henry getting squashed?....duh, no shit....and as far as HHH hurting business, i suggest you read various interviews with Austin,Jericho,Angle,Booker and Lesnar.....and one more thing: Mania this year had a bigger buzz and was the most profitable it's been in a few years...why?....TAKER AND HBK GOING FOR THE TITLES....and guess who was nowhere within ten feet of the card...HHH...you really believe if we got HHH vs. CENA AGAIN that it would have had that kind of buzz?...and as far as your Goldberg argument,you have no clue what you're talking about...the fans wanted to see him take the title from H at Summerslam in the elimination chamber....not at a b-level ppv like unforgiven in a Goldberg has to leave Raw match which no one believed he was going to leave, therefore they knew the title was going to change hands....Summerslam is the 2nd most ordered ppv the WWE puts on every year and if you are going to pull the trigger and make a star or put a title on someone you do it at the ppv that has the most viewers so you can maximize the result....if hunter is so business savvy and wants to help the company he should have put Goldberg over that night....instead the wwe just managed to piss everyone off and frustrate people which ultimatley hurt the unforgiven buyrate, that's not Goldbergs fault.......and FYI, the majority of WWE fans at the stadium that night at mania believed that the Taker /Batista
match should have gone last....that's why the crowd died down after the match...and from what i've read the wwe locker felt it should have gone last as well....oh yeah i guess you are right....Taker doesn't deserve to be on top with a title.....anything that implies that Taker is not worthy of his status and not championship material is anathema....

 

[neza]

In the rocks book he says when he was coming up taker helped him. they wanted the rock to beat taker via dq or controversially but taker said no let him win fairly in order to help him where as the rock said triple h liked keeping hold of the belt to get him more advertising outside or the company as " the wwe champ"

 

[chaos@vincent_the phenom]

Well I disagree, He may do this to some, Like Mark Henry, but you cant compare him to HHH. I have read that Taker is a good man behind the back stage, he helps out, I even seen a vcideo with Kurt angle saying he is god, and would like to have another match with him. I have heared him referred to as ' The Godfather', you know, he is experienced, he doesnt do it on purpose. I agree, a storyline with him is always repeated whereby, he is injured, and that person always says he put out taker, then taker comes back and destroys that person. But I dont think anyone should take his streak, a legend sjhould have somehting that distunguishes them, and takers is his Undefeated streak at WM.

 

[NYSandman]

The Undertaker can put people over see Mick Foley as Mankind in 96. Triple H however thinks that just because he's married to the bosses daughter and will inherit the company at some point it gives him the automatic right to bury people. Granted HHH put Beniot, Orton and Batista over only because People were sick of him winning the belt at every WM, Vince was the one that decided to put the belt on Orton to begin with tho. Lest we forget that it was Orton that was Triple H's protege at first

Yes, but who was in the locker room to verify all this? All we can do on these boards is speculate, and gather whatever info we can. No one here, to my knowlege anyhow, has been in a talent meeting or in the locker room, so where does all this come from? How do we know HHH feels intitled because he's Vince's son in law? How do we know if the Undertaker uses politics. It is all speculation.

We go by what we see on TV. HHH and 'Taker deserve to wield some power, because of what they have done for the company. When I started my job, I wasn't allowed in the server room. Now, I run the server room because I've been there 7 years, and they trust my judgement. Same with HHH and 'Taker.

Vince is God in WWE. I would be surprised if he allowed any particular wrestler to gain too much power. But I'm sure he respects the opinions of the veterans. I think we should give both these guys a break, and realize they will always have influence, as should Austin, Rock, Hogan, anyone who has given a lot and been a solid performer for years.

Also, I don't give too much head room to guys who are in love with the company until they get fired, and then go do a shoot interview where they give their opinions. If you just got fired, would you speak well about your former employer, especially if you're heading to a new fed who will love the idea of you burying your old company?

HHH is a real easy target because he married Steph, but there has always been something about this man. You can tell, sometimes just by the look in his eyes, that he truly loves what he does. I don't see that on too many guy's faces. I don't think he would put his own agenda above what is good for the business. Maybe when he was younger, but I don't think so now.

Same goes for 'Taker. He has tried to put over some of the biggest, steamiest piles of human wrestling toxic waste that I have ever seen. So, I think there are two sides to this debate. Also, 'Taker and HHH don't need to push themselves anymore. They are both so well established and well loved by the fans, that no politics are needed to get them over.

 

[MachoFan]

the undertaker does not bury talent fools he makes talent he has the best matches and is not afraid to lose them to the stars of tomorrow very few greats do this just look at what he has done for Batista and the great match he had with angle at no way out 06 he is without a shadow of a doubt one of the best atm and when he starts a program with edge i shall be watching it with high anticipation

 

[BDOG]

There the biggest stars on each of their respective shows, the wwe does not care if a young superstar get a pinfall over a legend they care that the millions of fans each year pay up to see HHH or Taker dominate in the ring! and that usually ends up in the signature maneouver! wouldnt you be pissed im you paid 100 bucks for a ticket and not see a tombstone form the undertaker!

 

[headake151]

undertaker made batista look like a legitimate wrestler at the ppv using clean. It looks like he might be passing the torch for the buisness.

HHH did the same tho hes really making umaga look like the unstoppable beast. Just look how Cena beat Umaga completely putting him over even though he won. While HHH beats him clean every week.

The undertaker loses at ppvs just as much as he wins HHH has only lost 2 matches since returning both of which put himself over and not the victor. I dont see the comparison here.

 

[jackhammer_27]

I totally Agree. Taker has done it for years, probably even before triple H had all his backstage power.

Im sick of seeing Taker get 'injured' only for the person who 'injured' him to be buried by Taker when he makes his return. The WWE need to realise fans don't want to see the same storylines over and over again.

Taker gets injured and is gone for months. the guy who injured him then comes out every week saying he put Taker away only for the bells and druids to come along. Then it takes Taker a year to get to the ring when he has returned, whips the guys arse and then wins within ten, maybe fifteen minutes if we're lucky. then Taker comes out on the next television show saying he wants the belt and goes for it.

Same storyline, just that it will prob be Edge next who puts him out of action. I bet anyone this happens and Taker comes back and beats Edge at the next Wrestlemania.

Last time I checked every time this scenario happens Taker comes back to a huge pop and the crowds eat it up. Maybe the idea is stale, but you can't ignore how successful and popular the angles seem to be. Wise up. People love Taker and they always will.