Double Standards

[Proof]

A lot of people here hate John Cena because of his character. They hate him because his character is aimed towards little kids. Then I remembered, the same guy's that complain about Cena's character being cheesy are the same guy's that eat up what the Undertaker does. If an old man, pretending to be from hell, with super powers, that can appear in the middle of the ring, can summon fire from God knows where, that makes his way to the ring with smoke coming out of everywhere, no sells finishers, has friends that are supposedly from hell, has a brother from hell, and that can somehow.. SOMEHOW sends his opponents to hell (Paul), isn't cheesier than John Cena, then there is something wrong with the internet fans.

The segment featuring the Undertaker and Teddy Long last friday is cheesier.. CHEESIER than anything John Cena has done.. Cheesier than anything Hornswoggle has done.. cheesier than anything Doink the Clown, Big Dick Johnson, Papa Shango have done. And that was only one segment..I hope you guy's never seen his feud with Booker T...It makes Hornswoggle/Chavo look like a feud of the century. The PG era fits Taker perfectly, cause he is the cheesiest and most embarrassing character of all time.

 

[Stickstar 16]

Hmm, you do have a valid point, and while I am a greater fan of John Cena than i am Taker, i do see why people make him the exception to the anti cheese rule, and not its not gonna be "CAUSE HE"Z TEH UNDERTAKER!!!!!1!!!!1!!"

I say the reason that they allow the Undertaker to be as cheesy and "supernatural" while hating on Cena for the similar things, is pure nostalgia, the Undertaker has had this gimmick since he started with the WWE, and although he changed with the attitude era, its was a neccessary facilitation to be able to get over with the fans at the time, who weren't believing the magic and demons and goblins thing. When Taker first debuted with the Phenom/Deadman gimmick, it was the time where kayfabe was still maintained and people really believed that everybody was who they portrayed in the ring.

So how does that translate into this PG era, and why he is not given the same hassle as Cena, quite simply put, he had that gimmick then when it was a pretty child friendly product, and most children believe in magic and ghost and goblins, so Taker is over with them, not to mention all the smarks love him because he's a great guy and locker room leader, and a legend.

Another point, Taker takes quite a bit of time off, so when you don't see something on someone for an extended amount of time, you are always super happy to see them when they show up, like if you didn't see your boyfriend/girlfriend for a month, when you see him/her you're extra excited. This is why Taker is so fresh all the time, because if you only wrestle 4-6 months a year than you should be.

Finally, its cool to be a smark and hate on John Cena, and belittle his talent, passion, work ethic and ability, its not cool to make fun of the Undertaker, because "OH NOEZ< HE"Z A LEGENDZ ANDZ A LOCKERZ ROOMZ LEADERZZ!!!!!!1!!!!!1111!!!". I think the Undertaker would be more criticised if he wrestled the whole year or most of the year like Cena does, the same with HHH. I don't see Taker putting people over left right and center, but yet he is not criticised like HHH is.

I mean, i like Taker, i like watching him wrestle and work, and as he's gotten older, and into MMA he's been putting on some classics, i just think he gets by on a lot of nostalgia and memories which have earned him a free pass from the criticism given out to a lot of other equally talented and over superstars.

 

[Mustang Sally]

If an old man, pretending to be from hell, with super powers, that can appear in the middle of the ring, can summon fire from God knows where, that makes his way to the ring with smoke coming out of everywhere....

And don't forget.... he can turn up the lights in the arena just by raising his arms.

There are some good points made in this post and the one that follows. For myself, I like John Cena just fine and have had trouble understanding what so many folks don't like about him. He works hard, tries his level best, and has his character constantly reaching out to fans. Also, his wrestling repertoire has grown in leaps and bounds as he's gained experience. Yet, he has many detractors.

On the other hand, the Undertaker's character was designed to inspire awe and fear.... yet he's cheered. To me, the most illogical aspect of 'Taker is that he's been a face for so many years. When he first appeared in WWE, I remember the camera panning the faces of kids in the crowd that looked scared to death. That was exactly how he should have been depicted.

Even his "biker" gimmick seemed to go against what was logical. When you see a guy on a motorcycle who dresses like that and emanates such a menacing aura, do you go up and say hi, or do you take pains to stay out of his way?

Personally, I believe they should turn Calloway bad again. If you think he's popular now, a turn to the dark side might get people's blood boiling.....just like it used to.

Give me Cena the good guy........ and Undertaker the bad guy.

 

[Dave]

You are correct to an extent.

Cena is a cheesy character that plays off of all the "emotion" that he generates. They are trying to sell him as the American Hero. I suppose he does that well and I generally respond positively to any promo cut by Cena. I like him and his mic skills and more so, his ring skills are pretty good. I think that people don't like him because he is being pushed down their throats. I don't agree with that comment because he does deserve everything that he gets. I guess the reason that people don't say that Taker is the same is because he has been there a logn time. Taker has been with the business a long time now and comes from a time in wrestling that it was the in-thing to have a strong wrestling gimmick. I guess it has just stuck with him and the fans are ready to see it.

 

[Tastycles]

The reason for these "double standards" by the IWC is basically because the Undertaker has been around so long they accept the pitfalls and ridiculousness of his character. The segment on Friday was one of the worst segments this year in terms of production, yet it gets off relatively easily because it involved the Undertaker.

If Taker debuted yesterday, the IWC would hate him, because his character is absolutely stupid and cheesy and everything else. However, Taker has earned the respect of the fans so they are willing to accept the ridiculous antics that he gets up to.

This will come around. Cena's praises will be sang in the future, and some new star will be mocked, because people generally support whoever was the top face when they were young. It's what's happening with Taker, and it is why you rarely hear any criticism of Steve Austin, despite the fact he was quite a lot more one dimensional than John Cena is. The IWC are largely clouded by their own preferences, which is why its a bit shit a gauging how good people are.

In short, Taker gets away with it because he's been doing it since we were too young not to be taken in by it and Cena hasn't.

 

[JBK2008]

I have to agree I thought the kidnapping of Teddy Long was kinda dumb and the whole thing looked awful but it is the Undertaker and it's something I def expected from him. Yeah it was cheesy but it was necessary for the program to continue. Cena's stuff has been dumb from time to time, but right now, I give the edge to Taker just because it's him.

 

[Paradox]

I agree with you a 100%. It really is a true true that Cena is hated for his cheesy gimmick while 'Taker is loved for his over the top gimmick. I for one am getting tired of 'Taker's gimmick, it has been done to death. More so than Cena. I don't care about the nostalgia it's bland. He does the same thing every time he comes out. When a majority of your promos are "Rest in Peace" and "I'm going to take your soul" I think it's time for a change.

Let's take a look for a minute at this, Cena has been with same gimmick for around 3 to 4 years. While Taker has been with his current deadman gimmick since 04. (5 years) The same gimmick that he came in with in the early 90s. People can come on here and say that 'Taker freshen things up. I.E. his apparel, his in ring moves, but what exactly does that change? Not much of nothing. Yet, people believe it is fresh. Then those same people turn around and harp on Cena for his in ring ability. Yet, when he adds moves he is still hated, and told he sucks.

The same thing goes for both of their matches. 'Taker's matches are extremely predicable, with him getting beaten up after dominating the early going. Then he starts using signature moves to win, and people love them. Cena's matches are the same way, they are predictable, he gets beat up, comes back using signature moves, and is hated for it.

To me it's one of the biggest hypocrites that the IWC has. It is extremely annoying to myself. When I constantly see one poster in particular criticize Cena, and praise 'Taker. Yes, 'Taker has been in the business longer. So what does that have to do with anything? Yes he's great and all, but that doesn't mean he should be free from scrutiny. Cena is one of the hardest working men in the business today, and has been for the better part of two years. No one has a work ethic like his, yet he is still hated by some in the IWC. I for one enjoy both of them, but believe each of them needs a change.

 

[secret titan]

Wow, I'm still trying to find out what exactly the double standard is. Is this thread supposed to be an anti-Undertaker thread?

The fact is, nobody is going to be 100% happy with either wrestler. I can tell the few that have posted here, think the Deadman is stale and want him to change because his character isn't "believeable."

Characters like the Undertaker make wrestling more entertaining. If everyone played a normal person, you guys would say it's too plain. I will be the first to admit that I don't watch wrestling for the matches as much as I do for the entertainment. Taking gimmicks away from everyone would take way too much away from the "E" factor and it wouldn't even be as enjoyable. It isn't called the WW"E" for nothing.

Undertaker has his deadman gimmick, deal with it. It works fantastic for him, if it didn't, he would just be another wrestler.

 

[Proof]

I find it really ignorant that people give the Undertaker a chance because he has been here before I was born, but they can't give Cena a chance. Cena has been here for seven or eight years and I still see people complaining about his character. If they gave the old man a chance, why not give a chance to Cena or even Hornswoggle? Hornswoggle beating Mark Henry is much more believable than some old guy with super powers. There isn't a gimmick in the history of pro wrestling cheesier than the Undertakers. If Taker deserves praise, then so does Hornswoggle, Doink the Clown, Papa Shango, and the Shockmaster. His feuds are the same crap. "Rest IN PEACE"... Listen , I am 18, not 5 year's old. I don't find this gimmick appealing at all. It embarrasses me and makes me want to stop watching wrestling. Even when I was a little kid, I found the gimmick embarrassing and ridiculous.