This is a sixth round match in the Miami Region. It is a standard one on one match. It will be held at Sun Life Stadium in Miami, Florida
#1. Undertaker
(Won 83-71 in Round 5)
Vs.
#3. John Cena
(Won 83-73 In Round 5)
This match takes place the same night as the previous round. The margin of victory of the previous round will determine the amount of damage and energy spent in a round. For instance, a win by 50 votes would mean the winner expended very little energy, whereas a win by 1 vote would mean the winner spent a good deal of energy in a hard and close match.
Polls will be open for five days following a one day period for discussion. Voting will be based on who you feel is the greater of the two competitors. Post your reasons for why your pick should win below. Remember that this is non-spam and the most votes in the poll win. Any ties will be broken by the amount of posts of support for each candidate, with one vote per poster.
Also remember that this is a non-spam forum. If you post a response without giving a reason for your selection, it will be penalized for spam and deleted.
On a big stage like this the Undertaker is known for rising to the occaision. Cena will make it interesting as I see several near falls but in the end Taker wins on big match experience
Well, this is kind of a hard one. It really doesn't matter to me which guy wins because their not the one's I'm supporting but I don't really have a preference to which one wins. Taker has a slight advantage but not by a lot and Cena has defeated some real legends in this thing already. I'm still on the fence but I'll just wait and see which side can convince me.
If it wasn't for the Wrestlemania streak then the Undertaker wouldn't be shit. Look at his career the past 5 years or so... everything has revolved around his matches at Wrestlemania. That's it. Nothing else is important.
Well, this isn't Wrestlemania. This is simply a high profile match, and if you eliminate the 'Mania record, 'Taker has plenty of losses in high profile matches. The guy is very, very beatable. He has multiple losses to Brock Lesnar, Kurt Angle, HHH, Shawn Michaels, Kane, Bret Hart, Mick Foley, Steve Austin, etc. Shit the guy has even suffered losses to Vince McMahon, Maven, and Golddust. So, I don't want to read any bullshit about how hard it is to beat the Undertaker. It can be done. And Cena is certainly a guy who can do it, as he has shown before.
Before Cena became a main event star, he was giving 'Taker all he could handle in matches. He even beat him one time, in fact. So, if he could do it back then, then why should I believe prime Cena wouldn't pull off a victory against him?
The fact is, Cena is the man. 'Taker has never been the man. He's been a dead man, but he's never been completely handed the ball to run with. When he came to WWE, there was Hogan. Then there was Bret and Shawn. Then Austin and Rock. Then HHH and Lesnar. And for the past 7 years it's been John Cena. However, 'Taker has never been given that top spot for a long period of time. Hell, there were plenty of times where 'Taker played 2nd fiddle on Smackdown. Has that happened to Cena since he rose to the top? Of course not. Why? Because he's the fucking man. And the man is the one who should go over here.
'Taker is simply a gimmick who has a good match a couple of times a year (these days once a year). That's all he is. Cena, on the other hand, is the man. The face of WWE. The face of professional wrestling. Do the right thing and vote for the man. Vote for John Cena.
I am on the fence with this one... on one hand you have John Cena, the WWE's top draw for the past 7 years, and on the other you have The Undertaker, a man who has been more relevent throughout his 20+ year tenure with the company than anyone else in the company. Never completely on top, but always relevent.
Cena could arguably be booked to go over Taker at any other point of the year except Wrestlemania. As I stated in an earlier round I don't feel that The Streak can be argued as Undertaker's prime because The Streak is an entity onto itself. Mania aside I'm leaning towards Cena right now.
Now this is a big time match up right here. The Undertaker has been around for a very long time and has had an extremely impressive career, while on the other hand John Cena has been the man for the last 8 years and carried the WWE and made himself into one of the biggest names in the history of professional wrestling.
Experience is definitely on the side of the deadman. I give strength to Cena. When it comes to endurance you can make a case for both men as they both have performed in long matches throughout their careers, but I am going to give the endurance edge to Cena. When up against a top performer he always finds himself in longer matches and never looks gased at the end.
Many people will point to the Streak as the reason the Undertaker should win. Well this is not at WrestleMania and if you look at the streak and want to say he beat HBK and Triple H twice, you are current, but you also have to at the fact he beat Giant Gonzalez, Mark Henry, and King Kong Bundy. No question 20-0 is extremely impressive esp when you look at 4-0 vs hbk and hhh, but remember John Cena has made Triple H and HBK tap out at back to back consecutive WrestleMania's. But like I said this isn't at WrestleMania.
Taker throughout his career outside of WM has proven to be very beatable with alot of losses to alot of less equal superstars. John Cena or as some say "Super Cena" has continuously beaten everyone thrown at him whether inferior or his close equal. Taker has not had alot of high profile matches over the last few yrs outside of 1 a year whereas John Cena is consistently in such matches and more often than not wins.
This will be a damn close match with alot of close finishes, but after 3 Attitude Adjustments I truely believe John Cena will win this match.
I was afraid this might happen. The Undertaker vs John Cena. What a match this would be. During Cena's time on top, we've only seen the two face off in tag matches. So this one be one for the books and I would love to see it go down.
I'll be honest with you, it's a little hard to come up with a great argument as to why 'Taker should go over John Cena. I mean, Cena has been the biggest star in the biggest pro wrestling company in the world for the past 7 years and although I don't really care much for Cena; I'd be an idiot to say that he's on top but he's a bad performer and all that crap. Over the past 7 years, Cena has beaten every top star in the WWE in one-on-one contests, except for Th Undertaker. Truth is that John Cena has proven time and time again to be one of the best performers in the WWE and he's earned and worked his ass off for everything that he has. You don't have to like John Cena to respect him and I'd be lying if I said that I didn't respect the hell out of him.
Although Cena has beaten every top star in the WWE over the past 7 years in one-on-one matches, well so has The Undertaker except for Cena. Everyone that Cena has beaten, 'Taker has beaten. Randy Orton, Edge, HBK, HHH, Khali, Mark Henry, Batista, Big Show, Jericho, CM Punk, and hell, 'Taker even has a win over Rey Mysterio in a title match. These men have also beaten both 'Taker and Cena at times. So I don't think that this helps either man's case. What's more proving though, is that in '03, 'Taker and Cena had a one-on-one match on a Smackdown PPV and 'Taker DESTROYED his ass. Now neither men were in their primes, but I think that it goes to the credit of 'Taker that he did whip Cena's ass in that match.
This would be a tough and hard fought match. Several near falls and near victories will happen. In the end, however, I see Cena falling to a second Tombstone and 'Taker being the winner of this match.
I was afraid this might happen. The Undertaker vs John Cena. What a match this would be. During Cena's time on top, we've only seen the two face off in tag matches. So this one be one for the books and I would love to see it go down.
I'll be honest with you, it's a little hard to come up with a great argument as to why 'Taker should go over John Cena. I mean, Cena has been the biggest star in the biggest pro wrestling company in the world for the past 7 years and although I don't really care much for Cena; I'd be an idiot to say that he's on top but he's a bad performer and all that crap. Over the past 7 years, Cena has beaten every top star in the WWE in one-on-one contests, except for Th Undertaker. Truth is that John Cena has proven time and time again to be one of the best performers in the WWE and he's earned and worked his ass off for everything that he has. You don't have to like John Cena to respect him and I'd be lying if I said that I didn't respect the hell out of him.
Although Cena has beaten every top star in the WWE over the past 7 years in one-on-one matches, well so has The Undertaker except for Cena. Everyone that Cena has beaten, 'Taker has beaten. Randy Orton, Edge, HBK, HHH, Khali, Mark Henry, Batista, Big Show, Jericho, CM Punk, and hell, 'Taker even has a win over Rey Mysterio in a title match. These men have also beaten both 'Taker and Cena at times. So I don't think that this helps either man's case. What's more proving though, is that in '03, 'Taker and Cena had a one-on-one match on a Smackdown PPV and 'Taker DESTROYED his ass. Now neither men were in their primes, but I think that it goes to the credit of 'Taker that he did whip Cena's ass in that match.
This would be a tough and hard fought match. Several near falls and near victories will happen. In the end, however, I see Cena falling to a second Tombstone and 'Taker being the winner of this match.
You can't possibly use the 2003 match as your reasoning to vote for Taker. This tournament is about both guys in their primes. John Cena was not in his prime back then. John Cena is currently in his prime and has beaten the guys you listed above in major title matches. He won countless title matches against Orton and Edge. Defended his title and won against Triple H and HBK. Hell even beat Triple H and Edge in a triple threat match and Orton, Edge, HBk in a Fatal Fourway match. Also throughout Cena's prime he has faced many monsters and each time Cena has always overcome the odds and beaten them. Taker typically beats them too but that is after they are used to take him out of action for some time. Both men in their primes are great no question, but John Cena has proven time and time again that against the top performers and men that tower over him in size that he is able to overcome the odds and win. You can't deny that over the last 8 years Cena has been challenged countless times and has almost always came out victorious. It is for this reason he will win this match.
I was kinds of on the fence on this one but think about it, this match takes place on the same night as the last round. I think this tips the scales in Cena's favour. Undertaker had a match with sting and that had to be a tough one, with both guys being able to dish out a lot and receive a lot of hurt, but Cena only had to beat Hulk Hogan who usually had to rely on his Superman skills to win a match. So I think Cena would be the fresher of the two going into the match and would win the match.
John Cena wins, and it shouldn't be that close. Undertaker has been booked strongly one night of the year, and besides that is little more than a sideshow attraction. John Cena has been the face of the biggest wrestling company in the world for longer than anyone since Hogan. Any way you add it up, especially since they received about equal damage in the last round, Cena wins this.
This would be an EPIC encouter in my view. From an overall perspective, Taker & Cena are arguably the two most dominant guys to set foot in a WWE in the past 20 years. From a kayfabe perspective, both men are damn near indestructible and have wills of solid steel. Whoever wins this match would most definitely have earned it.
Cena is someone that doesn't get nearly the amount of credit from internet fans that he deserves. Time after time, Cena usually winds up in great feuds that bring some downright epic matches. Cena isn't a technical marvel I grant that, but he knows how to tell a story inside that ring as good or better than anybody else in there today.
Taker is someone that, in my eyes, changed what it meant to be a big man in wrestling. He wasn't some lumbering, muscle bound freak or slow 7 footer that could barely move around the ring. His character is among the most original of all time and his longevity, continued popularity & relevance in wrestling is the stuff of legend. He's also underrated as far as his in-ring ability goes. Even when he was put into shit feuds with shit opponents, I found myself giving a crap about almost all of them.
Given that both guys are no doubt tired from their previous matches in the same night, this could go either way. Cena is someone that simply doesn't give up and will endure whatever go get the win. Same goes for Taker. I think we're also letting the myth of Taker's streak get in the way and shouldn't make the mistake of forgetting that Taker is, arguably, the most dominant guy in WWE for the past 20 years. The only huge name to come through WWE in the past 25 years or so that Taker didn't beat was Brock Lesnar, though he probably would have had Lesnar stayed in WWE for more than just slightly less than 2 years.
I look for both these two to be throwing bombs at each other, just giving it their all from the beginning. Both men would hit their finishers multiple times without either scoring a win and everyone would be sitting on the edge of their seat. In the end, I think I'm giving this to Taker. I don't see Taker as having as hard of a time with Savage as Cena had with Hogan. I love Savage but, kayfabe, Savage was never on Hogan's level, nor Taker's in my view. Savage would've made Taker earn his victory, but I don't see Savage as taking Taker to the limit in the same way as Hogan took Cena. Hogan was THE man in his day; no ifs, ands or buts about that. I think it would've taken EVERYTHING that Cena had to beat Hogan.
Both guys are tired and still have a good amount left in the tank, but I just don't see Cena having enough juice to get by Taker here. Taker doesn't need WM to have amazing wins, he's spent his entire career getting them over the biggest names in the business. I see Taker managing to lock Hell's Gate onto Cena about the 30 minute mark, for probably the third time that night, only Cena is now unable to power his way out of it or drag himself to the ropes. He gives us a great tease, maybe even lifting Taker off the canvas slightly a couple of times and/or getting to within a few inches of the ropes, before ultimately passing out.
I was kinds of on the fence on this one but think about it, this match takes place on the same night as the last round. I think this tips the scales in Cena's favour. Undertaker had a match with sting and that had to be a tough one, with both guys being able to dish out a lot and receive a lot of hurt, but Cena only had to beat Hulk Hogan who usually had to rely on his Superman skills to win a match. So I think Cena would be the fresher of the two going into the match and would win the match.
Undertaker didn't have a match with Sting; it was with Randy Savage.
Also, the fact that the match takes place on the same night, IMO, goes more to 'Taker's favor than it does Cena's. In 'Taker's prime, he was usually billed as an unstoppable and unhurt-able (if that's a word) wrestler. Another thing too, 'Taker won his match by a wider margin than Cena won his and Cena's last opponent (Hogan) was a tougher one than the Macho Man.
I think that when we are talking about who may be the greatest wrestler of all the times, if it were to come down to these two, then 'Taker should win. Aren't we talking about kayfabe here? If this tournament were about who was the bigger draw, face of the company, and all of that jazz; then it should only be between Hogan, Austin, The Rock, Ric Flair, Lou Thez, Bruno, and Cena. But that's not what we're talking about is it? So Kayfabe wise; all of that stuff, drawing ability, merchandise sales, and being the face of the company is irrelevant.
Kayfabe wise, this would be one hell of a match and since 'Taker has more wins against Cena than Cena has against 'Taker; kayfabe wise 'Taker should win. I'm not saying that it's hands down The Undertaker, but I do think that 'Taker would be able to squeeze this win out.
Kayfabe wise, this would be one hell of a match and since 'Taker has more wins against Cena than Cena has against 'Taker; kayfabe wise 'Taker should win. I'm not saying that it's hands down The Undertaker, but I do think that 'Taker would be able to squeeze this win out.
They haven't faced off at all since Cena became the undisputed face of the company, so this point is irrelevant. The last clean 1-on-1 victory Taker has against Cena was during his first U.S. Title reign in '04. Cena during his prime is much better than Cena of 8 years ago.
You can't possibly use the 2003 match as your reasoning to vote for Taker. This tournament is about both guys in their primes. John Cena was not in his prime back then. John Cena is currently in his prime and has beaten the guys you listed above in major title matches. He won countless title matches against Orton and Edge. Defended his title and won against Triple H and HBK. Hell even beat Triple H and Edge in a triple threat match and Orton, Edge, HBk in a Fatal Fourway match. Also throughout Cena's prime he has faced many monsters and each time Cena has always overcome the odds and beaten them. Taker typically beats them too but that is after they are used to take him out of action for some time. Both men in their primes are great no question, but John Cena has proven time and time again that against the top performers and men that tower over him in size that he is able to overcome the odds and win. You can't deny that over the last 8 years Cena has been challenged countless times and has almost always came out victorious. It is for this reason he will win this match.
I am using the matches that they've had in '03 and '04 as reasoning for voting for 'Taker. When you think about it, kayfabe wise, it's really the only measuring stick that we have to go by. As I've said, all of the top stars that Cena has beaten of the past 7 years while he was on top, 'Taker has also beaten. Add to the fact that over the last 20+ years 'Taker has been in the ring with and beaten every major wrestling star not named Sting, then I think that from a kayfabe point of view then this match would go 'Taker's way.
I'm not saying that 'Taker would just destroy Cena. I think that Cena would easily take 'Taker to the limit. I also think that Hogan probably took more out of Cena then Savage took out of 'Taker. When I look at all of this from a kayfabe point of view, I just see 'Taker coming out on top in one epic/hell of a match.
Undertaker may not have been THE GUY in the WWE as in the face but neither was Andre. The Undertaker is the second coming of Andre, a special attraction who never needed to the title to be over and be popular, he was a special attraction. Bret Hart stated in his book that in the early to mid 90's when they did worldwide tours in Europe, Asia or Africa they couldn't run the tour without The Undertaker and Bret Hart, as in they wouldn't let the WWE tour there without The Undertaker and Bret Hart. Think about that for a second, without Undertaker you are not allowed to perform at "insert arena here". Of course not every place did this but there were times where WWE almost had to cancel entire tours because they were unsure the Undertaker could make it as he took quite a bit of time off all through his career.
Andre was never THE GUY in the WWE either but it sure as shit didn't mean that he wasn't a draw. The Undertaker WAS in fact a draw and was just as important, if not more important to the WWE than the top guy. I remember tons of people growing up stating that they only watched wrestling to see the Undertaker, my girlfriends mom has a shrine of The Undertaker because she's such a big fan. Anyone who says The Undertaker wouldn't win because he wasn't THE GUY have no idea what they are talking about.
Also as "The deadman", there isn't too many time The Undertaker lost clean. Of the top of my head Austin and Warrior were the only 2 people to beat Deadman Taker clean and both weren't exactly in The Undertakers prime. Even Mankind, Kane and Yokozuna couldn't beat The Undertaker clean, they always needed to cheat, John Cena isn't gonna cheat. Even the champion and top guy in the mid 90's couldn't beat The Undertaker without some sort of bullshit happening such as 10 guys coming down to beat The Undertaker. That was Undertakers gimmick, the man who would never go down and stay down.
If John Cena win's this match, it would not be a clean victory, not prime Undertaker, it wouldn't happen, if Hogan, Bret Hart, Diesel, HBK, Yokozuna and every other big name in Taker's prime didn't beat him clean then neither would Cena.
I got to give this one to The Undertaker. I understand Cena's the guy, I understand he beat tons of people and hasn't lost clean much either but like I said, just because Undertaker wasn't the face of the WWE doesn't mean he wasn't massively over and a massive draw because he was. Back in Taker's prime the face was usually the WWE champion (like Bret, Hogan, ect.), Undertaker wasn't champion because it was unnecessary for him to be. Basically his character dictated he couldn't be champion because they wouldn't have him lose clean, note I'm talking prime Undertaker here, not Undertaker 1st coming in, not Undertaker in the late 90's - early 2000's, I'm talking 94-97 Undertaker.
Anyone who says "all Undertaker has is the streak" is being ridiculous. Just because it's his big thing now doesn't mean it was in his prime. The Undertaker didn't have the streak back then but there weren't too many times back in his prime he lost let alone lost clean. Cena wouldn't cheat, his character dictates he wouldn't cheat so either he wins by someone else cheating for him, or he loses.
This is going to be an fantastic match. Both guys are obviously tired from the last match. With both of them being very close. I think there was a two vote difference. So both men will be on equal ground there. If there is an advantage, its not much. Both guys have given a lot to this industry. (Mainly WWE)
On one hand you have Cena. The guy, everyone loves to hate. However, the guy is all around the best wrestler in the business. Name a guy right now who has put on consistently solid matches, who's great on the mic, who's brought more guys into the spotlight, then John Cena? A lot might not want to admit it, or just can't think about it. however, this guy is the best for a reason. He's at the end of the card constantly for a reason. Because he sells, and puts on good matches all the time.
On the other hand you have the Deadman. One of the best wrestlers ever. He's put on great matches, cuts a great promo (when he does speak), and has solidified many guys in the business. Oh, and there is that thing called the streak. Unfortunately we do not get to see him as much, because his body cannot take it anymore, but when he's around, its a big deal.
Both guys have lost their fair share of Big time matches. Cena obviously with his lost to the Rock, and Miz at the last two Mania's. Though 'Taker has lost his fair share of big matches too. Brock Lesnar, and Kurt Angle come to mind. This does not deny the fact these two guys are big stage players.
In this setting it all comes down to who has more in the tank after a hard fought match. This is where I have to give it to Cena. In his prime the guy is known for coming back from everything. Yes, 'Taker has shown that he can come back and win a match when he's down, when he's had the hell beat out of him. To me, Cena is the guy who can have everything thrown at him and still get the win, he can take multiple finishers, be in submissions for a great amount of time and still win. If this was a Wrestlemania match, 'Taker would win. Its not, Cena wins.
So this talk about Undertaker beating John Cena...yeah it certainly should not happen. First off, I want someone from Taker's side to tell me exactly the time frame that was his prime. Quit skirting around it. Is it from '90-'96? Is it from '96-'00 (pre-American Badass)? Is it '00-'03 when he was the American Badass? Or was it '04-'10?
It really shouldn't matter, regardless. The Undertaker isn't as good as Cena is. It's a simple fact. I can't help but think that Taker would realize that the better business would be to put over Cena outside of kayfabe. In the end Taker loses to the bigger star.
Well, I will put it like this...
We can not, repeat, can NOT apply the match in 2004 where Taker beat Cena, as Cena was not in his prime. IMO, Taker was not either.
Let's go from thence:
Cena is THE man of WWE. Cena has put more into the wrestling business than anybody since the Hulkster, and has reaped accordingly.
Taker is also very renowned, considering his always-entertaining Satanic gimmick and...
The Streak.
Which brings me to my next point: This is NOT a Mania match. Taker's streak doesn't really apply, nor does Cena's Mania record.
When it comes down to big money places like Miami, Cena has the upper hand (again, not concerning Mania). I'm not saying that Cena hasn't lost at big money places- Cena has lost in Boston, for crying out loud!
In the end, it comes down to whose engine is running on dry. Despite Taker's big man physique and Dead-like gimmick, Cena's amazing endurance would hold in a situation such as this (as it normally does).
Rather close, but my vote is for the Chain Gang Commander.
If you think that The Undertaker should win this, you know nothing about professional wrestling. Cena is a bigger star, has held more championships for longer, drawn more fans, sold more merchandise, wrestled week in week out, stole the show, crossed over into the main stream, put more people over, and I could go on, but he's done all that moreso than The Undertaker in half the career. Cena is a better professional wrestler than The Undertaker in every single way, and if you can't see that, you're blinded by the (dimming of) the lights.
The undertaker has more longevity to his career as it stands right now. But that is only a matter of time for Cena. For me Cena has shown time and time again he plays well at this sort of event, therefore he pulls my vote in a tight match.
Ohhh Fuck, here we go. Tastycles seems to think this is a "who can make the most ******ed statements at one time" tournament.
CONGRATULATIONS, You're #winning!!!
That's right folks, if you have a differing point of view you know absolutely nothing about wrestling, and that's the bottom line because some guy on the internet said so!
I'd love to see you validate that statement somehow considering the fact that Undertaker has been a top tier player since the day he arrived. He has always been one of the WWE's biggest stars whether it was the Hogan Era, Next Generation, Attitude Era, Ruthless Aggression Era, PG era, or what have you. This is a guy who has stood the test of time and been relevant, holding titles all through the different eras with all the changes of the tides. No matter who "The Guy" was at any given time, The Undertaker either feuded with them, was a major threat to them, or beat them at one point or another. Add to that the fact that he's been as big a star as he has for longer than a good number of the members here have even been alive and I see no way, shape, or form in which you can say with any validity or confidence that Cena is a bigger star.
Undertaker has won the WWE Title 4 times, the World Heavyweight title 3 times, is that not good enough? He's also held tag titles 7 times and the hardcore title once if you want a total tally. That's still a lot of gold and when you stop and consider that he's never really needed it, that makes it all the more impressive.
No one can argue John Cena's success, he has amassed quite a number of title reigns (12), but he's played hot potato with the title a bit, losing it and gaining it back which has made the number of reigns significantly higher. To his credit he has had 3 reigns that lasted for extended periods of time, but he hasn't had a long title reigns since 2007 by comparison which tells me he's seen his best days already.
With all that in mind I'd say the arguments about titles reigns, length of reigns, etc... is almost futile. Cena has a few more than Undertaker but they have mostly been short reigns, and while Undertaker hasn't held any of the titles for AS LONG as John Cena, he still has almost as many and holds the grandest title of all being undefeated at WrestleMania which trumps pretty much every other accomplishment and title in the history of the business.
So you mean to suggest than in Cena's 8 years that he has sold more merchandise and drawn more fans than Undertakers cumulative over the course of over 20 years? I'd say that's quite a stretch and virtually impossible considering that Undertaker has always been quite a draw and merchandise machine himself. This is something that I think time simply doesn't allow.
Undertaker did the same thing for more years than John Cena's been wrestling period, that's nothing to try and tout as a reason Cena is somehow better. All he is doing is the exact same thing anyone and everyone whose ever been in his position has been expected to do, and I don't mean just champions and top draws, I mean WWE Superstars in general. They are all expected to wrestle week in, week out and they do.
Bret Hart was a war horse in that regard being on the road pretty much constantly for 14 straight years and missing something like 2 days EVER. Cena's still got some road work to do before you can really tout that, and even with a longer run on the road, he's been sidelined numerous times for injury.
Undertaker has had that problem in these later years, but you can't forget from 1990 to say.... 2004-05 he was pretty much injury free and on the road constantly himself. He's been a road warrior for the WWE like few people ever have.
And the last 4 years at WrestleMania, who has stolen the show? Undertaker vs Triple H and Shawn Michaels. Even though Cena-Rock had top billing at WM28, everyone walked away from that event knowing that Taker-HHH was easily the MOTN just as they did the previous 3 years and arguably the previous 5 years with his matches against Edge and Batista. Those were great matches as well, and Undertaker has stolen the show with both Edge and Batista in their feuds at numerous PPVs.
Basically you're talking match quality here and whether it was the original Undertaker whose gimmick and presence was so captivating and awe inspiring, all the way to the modern day Undertaker, he has always delivered great matches in one way or another.
This has absolutely NO relevance to this match, and if you want to talk about popularity basically; while Undertaker may not have made movies and shitty rap albums, he is one of the most recognized figures in wrestling the world over no matter where you go. He may not be a media sensation, but he is an international star in his own right.
Rrrreeallllyyyy??? So once again, in the over 20 year career of The Undertaker, you are daring to suggest that in only 8 years, John Cena has put more people over? Tell you what, you PROVE IT and I mean do your homework and show me, and I will never argue otherwise again. However, I think the fact of the matter is that you are horribly, horribly wrong on this one. If you'd like I'll go ahead and do the homework and prove you wrong myself, but I think it would be much more entertaining for everyone else to see you have to admit how pathetically wrong you were on that one.
Here's the actual list for those betting Tastycles doesn't want to have to eat his own words:
Mankind
Vader
Shawn Michaels
Kane
Stone Cold Steve Austin
Kurt Angle
The Rock
RVD
Jeff Hardy
Brock Lesnar
Big Show
Vince Fucking McMahon of all people
JBL
Randy Orton
Mark Henry (even though he never lost to him, you don't necessarily have to lose to someone to put them over"
The Great Khali
Mr. Kennedy
Edge
Batista
CM Punk
Chris Jericho
Triple H
It should also be noted that he put quite a few of them over on multiple occasions.
Keep in mind now, Undertaker "putting these people over" doesn't mean he simply loses to them, that would be the most literal form of putting someone over. Putting someone over also means that you help elevate them, thus, getting over. Anyone who feuds with him is elevated as a result just by being in the same ring as him. It shows the audience that the person is legit enough to be in there with him, and it's also a sign of respect that he feels you're legit enough to be in there with him. Jeff Hardy is a good example for that, and even Triple H and Mark Henry. They never beat him, but I think it's safe to say HHH's career has been emboldened from his battles with Undertaker, Jeff Hardy got Takers direct endorsement on national television, and Mark Henry became a legit threat after years of obscurity by feuding with Undertaker and we all saw how far he's come since then. But, don't forget, he's beaten all of them too.
John Cena may have lost to a number of people but the resume looks nothing like this, and Cena has faced numerous people who weren't elevated by beating him or facing him because they were his peers, like Orton, Batista, Edge, Or they were already such big stars, he was the one getting put over e.g. Kurt Angle, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, JBL, etc....
Please explain how that is? So he's won titles, gimmick matches, and been placed as the poster boy of the company. There have been many before him in the same position and there will be many like him later down the road. Undertaker is one of a kind, there will never be another like him, and while all the guys like Cena have come a went as will he, Taker has been there and watched them all come and go. He might not outlast Cena for obvious reasons, but when he retires for good he will leave behind a pair of boots that can never be filled, not even by John Cena.
Cena is a better professional wrestler than The Undertaker in every single way, and if you can't see that, you're blinded by the (dimming of) the lights.
Nope. Not really. Good story though Poncho. Even though Undertaker is by far bigger than Cena, he still does things we still haven't seen Cena do. He's taken bigger bumps, flown higher, delivered bigger slams and splashes, out-wrestled and submitted as many people, and above all else continues to go out there every year at WrestleMania and show the world how it's done. Undertaker is so good, so commanding, with such a power over the audience he doesn't even need to do anything to get them riled up except show up. Look at the last few years with Triple H, a cold stoic stare is all it takes for him to have everyone in the palm of his hand. He can just stand there, and the power of his presence alone makes the building erupt. Then when you get to his performance in the ring, he is second to absolutely NONE. He's easily the best big man of all time, and arguably the greatest of all time if you're not bullshitting yourself and glorifying someone else you happen to be a bigger fan of. The Undertaker will go down as the greatest character and biggest figure ever in wrestling, possibly next to Hogan, and he beat Hogan.
I like The Undertaker and I do not really like John Cena but I think that John would take this.
The fact is, that Undertaker has had a very good record against most people in the industry but whenever he has come up against the top face of the company, he has rarely been booked as the guy to go over. He has been surprisingly human when he has faced them and all of them have found a way to beat him. Hogan beat Taker in his prime clean and only lost via interference to him. Austin beat Undertaker repeatedly. Brock Lesnar has beaten him repeatedly.
Undertaker vs John Cena, though, has the potential to be bigger than any of those feuds. The legend of The Undertaker has just gotten bigger in the succeeding years and with Cena vs Rock out of the line, you could say that Cena vs Undertaker is the most awaited feud of this era. I expect their first match to take place at WrestleMania which Undertaker would win, but I do expect Cena to win at just about any other PPV. Even at WrestleMania, mind you, it is not really a given that Cena would lose. An argument can be made that Cena is probably the only guy Undertaker should give up his streak to.
Still, this is not WrestleMania and over here, Cena has the edge. Like other top faces before him, I think that he will beat Undertaker. It would be an epic match with both guys hitting their finishers on more than one occasion but I expect Cena to prevail.
Rattlesnake, to be fair Hogan didn't necessarily beat Taker clean, Paul Bearer threw ashes in Takers face by mistake which allowed Hogan to win, not really clean as he was stripped of the title immediately after because of the shady business in the title matches him and Taker had.
You also got to remember when Lesnar beat Taker clean he was 37 and past his prime. As the Deadman he lost seldom and very rarely clean. Austin beat him clean yes but considering Austin was the biggest star ever in wrestling I think that one can slide. Also, Taker has beaten many top guys in the WWE and even got screwed out of the title during his title match against Bret Hart the top guy at Royal Rumble 96.
Also, when Bret Hart was the face of the WWE and champion The Undertaker often ended main eventing the show such as Summerslam '94 and Survivor Series '94, 2 of the 5 PPV's the WWE had at the time, and 2 of them he was off, and the one he didn't main event he was a WWF title match against Yokozuna at Royal Rumble 94 when they wrote him off television and that was the Rumble, the Rumble 9 times out of 10 closes the show. So in '94 (one of his prime years) he main evented 2 of the 3 PPV's he was in over the top guy. If he's closing the show and the main event even over the top guy in the company it goes to show that obviously Undertaker did plenty to draw fans himself or else he wouldn't be closing as many shows as he has.
He's beaten Yokozuna clean who was a top heel, Bret Hart, HBK, Diesel, Austin, Vader, Kane, The Rock, Mankind,ect. And each victory mentioned was done during his prime (for the record prime is usually late 20's to early 30's so let's say 29-33 or years 94-98).
Understand everything I say is not underestimating Cena its just realizing how great The Undertaker truly is. He is the best big man ever and I would say in the long run is more influential in the history of wrestling than Cena ever will be. Not the #1 guy but always in the main event and he was a special attraction, special attractions are never the top guy but in a lot of ways are more important than the top guy. Basically he is the Andre The Giant of WWE for the last 20 years. The Undertaker could draw fighting anyone whether it was Hulk Hogan or Bastion Booger, very few wrestlers could do that.
Keep in mind now, Undertaker "putting these people over" doesn't mean he simply loses to them, that would be the most literal form of putting someone over. Putting someone over also means that you help elevate them, thus, getting over. Anyone who feuds with him is elevated as a result just by being in the same ring as him. It shows the audience that the person is legit enough to be in there with him, and it's also a sign of respect that he feels you're legit enough to be in there with him. Jeff Hardy is a good example for that, and even Triple H and Mark Henry. They never beat him, but I think it's safe to say HHH's career has been emboldened from his battles with Undertaker, Jeff Hardy got Takers direct endorsement on national television, and Mark Henry became a legit threat after years of obscurity by feuding with Undertaker and we all saw how far he's come since then. But, don't forget, he's beaten all of them too.
You're one of many that have said that Foley owes a lot to Taker or put him over. Undertaker was slow and boring as shit before Mankind appeared. Mankind did just as much for Taker if not more than the other way around.
You mean when he basically squashed him at Fully Loaded or lost because he couldn't even figure out that it wasn't Kurt but his brother at Survivor Series?
I'm assuming you mean at the end of 2001 when Taker took the Hardcore strap from him. RVD feuded with Goldust and was the curtain jerker for WM 18. Plus, RVD has always been over so Undertaker had nothing to do with it.
Tell me what was the Jeff Hardy highlight between that ladder match and when he left in 2003? I'll save you the research. There weren't any. He was right back to midcard and tag teaming.
I am using the matches that they've had in '03 and '04 as reasoning for voting for 'Taker. When you think about it, kayfabe wise, it's really the only measuring stick that we have to go by.
Why is it the only measuring stick? Because it helps further your argument that the Undertaker beat Cena, with the use of a shot to the head with Cena's chain, while the ref was down? Kayfabe wise my balls. You just want to use a bullshit argument before Cena was in his prime.
As I've said, all of the top stars that Cena has beaten of the past 7 years while he was on top, 'Taker has also beaten. Add to the fact that over the last 20+ years 'Taker has been in the ring with and beaten every major wrestling star not named Sting, then I think that from a kayfabe point of view then this match would go 'Taker's way.
So 'Taker has beat the same guys that Cena has. Woo hoo. I've got a new one for you. 'Taker likes to bring in some MMA and submission work to his matches. John Cena fucking beat Brock Lesnar, a former UFC Heavyweight Champion, in the ring, 1-2-3. Yeah, from a kayfabe point of view, I think this match would go to John Cena.
I'm not saying that 'Taker would just destroy Cena. I think that Cena would easily take 'Taker to the limit. I also think that Hogan probably took more out of Cena then Savage took out of 'Taker.
What makes you say this? 2 votes is too close to say anything of the sort. Savage was likely to take more out of an opponent than Hogan. Of course you could talk about taking punishment which would wear out his opponent before he Hulked up. But still, what makes you think that Hogan would wear Cena out more than Savage would on 'Taker?
When I look at all of this from a kayfabe point of view, I just see 'Taker coming out on top in one epic/hell of a match.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
