Miami Region, Sixth Round: (1) The Undertaker vs. (3) John Cena

[Larry]

I can't be bothered to argue against this point by point, it's just so wrong. All I would say, and I mean this sincerely, you are by far the stupidest poster I have ever had any interaction with on this website. No doubt you think you're winning the argument, but when you opened your mouth Taker was 8 votes behind. He's now 22 votes behind.

SO that's all you've got? I've cut you off at every corner and every argument and this is what you're reduced to? Since you've been thoroughly handled now you just want to throw a tantrum and say I'm the stupidest person yada yada yada. I have won this argument, this response is proof enough. Of course you also went as low as to try and suggest that somehow I am responsible for the outcome of this match, like I somehow make everyone go against Undertaker. You're a sad sorry bitch, a sore loser, a horrible debater, and you lie and try to twist things in your favor when all other devices have failed.

There's a few points that shoot your argument down in flames:

Like everything else you brought, that you thought was doing the same, but did nothing? This should be rich.

1) You said he "feuded with Savage, Ultimate Warrior, Koko B. Ware, Sgt Slaughter, Sid Justice, Dusty Rhodes". I pointed out that he has wrestled a grand total of zero of these people in a televised singles match. he wrestled Sid at (pre-PPV era) King of the Ring which ended in a draw. He also wrestled Warrior and lost in a direct to video number. He's never been in the ring with Savage and wrestled Rhodes and Ware in an elimination match that he himself was eliminated from later on. Sgt. Slaughter was his tag partner. None of those things is a feud, they are matches, or lack thereof. That is not twisting the facts, it's stating them.

"WITH"! dumbfuck "WITH"! Did I say AGAINST?! No I didn't, and I actually went through and explained exactly the situations you had questioned in the last post. The fact is he DID feud WITH all of them, that means he was involved with all of them slapnuts, can you get that through your think skull?

2) Cena building Miz to be able to headline WrestleMania is more of a push to a specific wrestler than anything Taker has ever done.

That's your opinion and it amounts to a hill of beans or less. Keep grasping at those straws though.

3) It's Kojak, not co-Jack, if you're going to throw insults around, at least use actual words, you fucking imbecile.

Oh gimme a break, I responded to a lot of stupid horseshit from you, and you're going to nit pick me on that? As I noted, your desperate and a little bitch. We should nickname you Squeak from now on. That's it, your a little bitch Squeak.

4) You seem to be under the impression that I'm putting words into your mouth saying that you are claiming something makes Taker the greatest of all time. The inherent point of this tournament is to find that, therefore all of your arguments suggest that. Or did you not realise why you were here?

Wrong again Squeak, I mean little bitch, aww fuck it. Either way you're wrong and making more stupid ass assumptions like the cunty, salty, desperate waste of skin you are.

5) You're great at reading and regurgitating Wikipedia. Not so great at interpreting information. Classic interaction:

I'm just great all around, especially at taking factual information and booting it up your ass and cramming it down your throat. You can bitch about it all you want, it doesn't change the fact that you've been owned little bitch, I mean Squeak.

Ba-Bomb: Snuka was a legend
Tastycles: By the time he fought Taker he was insignificant and irrelevant
Ba-Bomb: Actually he was in WrestleMania VI, Survivor Series 1990 and Royal Rumble 1991 before he fought Taker.

God you're a shameless fuck. You challenged me to name anything Snuka had done in the year prior or after facing Undertaker, and I gave you not just one thing but three things, all occurring 3 of the big 4. You got fucking owned and now you're trying to make it seem like I somehow fucked up, but fact of the matter is YOU FUCKED UP, when you thought you'd try to fuck with me, and pull your little conniving bullshit, and you got your fucking balls bashed in. Too bad, so sad, eat a dick up till ya hick-up.

This is true. What you don't seem to understand is that being on a Survivor Series team that gets whitewashed by a team featuring The Warlord and Paul Roma, losing in less than 4 minutes at WrestleMania and being the 13th man in the Royal Rumble and the 8th man eliminated do not make you relevant.

Of course, only what you say, makes people relevant. Alert the fucking media and post a bulletin on WZ right now! Little bitch aka Squeak, is the end all be all authority on everything to do with wrestling. He decided what makes people relevant or historically significant, who and what was historically significant at the time of it's occurrence, he also decided whether or not YOU know anything and the degree of your intelligence, and stand basically as the singular authority on all things he deems to be the singular authority on, all the while being a little bitch now nicknamed Squeak, and being a big douchebag who makes outlandish statements and gets sand up his vagina when people call him out on it, and beat him over the head with facts. WHAT-A-MAN!

 

[Larry]

Ba-Bomb is a fucking moron.




Really? Edge was already at the pinnacle of his career, not thanks to the Undertaker, but thanks to his opponent in this match, John Cena. The Undertaker feud did very little for Edge. Edge was already getting massive heat. He was already legitimate from pinning Cena and beating him clean, and outsmarting him at every turn. He got nothing from his feud with the Taker, where he was constantly using La Familia' to gang assault Undertaker and STILL losing. I give credit where credit is due here, Taker gave Edge a great match and really made him look great, but Edge was already MADE by the time the Taker feud came around.

And Batista was made to look like a beast well before the Taker feud. I don't see how Batista being made to look scared by the Taker's tricks did him any favor. Again, the Mania match made him look really good, but Batista was already at the top. I don't see how it elevated his status much at all.

WOW, that just earned you so much E-Cred, everyone's gonna think you're cool now.

Why am I like the only person being realistic and factual about shit? Like what you quoted above, really, you mean to try and suggest that going over Taker was just meaningless to the careers or status of either Edge or Batista? So going over Taker and winning titles off of him and having hot feuds with him is no better than having feuds with Santino Marella or someone like that is what you're trying to say? Bitch Please! Get fucking real dude, you ain't gotta lie to kick it! And trying to suck the mods e-dicks by coming at me isn't going to help you either, just like in real life when you get on your knees and they've splooged in your mouth, they won't respects you afterwards so don't bother trying. What am I saying? You probably already know from experience, so I'm just preaching to the choir.

 

[Tastycles]

SO that's all you've got? I've cut you off at every corner and every argument and this is what you're reduced to? Since you've been thoroughly handled now you just want to throw a tantrum and say I'm the stupidest person yada yada yada. I have won this argument, this response is proof enough. Of course you also went as low as to try and suggest that somehow I am responsible for the outcome of this match, like I somehow make everyone go against Undertaker. You're a sad sorry bitch, a sore loser, a horrible debater, and you lie and try to twist things in your favor when all other devices have failed.

Yawn.

No, I want to stop arguing with you because you can't take anything on board. At no point have I said Taker is bad, or that he doesn't deserve to be regarded as good or great. What I've said is that he doesn't have the credentials that Cena has. You wheel out things like feuds which never happened and matches against King Kong Bundy in your favour, not realising the issue at hand.

As for me being a terrible debater, I reallly don't care about your opinion, and I certainly don't need to prove myself to you. When I post, the support for the people I supported goes up. When you post, it stays level.

Like everything else you brought, that you thought was doing the same, but did nothing? This should be rich.

I'm genuinely unsure. Are you this cocky or is it a smoke screen? If you're this cocky, you are a moron. If it's a smokescreen, Ray Charles can see through it.

"WITH"! dumbfuck "WITH"! Did I say AGAINST?! No I didn't, and I actually went through and explained exactly the situations you had questioned in the last post. The fact is he DID feud WITH all of them, that means he was involved with all of them slapnuts, can you get that through your think skull?

That is clearly not what you meant. Your original wording, verbatim:

...that he was feuding with Randy Savage, Ultimate Warrior, Sgt. Slaughter, Sid Justice, and obviously Hulk Hogan???? None of that counts right? Those were all legends and top tier talent that he was just steamrolling through, but that serves no relevance here right?

How do you steamroll through, in order, someone you never meaningfully laid hands on, someone you lost to, your tag partner, someone you drew with and someone you beat, via interference and lost to less than a week later? You can try to hide behind semantics all you want, but look at what you wrote, and look how inconsistent that is with what you just said.

Oh gimme a break, I responded to a lot of stupid horseshit from you, and you're going to nit pick me on that? As I noted, your desperate and a little bitch. We should nickname you Squeak from now on. That's it, your a little bitch Squeak.

Big man.

Wrong again Squeak, I mean little bitch, aww fuck it. Either way you're wrong and making more stupid ass assumptions like the cunty, salty, desperate waste of skin you are.

Sorry, what's your point? Oh you don't have one?

I'm just great all around, especially at taking factual information and booting it up your ass and cramming it down your throat. You can bitch about it all you want, it doesn't change the fact that you've been owned little bitch, I mean Squeak.

Again, you've made no point here and are just slinging shit, which isn't going to stick.

God you're a shameless fuck. You challenged me to name anything Snuka had done in the year prior or after facing Undertaker, and I gave you not just one thing but three things, all occurring 3 of the big 4. You got fucking owned and now you're trying to make it seem like I somehow fucked up, but fact of the matter is YOU FUCKED UP, when you thought you'd try to fuck with me, and pull your little conniving bullshit, and you got your fucking balls bashed in. Too bad, so sad, eat a dick up till ya hick-up.

Oh, right yes, I see what you were doing. When I said "what did he do either side for a year" I obviously meant "what did he do either side for a year that supports your claim that he was still a tough nut to crack". I'd have thought that was obvious, as it's unlikely that Snuka ceased to exist for a year.

Of course, only what you say, makes people relevant. Alert the fucking media and post a bulletin on WZ right now! Little bitch aka Squeak, is the end all be all authority on everything to do with wrestling. He decided what makes people relevant or historically significant, who and what was historically significant at the time of it's occurrence, he also decided whether or not YOU know anything and the degree of your intelligence, and stand basically as the singular authority on all things he deems to be the singular authority on, all the while being a little bitch now nicknamed Squeak, and being a big douchebag who makes outlandish statements and gets sand up his vagina when people call him out on it, and beat him over the head with facts. WHAT-A-MAN!

No, I'm not the authority on wrestling, and never denied Snuka's historical significance. I have merely stated that beating him in 1991 is not a great achievement. You then posted three lacklustre results for him in the year before their match, because you somehow thought it would refute it.

As for being irate. I'm not angry, nobody has ever made me angry on this site, though Sidious came close at times. He was like you in his pigheadedness, but he was intelligent enough to at least frame his opinions in a coherent argument. You're the one that started with the insults directed at me, and you're the one that has just posted hundreds of words that didn't contain a single argument relevant to the match. I made 5 points and your responses were:

1) Semantics, later shown to be unfounded.
2) That's irrelevant!
3) Name calling
4) Name calling
5) Name calling

If I was annoyed, I could infract you for flaming. You're the one trying to get personal, but if you think a teenager calling me names is going to bother me, I hate to disappoint you, but it's not.

 

[Benson]

WOW, that just earned you so much E-Cred, everyone's gonna think you're cool now.

Why am I like the only person being realistic and factual about shit? Like what you quoted above, really, you mean to try and suggest that going over Taker was just meaningless to the careers or status of either Edge or Batista? So going over Taker and winning titles off of him and having hot feuds with him is no better than having feuds with Santino Marella or someone like that is what you're trying to say? Bitch Please! Get fucking real dude, you ain't gotta lie to kick it! And trying to suck the mods e-dicks by coming at me isn't going to help you either, just like in real life when you get on your knees and they've splooged in your mouth, they won't respects you afterwards so don't bother trying. What am I saying? You probably already know from experience, so I'm just preaching to the choir.

Yes, that's it. I'm trying to look cool. Or it's just my honest opinion. Trust me, I've gotten into a similar argument dozens of times. Coco can vouch for me. So can Champ. You honestly have no fucking clue what you're talking about.

 

[Benson]

Like what you quoted above, really, you mean to try and suggest that going over Taker was just meaningless to the careers or status of either Edge or Batista? So going over Taker and winning titles off of him and having hot feuds with him is no better than having feuds with Santino Marella or someone like that is what you're trying to say? Bitch Please!

And yeah, that's exactly what I said. Honestly, are you fucking stupid?And secondly, NONE of them ever went over in their feuds with Taker.

 

[SSJPhenom]

Don't speak. Do you know how stupid you sound right now? Have you even paid attention to what SSC and I were talking about? SSC keeps talking about when Undertaker cowardly attacked Cena, his tag team partner, from behind, as if it was some great statement and some relevant point in this debate.

Not only did Cena not sneak attack Undertaker and faced him like a man, Undertaker had a chance to face Cena 1 on 1 and chickened out and faced Batista instead. Then, in the match at No Way Out, Cena pinned Undertaker clean in the middle of the ring as part of the match.

Don't speak. You'll only say something more stupid than you already did.

Of course I paid attention to what you and SSC were talking about and that conversation was between you and him.

I was just pointing out that all your video really did was point out that it took a Spine-Buster from Batista, Sweet Chin Music from HBK, and finally the FU/AA from Cena to put 'Taker down long enough for the three count.

I wasn't trying to cut in on the conversation that you already had, I was starting my own.

 

[Slyfox696]

Of course I paid attention to what you and SSC were talking about and that conversation was between you and him.

I was just pointing out that all your video really did was point out that it took a Spine-Buster from Batista, Sweet Chin Music from HBK, and finally the FU/AA from Cena to put 'Taker down long enough for the three count.

I wasn't trying to cut in on the conversation that you already had, I was starting my own.

Why would I want to have a conversation with you? You're not very smart and are a terrible debater, as evidenced by the arguments you've given in this thread. You took something I posted completely out of the context in which I posted it, and then tried to make an argument from that.

Your post was completely useless and irrelevant, as mine was posted to show how not only has Cena made a statement to the Undertaker, he also did it in the context of a match as opponents, not in a cowardly sneak attack on his tag team partner. My post was intended to refute the asinine position that Undertaker somehow made a point by sneak attacking Cena. If a sneak attack Tombstone somehow makes a point (it doesn't), then Cena giving Undertaker an FU AND pinning him in the middle of the ring makes a bigger point. SSC was essentially claiming the circumstances surrounding the actual even were irrelevant to the event itself, at which point Cena's pin trumps Taker's cowardly sneak attack.

You took my post completely out of context to try and score cheap points. You made yourself look silly while doing so. Do both of us a favor and argue with people who can actually tolerate your low level of intelligence, because I'm not sure that I can.