The Undertaker: Best Ever?

[SSJPhenom]

Before everybody rips my head off let me explain. I'm speaking kayfabe wise.

I know when talking about the best ever in wrestling period it's between Hogan, Austin, and the Rock. Last year though, the Rock said something in a promo before his match with Cena. He said that he had beaten Hogan and Austin and if he were to beat Cena, then he could be considered the best ever.

Well not only has 'Taker beaten Hogan, Austin, and Cena. He's also beaten the Rock and just about every other major star in wrestling over the past 22+ years. Also, he's beaten Hogan and Austin for WWE Championships.

Taking that into consideration, in the kayfabe world of wrestling; is the Undertaker the best ever?

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

Nope.

Taker has never been the top guy or the guy to carry even Smackdown. That was the job of guys like Batista and Edge. Some may say that he's elevated guys but I can say that he has drugged guys down to his level when he wasn't at his best.

Taker's never beaten Savage, Warrior, or Lesnar. So there.

 

[SSJPhenom]

Nope.

Ok.

Taker has never been the top guy or the guy to carry even Smackdown. That was the job of guys like Batista and Edge. Some may say that he's elevated guys but I can say that he has drugged guys down to his level when he wasn't at his best.

You seem to miss the whole idea of this thread. I don't care if 'Taker was never considered the top guy or not. I'm looking at kayfabe wins and losses. In that respect there is nobody that has beaten more greats, more legends, or more champions past, present, or future.

And drug people down to his level? On his worst day he is still better than about 70% of the roster.

Taker's never beaten Savage, Warrior, or Lesnar. So there.

That's why I said he's beaten nearly ever major star over the past 22+ years.

 

[Thriller Ant]

You seem to miss the whole idea of this thread. I don't care if 'Taker was never considered the top guy or not. I'm looking at kayfabe wins and losses. In that respect there is nobody that has beaten more greats, more legends, or more champions past, present, or future.

Being the face of a show is kayfabe. Guys like Edge and Batista were the faces of SmackDown because they were the best on the show, in or out of kayfabe. Taker is good, he'll be a Hall of Famer, but he is far from the best ever, no matter the criteria.

 

[HBsam31]

In kayfabe I would say he is definitely in the discussion, but I agree with Little Jerry Lawler. He didn't beat Lesner, Savage or Warrior so I imagine there are a lot of other guys in the discussion to. In kayfabe Taker probably has one of the better win loss records, but again I agree with LJL in that he probably has brought some guys down when he wasn't at his best. I hesitate to call anyone the best ever, but I will admit that Undertaker is definitely in the discussion, and I must say that until the last several years that Taker was one of the most consistent guys WWE has ever had on the roster.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

Ok.

Yep.

You seem to miss the whole idea of this thread. I don't care if 'Taker was never considered the top guy or not. I'm looking at kayfabe wins and losses. In that respect there is nobody that has beaten more greats, more legends, or more champions past, present, or future.

Other than Wrestlemania, Undertaker routinely loses all the time.

HHH has title wins over Mankind, HBK, Goldberg, and Rock.

Hart has beaten Austin, Piper, Savage, Sting, HBK, and Ric Flair.

Pretty good if you ask me.

And drug people down to his level? On his worst day he is still better than about 70% of the roster.

Better than 70% of the roster? Watch his matches from 2000-2005 and come back and tell me that he was better than 70%.



That's why I said he's beaten nearly ever major star over the past 22+ years.[/QUOTE]

 

[SSJPhenom]

Other than Wrestlemania, Undertaker routinely loses all the time.

HHH has title wins over Mankind, HBK, Goldberg, and Rock.

Hart has beaten Austin, Piper, Savage, Sting, HBK, and Ric Flair.

Pretty good if you ask me.

That is pretty good, but you're selling 'Taker short by a lot.

'Taker has title wins over Hogan(twice), Sid, Austin, Batista, Edge, and CM Punk. 'Taker has beaten Mankind, Hart, HBK, HHH, the Rock, Yokozuna, Flair, Kane, Kurt Angle, John Cena, Kevin Nash, DDP, Booker T, Christian, Vader, Big Show, Orton, Eddie, Mark Henry, Great Khali, Jeff Hardy, Chris Jericho, Rey Mysterio, and etc. Those are just past champions that I've mentioned. I'm sure I'm missing a few as well.

Better than 70% of the roster? Watch his matches from 2000-2005 and come back and tell me that he was better than 70%.

I can name several great matches that he had during this time period. vs HHH WM 17, vs Flair WM 18, vs Jeff Hardy Raw 2002, vs Orton WM 21, vs Kurt Angle Smackdown 2003, vs Kurt Angle and Rock Triple Threat Match, vs Brock Lesnar Hell in a Cell, and I could go on.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

That is pretty good, but you're selling 'Taker short by a lot.

Not really.

'Taker has title wins over Hogan(twice), Sid, Austin, Batista, Edge, and CM Punk. 'Taker has beaten Mankind, Hart, HBK, HHH, the Rock, Yokozuna, Flair, Kane, Kurt Angle, John Cena, Kevin Nash, DDP, Booker T, Christian, Vader, Big Show, Orton, Eddie, Mark Henry, Great Khali, Jeff Hardy, Chris Jericho, Rey Mysterio, and etc. Those are just past champions that I've mentioned. I'm sure I'm missing a few as well.

Undertaker has never beaten DDP, Eddie, or Christian.

I can pick nits all day. You don't want to go there.

I can name several great matches that he had during this time period. vs HHH WM 17, vs Flair WM 18, vs Jeff Hardy Raw 2002, vs Orton WM 21, vs Kurt Angle Smackdown 2003, vs Kurt Angle and Rock Triple Threat Match, vs Brock Lesnar Hell in a Cell, and I could go on.

People thought that Jeff Hardy match was great? Shock and awe.

 

[SSJPhenom]

Not really.

Yes really.

Undertaker has never beaten DDP, Eddie, or Christian.

That's right, at King of the Ring 2001 that wasn't an official match. 'Taker just beat the shit out of DDP.

I could've sworn that there was a fatal 4 way or something with Eddie and 'Taker in it. Not the one with JBL and Booker T but another one. Idk.

Also, didn't he have a match with Christian during the Ministry angle to teach him a lesson or something like that?

People thought that Jeff Hardy match was great? Shock and awe.

Yes. For what it was, a championship ladder match on Raw, it was pretty good.

 

[justtxyank]

I came into the thread expecting to give a resounding "HA!" but after realizing you are talking kayfabe sense, I can see some merit. Ultimately I will disagree, but I think kayfabe wise the Undertaker is probably one of the best ever.

I still think Hulk Hogan is #1, even in Kayfabe terms. At his peak he was slaying legends like Wilt slayed skanks.

 

[Dirk]

If we ARE talking full-blown kayfabe, which we are, I'd give the edge to Taker. Why? Because he's dead! Being at 20 and 0 from beyond the grave is pretty fucking impressive to me...

Foley and Festus come close, for being mentally damaged, but Taker is DEAD. So maybe he isn't the best ever, but in terms of hardships overcame, the Undertaker definately takes it. Imagine what a living Taker could do!

The Undertaker character always perplexed me somewhat. If other wrestlers were meant to be raging, white-hot, over-the-top explosions, Taker was always icy, stoic and menacing and that is probably enough to give his a gold star in his class (in which he is the lone contestant).

 

[Papa Pillman]

I know when talking about the best ever in wrestling period it's between Hogan, Austin, and the Rock.

Ric Flair says Hello.

Taking that into consideration, in the kayfabe world of wrestling; is the Undertaker the best ever?

Four people have more cumulative days holding the World Title(and that's just looking at its WWE history) than Undertaker does, including Sheamus.

Twenty have more cumulative days as WWE champion, including JBL.

He has less total world title reigns than all the other guys who have been consistent top-of-the-card mainstays during the two title era... Taker:7, Triple H:13, Cena:12, Edge:11, Orton:9. He also has far less days as champ than Rock and Austin, one less reign than the Rock and only one more than Austin, neither of which ever got the luxury of holding the "Big Gold Belt" and being regular players during the two title era. He only has one more reign over the world, and far less total days as champ than either Batista or Punk, two guys who only main evented for a portion of the era.

So no, Taker is not even close to the greatest in kayfabe terms. Hell he is likely the greatest "big man" ever in reality, but in kayfabe that might not even be true.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

He'll go down as the greatest in Wrestlemania history and that's it.

It's clear they are now positioning Bruno for his "rightful" place as "the best ever" in Kayfabe terms.

Where Taker does score though is the greatest "gimmick" wrestler ever. Over time, even he has changed his persona away from the Deadman being literal. It's now more a way to describe his approach rather than how it was in the days of his first matches, with his soul in an urn. A lot will depend on what Taker does when he retires... does he hang up the Taker moniker and go by Mark Callaway thus ending the Taker persona forever or does he forever just go by Undertaker? If he does the former, then yes Undertaker goes down as the greatest gimmick ever. If he tries to carry it on - it will become as lame as Hogan is now.

Is he the best big man ever? Kane goes into that discussion, Vader, Hogan and Big Show are all in there. In reality Andre gets that nod and Kane just pips Taker to 2nd for me - he's a better all round worker and is the true "most consistant" guy WWE has had for the last 15 years (Jericho is 2nd on that - he has never "not delivered" in the ring)

 

[The 1-2-3 Killam]

I think, in terms of kayfabe, he is perceived to be the best ever by a lot of the wrestlers. For instance, there's a reason that Shawn Michaels and Triple H - two guys in contention for the accolade themselves - tried so diligently to end the Undertaker's WrestleMania streak. There's a reason they would put their careers on the line to get it done. So yes, I think from that perspective, he is probably perceived as the best.

Now, in other brackets, I don't think I'd put 'Taker as the best. He's damn good. I want to get that out of the way right now. He's managed to keep relatively the same shtick for over 20 years, and still remain as one of the biggest, most respective names for every single one of those years. He's offed Rock, Lesnar, Austin, Hogan, Triple H, Mankind, Kane, McMahon, Ric Flair, Jake Roberts, Shawn Michaels, etc etc. The list goes on, and on, and on... But name one time period where he was THE guy. Where he was the man to carry the WWE flag and rep the company as the top babyface? Or heel, for that matter? Hogan carried wrestling for a decade. Rock and Austin had short reigns, but they carried wrestling for their era. Undertaker has seemingly always been around. He's always been dominant, and perceived as unbeatable. He's damn near the best ever, but without the distinction of carrying an era of pro wrestling, there will always been those above him on the totem pole.

I see it like this. It's like Dan Marino or Karl Malone. Some of the best playres in the history of their sport, and they were consistently good fro quite some time. But they never won the big one. They were never THE guy in their sport. There was always somebody better. And they may have beaten the best on occasion in the regular season, but when it counted, and when the title of best of all time was on the line, they didn't measure up. Or their team didn't measure up, and elevate them to greatness. That's Undertaker. Always been there, and always been good.

 

[NotoriousMEAT]

The Undertaker is in the discussion of greatest of all time regardless if it's kayfabe or not. I understand what the OP is asking, but it's hard to judge by kayfabe.. because kayfabe shit like wins and losses don't matter. For example, The Undertaker never beat Lesnar because as an established vet, he was doing his job to get Brock over as The Next Big Thing. Someone mentioned he losses more than he wins, but that's what the established stars do once their time as THE guy (or one of) has passed. Because they can. You make stars, to create new ones. I think it was Mark Madden's most recent article on WretleZone where he classified Taker as 1 of only 4 "A+" wrestlers (along with Austin, HBK and The Rock) of the last 20 years. The credentials he list are all valid. I usually feel Madden is overly critical, but I completely agree because when I'm forced to choose the Greatest of All Time, those are the 4 I think of. They all have a case.

-The Rock is the most accomplished in and out of the ring.
-Shawn Michaels is the greatest in ring performer.
-Stone Cold is the biggest draw. Sorry Hogan.
-The Undertaker is the greatest character and is by far the longest tenured star.

You don't have to call Taker THE greatest of all time. But you at least gotta put him in the top 4.

Also regarding something else the OP mentioned. The Rock said last year he'd be the first guy to beat Hogan, Austin, and Cena all at WRESTLEMANIA, which he has done and that would be his claim for G.O.A.T.

 

[MCMG]

In terms of who beat who than Yes, i agree with you. He has beaten all the big names so he should be considered the best ever.

I think people are being overly-pedantic. Has The Undertaker ever beaten Santino? No? Doesn't make any difference.

 

[lowandmighty]

I see what "I Am Phenom" is saying and if you were to judge the kayfabe best ever the way he is saying then the answer is yes The Undertaker is the best ever. Especially since he also beat Triple H and Shawn Michaels at Wrestlemania who are two more in the "best ever league". Plus he has never lost at Wrestlemania.

However there are other ways you could claim a wrestler to be kayfabe the best ever such as: Most days in a row as champion, most days altogether as champion, number of world championships held, total number of championships held, most wins altogether, most moves performed, being Hulk Hogan, beating Hulk Hogan the most times.

So there will always be an argument over who is the best ever kayfabe or not. There will never be one overwhelming answer.

 

[Big Papa Santo]

I don't necessarily believe that there is a definitive "best" wrestler (Although there are definitely good wrestlers and mediocre wrestlers) but I'd rather like to believe that there is a group of all-time greats, and what makes each of those all-time greats......well.....great, is that they each did something that differentiated them from the rest of the pack. Steve Austin helped singlehandedly spark one of the greatest eras of professional wrestling history, Hulk Hogan helped pro-wrestling go mainstream and shape what it is today, Bruno Sammartino was the first real "superstar" of wrestling, and that's just naming a few of the many greats that have paved the way for the modern state of professional wrestling. The Undertaker is high on that list, and with good reason. Their has never been a wrester as superstitious and ominous as The Undertaker. There is just something that clicks when that man walks to the ring, with his eerie, slow and dramatic music, his methodical wrestling style, or the way that he talks to the crowd with his deep, dark voice. When any other wrestler uses that kind of gimmick, its cheesy and childish, but when Mark Callaway ties up his boots and puts that long, black trenchcoat on and walks into the ring, it's chilling to see. Not only has The Undertaker had an amazing career, with multiple world title wins, but the one thing that has solidified him into one of the sports greatest icons is "The Streak" The streak is to Wrestlemania what pumpkin pie is to Thanksgiving, it's a yearly tradition. Every year a wrestler challenges The Undertaker, and every year they fall. Some of the best matches in Wrestlemania history have been streak matches. Shawn Michaels Vs. The Undertaker I & II, Triple H Vs. The Undertaker I & II, when 'Taker steps inside of the squared circle at Wrestlemania, under those bright lights, no matter who he is facing, it is almost always an instant classic (With a few exceptions) So to answer your question, I don't know for sure if The Undertaker is the single best wrestler in the history of this business, but he's pretty damn close.