Undertakers lackluster WM opponents

[Matisyahu]

Over time Undertaker's Wrestlemania streak has become the stuff of legend. At 20-0, Undertaker has unquestionably become the cornerstone of present-day Mania events and usually, his matches are the most anticipated matches of the event.

But looking back from beginning to end, Undertaker streak is slightly tainted in that he has beaten HHH 3 times, HBK twice, has some quite unforgettable matches against the likes of Giant Gonzalez, Jimmy Snuka, King Kong Bundy, etc., but also matches against guys like Batista, Randy Orton, and Edge that were absolutely phenomenal!

Through it all, I for one can think of some great matches I would have rather seen instead of the earlier clunkers with Bundy and others.

Now granted its no secret that The Undertaker's streak was unintentional at first, more coincidence than anything. Later down the line it became one of the traditions of Mania that someone was going to take their shot at ending Taker's streak in order to cement their legacy. But again, if I had my way, there are some matches I would have rather seen instead of what we got.

First of all I'm not going to pretend to remember who were on the roster at the time of each match but rather just say who I would rather have seen.

1. Jimmy Snuka: Don't get me wrong, Snuka is a legend but to me a guy like The Ultimate Warrior would have been a much more impressive match at the time considering it was during this time that Undertaker was almost a zombie in that he kept coming and seemingly felt no pain at all. It would take someone either larger than Taker himself or someone of Warrior's stature to be able to over come someone who just kept coming. To me that would have one hell of a match up even main event quality.

2. Giant Gonzales: This match was absolutely terrible beyond words. Undertaker looked pathetic in the match and got decimated and then worst of all got knocked out with the ether soaked rag for the dq. They should have stricken this one from the record because I dont think a win by dq in a match this bad should even get any mention whatsoever in the WWE. If I was to have Taker face anyone at this time it would have been someone like Yokozuna who would have been a much better WM quality opponent for The Phenom. Yokozuna was perhaps the greatest big man in the WWF era or any since considering he had amazing agility, and seemed damned near unstoppable during this time.

3. King Kong Bundy: Another waste of a match for me in that Dibiase's Million Dollar Corporation has taken Undertaker's urn and have sent King Kong Bundy in to destroy the Undertaker who may or may not be weak without the urn. Of course throughout the match the urn passes back and forth between Taker, Dibiase, Paul Bearer, and finally Kama who plans to turn it into a gold chain. Somewhere in the confusion Undertaker slams Bundy and wins. I would have much rather of seen Taker take on Big Van Vader who I believe was still in WCW at the time but it would have been a classic! Vader was an absolute beast at this time and I can only imagine how Undertaker vs Vader would have played out given that Vader was the most dominating, hard hitting, brutal heel in WCW at that time and Undertaker was seemingly indestructible and could pretty much take on anyone and keep getting back up.

4. The Big Bossman: I understand that at the time Undertaker was on a never ending mission to destroy Vince McMahon and The Corporation but this was yet again a throw away match. I would much rather have seen The Undertaker take on someone like The Rock or Stonecold in the cell. Given that we never got to see either men take Taker on I'd love to have seen either one. I just cannot understand why Taker never faced Stonecold or the Rock at Mania it just baffles me!

5. Albert and The Big Show: Would much rather of seen one on one with Show on this one. I think with their history together these two could have had a great one on one contest. I really wish they would have made Show a more realistic character. How the hell is it that Big Show didn't dominate the WWE? He is a freak of nature who could believably destroy anyone on the roster but always seemed to get humiliated by guys half his size. I think if they made Show more believable he could have been Taker's biggest threat to the streak. Yet again another throw away match.

I can go on and on but if you had it to do over again, who would you have rather seen go up against Taker over the years?

 

[Headman]

The Ultimate Warrior would have ended his streak before it even got started. You should be glad he didn't face Warrior at that time for that reason alone. You are right about Gonzales though. Taker eventually got a clean win over him, but his WM effort looked quite pathetic. I do understand that the WWF still had plans for the rivalry, but Taker looked weak on the grandest stage of them all. I still don't mind Gonzales as an opponent for Taker at WM and didn't expect a wrestling classic, but the way the match was booked just wasn't very favorable for Taker. Actually the only opponents on your list that I would have changed would be The Big Boss Man (Awful match) and Albert/Big Show. It should have been Taker vs Show one on one. I also would have changed Mark Henry because no one on planet earth thought Mark Henry stood a shot in hell at that time.

 

[HBKperfect23]

1. Jimmy Snuka

Snuka doing the job was good for Taker. He was a legend on his way out and giving Taker a win over him was good for Taker to get over. Just like Tito putting over HBK at 8 was good for him.

2. Giant Gonzales

5 star match? of course not. Gonzales had a huge presence and the sight of those two in the ring together was impressive. He was a credible challenger for Taker. The only one on the roster who I could see challenging Taker at 9 was Bam Bam.

3. King Kong Bundy

I agree with the Vader scenario but that wasn't possible at the time. Bundy was once a monster heel and if used right could have been a credible opponent for Taker. He had to fight someone from the MDC. There wasn't many too choose from.

4. The Big Bossman

On paper this isn't horrible. Bossman was over and always decent in the ring. I cant think of a better opponent at the time for Taker given that Rock, Austin, Show, Mick were all unavailable.

5. Albert and The Big Show:

Ill agree here. Show/Taker was the way to go.

 

[AhSpicyDrop]

1. Jimmy Snuka: Don't get me wrong, Snuka is a legend but to me a guy like The Ultimate Warrior would have been a much more impressive match at the time considering it was during this time that Undertaker was almost a zombie in that he kept coming and seemingly felt no pain at all. It would take someone either larger than Taker himself or someone of Warrior's stature to be able to over come someone who just kept coming. To me that would have one hell of a match up even main event quality.

At the time going over Jimmy Snuka in the way that he did was impressive. As Headman said if he had been booked to face Warrior then we wouldn't even have a streak to talk about. Plus Warrior was booked against Savage and there's no way I would want that match erased from history. Undertaker was hardly a polished worker back then and a match between him and Warrior would have been a disjointed clusterfuck.

3. King Kong Bundy

Disagree here, because the Undertaker vs. Million Dollar Corporation angle was awesome, and it got some long play. Out of all the big men that Undertaker wrestled he had some of the best chemistry with Bundy. He arguably brought some of the best matches out of KKB. The ending of the match left a little bit to be desired but it was a decent match and good story.


The others I can't disagree with... they were garbage.

Somewhere on the Mania trail it would have been nice to see Undertaker face Austin, and he should have had a single's match with Show.

 

[The Brain]

One of my many pet peeves is how people want to go back and rewrite history based soley on hindsight while completely ignoring the reality of the time they're talking about.

Now granted its no secret that The Undertaker's streak was unintentional at first, more coincidence than anything. Later down the line it became one of the traditions of Mania that someone was going to take their shot at ending Taker's streak in order to cement their legacy. But again, if I had my way, there are some matches I would have rather seen instead of what we got.

I'm glad you realize Taker's streak was not planned from the beginning. Since you do realize that you should also realize that Taker was not going to be booked in high profile matches at the very beginning of his career.

1. Jimmy Snuka: Don't get me wrong, Snuka is a legend but to me a guy like The Ultimate Warrior would have been a much more impressive match at the time considering it was during this time that Undertaker was almost a zombie in that he kept coming and seemingly felt no pain at all. It would take someone either larger than Taker himself or someone of Warrior's stature to be able to over come someone who just kept coming. To me that would have one hell of a match up even main event quality.

Jimmy Snuka, the Phenom. What? You thought Taker was the Phenom? He is, but Snuka was the Pehnom first. When Taker destroyed Snuka at his first WrestleMania he took that nickname from Snuka. Taker had only been in the WWF for about four months. Snuka was a good first opponent for Taker's first singles ppv match. Besides, if you put Warrior against Taker you're taking away one of the absolute greatest matches in mania history away in Warrior vs. Savage.

2. Giant Gonzales: This match was absolutely terrible beyond words. Undertaker looked pathetic in the match and got decimated and then worst of all got knocked out with the ether soaked rag for the dq. They should have stricken this one from the record because I dont think a win by dq in a match this bad should even get any mention whatsoever in the WWE. If I was to have Taker face anyone at this time it would have been someone like Yokozuna who would have been a much better WM quality opponent for The Phenom. Yokozuna was perhaps the greatest big man in the WWF era or any since considering he had amazing agility, and seemed damned near unstoppable during this time.

I've said it a million times that Gonzalez was the right opponent for Taker. The quality of the match didn't matter. It was about the spectacle. It was a great visual and worked just fine for Taker at that point in his career. It would have been terrible for the 2007 Undertaker but it was perfectly reasonable for the 1993 Undertaker. Not to mention you're taking apart the main event by putting Yoko against Taker.

3. King Kong Bundy: Another waste of a match for me in that Dibiase's Million Dollar Corporation has taken Undertaker's urn and have sent King Kong Bundy in to destroy the Undertaker who may or may not be weak without the urn. Of course throughout the match the urn passes back and forth between Taker, Dibiase, Paul Bearer, and finally Kama who plans to turn it into a gold chain. Somewhere in the confusion Undertaker slams Bundy and wins. I would have much rather of seen Taker take on Big Van Vader who I believe was still in WCW at the time but it would have been a classic! Vader was an absolute beast at this time and I can only imagine how Undertaker vs Vader would have played out given that Vader was the most dominating, hard hitting, brutal heel in WCW at that time and Undertaker was seemingly indestructible and could pretty much take on anyone and keep getting back up.

Vader? Why even mention him? You said he wasn't even with the company so why bring him up? Yeah, I would have loved to see Taker vs. Vader at W11. I would have liked to see him against Andre the Giant too. Even though he was dead he had as much chance of wrestling at mania that year as Vader did.

4. The Big Bossman: I understand that at the time Undertaker was on a never ending mission to destroy Vince McMahon and The Corporation but this was yet again a throw away match. I would much rather have seen The Undertaker take on someone like The Rock or Stonecold in the cell. Given that we never got to see either men take Taker on I'd love to have seen either one. I just cannot understand why Taker never faced Stonecold or the Rock at Mania it just baffles me!

Taker never wrestled Austin or Rock at mania because they had other things going on. When you attempt to rewrite history you have to look at all angles. Austin vs. Rock was the main event of WM15. Taker spent the second half of 1998 feuding with Austin so a mania match wouldn't have been anything special. Rock and Taker didn't make much sense at that time. Sure, Bossman was a poor opponent for Taker at mania. I agree with that. That doesn't mean you should just take the main event apart to give him a better opponent. Who do you suggest for Austin or Rock if Taker wrestled one of them?

5. Albert and The Big Show: Would much rather of seen one on one with Show on this one. I think with their history together these two could have had a great one on one contest. I really wish they would have made Show a more realistic character. How the hell is it that Big Show didn't dominate the WWE? He is a freak of nature who could believably destroy anyone on the roster but always seemed to get humiliated by guys half his size. I think if they made Show more believable he could have been Taker's biggest threat to the streak. Yet again another throw away match.

Agree.

I can go on and on but if you had it to do over again, who would you have rather seen go up against Taker over the years?

For the love of God, John Cena. Taker could have wrestled Cena in 2009, 2010, or 2011. Any of those manias could have given us that great match. I've always assumed we would eventually get it. Now I'm getting worried. I'm afraid it's WM30 or never.

Also you could make a case for Kurt Angle at WM22. They had a great match at No Way Out just one month earlier and it was certainly a mania worthy match.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

This is a great point, one I have made in the past - that for all the impressivness of 20-0, most of the opponents in the first 10 Mania's were very poor and the matches sucked equally. Indeed Taker on the whole was booked very poorly for most of his career - it was only really in 97 that he started getting "properly" booked as a top guy and really "learning his craft" in terms of match quality as he was then working with the bigger names like Bret and Austin. Prior to that he was just "a gimmick" and attraction in the way that Andre was before him and the names he faced were keeping with that.

Had they booked him differently it might not have worked over the time period it has, but he would have certainly been more "of a worker" quicker. If I was gonna do it I'd have put him over Big Bossman at Wrestlemania 7, retiring Hogan at 8 and beating Savage at 9. That way by WM10 he'd have been solidified as a main event worker and more accustomed to working the biggest match, rather than the biggest opponent at Mania.

It's hard to argue with the formula, it did work as few others have ever been around as long as him... but out of 20 matches only really a handful have been "classic", the rest mediocre to good. That's not a "Bret says 4 out of 10" but based on just the quality of opponent. Here's how I'd have done all of them to 14, as thats when the quality went up greatly:-

7 - Bossman - Big man and strong face - someone who would put Taker over far stronger than Snuka did and lead into a Hogan feud. Bossman faced Perfect in a pointless IC feud - Snuka was literally fed to him - there was no "phenom" left in him. Bossman could have used spots like the nightstick and even tried to cuff Taker only to fall and get put on the shelf from the Tombstone, rasing Hogan's ire and starting their feud.

8 - They blew their wad a little early on this - if Hogan wanted out he should have put Taker over in the retirement match angle rather than the clusterfuck they got over the Survivor Series - I get Flair was coming in and getting the belt, but this match should still have happened as the "rubber match".

9 - Savage wasn't used in ring and this was crazy...again if Vince wanted him out of the ring, then why not let Taker end both the MegaPower's careers... Hogan could still have "returned" after the match to save Randy and perhaps The Mega Powers could have faced Taker at Summerslam. In my eyes Taker was turned way too early that first time.

10 - By now I'd say he would be ready for a face turn and Yoko would have been perfect - they went with the Casket match loss at the Rumble so they could still have had Taker not wrestle but returning to cost Yoko the title would have made a lot of sense. Failing that Bam Bam Bigelow would have been a great opponent for Taker around this time.

11 - Again, Bigelow would have worked if not for the LT match, but by now I think Taker would have been more in the title picture - Of course if my ideas have happened guys like Razor and Diesel would have been booked far differently, as would my main pick for this year - The British Bulldog. Taker wouldn't have faced a true "power" wrestler yet and the two could have had chemistry based off of #1 contendership to Bret or Diesel.

12 - By now Taker would have had a couple of title runs and I would have throttled him back and had the break for a while to preserve his status - instead of the Warrior squashing Trips I'd have given it to Taker.

13 - Again alot of things would be different, but I still think Austin and possibly Pillman would have been there and strong as a duo. This year I'd have the first "Handicap" Title match with the two facing him for the title - this would have been the first loss potentially but if he did go over he'd have dropped it to either Austin or Pillman shortly afterwards so they could feud with each other and Bret.

14 - Kane - no reason for that character not to have proceeded as it did - Taker would not have faced anyone remotely like him before at Mania so again there would be great peril as to the now forming "streak" continuing.

 

[Pedigree1]

1. Jimmy Snuka: Don't get me wrong, Snuka is a legend but to me a guy like The Ultimate Warrior would have been a much more impressive match at the time considering it was during this time that Undertaker was almost a zombie in that he kept coming and seemingly felt no pain at all. It would take someone either larger than Taker himself or someone of Warrior's stature to be able to over come someone who just kept coming. To me that would have one hell of a match up even main event quality.

You better thank your lucky stars that warrior never faced taker at WM7! If that had happened taker would have started 0-1! No way would warrior job to taker not at that time not in any time! Warrior just wouldn't do that ever!

2. Giant Gonzales: This match was absolutely terrible beyond words. Undertaker looked pathetic in the match and got decimated and then worst of all got knocked out with the ether soaked rag for the dq. They should have stricken this one from the record because I dont think a win by dq in a match this bad should even get any mention whatsoever in the WWE. If I was to have Taker face anyone at this time it would have been someone like Yokozuna who would have been a much better WM quality opponent for The Phenom. Yokozuna was perhaps the greatest big man in the WWF era or any since considering he had amazing agility, and seemed damned near unstoppable during this time.

I agree here but not really alot of options at that time. If you think Yoko would have been a better choice you my friend,are taking apart the main event for that match. Giant Gonzales yes was awful in the ring terrible beyond words. But who would have Bret Hart faced? Giant Gonzales was absolutely the right way to go at that time.

3. King Kong Bundy: Another waste of a match for me in that Dibiase's Million Dollar Corporation has taken Undertaker's urn and have sent King Kong Bundy in to destroy the Undertaker who may or may not be weak without the urn. Of course throughout the match the urn passes back and forth between Taker, Dibiase, Paul Bearer, and finally Kama who plans to turn it into a gold chain. Somewhere in the confusion Undertaker slams Bundy and wins. I would have much rather of seen Taker take on Big Van Vader who I believe was still in WCW at the time but it would have been a classic! Vader was an absolute beast at this time and I can only imagine how Undertaker vs Vader would have played out given that Vader was the most dominating, hard hitting, brutal heel in WCW at that time and Undertaker was seemingly indestructible and could pretty much take on anyone and keep getting back up.

As the Brain said it,Andre stood as much of a chance to face Taker as vader did. Vader yes if he was with the company would have been head and shoulders above KKB at that time. But Bundy still was a very serviceable company guy. Past his prime no doubt but WM11 really didnt have a lot of star power at that time.
4. The Big Bossman: I understand that at the time Undertaker was on a never ending mission to destroy Vince McMahon and The Corporation but this was yet again a throw away match. I would much rather have seen The Undertaker take on someone like The Rock or Stonecold in the cell. Given that we never got to see either men take Taker on I'd love to have seen either one. I just cannot understand why Taker never faced Stonecold or the Rock at Mania it just baffles me!

SCSA and the rock were busy feuding over the title so this is just talk. Yes i would have loved to have seen taker face SCSA or the rock at mania but SCSA v Rock was money! Those two just had amazing chemistry together and bossman is or was very decent in the ring. Moved very well for a guy his size and had amazing agility. Not a throwaway match at all IMO! Not a bad match at all not the best not the worse either.

5. Albert and The Big Show: Would much rather of seen one on one with Show on this one. I think with their history together these two could have had a great one on one contest. I really wish they would have made Show a more realistic character. How the hell is it that Big Show didn't dominate the WWE? He is a freak of nature who could believably destroy anyone on the roster but always seemed to get humiliated by guys half his size. I think if they made Show more believable he could have been Taker's biggest threat to the streak. Yet again another throw away match.

I do agree here! Big show one on one would have been much much better a legit threat to end the takers streak! But if that had happened Taker would have gone over and the streak would have marched on regardless!

 

[Matisyahu]

One of my many pet peeves is how people want to go back and rewrite history based soley on hindsight while completely ignoring the reality of the time they're talking about.



I'm glad you realize Taker's streak was not planned from the beginning. Since you do realize that you should also realize that Taker was not going to be booked in high profile matches at the very beginning of his career.



Jimmy Snuka, the Phenom. What? You thought Taker was the Phenom? He is, but Snuka was the Pehnom first. When Taker destroyed Snuka at his first WrestleMania he took that nickname from Snuka. Taker had only been in the WWF for about four months. Snuka was a good first opponent for Taker's first singles ppv match. Besides, if you put Warrior against Taker you're taking away one of the absolute greatest matches in mania history away in Warrior vs. Savage.



I've said it a million times that Gonzalez was the right opponent for Taker. The quality of the match didn't matter. It was about the spectacle. It was a great visual and worked just fine for Taker at that point in his career. It would have been terrible for the 2007 Undertaker but it was perfectly reasonable for the 1993 Undertaker. Not to mention you're taking apart the main event by putting Yoko against Taker.



Vader? Why even mention him? You said he wasn't even with the company so why bring him up? Yeah, I would have loved to see Taker vs. Vader at W11. I would have liked to see him against Andre the Giant too. Even though he was dead he had as much chance of wrestling at mania that year as Vader did.



Taker never wrestled Austin or Rock at mania because they had other things going on. When you attempt to rewrite history you have to look at all angles. Austin vs. Rock was the main event of WM15. Taker spent the second half of 1998 feuding with Austin so a mania match wouldn't have been anything special. Rock and Taker didn't make much sense at that time. Sure, Bossman was a poor opponent for Taker at mania. I agree with that. That doesn't mean you should just take the main event apart to give him a better opponent. Who do you suggest for Austin or Rock if Taker wrestled one of them?



Agree.



For the love of God, John Cena. Taker could have wrestled Cena in 2009, 2010, or 2011. Any of those manias could have given us that great match. I've always assumed we would eventually get it. Now I'm getting worried. I'm afraid it's WM30 or never.

Also you could make a case for Kurt Angle at WM22. They had a great match at No Way Out just one month earlier and it was certainly a mania worthy match.

I should made myself clear on all of this. I was merely saying if knowing how Undertaker would EVENTUALLY turn out character wise, there could have been better choices from a pure fantasy standpoint. I realize guys like Warrior would refuse to put Taker over. And the Vader thing was merely a match I would have loved to see although he was in a different company. I had hoped someone would come up with their own fantasy matches rather than say how foolish mine were

 

[GameOver]

from a purely "fantasy" perspective it's obvious any of the big names that never faced him at Mania but had a chance too can be chosen.

Austin, The Rock, Hogan, Goldberg, Vince & Shane McMahon, Kurt Angle, Randy Savage,
Bret Hart

obviously you can't put the likes of anyone that had pretty much finished b4 Taker made his first WrestleMania. Which counts out a hell of alot of people most notibly Andre who was dying at that point and could barely walk let alone wrestle.

Ultimate Warrior was battling Savage why would they have dropped that to go with Undertaker who was a relative unknown having only been in the company for 5months and anyway the streak wasn't mentioned til WrestleMania 21, 12 victories came b4 that mania and b4 they even acknolwedged it was a streak.

Sure in heinsight he coulda faced all the legends but they were busy at the respective times with other bigger names. tho Taker could've faced Hogan at WrestleMania 8 or Yokotuna at WrestleMania 9 but they had other plans. can't change it now it's done

 

[shooter_mcgavin]

On paper this isn't horrible. Bossman was over and always decent in the ring. I cant think of a better opponent at the time for Taker given that Rock, Austin, Show, Mick were all unavailable.

What about Ken Shamrock ... Shamrock was quite a big deal at the time (heck I would put him around or above Triple H in terms of being over). Since Shamrock was part of the corporation and he was such a non factor at the IC Title debacle why not Shamrock vs. Undertaker ... Corporation vs. Ministry at WMXV.

They had a match a month later anyways and I thought it was a good match.

 

[Dirk]

Things like those matches mentioned serve to remind us that most people don't start at the top.

If you love to watch a certain guy and he isn't pushed to the moon, just be patient and cross your fingers. That's what I take from those weird 'Taker matches.

 

[MCMG]

The WM XIX match is the one that annoys me the most. A-train and the Big Show vs the Undertaker.

Look at this card and see the talent on display. Rock/Austin Lesnar/Angle HHH/Booker T HBK/Y2J. Hell even Matt Hardy/Rey Mysterio is a good combination. There are two ways to look at this card. 1) It was so good that there was no space for a big-name Taker match. 2) There is so much talent - How the f**k did they not do better with the Undertaker.
I think 2. This is obvious when you think that as well as the aforementioned matches both Eddie Guerrero and Chris Benoit were in a triple threat tag-team match. Eddie teamed with Chavo and Benoit teamed with Rhyno. Yes. Rhyno. Would Benoit/Taker be better than handicap match? Of course it would. Two greats of the ring and it would be one of his best at Mania.

Mark Henry was another poor choice. Did anyone actually believe that he would end the streak. He is simply not worthy of facing the Undertaker at Wresltmania.

I loved the match but Taker/HHH part 3 was just overkill. Match of the night. Match of the year. Just before and after the match it feels like they could have done something different. There are other options that this for the third time. However, i did love this match and glad it happened.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

Taker WAS pushed to the moon though and DID start at the top- his first match he took out Dusty Rhodes and Koko B Ware via Ted DiBiase... Push didn't get bigger for a debut at that time and one year later he was tombstoneing Hogan for the title. They throttled back on that push the moment he got the belt - not sure why to this day, maybe Hogan balked at it, maybe they just didn't quite have enough faith in Taker at that time or just felt Flair was the better guy but a 3 day 1st title reign a year to your debut is even now not a common occurrence. From then they put Taker with whoever was bigger than him, every time - all it really did was show that for a "physical specimen" which he is, he wasn't that special or rare...

My suggestions would have meant he was a main event worker off the bat - what we got was something else, a replacement for Andre. It worked... but had they shown proper faith with Taker at the time and used a path similar to what I suggested, the 95 lull might not have happened... he could have easily put WCW to the sword.

 

[FlairFan2003]

Taker's 1st title run was just a short surprise to throw off and shock the audience.

When you look at Taker's opponents you have to consider where he was on the card over all and who was ahead of him and why. No doubt WWE saw Taker as a great gimmick but saw more long term value in more realistic wrestlers such as Hart, HBK, Nash, Luger, & Yokozuna from 93-95. In the late 90s he was a bigger part of the show but the hoopla was generated by the the surprising rise to prominence of Austin & Rock.

Certainly as Taker's legend grew (plus the abscences of Austin & Rock) there is no doubt the matches gained higher profile and had more importance.

Ultimately, I understand the booking of Most of Taker's early WM bouts, especially in light of where he was on the roster vs Hart, Yoko, HBK, et all. Could WWE have utilized him better during those years ? Sure. WCW definately misused Flair & Hart and Goldberg during the Monday Night Wars. WWE could have mined more from Ted DiBiase after his feud vs Savage in 1988. Hindsight is 20/20. Ultimately the sum and length of The Streak along with high profile wins over Flair, Triple H, HBK (especially The Streak vs Retirement Match), Batista, Edge, etc really make it one of the most impressive things we've seen in the last 30 years of pro wrestling.

 

[Robert86]

Ironically, I always thought that The Undertaker vs Hulk Hogan at WM6 should have taken place instead of The Ultimate Warrior. That would have been the true passing the torch moment. The Undertaker began his Streak at WM7. Taker has been undefeated at WrestleMania for 22 years now and the cornerstone of WWE ever since he started with them

Ultimate Warrior was just a waste of space, time, & money.

The Ultimate Warrior would have ended his streak before it even got started. You should be glad he didn't face Warrior at that time for that reason alone. You are right about Gonzales though. Taker eventually got a clean win over him, but his WM effort looked quite pathetic. I do understand that the WWF still had plans for the rivalry, but Taker looked weak on the grandest stage of them all. I still don't mind Gonzales as an opponent for Taker at WM and didn't expect a wrestling classic, but the way the match was booked just wasn't very favorable for Taker. Actually the only opponents on your list that I would have changed would be The Big Boss Man (Awful match) and Albert/Big Show. It should have been Taker vs Show one on one. I also would have changed Mark Henry because no one on planet earth thought Mark Henry stood a shot in hell at that time.

 

[The Eighties]

I always thought Boss Man vs Taker could have been better as Boss Man was a good worker and if the match wasn't booked to reflect their position on the card I think they could have had a great match even if it was an odd one as both were heels in the storyline. The only other viable opponent that year was Shamrock.

The match with Gonzalez was the drizzling shits but the only other option that year was Bam Bam Bigelow and I think back to Rumble 93, the arrival of Gonzalez with Wippleman during the Rumble match, even with the goofy fur pads and muscle suit nothing could dilute the visual awe of a man standing head and shoulders over The Undertaker, you simply wouldn't get that with Bigelow. So it was the right match IMO and I'm not sure there was any way to make it better as at the time Taker was working as a slow zombie and Gonzalez couldn't do anything well, those that place him and Khali together do Khali a disservice.

Mania 19 certainly should have been Taker vs Show in a singles match instead of the crappy tag match that was actually a handicap match for the most part.

The choice of Mark Henry at Mania 22 was a bit baffling as well since he wasn't the destroyer he is now. Looking at the card that night JBL would have been a viable option as I don't think Taker had beaten him at that point as he always escaped in their title matches. The most interesting option would have been a heel turned Benoit vs Taker. This is really the only one of the choices where I think there were viable other options, the rest of his opponents were the right choices at the time.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

That was what I never understood though - you have a guy who was 6ft 10" billed - towered over the roster and they, year on year tried to make him small and the underdog by bringing in chumps like Gonzales. Rather than building him and his skills early so he could be the legit new Hogan level worker - they just repeatedly put him with bigger, shitter workers. I don't buy it was a "surprise" to tease the fans, I think they pulled the trigger but Hogan was flip-flopping on staying/going/working with Flair - Taker v Hogan at Mania 8 was probably their original back up. It's kinda telling that almost immediately after that Tuesday in Texas clusterfuck - Taker was a face, they panicked when Sid didn't deliver in that role and moved him over, thus setting the pattern for his booking for the next 5 years. It's odd that Hogan would bring in Taker, but not seem to want to work him at Mania, choosing Sid instead.

I get they always had Andre till that point, but they didn't need to replace him in that way. Taker was never a roid freak so they didn't need to worry about that side of things.

For the guy who said Mania 6 for Taker, he didn't sign for them till after then, as Hogan met him while shooting Suburban Commando and recommended him at that point. Like I said earlier, it's hard to criticize because in the end they got more than they may have done out of the character otherwise - but come 95 - WWF was the shits and Taker was fighting Mabel and Kama rather than being the star of the show he could have been beginning a face run after being heel for those first 4 years.

 

[FlairFan2003]

That was what I never understood though - you have a guy who was 6ft 10" billed - towered over the roster and they, year on year tried to make him small and the underdog by bringing in chumps like Gonzales. Rather than building him and his skills early so he could be the legit new Hogan level worker - they just repeatedly put him with bigger, shitter workers. I don't buy it was a "surprise" to tease the fans, I think they pulled the trigger but Hogan was flip-flopping on staying/going/working with Flair - Taker v Hogan at Mania 8 was probably their original back up. It's kinda telling that almost immediately after that Tuesday in Texas clusterfuck - Taker was a face, they panicked when Sid didn't deliver in that role and moved him over, thus setting the pattern for his booking for the next 5 years. It's odd that Hogan would bring in Taker, but not seem to want to work him at Mania, choosing Sid instead.

QUOTE]

Yes Taker got a nice push coming in but if he would have faced either Ultimate Warrior or Hogan early on he almost certainly would have been booked to lose. He was young, fairly unknown, WWE saw potential in the gimmick and liked his athleticism but you dont book the brand new guy against the superstar at a premium event and think A.) Average fans will watch (they wont, too much belief the SuperStar will win, no drama) B.) The company would be foolish enough to put so much bank so soon behind such a newcomer. How many years did it take Randy Savage, who was more established in the wrestling industry under his gimmick, to be a WM headliner ? Brett Hart was a well known commodity as a tag wrestler but still needed a full two plus years as a singles star before he was consistent headliner ? Rare exceptions were guys like DiBiase (very well known, very experienced, great gimmick) and Flair (the 2nd biggest star nationwide in the 80s behind Hogan, definately the biggest non WWE star) but their experience and audience recognition made them different.

With regards to WrestleMania 8 the long held story was that WWE wanted a Sid vs Hogan match originally but started tinkering with the plans when Flair became available. The Federal Steroid Investigation started heating up in late 91/early 92 which lead WWE over the next year to start purging wrestlers with drug issues (Marty Jannetty, Kerry Von Erich) and any involvement in the case. Hogan & Piper, two prinicpals in the investigation, suddenly had to disappear. At the start of 92 WWE wasnt looking for Hogan to leave. Furthermore, once it became apparent that it was in everyone's best interest for Hogan to take time off it made no sense to book him to win the World Title off Flair if he wasnt going to stick around for subsequent house shows and a final blow off match. They certainly werent going to book Hogan to lose in that sitiuation with no time table for win (or if) he would come back and get revenge. Hogan needed an opponent who was credible, established, and who wouldnt be harmed significantly by losing clean in what was to be billed his "Final Match" - Flair or Savage could have filled that bill but again Flair was champ and it made no sense to have him lose to Hogan if Hogan was leaving. Savage was a fan favorite at the time. Taker was not established enough with the audience to be seen as a credible threat to Hogan (most people I know didnt think Taker would beat Jake Roberts on the show, although back in those days backstage info like Roberts pending departure were not known). Sid fit that bill.

If WWE had seen Taker's potential as a legit main event attraction and not just a gimmick then maybe he would have been booked in a more significant way during the 93-96 years when WWE clearly wasnt settled on Hart but chose to challenge him for the top spot in the company with a revolving door of HBK, YokoZuna, Kevin Nash, etc. Again, hindsight is 20/20.

Taker is then rare wrestler who's charisma and performance ability got him so over with fans that even when he was booked poorly, underutilized, or made to look weak he STILL remained way over with those fans. Not many guys have that ability. I would say Austin & Flair had it, maybe Savage, but there just arent many guys who can be underutilized like that and still remain huge. Taker has, it's a big part of what really makes him a legend in the business.