What if Kane had not debuted as Undertaker's brother?

[SD619]

As we all know, Glenn Jacobs is well-known for his portrayal of Undertaker’s brother Kane. Before debuting as Kane , he appeared as Isaac Yankem and fake Diesel. His successes, though, came when he became Kane. His feuds with Undertaker made for some compelling story-lines and still remains Kane’s best feud.

What if, Kane had been introduced as another monster (with the same character, attire etc.) and not as Undertaker’s brother?

I believe that such a move would have affected Kane more than the Undertaker. Undertaker has had many other feuds to cement his legacy and also the streak. Kane, on the other hand, would not be as high up as he is today. He would probably have a word title or two but would be on the level as someone like the Big Show i.e. a big man who could be counted upon to be a main-event face/heel when needed.

 

[PsychoBlack]

Kane is on the level of Big Show right now. Before he returned with the mask he was stale and if someone went down with an injury he was who they called upon. Being Undertaker's brother is what made kane the most believable monster though. Even Last year you Kane made it believable again after all of the feuds we have seen between them. I dont know if the Kane character would have ever came into play if he was'nt Takers brother

 

[Wald]

He would have been called an Undertaker rip-off and they would have feuded into Wrestlemania anyway, where the Undertaker would have beaten him and sent Kane straight to the 'Monsters that couldn't beat Taker bin' along with Giant Gonzalez, King Kong Bundy and the rest

 

[justtxyank]

Interesting question. I think there are two answers that would both make sense. Comrade's makes perfect sense of course in my mind.

The other possibility is that if he was introduced correctly it may have been BETTER for his career. The truth is that Kane is a good worker for his size, and was particularly impressive back then. He got mega over at various points (feud with X-Pac) without being connected to Taker. It is possible that the connection to Taker, while a blessing, has also been a curse.

 

[Pedigree1]

Interesting question! Kane is agile very agile for his size he hardly ever gets hurt and is a company man through and through!! Being Takers brother i think is the reason he has lasted as long as he has!! But at the same time it has hurt him also always being compared to the dead man!! I always have liked Kane his character his monster heel persona just fits him well. But when he won his second title he did that without being mentioned as the takers brother just did it being a monster

 

[Rulk25]

IMO he would have ended up future endeavored and ended up in WCW. This was what his 3rd?? 4th?? gimmick Anything short of gangbusters would have led WWF to decide he was not worth it (not that they could not give him a good gimmick

He rod the coatatails of the Taker to the top. Lets face it a mask was the best thing for him as he was not conventionally attractive and anything short of the Taker's brother would have made him just another monster heel fed to a god guy and dropped shortly afterwards

 

[Sicc Nick]

Very good question and thread. I assume that Kane would have still been a very big deal, because WWE kept runnin' with Glenn Jacobs and kept tossing opportunity after opportunity his way. They knew that his characters before Kane and the fuck-ups regarding those characters was not any fault of Glenn's, but of WWE's or Vince McMahon's.

Kane probably would have been better off without being Taker's brother, because it seemed like his first 12 months on the show all revolved around Undertaker and Kane's relation to him, rather than Kane being one bad son of a bitch. Had he just been another monster, he would have probably been undefeated for a long time and would have faced Taker at Wrestlemania in '99, and not '98, and quite possibly would have been world champion fairly quickly.

 

[Cookie14]

Realistically, how could Kane have debuted if he hadn't been Undertakers brother?
How could you explain the link to Paul Bearer? Or the mask? Or the hatred of Taker?
If he hadn't been Takers brother then he would hav just been another random big guy fed to Taker before vanishing.

 

[Scorpion Eye]

The WWE didnt need to use Kane's character as Undertaker's half-brother to get him over. Why? Eventually somewhere down the road, the Undertaker and Paul Bearer were destined to have a falling out, Wrestling 101. Kane could have simply been another "monster" that Bearer knew from the funeral home or that he created a la "Frankenstein" or just his son. In retrospect that whole half-brother storyline was kind of stupid anyways. First Undertaker is blamed for the fire, which he denies and blames Kane, only to confess to it when the Ministry of Darkness started. Point being, as long as the you still had Taker, Kane and Bearer involved, it still would of been a success despite what the actual back story was. Though without the half-brother storyline I guess the name Kane is irrelevant.

 

[DirtyD79]

Honestly I thought the whole funeral home fire and being Taker's brother thing was just stupid as hell. Sure he could have feuded with Taker as someone Bearer trained to destroy the `Taker. But the whole soap opera bullshit was just plain dumb even by pro wrestling standards. I think he would have got over and got pushed just fine without the whole brothers thing. The man survived that whole Katie Vick thing which by all logic should have deep sixed any shred of credibility anybody involved with the angle had.

They just needed to find the right character for him. I mean really a wrestling dentist? That crap was already played out by 1987. A fake Kevin Nash? Nobody could have polished that turd. A gimmick like that just wasn't gonna work unless the whole audience consisted of amnesiacs and lobotomy patients.

 

[Champ1432]

Isn't Kane in that exact role right now? Most of the time anyway, he seems to be one of the guys they call on (like Big Show) to fill in for a main event or two, or have a short feud with a main eventer. Not that he hasn't has an impressive career. I think he's had a good career and continues to be an entertaining superstar. At times, he may have gotten a little stale, but they've always been able to refresh and renew his character to make it interesting again, this latest time by putting the mask back on him.

So what would have happened had he not debuted as Taker's brother? I'm not sure he would be in a much different place than he is now. Assuming the rest of his gimmick was similar to when he debuted, I think people still would have seen him as an evil monster, and he's talented enough to have still gotten over well without the Undertaker's help. Certainly, it was probably easier for him being placed in that storyline, but I think he could have made it work regardless. I don't think anything drastic like him getting released would have happened. As others have said, the WWE stuck with him through several failed gimmicks, I think that says they saw the talent that was there and wanted to find something that worked for him.

 

[mrpops]

They just needed to find the right character for him. I mean really a wrestling dentist? That crap was already played out by 1987. A fake Kevin Nash? Nobody could have polished that turd. A gimmick like that just wasn't gonna work unless the whole audience consisted of amnesiacs and lobotomy patients.

I understand you were trying to pull off a sick burn, but it failed. You claim the gimmick wouldve worked if the whole audience couldnt remember said gimmick....which makes no sense. You also claim it wouldve worked for lobotomy patiences....which again makes no sense.

Oh well, atleast you tried. Better luck next time.

 

[CDR]

Kane is a great character, especially for wrestling. He's powerful, exciting to watch, and mysterious enough to always keep you interested. When he made his debut, taking out the Undertaker and costing him his match with Shawn Michaels, he made an impact that couldn't be crippled. As the storyline progressed and we learned more and more about Kane, it was like a mysterious novel that you can't put down. The questions that everybody had for him were numerous. Questions about his childhood, his parents, his relationship with his brother the Undertaker were all on everybody's mind when Kane was on the television screen. There's one key thing though. Kane's mystique was completely entangled in the Undertaker's mystique. In essence, Kane's character heavily relied on the Undertaker and and his own mystique. Without the Undertaker, Kane's character has a massive void that couldn't be replaced, no matter what.

So, in the end, there is no way that if Kane made is debut without the fact that he's Kane's brother he could have maintained the steam behind his character. Without Undertaker, there would be no Kane.

 

[Dagger Dias]

Kane would not have seen even half of the success he has had if he had not been Undertaker's (kayfabe) brother. He would have been about as successful as the dentist or fake Diesel in another role. His feuds with Taker are what made Kane into what he is today. There's no denying the skills that he has, but without that original Taker feud I don't see how he possibly could have made as much of an impact because the Wrestlemania 14 angle with Undertaker was what established Kane in a big way.