Who has talked bad about The Undertaker in interviews?

[Creepy Old Man]

I've often heard that nobody ever has anything negative to say about Mark Calaway but three exceptions come to mind.

Shawn Michaels said he didn't think Calaway was "all that" and "didn't care for him much" in the 1990s. He said that in his opinion Calaway basically tried to rule by fear and that Michaels refused to comply.

Doug Gilbert said he used to ride with Calaway in Memphis and helped him out financially, but that Calaway barely acknowledged him in the WWF locker room in 1996. Gilbert said: "I though, 'Man, f**k you'."

Hulk Hogan is said to have buried Calaway backstage after their match at Survivor Series 1991, because Calaway apparently botched the tombstone. I believe Hogan persisted with this story in his book. Whatever.

Has anyone else talked negatively about Undertaker?

 

[HeroForHire]

I can't recall anyone talking bad about him. Anytime someone ever brings him up it is with the up most respect for him. It sounded like he made you earn your respect in the locker room, and once you earned it you were good to go. I remember hearing that he really didn't like DDP. So maybe there might be a DDP interview where he doesn't have nice things to say about him.

 

[alaricrose]

To be perfectly honest, the only complaint that I've heard about the Undertaker is that the "Wrestler's Court" are show trials. The verdict and sentences are decided beforehand, so the only way to alter that would probably be to plead guilty and throw yourself at the mercy of the court. Descriptions from shoot interviews and books from the Hardy Boys and Shannon Moore.

Beyond that, in every shoot interview that I've heard him mentioned in, he's always praised as a consummate professional who values respect more than anything else. He's also willing to admit when he is wrong, such as with CM Punk. (source: CM Punk: Best in the World). Frankly, he seems like the person who would be best suited to work as a road agent or a trainer after he retires. I think it would be safe to assume that if he were to open a wrestling school, anyone who graduates from the school would get a look from any serious promoter.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

There are by definition gonna be 2 camps... those who talk about Mark Callaway and those who don't. One side is going to survive in the business, one isn't... It's easy to talk about a Triple H or a Cena... they put their heads above the parapet... Taker never has done.

It's important to understand WHY the man is revered.. It isn't cos a "gimmick worked" or he "made Vince money" or he "had 21 wins at Mania"... those are in reality window dressing.

The only other man with the level of respect he has in the HISTORY of the WWE/F is Robert "Gorilla Monsoon" Marella... literally no one is on as high a pedestal or respected as much... those who worked with Gorillia eulogise and those who didn't wish they did. The WWE roster from the last 18 months onwards will have the same, they either got to work with Taker or didn't...they ALL would wish they could have.

Part of that is by design. Every leader MUST have a second... one who is inscrutable, respected and attracts not only loyalty but the desire to go to war for... it goes as far back as Sun Zsu or the Romans... soldiers didn't fight and win for their "Ruler" but their "Commander or General".

Mark Callaway is a guy who has "been there, fought in the trenches, won, lost and still would BLEED the company rather than show it in a bad light." How many times has he been seen in public since his loss to Brock? You can count them on one hand and he has made SURE to show that either a) he is selling the beatdown or b) was legit about passing the torch to Brock. What he then does with it is not Taker's concern...

Gorilla was the same... Vince made the call to take him out the ring and make him the PBP guy...so he applied himself, he didn't fight it... and he became GREAT at it... not through talent, but cos he "got" what was required and showed that lesson to others. Callaway has been a master of that for many years, when he was needed to fight "giant of the quarter" he did...when he had to step up and learn to Main Event in 96/97 he did... when he had to sell Mania in what amounted to veterans matches, he did.

Anyone who works or has worked in WWE in the last 15 years at least sees this, gets it and either couldn't or were not able to do better... Wrestler's Court is a misnomer, from reading Jericho's latest book some of Vince's ideas of "punishment" are so far out of whack that a guy like Taker becomes invaluable... perspective...fairness and forgivness... look at guys like Miz... banished for eating chicken over a bag, not allowed to even MIX with the "boys" for over 6 months, but still got his time in the sun as the Champ and still got his Mania main event. That's not cos Vince or Cena or anyone else "stood up for him" it's cos Taker said "he did his time, he's cool now, and he's earned it... I trust him to follow my match..." The worst you can say is that after a time he "stepped down" and let poor choices like JBL take his place, who are weaker men, compelled more to bullying to compensate for the respect they didn't have.

The only possible guys to slate him are either those who don't know him, got on his bad side or who just don't understand the mentality. Been reading Jericho's latest book and the chapter on the only "pin" he has over Taker, and the circumstances leading to it cement the respect... The Pyro guy? not so lucky... or was he? He got fired, not destroyed by Taker as he clearly could have been... what COULD have happened to that man is downright scary...but Taker went out with severe burns and still put Jericho over for the title, as was the plan, despite Chris wanting to change to help him...and you can believe if he'd been overrulled, Mark Callaway would have kicked the living shit out of Jericho, the Ref and Vince if it had have come from him, all he did say was "Get him out of the building, I don't EVER want to see him..." The pyro guy probably still worked etc... but he got a pass, that's for sure.

That's why no one speaks ill of Taker... it's easy to "fear" him, impossible not to respect and very hard to find much fault other than hanging on that 3 or 4 years too long. If he has done "bad" backstage or in the biz... the tales are not out there... he very much seems to be the island in the middle of the crazy sea of wrestling.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Taker is someone that has an old school mentality in that if you want respect, you have to earn it. If you go around acting like you're better than anyone else, he's gonna call you out on it, especially if you've done nothing to back up your ego. If you go around acting as your shit didn't stink, he'd let you know in no uncertain terms that it did. At the same time, he's also not one of these high & mighty veterans who can never admit to being wrong or being at fault. If he screws up or discovers that maybe he's in the wrong, he'll man up and admit it rather than try to pass the buck.

In the days before Twitter or Facebook, in the days before fame & fortune could be essentially handed to you via reality television despite a noticeable lack of marketable talents or paying dues, in the days before people developed the mentality that they're entitled to greatness, you had to bust your ass to become a major player whether it be in pro wrestling or just about anything else for that matter.

Taker is somebody that protects the business as best as humanly possible in this day & age. From everything I've heard or read about him, he's a straight up guy who'll tell you how it is and will play it straight with you if you play it straight with him. He also just has that old fashioned, old school work rate. As has been mentioned, Taker still went out there to wrestle a match despite being burned by the pyro at Elimination Chamber. While not exactly life threatening burns, you know it had to hurt like hell. Anybody that's ever been burned knows that even a few seconds of having your flesh exposed to a few hundred degrees feels like an eternity. Taker was sweating during the match, which would only serve to irritate the his skin that much more.

Do some wrestlers have negative opinions of Taker? I'm sure some do, though whether or not those hard feelings are justified is probably questionable among most situations. For instance, HBK may not have been fond of Taker back in the 90s but, then again, how many people did Michaels piss off during those days? By his own admission, Michaels was a world class shit who wouldn't hesitate to screw over anybody if he thought it was either beneficial to him or if he'd just get a kick out of it.

 

[Navi]

Sorry and I don't mean to sound like a douche but I just hate it when fans call wrestlers by their birth names. The Undertaker spent years building his persona and if he wanted to be called by his birth name like Randy Orton, he would have.

Getting to the point of the thread. I'm sure there are other wrestlers who have had issues with Taker, and made comments that could be considered disrespectful by anyone listening. You have to take into consideration that in hearing them, we don't know the full story behind it and it is a personal opinion being made by someone who knows him.

The fact that I can't readily recall any of them, means that maybe there isn't a lot out there.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

Theres a simple reason using the real name is important here... it illustrates that people don't speak ill of the MAN behind the gimmick. It's not like he wanders around the backstage area surrounded by druids and turning lights on and off with a rise of his hand. The "locker room leader" and person with the respect in the business is Mark Callaway, the Undertaker is the vehicle for that allows the fans to show that respect. While the gimmick itself deserves some respect, it's nothing without the man behind it...

 

[Mustang Sally]

It's significant that of the three examples cited by the OP, none of the remarks were made in this century. In fact, the oldest one (by Hogan) was apparently made 23 years ago.

This is an indication that Undertaker had yet to earn his status as a legendary performer back then and was subject to the slings & arrows everyone else had to endure.

Today, the man has long been known as a defender of the faith, protecting his profession and remaining popular and approachable in the locker room. Of course, this is what we've read; who knows how true it is?

At the same time, other performers have apparently loved working with him since, despite his character's reputation for brutality, no one seems to gets hurt working matches against 'Taker, as his style is smooth & fluid, his working ability so refined that his matches come off without a hitch. This is especially ironic in that it's 'Taker himself who's always getting hurt due to the style of others.

That ability to work smoothly probably plays well with the other wrestlers. Whether Undertaker takes younger performers under his wing and advises them during road trips is another matter.

But, as with Shawn Michaels, who was criticized widely back in the old days but came to be regarded highly, so it is with Undertaker; today, you never hear a bad word spoken against him.

 

[Navi]

Theres a simple reason using the real name is important here... it illustrates that people don't speak ill of the MAN behind the gimmick. It's not like he wanders around the backstage area surrounded by druids and turning lights on and off with a rise of his hand. The "locker room leader" and person with the respect in the business is Mark Callaway, the Undertaker is the vehicle for that allows the fans to show that respect. While the gimmick itself deserves some respect, it's nothing without the man behind it...

Yes I realize that the Undertaker is a character, but thank you for proving my point in a way. The Undertaker is how we fans know him. Now if you know him or anyone on the roster personally, then by all means use their given names, but if you don't that's where my problem is.

To my knowledge there is only two on the roster that use their birth names, John Cena and Randy Orton. To go up to them and call them Mr. Cena or Mr. Orton is acceptable, because that's how we know them. To go up to The Undertaker and call him anything but at a meet and greet, is a huge sign of disrespect, as the man spent years in building up that persona.

Listen I don't expect everyone to think the same as I do, God help us if that happened. It just as always been a pet peeve of mine, and it will always be.

I just think in a thread talking about showing respect towards The Undertaker, and calling him Mark Callaway is ironic.to say the least. You can call the guy anything you want that's your option, to me he's the Undertaker and will always be.

 

[Creepy Old Man]

Sorry and I don't mean to sound like a douche but I just hate it when fans call wrestlers by their birth names.

The men I mentioned weren't criticising The Undertaker. They were criticising Mark Calaway.

Criticising The Undertaker: "That gimmick sucks".
Criticising Mark Calaway: "He was a d-bag in the locker room".

Besides, The Undertaker wrestled as "Mean Mark" in WCW, let Ken Shamrock call him by his real name on Raw in 1999, and openly acknowledged his real name on a 2002 edition of TSN's Off the Record. Can't unsee all that.

 

[chuckmdubya]

There are very few serious critics about the Undertaker, apparently there is not much to critique. The man seems to be very well respected by almost all in the industry. The criticism from HBK probably did happen, but from what I've heard, if You weren't in HBK's "click" of friends than he didn't have much use for you back then.
And Hogan, well he was king of the mountain then, if you angered him then he was gonna get back at you. An assumption, but possibly correct, a person in power usually uses that power.
And on a personal note, I have done concrete construction work for a living. I did an add on to the home of the sister of gold and stardust, (the real life daughter of Dusty Rhodes) near Austin, TX. Her and her husband are great people. Me and her husband would talk about wrestling when I had the chance. They both told me that The Undertaker was by far and away the coolest guy there, very nice, respectful, and just cool. Two people they told me they didn't really like where HBK and Ric Flair.

 

[CrucifiedRaven]

I don't think I've ever heard someone talk badly of Undertaker. Certainly not anyone of sane mind.

Unless Shawn Michaels was looking in a mirror, nobody was "all that" in his opinion in the 90's. He was desperately trying to protect his spot.

Who hasn't Hulk Hogan buried backstage? Also, trying to protect his spot.

Who is Doug Gilbert?

 

[willross]

The only people I saw/heard bad talk Taker was Paul London and Brian Kendrick.

But in that interview they come across as a bunch of immature stoners.

Also, from seeing Kendrick at a indy show in Toronto, he was acting like a jackass, even told a little kid to "shut the fuck up", which i found inexcusable, especially working babyface, but even as a heel, out of line. So if he acts like that, I wouldn't be surprised if Taker told him off a few times and he remained bitter about it cause he has problems being a man

 

[FlairFan2003]

Criticism itself needs to be looked at through the prism of the critics agenda. Several people have been critical of Hogan for "protecting" his character. How many of them were truly in Hogan's stratosphere ? Jealousy anyone ?

That's not saying some criticism isn't warranted. I for one think Hogan should have given more to Savage & Flair than he did but others would disagree.

Brett Hart is still vitriolic towards HHH, even refusing to admit he is a talented wrestler. Of course, his part in 1997 Montreal probably plays a large role in that.

A lot of times when you hear random critiques it's just sour grapes. The only time I take it at all seriously is when you hear a lot of it from different sources all saying the same thing. There is probably a grain of truth in there somewhere.

I don't put much stock in anything HBK said pre his 2002 comeback. He has gone out of his way to walk back almost everything he was known for back then. HBK has publicly been very appreciative to both Taker & Hart despite any differences they may have had. In fact, the only guy who gets more props from HBK today is probably Ric Flair.

Considering how long Taker has been around it's impressive that so little has been said publicly negative about him.

Besides, even when guys have criticism of each other it doesn't mean they don't get along and cant work together. Wrestling is full of guys who had major differences but managed to put them aside and do quality work together, and bragged about it later, and praised each other as well.

 

[mizowns]

Undertaker was never a threat.

He was not the main guy.

So people don't have much to care about there.