Who really is Mr Wrestlemania?

How about those three months that Shawn was champion before the nWo was even created? The ratings were poor, buyrates were pitiful, and Shawn was a terrible draw. Fact. Yeah, going against the nWo didn't help, but if he was as great of a draw as people like to make him out to be then he wouldn't have been drawing such as poor ratings. And Austin proved that you could beat the nWo, y'know.

Like I have kept saying, The first three months of Shawn's reign was Hall and Nash coming in as the Outsiders, and acting like they had come from the WWF to destroy WCW, which is just as compelling and as interesting as Hogan turning Heel. Shawn was fighting a losing battle against something like that. Maybe, historically, if he hadn't been up against that kind of competition, he would have been pulling down mid 3's in the ratings and would have been considered a great draw, but the fact that the WWF survived when all they had was Shawn and a handful of other guys, and the fact that later on Shawn drew massive numbers, shows that if he had not been going up against such stiff competition during the time, he would have drew more than he had. All it takes is a little bit of deductive reasoning to see that.


No shit, but you know who he had carry those PPV's? Hogan. Y'know who was a main factor in Wrestlemania becoming such a success? Hogan. Who had the charisma to get the 'Real American' gimmick over? Hogan.

Ok, but you have to have some charisma for the crowd to buy in it. Just because Hulk Hogan and Dean Malenko say the same thing doesn't mean it'll get over equally. Having Charisma and being able to connect with the crowd is just as important as getting the best promos.

Sure, Hogan had a lot of weight to carry on his shoulders during those first few Wrestlemanias, and yes it does take Charisma to pull off the gimmick that Hogan had to pull off, and no, Dean Malenko couldn't have done it, but...let's say you take a poll of 100 wrestlers or so, how many of them would have the charisma to pull off what Hogan did? How many would be able to perform the promo's the writers wrote, and get over with the crowd the same way Hogan did? Out of 100 Wrestlers, I would say that there could be about 10-15 guys who could do exactly what Hogan did. Out of those same 100 guys, how many of them could grow to match the in-ring ability that HBK has still to this day? How many of those guys would have the ability to tell a compelling, interesting, and incredible story in the ring using their bodies? I would say....to match what HBK can do....maybe 2-3 guys, and I admit that those are light estimates, but do you see the point? There are plenty of guys out there who could do what Hogan did. There aren't many who can do what HBK can do.

Bullshit. Thats more fucking subjective then anything.

How exactly is it more subjective? Yeah, they are told what to do out in the ring, and they are told the finish, and all that, but not everyone is able to sell the pain, and perform the moves so that they look truly real, and to tell a story in the ring with their bodies. Going out into the ring and doing what they are paid to do is more an art form than anything. Standing in front of Camera and saying exactly what you were told to say, that is subjective.

PWI is a kayfabe fucking magazine. They have no credibility. Besides, you fucking know that his match vs Mcmahon wasn't MOTY in 2006 and his match vs Diesel in 95 wasn't MOTY. It's just a bunch of marks that were voting for their favorite wrestler, aka Shawn. The Flair and Angle matches wouldn't be on my list, either. Flair/HBK wasn't even the best matche AT WM. Undertaker/Edge was. If you want some credible sources, check the Wrestling Observer. Wanna know how many PWI MOTY Shawn has at WM? 2. X and XXV.

Again, it's just a bunch of marks voting for their favorite wrestler. Fucking Austin/Rock from X-7 was 1000000 times better then TLC 2 but TLC 2 won it. Don't use kayfabe sources as 'attempted' proof because it just doesn't work.

How is PWI a non-credible, kayfabe magazine? Explain that to me with some actual facts to back up your claim rather than just sounding like your just pissed off at the results of the polls they have done, and your just looking to smear it for revenge. The fact remains they are still polls done by thousands of fans of professional wrestling, and the results say that Shawn has had 8 matches at Wrestlemania that were deemed the best. Like the results or not, those are the facts.

And, like I said earlier, if Hogan doesn't help put WM on the map then there is no discussion of who's Mr. WM. Hogan started WM as the Super Bowl of Wrestling.

And, like I said earlier, if Vince doesn't have the balls to put on Wrestlemania in the first place, there is no Hogan. I respect Hulk Hogan for what he has done, and for the moments he has provided, but nobody has put on more memorable matches, and provided more moments on the biggest stage of them all than HBK. Period.
 
That doesn't change the fact that Shawn was a poor draw and helped put the WWF in the ratings hole that they were in.

Yes exactly... If you think of things in this one dimensional childish way... then yes your exactly right. But if you actually think ..and look at it objectively you'll find thats not exactly how things went down. Nobody in WWE history had to tow the boat alone like Shawn did... As good a draw as Hogan and Stone Cold were.. they always had support.. they always had top level heels to work against. Not to mention Shawn was one of the main guys that got wrestling to go in the "attitude" direction which ultimately was what led to the rise of Stone Cold..DX The Rock and saved the WWF.


Undertaker, Foley, Vader, Sid, a rising Austin?

Did you even watch WWF at the time??? Taker was the only one that was an actual draw a that point was Taker. Foley and Austin were just starting to get some traction but were still a long way from breaking out. Sid and Vader were both playing monster heels but neither drew anything while there.


Like I said earlier, obviously the TOTAL amount of buys now are gonna be greater then in the 80's because PPV's weren't as common then and it's expanded.

Wow you seem to be full of excuses for certain things and then accept no excuses for others. The fact of the matter is PPV availability has been very widely available since about 91. And it was even pretty widely available even before that. The FACT is that Shawn has headlined some of the biggest.. most attended... most bought PPV's of all time. I know it hurts but give the guy credit where credit is due..


Pretty sure that Nitro was drawing mid 3's while WWF was only drawing 2's.

Yep your right... The NWO, Sting, FLair, HOgan, Savage, Luger, Nash, Hall, Arn ANderson, The giant, were beating.... HBK and Taker... A powerhouse supergroup of top drawing main event guys were beating a two solid performers who were just entering the mainevent picture... Wow Shawn must have been horrible to not be able to compete..

Btw.. Hogan and TNA right now would give their left nuts for one of Shawns "2's" now ;)

And I'm not trying to discredit Shawn. He was a good worker, but he was a terrible draw, no matter how many excuses you people try to make for him.

He's actually by the #'s considered the 10th highest draw in the history of the company going all the way back to the 60's. According to buyrates and gates and merch for his entire career.. not just judging on 2 years in the 90's.. Id hardly consider that terrible.


If you are trying to (somehow) imply that Shawn is a better wrestler, overall including everything, then Hogan, just stop.

Nobody was "implying" that at all.. just that your argument is an old one.. And its the story time and time again.. Hogan was hugely popular back in the day.. and I was a fan.


Pretty sure Hogan got over without much help from the bookers. The people came to see Hogan.

Haha no he didn't.. Hogan was pushed to the moon by Vince. Hogan was the perfect guy for the right time.. He was the cartoon hero that had come to life.. and us kids screamed and wanted to see Hogan go out and hulk up beat up the guys... BUT what Im saying is that is ALL part of the script.. ... We love Hogan for playing "his part" in a story that was created for him.. Shawns WM legacy is about what HE went out and created in the ring.


And when you get 20+ minutes against top workers every year like Shawn had of COURSE you're gonna have memorable moments and are able to 'steal the show'. And you're acting like Shawn was the only one that gave it all on the biggest stage in wrestling.
Why would you not give you best performer 20+ with a top worker? He's your ace in a whole.. You can give him a match at mania against a good worker and its another mainevent level match and you don't even need to have the title involved which means they can hype another match that needs the title to make it special.


Are you ******ed?
No

You don't think Austin, Rock, Cena, Hogan, Savage, Bret, etc. gave their all on the biggest show of the year?
Thats just it... EVERYONE works their ass off... but Shawn goes out and outperforms them all just about every single year.



As for MOTY, all an opinion based thing. He had maybe 2 MOTY's (XX, and 23, haven't seen either Taker match), but that's just my opinion.

:lmao: Try.. The Ladder match at WM X... The Iron Man match at 12. Triple threat at XX.. Angle at 21. Flair at 24.. Taker at 25.. Taker at 26 probably.. And thats not just my opinion...


To say that Shawn is Mr. WM because he 'always gave his best effort and tried to put on a show' excuse is crap. Everyone tries their hardest at WM. Someone give me an instance where a worker phones it in and kept their job.

Wow you love to twist things... I didn't say because he puts his best effort.. Everyone works their ass off to have the best match they can at wreslemania.. But only one guy has had natural talent and skill to have the best match at almost every single WM he;s performed at.
 
That's not what you said earlier...

But I never said anything about HBK being champion. I was talking about Mr. WM.

Hogan's matches were never going to match up with HBK b/c his opponents were a million times inferior, aside from maybe 2.

One of the two was John Cena. Shawn Michaels made John Cena look good. Did Hogan ever make his opponents look good?

However, Hogan's moments were more memorable then HBK's were, which is what WM is about: having the memorable moments.

I think his moments were earlier on, so I guess people like me, who grew up in the 90's find guys like HBK and Bret Hart more memorable. (That doesn't mean I don't know my facts about the 80's. My dad was a big fan of 80's wrestling so I have seen most matches and stuff of Hogan.) But, I still think Wrestlemania is about putting on great matches, and HBK does his job. Plus, that's just your opinion and like you said, I can't change it.
 
Lost what I had replied to earlier, but let me put out a few points:

-Shawn, no matter what excuses you try to bring, was a poor draw as the main guy. Once Vince saw how poorly he did as champion he was made nothing more then a transitional champion.
-Hogan wasn't created by WM. He was a champion for over a year before Wrestlemania I even aired. He just got bigger b/c of WM.

Try.. The Ladder match at WM X... The Iron Man match at 12. Triple threat at XX.. Angle at 21. Flair at 24.. Taker at 25.. Taker at 26 probably.. And thats not just my opinion...

I said XX was the MOTY. As was his 23 match vs. Cena. And the Taker matches might be too, I haven't seen them or a whole lot of stuff from the past two years. But...

Owen/Bret from same show > Ladder
Undertaker/Edge from 24 > Flair
Triple H/Batista HIAC > Angle
Austin/Bret SS > Iron Man

One of the two was John Cena. Shawn Michaels made John Cena look good. Did Hogan ever make his opponents look good?

First of all, John is a great wrestler and started to really work well almost 6 months before that. His TLC vs Edge and LMS vs Umaga were both great matches. Just because he doesn't flip around and do a bunch of moves doesn't mean he isn't a great worker. And #2, Warrior. Warrior was 10000000x worse of a worker compared to even Cena.

I think his moments were earlier on, so I guess people like me, who grew up in the 90's find guys like HBK and Bret Hart more memorable. (That doesn't mean I don't know my facts about the 80's. My dad was a big fan of 80's wrestling so I have seen most matches and stuff of Hogan.) But, I still think Wrestlemania is about putting on great matches, and HBK does his job. Plus, that's just your opinion and like you said, I can't change it.

If you're going by great matches Quality > Quantity. Bret Hart has 2 Top 20 WWF/E EVER matches just at WM. Does that make him Mr. WM?
 
First of all, John is a great wrestler and started to really work well almost 6 months before that. His TLC vs Edge and LMS vs Umaga were both great matches. Just because he doesn't flip around and do a bunch of moves doesn't mean he isn't a great worker. And #2, Warrior. Warrior was 10000000x worse of a worker compared to even Cena.

My point is, Cena isn't that great. He's not a very good wrestler, IMO. But HBK made him look good. I bet you HBK can make Warrior look decent. Could Hogan make Warrior look decent?

If you're going by great matches Quality > Quantity. Bret Hart has 2 Top 20 WWF/E EVER matches just at WM. Does that make him Mr. WM?

Where did you see/read that? Cause if it's PWI or WWE.com or anything, it's totally kayfabe, right? :suspic:
 
I think his moments were earlier on, so I guess people like me, who grew up in the 90's find guys like HBK and Bret Hart more memorable. (That doesn't mean I don't know my facts about the 80's. My dad was a big fan of 80's wrestling so I have seen most matches and stuff of Hogan.) But, I still think Wrestlemania is about putting on great matches, and HBK does his job. Plus, that's just your opinion and like you said, I can't change it.

I understand that to YOU HBK may be more memorable than Hogan, since that's when you grew up. But it's not opinion, it's fact that Hogan did more for wrestling. HBK was one of the biggest wrestling stars of the 90's, sure. But Hogan was one of the biggest stars in all of entertainment in the 80's. The highest attendance for a US wrestling event is still Hogan/Andre at WM III. And the most viewers an entire wresting program has gotten on tv is still Hogan and Andre's rematch on The Main Event. No wrestler has sold as much merchandise as Hogan. And the 90's wrestling boom wasn't really because of HBK or Bret Hart, it was because of Hogan and the nWo, Goldberg, Sting, Steve Austin, the Rock, and the Triple H-led, Shawn Michaels-less DX.

You can argue that HBK is better in the ring, most would agree.

You can argue that HBK is better on the mic, though that's debatable.

You can argue that HBK did less politics backstage, though that's also debatable.

But you can't argue that HBK was the bigger draw.
 
My point is, Cena isn't that great. He's not a very good wrestler, IMO. But HBK made him look good. I bet you HBK can make Warrior look decent. Could Hogan make Warrior look decent?

Yeah, actually, he is. He's a top 5 worker in the WWE right now. Just because HE ONLY KNOWS FIVE MOVEZS!!! doesn't mean that he's a bad worker. He can tell a story and performs great in the ME. And Hogan did have a pretty memorable Mania ME against Warrior at 6, iirc. But I forgot since they didn't do a whole bunch of flippy moves it must've sucked.

Where did you see/read that? Cause if it's PWI or WWE.com or anything, it's totally kayfabe, right? :suspic:

Many people have had those two matches better then any HBK match, save for maybe the 2 Taker matches. Credible reporters have rated those as a top 10 match ever. So yeah. While Dave Meltzer has some 'out there' opinions, I'd still take it over anyone who has HBK/McMahon as MOTY in 2006.
 
Yeah, actually, he is. He's a top 5 worker in the WWE right now. Just because HE ONLY KNOWS FIVE MOVEZS!!! doesn't mean that he's a bad worker. He can tell a story and performs great in the ME. And Hogan did have a pretty memorable Mania ME against Warrior at 6, iirc. But I forgot since they didn't do a whole bunch of flippy moves it must've sucked.

Did I say Hogan vs Warrior wasn't memorable? Of course it was. I'm not saying that Hogan was not memorable. It was memorable but not great. Oh yeaah flippy things. You know, that high flyers do? Bret Hart doesn't do any flippy things, does that mean I think his matches suck? No.
And by the way, Cena still isn't that great. Because HBK does the 5 moves of doom all the time, so does The Rock, does that mean I think they are bad workers? No. But it's just that they entertain me more in the ring.

Many people have had those two matches better then any HBK match, save for maybe the 2 Taker matches. Credible reporters have rated those as a top 10 match ever. So yeah. While Dave Meltzer has some 'out there' opinions, I'd still take it over anyone who has HBK/McMahon as MOTY in 2006.

HBK/McMahon is probably only in there cause Vince was a huge heel.

You can argue that HBK is better in the ring, most would agree.
I did.


You can argue that HBK is better on the mic, though that's debatable.
Umm, sure... :p


You can argue that HBK did less politics backstage, though that's also debatable.
I guess so, but HBK was pretty much a dick backstage in the 90's


But you can't argue that HBK was the bigger draw.
I know that very well. Because If I go up to a stranger who has never watched wrestling before and asked them if they knew who HBK was, they would say no. If I asked that same person if they knew who Hogan was they would probably say yes. I understand that Hogan and the creative team made Hulkamania which made Wrestlemania. But Hogan did pass on the torch, to IMO a better guy in the ring. The Heartbreak Kid. (and Bret Hart.) and that's what matters to me.
 
We're just going in circles here now, so I guess we're just gonna have to agree to disagree. If I'm gonna argue why HBK is a bad draw I'll make a different thread about it. This is about who's Mr. WM, even though I still think anyone who picks HBK is picking him just because their a mark for him, I'm gonna stop now. Just kinda wasting mine, and your, time going around in circles.
 
This is about who's Mr. WM, even though I still think anyone who picks HBK is picking him just because their a mark for him
I actually agree with you. I am a mark of HBK and I do think he is Mr. WM, although maybe some people might think he is Mr. WM because he does put on great matches. I've been trying to tell you that in my previous posts. :icon_neutral:

Anyways, good luck with your other thread, if your gonna make it. Because I know HBK wasn't a bigger draw than Hogan, but that was just cause everyone was watching Hogan on WCW rather than HBK on WWF.

And okay, I'm done too. :)
 
I understand that to YOU HBK may be more memorable than Hogan, since that's when you grew up. But it's not opinion, it's fact that Hogan did more for wrestling. HBK was one of the biggest wrestling stars of the 90's, sure. But Hogan was one of the biggest stars in all of entertainment in the 80's. The highest attendance for a US wrestling event is still Hogan/Andre at WM III. And the most viewers an entire wresting program has gotten on tv is still Hogan and Andre's rematch on The Main Event. No wrestler has sold as much merchandise as Hogan. And the 90's wrestling boom wasn't really because of HBK or Bret Hart, it was because of Hogan and the nWo, Goldberg, Sting, Steve Austin, the Rock, and the Triple H-led, Shawn Michaels-less DX.

i think it was quoted best in an interview right after the NWO angle started up..
"Hulk Hogan is who he is due to media appearances" you take away all the movies, TV shows, Commercials, is he still a house hold name? probably not. comparing HBK and Hogan for "Mr.Wrestlemania" really HAS no right answer. they were 2 VERY different people at 2 VERY different times. HBK wasnt as much of a media ****e as Hogan. now im not knocking him for it, because i would have done it too, but the man was on EVERYTHING right up to effin cereal boxes. THAT is what made him a household name, not his in-ring work. Same can be said for The Rock now, but to a lesser degree of course, but all the movies, TV shows ect made him a house hold name to those who dont WATCH wrestling.

Hogan cut good promo's in HIS time, the ones now? not so much. HBK in the original DX cut some GREAT Heel promo's, ripping apart the wall between what we saw on camera, and what went on in the back. Even right up to his retirement speech, which was very nicely done as well. It's a proven fact that Austin carried the birth of the attitude Era, but who was the front man behind it all? DX/HBK. who passed the torch to Austin to start the "Austin Era"? HBK.

yes without a shadow of a doubt Hulk was behind the "Boom" of the 80's. but could that not have been ANYONE? could you not throw an American flag in the hands, and have him slam this huge truck of a man, tell kids to say their prayers and eat their vitamins, go to school, respect your parents blah blah blah, and we would have eaten it up! THAT would have been the man. it just so happened it was Hulk, now that theory cant be proven i know, but it also can NOT be shot down, because YOU do not know either.

HBK was the only one who could have done what he did at the start of the AA. because that wasnt really a character, that was Shawn in real life. Hunter stopped being the "Blue Blood" character and was being himself. they were childish, immature, rude, and had bigger ego's then Vince himself, but thats what we LOVED about it, was that they really were not trying to feed us the comic shit anymore, and wrestling became more REAL. so for me, Wrestlemania became more enjoyable, because i could actually connect to and understand the hatred between the two better. Prime example of it, and one of my favorite WM matches ever. HBK vs Y2J. the story building up to it was REAL. the fact that Y2J had modeled his career after shawn, they showed old footage of him immatating Shawn. so for me, that match really was past vs present. (Same as Rock Hogan for others) i grew up watching Hogan, as well as HBK, and of course i'll always remember Hogan, but when you're a Kid and he's crammed down your throat every min of every day, of COURSE you're not going to forget him. HBK they really didnt have to try as hard, didnt have to throw him in cartoons, and in cereal, and movies and all that shit, and thats what makes me more of a fan of his then Hulk. and why to ME HBK is Mr.Wrestlemania.
 
i think it was quoted best in an interview right after the NWO angle started up..
"Hulk Hogan is who he is due to media appearances" you take away all the movies, TV shows, Commercials, is he still a house hold name? probably not.

Seriously, most of your posts are pretty good, but this may be one of the dumbest things I've ever read. It's not like Hogan got on the cereal boxes, movies, and TV shows, and THEN became a famous wrestler. Hogan became a world famous wrestler FIRST, and then transcended wrestling. Shawn The reason michaels isn't on TV shows (although he actually does have a couple of guest shots on TV shows), cereal boxes, and movies isn't because Shawn didn't want to do those things, it's just that he was never a big enough star to warrant it. he wasn't famous enough, he wasn't popular enough, and that's just that. Hogan's media appearances were a product of Hogan's wrestling success, not the other way around.
 
Seriously, most of your posts are pretty good, but this may be one of the dumbest things I've ever read. It's not like Hogan got on the cereal boxes, movies, and TV shows, and THEN became a famous wrestler. Hogan became a world famous wrestler FIRST, and then transcended wrestling

well i do thank you for the first half of the first sentance, and as for the rest i think you took it out of context, i said that it was all the other stuff that made him a house hold name, not a famous wrestler. i mean, HHH for example, in the wrestling world, one of the most well known ever, but a hosehold name even in houses of families who have never watched wrestling before? probably not. but others like say the Rock, or John Cena? yeah, they're pretty damn well known outside the wrestling world, but Hogan was an international star, just as much for his outside wrestling work as inside.
 
You're kidding right? His match against Diesel wasn't a quality match? What about the No DQ match against Sid Vicious? Have you even seen them? To imply that the Undertaker didn't have any good matches until Kane showed up is just silly.


Nothing impressive about Wrestlemania 3, nope history certainly wasn't made there.:rolleyes:

This is where I'm going to point out how biased and blind people are when it comes to Shawn Michaels;


Was Shawn Michaels a good performer? Undoubtedly. But it takes two to tango and Scott Hall certainly wasn't in need of Michaels carrying him, this match is just as much a Scott Hall classic as it is a Michaels one.


Again half of this match is Bret Hart, it's not as though Michaels could've pulled this off with anyone, it needed Bret Hart to be a success.


Again this match wouldn't be a classic without Austin.


Again, this match is only as good as the people involved. Jericho deserves just as much credit for this match as Michaels.


Again, this match contains two other wrestlers who were just as good as Michaels (Benoit was better).


Kurt Angle deserves half the credit.


Now here's a match where HBK deserves the credit, he carried Cena during the match, not to say that Cena's terrible but he certainly isn't at the technical level that Michaels was at. So there he goes, Michaels can have 1.


Again, Michaels can have second victory because he was working with a wrestler who had become rather limited in comparison to what he'd been capable of a decade beforehand.



Both of these matches are quite overrated, I'll give credit where credit is due, the first match was the highlight of that WM. The second one didn't live up to the first but was in no way bad. That being said both guys gave it there all, for arguments sake I'll give Michaels the second match because the Undertaker had become rather limited in the year between the two matches.

It'd be silly of me to imply that these matches weren't good. Because they were, but to me the people involved in these matches were often just as good as Michaels and in the case of Angle and Benoit, I'd say they were overall better.

The argument for "Mr Wrestlemania" is a bit difficult, seeing as it's generally based on match quality and it's incredibly rare for a match to be of particularly high quality on the back of a single person. Which is why I personally don't feel that the title belongs to anyone. However in the spirit of the thread. the following are people who've had multiple classic matches at Wrestlemania who could be considered "Mr Wrestlemania";

Chris Jericho
Chris Benoit
Kurt Angle
The Rock
Stone Cold Steve Austin
Kevin Nash
Scott Hall
Bret Hart
Shawn Michaels
The Undertaker
Hulk Hogan
Randy Savage

And there are others. Attributing that sort of title to someone is borderline impossible because a truly good match needs two amazing wrestlers, which is why no one man is worthy of holding that title.

I agree, it takes two to tango. If u got people like Razor Ramon, Diesel, Bret Hart, Stone Cold, Chris Jericho, Chris Benoit, Triple H, Kurt Angle, John Cena, and Undertaker as your Wrestlemania opponent of course you're bound to have great matches at Wrestlemania. If not, then you're completely a f*cked up performer like Triple H & Randy Orton, two men with array of great opponents but only got not more than 1 or 2 Wrestlemania classics. Triple H's Wrestlemania classics are only against Undertaker at Wrestlemania X-7 and against Chris Benoit & Shawn Michaels at Wrestlemania XX. Just look at Shawn Michaels' match with El Matador at Wrestlemania VIII or Tatanka at Wrestlemania IX, he didn't steal the show right? Right, because his opponents weren't good at all.

If u want to bring up his match against Vince at Wrestlemania XXII or Flair at Wrestlemania XXIV, I want to say those two matches are two of the most overrated matches I've ever seen in my life. And tha also shows how PWI and most of Shawn Michaels fans could be sooooo biased when it comes to him. Edge vs Foley OWNED Wrestlemania XXII, my god it was such an underrated match!

And as for Wrestlemania XXIV....The vast majority of people have said Ric Flair or Shawn Micheals, which I fully understand, but I think that the performance put on by The Undertaker and Edge is often overlooked. I re-watched that match recently, and it was outstanding, by far the best match on the card that night.

People remember the Flair retirement from that night. They remember CM Punk winning Money in the Bank. Some even remember Floyd Mayweather vs. The Big Show. All of those were important matches, but The Undertaker and Edge put on a true main event worthy performance that always seems to get lost in the shuffle. I mean, I'd even go so far as to call it a classic. I think that most people had a pretty strong inclination that The Undertaker would win, but it was exciting all the way through, it had a ton of great twists and turns, it had some great near falls. Overall just a great, great match.

On the whole, Wrestlemania 24 wasn't a spectacular pay-per-view. There have been plenty of 'Mania events before and hell, even since, that have far outstripped it. However, that was an excellent match and main event worthy.Undertaker vs Edge is THE best Wrestle Mania 'WRESTLING' match since Angle vs Michaels. Edge reminded everybody that he's one of the best in the business & not just a transitional champion. He was actually more dominant over The Undertaker than anybody else has ever been at a Wrestle Mania. Edge reversed almost every Undertaker move and what made the match even more interesting was the less predictable finish which saw The Dead Man win via submission instead of The Tombstone that EVERYBODY was expecting him to win by. Wrestling quality wise, this match is on another planet compared to Shawn Michaels vs Ric Flair in a 'retirement' match(which doesn't hold any meaning by now cause Flair wrestled again in TNA).

Those who aren't clouded by hype could tell Undertaker vs Edge is comparable to any technical wrestling matches in masterpiece level. It surpassed my expectations and was extremely intense. This was a great main event that truly culminated the whole night just into one match. Edge tried to have everyone help him keep his title, but Undertaker in an unreal state takes them all on. You can feel the intensity, the rivalry and the hype behind this match. Lots of nearfalls and counters made this match just plain enjoyable and pure entertainment.

The first half of the match featured many counters and reversals, including Edge reversing Old School, the Chokeslam, and the Last Ride. The match picked up the pace big time later on. Undertaker hits the Chokeslam and Last Ride, but fails to get the pin on both. Undertaker later attempted a big boot but hit the referee instead, this gave Edge the opportunity to nail Undertaker with a video camera. Undertaker gave Edge a Tombstone Piledriver afterwards, but the ref was still out so as Undertaker pinned Edge, a new ref had to sprint down the entrance ramp to make the count. Unfortunately, this gave Edge enough time to kick out. Edge later hits a spear, but Undertaker suddenly locks Edge in his new submission hold immediately after. After hanging in for a while, Edge submits and The Undertaker wins the World Heavyweight Championship at WrestleMania for the second straight year. A WrestleMania classic and amazing match. Edge is a surefire Hall of Famer, he is worthy to be included on the list. I dare say this match is as good or maybe even better than their match at Summerslam 2008.

I agree with anyone labeling this match as the most underrated Wrestlemania match of all time. I can't believe horrible matches like Undertaker vs Giant Gonzales at Wrestlemania IX, Undertaker vs Big Boss Man at Wrestlemania XV, and Undertaker vs Mark Henry at Wrestlemania XXII made it to wweclassic but this match didn't! That alone proves how overlooked this gem is.

Hogan pretty much put Wrestlemania on the map, while Taker had to deal with five talentless giants who destroyed nearly all the credibility The Streak had, of course I'm talking about Giant Gonzales, King Kong Bundy, Big Boss Man, A-Train, and Mark Henry.

So, yeah, Michaels is Mr. Wrestlemania but only cause he got array of great opponents to tango with.

And the last but definitely not the least, I believe The Undertaker is the most underrated Wrestlemania performer of all time. His match with Diesel at Wrestlemania XII, Sid at Wrestlemania XIII, Ric Flair at Wrestlemania X-8, Randy Orton at Wrestlemania XXI, and Edge at Wrestlemania XXIV are all criminally underrated matches which will never get the recognition they deserve. Ever.
 
I have to go with Hogan. You may not like him, you may say he is not a good wrestler at all etc etc. But as the op said he basically headlined the first 9 wrestlemanias. Just because they are long time ago doesn't make them less important. Its like a guy coming from the attitude era and headlining every wrestlemania by being the biggest draw to this day. (without missing of being the main event)

My other point is this: Let's say after 30 years from now, if wrestlemania is still going on (although unlikely) you could witness more great performers during this time. What will make Hogan unique is that he was there at the start of it by dominating from the start and for long years.

Does this make him a great in ring performer? No. Does this put him in the history of the Wrestlemania? Yes
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,826
Messages
3,300,732
Members
21,726
Latest member
chrisxenforo
Back
Top