Who's Legacy Will Be More Memorable: Andre the Giant, or The Undertaker?

[Tenta]

Welcome, boys and girls, and welcome to what is supposed to be another of Tenta’s challenges. However, at least on this topic, I get the funny feeling that other opinions are going to be arriving very shortly. This topic, I promise you, is going to be one that’s very polarizing, as it deals with many fans favorite wrestler (and, admittedly, one of the favorite wrestlers of my expected opponent today, and probably for the next couple days.) That wrestler is the Undertaker. That’s why, hopefully you understand, I’m not going to debate every single Undertaker fan on these forums. That’d lead to a battle the style of 300, and quite frankly, I’m not exactly looking for that at the moment. Maybe I can get some help from some folks that kick it Old School, but nevertheless, I can see this topic getting out of hand. With that in mind, let me bring out the man I’ve called in to challenge on this night, SavageTaker.

Ok, Savage. I gave you something that was right up your alley. And we’re going to see how you fair. Knowing you, this will be fun, it will heated, and it will be good. So let’s just get on with the Damn thing.

A long, long, time ago (And I can still remember), Vince McMahon had a pressing issue on his hands. You see, for years, Vince always touted a Giant, the likes of which had never been seen in professional wrestling lore. That man was the Eighth Wonder of the World, Andre the Giant. This is the man that went undefeated for fifteen years (That is, if you’re going to forget matches against Inoki and El Canek. Or if you’re going to forget draws against Harley Race.) Still, this Giant had seen better days. With a throbbing back and unable to move without feeling pain, Vince finally decided it was time to put the big man down. He was going to relegate him to managing, occasional appearances, and that was pretty much the gist of it. But now, without that Giant, Vince was going to need an attraction, similar to this big man. Andre was always a spectacle, so in spite of him not being Vince’s creation, Vince decided to let the guy inspire crowds worldwide. Now that man was gone, and no one was left to take that spectacle. Hogan was a spectacle, but nowhere near the type of awe-inspiring creature Andre was. Besides, by that point, Vince was eager to phase Hulk out, too, so he needed a new spectacle. Someone that just wouldn’t be a star; he needed an attraction. Someone to have that same aura as Andre.

In short, Vince needed a Phenom. And lo and behold, Vince rolled the dice on a red haired kid from Texas. That kid was Mark Calloway. But you know him best as The Undertaker. And The Undertaker took the responsibility, and ran with it. For two decades, this man has been a staple in the WWE. Even now, the guy works his ass off. Though, and while it’s sad to admit, this guy has to nearing the end of the line. No mere mortal can withstand that much wear and tear. So, call me bat shit crazy, but I see this guy retiring at next year’s Wrestlemania. The spectacle has run for nineteen years now. In comparing the aura of these men’s career, one can’t help but wonder how these two will be tied forever in history. These men were the leaders of the locker room, and the most respected guy backstage. But now, the time has come. Of these two men, who is going to have the longer lasting legacy; The Undertaker, or Andre the Giant? And since, well, Savage has one of the guy’s names in his full name, well then it leaves me no choice, really. I’m going to have to go with Andre the Giant.

Now then, as for my reasons:

1. Andre the Giant is known more around the world as a wrestler than The Undertaker

And this is probably the largest “no shit” of all my reasons, but we can’t deny that Andre is more well known to larger groups of wrestling audiences than The Undertaker. After all, before the guy even came to the states, he worked constantly in Japan, and was one of the larger draws they had, pardon the pun. It was here he’d regularly wrestler the biggest names that Japan had to offer. Inoki, Hansen, The Machines. Everyone was brought in to take this Giant off of his feet. Very few could, and to the Japanese, they treated him as one of their own. While people in Japan know who the Undertaker, few latch on to him like they did to their beloved Andre. He was continuously voted the most popular wrestler in kayfabe magazines, even though he wouldn’t step foot into the WWE until 1973. As soon as Vince could use him, he’d continuously run Andre on shows in America, while still keeping him under engagements in Japan. The reason why is simple; he was absolutely fucking over in Japan. It’d be here that Andre brought along the likes of Hogan and company, and expose them to the Japanese market.

Canada was no different. It was the first place he’d work in North America. They absolutely revered the guy. Almost every day, Andre stopped by the home of family royalty in Canada, the Hart family. Jean Ferre first made a name for himself throughout Canada, and although he was inexperienced and raw, it didn't take a seasoned pro to spot the potential in the seven-footer. Soon after his rookie year, the young giant (who soon changed his name to reflect his immense stature) steadily made his way through virtually every regional promotion in the country, working in major cities and small towns alike. After a short time paying his dues on the undercard, Andre the Giant -- the biggest wrestler, or athlete, the world had ever seen -- quickly became the largest box-office attraction in the world of professional wrestling....

What about in other areas of the world, you say? Just as revered, if not more. France latched onto the big guy as their national hero. All of Europe absolutely loved watching Andre perform, and was continually the most over guy on Vince’s constant tours of Europe. Even when Andre could no longer wrestle, Vince Jr. Saddled up Andre, and had him take the journey over, just for the pop of the matter. Everyone clamored to see Andre. And everyone wanted a piece of the action. Which leads me to.

2. Andre was more of a mainstream name than The Undertaker could ever hope to be

Simply put, Andre was Hulk Hogan, before Hogan ever existed. Andre was famous for working with any celebrity athlete that wanted a piece of the action, and many of all shapes and sizes wanted to take on the big man. In Japan, while Antonio Inoki was fighting Muhammad Ali, Andre was fighting the likes of Chuck Wepner. That’s right; Andre was fighting the man that inspired Rocky Balboa. If that’s not sports iconography, I tell you I have no idea what is. In what was an accomplishment at the time, Andre was featured in Sports Illustrated. Fittingly, Andre's S.I. profile was the largest featured article up to that point in time for the publication. Consider that; Andre had breached the world of professional wrestling enough that he was viewed as a legitimate superstar in the world of sports. Only one other wrestler has even been featured (in a positive light, mind you) in the pages of Sports Illustrated. If you guessed Hulk Hogan, you understand your rudimentary professional wrestling. Even legendary sportscaster Bob Uecker wanted in on the action, being the man to interview and, consequentially, get choked by Andre the Giant.

[youtube]BnnsDCyB_XM[/youtube]

And while The Undertaker set his foot in Hollywood for all of a cup of coffee, Andre was a legitimate draw in the box office. Andre, being a very sociable creature, often made good with such men as Arnold Schwarzenegger, William Shatner, and yes, Billy Crystal. We’ll hear more from that guy later. Anyway, his connections and massive size, along with his ability in front of a camera, landed him plenty of gigs in Hollywood. Either as playing Sasquatch on the Six Million Dollar Man, or on such shows as The Fall Guy and The Great American Hero, it was pretty difficult to not see that huge mug on your television screen. Of course, big men need to find themselves on the big screen. And that’s exactly what Andre did, either appearing in Conan the Barbarian alongside his friend Arnold, or as the gigantic Fezzik in The Princess Bride. Come now, who hasn’t tried to do this scene at least once with their friends?

[youtube]DP5-qJSzDUg[/youtube]

I know one crew of friends at least made an attempt.

[youtube]1IuCu1dmSNs&feature=related[/youtube]

Consider that for a minute…. Sixteen years after his death, people are still either quoting him, talking about him, or are passing on his legend. As a matter of fact, aside from Steve Austin, The Rock, and Hulk Hogan, he’s easily the most recognizable name and face in the history of professional wrestling.

Now you remember that name, Billy Crystal? You do? Great, because that guy becomes pretty important, too. Andre and Billy became very close friends, often spending many a night together. As a matter of fact, Billy was so touched by Andre’s friendship, he decided to write and produce an entire fucking movie about the guy’s life. Consider that for a second… Andre has a full movie dedicated to his honor. And for that matter, another one’s out, as we speak. I don’t know about you, but I’ve never heard of any professional wrestler having whole movies made in their honor. And yes, that counts the Undertaker.

3. Can you say, “Bigger Draw”?

Let’s just forget about Wrestlemania 3 for a second. In spite of the obvious over inflation Vince and Co. Have done over time, it’s still pretty likely the WWE drew at least 78,000 people just for that show alone.

Anyway, there’s also the matter of selling out Shea Stadium twice; once with Hulk, the other with Wepner as described earlier. In the Wepner case, Andre and Chuck drew 32,000 people to Shea Stadium, much as is the case when Andre and Hulk put 36,295 people in the seats. Whenever a promoter needed a big draw to an event, Andre was the one typically called on to bring the people in. Andre has been, and always will, be a standard bearer when it comes to attendance. Because the guy could simply flat out draw.

Yes, more than The Undertaker.

More Stars Were Made Off Andre’s Name

At the end of the day, both of these guys will be remembered as Hall of Famers. But the big question is, “How many times did Vince turn to both of these men to create a new star?” When you’re having talent, and you want to see if you’ll get people to care, you pair that rising star with someone that is a consistent draw, and will bring across an audience everywhere he goes. That was always Andre, for Vince McMahon. For years, many wrestlers made a name for themselves off Andre’s back. From the Ultimate Warrior, to Jake Roberts, to everyone in between. The Giant always had a habit of taking wrestlers, and making them superstars, just by wrestling with him on a couple tours. And lest I forget this guy;

That’s right, Hulkamania may have been born before Andre. But it was after this match that everyone knew Andre passed the torch. Hulk even recounts it, saying that if it wasn’t for Andre putting Hulk over, Hulkamania wouldn’t have been nearly as strong as it was. Once Hulk got the rub from Andre, he was to be known around the world, and to be honored as an icon, for having slain the Giant.

Meanwhile… Who’s career did The Undertaker ever make? Kane, perhaps? There’s no way to convince me made Mankind. As a matter of fact, as I think about it, the only wrestler who’s career was made off the Undertaker was in fact Kane. No wrestler has been made more famous from having worked with Taker. Not one. Ken Kennedy is gone now, Randy Orton sure as Hell wasn’t made by the Undertaker. All of the young bucks that have feuded with The Undertaker really didn’t get much rub from The Undertaker. And in this business, your job is simple; To be a star, and to make stars.

When you remove all the smoke and mirrors, it’s just a gimmick

That’s all The Undertaker is; a gimmick. Yes, that gimmick is great, but that is the legacy of Mark Calloway. And gimmicks, like anything else, are fleeting. People got sick of the Undertaker by 2000. So what did Vince do? He repackaged The Undertaker as the American Badass. Not a good call, to be sure, but the message was there; The Undertaker had grown stale, and needed something else. And when it was Mean Mark left with his Harley and Badassness, we all absolutely shat on him.

Now, Andre The Giant wasn’t a gimmick… He was pure legend. To this day, he’s regarded as the World’s Greatest Drinker. People speak of him as if he were a mythic being. Stories from everywhere about a professional wrestler that dwarfed everyone. Andre is indeed larger than life, and will always be remembered for how much larger than life he was. He exceeded the typical boundaries of what a man can and can’t do. His legacy is firmly cemented every time you drink a beer, every time you watch Giants in the ring. He is the only wrestler that is completely one of a kind, and that there will never be enough of.

When it’s time for The Undertaker to hang up the boots, Vince will go back to the drawing board, scheming of plans. He’ll need another replacement. But Vince won’t be looking for the next Undertaker. No, in his heart, Vince will always be searching for the next Andre the Giant.

 

[klunderbunker]

It's not a fair comparison to make. You have a guy like Andre that was pushed as a main event guy and one of the biggest stars in the company. Taker was pushed as a mythical character with a backstory that was told to us in small pieces over the years. Taker may never have drawn 93,000 people, but he did draw 74,000 at Mania 24. Taker may not have drawn 93,000, but in a sense Andre didn't either. If that match had been against anyone other than Hogan, the match wouldn't have meant anywhere near as much. Andre played a big and likely equal part in it, but Taker was more of the focus of the main event of Mania 24 than Edge was. Anyway, that's beside the point.

This isn't a fair comparison to make. Taker was never built up to be a superstar like Andre was. He's a star in the wrestling world, but Andre has something that Taker couldn't have: he was the only man anywhere near his size of taht era. Taker is what, the 4th tallest man in the WWE at the moment behind Khali, Kane and Show? His gimmick is the main thing that he is known for which isn't marketable to the mainstream. Andre's size is the polar opposite as everyone is interested in things that are completely out of the ordinary. As far as mainstream goes, it's not a fair comparison to make.

In the ring though, I think it's a lot closer than you're making it out to be. Taker has a longevity that Andre simply doesn't have. He's been around for nearly 20 years with nearly 19 of those being in the main event scene. That's simply unheard of when you think about it. he could have great matches with just about anyone, which is something Andre couldn't. Andre had more or less two potential match styles: a David vs. Goliath style or a clash of the titans style. Taker can do far more styles because while he's a giant, he isn't so huge that it's impossible for smaller men to do anything with him. Andre will be far more remembered for one moment, which yes is far bigger than anything else in wrestling history, but I think Taker will have a broader and more versatile legacy, in the wrestling world that is.

 

[It's...Baylariat!]

The issue with this comparison is that the Undertaker is a character. Andre the Giant is a legend. The man was larger than life. Literally. In Japan, Andre was an icon due to his size. No one in Japan had seen anyone that size in their life, and he was mobile, too. It was a scary site. Andre is a man who was simply a person who was a benefit of his time. If he debuted in the 2000's, he wouldn't be nearly as legendary. He was a benefit of his time, I guess. Not to mention Andre made stars. Undertaker hasn't.

I like you're analysis of why Andre has the bigger legacy, because it's true. Andre was mainstream, made superstars (Hogan, Hansen) and was someone who made a lasting impression on people. I cried when he passed away. When I was 9. Seriously.

The Undertaker is a mythical character, but is a product of a promotion machine. He's a lot of smoke and mirrors. He's a cool entrance, a few classic moves, and his eyes being rolled back. A terrific worker, but someone who just could not replace Andre the Giant. Undertaker will go down as a legend, but not as big as Andre. Taker wasn't big in Japan, his matches at Wrestlemania won't be as remembered as Andre's and simply put, Andre was a better wrestler.

Good thread, Tenta.

 

[Dagger Dias]

It is going to come down to the undefeated streak, honestly. Andre may have been mainstream during his time.... but for the first four months of each year, every wrestling fan in the world is talking about Undertaker's undefeated streak at Wrestlemania. He will be attempting to go 18 and 0 this year. Now, we will have to play the "what if" game for a moment here. Say that Undertaker is still undefeated when he retires. He will forever be known as the man who went undefeated at the biggest show of the year for nearly two entire decades.

We won't really know until after Undertaker's career is over, or unless he somehow loses at Wrestlemania. Neither has happened yet. In my opinion, we honestly will not know for a while because it is going to come down to whether Undertaker is still undefeated at Wrestlemania when he retires. That would be the ultimate legacy for any wrestler to leave behind.

 

[Tenta]

It's not a fair comparison to make. You have a guy like Andre that was pushed as a main event guy and one of the biggest stars in the company. Taker was pushed as a mythical character with a backstory that was told to us in small pieces over the years.

Until Vince didn't need him anymore. Sure, he was pushed as a main event guy. However, more often than not, in the height of his push, he had become a jobber. He was fodder for names like Warrior and Hogan, to get these guys over. Sure, he'd always been pushed in the main event, but how's that any different from The Undertaker? The Undertaker has always been built as a dominant force, no other way around it. He was built to not even be knocked off his feet until he got to Hogan (Before you say it, I know, he lost to Tito Santana in Mexico).

Taker may never have drawn 93,000 people, but he did draw 74,000 at Mania 24. Taker may not have drawn 93,000, but in a sense Andre didn't either. If that match had been against anyone other than Hogan, the match wouldn't have meant anywhere near as much. Andre played a big and likely equal part in it, but Taker was more of the focus of the main event of Mania 24 than Edge was. Anyway, that's beside the point.

And all of this was piggeybacked off the success of men like Hogan and Andre. Riddle me this; if Hogan and Andre don't bring in 93,000 (I'm not sure they even brought that in, though) is there a 74,000 draw at Wrestlemania.

Besides that, unlike Wrestlemania 24, Hogan and Andre was the only real mainstream event, per se. Sure, you had Savage/Steamboat, but tell me you really thought that was going to be a match that stole the spotlight like it did. People ordered Wrestlemania 24 for Hogan/Andre. Meanwhile, at Wrestlemania 24:

You had Ric Flair's retirement (No wrestling fan in the vicinity is going to miss that, KB. You know this.)
The other Heavyweight Championship Match.

To say The Undertaker is solely responsible for that gate is lying to yourself, KB. I'd say more people were interested in seeing Flair go. When we look back at Wrestlemania 24, do we think of Undertaker/Edge? Do we think of Cena/Orton/Trips?

No.... We all know the first thing that comes to mind. That'd be Flair/Michaels.

This isn't a fair comparison to make. Taker was never built up to be a superstar like Andre was. He's a star in the wrestling world, but Andre has something that Taker couldn't have: he was the only man anywhere near his size of taht era.

Now this I'll take with validity. However, if we're to believe what's said of Andre, he was never seven foot four. Again, this is getting into muddy waters, but most people will tell you he's six foot eleven. A huge man by his own rights, but certainly not as tall as NBA Centers, even at this point.

Besides, the allure to The Undertaker isn't the height; it's the gimmick. The aura he brings to the ring is based off his gimmick. Now, you're right in saying that these are two different reasonings for the aura. Andre had his height, Taker had the gimmick. Nevertheless, it's still the exact same awe-inspired feeling one has looking at these men. In short, it's a presence that both men have. That's the comparison we're making here.

Taker is what, the 4th tallest man in the WWE at the moment behind Khali, Kane and Show? His gimmick is the main thing that he is known for which isn't marketable to the mainstream.

How's it not marketable? There's an entire audience on those obsessed with the dead, and the macabre. It's what Tim Burton has based his career around. People like the strange, and the eerie. And with the Undertaker as strange as he is, how is that unmarketable?

You see the people that come in all Black for the Undertaker? That area, what some may deem "Goth". There's a whole audience waiting to be had for The Undertaker his entire career. Of course he's marketable. Just not to the market Vince would ever consider.

Andre's size is the polar opposite as everyone is interested in things that are completely out of the ordinary. As far as mainstream goes, it's not a fair comparison to make.

And again, how? Undertaker is marketable. He wouldn't be around still today if he wasn't.

In the ring though, I think it's a lot closer than you're making it out to be. Taker has a longevity that Andre simply doesn't have.

Andre died young. That's the only way I can say you're right on this matter. Andre started wrestling in 1963. His final match, I believe, was at Wrestlemania 6, or the European tour that occurred afterward. That's a good twenty seven years of working in the business.

So where's this lack of longevity again?

He's been around for nearly 20 years with nearly 19 of those being in the main event scene. That's simply unheard of when you think about it. he could have great matches with just about anyone, which is something Andre couldn't.

I'm going out on a limb here... I like Andre's matches more than The Undertaker's. At least, an Andre in his prime. At least when he was having sixty minute matches with Harley Race. Or his matches in Japan with Hogan. The best of Andre beats the best of the Undertaker, for me, and the worst of Andre beats the worst of the Undertaker, for me as well.

Andre had more or less two potential match styles: a David vs. Goliath style or a clash of the titans style. Taker can do far more styles because while he's a giant, he isn't so huge that it's impossible for smaller men to do anything with him.

Let's consider exactly what happens when he faces larger competition...

Khali...

Gonzalez....

Mabel....

Bundy....

You noticing a trend here, KB? These were absolutely shit-tastic matches. The Undertaker just doesn't make for a very good David.

I know, I know.... "Those are all bad workers", right? I'll agree with one thing, I liked his feud with Diesel. Otherwise, The Undertaker as a small man just doesn't work.

Andre will be far more remembered for one moment, which yes is far bigger than anything else in wrestling history, but I think Taker will have a broader and more versatile legacy, in the wrestling world that is.

What you're failing to see here is that Andre's going to be known for more outside the ring. Whether as the first wrestler on the cover of SI, or as Fezzik, Andre's legacy goes far beyond the ring. It goes to our movies, our books, even our catchphrases ("The Irresistible Force meeting the Immovable object". I know, it's Gorilla's, but it was sparked by Andre/Hogan.) Meanwhile, outside the wrestling world, Undertaker will be a relative unknown. And that, quite frankly, leads to longer lasting impressions in society.

 

[Tenta]

It is going to come down to the undefeated streak, honestly. Andre may have been mainstream during his time.... but for the first four months of each year, every wrestling fan in the world is talking about Undertaker's undefeated streak at Wrestlemania. He will be attempting to go 18 and 0 this year. Now, we will have to play the "what if" game for a moment here. Say that Undertaker is still undefeated when he retires. He will forever be known as the man who went undefeated at the biggest show of the year for nearly two entire decades.

We won't really know until after Undertaker's career is over, or unless he somehow loses at Wrestlemania. Neither has happened yet. In my opinion, we honestly will not know for a while because it is going to come down to whether Undertaker is still undefeated at Wrestlemania when he retires. That would be the ultimate legacy for any wrestler to leave behind.

There should be something said for what Dagger has pointed out. It's actually a very brilliant point to make. Sure, the Undertaker has the streak. And if holds on to it, that will be his lasting legacy in the business. People will look and say, "My God, he went undefeated for that long?"

What you fail to note is that by Wrestlemania 15, the streak had become a product of Vince McMahon. Sure, it didn't start out that way, but by 1999, Vince knew he had something, and that he could use it to market The Undertaker as this mythical creature. I give Undertaker credit for having done it, but it is all Vince's choice. If he wanted, he could Taker pass the torch to someone. But I guarantee you... It won't have the impact og Hogan/Andre. Because while the Undertaker is a product, Andre the Giant is simply a legend.

 

[DiscipleofWrestling]

Well, if you are going to go with mainstream appeal, THERE IS NO COMPARISON. Andre the Giant is more memorable in that regard. As has been mentioned, he brought people in, was literally larger than life, and made people based off of working with him.

But Undertaker is just a character? Must be some character to make it work for 20 ******* years. I would accept that just on merits if the character was only a blip on the radar, but you have to give credit to the man behind the gimmick. The legacy of Mark Calloway is his ability to change with the times, to evolve. I'm not just talking about makeup, pyros, and torches. I'm talking about the man's ability to tell a story, to go out there every night and give 120% of what he had to make a good match. No offense to the Andre love, but I'd almost have to be on drugs to enjoy some of Andre's matches from late in his career. No one can ever deny what Andre gave to the business, but when you look at the Undertaker, what he is is much more than marketing. He is truly a phenomenal athlete to be able to do the stuff he can do even at his age (44).

Andre the Giant will always be remembered more, in my opinion, for the bodyslam and The Princess Bride than whatever else he did in his life. Undertaker, unfortunately, has had his great moments limited to the pro wrestling fan community... except for Hell in a Cell with Mankind. And to be honest, more of the younger fans from today most likely remember that than the bodyslam.

So, what I'm trying to say is that it depends on what generation you consider when you are talking about legacy. Piper's legacy didn't help him a damn bit a few weeks ago on Raw. Did you hear a cricket during that? I did. Andre will be remembered fondly by the older fans and people that happened to like The Princess Bride. The Undertaker, and I know I'm going to catch hell for saying this, is this generation's Andre the Giant of the 1980's--- that old veteran that the fans from the 90's on still gather towards. He just hasn't had the opportunity to star in a movie with Cary Elwes.

In the end, all legacy is is truly in the eye of the beholder. For me, I'll always remember Undertaker more fondly. You may think differently. It's like politics. It depends on how you see things.

 

[Tenta]

But Undertaker is just a character? Must be some character to make it work for 20 ******* years. I would accept that just on merits if the character was only a blip on the radar, but you have to give credit to the man behind the gimmick. The legacy of Mark Calloway is his ability to change with the times, to evolve. I'm not just talking about makeup, pyros, and torches. I'm talking about the man's ability to tell a story, to go out there every night and give 120% of what he had to make a good match. No offense to the Andre love, but I'd almost have to be on drugs to enjoy some of Andre's matches from late in his career. No one can ever deny what Andre gave to the business, but when you look at the Undertaker, what he is is much more than marketing. He is truly a phenomenal athlete to be able to do the stuff he can do even at his age (44).

Andre the Giant will always be remembered more, in my opinion, for the bodyslam and The Princess Bride than whatever else he did in his life. Undertaker, unfortunately, has had his great moments limited to the pro wrestling fan community... except for Hell in a Cell with Mankind. And to be honest, more of the younger fans from today most likely remember that than the bodyslam.

I personally would like to think he'll be remembered for more. I'll remember him as the guy that threw the original Rocky out of the ring. Or choked Bob Uecker. Sadly, you're right in saying it's in the beholder. Most people aren't going to remember those things, no matter what the case may be. But when comparing the two in ring, we shouldn't forget to include these very early matches.

Consider this... Anyone that sees recent Taker matches will see an old, hurt man, who just is a shell of what he used to be. Sadly, that's what people remember Andre for, and it's not fair. We can't judge from the tail end of the career, but I suppose I can't argue with that.

Anyway, good post, man

 

[batboy]

If he wanted, he could Taker pass the torch to someone. But I guarantee you... It won't have the impact og Hogan/Andre. Because while the Undertaker is a product, Andre the Giant is simply a legend.

Now your going to tell me that IF, and thats a big if, UT was to lose to someone, and at the same time lose the world heavyweight championship, at WM, this won't be bigger then Hogan/Andre.
OK, back on this topic, as much as I hate to admit it you do make a good point in that Andre is more memorable to us older fans. At first Undertaker came out as a gimmick, no selling hits, slow moving, and basicly being the deadman, but Andre has his size. He is a tall dude and no one ever witnessed a man of his size before. Outside of wrestling Andre was still himself, a tall dude that if you saw, you wouldn't want to start trouble with but UT, outside of wrestling, still somewhat stays in character which may be the reason he ain't in movies or doing special apperances on tv show like some other wrestlers, imagine Mark playing either main villian in any of the Blade movies or even Van Helsing (tryingto somewhat still keep him in character).
Even though UT has "The Streak" with WM, Andre's streak lasted 15 years, not 15 years at one ppv but 15 years in wrestling.
Now Andre may have movies but UT has matches based off of his character. Because of this there are casket matches, buried alive, and hell in a cell. I just wish they would bring the first two matches back every once in a while not like how they are doing with these ppv now in days.
Sorry if I got a lil off track with my rambling but reguardless,back to answering this topic, it goes more in the time you where raised in. Before this post I was always a UT mark but thinking about it Andre Did leave a bigger mark for people, for and during his time period, then UT has with unfortunatly the internet.

 

[The Brain]

I think most wrestling fans born around 1985 or later are going to remember Undertaker more fondly than Andre. He has been a major part of wrestling ever since they became fans. He has had countless big matches and feuds and been built a as legend. These fans never got an opportunity to see Andre. Odds are if they find old WWF tapes featuring Andre they are during his later years when he is well past his physical prime. They probably won't be impressed. I became a fan in 1986 just as Andre was really starting to slow down. I haven't seen too many of his matches in his prime, but I know his later years don't do him justice. The majority of younger generations don't have much interest in learning about previous generations. With that said I expect most people under 25 to answer Taker.

For me it's Andre. There are many reasons for this. Andre was around in the kayfabe days. It's so well known now that wrestling is scripted that people outside of wrestling aren't impressed by Undertaker. He is written in as the winner. Of course we know it was like that in Andre's day too, but it wasn't as well known back then. It was known, but not openly talked about. Also we have seen Undertaker a lot more. Sure he takes an occasional hiatus, but Taker has been on countless WWE programs including well over 100 pay per views. There was more mystique surrounding Andre because he was rarely seen on tv. If Andre was coming to town you needed to get a ticket because you weren't sure when you would see him again. As mentioned before, Andre was one of a kind. There simply weren't people that size back then. He was unique. Vince could have chosen someone else to be the Undertaker. I'm not saying just anyone could have been as successful, but someone else could have been given that gimmick. There could only be one Andre. Years ago people attended wrestling shows to see Andre the Giant and Hulk Hogan. Now they attend shows to see WWE. I bet most people reading this have already decided if they are going to order WrestleMania 26. The WWE hype machine has already sold the event months before a single match has been announced. It was Hulk Hogan vs. Andre the Giant that sold WrestleMania III.

You could easily make a case for either in the wrestling world. There is no doubt in my mind that Andre is more mainstream. I don't know if I've ever heard anyone outside wrestling talk about Taker. To us wrestling fans Undertaker is famous. Outside of wrestling, not so much. Andre was famous in the mainstream. It's 3 am and I can barely keep my eyes open. I'm falling asleep while typing this so I hope I made my point. They're legacy is about equal in WWE, but Andre is light years ahead of Taker mainstream.

 

[TheLittleOne]

ANDRE.. n e one who says taker is young.. or did not follow closely in the late 70's early 80's...
PLUS, on taker's side..: taker spent almost all of his years in the wwe working year round incl. house shows.. ANDRE was much more of a special attraction. it was a BIG DEAL when andre made an appearence or a match.. he wasnt featured on random wwe tv every week..
and both of them became very shells of their former selves at their respective ends.. but not their own fault.. andre had a disease (giant thing) soo much pain, plus he was a very unhealthy person (binge drinkin and eating) taker's body is soo beat up.. many of u dont know he limps in normal life and needs injections of muscle relaxers in his back before he goes out.. sad.. but taker tries harder to be healthy.. and i expect his schedule to slow down after mania 26..but i dont see him leaving for many years.

ANDRE is more popular if u ask strangers..he is a legend.. but not fair to call taker a gimmick,. the undertaker is also a legend..and my age group and below (people 35 down to teens) will prob remember undertaker forever.. but andre is a household name..

hulk hogan the rock stonecold steve austin andre the giant a good idea is to add one more name to that list for household names in wrestling/ if u think its ric flair THINK again while he deserves it..trust me u ask a man who never saw wrestling before.. there is a chance he might of heard of ric flair but not guarantee.

 

[acstylez]

I say the Undertaker. He has the undefeated streak, and has beaten every wrestler he's faced. Andres most memerable part of his legacy was getting slammed.

 

[sammysrh]

I dont even know why these two are being compared because of quite a few reasons. Undertaker is obviously the much more memorable with his legacy over Andre. Reasons being:
Undertaker has won multiple championships
Undertaker has made a legacy with his constant wins over almost everyone who has crossed his path
He as well as having the gimmick to stand up with it, has the in ring ability and as a 44 year old man I would call that damn good. Most men retire about 5 years before that.
As well as having the tag team of the B.O.D. with kane.
AND last but not least certainly, the streak. His streak is the greatest feat anyone could probably ever beat. being 17-0 at wrestlemania is just something that is indescribable.
<b>Now</b> to see what Andre will be remembered for? Probably just mainly Wrestlemania 3 where <b>he</b> was body slammed by hulk hogan which made his career skyrocket. That is all people remember of him. I will ask Joe Bob off the street "hey what do you remember about Andre the Giant?". He will either A. not know anything about it or B. say " Oh yeah thats right. Hulk Hogan slammed him at WM3". So He needed to be body slammed to have a legacy and because of his size thats the only reason he is that well known. If he was 6 inches shorter and 100lbs lighter i GUARANTEE he wouldnt have had a career at all. So my deciscion would have to be the UNDERTAKER

 

[It's...Baylariat!]

I dont even know why these two are being compared because of quite a few reasons. Undertaker is obviously the much more memorable with his legacy over Andre.

I'd say so, because most of us don't remember Andre except for Wrestlemania 3, but he was a legend in every facet of wrestling. In Japan, the WWE, the NWA, everywhere. He was a marvel of modern wrestlers with his size and agility

Reasons being:
Undertaker has won multiple championships

Andre didn't need championships to be over with the crowd. His name alone put him over. Anyone he wrestled was better off because they did.

Undertaker has made a legacy with his constant wins over almost everyone who has crossed his path

Andre's beaten better wrestlers. Hogan, Hansen, Piper, and many, MANY more credible opponents. Not to mention epic bouts with Antonio Inoki, Giant Baba, and other Japanese legends.

He as well as having the gimmick to stand up with it, has the in ring ability and as a 44 year old man I would call that damn good. Most men retire about 5 years before that.

I would give you this except Andre would have wrestled as long as his body would have let him. Unfortunately, Andre had Giantism and couldn't stop growing, which ended up killing him.

As well as having the tag team of the B.O.D. with kane.

Just no. Andre tagged with Giant Baba and Hulk Hogan at one time.

AND last but not least certainly, the streak. His streak is the greatest feat anyone could probably ever beat. being 17-0 at wrestlemania is just something that is indescribable.

As opposed to being undefeated in ANY match for 15 YEARS? Which is what Andre had. Undefeated, for 15 years until his match with Hogan. Undertaker lost to Tito Santana and was eliminated by Maven from the Royal Rumble. The streak is great, but he also beat some bad wrestlers during that streak. Albert, King Kong Bundy, and an over-the-hill Jimmy Snuka to name a few.

Now to see what Andre will be remembered for? Probably just mainly Wrestlemania 3 where he was body slammed by hulk hogan which made his career skyrocket.

If you mean Hogan, then yes, it catapulted him to the star he is today, but if you're saying this made Andre's career skyrocket, then you're very wrong. Andre was at the twilight of his career when the match took place and still helped put on a great show.

That is all people remember of him.

No it's not. Read some of the posts in here.

I will ask Joe Bob off the street "hey what do you remember about Andre the Giant?". He will either A. not know anything about it or B. say " Oh yeah thats right. Hulk Hogan slammed him at WM3".

Then Joe Bob doesn't know much about Old School wrestling then.

So He needed to be body slammed to have a legacy and because of his size thats the only reason he is that well known.

He's an icon. Larger than life. Back in the 70's no one was that big anywhere. His size and mobility had a lot to do with his aura. But he was also able to put on good matches and entertain the masses.

If he was 6 inches shorter and 100lbs lighter i GUARANTEE he wouldnt have had a career at all. So my deciscion would have to be the UNDERTAKER

Well in that case, he'd be about the size of the Undertaker. So you've just canceled out everything you said. Great job. Undertaker's a great wrestler and will be a first ballot HOF'er, but he's nowhere near the legacy of Andre the Giant.

 

[ChristianRivers]

I've got to disagree. While Andre' was great because of his size, the two most things he'll be remembered for are the body slam and the Princess Bride. It's gone unnoticed by most people but Taker was in Surburban Commando as one of the bounty hunters after Hogan. And he was also in an episode of Poltergeist:The Legacy as a Demon Bounty Hunter. After he had the lord of darkness coat. Let's not forget to be objective. There are some advantages, and disadvantages to both but I'm going with Taker being remembered for more wrestling wise.

Mark Callaway worked the Independents before being called up to WCW, and later WWF. Where at first he was a little put off being The Undertaker. But looking at what he has accomplished I think it is fair to say that if Vince would have hired anybody else it just wouldn't be the same, and things would have likely failed. That being said the Undertaker is not just a gimmick. He traveled the independent circuit around Tennessee, Dallas, and many other independent territories. WCW mismanaged him when he was Mean Mark so thankfully for us it worked out that he found himself as The Undertaker. Taker is a power/submission wrestler. He is very athletic for being 6'8 299lbs. Andre was never able to take a big swan dive over the top rope. Neither could Andre walk the rope. Taker on Raw never lost for the first two years he was there. Not to mention during his tenure in the business he has put over and created new stars so Wrestlemania is usually the time the wrestlers give back to Taker. That is what the streak is really about. Taker makes every opponent look great, so when they lose the loss can be over looked, while the respect for Taker is paid back keeping the streak intact. There have been a lot of matches built around the Undertaker. The Buried Alive match which is rare, Inferno match, which you'll probably never see again. Hell in a Cell, Coffin, now known as casket. Not to mention that the Undertaker has evolved and gotten better over the years. He uses mind games to confuse his opponents, and he has changed his entrances to throw his opponents off. Let us not also forget that Championships are what its about in wrestling but now Undertaker has transcended championships because now his mere presence is enough to send the crowd into a frenzy. It always has been.. He is one of the most respected, and beloved wrestlers there is. He has consistently worked through his highs and his lows. He is a true phenom, and deserves everything he has accomplished. Being undefeated at the big show each year is also legendary in itself. Taker has held every major title in wrestling. To pretty much just discount his accomplishments is ridiculous. In today's age Taker will be remembered for more. Andre will always be remembered for what he did for the business.

It's two different era's. Why can't we remember them both for what they accomplished? One legacy shouldn't be held in more high regard than the other. Taker will be remembered more for what he did for the wrestling business. And for how he evolved and got better as the years went on. His passion to have good matches with whoever he was matched up with, his multiple tag, and world championships, and how he mastered his character, and how his presence instantly captured all who shared in the experience. The very novel entrances which were unlike anything you could imagine, and may never come around again.

Andre with Bobby Heenan. When I was growing up I caught the last part of Andre's career. So when Taker was in the early years of his career I was instantly captured on how different the gimmick was. But it wasn't just the gimmick. It was the fact that the guy could actually wrestle better than anybody in the WWF at the time. But in my honest opinion we should remember both legacies because they'll both be great memories in wrestling history. The only difference is now we're apart of Taker's history making moments. What's better than being there?

 

[ashe draven]

Like KB said i dont think this is a fair comparison..but an interesting thread. Andre is iconic, 1 of a kind, a HUGE draw, & made superstars. The same can be said of taker. imho though, taker has had more memorable fueds, longjevity, & the WM streak. As well as changing is char throughout his career. Did Andre do that? Not to take anything away from the 1 & true GIANT. My vote goes to Taker.

 

[Proof]

Taker was never a household name. People go on with his Wrestlemania streak. It's fake and the WWE is more responsible for creating that than Taker. Andre the Giant was one of the most recognizable entertainers in the world, on par with guy's like Ali. I can't believe people people think Takers fake streak is bigger than Andre's legacy. If you want to talk about being 'undefeated', didn't Andre go undefeated for like 20 something years? Taker's legacy is made up of dressing up like a cartoon.

 

[King Douche]

I say Andre the Giant cause like you said alot of people know him more then Taker and he done more then Taker. Also his gimmick was awesome and grest, Taker's gimmick was fine up until a certain point in time, now the gimmick is just crap really. Also I agree Andre was the big superstar before Hulk Hogan and he did make Hogan a legend in his own right. Every time they show Hogan's highlights they mainly show him and Andre at WM 3. Also Andre is a crowd seller then Undertaker. So Andre takes my vote.

I think John Cena is more of a Andre the Giant popularity wise. He is the most known superstar in professional wrestling today, and star in movies and be on television shows and all that good stuff. He may not wrestle as good, but he is billed/booked as Superman though in his matches.

 

[Pathogen]

I just don't feel that the men concerned are comparable at all. Ther Undertaker is actually a very good wrestler. Aws far as I'm aware, Andre never was. Being a physical marcvel does not a good wrestler make, no matter how much Vince thinks contrary. When was Andre ever the champion at all? Oh, yeah, thye hof worthy Haku! Purlease! Lol

 

[Suneeboy]

There have been some really great posts in this thread, and I am actually pissed that I didn&#8217;t get in on this sooner. Tenta, I&#8217;ve been reading your posts and you are one sick son of a bitch, and by one sick son of a bitch I mean your posts are great and make me reflect on my life and how I can become a better person.

Now on to your post. I&#8217;ve seen that some people have said that it isn&#8217;t a fair comparison, and I have to agree. What you are doing is comparing them as pop culture icons, and The Undertaker simply is not that. Andre the Giant cannot be compared to those who have been confined to the wrestling business and not ventured into other areas of entertainment on a mass level. Andre is a pop culture icon of the 70s and 80s. The Undertaker is &#8220;merely&#8221; a wrestling icon of the 90s up until now.

Andre the Giant created new stars yes, because his kayfabe character allowed it to be written into storylines and still keep him strong. The Undertaker&#8217;s gimmick is not really compatible with putting people over. To keep the character as a mainstay and a top draw, the character has to win, and win often and dominantly. The Undertaker&#8217;s character was and is built around him kicking ass and taking people out. Also to add, the Undertaker&#8217;s career is still in full effect. We will not know what his mark is on professional wrestling until he is gone, and I have a feeling that he will be one of those guys that when he is gone, he will be gone for good.

As a pop culture icon Andre the Giant is in a class with very few men, and of course has a more solidified legacy than The Undertaker. As a professional wrestler, you can create a very strong argument that The Undertaker is very much in the same league as the Andre, and in many ways can and will pass him as a professional wrestling icon. I don&#8217;t think we will be able to go toe to toe on that subject until The Undertaker is gone. As far as passing the torch, when The Undertaker does lose at &#8216;Mania (I am one of them who thinks he should and will end the streak), we must then gauge his career with that great defining moment which will definitely sweeten the pot with talking points, for a great debate on the two men&#8217;s careers.

 

[One Punch Doug Crashin]

there are two things to remember when thinking about Andre the Giant and The Undertaker

1: The Undertaker was billed as being a mythical character while Andre was more of an unbeatable giant which he was during his first couple of years as a pro.

2: you have to consider each generation the two wrestled in. During Andre's wrestling career you had people going: would you look at that guy! with The Undertaker you had people going: hey look at that guy, he's tall but so is everybody else in the fed. what makes him different then say a Psycho Sid or a Vader.

you also have to consider what each wrestler meant to each generation of fans. I grew up watching Andre during the late 80's and thinking how in the world can a guy grow to be that tall. but when the Undertaker debuted at survivor series I thought to myself, great here's another guy who's tall and weighs alot...

so in essence what I believe is that Andre's Legacy will be the most memorable because of the things I stated above.

 

[dd23beatlesfan1]

I've been meaning to make a post on this thread for awhile and have never gotten around to it until now. There's been some very good posts in this thread, and great arguments for both Taker and Andre. I'm not quite sure what more new ideas I can bring to this thread, but I guess I'll see where it goes. It's probably going to be pretty long, so sit back, make you a bag of popcorn, and a can of soda, and enjoy a long essay on this subject haha.

To start off with, I should note that the Undertaker is my favorite wrestler of all-time. From his amazing gimmick/character, to his longevity, to his amazing atheltic ability that he displays for a man of his size, to the fact that he's changed his style (both in the ring and from a character standpoint) for over 20 years to keep himself relevant (which is something I respect and admire him for tremendously), Taker is just one of the greats and is arguably the best big man wrestler of all-time. Keyword is arguably. I agree that he has competion for that title.

One of those competitors is of course Andre the Giant. Andre the Giant isn't just a legend in the business, but an icon. Other than Hulk Hogan and the Rock, there is probably no other wrestler in the history of wrestling (in the Western part of the world anyway) that was as big of a pop culture star as Andre. Andre was literally the biggest star in pro wrestling from about 1973-1984. It wasn't until Hogan the Rock N' Wrestling era came along that Andre was dethroned as the most widely known wrestler in America and the rest of the western world. Andre was also a great worker (just ask any of the wrestlers who wrestled him), and was actually a good athlete when he was younger. Many people make the mistake of thinking that Andre was a terrible wrestler because all he could do was punch and sit on people. Many of these same people don't know anything about Andre's career before 1987, which was the point in Andre's career when he really should've retired and tried to enjoy his final years as much as he could. Andre was in no shape to compete at this stage. Now from what I've read of Andre, Andre was probably never as good an athlete as Taker, but for his time in the early 70's Andre was very agile and atheltic for a guy who was 7 feet tall and almost 400 lbs.

Andre is one of the biggest names in the history of wrestling bar none. Bigger than the Undertaker even.

So whose legacy will be more memorable in the final history of wrestling, Taker or Andre?

That's a tough question to answer obviously. It's an intriguing matchup because in many ways, Taker was Andre's successor. In the 1970's and 1980's, Andre was the established locker room leader, even more so than Hogan. Hogan may have been the biggest star, but Andre was the "boss" of the locker room. All of the wrestlers looked up to Andre, and Andre was who solved any problems between any wrestlers most of the time. Taker, today has this role. He is the most respected wrestler in the locker room. John Cena and Triple H might be higher on the totem pole in the company so to speak, but according to the wrestlers, Taker is the king, the man.

Both wrestlers were probably the biggest "attractions" WWE had in their respective eras. While the title picture in the late '80s centered around Backlund, Hogan, and Savage, Andre was the one guy that could draw as much or even more than the champions based on his star power alone. In the 90's the title picture centered more on Bret, HBK, Diesel, Stone Cold, and the Rock, but Taker was "the attraction" of the show, the guy that could often outdraw or draw close to these guys on his star power alone. Now in this decade, Taker has been very involved in the title picture on Smackdown, but he is still one of those guys that doesn't have to have the title to be a big star. Just like Andre.

Both wrestlers were important on the history of wrestling, and in particular the evolution of the big man wrestler. Once again many people don't realize this, but Andre was very revolutionary for big men in wrestling from an athletic standpoint in his time. For one, nobody in wrestling before was as tall as he was. Most of the biggest guys in the '60s were like Killer Kowalski or Don Leo Jonathan, guys that were maybe 6'6 or 6'7 and weighed 250-300 lbs. They were tall and lean, but not "giant-like." Or you had super-heavyweights ala Haystacks Calhoun and Gorilla Monsoon, who were about 6-2 to 6-4 and weigned 400-600 lbs. Guys that were slow and plodding and were just freaks and not really wrestlers (although Gorilla was better than that). Andre was the first big guy to really combine both elements of what a "big guy" wrestler was. When he first came in he was 6'10-7 feet tall and weighed about 350-400 lbs. So while he was a giant from a height standpoint, but he was also big from a weight standpoint. He also elevated the athletic level for the big guy wrestler. He was doing dropkicks just like the smaller, ariel guys in that time. And for the next 20 years, most big guy wrestlers wrestled like Andre, although there wasn't really anyone as big as he was. As he got older he got bigger obviously.

20 years later, when the Undertaker debuted, you could very well say that he revolutionized what a big man wrestler could do in the ring as well. You never saw big guy wrestlers do moves off of the top rope and land on their feet when they were knocked out of the ring, and do dives over the ropes, or walk the ropes. Only light-heavyweight wrestlers did stuff like that. Today, just about every big wrestler has to be quick and agile and be able to move off the ropes or they'll be laughed out of the building. If you compare the athleticism of big man wrestlers today compared to 20 or 30 years ago, the athelticism and overall action is much higher and better than it was. I think the Undertaker was really a pioneer and revolutionary in this aspect. The Undertaker raised the athletic bar for big man wrestlers (along with Vader and Bam Bam Bigelow of course) in his generation, just as Andre had done 20 years prior.

I've seen people say "how can you compare the two, they're so different," but in reality I don't think so. I think they're very similar, both in their overall standings in the history of wrestling, and their roles in the WWE. They're arguably (and for my money, are, besides Hogan), the two greatest big man wrestlers ever in wrestling. Just my opinion anyway.

So whose legacy is going to be more memorable? It's probably a good idea to first answer who is a greater wrestler overall? As for who is a greater wrestler, I will have to go with Andre on this one. I think in the ring the Undertaker was a better wrestler than Andre, he was more athletic and had better matches from what I've seen (although this is a bit unfair as I haven't seen near as many Andre matches as I have Taker matches). But being a great wrestler isn't just about in the ability in the ring as we all know. It's also drawing power, influence and impact on the wrestling business, and of course mainstream notoriety. When it comes to those three aspects, Andre has Taker beat. As I stated previously, when it comes to being a bigger overall star (meaning wrestlers who broke through to mainstream pop culture, and not just pro wrestling culture), Andre is bigger than Taker. Simple as that. Andre has had movies and books made about him. He appeared on the Tonight Show in the '70s, when no wrestlers could get hardly any mainstream publicity. He appeared in Sports Illustrated. He appeared in TV shows. He appeared in movies. Andre was one of the biggest wrestling stars ever.

Taker is obviously a big star no doubt, but in mainstream pop culture he is not in Andre's class. Frankly I don't even think Stone Cold was in Andre's class, but that's another argument for another day. In the modern history of wrestling, when it comes to mainstream pop culture notoriety, I think only Hogan and the Rock are in Andre's class. After Andre, Hulk, and the Rock, then you have Stone Cold, Roddy Piper, Jesse Ventura, Randy Savage, John Cena, etc. Then after that, you have Ric Flair, Dusty Rhodes, the Von Erichs, Jerry Lawler, Bret Hart, Sting, Kurt Angle, Triple H, Goldberg, and probably the Undertaker.

When it comes to drawing power, Taker is no doubt a big draw and has been for over 20 years. It's well documented that Taker and Bret literally kept the WWF alive in the mid '90s when they were both the major draws and the biggest reasons that all of the European and foreign tours sold out consistently. And to this day, Taker still brings in the crowds. Taker is one of the biggest draws the WWF has had in the last 20 years. But Andre I would say was an even bigger draw in his prime. Andre was such a huge draw, that Vince Sr, would loan Andre to other territories just to help these territories make big money. Andre was brought in for all of the major year end shows for these territories. Whenever a promotor wanted to draw a big crowd, he either got the NWA world champion, or Andre. Andre was a major draw wherever he went, whether it was in Canada, Japan, Mexico, or some little rinky dink town in Texas.

As far as influence and impact on the wrestling business, I have to give it to Andre, although this matchup is close. If you take solely the evolution of the big man wrestler, both are equal in their impact. But on wrestling as a whole, I've gotta give it to Andre. Andre was a major part in keeping the wrestling business alive in the '70s, when it had been on a steady decline since it's glory days of popularity in the 1950's. Andre brought further mainstream notoriety to pro wrestling, and helped pave the way for the wrestling explosion in the '80s. Plus not to mention his overall influence he had on a generation of wrestlers (not just big man wrestlers, but all wrestlers).

Taker is also important no doubt, but I think on the overall history of wrestling, Andre was more important and meant more. He was a bigger draw, bigger mainstream star, had almost the same amount of longevity as Taker. I think overall Andre was a greater wrestler than the Undertaker.

So in theory beings he's the greater wrestler, and beings his legacy is more important and bigger than Taker's than that means his will be more memorable, right?

Not necessarily. The one advantage that Taker has over Andre is that his career took place during a technological revolution, not just in wrestling, but the whole world. Most of Andre's best work can not be found or is very difficult to find. This is obvious when you ask most younger fans about Andre. Just look at the very people in this thread that have talked about how much Andre sucks and how overrated he is. Those people have probably only seen Andre's later WWE work towards the end of his life, when he was, simply put, not very good. Unfortunately, this part of his career is what will be more memorable to newer and younger fans than his earlier career when he was at his peak in atheltic ability, match quality, and drawing power. It really doesn't do his legacy justice, and while it's not fair, more fans, especially younger fans are going to remember the Andre that was slammed by Hulk Hogan at Wrestlmania III who could barely move and who only sat on guys or choked them, then the phenomenal giant who sold out tours left and right, who appeared on the Tonight Show, and who did dropkicks and dazzled audiences with his atheltic ability and charisma. It's not fair but that's the way it is. Andre's final years I feel are going to bring his legacy down even more to newer fans, which has been what's been happening since his death. Of course this could change if WWE could unveil footage of his stuff in the '70s (which they do have), and make a proper DVD of him and his career (a documentary on his life and career would help a lot I think), and just more footage of him on the website. Andre hasn't really been exploited with WWE's overall outreach, like other wrestlers have. And that's a severe disadvantage to him and his overall legacy.

Taker on the other hand has probably every match he's ever had documented. He's had buttloads of DVD's done on him already (with more coming in the future I'm sure), all of his matches and feuds have been and continue to be shown on DVD's and TV. You can find plenty of his stuff on YouTube. Taker has the advantage of being a modern wrestler in which, like all wrestlers of his generation and in the future, his career and legacy is much more accurately documented, than wrestlers in Andre's era and wrestlers from before that.

Taker is at a bigger advantage of being more remembered and revered to newer fans and younger generations than Andre point blank.

It will be up to true wrestling historians and fans that are eager to learn wrestling history to keep Andre's legacy and career alive and in the minds of fans. Which isn't impossible, because Andre's legacy is so huge and he was so charismatic that I'm sure newer fans will still come across Andre and fall in love with him all over again. Andre wasn't just a typical giant, but perhaps the most unique and one of a kind giant in wrestling history. His legacy will be remembered.

But again probably not as much as Undertaker's. So in the end, I think the Undertaker's legacy will be more remembered than Andre's. I wouldn't be surprised if in 20 years, when "greatest wrestlers of all-time" lists are being made, if Taker doesn't pull ahead of Andre on those lists.

 

[BrothersMinistryofDarknes]

I love these comparisons topics... Simply because sometimes there just not fair.

To start off with Andre and The Undertaker are my favorite wrestlers of all time. Simply put two men who were both revered and respected.

With that said the Undertaker will go down in history as being one of the most if not the most versatile big man in professional wrestling. But Andre's legacy will always be number one..

lets face it.Andre was a legend the day he was born. Andre was just that a true Giant. Loved by all. His mainstream success was due to his likable nature, and the fact that people were truly in awe of him.

But what truly cements Andre's legacy is not just his acomplishments, but one factor that Hogan eluded to. If Andre had been a mean person he could have ruled the wrestlng world with literaly no competition. Destroying everyone in his path.

That simple fact is what gives Andre his legacy. Here you had a Giant of man that had he wanted to could go out on any given night and beat someone, but he chose not too. He chose to have fun and enjoy his life.

The Undertaker is at heart a gimmick. cut and dry, plain and simple. But what made this gimmick work was that fact that he came in the comapny and right away went after the main man Hogan. And he took off from there. The Undertaker is arguably the best big man of his era. More versatile in the ring and as a character. What also lends to the legacy of the Undertaker is his WM record.

Through all the BS his character has went through his legacy is built on the fact that he never loses at WM.

Many say the Undertakers legacy means more because of his longevity over Andres as a main eventer.
The problem here is that Andre really had know longevity because of his disease. Many of the younger fans don't realize that Andre was afflicted with a disease. And while his early career was off the charts. His Latter days were just not that great. And that truly was through no fault of his own. I believe the WWE has done a poor job in rembering his legacy. Many younger fans just know of Andre being slammed by Hogan. Thay don't know about Andre's sellout matches around the world. Or the fact that he could do a dropkick with the ease, or fly off the top ropes with the best of them.

But as I alreay said Andre was already a main eventer from the day he was born.

At the end of the day I think Andre will always be remembered more simply because of who he was and what it meant see him. The Undertaker at the end of the day is still Mark Calloway. THe gimmick will be remembered for being the only gimmick to outlast the gimmick yrs.

Jim Ross put it best when he said The Undertaker has achieved Andre like status. Which i gathered he meant as Andre became a legend in his own time, so has the the Undertaker.

 

[8thwotwATG]

With some trepidation, I'm going to make an attempt to add something to this EXCELLENT thread that,as of yet, hasn't been said. First of all, it is definitely easy to see the parallells between the two careers of both men, but indeed it is the careers of two wrestlers seperated by a generation. Perhaps that's the real answer here, in that the wrestling fans of my generation will in most all cases see the legacy of Andre the Giant as being greater than that of The Deadman; who will be considered by younger fans as having the greater legacy. Arguments for both can definitely be made, but I have to say that overall, Andre faced off against the better talent over the course of his long career, worked some unbelievably stiff matches (especially in Japan; look on youtube for some early matches he had against Strong Kobayashi and Stan Hansen). I also would have to agree that his being in the ring with some wrestlers gave them the "rub" they woudn't have otherwise recieved. Bear in mind also that the majority of this occured before the era of the Internet, PPV's, and Pro Wrestling being on an international level. Yeah, I agree that I'm prejudiced(see my avatar!), but I really can't see how The Underteakers eventual final legacy will overall exceed that of ATG.