Will Undertaker ever come back?

[A.J.]

Now before everyone begins to go off on me and go crazy on here just let me have my say and you can say what you want after that.

We all know that the Undertaker is a legend in the business and has done many great things and put on some damn good matches and has amazed us with his skill in the squared circle. But when i look back at the Undertakers career as it stands right now the Undertaker is never been qualified in the McMahon's eyes as a real guy that can be the man and carry the company as the World Champion.

Looking at Takers last four reigns they really have been nothing special. The only one that he was on top for a while was when he was the champion from Wrestlemania 13 to Summerslam that year. Other than that Taker has had a 6 day reign, a month and less than a week reign, barely a two month reign. Now to me that says undertaker as good as he is in the ring just isn't cut to be the top guy headline show after show and PPV after PPV.

I'm not knocking Taker at all, but Undertaker just isn't World Championship material at all. For me Undertaker has had more memorable matches when he was not the world champion. Taker is guy who functions better without the belt and all his great feuds seem to surround that idea. For a guy that has been in the business for almost 20 years has had only one real run as champion and yet the ratings show not man tuned in for it.

For all the great things Taker has done he just never been a World Champion kind of guy. So thats why i feel Taker will never be known as a "World Champion" material.

 

[Shocky]

Undertaker = Andre the Giant in this regard. Andre had what, one 45 minute title reign throughout his career, but does that deminish from the legacy of him, no. Andre was the man of the WWF throughout the 70's and early 80s. You put Andre in the ring, you get respect and instant credibility.

Undertaker was a victim of Hogan during his first title reign. Hogan pulled his politics to cause controversy to get the belt onto Flair, but Taker returned the favor by ending his return to glory in 02.

Undertaker had the highest rated stint as champion in the history of Raw, that is a fact. Sure, a lot of that had to do with the Corporate Ministry and the Higher Power storyline, but the Undertaker was the man on top at the time, and he brought in over 6.0 during that title reign. Even in 97 his title reign outdrew those of HBK and Bret Hart.

Undertaker is simply one of those guys that are bigger then the belt. His WM streak is probably worth more to alot of fans now then a title reign by a mediocre champion. If you did a poll and asked people what is more impressive, Taker's WM Streak, or Cena's 2 year title reign, Undertaker's Streak is the most impressive.

Undertaker has proven that he doesn't need the belt. He is beyond the belt. Right now though, who on Smackdown deserves the WHC. King Booker had his run. Big Dave has had it twice. Kennedy is still too green. Benoit, uh, I love Benoit, but you don't know where his head is anymore. The Undertaker will have a very lengthy title reign, simply because no one on Smackdown deserves the WHC right now.

 

[X]

You give damn good arguments as always doc, but I'm afraid I'd have to disagree with you there. Simply because he's never been given more then a few monthes with the belt doesn't say anything about his ability to draw or headline PPV's. All it says is that booking doesn't trust him or respect him enough to give him a lengthy run.

But honestly, these days title runs are so much shorter that a few month reign is about average(unless your name is John Cena).

I mean, like said above, the Undertaker was THE main heel in the company after Rock turned face after Backlash 99. And he did it better then almost anyone else. The Corporate Ministry and the Higher Power storyline to me is simply the greatest angle in the history of this sport, the only things even comparing IMO being the Hart Foundation vs. Austin feud and possibly the entire McMahon and Austin feud. Taker put on great matches too, whether it be his criminally underlooked matches with Austin in 99 at Over the Edge and Fully Loaded, or him pulling out one of my all time favorite matches that NOBODY ever gives credit to---his match with The Rock at the King of the Ring 1999. Those guys went a good thirty minutes and completely tore the house down before handing it off to Austin and the McMahon clan for a classic ladder match.

I mean...I don't really understand your point. I mean I understand it, but come on mate we're talking about the Undertaker, how is he not world champion material? Guy's a legend and he deserves much more then he's gotten at the very least.

 

[A.J.]

Haha well Xfear let me borrow a line a from Eric Bischoff, "Controversy creates cash" Well mines isnt cash but more responses lol

Back to point, i respect Taker as much as anyone and he has done a lot for our business, but i just feel that as Shocky put it he is bigger than the belt. I think he is just one of the few guys that i see that are not "World Champion "material as he put on great matches without the belt and some of his best feuds are without the belt like HIAC with HBK, and Foley.

You and shocky make grand points as he did draw it just that to me his gimmick never really carried into lengthy reigns as the man. Though some of his matches are overlook as i agree with you about Rock and Taker from KOTR 1999 awesome match. just for me Taker is one who doest need the belt thus making not "World Champion" material.

I hope this reign is a good one he deserves it, just i feel its a wee bit too late in his career to be main man of Smackdown!. Though there are not many who could be there right now.

His WM streak outweighs any of his title reigns. I respect and love Taker but his one who doesn't need the gold to be know as the man.

 

[Prax]

X, his point is that he doesn't need the championship in order to get the crowd reactions, draw crowds and put on good matches, and I agree with him there.

For the last several years the undertaker has been promoted as more of a special attraction than a main event in WWE. He doesn't need to be there every week and he doesn't need to have a feud every month in order to draw the crowds that the does. In fact, I would argue that a Champion NEEDS to be at the show every week, whether he's defending or not. I question if the Undertaker is even willing or able to be at the shows every week, on top of all the arguments that were made.

I would like to say that I like Undertaker as a champion, and I'm glad that he's getting a chance to be the top guy on Smackdown! with the championship, but my line of thinking is... if he can't take the ball and run with it by mid-summer, I don't know if I want to see him hold the title past Summerslam.

He needs to be able to be at every show and wrestle more often than not and I don't know if he can.

(btw, Dr. what are trying to be like Jake? lol)

 

[A.J.]

See Prax is getting where I'm coming from. As i said before any real lengthy reigns would have come before but hes bigger than that now. Taker is a special attraction and i just don't think he needs to be the champ to prove what he has done.

(btw, Prax i thought i let my Jake side out lol, I mean someone bash taker are you kidding me hes supposed to be untouchable lol)

 

[X]

Ahhhh, I see your point now. I thought you were insinuating that Taker wasn't good enough for the gold, but actually you're saying the exact opposite.

You make a good point there doc, as most of Taker's classic matches have been without a title involed (excluding the previously mentioned criminally overlooked match with Rock at KOTR '99 and a few others). He is bigger then the gold I suppose, much in the same way a guy like Mick Foley is bigger then the gold. He too never got his due with the title, the longest he ever held onto it I believe was about a month maybe tops. But then again, alot of Foley's best matches were title matches too: his classics with HBK at Mind Games, his feud with the Rock in late '98, early '99.

I understand where you're coming from now. But don't expect the same understanding from the newbs on the forum, I can just see the next twenty posts being people with under 10 posts writing in all caps: "WAT R U DUMB U SUK TAKER IZ DA SHIT U A *** I FUKED UR MOM HAHAHA STFU TAKER IS GOD!"

 

[Prax]

X you're wrong, it's past their bedtime, lol. But that's why I'm here, to ban them all

But you hit it right on the money... sure Taker's title feuds were good, everything the man does is fucking amazing, but he doesn't need the title for them to be amazing. In fact in my eyes it's preferable to have the title on someone else who actually needs it and have Taker feud with someone to put them over, at this stage of his career.

 

[Shocky]

The big question is Prax, who on Smackdown deserves to have the WHC. It's a very Short list. You can't put the belt on Kennedy yet, without risking him pulling an Orton and simply not be able to handle the pressure. The Undertaker is simply the best person to have the title right now, and for the forseeable future.

 

[X]

True, very true Shocky. I agree Taker is at his best usually without the belt, but he's getting real old now and he's bound to retire in the next few years. And when you see the very short list of WHC contenders on Smackdown!, I think the best choice is to go with Taker. For one thing, he can finally get the long run he has deserved his entire career. Sure he doesn't need it, but it's like a confirmation of sorts to bow out of this business as a top dog.

But Taker is at his best when he's putting people over, and that's exactly what I think he is going to be doing to Kennedy with the title. I see him holding onto the belt for most of the year, leading perhaps to Survivor Series or something like that where we'll see Kennedy cash in his MITB and be put over by Taker. Would make the most sense considering they've already had quite a few matches.

 

[rampage01]

I understand what your saying. I think that Undertaker is definitley worthy of being champion for a long period of time, even more so than Batista. But also look at the main event talent that smackdown has right now. Its not that much. Im not trying to disrespect the wrestlers there but the only main event level guys they have right now are Benoit, Kane, Booker T who is out, Undertaker and Kennedy who is getting a huge push and will be champion. Batista can't be champion forever so it makes sense for Taker to be.

 

[JSin1884]

Gentlemen, you all make very valid, well thought out points, but I can not 100 % agree with the title of this passage. The Dead man is one of the talents that has kept the WWE in top standing where it is today and is DEFINITELY owed a lengthy reign as champ! Should it have been done before when he was a little younger? Hell yeah! Can we turn back the clock? Hell no! So let the dead man enjoy this time in the #1 spot cause it is long as hell over due! He will carry SD until Kennedy is ready, no doubt about it.

 

[Prax]

The big question is Prax, who on Smackdown deserves to have the WHC. It's a very Short list. You can't put the belt on Kennedy yet, without risking him pulling an Orton and simply not be able to handle the pressure. The Undertaker is simply the best person to have the title right now, and for the forseeable future.

Touche Shocky, I can't think of someone who can carry the smackdown brand other than him, but I really would like to see Finlay win the title, just because i'm a finlay mark, lol.

Kane could do it too.

 

[Big Ace]

Well after reading some of the replies, they're all true. The Undertaker clearly doesn't need the Title. He's above it. The thing is, unlike most others, 'Taker never recieved a really fair Title reign. The guy who resembles 'Taker the most that comes to mind is HBK. Neither need the Title, but the Title needs them. In my mind, one of the reasons they gave him the Title was to make it more prestigious. That's actually quite true because when Batista held the Belt, it was a bit...Lackluster.

The Undertaker is clearly positioned as one of Wrestling's greats because he's never broken Kayfabe. The guy doesn't even show up at the HOF ceremonies. He's clearly one of the most athletic big men the WWE and Wrestling have ever seen. Like I've stated on another forum, You find me another guy who's jumped over the top rope like that who's over 300 pounds that's not Kane, you will forever get my respect. 'Taker's the most respected guy on SD and maybe 2nd most to Flair in WWE. He's been there since 1991 guys.

'Taker and HBK never left for the competition. I will always respect the hell out of them for that. 'Taker deserves this, World Title material or not. I agree with you though Doc. He's above and beyond the Title. I hope he does get his long-deserved Title reign this time. Let Kennedy build as a top heel until you give it to him. Finlay is still a little 'Eh' to the younger crowd as they've never seen him wrestle back in the day. Booker's out, We're tired of Batista. There's practically no one else. Let 'Taker fued with Kennedy again or Finlay this time. Long live this Title reign.

 

[X]

Many fine points Ace as usual mate. However there's one thing I must disagree with----Taker broke kayfabe for a good three or four years there if you remember his American Badass gimmick there. That couldn't of been any bigger of a break of kayfabe. I mean, we've been lead to believe in kayfabe that this man has grown up a loner after starting a fire that killed his parents and horribly burned his brother, Kane. Then all of a sudden over the years of his random dark magic acts(such as shuttung off lights---the horror!) the guy found time to get a hobby(motorcycles)? Not to mention he was able to find a WIFE? And you brought his wife on TV as part of a storyline?! Well hey it could be worse it's not like they would take a very well respected performer and have him act as an insane stalker----oh wait, nevermind, hello DDP!

Not to mention the breaks in kayfabe for Kane, who also apparently found time to find a girlfriend of his own in Katie Vick--albeit a dead one. I can see how Vince might've thought necrophilia would add to the evil aura of Kane...hey I mean c'mon guys this is straight from the guy who gave us such genius angles and gimmicks as the Gobbeldygooker, the Bastion Booger, Aldo Montoya, I mean this is the guy that was so smart he said, "Yeah, I know that Scott Hall and Kevin Nash left the company to go to WCW, so what? I'm just going to hire two new guys to play their characters that look nothing like either of them and I bet the fan's won't even notice!".

I can't tell you how happy I was the day when Taker came back to his original dark character. The only thing that'd make me happier would be if they turned Taker heel and had him return to his 1999 era Satanic character. Fuckin' American Badass....yeah that was a good idea, hey let's solidify his new character by having Kid Rock perform his entrance, the kids love that Kid Rock and I'm sure he'll stay in fashion and on the charts for atleast another decade!"

 

[Big Fella]

I can't tell whether or not the thread-starter meant Taker is too good for the belt, in which I'd disagree with, or, he was not good enough for the belt, in which I'd also disagree with, but I still generally agree with the majority of the post.

I'm neither a huge Taker fan nor a huge Taker basher, so I think I can easily take a very subjective view.

FACT, Undertaker's reign near the top of the card is almost as long as anybody in the game. He has nearly 2 decades of excellence, and is a future WWE HOF'er. No questions about it.

But I personally have never liked his style. I was never intrigued (even as a youngster) by the Dead Man persona, and I don't much care for Kid Rock or motorcycles. The Satanic thing did nothing for me. I've never found the guys ring work or mic work to be particularly entertaining.

One could argue that by only having one (likely 2 soon) lengthy Word Title reigns is a bit of an injustice to such a legendary career. I really wouldn't agree. Taker was always one of the top guys in the company, but never the undisputed top guy. He was never given the ball to run with the way Michaels was, Hart was, Austin was, Rock was, or the way Cena has been. That wasn't his place.

Taker was the model of consistency. A guy thrown into a feud, have the match second to last, and have no one question it's spot on the card. Taker is a guy that could wear the belt for a few months if other top dogs were injured, or if stability was needed at the top.

But whether he didn't want it, or Vince never thought he could do it, Taker was never really handed the keys to the WWE Machine.

 

[Bernkastel]

Many fine points Ace as usual mate. However there's one thing I must disagree with----Taker broke kayfabe for a good three or four years there if you remember his American Badass gimmick there. That couldn't of been any bigger of a break of kayfabe. I mean, we've been lead to believe in kayfabe that this man has grown up a loner after starting a fire that killed his parents and horribly burned his brother, Kane. Then all of a sudden over the years of his random dark magic acts(such as shuttung off lights---the horror!) the guy found time to get a hobby(motorcycles)? Not to mention he was able to find a WIFE? And you brought his wife on TV as part of a storyline?! Well hey it could be worse it's not like they would take a very well respected performer and have him act as an insane stalker----oh wait, nevermind, hello DDP!

Not to mention the breaks in kayfabe for Kane, who also apparently found time to find a girlfriend of his own in Katie Vick--albeit a dead one. I can see how Vince might've thought necrophilia would add to the evil aura of Kane...hey I mean c'mon guys this is straight from the guy who gave us such genius angles and gimmicks as the Gobbeldygooker, the Bastion Booger, Aldo Montoya, I mean this is the guy that was so smart he said, "Yeah, I know that Scott Hall and Kevin Nash left the company to go to WCW, so what? I'm just going to hire two new guys to play their characters that look nothing like either of them and I bet the fan's won't even notice!".

I can't tell you how happy I was the day when Taker came back to his original dark character. The only thing that'd make me happier would be if they turned Taker heel and had him return to his 1999 era Satanic character. Fuckin' American Badass....yeah that was a good idea, hey let's solidify his new character by having Kid Rock perform his entrance, the kids love that Kid Rock and I'm sure he'll stay in fashion and on the charts for atleast another decade!"

Um actually XFear, if you follow the Kane story, Katie Vick happened when he was a teenager, HHH just brought up the fact that kane had killed her in a car accident when he was younger. There was no break in kayfabe.

As for Taker and the Title, I agree, Taker is much bigger than the title. The fact that he is 15-0 at wrestlemania proves that he never did and still doesn't need a title to get over.

 

[reddevil69]

undertaker was not given the title from 1990-1997 for a considerable length of time because of his gimmick, not because of a lack of confidence in his ability...WWF was geared toward kids at the time and in the wake of the steroid scandal the last thing the company needed was to have a demonic, evil, dark character with 'satanic' tones as the flagship of the company....no parent wanted their 10yr old hanging posters of a guy that stole your soul and buried you alive on the wall....open up an issue of WWF magazine from that era and look at the merchandise they were producing....he deserves the title in 2007, his popularity is arguably at it's peak...go to the WWE shopzone...they have a commerative shirt for his victory over Batista at WM 23...when was the last time they made a shirt for someones victory at Wrestlemania?...they don't produce these shirts because they don't sell, they do it because they know there is a market for them....'Taker draws money and he deserves to be in the main event positon period...Vince McMahon is in this business to make money, not to lose money....'Taker draws more money in the main event slot than Batista, Booker or Kennedy, and for that matter Cena or Michaels....i haven't heard anyone boo 'Taker but i've heard alot of boos for Cena lately and this past monday in London, there were boos for Michaels as well.....people want to see Undertaker and they want see him in main event matches that mean something...he will give the World Heavyweight Title some much needed credibilty in the wake of Batista's lame run with it .....

 

[RikRaines]

Here this video says it all. It was a character shoot from 1998 with the Undertaker. Granted it is all scripted being a character shoot, but it basically Undertaker talking about his WWE role through out the years ;p

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUDw_vxT40E

 

[Stevie78]

There's a lot of interesting points been made on both sides here, but I have to agree with what Big Ace said earlier. Don't you think that the WHC has lost quite a bit of its prestige over recent months with Batista at the helm? I'm not really knocking Batista but I don't think that he's been anywhere near the top of his game since he came back from surgery, and since he's been champ this has reflected badly on the belt (others I know would argue that he's NEVER been top of his game, but that's for a different discussion!).

I see the move of putting the belt on Taker as twofold. Firstly, he does deserve a decent run as acknowledgement of his achievements. Whether he needs it or not is irrelevant, a final - decent length - run gives a public acknowledgement of what he' done for the company. Secondly, and I think FAR more importantly, who better to restore both the reputation and the prestige of the WHC after Batista's run?

 

[souldaddy81]

Undertaker is part of a group of wrestlers i like to call ATW's- All Terrain Wrestlers. They can be part of any angle or match, and still make it good. (other ATW's are HHH, HBK, Austin, Rock, Angle, Benoit, Edge, RVD, Flair, Sting, and AJ Styles) Whether its for a World title, or a grudge match or tag team about, it doesnt matter, he's that good. If you take a look at alot of Undertakers most memorable matches, they werent for titles.......

-Hell In A Cell vs Shawn Micheals
-Hell In A Cell vs Mankind
-Inferno match vs Kane
-BoilerRoom Brawl vs Mankind
-grudge match vs HHH as WM 17
........these were all great matches, but then again, take a look the matches where either he was champ, or he was going after the belt.......

vs The Rock vs Kurt Angle at Vengeance
vs Kurt Angle at No Way Out
vs Batista at WM 23
vs Stone Cold at SummerSlam 98
Hell in A Cell vs Brock Lesnar
..................... See, so I think it doesnt really matter. Wanna know why it doesnt seem like 'Taker is such a great champ? Look who he has to work with on Smackdown. This is the late 90's and early 2000's where you had HHH, Austin, Rock, and Angle. So think about that as well. He's a great champion, but more importantly, he's a great wrestler!

 

[A.J.]

Just to make my case again i am not knocking the Undertaker at all as all I'm saying is he is beyond the belt and being so hes not "World Champion" material. I hope they do give him a long title run, but i feel its almost pointless now for taker as he is beyond it.

Sad thing for Taker is he was in era where he wasn't the guy that people bought stuff from so the writers didn't put him in all the main events or main storylines. though he has been in some like the corporate minstery.

Just the dead man was caught up in the Hogan era, HBK/Bret Era, Austin era so he was never properly giving a lengthy run as the man just once in 97. All i'm trying to say he deserved another run before this as now he is one of only few men that are bigger than the belt.

 

[reddevil69]

Just to make my case again i am not knocking the Undertaker at all as all I'm saying is he is beyond the belt and being so hes not "World Champion" material. I hope they do give him a long title run, but i feel its almost pointless now for taker as he is beyond it.

Sad thing for Taker is he was in era where he wasn't the guy that people bought stuff from so the writers didn't put him in all the main events or main storylines. though he has been in some like the corporate minstery.

Just the dead man was caught up in the Hogan era, HBK/Bret Era, Austin era so he was never properly giving a lengthy run as the man just once in 97. All i'm trying to say he deserved another run before this as now he is one of only few men that are bigger than the belt.

I agree with you...'Taker is bigger than the title, but that is the main reason why the belt needs to be on him right now....WWE needs a credible perfromer that can bridge the gap between the new generation of fans and the older fans...the over 30 crowd respects him because of his longevity and because they've watched him perform for 17yrs and he represents the old school toughness that many of the 80's early 90's era wrestlers had....the younger fans in their teens and even younger kids like him because he's cool and there is no one else like him in the company....Cena is booed regularly by older fans and Batista is not respected by anyone who knows anything about work-rate....Taker and Michaels are probably the only two performers right now that are unanimously "over" with the entire demographic that watches wrestling.....the Champ needs to be viewed as the ultimate performer in the company period and right now there is no one that fills that role more so than Undertaker....and as a side note: Undertaker consistently sold more merchandise than both Bret Hart and HBK during the 1990's.....key word:"consistently"...i'm not talking about having a hot couple of months every year....

 

[Monkey_Mania]

I totally agree. Undertaker is at his best without the title. I mean look at some of the matches he's had with a title, i cant remember any. Now look at the matches he had without the title or in an attempt to get it.

Angle vs. Taker-No Way Out 06'
Mankind vs. Taker-Hell in a Cell
Taker vs. Kane-Inferno Match
Taker vs. HBK-Hell in a Cell
Taker vs. HHH-Wrestlemania 17

Plus many others i just do't have time to post them all.

I don't mean to say that Taker' isn't "championship material" but like everyone else has said he is simply bigger than the title itself

 

[LilNaitch2009]

I think everyone should check out the video that RikRaines posted. The first part of it really sums up the stigma Undertaker has faced during his career. Vince has always used him to clean up the messes he makes with some of his ridiculous gimmicks. The first one that comes to mind is Giant Gonzalez. Vince thought it would be a great idea to bring in a humongous guy who couldn't wrestle worth a hill of beans and have him compete. (sound like anyone we're seeing these days?) When things turned choppy, he brought in Undertaker to finish him off at Wrestlemania 9 and basically get rid of the problem. Once Undertaker cleaned up all of Vince's problems, maybe he'd throw him a bone and let him have the title for a bit. But, even through all of those things, he's consistently been one of the most popular guys in the business. Whether he was a monster heel during the Ministry days or the face that he's become now, people still love the guy. He consistently sells boatloads of merchendise and continues to be a huge draw. In my opinion, he's gained the type of reputation that Ric Flair has. He may be slowing down and losing some of that ability that he may have had before, but, my God, its the Undertaker. You just want to see him perform. Is Ric Flair in bad shape nowadays? Of course he is, but when he gets in the ring, he brings in all of that history, all of that experience, all of that dedication and commitment that just makes you fall in love with the guy and everything that he's done for the business. I think that's the same thing that's happening with the Undertaker now. Does he need the belt to be the man? No. But it certainly is an added bonus to see him walk down the aisle with gold around his waist.