Joined
·
72 Posts
and vice-versa?
Do you think that Undertaker consider himself bigger star than Rock
1 - 20 of 96 Posts
Joined
·
34 Posts
They were both mega stars in their own right. Rock just happened to branch out into Hollywood, and it's benefited him tremendously. On the other hand, Taker had the greatest wrestling gimmick in history. I don't think there's any heat between the two for who was more of star then the other.
No he's a more memorable and respected gimmick but no way is he a bigger Superstar than Rocky.
Joined
·
72 Posts
But... isn't it that gimmick made Taker over? Rock did it on his own, i mean one can became megastar because longevity and one because of talent.
Joined
·
72 Posts
Rock was already the biggest (most popular) star in pro-wrestling at this point (2004).
Yeah... there's no heat, but for some reason relationship between these two always intrigues me. WWE seems to kind of "protecting" them from each other since Rock return in 2011, i mean there was no confrontation, no segment... fans would be split.
Another interesting (kind of similar) relaionship was between Thesz and Flair i think.
Joined
·
825 Posts
Undertaker is no where near the rock
Joined
·
4,752 Posts
No
Joined
·
158 Posts
So you're implying that it was easier for Taker to get over than The Rock? I couldn't disagree more with you
The Rock had freedom on the mic, he could say whatever he wanted, so I think it was easier for him to get over, because he didn't have the restrictions that Taker had.
Undertaker had to act like a dark, mysterious men, he couldn't do whatever he wanted, he had to make people believe he's a deadman with the way he moved, they way he talked, his facial expressions... so for that I give more credit to Taker.
Joined
·
17,869 Posts
You’d have to ask him. Has he ever given any indication that he does? I’d guess he doesn’t. As for Rock, he probably knows how big of a star he is and that he’s a bigger star than Taker, but I think he has too much respect for Taker to ever say it.
It’s two of the biggest stars in wrestling. One of them though is a mega star and the clear bigger one.
It’s two of the biggest stars in wrestling. One of them though is a mega star and the clear bigger one.
Joined
·
2,302 Posts
There's a legitimate argument that he's a bigger star in wrestling, it just depends how you measure it. He's had more great matches, main evented more, been a star for longer, drawn more money. The Rock's peak was obviously much higher though, and he only left because he transcended the industry.
Joined
·
72 Posts
But Taker never had match like Rock-Hogan at WM X-8.
Joined
·
72 Posts
IIRC in the thread about Undertaker being in Rock's Mt.Rushmore there was a similar post (maybe yours?) but yeah question is then in which tier Taker sees himself? Obviously not in Hogans one but maybe above HBK-HHH...
Taker was always the guy that worked with THE guy. He was never the main draw at any point in his career. No offense to the mans talent and dedication, but if were talking pure star power, Undertaker was never treated as the top star in any era. He was always behind at least 2-3 other guys.
The Rock became the second biggest, arguably biggest, star of WWE's hottest era since Hogans prime, and the proceeded to have huge sucess in hollywood.
The Rock drew more fans, made more money and has far more mainstream recognition than Taker, even before his movie career took off. I honestly don't see how theres anything to discuss.
The Rock became the second biggest, arguably biggest, star of WWE's hottest era since Hogans prime, and the proceeded to have huge sucess in hollywood.
The Rock drew more fans, made more money and has far more mainstream recognition than Taker, even before his movie career took off. I honestly don't see how theres anything to discuss.
Joined
·
72 Posts
There's the WWE propaganda that presents Austin as the greatest superstar ever (it's Hogan obcjectively speaking) and Taker as the greatest legend ever (it's also Hogan).
Like you said, technically, Rock made more money for the company, but what makes him bigger star is that he is just so much more talented.
Joined
·
17,869 Posts
Thing is, the way Taker speaks about HBK and Triple H, it always seems like he would put them above himself. So if he puts Rock in that category, based off what I interpret, I'd say he definitely thinks Rock is bigger than himself.
(Now Rock is also much bigger than HBK and HHH, but we're just talking Taker's thoughts here).
Joined
·
3,799 Posts
The thread is called "Do you think Undertaker consider himself (a) bigger star than The Rock", not "Do you consider Undertaker a bigger star than the Rock?". But for some reason it had to devolve into that. Sad.
Joined
·
7,318 Posts
???
His matches with Shawn Michaels alone eclipse Hogan/Rock and it's not up for debate. And I can think of a lot of other matches that surpass that from a quality standpoint. And then there's his Hell in a Cell match with Mankind, which is one of the most popular matches of all time.
So I'm not really sure what you're saying with this statement. Are you saying he's never had a match better than that one? If so that's a load of shit. And if you're saying he's never had a match on par with it from a popularity standpoint, then I once again have to point out that's a load of shit.
Austin being presented as their greatest star ever isn't propaganda. An argument can absolutely be made that he was. He was the top guy during arguably their biggest peak (the Atititude Era) and was directly responsible for some of their greatest matches and moments of all time. Hogan can't sit there and claim he was part of some of the greatest matches in WWF/E history, because he wasn't. I take nothing away from what Hulk Hogan did in fact accomplish, but saying that Austin is the greatest wrestler in WWE history is just WWE propaganda is absolute nonsense.
Ric Flair and Andre the Giant are easily up there with the Rock as far as star power in wrestling is concerned.
1 - 20 of 96 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!