Wrestling Forum banner

41 - 60 of 96 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
157 Posts
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.
In the Road to Wrestlemania 28 and 29, Taker's segment were the highest rated segments of the show, even higher than Rock's

When Taker and The Rock were in the same show, Taker's segments used to draw more ratings than The Rock's segments, this is a fact.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,426 Posts
Both huge stars obviously, but if you asked Taker, I really don’t think he’d put himself above The Rock.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
Discussion Starter #44
Both huge stars obviously, but if you asked Taker, I really don’t think he’d put himself above The Rock.
He lately said in interview that going to Hollywood and becoming a movie star would be betrayal to wrestling for him, so... old-school mentality that he has, I'm pretty sure he puts himself above than Rocky
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
Discussion Starter #45
In the Road to Wrestlemania 28 and 29, Taker's segment were the highest rated segments of the show, even higher than Rock's

When Taker and The Rock were in the same show, Taker's segments used to draw more ratings than The Rock's segments, this is a fact.
Once in a life time > Twice in a life time > End of an Era > Punk match

(not in terms of in-ring work, but there's a reason why Rocks matches were main-events)
 

·
I know I'm dope, but don't wet that.
Joined
·
13,762 Posts
He lately said in interview that going to Hollywood and becoming a movie star would be betrayal to wrestling for him, so... old-school mentality that he has, I'm pretty sure he puts himself above than Rocky
Wonder what he told hhh then hhh did that flip blade 3.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,027 Posts
I would consider his Wrestlemania match with Kane, as well as the Hell in a Cell match with Mankind to be big money matches.



WCW was hardly a local wrestling company by the time they got Hogan. But I do agree.



Okay? Good for him. Andre was still a bigger draw than him.
Wrestlemania 14 would have anywhere between 6 and 9 buys if Taker Kane headlined it. That was a #2 storyline all of the way. A strong #2 but people pay for the main event.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
105 Posts
Anyone who watched back in the day when the Rock was at his peak knows this is an easy question to answer. Taker has always been a good solid main event backbone, and in terms of longevity then he's miles ahead of the Rock. But when the Rock was there and at his peak, he almost dwarfed everyone else, including Taker. Hogan, Rock and Austin are in a league of their own in terms of pure stardom.
 

·
Greek God of Knowledge
Joined
·
7,298 Posts
You're confusing title match with main event as did WWE. Not always the same. The fact that no one cared about Jericho v HHH while Rock v Hogan had a once in a lifetime crowd says it all. That was the main event that year.
I'm not confusing anything at all here. For a lot of people, Kane vs Undertaker was the biggest match of that card heading into the event. This isn't to say that more weren't invested in Austin vs Michaels. They absolutely were. But your logic doesn't work here and its for the very reason I listed.

HHH vs Jericho was the title match, and thus was most likely going to main event. At that point, the world title match not main eventing Wrestlemania only happened twice, so fans were more than likely expecting HHH/Jericho to headline the event (even though I absolutely 100% agree that it shouldn't have).

Not to mention, even if Kane vs Undertaker did end up headlining that show, Austin vs HBK still would have happened. Austin was still a rising star at that point. Fans were going to pay to watch it. So this idea that Kane/Taker would have resulted in the number you suggested is laughable.. There is nothing you can give me that would suggest that to be the case.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,027 Posts
I'm not confusing anything at all here. For a lot of people, Kane vs Undertaker was the biggest match of that card heading into the event. This isn't to say that more weren't invested in Austin vs Michaels. They absolutely were. But your logic doesn't work here and its for the very reason I listed.

HHH vs Jericho was the title match, and thus was most likely going to main event. At that point, the world title match not main eventing Wrestlemania only happened twice, so fans were more than likely expecting HHH/Jericho to headline the event (even though I absolutely 100% agree that it shouldn't have).

Not to mention, even if Kane vs Undertaker did end up headlining that show, Austin vs HBK still would have happened. Austin was still a rising star at that point. Fans were going to pay to watch it. So this idea that Kane/Taker would have resulted in the number you suggested is laughable.. There is nothing you can give me that would suggest that to be the case.
I'm not confusing anything at all here. For a lot of people, Kane vs Undertaker was the biggest match of that card heading into the event. This isn't to say that more weren't invested in Austin vs Michaels. They absolutely were. But your logic doesn't work here and its for the very reason I listed.

HHH vs Jericho was the title match, and thus was most likely going to main event. At that point, the world title match not main eventing Wrestlemania only happened twice, so fans were more than likely expecting HHH/Jericho to headline the event (even though I absolutely 100% agree that it shouldn't have).

Not to mention, even if Kane vs Undertaker did end up headlining that show, Austin vs HBK still would have happened. Austin was still a rising star at that point. Fans were going to pay to watch it. So this idea that Kane/Taker would have resulted in the number you suggested is laughable.. There is nothing you can give me that would suggest that to be the case.
No, my logic works perfectly. Go back and look at the promotional material and you'll see what the draw was. I can with a straight face tell you that the Rock vs Hollywood Hogan was a bigger match than Jericho v HHH. You know that to be the case too. Just because WWE had HHH and Jericho close the show means nothing. Rock was leaving to film movie immediately following WM/ closing with HHH was the proper call. You can't even begin to suggest that Undertaker vs Kane was bigger than Austin vs Michaels with Mike Tyson as ref though.

It was not the draw of 14, nowhere to close to it, if by a lot of people you mean 6-9 sure I agree with you otherwise nah. And yes that # is for jokes but Taker vs Kane as the main event wouldn't pull anything big. It's a #2 match all the way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,885 Posts
That doesn't mean they aren't big money matches... and Undertaker vs Mankind was absolutely the main attraction for that show.
Dude, non of these matches is an all time big money matches. They weren't even the main attraction for those event. Taker/Mankind might've stole the show, but Austin/Kane was definitely the main-event, that's not even debatable.

Taker wrestled Foley and Kane countless times, yet I don't remember Taker ever main-evening a single PPV with either one of these guys, why? because they're not big money matches.
 

·
Greek God of Knowledge
Joined
·
7,298 Posts
No, my logic works perfectly. Go back and look at the promotional material and you'll see what the draw was. I can with a straight face tell you that the Rock vs Hollywood Hogan was a bigger match than Jericho v HHH.
It absolutely was the bigger match. No one in their right mind would argue otherwise. I'm just making the point that the main event match is not always going to be the only match that people care about.

Just because WWE had HHH and Jericho close the show means nothing. Rock was leaving to film movie immediately following WM/ closing with HHH was the proper call. You can't even begin to suggest that Undertaker vs Kane was bigger than Austin vs Michaels with Mike Tyson as ref though.
Of course it wasn't bigger, but lets not sit here and pretend like no one gave a shit about it.

It was not the draw of 14, nowhere to close to it, if by a lot of people you mean 6-9 sure I agree with you otherwise nah. And yes that # is for jokes but Taker vs Kane as the main event wouldn't pull anything big. It's a #2 match all the way.
A number 2 match being the main event of the show as supposed to the clear number one isn't going to result in the numbers being nearly as drastic as you suggested, because once again almost no Wrestlemania back then was a one match show.

Dude, non of these matches is an all time big money matches.
Where did I state that it was an all time big money match?

They weren't even the main attraction for those event. Taker/Mankind might've stole the show, but Austin/Kane was definitely the main-event, that's not even debatable.
Main event does not = biggest attraction. And at the time, that match was most definitely being promoted as the biggest match on the show.

Taker wrestled Foley and Kane countless times, yet I don't remember Taker ever main-evening a single PPV with either one of these guys, why? because they're not big money matches.
This is such an incredibly flawed argument that I'm considering just not further discussing this with you, but I'll play along anyways.

First off, Taker actually has main evented a PPV with Kane before.

Second, Mankind and Kane have both main evented PPV's in the past with different opponents. At the time it was all about whether or not you were in the WWF title picture. If you were, you were main eventing. Your logic is entirely based on circumstances.

Third, going by your logic, as I stated to the other person, HHH/Jericho was the true attraction at Wrestlemania 18 because it was the main event, not Hogan/Rock. See why that logic doesn't work?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,027 Posts
You just conceded the point when you said Rock v Hogan was bigger than HHH v Jericho and Austin v Michaels was bigger than Taker v Kane

You're just wrong that people care about the undercard. That's not how ppv's work back then. Today I think it's different and people are used to stack cards but going back to the 90's I've watched hundreds of boxings cards not one time could I tell you what a 2nd match on the card was. The poster, the advertised match, the main event is what sells it to 9/10 people back then. At WM that was Rock v Hogan even though it didn't close the show due to circumstantial reasoning.

I concede the 6 to 9 figure was a joke but the facts are Taker v Kane isn't big enough to sell a Mania and would never come near the main event. It is an undercard match with no real drawing power. It could struggle to main event a b ppv and that's it. Taker v Mankind Hell in a Cell at least has the cell as a selling point. It wasn't the main event but it could main event. Not WM but King of the Ring sure. Still not a big $ match though and proof of Taker being a big draw like you suggested.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,885 Posts
First off, Taker actually has main evented a PPV with Kane before.
Them two going against each other? When?


Second, Mankind and Kane have both main evented PPV's in the past with different opponents. At the time it was all about whether or not you were in the WWF title picture. If you were, you were main eventing. Your logic is entirely based on circumstances.
....but did they main-event against Taker?? That's the argument.


Beside Survivor Series, every Austin PPV match in 1998 was the main event, regardless of where that match is placed. Saying that Kane/Taker was the true main-event of WM 14 is straight up lunacy. You think they payed Tyson a shitload of money just to put him in a secondary program???...


Third, going by your logic, as I stated to the other person, HHH/Jericho was the true attraction at Wrestlemania 18 because it was the main event, not Hogan/Rock. See why that logic doesn't work?
Again, I've never said anything about whos closing the show.
 

·
Greek God of Knowledge
Joined
·
7,298 Posts
Them two going against each other? When?
Hell in a Cell 2010

....but did they main-event against Taker?? That's the argument.
No it's not. The argument is whether the matches themselves were big money matches. You seem to be under the impression that unless the match was in the main event, it wasn't a draw, which is laughable.

Beside Survivor Series, every Austin PPV match in 1998 was the main event, regardless of where that match is placed. Saying that Kane/Taker was the true main-event of WM 14 is straight up lunacy. You think they payed Tyson a shitload of money just to put him in a secondary program???...
Where did I ever state that Kane/Taker was the true main event of WM 14? I'll wait.

Again, I've never said anything about whos closing the show.
Your exact reply to Taker/Mankind was "it might have stole the show, but it wasn't the main event". What do you think main event means?
 
41 - 60 of 96 Posts
Top