sage
AC Slater
Posts: 238
|
Post by sage on Mar 9, 2009 2:10:06 GMT -5
Taker always strikes me as the most kayfabe character. As this is also about Flair, case and point was when he came out to pay his respects after Raw had gone off air. What I find sad for Calloway, is due to the death connotations of his character, he is never (at least I have never seen him) appear on any WWE tribute programme to any wrestler that passed, which must be hard from his as the avowed 'locker room leader'. damn, that is sad. They should just let him take part in those as Mark Caloway, out of costume and out of character. D:
|
|
|
Post by D2: Sweet & Sour Edition on Mar 9, 2009 2:53:28 GMT -5
Kane should retire him. After the match, Kane should take off his ring gear, burn it all in a metal trash can, then give him a suit. After that he'll absorb The Undertaker's powers. This.
|
|
|
Post by squaredcircle on Mar 9, 2009 7:57:20 GMT -5
I'd say Undertaker meant more to WWE and wrestling as a whole, because WWE is american wrestling. Flair made his name wrestling in the 2nd tier companies while the Undertaker has always been main event at the big show. wtf? Flair made his name wrestling for the NWA, arguably the biggest promotion of its time. the NWA was nationwide. WWWF was the northeast exclusively. Flair had to wrestle everyone. one shouldn't make such absurd statements. Mark Callaway has been a great performer. But I'm not a big fan of the UT gimmick, mainly because I'm not a fan of the WWF cartoon style. I like the idea posted on page 1 of his final tribute - Taker wins, house goes dark , Taker is gone.
|
|
randomranter
Dennis Stamp
When you grow up....... YOU'RE GONNA BE WROOOOOONG!!!!
Posts: 4,804
|
Post by randomranter on Mar 9, 2009 8:13:47 GMT -5
I'd say Undertaker meant more to WWE and wrestling as a whole, because WWE is american wrestling. Flair made his name wrestling in the 2nd tier companies while the Undertaker has always been main event at the big show. wtf? Flair made his name wrestling for the NWA, arguably the biggest promotion of its time. the NWA was nationwide. WWWF was the northeast exclusively. Flair had to wrestle everyone. And exactly why would this have anything to do with whether or not Flair was important to the WWE? Your personal likes or dislikes have nothing to do with the fact that UT has been far, far more important to the WWE than Flair ever has. I actually picture that he's going to go out in this way, or something similar. UT likes to keep things "in character" as much as possible -- he doesn't even show up on-screen at tribute shows, and his Flair tribute was done off-air. I don't picture him getting some kind of grand Flair-like sendoff for precisely this reason. He'll get something that fits his character, even if it's not "flashy". But to get back on topic, I'll echo what other people have said: Flair's career was more important to professional wrestling as a whole, but UT's career was more important to the WWF/E.
|
|
Bo Rida
Fry's dog Seymour
Pulled one over on everyone. Got away with it, this time.
Posts: 23,545
Member is Online
|
Post by Bo Rida on Mar 9, 2009 8:18:08 GMT -5
Yes, I think there will be a huge hole once he's gone, the basic formula of his feuds has been a major part of WWE for so long it won't be the same without him. Flair's position can be filled to a degree but I don't think anybody can successfully replace the Undertaker, I think Kane was the only chance they'll ever have.
I have no idea what they can do for his sendoff. A Flair esque retirement would seem out of place and nobody would beleive a kayfabe death is for good as his shtick often involves him being killed/banished only to come back and exact his revenge.
|
|
|
Post by squaredcircle on Mar 9, 2009 8:43:30 GMT -5
And exactly why would this have anything to do with whether or not Flair was important to the WWE? Your personal likes or dislikes have nothing to do with the fact that UT has been far, far more important to the WWE than Flair ever has. relax, random. i agree with you. UT was much more important/influential to the E than Flair. I'm not a fan, but I recognize that. the poster i quoted posited that UT was more important to wrestling because Flair wrestled for a second tier promotion. i would not call the 70s and 80s NWA second tier.
|
|
SAJ Forth
Wade Wilson
Jamaican WCF Crazy!
Half Man-Half Amazing
Posts: 27,214
|
Post by SAJ Forth on Mar 9, 2009 9:01:33 GMT -5
I'm beginning to wonder whether Taker will ever really retire in a finalised way, or he'll just gradually wind down his caeer towards only making sporadic appearances until it's not feasible for him to wreslte anymore. I think that's how they might do it. Undertaker means more because, as many have said, he was built up in house. Flair had already been built into main event status when he arrived, Undertaker has been seen evolving over the last 18 years of his run.
|
|
|
Post by therealmamamiller on Mar 9, 2009 11:36:28 GMT -5
Yes, Taker means more to the WWE than Flair. Although Flair's first run with the WWE was decent it was pretty short lived and I don't think the fans were really all that in to him. His second stint was basically that of an old man no longer in his prime. Now I still think Flair is a legend but really by the time he came to WWE even the first time he wasn't really in his prime. Oddly with Taker I think he's really improved with age and his loyalty to the organization and its true fans puts him in a class above Flair's .
|
|
Professor Chaos
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Bringer of Destruction and Maker of Doom
Posts: 16,332
|
Post by Professor Chaos on Mar 9, 2009 13:46:56 GMT -5
In terms of WWE yes Undertaker >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than Flair. If you're talking WCW then Flair of course is superior to Mean Mark.
|
|