Memorial to the Undertaker

[pinksparklepuff]

Apr 10, 2014 17:26:38 GMT -5 BaneTheDestroyer said:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_WWE_United_States_Champions

Try telling me that there aren't plenty of times that the U.S. Championship wasn't relevant. If you try to, you'll be wrong.

When Orlando Jordan held it.
But it regained relevance when Benoit won it in record time.


Undertaker hasn't retired yet.

[ethanm1834]

As noted, Undertaker was legitimately hospitalized with a severe concussion sustained in his WrestleMania XXX match with Brock Lesnar. Undertaker was released on Monday, however, and was actually backstage at RAW. For whatever reason, the decision was made not to use him on the show.

Those who saw Undertaker backstage at RAW noted that he was limping around pretty badly, and appeared to be in rough shape.

Regarding the decision to end Undertaker’s streak at WrestleMania, there is said to be a number of people in the company who were very unhappy about that decision, but couldn’t — and won’t — say anything about it publicly.

The decision was reportedly made by Vince McMahon, not Undertaker himself. There are conflicting reports regarding the call. Some “in the know” claim that McMahon had to talk Undertaker into it, while others, also “in the know,” say McMahon made the call and Undertaker simply went with it.(Credit: Wrestling Observer Newsletter)

Just FYI.

[miketheratguy]

Apr 10, 2014 17:33:21 GMT -5 BaneTheDestroyer said:

Apr 10, 2014 17:32:10 GMT -5 miketheratguy said:

OT: So did Undertaker actually retire on RAW then, or what?

No idea. Hopefully, but after him saying he doesn't think he's done, I'm going to assume not, lol.

He said that he doesn't- you mean, he said this after WM30? Oh for fuck's sake.

[BaneTheDestroyer]

Apr 10, 2014 18:06:48 GMT -5 miketheratguy said:

Apr 10, 2014 17:33:21 GMT -5 BaneTheDestroyer said:

No idea. Hopefully, but after him saying he doesn't think he's done, I'm going to assume not, lol.

He said that he doesn't- you mean, he said this after WM30? Oh for fuck's sake.

According to dirtsheets, he said (the day after the articles were all posted) that he doesn't think he's done. Apparently Sting and Taker may happen at WM 31 if they get Sting to sign. Despite Taker's no longer relevance to the ppv.

[BaneTheDestroyer]

Quite possibly the least built-up Undertaker WrestleMania match of all time. Very little hype. Very little storytelling. No emotion before the match or during the match itself.

Brock Lesnar, a PART-TIME WWE performer who, at least from what I've gathered over the years, could care less about WWE or the wrestling industry and doesn't have very much respect for The Undertaker himself. And not just the Undertaker gimmick, but the man behind the character, Mark Calaway. Mark Calaway is widely regarded as being one of the most, if not THE most, respected individual of all time behind the scenes. He's considered to be a lockerroom leader. Brock Lesnar doesn't seem to have very much respect for Mark Calaway, at least from what I understand. It's been my understanding over the past number of years, especially when Lesnar was doing his UFC fighting, that Lesnar just simply doesn't respect or care about the professional wrestling business. It always seemed to me like the only reason why he wanted to come back to WWE was for one thing: the money.

Of all people who could have ended The Undertaker's WrestleMania Streak, it was Brock Lesnar. Now I'm sure that this had to have been up to Undertaker/Mark Calaway himself, but why he would give this honor to Brock Lesnar is beyond me. I don't get it. I don't understand it. And I never will.

I've often told people that The Undertaker is my favorite professional wrestler of all time. He was the very first wrestler that I ever remember seeing when I was very young, maybe three years old. I can't even remember anything about the first time I saw him other than watching him make his entrance on television. As I got a little older, I fell in love with the Undertaker gimmick. When I was seven years old in 1999, I thought that The Undertaker and his Ministry of Darkness was just the coolest thing ever, and when they joined forces with The Corporation to form The Corporate Ministry... I loved it. The Undertaker has always been my favorite wrestler of all time, and his WrestleMania Streak meant a lot to me.

For me personally, The Undertaker's WrestleMania Streak wasn't just about The Undertaker. To me, the Streak represented wrestling's past. Everybody always says, "Oh, wrestling was so much better back in the day." I don't like to bitch and say that kind of stuff, but I definitely feel that it's important to pay tribute to wrestling's past, and indeed, that magical period of time from the 1980's until approximately 2001.

I was born in 1991, so I was a child of the 90's. That was my era. But I also like to watch stuff from the 80's and even before the 80's. To me, The Undertaker - both his Streak and the character itself - represented that last... thing... from wrestling's past. That last... reminder... of how things used to be.

I'll even go as far as to say that The Undertaker's Streak may have been the last real "thing" left in wrestling. The Championships don't really mean much anymore. Wins and losses don't seem to mean anything anymore. Nothing seems to really matter anymore... except for The Undertaker's WrestleMania Streak. And now that's all over.

Who ended the Streak? Brock Lesnar. A guy who left WWE in the prime of his career in 2004 after WWE put the time and effort into building him up. He leaves WWE to go tryout for the NFL and failed, and so then he gets into mixed martial arts fighting. When he gets into MMA, he says things like, "I'm not a phony, fake wrestler." "I'm not doing that fake stuff anymore." Lesnar disrespects the business that turned him into a star. He would also go on to say disrespectful things about Mark "The Undertaker" Calaway in interviews after a now infamous confrontation between the two at a UFC show after one of Lesnar's fights.

Brock Lesnar has ended The Undertaker's Streak. A part-timer who doesn't seem to respect or care about wrestling and only came back to WWE for the money, has now destroyed a big part of WWE and pro wrestling's past.

As for the match itself... I guess the match itself made sense. It was a rather pathetic performance and the story that they told in the match was that The Undertaker is simply too old and too tired and he just couldn't compete against a physical specimen with the background of Brock Lesnar. The match itself made sense, but having a human being like Lesnar end the Streak did not make sense. Hell, I would have rather seen John Cena end it. Not Brock Lesnar.

And to add insult to injury, like I said earlier, there wasn't any emotion in this match. There was no Jim Ross on commentary and the commentary team almost didn't seem very surprised that Undertaker lost. In fact, after it was over, they almost didn't seem to care. After it was over, we got THE DIVAS MATCH. The greatest undefeated Streak in pro wrestling history just came to an end, and immediately afterwards, we get THE DIVAS MATCH. THE DIVAS MATCH CAME AFTER THE UNDERTAKER JUST LOST!!!!!!!!!!..........

[SoonDragon67]

Apr 10, 2014 17:37:17 GMT -5 BaneTheDestroyer said:

Apr 10, 2014 17:33:23 GMT -5 SoonDragon67 said:

Give me a specific example. Don't give me a wikipedia list of every United States Champion.

Well, let's give you a list:

Miz
Miz again
Benjamin
MVP
Benoit
Cena
Cena again
Eddie
Booker T



Annnnnnd so on. I stopped going through them because I was bored. That's also not including ones that I don't know about at all.

I'm going to look into each of these title reigns more in depth before I give reply. However Miz's title reigns were definitely irrelevant. Hell the first reign was all about how he had both it and the tag titles at the same time. That's about it minus his feud with MVP. After he lost the tag titles the US title was ripped off of him faster than you could say "What the hell just happened?"

His second title reign was even worse.

[SoonDragon67]

Apr 10, 2014 17:39:53 GMT -5 BaneTheDestroyer said:

And here are a list of times when the World Heavyweight championship was irrelevant:

Orton (yes, he was made to be quite irrelevant)
Cena
Del Rio
Bryan
Christian
Ziggler
Mysterio


Once again, stopping early.

This was about the WWE Championship, not the WHC. Your argument here is in no way relevant.

[BaneTheDestroyer]

Apr 10, 2014 18:21:58 GMT -5 SoonDragon67 said:

Apr 10, 2014 17:37:17 GMT -5 BaneTheDestroyer said:

Well, let's give you a list:

Miz
Miz again
Benjamin
MVP
Benoit
Cena
Cena again
Eddie
Booker T



Annnnnnd so on. I stopped going through them because I was bored. That's also not including ones that I don't know about at all.

I'm going to look into each of these title reigns more in depth before I give reply. However Miz's title reigns were definitely irrelevant. Hell the first reign was all about how he had both it and the tag titles at the same time. That's about it minus his feud with MVP. After he lost the tag titles the US title was ripped off of him faster than you could say "What the hell just happened?"

His second title reign was even worse.

You're wrong. Just....wrong. Though, I will admit that I only put the two Miz reigns there because I didn't know which was which (same with Cena). Only one of both of those belong there to my knowledge. But Miz's reign made the championship relevant again.

[BaneTheDestroyer]

Apr 10, 2014 18:22:59 GMT -5 SoonDragon67 said:

Apr 10, 2014 17:39:53 GMT -5 BaneTheDestroyer said:

And here are a list of times when the World Heavyweight championship was irrelevant:

Orton (yes, he was made to be quite irrelevant)
Cena
Del Rio
Bryan
Christian
Ziggler
Mysterio


Once again, stopping early.

This was about the WWE Championship, not the WHC. Your argument here is in no way relevant.

Not really. If you want me to go through that though, here I go:

Daniel Bryan
Daniel Bryan again
Del rio
Cena
Mysterio & Punk were champion at the same time
Punk & Cena were champion at the same time
Batista
John Cena again



And I'll stop there.

[SoonDragon67]

Apr 10, 2014 18:25:55 GMT -5 BaneTheDestroyer said:

Apr 10, 2014 18:21:58 GMT -5 SoonDragon67 said:

I'm going to look into each of these title reigns more in depth before I give reply. However Miz's title reigns were definitely irrelevant. Hell the first reign was all about how he had both it and the tag titles at the same time. That's about it minus his feud with MVP. After he lost the tag titles the US title was ripped off of him faster than you could say "What the hell just happened?"

His second title reign was even worse.

You're wrong. Just....wrong. Though, I will admit that I only put the two Miz reigns there because I didn't know which was which (same with Cena). Only one of both of those belong there to my knowledge. But Miz's reign made the championship relevant again.

After his feud with MVP he didn't have a single US title defense until he lost it to Bret Hart. His US title reign was pushed aside for his tag title reign and was really only there to give Miz two titles at once. The title had some relevance during his feud with MVP, sure, but after that it was just there. It meant nothing.

[BaneTheDestroyer]

Apr 10, 2014 18:31:13 GMT -5 SoonDragon67 said:

Apr 10, 2014 18:25:55 GMT -5 BaneTheDestroyer said:

You're wrong. Just....wrong. Though, I will admit that I only put the two Miz reigns there because I didn't know which was which (same with Cena). Only one of both of those belong there to my knowledge. But Miz's reign made the championship relevant again.

After his feud with MVP he didn't have a single US title defense until he lost it to Bret Hart. His US title reign was pushed aside for his tag title reign and was really only there to give Miz two titles at once. The title had some relevance during his feud with MVP, sure, but after that it was just there. It meant nothing.

.....I'm not talking about that one. Bret Hart made that championship irrelevant again though.

[SoonDragon67]

Apr 10, 2014 18:29:59 GMT -5 BaneTheDestroyer said:

Apr 10, 2014 18:22:59 GMT -5 SoonDragon67 said:

This was about the WWE Championship, not the WHC. Your argument here is in no way relevant.

Not really. If you want me to go through that though, here I go:

Daniel Bryan
Daniel Bryan again
Del rio
Cena
Mysterio & Punk were champion at the same time
Punk & Cena were champion at the same time
Batista
John Cena again



And I'll stop there.

The Daniel Bryan reigns were short but they were far from irrelevant.

Del Rio I agree with.

Cena I agree with in both cases.

Mysterio was a "fake" champion.

The Punk and Cena storyline...You thought the WWE title was irrelevant during that time? REALLY?! F*** it, I'm done. You aren't worth my time.

[BaneTheDestroyer]

Apr 10, 2014 18:34:40 GMT -5 SoonDragon67 said:

Apr 10, 2014 18:29:59 GMT -5 BaneTheDestroyer said:

Not really. If you want me to go through that though, here I go:

Daniel Bryan
Daniel Bryan again
Del rio
Cena
Mysterio & Punk were champion at the same time
Punk & Cena were champion at the same time
Batista
John Cena again



And I'll stop there.

The Daniel Bryan reigns were short but they were far from irrelevant.

Del Rio I agree with.

Cena I agree with in both cases.

Mysterio was a "fake" champion.

The Punk and Cena storyline...You thought the WWE title was irrelevant during that time? REALLY?! F*** it, I'm done. You aren't worth my time.

The champion's irrelevant if two people are holding it, yeah. Very much so. Daniel Bryan's championships weren't really relevant either.....sorry.

[BaneTheDestroyer]

Sting has apparently reached an agreement with WWE? Anyways, at WrestleCon, on April 7 in New Orleans, he claimed (and there's a video) that 31 is his new favorite number.

[SoonDragon67]

Apr 10, 2014 18:49:51 GMT -5 BaneTheDestroyer said:

Sting has apparently reached an agreement with WWE? Anyways, at WrestleCon, on April 7 in New Orleans, he claimed (and there's a video) that 31 is his new favorite number.

So he discovered Baskin Robbins?

And we're supposed to care why exactly?

[BaneTheDestroyer]

Apr 10, 2014 18:56:02 GMT -5 SoonDragon67 said:

Apr 10, 2014 18:49:51 GMT -5 BaneTheDestroyer said:

Sting has apparently reached an agreement with WWE? Anyways, at WrestleCon, on April 7 in New Orleans, he claimed (and there's a video) that 31 is his new favorite number.

So he discovered Baskin Robbins?

:lol:

[skylerb97]

Apr 10, 2014 18:36:45 GMT -5 BaneTheDestroyer said:

Apr 10, 2014 18:34:40 GMT -5 SoonDragon67 said:

The Daniel Bryan reigns were short but they were far from irrelevant.

Del Rio I agree with.

Cena I agree with in both cases.

Mysterio was a "fake" champion.

The Punk and Cena storyline...You thought the WWE title was irrelevant during that time? REALLY?! F*** it, I'm done. You aren't worth my time.

The champion's irrelevant if two people are holding it, yeah. Very much so. Daniel Bryan's championships weren't really relevant either.....sorry.

really the Title was irrelevant during the Cena vs Punk angle. Despite the "pipebomb promo the match itself, the Tournament held to crown a new world champion while apunk's name couldn't be mentioned. And the Champion vs Champion match officiated by one of the most decorated WWE champion and being the most built up match at that paper view?!

[BaneTheDestroyer]

Apr 10, 2014 19:03:04 GMT -5 skylerb97 said:

Apr 10, 2014 18:36:45 GMT -5 BaneTheDestroyer said:

The champion's irrelevant if two people are holding it, yeah. Very much so. Daniel Bryan's championships weren't really relevant either.....sorry.

really the Title was irrelevant during the Cena vs Punk angle. Despite the "pipebomb promo the match itself, the Tournament held to crown a new world champion while apunk's name couldn't be mentioned. And the Champion vs Champion match officiated by one of the most decorated WWE champion and being the most built up match at that paper view?!

Yes, very much so. Like I said, any time they're claiming that two people are the champion, it's not really relevant as an accomplishment. If you're both the champion, you can't really claim that you're the best. You just can't. Same reason that two heavy

Note, I never said that the feud was irrelevant. Notice I only said when they were both champion. The feud did a great job of promoting the championship and making it really relevant.....until they tried making it out as if more than one person can be the champion at one time.

[skylerb97]

Apr 10, 2014 19:12:44 GMT -5 BaneTheDestroyer said:

Apr 10, 2014 19:03:04 GMT -5 skylerb97 said:

really the Title was irrelevant during the Cena vs Punk angle. Despite the "pipebomb promo the match itself, the Tournament held to crown a new world champion while apunk's name couldn't be mentioned. And the Champion vs Champion match officiated by one of the most decorated WWE champion and being the most built up match at that paper view?!

Yes, very much so. Like I said, any time they're claiming that two people are the champion, it's not really relevant as an accomplishment. If you're both the champion, you can't really claim that you're the best. You just can't. Same reason that two heavy

Note, I never said that the feud was irrelevant. Notice I only said when they were both champion. The feud did a great job of promoting the championship and making it really relevant.....until they tried making it out as if more than one person can be the champion at one time.

[ again we disagree there's a difference between irrelevance and not being as relevant as you want it to be

[wildknight]

Apr 10, 2014 16:25:23 GMT -5 BaneTheDestroyer said:

Apr 10, 2014 16:21:17 GMT -5 wildknight said:

No. Punk walked out on his contract like a child, because he wasn't getting the match he wanted. There is a sharp difference between refusing to participate in something you know lacks integrity (like an actor refusing to be in a movie if he knows it's going to be bad), and refusing to do something because you can't have everything your own way. Punk has no integrity. He didn't leave because of what was going to happen, he left because of what was not going to happen; namely, CM Punk getting a Wrestlemania Main Event.

As far as I've read, admittedly not a lot, Punk was complaining about how WWE isn't using the new talent and was pushing people that have already had the spotlight (bad wordplay there since Punk's had the spotlight, but I mean oldies). Was he mad that he didn't have the spotlight at WM? Probably, but when you think about who did, that's pretty reasonable. Batista, dammit. Batista.

Yeah... I don't for a second buy it. When I see video of him talking about it, he's lying. CM Punk has always been all about CM Punk. He's never been loyal to the company, or to anything other than himself for that matter. Him walking out and saying it was all about how the new talent wasn't being used properly is ridiculous... he had no way of knowing what was going to happen at Wrestlemania.