I really don't base my favorites depending on how much money they draw, or if they are the face of the company. If they are entertaining, talented, and have good work ethic, that is really all that matters to me. Hogan's Leg drop of doom and super kick-out powers, associated with his backstage politics doesn't push me to see him as one of my favorites. That doesn't take away from his amazing contribution to pro wrestling, just as who he is now doesn't take away from what kind of person he was back then. Austin was a draw, with the right attitude, being the right guy the company needed at the right time. Stone Cold is undoubtedly WWE's biggest draw but talent wise I would hold Undertaker above in that list.
HBK, Misawa, Lesnar, Kenta, CM Punk. Those are my favorite wrestlers ever. I wouldn't even consider calling them a top five guy all time
I don't have a problem with you saying that you like Undertaker or that he's one of your favorites. My problem is that you said you'd fight tooth and nail saying he was one of the top five ever. No, you didn't fight tooth and nail, you simply said "he's one of my five favorites." Which has nothing to do with him being a top five wrestler of all time.
You said how Undertaker played the second highest tier at best. In a storied career that long with all those accomplishments, you'd think that he should be face. But the fact is that just as a company like WWE needs somebody as their face, they also need cornerstones to build their company on. Undertaker is one of those cornerstones. You hear about Undertaker from the guys who he worked with; unlike Hogan or HBK, nobody talks shit about him or hates his ego. There is a reason why in the video of top 50 superstars (though some of it was truly controversial) Undertaker was no. 2.
If I'm correct HBK was number one on that list, and I'm trying to think if Hogan was in the top ten which is a joke. Not to mention it covered the top 50 WWE superstars of all time and not top 50 wrestling superstars of all time. But I digressing, I must bring up that being a nice guy doesn't make you a top five wrestler either. You're saying that you'd fight tooth and nail to prove he's a top five wrestler, and you've done nothing but state opinion. Sure he could have been a cornerstone. But that cornerstone would've sunk the ship without Austin, Rock, Hogan, and Cena.
Dusty Rhodes is a legend. Was he one of the most talented guys in the ring?
Ricky Steamboat was amazing. Was he the face of the WWE? The top guy?
No one is saying that Dusty Rhodes or Ricky Steamboat are top five wrestlers either.
I respect your opinion bro. It isn't a joke to say for me as a fan that he in my view will be the biggest star to enter WWE. A guy like HBK (who once had one of the biggest egos ever) admitted himself that Taker would be the greatest guy to go into the HOF.
That's like me saying that One Direction bigger than the Beatles because Miley Cyrus says they're one of the best bands she's heard, and she's very egotistical. Anyone who thinks Taker is a bigger "STAR" than Hogan or Austin, or Rock, or Cena. Is crazy. Taker has never been that big a star when he's always played second fiddle at best. The guy had a great career but he's no where near top five.
P.S. The Rock may be more charismatic and "electrifying" with his "Finally"s and other catchphrases, but could you really compare Undertaker and The Rock? Yeah the Rock drew more, but he split for Hollywood whereas Undertaker committed himself to WWE.
[/QUOTE]
I don't like the Rock that much, I haven't since he returned but saying Undertaker is a bigger star than the Rock. Is like saying Doug Williams is a bigger star than Tom Brady. It's a joke.
