Undertaker > Hogan
Posted 25 October 2013 - 02:39 PM
Posted 25 October 2013 - 02:50 PM
Posted 25 October 2013 - 02:52 PM
Posted 25 October 2013 - 03:01 PM
Strongly disagree. Hogan has much stronger name value to non-wrestling fans. I don't really get the respected part or how that effects star power?
Wasn't trying to relate the two, just looking at the whole package as a fan.
Posted 25 October 2013 - 03:08 PM
That tells you everything you need to know.
Undertaker = wrestling icon.
Hogan = cultural icon.
Posted 25 October 2013 - 03:42 PM
Does anybody think Undertaker is a bigger star than Hogan?
I literally don't understand how anyone can possibly think that.
Posted 25 October 2013 - 03:45 PM
Posted 25 October 2013 - 03:52 PM
I was thinking about this one earlier. Does anybody think Undertaker is a bigger star than Hogan?
So I'm saying Undertaker > Hogan. Agree or disagree?
Disagree. Not remotely close. One could say that all of the Attitude Era wrestlers combined weren't/aren't bigger than Hogan.
Hulk Hogan was Pro Wrestling on a national level in the 80s. Stone Cold, Rock, Taker, HBK, Foley... collectively they were for a stretch in the 90s. Excepting of course that when WCW topped the WWF for a stretch, it was that Hogan guy who was WCW when they were winning.
Posted 25 October 2013 - 04:04 PM
Posted 25 October 2013 - 08:18 PM
Posted 25 October 2013 - 08:50 PM
Posted 25 October 2013 - 09:34 PM
Posted 25 October 2013 - 10:03 PM
Posted 25 October 2013 - 10:21 PM
Posted 25 October 2013 - 11:42 PM
Posted 26 October 2013 - 12:19 AM
Posted 26 October 2013 - 12:23 AM
What about Taker vs. Bret?
That is a MUCH more interesting and thought-provoking question.
Posted 26 October 2013 - 01:09 AM
An aside, but I'd put Macho Man ahead of everybody except Hogan as far as "big star". When TIME magazine does an Obit with a pic and "guest writer", it means you transcended wrestling.
I love Savage, but I can't see an argument for him above Andre. In terms of how I would define a star I would put him safely behind Bruno, Austin and as much as I hate to admit it, The Rock as well.
This is really tentative, and I could be persuaded otherwise, but my tentative WWE depth chart in terms of overall value to the promotion/stardom/whatever the fuck term you want to use would be something like this:
3. Bruno (I could possibly be convinced to flip Bruno and Austin)
4. Andre (I could see arguments for Andre higher than Bruno and Austin on an overall list not exclusive to WWE)
5. The Rock
9. Backlund (To me maybe the hardest guy to rate and I have the least confidence in his placement)
This is off the cuff without looking at roster list and it's possible I'm forgetting guys that deserve inclusion. There are other guys like Angle, Eddie, Batista, Edge, Jeff Hardy, Valentine, Patera, and others who I could see on that latter portion of this list. Maybe if I get bored I could try and draw it further.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users