Should Kane have had a REAL World Title Run?

Tommy Platinum · 01-09-2009, 12:46 PM

I believe this has been discussed before in one thread or another, but it is an interesting question.

Back in the attitude era, Kane was an extremely popular superstar, and to me he is one of the main guys who represents that era of wrestling. When he was masked, mysterious and had a real character, he was definitely World Title material. He was great as both a heel and a face in my opinion, but I think sadistic heel Kane was probably the best bet for World Champion. After a successful and memorable program with the Undertaker on his debut, he eventually defeated Stone Cold for the WWF Title in a First Blood match at King of the Ring 98. However, the next night on RAW, Austin was WWF Champion once again. To me this was pretty disappointing, or more to the point, the fact that this was his only night as Champion is disappointing.

I would class Kane as one of the best big men I have seen. He was very over at times both as a face and a heel, and he had a great gimmick. I don't see why he was never given a real chance to carry the title. Obviously Kane's prime came when the WWF was stacked with talent, and it was difficult for him to break through, especially as a face, considering the amount of talent in his way, but I think he would have been a great dominant heel Champion, and really would have put someone over at the end of it.

Did WWE drop the ball with Kane? Should he have been Champion more than 1 day in a career over a decade long?

Dr. Proxy · 01-09-2009, 01:21 PM

Kane would make a decent tile run imo, only if WWE start to pick him up more these days, WWE have really dropped the ball with his since his un-masking. I'd like to see him in the title picture looking more dangerous and dominant. They seriously need to GTFO with this Kane/Kelly Kelly angle..only if they go somewhere with a possible Orton/Kane feud.

Ping von Erich · 01-09-2009, 02:39 PM

Kane's usual M.O. is one step forward ten steps back.. meaning, for every cool thing they do with his character or decent little match or feud he's involved in there's that much more dreck and bullshit they have him involved in.

I'd love to see him get involved with the Bradshaw, Shawn Michaels thing.. maybe have Bradshaw approach Kane the same way he approached Michaels.. maybe have Kane break character a little bit.. break the fourth wall, as it were. Have Bradshaw call him Glenn, mention how he'll never get out from under the Undertaker's shadow, shit like that.

Have Bradshaw more or less screw with Kane's head via Bradshaw's usual sick promo work, turn Kane into JBL's hitman hound from hell.. maybe have JBL sick him on Undertaker? Play off both Bradshaw and Kane's real history with 'Taker.

I don't know, just brainstorming.

Sam · 01-09-2009, 04:12 PM

Kane probably should've had a more meaningful title reign, but unfortunately for him, especially during the attitude era; he was very good when others were white hot--ie Austin, Mankind, Rock. It would've been cool had he gotten the title during the 2002 brand split when Trips was handed the World Title, or in 2003 when Trips was still on top.

New Jersey's Favorite Son · 01-09-2009, 05:09 PM

IMO when he beat Austin, to really make Kane an unstopable monster, he should of had it 4-7 months. But as usual they dropped the ball, they also did 2 more times on Kane, once in 2002-2003, he should of beaten Triple H for the WHC, it would of made an interesting storyline IMO. And of course more recently, they dropped the ball on his ECW Title Run, they could of made him an unstopable monster on ECW, like Big Show was before him and Mark Henry afterwards, but they messed up then to.

Savage_Animal · 01-11-2009, 02:28 AM

kane should have had a good run. wwe dropped the ball with him the day he lost wwf title back but luckily didn't real start dropping the ball till about 01/02 i believe. he should of beaten hhh when he was forced to demask. the guys they have their which they do don't understand the old school values like crebility and such. to me mark henry is a shit wrestler and barely understable on mic. it was unforunate that kane's ecw title reign was cut short from wwe applogizing for michael ps hayes telling henry the truth. they could have done so much more with him but didn't. kane still has a bit left in the tank if his mach with cm punk or batista when did the chain wrestling back in september/august. doubt he will get a world title reign of any sort with how current product is going. not about appealing kid thing but general bullshit terrible surprise shit. but who knows it may happen under to cicrumstance but i doubt he will gte anothe reign.

horrorfan_1986 · 01-11-2009, 03:06 AM

Should Kane have had a real title reign? No.

Think about all of the big stars that has been in the WWE since 1997. Austin, Rock, Taker, Michaels, Hunter, Cena, Batista, Foley, Angle, ect. Should Kane really be pushed as the top guy with that kind of talent on the roster?

Kane is IMO best suited as the monster who goes after anyone. His title win in 1998 shouldn't have even happened. He was a great threat to Austin and should of had the match end in some controversial manner (Remove the first blood rules and have Kane get DQ'd or something). There's nothing about Kane that makes him feel "Right" about being the champion going into a match.

KenTheKiller · 01-11-2009, 10:43 AM

Someone's going to come in and laugh at Batista being there over Kane, but I agree with you.

Should Kane have had one? Maybe in 1998-1999 but at no point after that. And truth be told, since 2004 ended he's been pretty much terrible anyway, just as far as in ring ability goes. Never mind how his character has been.

And he should never get one now.