Would WWE be better without HBK and Taker?

Tommy Platinum · 01-30-2009, 03:53 PM

People constantly talk about how the WWE would be better without Triple H dominating everything, but I am taking the slightly more controversial viewpoint that the WWE would be better without HBK and Taker at this stage. There have been rumours of retirement concerning both guys in recent months, and I just think part of what is bringing the product down is old guys retaining prominent roles in the company. I know Taker and especially HBK stay out of the title picture a lot of the time (HBK hasn't been World Champion since 2002) but they nevertheless get on PPV pretty much every month, and the last two Wrestlemanias have seen Undertaker win a World Title.

Neither are as good in the ring as they once were, but this is particularly noticeable with Undertaker, and basically I think a lot of people are just getting bored of them. I respect what they have done in their careers as they triuly are two of the best of all time, don't get me wrong, but I think at this stage it is time for these two to step aside for the good of the product and let younger, hungrier guys who represent the future take over. The less old guys holding people down the better. It is time to usher in a new era rather than clinging onto eras past. Give them the great retirement match they both deserve, promise them a hall of fame spot somewhere down the line and let them both go.

CGS · 01-30-2009, 04:12 PM

The WWE Have lost Big Stars in the past (Austin Rock, Bret Hart, Angle Etc...) & Survived Fine. Having HBK & Taker Retire now won't hurt the WWE at all. Hell Taker isn't even around that much anymore comes around Around Mania Time sticks round now & Then Through Summer and Towards the end of the year & WWE has done well without him.

I Disagree with You (Tommy) When you say that the product is hurt with Veterans still playing a dominate role in the company. To Maintain a good product a mixture of Veterans, Current Stars And Future potential is needed. Plus The Veterans are more or less currently used mainly to put younger & Up & Coming stars over.

Tommy Platinum · 01-30-2009, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Infamouz Chuckz
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 20 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

The WWE Have lost Big Stars in the past (Austin Rock, Bret Hart, Angle Etc...) & Survived Fine. Having HBK & Taker Retire now won't hurt the WWE at all. Hell Taker isn't even around that much anymore comes around Around Mania Time sticks round now & Then Through Summer and Towards the end of the year & WWE has done well without him.

I Disagree with You (Tommy) When you say that the product is hurt with Veterans still playing a dominate role in the company. To Maintain a good product a mixture of Veterans, Current Stars And Future potential is needed. Plus The Veterans are more or less currently used mainly to put younger & Up & Coming stars over.

I am guessing you are not counting Triple H as a veteran.

But even Undertaker has won the World Title at the last two Wrestlemanias, and although he does put people over in terms of making them look good in matches (something Trips can't do) he still defeats everybody. His streak will remain intact, which in a way is a waste.

Him and HBK may help to get people over sometimes, but I can't think of many recent examples, and for everybody they help to get over, they are keeping somebody else off the PPV card.

Tyler Durden · 01-30-2009, 04:43 PM

I still love both characters. Shawn in particular has helped take a story that was pretty retarded from a logic viewpoint and make people pretty interested in it in the build for Rumble. As a performer, both guys are every bit as good as they were three or four years back and that's amazing. With their passing years (Shawn anyway) lacks the athleticism of the past, but makes up for it with the experience and the story telling.

I would be happy to see both guys, once they do retire, return three or four times a year for angles and storylines and, when they do, I hope they then use that time to help put people over around them. There's a way to do it though, and if they get beat too often, beating them will become meaningless. The template for me was set by the Foley/Orton feud before Foley over did the returns.

CGS · 01-30-2009, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tommy Red
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 20 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I am guessing you are not counting Triple H as a veteran.

But even Undertaker has won the World Title at the last two Wrestlemanias, and although he does put people over in terms of making them look good in matches (something Trips can't do) he still defeats everybody. His streak will remain intact, which in a way is a waste.

Him and HBK may help to get people over sometimes, but I can't think of many recent examples, and for everybody they help to get over, they are keeping somebody else off the PPV card.

HHH is a veteran in a way but i don't really see him as one. The Way i see Veterans is people who are literally past their prime and should retire in the next 1 - 2 years. HHH has at least another Five years in him if he stays healthy & avoids another serious Injury.

The Streak is just one of those one in a lifetime Achievements really. No One has & will ever be able to get anywhere close to something like that. Plus Taker doesn't really have that much left in him 2 Manias at Most So I don't see the point in breaking the streak now. If They was gonna do it they should of done it against Either Kane @ Mania 14 or Orton @ Mania 21. Plus i doubt there is anyone WWE can trust to break Taker's streak Because if they are going to break Taker's Streak the WWE need to be 100% confident that they are going to around for years to come, Is over with the fans etc...

HBK Put Over Cade on an Episode of Raw Late Last Year. Taker hmmm. Pretty Much Just been involved with Edge & Show who are already established and Hasn't really wrestled that much Over the past year.

Bigpapa42 · 01-30-2009, 05:11 PM

Actually, I think the Undertaker having to take time off all the time keeps fans from getting as tired of him. Not that it exactly keeps the character fresh, but just keeps it from getting too tiresome.

Tomas · 01-30-2009, 09:10 PM

I disagree about HBK as said above he makes the worst storylines into the best things going on over on Raw hell this past year HBK has been absolute gold with all the feuds he's been in even making batista look fantastic.
Taker I am undecisive, i personally would like for him to only appear at mania for the streak as that seems all that hes's about anymore, I'd say have him really only work on tv during that time frame and it should be fine.

Caesar · 01-31-2009, 03:25 AM

HBK is not the same guy he was 10 years ago (it's almost stupefying to have to point out that obviousness about ANYONE, no matter who they are or what they do in life), so I guess, technically, yes, he is past his prime. But he's been part of two of the best angles in recent years in the WWE, and can still put on a show stealing match at any given moment. He still lives up to his monikers. The Showstopper. The Main Event.

'Taker comes and goes so he stays relatively fresh, and he can still go in the ring too. Not every night and not with every opponent. But when you're facing Mark Henry, The Big Slow, Khali...c'mon. You can't put a square peg in round hole. I think that angle with the British guy being a vampire or whatever, would have been exactly what Undertake excels at. I think an Undertake/Umaga feud would be very good too (just not at 'Mania, please).

I also don't see how HBK/Taker retiring is going to elevate anybody who isn't already there, like MVP or Hardy, as neither Shawn or Undertaker is in the "top spot" anyways. And other guys like Morrison and Punk aren't suddenly going to shoot through the glass ceiling if they leave either. I don't see anybody who you can point to and say their career and status is being effected by HBK/Taker still being around. So I don't see how the WWE would be better off without them, when they still draw and sell.

Kurt Cosby · 02-02-2009, 02:32 AM

HBK is one of the reasons I haven't given up on the WWE. I've been watching wrestling since I've been old enough to watch TV (over twenty years) and HBK has been around almost the entire time, and Taker isn't far behind. Taker's character bores me a bit (I prefered him in 1998 when he was still the dead man but talked quite a bit, or in 2002-2003 when he had an attitude), but he's still a damn good wrestler.

HBK is past his prime, but really, that's not a great tragedy because he's routinely part of the best storylines and feuds on Raw. He's still amazing.

I really don't think I could watch WWE without the veterans. (HBK, Taker, Triple H, Jericho). Orton and maybe Edge are the only ones of the current crop I think might be able to keep me watching if the others dissapeared.

Dj1223 · 02-02-2009, 06:45 PM

HBK has put over practically everyone. He makes everyone look great. For someone of his stature to sit back, build up the young guys, and stay out of the spotlight, he clearly is making the business better.

Taker on the other hand still has that ego. He rarely puts over the young guys and still wants to be on top. besides being the locker room leader, Taker isn't doing much for the business anymore

Would WWE be better without HBK and Taker?

This is a discussion on Would WWE be better without HBK and Taker? within the WWE Discussion forums, part of the Wrestling Forums category; People constantly talk about how the WWE would be better without Triple H dominating everything, but I am taking the ...