Sidebottom Posted October 25, 2013 Report Share Posted October 25, 2013 I was thinking about this one earlier. Does anybody think Undertaker is a bigger star than Hogan? I think when it comes to name recognition, Undertaker is as a known name as Hogan, amongst fans and non fans. When Paul Bearer died it was shocking that so many people knew who he was, so I have little doubt normal folk know who Taker is, if only for being that Wrasslin guy. Taker also gets bonus points because the general impression I get is that he is more respected than Hogan. No big star has ever bad mouthed Taker. As a man, he's made and saved his millions, has never been in any dodgy scandals and as far as in ring work goes: he can lay claim to having some of the greatest matches of all time. Longevity is also a factor here. So I'm saying Undertaker > Hogan. Agree or disagree? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zero Posted October 25, 2013 Report Share Posted October 25, 2013 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? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebrainfollower Posted October 25, 2013 Report Share Posted October 25, 2013 I'm an Undertaker mark. As a kid I loved the old Universal horror movies and when the Undertaker debuted he was like a character from those movies come to life (watch Abbott and Costello meet Frankenstein, see how Dracula interacts with the monster and tell me he and Paul Bearer didn't get the idea from that movie) and I was an instant fan. I was the only kid cheering in the Worcester Centrum when he first challenged Hulk Hogan and his six day world title run in 1991 were some of my crowing moments in our schoolyard. Other than Bikertaker I've stayed a fan since. And even I wouldn't say he was ever a bigger star than Hulk Hogan. More respected by a larger % of his peers? Absolutely (though I am sure DDP has a different viewpoint). Had better matches over a longer number of years? hmmm maybe. I would say Hogan 82-87 was doing better work than Taker except for his very best matches. But more known or as known to the public? Not a chance in hell. Hulk Hogan is the biggest star in US wrestling of the last 50 years by a MILE. He made wrestling national. He literally drew half the house in match after match. His merchandise sales ushered in the modern era of wrestling. And when he was stale, dull as dishwater and "washed up" he turned heel and turned a good angle white hot and kicked his older mentor's ass in the ratings for 2 years. Those are accomplishments even the Undertaker can't come within a mile of reaching. And I love and respect him tons more than I do Hogan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sidebottom Posted October 25, 2013 Author Report Share Posted October 25, 2013 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted October 25, 2013 Report Share Posted October 25, 2013 My answer comes in the form of this series of images. That tells you everything you need to know. Undertaker = wrestling icon. Hogan = cultural icon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted October 25, 2013 Report Share Posted October 25, 2013 No. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kil Posted October 25, 2013 Report Share Posted October 25, 2013 Does anybody think Undertaker is a bigger star than Hogan? I literally don't understand how anyone can possibly think that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteF3 Posted October 25, 2013 Report Share Posted October 25, 2013 I dunno, I think it's a closer call than people are giving credit for. 'Taker doesn't have as much muscle mass but he's taller than Hogan by a few inches. That is what we're talking about, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted October 25, 2013 Report Share Posted October 25, 2013 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. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrickHithouse Posted October 25, 2013 Report Share Posted October 25, 2013 This thread might give me the testicular fortitude I need to finally make that Bulldog Bob Brown > Ric Flair thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebrainfollower Posted October 26, 2013 Report Share Posted October 26, 2013 Using JVK's first post I will say this Undertaker is a bigger star than the Silverhawks. Anyone wanna argue that point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted October 26, 2013 Report Share Posted October 26, 2013 What about Undertaker vs Hogan for, let's say, people under 25? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted October 26, 2013 Report Share Posted October 26, 2013 Hogan is easily the bigger star, but in the interest of steering this to a realm that is less mocking in tone, I do think Taker is underrated as a star by some. Of the non-fans I know who I can occasional con into going to watch a PPV at a sports bar with me and/or discuss wrestling around in vague ways by far the most common question is "is Taker still around?" or "when is Taker coming out." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Childs Posted October 26, 2013 Report Share Posted October 26, 2013 Where would you put him all-time among WWF/WWE stars? Behind Hogan, Bruno, Austin, Cena, Rock? Would he go above Backlund? HHH? Macho? Not making an argument so much as I'm curious what people will say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim Posted October 26, 2013 Report Share Posted October 26, 2013 Undertaker has never been as important to the company as Cena has been but probably a good number more people know of Undertaker than know of Cena so that depends on how exactly you want to think of "stardom." Undertaker > HHH easy enough it seems to me. Savage > Taker probably. Guys like Bruno and Backlund are harder because of course "The Undertaker" registers with more people than does "Bruno Sammartino" or "Bob Backlund" but was Taker ever close to as important to the company than they were? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted October 26, 2013 Report Share Posted October 26, 2013 Undertaker is strange because much of his career - even when he was basically an active member of the roster at all times - has been spent as a "special attraction" type. He's a closer comparison to Andre then he is to anyone who was an ace for any length of time, though I don't think he is an Andre level star. Over at Classics Steve Yohe is organizing a top 100 of all time which is supposed to be based heavily on over all value/stardom, with drawing power of course being the key element. Taker is someone who is likely to make my list, and I am inclined to put him ahead of people like HHH, Shawn and Foley even though you could argue that all three of those guys had more value to the company at their absolute peak than he did (in the case of Shawn I think it's highly, highly debatable or it is at least debatable how much value that argument really has). But I admit that comparing him next to Backlund or Savage is much tougher (my inclination is to put him behind Savage, but ahead of Bob). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Childs Posted October 26, 2013 Report Share Posted October 26, 2013 What about Taker vs. Bret? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Sorrow Posted October 26, 2013 Report Share Posted October 26, 2013 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marrklarr Posted October 26, 2013 Report Share Posted October 26, 2013 What about Taker vs. Bret? That is a MUCH more interesting and thought-provoking question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted October 26, 2013 Report Share Posted October 26, 2013 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: 1. Hogan 2. Austin 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 6. Savage 7. Cena 8. Taker 9. Backlund (To me maybe the hardest guy to rate and I have the least confidence in his placement) 10. Piper 11. Foley 12. HHH 13. Michaels 14. Bret 15. Misterio 16. Morales 17. Graham 18. Orndorff 19. Slaughter 20. Dibiase 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Sorrow Posted October 26, 2013 Report Share Posted October 26, 2013 I didn't even think of The Rock and Andre, that's a good point. But I'm thinking more people are aware of Savage than Austin, and, as much as it pains ME..Bruno. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted October 26, 2013 Report Share Posted October 26, 2013 Using JVK's first post I will say this Undertaker is a bigger star than the Silverhawks. Anyone wanna argue that point? So THAT's who that is. I was like hmmm Aquaman? I never saw SilverHawks. 1. Hogan 2. Austin 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 6. Savage 7. Cena 8. Taker 9. Backlund (To me maybe the hardest guy to rate and I have the least confidence in his placement) 10. Piper 11. Foley 12. HHH 13. Michaels 14. Bret 15. Misterio 16. Morales 17. Graham 18. Orndorff 19. Slaughter 20. Dibiase Jake I reckon. Possibly above some of these guys. Duggan. Beefcake. Possibly Rude and Perfect too. These are guys I'd say would be widely known in the 25-35 male demographic at the very least. Lou Albano must have been pretty well known for a certain generation of people. Flair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted October 26, 2013 Report Share Posted October 26, 2013 Oh and ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted October 26, 2013 Report Share Posted October 26, 2013 Jake, Rude and Jesse don't really fit all that well with what I'm trying to go for but am not articulating well. Heenan on the other hand should be in the top twenty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slasher Posted October 26, 2013 Report Share Posted October 26, 2013 I think Andre has to be #2. Rock should be above Austin. I don't think Bruno is really that famous outside the NE. Savage is there somewhere alongside Austin too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.