[gooker]

mooseheadjack said:

its funny, these showdowns are forcing me to look back on the late 90's-Early2000's WWE, something which I had thought I had fond memories of, and it is forcing me to change my mind, at least concerning the Main Event. HHH, Rock, Taker, HBK? Feh to all of them. Foley was the only saving grace among them

Just when I think we have some common points Moose, you go and say something like that. In addition to the millions of other points I could make regarding your seeming disregard for Taker, HHH, Rock, and HBK during that time, I'm going to take this route - Want to compare them to the wrestlers we're subjected to today? Oh wait, there is no comparison. I lived and breathed wrestling during the late 90's-early 2000's. Now, I'm staring at the first year I'm not gonna watch Wrestlemania in...actually, I really couldn't tell you when the last time I didn't watch Wrestlemania was. But I'm sure as hell not spending $25.00 (Goon and I usually throw in together) on it this year.

[Jack Quinn]

Gooker, just because they were better than what we have today doesn't necessarily make them great, it means what we have today is shitty.

And I am not denying that any of them were good, its just that none of them, except for Foley, did anything for me. DX was fun for a bit, then got played, so that takes care of HHH and HBK. Rock was never someone that did a whole lot for me, and Taker I never really cared for. I am not saying they are BAD, just that I never cared for them in the least. And asking me to pick between two guys I never cared about, I will pass probably

[gooker]

mooseheadjack said:

Gooker, just because they were better than what we have today doesn't necessarily make them great, it means what we have today is shitty.

And I am not denying that any of them were good, its just that none of them, except for Foley, did anything for me. DX was fun for a bit, then got played, so that takes care of HHH and HBK. Rock was never someone that did a whole lot for me, and Taker I never really cared for. I am not saying they are BAD, just that I never cared for them in the least. And asking me to pick between two guys I never cared about, I will pass probably

Huh. Point taken. Different strokes for different folks and all that. Good to see we at least agree that the current product is shitty (not that anyone on here doesn't agree with that sentiment). That said, from the way you made it sound, did you have the same feeling of apathy and regret watching it back then that I assume you do today? (at least that's how I feel when I'm watching it nowadays) In other words, if you weren't into DX, Taker, and the Rock, was there anyone from that time period you enjoyed other than Foley?

[Jack Quinn]

I know I preferred WCW back then, I am trying to remember who was in WWE at the time. When Bret was there I of course liked him. I have no doubt there were others, they are must not springing to mind at the moment. I don't think there was the apathy that there is now, partly because even if I didn't like all the guys, there were a lot of exciting moments that made it worth watching. There were some good stories being told, the product overall was exciting, even if all the pieces didn't click for me

Today, there are very few pieces that interest me, and the product as a whole has become so boring and predictable that its just not worth watching anymore

[Chris Eco]

My gut tells me to go with Undertaker. He's been solid in the right and on the mike his entire career, and I'm one of the people who really, really liked American Badass.

Bong-Bong-Bong-Bong-Dead-Man-Walking.

Plus, his 15 minute entrances are kind of cool and not just a lead up to him spitting.

[salmonjunkie]

firebreakerchip said:

Undertaker has had his periods where he just outright sucks. Either the storyline is insipid or his ring-work kills a match.

HHH feuded with Chris Jericho over Steph's dog. While Jericho was champion.

It must be me, but I never find that it's Undertaker's ring work that kills a match. He's had a few dull matches against big dudes who suck. But one can't seem to blame the Undertaker if everytime there's a big guy who sucks that the writers want to push, they put him against Taker. You think HHH vs. Khali or HHH vs. Giant Gonzalez or HHH vs. Heidenreich would be any good? Hell no.

Not knocking Hunter. Just defending Taker.

[salmonjunkie]

Let's try this again without stupid tripod...

Another criteria: Who looks cooler overdress and sitting on a throne:





Ok, they both look rather silly...