>>14142437> False, doesn't really matter anyway.True. He never was the guy. It matters because he sucks
> HAHAHAHAIts okay to laugh when you have nothing to say
> LMFAOI’m also LMFAOing at UAMFBN
> Who cares? REST IN PEACE is one of the most memorable catchphrases ever. Taker didn't need to cut "memorable promos".He sucked too much to cut a memorable promo. Thanks for admitting that one.
>ROFLICOPTER‘Fraid it’s true. He never gave anyone a rub.
>Talk about loyalty. You don't see that these days. Very smart too, having the foresight to know how WCW and the old WCW stars would end up turning out.Talk about being a coward.
>This was at the height of WCW's dominance. WWF's product as a whole was terrible at the time; they had only just started trying to change things up right before that WM. Also, his match was against Sid, and their match got less hype than the Bret/Stone Cold feud anyway. So while the product was to blame rather than any individual wrestler - or group of them - there are several other wrestlers who the blame should fall on first.Who lotta excuses. If Undercarder was talented, they never would have gotten in that position.
> Which Wrestlemania was this? Let me know so I can later modify this pasta to BTFO you on the fuck out on this "argument" as well. TIADo your own research. Hint: it was the one he headlined
>;^)Nice concession
> Taker was always such a big deal that he didn't need to be in the main title picture to be a big deal. During his entire career he's always gotten massive (toppest of tier) pops, a large number of signs, etc.It’s because he wasn’t a draw and never drew a dime etc.
>;^)Nice concession
>There's more of that loyalty. What a guy.Instead of being loyal, he should learn how to draw
>;^)Nice concession
All in all, you seem to agree UAMFBN greatest trait was his “loyalty” (cowardliness) which got him awarded the aforementioned middle management position on the card. He will forever be the Undercarder
