Sting = R-Truth

Watching Impact and seeing Sting, are they trying to rip R-Truth off or is it a poor Joker impression???

Is this what I have wasted my Saturdays on?

One of the best gimmicks going today,imo. R truth will nothing with his,especially in a feud with Morrison.

At least sting as invented himself,I'm for one enjoying him. Hope turns abit more serious and sinister has time goes on.

Joker sting has been awful, but mind you crow sting was awful and surfer sting was awful.

His new gimmick is nothing special really. If it were any other guy than Sting, it would be simply dreadful, however as Sting is one of the greatest wrestlers of all time in both ring skill and promo skills (IMO), he has managed to make the character work.

I'd say it was a little harsh to say that surfer Sting and raven Sting was awful, they proved him to be one of the best babyfaces and probably the best tweener with Austin of all time.

Maybe Sting is Little Jimmy?

Is R-Truth likely to spray paint Hogan anytime soon?


I miss Pauline

Has she gone?

Leone wrote:His new gimmick is nothing special really. If it were any other guy than Sting, it would be simply dreadful, however as Sting is one of the greatest wrestlers of all time in both ring skill and promo skills (IMO), he has managed to make the character work.

I'd say it was a little harsh to say that surfer Sting and raven Sting was awful, they proved him to be one of the best babyfaces and probably the best tweener with Austin of all time.

Imo sting has always been stupidly overrated, he's never been great in the ring. And he's had 3 gimmicks over 20 years. Never liked him.

I'd say that Sting is one of the top guys of all time. If you watch his early matches with Cactus Jack, you do see the origins of Hardcore and some top notch matches. Then as you move into the dark era Sting he made Hogan matches bearable and really helped to build up the nWo vs WCW feud. He is one of the few old guys in wrestling at the moment who can still put on a half decent match, however I would still prefer to see him going sooner rather than later.

To be fair though, a lot of guys have had few gimmicks in large careers. Mick Foley had 4 different gimmicks over about 25 years, Taker has had 2 over 21 years, etc, etc. However that is just my own opinion.

@gregers

Tough luck sunshine. He will go down one of the atg...so he should be. Easily top ten of ny generation.

Funny you won't bash taker but thats the only match left what every single wrestling fan wants to see.

I don't want to see Sting vs. Undertaker, I think it'd be dreadful and a huge dissapointment.

Leak

U are to young to understand about that match.

As I've said I've never been a fan of sting. Taker destroying Sting would be great tho.

They're both in awful shape, and any match with that much hype behind it with two guys who are very limited in the ring these days will always be a dissapointment, it has nothing to do with being "too young".

Haha,alright!

Taker v hhh was a average match but nobody is complaining about that. The actual wrestling might be pants but the build up,story telling and psychology in it will be worth it.

And it would sell!

Id rather had seen sting sign for wwe for 1 year than sign for tna.

To be honest I don't think it'd actually sell, ten years ago maybe, but I don't think 'Taker vs. Sting would be that big of a match these days.

Fair enough. Why was the internet buzzing when them vignettes was airing and 90% of the wrestling world was getting excited thinking it was sting?

Might have just been me.

The internet wrestling community is the minority though, it was 90% of the wrestling world, it was 10%, do you honestly think most of the fans in the arena and the ones at home were hoping those vignettes were Sting? Not a chance.

You have to think about it from the point of view of today's wrestling fans i.e between the ages of 8-15 most likely. The only thing most of them know of WCW is what WWE tells them, and WWE don't often show much about Sting because he doesn't have anything to do with WWE. I can guarentee those vignettes being Triple H would mean more to the majority of wrestling fans than if they were Sting.

Sting vs Undertaker can't happen at Wrestlemania 28 for one simple reason, Rock vs Cena. Do you think they are honestly going to try to build up a match that could easily end up being bigger than the main event, they made that mistake with Michaels vs Taker at WM 25 and they aren't likely to make it again any time soon.

Unfortunately Leak is right that the match would probably be pants. Taker vs Michaels and Taker vs Triple H worked because in both matches Taker's opponents were both in still good condition and Taker could rely on them in the match as well as on himself. However with Sting, having the two of them being told they have to produce a 15/20 minute match would be actually dangerous as an injury would become so much more likely as the match wore on. Also it is right the build up would be massive and it would almost certainly sell in large numbers, but can you imagine the internet uproar if the match turned out to be pants, it would cause WWE massive problems. If they did do a Sting vs Undertaker story ever I would go for a tag team match as the culmination of their feud, so they could be in the ring together briefly but could have a breather then have one pin the other in the end to close the match properly.

@Leone

Nobody mentioned mania 28. So why was sting a split second away for signing with the wwe? The only match for taker is sting at mania. The fact sting hasn't stepped in a wwe would instantly draw.

@ leak

How many people have access to the internet? I'm pretty sure every man and his dog wished/hoped it was sting. If your a 'wrestling fan' you would know who sting is regardless of your age,you are only 2 years above that age bracket! What would class yourself as?

You wouldn't know what that match would mean to the the older wrestling fan,which is still many. Too atg going standing in the same ring wild be an instant mark out moment. The fact that kids get taken by there parents,whom I would bet money that they also watched wrestling in there youth would love to see that match.

invincibleILeak (CL-6WF) wrote:The internet wrestling community is the minority though, it was 90% of the wrestling world, it was 10%, do you honestly think most of the fans in the arena and the ones at home were hoping those vignettes were Sting? Not a chance.

90% of the people in the arena have internet access. In turn a lot of people in the arena would be thinking Sting. Or in your mind do people who attend wrestling events not have internet access? I never understood this whole "IWC" thing as everyone I know and there aunts has the Internet.
Even if they didn't fans such as myself would think there is a possibility it could have been Sting if I was at the arena because of how I remember Stings vignettes been when I watched WCW as a kid.

invincibleILeak (CL-6WF) wrote:You have to think about it from the point of view of today's wrestling fans i.e between the ages of 8-15 most likely. The only thing most of them know of WCW is what WWE tells them, and WWE don't often show much about Sting because he doesn't have anything to do with WWE. I can guarentee those vignettes being Triple H would mean more to the majority of wrestling fans than if they were Sting.

You're aware that a lot of WWE's income comes from people who pay to watch there show such as PPV's right? While kids may watch wrestling a lot of adults do also who may have been into wrestling when they was young. I'd say around 60% of wrestling fans are kids. Meaning more to kids is irrelevant as with every kid there is a adult or two. HBK vs The Undertaker certainly wasn't a match aimed at the kids. It was aimed at the adults and nistalga played a big part in making the match great. The same could be said if Sting ever faced Undertaker.

Sting vs The Undertaker would be a fantastic match to have at a PPV and it would sell a lot in my opinion. Undertaker and Sting both can still put on a great match. Granted there not young anymore, far from it in fact but to say the match would suck and wouldn't sell is just been ignorant.

invincibleILeak (CL-6WF) wrote:They're both in awful shape, and any match with that much hype behind it with two guys who are very limited in the ring these days will always be a dissapointment.

Here you say the match would have hype behind it correct? This would mean the match would sell. You then type.

invincibleILeak (CL-6WF) wrote:To be honest I don't think it'd actually sell, ten years ago maybe, but I don't think 'Taker vs. Sting would be that big of a match these days.

This is a great way to contradict yourself.

Back on topic though. Stings current gimmick is more based of The Joker then R- Truth.

Whether they have internet access or not is irrelevant, I have internet access but I don't think I know a lot about the ins and outs of, for example, Peep Show, despite the fact I enjoy Peep Show and I watch it on a regular basis, I don't discuss it online or find out more about it, and I am sure most of WWE fans don't take part in wrestling forums or read dirt-sheets.

HBK vs. The Undertaker may have been for the adults but the kids understood the importance of it, because it is drilled into their brain from the very first time they watch it that these two guys are legends, we are told about their history, we're constantly reminded of their achievements. With Sting it would be hugely different.

Hitman Owl has hit the nail on the head, I'm 17, probably a little older than most of the wrestling fans in the arena, and I can honestly say I don't understand the importance of Sting, I can understand that the build up would seem amazing because they're both about mind games and psychological promos, but at the end of the day Sting to me isn't anything special, he's the guy from WCW who didn't go to WWE, and the only thing I have really seen of him is him putting on not brilliant matches in TNA.

I think Undertaker and Sting both need somebody whose more mobile in the ring than them to help them through the match, they could put on a decent enough match, but just look at all of you drooling at the prospect of the match, I think they'd have to put on something really special to not dissapoint you.

What you all want is Sting to face Undertaker 10-15 years ago, but I think you'd all be better off just thinking of the prospect, let it be the unachievable dream rather than be dissapointed when two old men fail to live up to the huge expectations.

I meant the hype among the internet wrestling community, and by that I mean people who discuss wrestling, read dirt sheets etc. not just a wrestling fan with an internet connection as I said in my last post. I think to most wrestling fans these days, Triple H vs. 'Taker and Michaels vs. 'Taker are both bigger matches than Sting versus Undertaker.

Put up a thread and see what happens,guarantee anyone would prefer to see taker v sting than triple h.

You can't say really say much about sting if you don't know the history.

Icon v phenom,that sounds about right.

I know that people on this forum would love to see Sting vs. Undertaker, that's not the issue. The issue is would WWE fans?

I think I am in the perfect place to comment on it not knowing the history of Sting, because most of the fans who are watching the shows, the PPVs and going to the shows don't know the history Sting, and WWE can't even fill it in. To WWE fans, Triple H, Undertaker, Shawn Michaels are the HUGE names, Sting doesn't mean anything.

Icon vs. Phenom means a lot to you, to a lot of fans Sting is just a random new guy.

invincibleILeak (CL-6WF) wrote:I know that people on this forum would love to see Sting vs. Undertaker, that's not the issue. The issue is would WWE fans?

I think I am in the perfect place to comment on it not knowing the history of Sting, because most of the fans who are watching the shows, the PPVs and going to the shows don't know the history Sting, and WWE can't even fill it in. To WWE fans, Triple H, Undertaker, Shawn Michaels are the HUGE names, Sting doesn't mean anything.

Icon vs. Phenom means a lot to you, to a lot of fans Sting is just a random new guy.

Whilst I can see how you think like that the majority of WWE fans live in America and will have been brought up on WWE and WCW action, their parents and grandparents will have told them tales of yore concerning Andre the Giant, Hulk Hogan, Sting, Bischoff, screwjobs etc. Few of the youngest WWE fans will have seen Sting in WCW but similarly many of the current generation will not have seen a Mick Foley, Austin in his prime, Rock when he was a full time guy, Vince when he was a proper heel boss, Hogan when he was a proper wrestler and more, but they still react to these things and still buy into the excitement of the occasion.

This means that while the interest in Sting v Taker will be big here, it would be even bigger in the States

invincibleILeak (CL-6WF) wrote:Whether they have internet access or not is irrelevant, I have internet access but I don't think I know a lot about the ins and outs of, for example, Peep Show, despite the fact I enjoy Peep Show and I watch it on a regular basis, I don't discuss it online or find out more about it, and I am sure most of WWE fans don't take part in wrestling forums or read dirt-sheets.

Neither do I much. Yet here I am.
A lot of wrestling fans will be on a forum at least talking about wrestling if they are into it or leaving comments on youtube and so on.

invincibleILeak (CL-6WF) wrote:HBK vs. The Undertaker may have been for the adults but the kids understood the importance of it, because it is drilled into their brain from the very first time they watch it that these two guys are legends, we are told about their history, we're constantly reminded of their achievements. With Sting it would be hugely different.

The WWE could drill Sting into the minds of the kids quite easy. The adults on the other hand will already know who he is

invincibleILeak (CL-6WF) wrote:Hitman Owl has hit the nail on the head, I'm 17, probably a little older than most of the wrestling fans in the arena, and I can honestly say I don't understand the importance of Sting, I can understand that the build up would seem amazing because they're both about mind games and psychological promos, but at the end of the day Sting to me isn't anything special, he's the guy from WCW who didn't go to WWE, and the only thing I have really seen of him is him putting on not brilliant matches in TNA.

This explains a lot to be honest. While your not older than most of the wrestling fans in the arena because of the fact that there are quite a lot of adults there you are quite young to understand or have watched Sting through his career, You also seemed to have missed out on the good matches he's had in TNA. Watching on youtube or reading about it on the Internet isn't the same as watching it when it happened.

invincibleILeak (CL-6WF) wrote:I think Undertaker and Sting both need somebody whose more mobile in the ring than them to help them through the match, they could put on a decent enough match, but just look at all of you drooling at the prospect of the match, I think they'd have to put on something really special to not dissapoint you.

HHH and Undertaker definitely didn't do that yet it still was a good match for what it was. I'm under no illusion of how old Sting is now and The Undertaker however I know they both can still put on a good match. We'll just have to agree to disagree here as both our opinions are different.

Basically your a wwe fan not a wrestling fan,unlucky chap.

JoshSansom wrote:Whilst I can see how you think like that the majority of WWE fans live in America and will have been brought up on WWE and WCW action, their parents and grandparents will have told them tales of yore concerning Andre the Giant, Hulk Hogan, Sting, Bischoff, screwjobs etc. Few of the youngest WWE fans will have seen Sting in WCW but similarly many of the current generation will not have seen a Mick Foley, Austin in his prime, Rock when he was a full time guy, Vince when he was a proper heel boss, Hogan when he was a proper wrestler and more, but they still react to these things and still buy into the excitement of the occasion.

This means that while the interest in Sting v Taker will be big here, it would be even bigger in the States

Couldn't have said it better myself.

JoshSansom wrote:

invincibleILeak (CL-6WF) wrote:I know that people on this forum would love to see Sting vs. Undertaker, that's not the issue. The issue is would WWE fans?

I think I am in the perfect place to comment on it not knowing the history of Sting, because most of the fans who are watching the shows, the PPVs and going to the shows don't know the history Sting, and WWE can't even fill it in. To WWE fans, Triple H, Undertaker, Shawn Michaels are the HUGE names, Sting doesn't mean anything.

Icon vs. Phenom means a lot to you, to a lot of fans Sting is just a random new guy.

Whilst I can see how you think like that the majority of WWE fans live in America and will have been brought up on WWE and WCW action, their parents and grandparents will have told them tales of yore concerning Andre the Giant, Hulk Hogan, Sting, Bischoff, screwjobs etc. Few of the youngest WWE fans will have seen Sting in WCW but similarly many of the current generation will not have seen a Mick Foley, Austin in his prime, Rock when he was a full time guy, Vince when he was a proper heel boss, Hogan when he was a proper wrestler and more, but they still react to these things and still buy into the excitement of the occasion.

This means that while the interest in Sting v Taker will be big here, it would be even bigger in the States

The one thing all of those things have which Sting doesn't have and that's all of those others guys were or became WWE guys, Hogan before he went to TNA, and still even a bit now is put over as a huge guy, Andre the Giant talked about as a legend, Foley, Austin and The Rock all referenced on WWE television. Sting? No, he's never on WWE TV. Yeah, parents and grandparents can stay stuff, but I think they will listen more to what the WWE "experts" tell them on TV.

Owl, I'm just debating it from what I feel the average WWE fan's view point would be. I probably am more of a WWE fan than you guys, because it's my only main stream option, TNA is poor and RoH doesn't have enough exposure for me to make the effort to follow, at the end of the day the average WWE fan is what WWE needs to market to though, there's no point targetting the minority.

That's the stigma around sting...HE HAS NEVER BEEN IN A WWE RING. Vince has tried multiple times to sign him but sting didn't want to be mis-used,when booker came over from WCW the rock said to him 'who the hell are you',sting thought that was disrespectful and he didn't want that treatment. Make no mistake about it sting will go in the hall of fame and vince will make shed loads of money off him. The back catalogue and all the rights he owns.

Answer this.

Why did wwe try so desperately to sign sting prior to mania 27?

An average wwe hasn't got a clue about wrestling. Only what the wwe is for.

invincibleILeak (CL-6WF) wrote:Owl, I'm just debating it from what I feel the average WWE fan's view point would be. I probably am more of a WWE fan than you guys, because it's my only main stream option, TNA is poor and RoH doesn't have enough exposure for me to make the effort to follow, at the end of the day the average WWE fan is what WWE needs to market to though, there's no point targetting the minority.

That's where we are different. I'm a fan of Wrestling not brands. Your possibly to young to know this but around the time the Attitude Era that WWE fans love so much was just as bad as the stuff WWE put out now. I used to turn over and watch WCW.

Don't get me wrong WWE/WWF has had some great matches but the same can be said for any wrestling promotion. The only thing is WWF/WWE has always been the top dog in popularity but this doesn't mean in quality. I watch both TNA and WWE because I'm a fan or wrestling.

If Sting turned up on RAW tomorrow(yes I know not going to happen obviously) can you honestly say you wouldn't care?

You seem to think I am criticizing Sting or that anything outside of WWE doesn't matter, I'm not at all, but for the last 10 years WWE IS wrestling for most people and Sting has never been on WWE television, never even mentioned, can you not understand for even a second that there will be a significant percentage of the audience who will fail to understand the importance of him?

Sting just isn't that good anymore, it's all well and good talking about the importance of his history, how good he used to be, how long how much people want this match but at the end of the day he's a 50 year old man who's wrestling most of the time is poor, and he would be wrestling Undertaker who's knees could go at any point, the match would be so slow and boring I'm not even sure for me, and quite a lot of other fans, who don't "get" Sting that the build up and promos would be enough to make up for it.

Owl, the average WWE fan is ALL that matters really though to WWE management, it's the average WWE fan who will buy their crap, and it's the average WWE fan they need to cater to.

We don't even know that they "desperately tried to sign him", we've been given drips of rumours that WWE offered Sting a contract, and he turned it down to stay in TNA. I think it was blown completley out of proportion.

If I'm being honest, and I'll probably get slated for this, but Undertaker vs. Cena would be a more important match.

If sting said it on record that was inches away from signing I think I will believe that.

So why did they try and sign him?

The match would be a draw,end of story.

Cena v taker would be huge and would massively draw,cena is the present and future.

If its all catered to 'the average wwe fan' what's with the punk angle,drawing in roh fans and what about the rock,the guy has practically sent mania buy rates through the roof. Is that for the average fan? I wonder if the majority of the fans(kids) know what punk on about. It's also funny how the rock got the biggest POP this year,I wonder if the kids did that aswell?

Didn't think so.

I just think you are a wwe fan and not a wrestling fan.

Can you answer my questions please

Sting v Taker would be a massive sell. The 2 guys in the 90's who both had their own mystique. I saw Sting in the 90's and he helped the whole NWO v WCW work and play out for so long. The whole will he or won't he had me gripped for months. I would pay to see them 2. Granted both are not in the best shape of their careers, but the hype would be immense and the mind games the 2 play on it's own would be entertainment value.

Sting with his current gimmick is pants. It isn't working. Resorting to trying to turn Hogan face and only for Hogan to double cross Sting with a predictable heel turn.

If Sting joined WWE he would sell. If Flair in his late 50's was still being used and getting a draw, I am sure Sting could.

Yes, in the 90s, a decade ago now. Yes it would probably sell, but it I just don't think it'd be as big as a lot of people like to make out. The mind games would be good yes, but then the match would be such a huge dissapointment considering how much you all want it.

HitmanOwl, are you actually reading my posts? I keep explaining how The Rock, Austin, Hogan they're a different kettle of fish because WWE has promoted how big these guys are, the fans have been told how big they are, but Sting has NEVER been mentioned on WWE television, he's not talked about as a great and if he just turned up on WWE I am 99% sure the reaction wouldn't be as good as you lot would hope for.

To answer your question; they tried to sign him because they could! Of course they want as many as the big names in wrestling as they can, but that doesn't prove any point at all, it doesn't prove that 'Taker vs. Sting would be amazing, and it doesn't even prove your point that they were "desperately" trying to sign him, they offered him a contract and Sting rejected it, hardly sounds "desperate" to me. WWE signed Chris Harris that way from TNA, is that because they thought putting him against 'Taker would draw huge? No, so it's an irrelevant point.

You keep trying to label me as a "WWE fan", yes....so what? You're a WWE fan too, so are most of the people in the wrestling section. Why does that mean I'm not a wrestling fan? Because I litterally couldn't watch WCW that means I am not a wrestling fan, because I don't agree with you about Sting means I'm not a wrestling fan, well in that case I think you're not a wrestling fan because you've only watched main stream promotions, why weren't you watching in the 60s in the territories, you're not a real wrestling fan....

Leak - the big thing is that if Sting joined WWE their commentators would suddenly promote him as the biggest thing since sliced bread and that would put him over with the fans

Really, I'm just trying to disagree with Owl who said it's the "last match all wrestling fans want to see". I just don't think that's true, sure it'd be a big moment, but I think there are lots of other matches and people that I'd rather see than Sting vs. Undertaker.

Punk v Austin for a start...but that's for a different thread!

The Sting character was interesting at first, but it irritates me how he is just a blatant rip off of a film character. Alright base yourself on The Joker but he might as well read from Jack Nicholson's script!

Sting and Undertaker would be a big draw, but the quality of wrestling would be pants. The could pull it off, I mean if 2 guys in great shape like Lesnar and Goldberg could wrestle crap, I am sure it wouldn't be that bad. Cena and The Rock will be a big draw, and I do hope they pull it off in the ring, but they have to go somewhere to beat the reaction when Hogan faced The Rock.

The one match I would like to see would be AJ Styles v CM Punk. That would be awesome!

Quite agree Enforcer. It is sad they are ripping a film character and more amazing that Sting is happy to try and portray it

I grew up watching Sting on WCW, and I used to love him. I always longed for the day that he would return, but that never happened. Then the next thing I know, he's popped up on TNA. I know very little about Sting, but if Taker vs. Sting was to take place then I would watch it.

Who's to say that the Sting we all see on TNA would be the one that came across to WWE? The WWE would re-invent the TNA version of Sting into something more plausible for the Taker feud. The psycological battle you could have going on through the year would be insane. Kids would eventually buy into Sting, it's no big deal for the WWE.

As for them putting on a great match, well, we'd have to wait and see if it ever happened. I believe that, yes they are both old and the match would probably be slower than most would want, but it would go right back to the basics of wrestling and could be a classic match for all.

@leak

U basing your opinions on what you sting you seen now. Basically anything wwe say about legends you believe?

U would be in the small minority who doesn't know sting. If they ever came face to face taker reaction would tell a thousands words

The crow comes alive to finally take the taker away.

Vince is in this business to make money,simple as that. Sting would draw huge numbers and you really can't comment on this because you don't understand that this would be a marquee match,end of chat.

Sting is near enough on par with hogan,Austin etc etc. Why would wwe mention him when he is working for tna? Promoting tna would be stupid.

I don't understand your logic at all. Nobody knows if the match would be bad,it can't be as bad as the majority of the wwe matches put on 2 day.

They tried to sign him because they could. Hmm funny he signed for tna instead,he's the only guy vince can't get and I bet it irks vkm.

If you could have one dream match what would it be?

HitmanOwl wrote:
They tried to sign him because they could. Hmm funny he signed for tna instead,he's the only guy vince can't get and I bet it irks vkm.

I doubt Vince loses any sleep over it.

He has the bigger shows
In the bigger arenas
With the bigger stars
On the bigger budget
Turning the bigger profit

Sting staying with TNA would affect none of those variables

I'm not saying that I(!) believe everything WWE says, obviously not, I read up on things, I watch old events, but at the end of the day the majority of the fans watching WWE only know WWE, and like you said, it'd be stupid for them to promote TNA, so even if he returns that Sting has been sat on his bum for 10 years.

Like Demon said, Vince won't really care whether Sting joins him or not, Sting is no where near as big as Austin or Hogan these days, maybe if he had joined WWE when WCW sank, but he's been stuck in a poor company with very little exposure for the past decade.

I think I'm actually in a better position to comment on the importance of Sting because I'm not blinded by nostalgia like you are, I'm not wearing the blinkers of thinking about what Sting has done in the past rather than what Sting is right now.

Sure, the match might be on par with most of what WWE puts on these days, but your expectations for most of what WWE puts on is very low, but you've shown on this thread that your expectations for a Sting/Taker match are very high, can you not admit that the match would be slightly dissapointing because these two guys are old, immobile and it simply isn't what you want Owl, you want to see Sting of 2001, face Undertaker of 2001 not what they are now.

tbh honest I'd rather have them both retire now along with every other oldy.

I said taker v sting would be a draw,u disagreed.

I think I'm right.

Vinny mac personally would be annoyed that sting has snubbed him on several occasions. Vinny mac could get anyone but not sting.

Well what's the difference between sting,triple h,taker?

That match with triple h,which never mentioned they have already met before was average at best. Your telling me sting couldn't match that?

Will agree to disagree,funny you keep dodging the questions.

What dream match do you want to see?

Mine would be sting v taker.

I'm not dodging any questions.

My dream match would be

CM Punk vs. Shawn Michaels

Well you ain't answered three from above.

Nice match to pick.

Well what's the difference between sting,triple h,taker?

In what way do you mean different?

That match with triple h,which never mentioned they have already met before was average at best. Your telling me sting couldn't match that?

I'm not saying they couldn't match that at all.

You're very much a selective reader Owl, I will quote myself from earlier to show you what I mean:

invincibleILeak (CL-6WF) wrote:Really, I'm just trying to disagree with Owl who said it's the "last match all wrestling fans want to see". I just don't think that's true, sure it'd be a big moment, but I think there are lots of other matches and people that I'd rather see than Sting vs. Undertaker.

It might match HHH vs. Undertaker, but that doesn't say much. The point I'm making is that Sting vs. Undertaker can never be the match you all want to see and expect.