10 WWE Questions You Most Want Answered (Mar 8)

1. Undertaker Better As Face Or Heel?

From @rocco_619: Overall would you say Undertaker is better as a face or a heel?

If you look at his career over the last 25 years he spent most of the time as a face, but his heel work really was great. The problem is that fans grew to love and respect him so much that they could never keep him heel for too long because he's the "conscience" of WWE as they like to say. He started out as a heel in 1990, that lasted for a couple of years, then he worked as a face for most of the 1990s until late 1998 into 1999 when he was more of a demonic heel. His heel turn in 2002 was fantastic and was the best part of his "Big Evil" phase. That lasted for about a year or so, though. It wasn't that long because crowds would cheer him for being an awesome performer, so WWE would turn him. Then he became the main face on the Smackdown brand for much of the 2000s. In terms of what he was better at, it's probably his run as a face. When you really think about it he's probably spent about 20 of his 25 years as a face, so there's a lot more of his face work out there to think about. There were definitely some bad feuds with awful opponents along the way, but the great work overshadows the bad parts for sure. The work he's done as a top babyface is what people are going to remember the most, but there's a lot of great heel work from him too. He really is a terrific all around performer. That's pretty obvious.