Kayfabe wise : Do you think these wrestlers could re-accomplish their accomplishments if they wrestled today?

Jesus look at everyone trying to outdo each other with their essays. "Kayfabe wise" questions are pretty pointless. All of them would do fine from a kayfabe standpoint.

Alright basically today the whole field of wrestling has been turned upside down. Its more fast paced with titles switching hands almost in a monthly manner, we rarely even see a yearly title reign, let alone stuff like 5 year, 8 year or 20 year reigns. The reason I would say is that majority of what we view today is SOLELY based on business and entertainment. Back in the days the champions were really something to talk about, they were like the top contenders of the food chain, untouchable and unbeatable by the lower creeds. But now? Just to give you an example, Jack Swagger not so long ago hoisted the World Heavyweight Championship around his waist, but now? He is almost always "jobbed" to other wrestlers. This would be unthinkable back in the days, I mean, they all had their ranks, nowadays the ranks change at an unbelievable rate, what is a jobber now will be a maineventer next year and so on. So in a nut shell, all the scenarios that you give will be impossible to maintain in CURRENT world of wrestling. So keeping Kayfabe in mind, lets try to answer, and ya of course I agree with you, kayfabe wise WWE today is alot harder (and unfair). 1. Andre The Giant undefeated for 15 years, now I know you said to keep thing strictly in kayfabe manner, but we HAVE to also respect what the fans want. Andre or a person who comes closest to him is The Big Show, and the way I see it, it all depends on how credible he is to keep the streak going, Andre was a big man, kayfabe wise, he would crush his opponents to bits (keeping in mind, later in his years he had the trouble of properly navigating around the ring, so he might be a bit slow off) but yes, Andre was a VERY hard opponent to beat, hell his defeat at Wrestlemania 3 was like a game changer in the world of pro wrestling. So yes, it is very much possible that Andre would have gone against the odds and beaten the top guys like Cena and maybe even The Undertaker to get to his 15 years streak. If Andre at his prime started out now and strictly kayfabe wise wrestling, then he would be laying his opponents like crazy. Remember, kayfabe wise means a lot in Andre's terms, he was a real life giant, and put him in a ring full of today's wrestlers, its obvious who would win. 2. Bruno Sammartino WWE Champion for 8 years, nah, this one I don't see happening, even if I do put it kayfabe wise, being the company's top wrestler and hoisting its championship for 8 years is just too long to go in today's standards, sure, if he's credible enough he can go on, but as you said, wrestling twice a week and participating in 12 PPVs per year, man thats ALOT to go through and STILL retain your title for 8 years. Plus we have Money in the Bank matches and don't tell me no one cashes against him for 8 years, so no, I don't think this one is possible. 3. Hulk Hogan WWE Champion for 4 years, This one is a bit tough, Hogan was a VERY charismatic guy, I would think it would be very much possible for him to maintain his WWE title, plus we're talking about a guy who is possible one of the hardest guys to beat clean, he's literally the "Hulk" of WWE in that case. The reason Hogan would accomplish this feat and not Bruno is merely the years they are in control and possession of the title. Bruno is in reign for 8 years you say, now there can be alot of incidents that can make him lose the title, considering each year WWE gets a new MITB winner, are you saying Bruno would fend himself and the title against 8 years of possible cash-ins? I doubt. Also don't forget the numerous gimmick matches, its not about who is stronger or more powerful, its about how aware and how much of a survivor you are to be in reign for 8 years. But Hulk, for a person that he is, its very hard to beat him, extremely hard. 4 years isn't THAT much of a deal, atleast not for him. Now you might say why can't he get ambushed in those 4 years by a MITB contractor, well as I said, this one is a hard pick, chances are he would lose, but I'm betting on his strength and the fact that how hard he is to beat, so Bruno is getting 4 years extra, in which he will have a larger chance of losing the title, that is why I say that Hogan has more chance to retain it than Bruno. 4. Fabulous Moolah WWE Women's Champion for 28 years, a big no. Moolah was a great wrestler no doubt, but the competition is just too harsh in the female sector of WWE today, kayfabe wise it would be almost impossible to defend it for 10 years, let alone 28 years. There are most competitors in the field than ever before, we got wrestlers like Kharma, Beth Pheonix etc. and being undefeated for 28 years straight and holding onto the title is a very hard task, so its a no, she cannot do it.