Professional wrestler The Undertaker has been in WWE a long time, but does simple longevity qualify him to be enshrined in the company’s Hall of Fame alongside such luminaries as Drew Carey, Koko B. Ware and Donald Trump?

We assembled a panel of respected sports-entertainmentologists to debate whether the so-called Phenom has truly accomplished as much in WWE as, say, Pete Rose. Here is a summary of their findings:

Arguments for induction:

• No known Wellness Policy violations, sextapes, or racial tirades
• Held his own at WrestleMania 9 against Giant Gonzalez
• Never worked for TNA
• Can magically affect lighting by raising arms
• Better rapper than Hall of Fame inductee Snoop Dog

Arguments against induction:

• Inactive 364 days of the year
• Never held Intercontinental Championship
• Was eliminated from a Royal Rumble by Maven
• Alleged involvement in childhood arson
• Powerless without urn
• Basically just a Mordecai rip-off
• Can’t moonsault

Verdict: Undertaker is not worthy of induction into the WWE Hall of Fame.