For one if Marvel got the rights to Superman it is probably because they paid for it. And I don't see DC giving up those rights cheaply. So why would Marvel pay that much money to hose a character's reputation? It doesn't make good business sense.
Secondly as much as there is a DC vs Marvel rivalry going on, most people here and in the industry grew up with Superman. I think Marvel would have more respect for the character then just dumping on it.
I don't think they'd job him out, but I do think that Marvel would ensure that at least a couple of their elite top tiers had a winning record against him. even if it's only 5.5/10.
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
No one said they would "dump" him. He would be and upper tier character, but would not be portrayed above Thor, Hulk or Surfer over time. I'm sure he'd have a great debut like Rulk.
The bottom line is Marvel is fundamentally different than DC and that would never change. Marvel would make a ton of money off Superman without having the universe job to him, and that's good business. Marvel heroes fight each other more than they do villians, so expect his inclusion in Marvel to lead to a round robin of battles with heroes. He'll beat many desicively, but not the top dogs. Then he'd move onto villians like Gladiator who he'd OUTSMART. Doom would eventually own him. You are dreaming if you think he'd ever have an h1's Superman portrayal in Marvel. He would adjust to the universe, not the other way around.