Guest Anglesault Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 DH, pops/markouts don't nessesarly mean ratings. They do if you continue to build upon them, instead of slacking off LIKE they did with Hogan and HBK. Wait. The gave both Hogan and Michaels world title reigns to try and capitalize on that They would have to put him into a thought out program with someone, with a goal for someone to reach for. Michaels had that.
Guest Downhome Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 But if it happens, it will only be short term. What's the point on spending that much time and energy on someone who will be there for a month when you got people who are already over (ie RVD) on your roster who you can build off of? Do you mean short term because that's how long you think they'll sign him, or that's how long you think he'll be over? Let me know, then I can reply to this the right way.
Guest AndrewTS Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 How did they "slack off" with Hogan? Face it, Hogan's old and simply is not going to get the 18-35 male demographic behind him, even with nostalgia, the same way a younger, charismatic, edgier superstar could do. He drove away fans, rather than helping the product, even if he did get pops and drew a little. Goldberg has a better chance, because he's not that old, and still could have great appeal. I hate him, but they could use him well. However, there is nothing about Goldberg that they can't duplicate with a WWE-bred hossoid for far cheaper, and that's why it's a waste in my opinion.
Guest Gimmick Poster.com Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 GOLDBERG!!! YOU must DIE, so that *I* may live....
Guest CanadianChick Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 But if it happens, it will only be short term. What's the point on spending that much time and energy on someone who will be there for a month when you got people who are already over (ie RVD) on your roster who you can build off of? Do you mean short term because that's how long you think they'll sign him, or that's how long you think he'll be over? Let me know, then I can reply to this the right way. I meant short term contract...sorry to confuse.
Guest Downhome Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 Wait. The gave both Hogan and Michaels world title reigns to try and capitalize on that Both of their title reigns were pointless. Hogan got his on a fluke title shot, that had no true story around it at all. Then when he got the title, he fought Taker in a HORRID feud over motorcycles or some shit, it meant nothing at all. I didn't even care for the horrid feuds. As for HBK, the fans had no reason to care, he's not even the same "HBK" that the fans cared about in the first place, no one wants to hear him talk about religion, they want The Heart Break Kid who dances, is flamboyat, etc... Neither Hogan or HBK had a title reign that meant anything, and the HHH/HBK feud was just as pointless, it was presented horribly. Michaels had that. Again, he had nothing to work with. The fans wanted to see him come back, he showed up, but was nothing what they wanted at all. Then they have him talk about religion, and then they have him in a horrid feud. It's all about what program you put someone in, and they just need to find something for Goldberg to do that will be interesting, and it will work. Sure I have my doubts, but I must hold faith untill I'm proven wrong.
Guest Downhome Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 But if it happens, it will only be short term. What's the point on spending that much time and energy on someone who will be there for a month when you got people who are already over (ie RVD) on your roster who you can build off of? Do you mean short term because that's how long you think they'll sign him, or that's how long you think he'll be over? Let me know, then I can reply to this the right way. I meant short term contract...sorry to confuse. If they sign him to a short term (meaning, a month or just one appearance) then I don't think they should bring him in period. Just like if they bring Rocky back for a month, I don't think they should do that. I am not for them EVER bringing in stars like them short term.
Guest Dangerous A Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 Goldberg is going to be good for 1, maybe 2 matches and that's it. WWE screwed themselves waiting this long to bring him in. He should've been the one, along with Scott Steiner, to spearhead the Invasion. But no. They screwed up. They had a ton more fans watching at that time and they could've prospered. Now they've waited too long. Will they pop the WM buyrate for Goldberg? You bet. Especially if you deliver the dream match of Rock vs Goldberg or Austin vs Goldberg. After that, he's through. The fanbase now either a) doesn't really know him or b)don't care about him. Goldberg's value is only to bring specialness to WM this year and that's it. He is not the person you want to build main event storylines around.
Guest Anglesault Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 One of the conditions of a Goldberg contract is that he has to be handcuffed while Regal or someone similar gives him stiff kicks to the head for fifteen minutes.
Guest AndrewTS Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 One of the conditions of a Goldberg contract is that he has to be handcuffed while Regal or someone similar gives him stiff kicks to the head for fifteen minutes. That'd be kosher with me.
Guest RavishingRickRudo Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 The only thing goldberg has is 'natural charisma' - attention gravitates toward him if he walks into a room. But that's it. The WCW fanbase is NOT coming back - They didn't for Flair, didn't for the NWO, didn't for WCW itself. They won't for Goldberg. Goldberg, without the streak, is NOTHING. He doesn't have the mic skills to be anything other than 'you're next!' and he gets completely exposed in anything over 3 minutes. So that means he would have to squash guys. Guys like Jericho, RVD, Benoit, Eddie, Hardy etc. and for what? So he could lose to HHH? The only value he has is putting over someone LIKE Jericho or RVD, to elevate them to the next level - but we all know that's not going to happen. There are 2 matches for him in the WWF. One vs. Austin and the other vs. Brock. Austin won't wrestle him because Austin learns from the Hitmans mistakes. Austin needs someone to protect him in the ring and he knows that Goldberg cannot offer him that security. And Brock is simply not experienced enough to guide Goldie through a match. Goldberg is not a draw - WCW was floundering from 99-01 and Goldberg was there. He is simply not what they need. They need to start with the basics. Work their way up. All of they 'get rich quick' schemes have FAILED without exception or acception, it is simply not the way to go. Goldberg *is* dangerous in the ring. He was trained for 6 months in the powerplant and that's it! I believe it was in the hitman shoot interview where Bret said that Goldie concussed him 3 times in their match at Starrcade. Goldberg has no respect for the business and therefore is not willing to grow FOR the business and learn the finer points of wrestling.
LaParkaYourCar Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 I hate Goldberg. He's a pimadonna who was only over when he was squashing people. DDP carried him to a good match by pretty much forcing Goldberg to practice and plan out a match. Without his streak he's nothing. He's just another big lumbering boring wrestler who was given a good push and got insanely over for awhile.........but the fans got REAL tired of him as time went by....and they will again.
Guest Rob Edwards Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 Goldberg is certainly a draw I think, it's just WCW messed up on their booking somewhat so that he became all about the streak and once that was over they didn't have a clue what to do with him
Guest Brian Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 The fatc, is bringing in the acts ahve a limited drawing period and capitalizing on that, especially putting them in the forefront, is very hard to do. Whereas you have Austin and Rock in the wings. Goldberg was a draw but was killed during WCW and he has a short-term name value, just like hogan, the nWo, Flair, etc.
Guest Downhome Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 Goldberg *is* dangerous in the ring. He was trained for 6 months in the powerplant and that's it! I believe it was in the hitman shoot interview where Bret said that Goldie concussed him 3 times in their match at Starrcade. Saying he's dangerous in the ring is insane as well, the Bret incident is the ONLY time he's ever truly hurt someone. Bret doesn't even blame Goldberg for his career ending, so I don't understand why all of you do. Bret blamed the WCW booking team for making him go out there while he was ALREADY hurt and not ready to perform, not Goldy.
Guest geniusMoment Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 It wasn't just Goldberg that ended Harts career, in fact if after that match Hart would have treated his concussion the correct way he would have been able to continue. What Hart did was wrestle a series of matches against The Funker, taking some sick chairshots to head, and giving himself a severe concussion, initially it wasn't any worse than a normal wrestling concussion. He then took a couple of plane rides which made it much worse. This damage on a already damaged head lead to something called post concussion syndrome, which is why Hart cannot wrestle. I don't want Goldberg either but don't blame it all on him.
Guest Brian Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 Goldberg has a rep though for being unrestrained and wild in the ring. That's how people interpret it as being stiff. He had little control.
LaParkaYourCar Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 It's not just him being dangerous it's his whole attitude towards the business. I don't get the vibe from him that he cares what happened in the Bret Hart match. His whole time in WCW he was just collecting a paycheck. He never really cared for the business.
Guest Downhome Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 It wasn't just Goldberg that ended Harts career, in fact if after that match Hart would have treated his concussion the correct way he would have been able to continue. What Hart did was wrestle a series of matches against The Funker, taking some sick chairshots to head, and giving himself a severe concussion, initially it wasn't any worse than a normal wrestling concussion. He then took a couple of plane rides which made it much worse. This damage on a already damaged head lead to something called post concussion syndrome, which is why Hart cannot wrestle. I don't want Goldberg either but don't blame it all on him. Exactly, plus Bret was ALREADY hurt going into the match with Goldberg. Bret blamed the WCW booking team, NOT Goldberg.
LaParkaYourCar Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 Please stop calling Goldberg "Goldy" that name is for Goldust. That's another reason Goldberg should have been more careful if Bret was already injured. Because he ended up hurting him 3 times in one match. I don't just blame him for the injury. I hated him before the Bret Hart match.
Guest Anglesault Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 Bret doesn't even blame Goldberg for his career ending, so I don't understand why all of you do. Because he was so FUCKING CARELESS that he concussed an already hurt guy THREE TIMES in one match. That was the end.
Guest RavishingRickRudo Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 No, Bret was hurt FROM Goldberg and then took the chairshots AFTER. Goldberg's 3 concussions in one match should have just put Bret Hart out for like say, 6 months. WCW's stupid decisions gave him permanent brain damage. Goldberg is notorious for being wreckless in the ring. I recall a match in 2000 where he rushed the ring, beat up team canada, and took storm in a pump handle and without caution threw him back. Storm landed pretty hard. Saying he is dangerous in the ring is putting it mildly.
Guest RavishingRickRudo Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 Bret doesn't blame Goldberg because Bret saw it as his responsibility to work around Goldbergs stupidity.
Guest Downhome Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 No, Bret was hurt FROM Goldberg and then took the chairshots AFTER. Goldberg's 3 concussions in one match should have just put Bret Hart out for like say, 6 months. WCW's stupid decisions gave him permanent brain damage. Goldberg is notorious for being wreckless in the ring. I recall a match in 2000 where he rushed the ring, beat up team canada, and took storm in a pump handle and without caution threw him back. Storm landed pretty hard. Saying he is dangerous in the ring is putting it mildly. No, Bret was very much already suffering before that match. While we're at it... ...how about we all list everyone that Goldberg injured. I'm not talking about a little bump that made someone hurt, that happens in every match basicly, I'm talking about something that REALLY hurt someone. Go ahead, list them all please.
Guest Brian Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 Someone call Observer Live about Goldberg's rep. It's been heavily publicized. He was loose, careless, unrestrained, unprofessional, had no care for the business or the people that worked hard to achieve what they did in it and was a shitty wrestler. If I still had back issues from those days, I'd bring them up.
Guest Downhome Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 Someone call Observer Live about Goldberg's rep. It's been heavily publicized. He was loose, careless, unrestrained, unprofessional, had no care for the business or the people that worked hard to achieve what they did in it and was a shitty wrestler. If I still had back issues from those days, I'd bring them up. For someone so "loose, careless, unrestrained, unprofessional", it sure it amazing that he never hurt more than one person seriously isn't it, and that one person was already on the brink of being seriously hurt. Yes, it's amazing indeed. Come on, you people are making it out like Goldberg is this insane beast who has almost killed everyone he has ever worked with, and that simply isn't true. People from DDP, Sting, and even Hogan has said they enjoyed working with him.
LaParkaYourCar Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 No, Bret was hurt FROM Goldberg and then took the chairshots AFTER. Goldberg's 3 concussions in one match should have just put Bret Hart out for like say, 6 months. WCW's stupid decisions gave him permanent brain damage. Goldberg is notorious for being wreckless in the ring. I recall a match in 2000 where he rushed the ring, beat up team canada, and took storm in a pump handle and without caution threw him back. Storm landed pretty hard. Saying he is dangerous in the ring is putting it mildly. No, Bret was very much already suffering before that match. While we're at it... ...how about we all list everyone that Goldberg injured. I'm not talking about a little bump that made someone hurt, that happens in every match basicly, I'm talking about something that REALLY hurt someone. Go ahead, list them all please. So you're saying he was pretty hurt before the Goldberg match? Did Goldberg know that? I bet so. Three times in one match on a man he knew was hurt is beyond careless to me no matter how many others he has injured. Besides his matches in Japan has he even been taking wrestling lessons? Frankly the way he wrestled he got lucky that he didn't injure anyone else seriously.
Guest Downhome Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 No, Bret was hurt FROM Goldberg and then took the chairshots AFTER. Goldberg's 3 concussions in one match should have just put Bret Hart out for like say, 6 months. WCW's stupid decisions gave him permanent brain damage. Goldberg is notorious for being wreckless in the ring. I recall a match in 2000 where he rushed the ring, beat up team canada, and took storm in a pump handle and without caution threw him back. Storm landed pretty hard. Saying he is dangerous in the ring is putting it mildly. No, Bret was very much already suffering before that match. While we're at it... ...how about we all list everyone that Goldberg injured. I'm not talking about a little bump that made someone hurt, that happens in every match basicly, I'm talking about something that REALLY hurt someone. Go ahead, list them all please. So you're saying he was pretty hurt before the Goldberg match? Did Goldberg know that? I bet so. Three times in one match on a man he knew was hurt is beyond careless to me no matter how many others he has injured. Besides his matches in Japan has he even been taking wrestling lessons? Frankly the way he wrestled he got lucky that he didn't injure anyone else seriously. I bet Bret knew it also, he could have stood up to someone and told them that he shouldn't be performing, WCW bookers shouldn't have made him, blah blah blah. It was an accident, that's all, it happens. It is horrible, and I hate it, but it happens. Bret's one of my favorites ever, but you can't just blame one man for what goes on. It's lucky more people don't get hurt PERIOD, and not just by Goldberg.
LaParkaYourCar Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 I don't know why I'm harping on this one thing anyway. It's not even the real reason I don't like the guy. He was insanely over at one point, but that still doesn't make me like him. You said if he got over you would say "I told you so" you could say it till you're blue in the face to me I don't care for the man's attitude. He's just another quick fix by the WWE. Plus he was worse than an Ex-WCW star.........he's pure home grown WCW talent which means I'd hate to see how Vince treats him after his initial program is over if he stays around.........well maybe I wouldn't "hate" to see what happens.
Guest Downhome Posted January 11, 2003 Report Posted January 11, 2003 he's pure home grown WCW talent which means I'd hate to see how Vince treats him after his initial program is over if he stays around.........well maybe I wouldn't "hate" to see what happens. So you want WWE to intentionally f'up once again? I'm sorry, but I don't want them to intentionally f'up, no matter what it is. If he's on TV, IF he's on TV (we don't eve know he's coming yet), then I would hope everyone here would hope for them to make the best of it, instead of trying to ruin yet another angle, which would as a result hurt the product that much more.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now