Wrestlefreak Posted September 14, 2006 Report Posted September 14, 2006 Goldberg's style was cool. Aside from being incredibly intense, the way his matches were booked as a sort of ritual slaughter ceremony- with a quick and painful end- was great. The spear and jackhammer were also great signature moves. Having said that, it's hard to see where Goldberg's career could have gone after the streak was over, given that alot of his success was based on him being unstoppable.
Hunter's Torn Quad Posted September 14, 2006 Report Posted September 14, 2006 Yeah, I wouldn't say the problem with Goldber in WWE was him not beating enough people. It was just more about how his character was portrayed. They wasted a lot of effort in trying to make him comedic, or turn him into the next Rock, when he should have just been an all out badass beating the crap out of people. Exactly. They took everything that made Goldberg get over and took it away, purely to prove that Goldberg wasn't all that good. Whether Goldberg was a good worker or not doesn't matter, because he got over huge before falling victim to politics.
The Buzz Posted September 14, 2006 Report Posted September 14, 2006 If you want a proper comparison for Goldberg, look no further than the Ultimate Warrior. Both had intensity, both had some sort of charisma, and had little nuances that made their characters fun to watch even if they weren't spectaculars workers or talkers.
Hunter's Torn Quad Posted September 14, 2006 Report Posted September 14, 2006 Goldberg was so much better than Warrior. Goldberg is very underrated as a worker.
The Buzz Posted September 14, 2006 Report Posted September 14, 2006 I'll agree with that, I'm actually a pretty big Goldberg mark dispite disliking him originally. He was never really as sloppy as the Warrior could be.
PLAGIARISM! Posted September 14, 2006 Report Posted September 14, 2006 As someone who tires of wrestling a lot more easily these days, I liked Goldberg. his part in the elimination chamber kept me enthralled like few other performances of this era. In fact, throughout his WWE run I can't really see that he personally did anything wrong.
pochorenella Posted September 14, 2006 Report Posted September 14, 2006 He was never really as sloppy as the Warrior could be. Bret Hart might disagree with that.
cabbageboy Posted September 14, 2006 Report Posted September 14, 2006 Goldberg's best stuff isn't anywhere near as good as Warrior's best stuff (vs. Hogan and Savage). I discussed this Goldberg streak thing in another WCW thread. The problem was not so much that he jobbed to Nash and his streak was over. It was that he didn't do shit after that. If Goldberg loses to Nash and simply regained it at that infamous Jan. 4 Nitro (with the Fingerpoke) I think things would be much different. Goldberg being screwed over was a storyline they could have run with, but they didn't do shit with him.
Hunter's Torn Quad Posted September 14, 2006 Report Posted September 14, 2006 Goldberg's best stuff isn't anywhere near as good as Warrior's best stuff (vs. Hogan and Savage). All of Warrior's good matches were down to the other guy working his ass off and, in the case of the Hogan match, going through the match move-for-move for two months prior. Those matches might have been better than Goldberg's best matches, but Goldberg at least was an active part of his good matches and worked hard.
cd213 Posted September 15, 2006 Report Posted September 15, 2006 After watching TNA tonight one man could and is as big as Godlberg in the same way with the fans...Samoa Joe. He's a monster that people believe will beat the shit out of everyone in his way.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now