Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2012 13:15:51 GMT -5
Actually Barrett's & Ziggler's personalities both play major roles in how their matches play out and their storylines. Barrett worked as a 'hired gun' for Paul Heyman and Ziggler actually stole John Cena's girlfriend - which is a big part of his personality (showing off, stealing girlfriends). I don't think anyone would get Ryback's personality instantly just from seeing him the ring. In fact, I think most people would see him as the bad guy because of his demeanor. When I forward youtube clips to friends who don't watch wrestling of Ryback, that's what they always say. They're genuinely surprised when I tell them he's supposed to be the good guy. I agree that a character doesn't need to be complex to work, but original - yes. More to the point if you expect audiences to NOT chant 'Goldberg' at Ryback you have to make him an original character that's more complex than what Goldberg was. You've got a guy who you admit isn't complex or original and has a look and personality similar to early Goldberg and you're honestly can't understand why people would chant the dudes name? I can't understand why they chant his name because doing so would imply that Goldberg is original, or that he's the only one allowed to do the whole "monster face" shtick. As you can see from this very thread, he isn't. In fact, you can go through a good amount of people on the roster and find that they draw inspiration from what someone else has already done. You don't see Brodus Clay getting "Flash Funk" chants. Yet Ryback is the only one who gets chants about a guy who's not even original himself? That's dumb. And judging by Goldberg's popularity, originality obviously isn't what's important. How well you play the character is what's important. When you see Ryback headed to the ring to destroy a whining champion it's incredibly easy to see who he is and what he does, especially when the commentators are singing his praises the entire time. That's why fans pop every time Ryback destroys CM Punk. If we're going to tell personal stories, then I've seen non-fans who understood that way back when Ryback was still squashing jobbers and hadn't feuded with anybody. As far as Wade Barrett and Dolph Ziggler go? Here's my question, when Ziggler fought Cena at TLC, where did the "Showing Off" really come into play? How did it contribute to the match, other than a meaningless flips of the hair that don't mean anything? What would have been different about his matches if his character were any different? Judging by the fact that he's still working the same kind of matches he was before the whole "Show Off" gimmick started taking hold, I don't think it contributes a lot. I know he references it, and it's something commentators like to mention, but I haven't seen it have any real effect on anything he's done. Even in the current storyline with AJ, her betrayal (or at least her explanation on SmackDown) seemed to have more to do with her anger towards Cena than Ziggler (and yes, I'm aware she ended the segment with the words "Showing Off", which made next to no sense given that Langston was the one who laid out Miz). Same applies for Barrett. Admittedly, I missed whatever segment he had with Heyman where he worked as a hired gun, but I haven't seen or heard any of his bare-knuckle boxing really accomplishing anything in the last few weeks. As someone who can't be bothered with watching many of Barrett's matches, does he even act like one? So you don't even watch Barrett's matches, but already make assumptions about his character? I mean, yeah though - he incorporates his bare-knuckle background into his matches and promos. Ziggler does plenty of things in his match and within the story of his character to further drive home the 'show off' gimmick. I question the last time you even watched a Ziggler match because he hasn't done a handstand in a while. The reason people don't chant "Flash Funk" at Brodus Clay is because they have 100% opposite wrestling styles. If Brodus Clay were a high flyer, then maybe the audience might chant "Flash Funk" if they even remembered who he was. I never said Goldberg was the originator of his particular gimmick, far from it actually, but because he popped during the Attitude Era he's the most popular/memorable one. Ryback gets the "goldberg" chant because his look, wrestling style & lack of definitive character reminds people of the most popular version of that character.
|
|
|
Post by Apricots And A Pear Tree on Dec 24, 2012 13:17:41 GMT -5
I'd like to poll the crowd to see which ones know who Goldberg is.
|
|
Allie Kitsune
Crow T. Robot
Always Feelin' Foxy.
Celestial Princess in Exile.
Posts: 46,065
|
Post by Allie Kitsune on Dec 24, 2012 13:34:55 GMT -5
I'd like to poll the crowd to see which ones know who Goldberg is. I'd like to see them start chanting "Flash Funk" at Ryback.
|
|
Arrow
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 5,122
|
Post by Arrow on Dec 24, 2012 14:37:08 GMT -5
So you don't even watch Barrett's matches, but already make assumptions about his character? I mean, yeah though - he incorporates his bare-knuckle background into his matches and promos. Read the post again, you'll see that the quote was "As someone who can't be bothered with watching many of Barrett's matches" (the ones with Sheamus or at Survivor Series). There might have been something I was missing. But that's not to say that I haven't seen him work recently. I've seen him fight Kofi on Raw, I've seen him against Orton, I've seen him in a tag match on SmackDown, and I saw the Kofi-Barrett match at TLC. He's not someone I enjoy, but I wouldn't say what I did without having something to go on. And in none of those matches did I ever see anything about Barrett's personality really on display, other than he works like any typical heel. EDIT: Watching his one of his matches with Sheamus now. And it's more of what I'm talking about. If I'm new to wrestling and watching Barrett now, I honestly couldn't tell if he was supposed to be a bare-knuckle brawler. That is, if commentary hadn't mentioned it. Nothing he does here really tells me that. I just finished talking about his most recent one at TLC. I'd still like to know how Ziggler's "Show Off" gimmick really advanced anything within it. He did his usual taunt once early in the match, and that was it. It wasn't even a particularly memorable moment nor did it have an effect on anything within the confines of the match. Much like Barrett above, Ziggler does one thing related to his gimmick and then seems to abandon it for the rest of the match. How is that playing a character well? That's nice. I get WHY they chant "Goldberg" at Ryback, that's been obvious, but that doesn't make the fans look any more knowledgeable for doing it, because Goldberg's no less of a ripoff himself. Those particular fans don't like Ryback's character? Fine. But chanting "Goldberg" isn't the way to get things changed. And the message they're trying to get across (that you can't be a monster because Goldberg already did it) doesn't make much sense.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2012 16:16:55 GMT -5
So you don't even watch Barrett's matches, but already make assumptions about his character? I mean, yeah though - he incorporates his bare-knuckle background into his matches and promos. Read the post again, you'll see that the quote was "As someone who can't be bothered with watching many of Barrett's matches" (the ones with Sheamus or at Survivor Series). There might have been something I was missing. But that's not to say that I haven't seen him work recently. I've seen him fight Kofi on Raw, I've seen him against Orton, I've seen him in a tag match on SmackDown, and I saw the Kofi-Barrett match at TLC. He's not someone I enjoy, but I wouldn't say what I did without having something to go on. And in none of those matches did I ever see anything about Barrett's personality really on display, other than he works like any typical heel. EDIT: Watching his one of his matches with Sheamus now. And it's more of what I'm talking about. If I'm new to wrestling and watching Barrett now, I honestly couldn't tell if he was supposed to be a bare-knuckle brawler. That is, if commentary hadn't mentioned it. Nothing he does here really tells me that. I just finished talking about his most recent one at TLC. I'd still like to know how Ziggler's "Show Off" gimmick really advanced anything within it. He did his usual taunt once early in the match, and that was it. It wasn't even a particularly memorable moment nor did it have an effect on anything within the confines of the match. Much like Barrett above, Ziggler does one thing related to his gimmick and then seems to abandon it for the rest of the match. How is that playing a character well? That's nice. I get WHY they chant "Goldberg" at Ryback, that's been obvious, but that doesn't make the fans look any more knowledgeable for doing it, because Goldberg's no less of a ripoff himself. Those particular fans don't like Ryback's character? Fine. But chanting "Goldberg" isn't the way to get things changed. And the message they're trying to get across (that you can't be a monster because Goldberg already did it) doesn't make much sense. I don't have the cashola to put down for the PPV's these past few months, but all of Ziggler's tv appearances have done a good job of showing off his 'show-off'ness. Same for Barrett. Ziggler's biggest flaw is hubris. He'd rather do 9 elbows in a row, taunt the crowd, then drop a 10th, rather than go for a pin in that time. Stuff like that. He also prides himself on being so charismatic that he can steal anyone's GF. Which he did, to the WWE's #1 face. Barrett works a heel style, but also works more towards a striking offense and also when he's on commentary he talks a lot about how he specifically applies his fighting past into his currently wrestling style. Ryback also establishes himself as the "guy who squashes dudes" which is very clear from his matches. But the larger point is beyond that he needs something else to differentiate himself from similar guys in the past. While GOLDBERG isn't the only guy to have that gimmick, he's the most recent. The audience (or at least from my POV) isn't saying "There can only be one monster gimmick!" But more "Add something new to his 'personality' to make him different!" Which is why they weren't chanting "FLASH FUNK!" at Brodus - aside from the fact that he dances, he's nothing like Funk. Ryback and Goldberg share many more common traits. They're not the same person or even the EXACT same character (that I'll agree with) but there's obviously not enough differentiating them at this point. It'd be like if Marvel came out with a guy called "Unbeatable Man" who fought evil the same way Superman did, worked as a blooger, but instead of fighting for Truth Justice and the American Way, he fought to protect Freedom for those whose freedom is in danger. It's different, but similar enough in the comic world that people would call it a Superman ripoff. Now, if Marvel added new dimensions to "Unbeatable Man" like he still can't control just how powerful he is and hurts people when he doesn't mean to - that would be enough that people wouldn't easily make the comparison. And to your point, I agree that the audience chanting something won't change anything - but that speaks more to WWE's refusal to actually listen to their audience. Honestly - it's not such unreasonable request.
|
|
saintpat
El Dandy
Release the hounds!!!
Posts: 7,664
|
Post by saintpat on Dec 24, 2012 16:33:10 GMT -5
I'll gladly abide all the "Goldberg" chants in the world if the "WWE universe" would get with the 21st century and drop the "What" chants.
They were always annoying, but they're so out of place now -- people do them because they think they're supposed to do them and they think it's still cool (IMO it never was). Someone please set them straight on this.
|
|
Arrow
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 5,122
|
Post by Arrow on Dec 24, 2012 18:49:53 GMT -5
The audience (or at least from my POV) isn't saying "There can only be one monster gimmick!" But more "Add something new to his 'personality' to make him different!" Which is why they weren't chanting "FLASH FUNK!" at Brodus - aside from the fact that he dances, he's nothing like Funk. Ryback and Goldberg share many more common traits. They're not the same person or even the EXACT same character (that I'll agree with) but there's obviously not enough differentiating them at this point. Honestly, I don't even believe that's what those fans are trying to say. I believe the reason is because they continue to associate any "strong face who dominates opponents" with Goldberg, despite the fact that it runs even before him. And I get that Goldberg was the most recent, but that still doesn't make the chants any less stupid. Because with the way Ryback has been losing, how vulnerable he's been made to look, has worked different kinds of matches (I don't believe I've ever even heard of Goldberg telling a story as well as Ryback, Team Hell No, & the Shield did at TLC) and angles, the only major things really still similar about him and Goldberg - or at least, what Goldberg is known for the most (his Streak and his squashes) - at this point are the fact that they're faces who rely on power. And no matter what personality you want to give or add onto Ryback, those remaining similarities can't be easily changed. They do. But for every person who chants "Goldberg", there are just as many popping for Ryback on his entrance, chanting "Feed Me More", or bringing Ryback signs. And it's for this reason that WWE won't change Ryback. It's like a smaller scale John Cena, for all his detractors there are just as many (if not more) fans. They see no reason to change that for a part of the audience that can't realize that Ryback works a style that goes way before Goldberg. It's clear that Ryback was only given this top level push because Cena got injured, but even after Cena has gotten better, Ryback remains one of the top faces on the show. Because he's popular enough that WWE wants to keep him in the center of the fans' attention.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2012 19:02:04 GMT -5
I've said it once, I've said it a hundred times... If Ryback had hair, there wouldn't be a problem. It's like you can't be a muscly, bald white man that squashes guys anymore. Maybe Ryback should start drinking beer, giving people the finger and beat up Vince almsot every week.....oh wait....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2012 19:17:33 GMT -5
The audience (or at least from my POV) isn't saying "There can only be one monster gimmick!" But more "Add something new to his 'personality' to make him different!" Which is why they weren't chanting "FLASH FUNK!" at Brodus - aside from the fact that he dances, he's nothing like Funk. Ryback and Goldberg share many more common traits. They're not the same person or even the EXACT same character (that I'll agree with) but there's obviously not enough differentiating them at this point. Honestly, I don't even believe that's what those fans are trying to say. I believe the reason is because they continue to associate any "strong face who dominates opponents" with Goldberg, despite the fact that it runs even before him. And I get that Goldberg was the most recent, but that still doesn't make the chants any less stupid. Because with the way Ryback has been losing, how vulnerable he's been made to look, has worked different kinds of matches (I don't believe I've ever even heard of Goldberg telling a story as well as Ryback, Team Hell No, & the Shield did at TLC) and angles, the only major things really still similar about him and Goldberg - or at least, what Goldberg is known for the most (his Streak and his squashes) - at this point are the fact that they're faces who rely on power. And no matter what personality you want to give or add onto Ryback, those remaining similarities can't be easily changed. They do. But for every person who chants "Goldberg", there are just as many popping for Ryback on his entrance, chanting "Feed Me More", or bringing Ryback signs. And it's for this reason that WWE won't change Ryback. It's like a smaller scale John Cena, for all his detractors there are just as many (if not more) fans. They see no reason to change that for a part of the audience that can't realize that Ryback works a style that goes way before Goldberg. It's clear that Ryback was only given this top level push because Cena got injured, but even after Cena has gotten better, Ryback remains one of the top faces on the show. Because he's popular enough that WWE wants to keep him in the center of the fans' attention. Ryback's been made to look vulnerable?!?! I honestly don't see that at all. If by vulnerable you mean it takes a cheating ref and 3 guys interfering at once to beat him as 'vulnerable' then yeah, but in reality he's been the most dominant force in WWE since Lesnar. I don't think we'll ever agree on the issue of Ryback if you honestly believe that. Best to agree to disagree on that one and just call it.
|
|
Corporate H
Grimlock
He Buries Them Alive
Posts: 13,829
|
Post by Corporate H on Dec 24, 2012 19:19:57 GMT -5
The very fact that people are writing essays on this forum about this particular subject shows that it has some relevance..it can't really be debated. The two characters are similar..what else is new? There's no denying it.
|
|
Arrow
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 5,122
|
Post by Arrow on Dec 24, 2012 19:27:42 GMT -5
Ryback's been made to look vulnerable?!?! I honestly don't see that at all. If by vulnerable you mean it takes a cheating ref and 3 guys interfering at once to beat him as 'vulnerable' then yeah, but in reality he's been the most dominant force in WWE since Lesnar. I don't think we'll ever agree on the issue of Ryback if you honestly believe that. Best to agree to disagree on that one and just call it. He's lost three straight pay-per-view matches and until the Slammys, has gotten his ass handed to him by the Shield. Even when teaming with the Tag Team Champions in a No Disqualification match, he still couldn't handle them. That's more vulnerable than I remember top level faces like Austin or Goldberg ever being. But yeah, we're never going to to end this argument otherwise, so I'm fine with just leaving it at that.
|
|
|
Post by Danimal on Dec 24, 2012 23:24:18 GMT -5
Thing with Ryback is that he's like Goldberg but without two of the best parts about berg. Ryback's set-up and finisher are nothing great. I loved the spear and jackhammer. I think Ryback's clothesline is a little overrated and a Samoan drop should not be a finisher(didn't buy the Angleslam either and I love Angle). I liked that while WCW pimped Goldberg he wasn't always pimping himself. He just kicked ass and said "Who's next?" Ryback totally plays to the crowd and implores them to say his catchphrase. That is fine for other wrestlers but with this gimmick I like a more hardcore businesslike approach.
|
|
klapaucius
Don Corleone
Johnny Two Times
Posts: 1,486
|
Post by klapaucius on Dec 25, 2012 0:24:21 GMT -5
I'll gladly abide all the "Goldberg" chants in the world if the "WWE universe" would get with the 21st century and drop the "What" chants. They were always annoying, but they're so out of place now -- people do them because they think they're supposed to do them and they think it's still cool (IMO it never was). Someone please set them straight on this. {Spoiler}WHAT?
|
|
|
Post by Cry Me a Wiggle on Dec 26, 2012 0:21:19 GMT -5
Thing with Ryback is that he's like Goldberg but without two of the best parts about berg. Ryback's set-up and finisher are nothing great. I loved the spear and jackhammer. I think Ryback's clothesline is a little overrated and a Samoan drop should not be a finisher(didn't buy the Angleslam either and I love Angle). I liked that while WCW pimped Goldberg he wasn't always pimping himself. He just kicked ass and said "Who's next?" Ryback totally plays to the crowd and implores them to say his catchphrase. That is fine for other wrestlers but with this gimmick I like a more hardcore businesslike approach. Bingo. That's why he feels like Diet Goldberg. The same basic gimmick without the great taste. Granted, I wasn't a huge fan of the Goldberg character either, despite being a WCW diehard, but despite the piped-in chants (which didn't really start until later) and manipulative way WCW got people to cheer the guy, it was refreshing to see someone new rise to the top in WCW. Ryback feels like Vince's idea of how a Goldberg gimmick should work: Slightly more self-aggrandizing and someone who plays to the crowd. The nice thing about Goldberg was that he didn't care what the crowd thought.
|
|
Glitch
King Koopa
Not Going To Die; Childs, we're goin' out to give Blair the test. If he tries to make it back here and we're not with him... burn him.
Watching you.
Posts: 12,714
Member is Online
|
Post by Glitch on Dec 26, 2012 1:58:15 GMT -5
Many good points were made by a lot of you guys on why Ryback is similar to Goldberg. Let me just list them together so we get the whole picture.
Appearance: Obviously to big,bald guys with goatees.
Booked as an unstoppable monster.
Moveset: Not just because they're limited but because of what they use. Clothesline and Samoan Drop by Ryback, and Spear and Jackhammer by Goldberg. A running strike followed by lifting your opponent up or above your head before the slam.
In his entrance, Ryback looks up and then down just like Goldberg did. Plus pyro as he moves his arms.
"Feed me more" is pretty much the same thing as "who's next"?
All those put together in that order show you why those chants go on. The only thing I see differentiating Ryback is his singlet and them song. And no, this is not the same as when people accused Goldberg being a Stone Cold knock off. That happened because they both had goatees and were top billing(and loyal wwf fans who hated wcw were very willing to accept that). Steve Austin wasn't a big unstoppable monster, and Goldberg wasn't a beer drunking,cursing, redneck tweener who hated authority.
|
|