|
Post by Mister Yummy on Dec 2, 2007 2:38:36 GMT -5
Chunkylover seems to have hit it on the head. It was a superb match, that featured strategy and more actual wrestling than in what many call 5 star classics. It's in the top 5 matches I've seen, and I'm dead serious about that.
|
|
|
Post by Dick Foley on Dec 2, 2007 5:16:32 GMT -5
After Goldberg raped Elizabeth, I lost all respect I had for him.
Plus, don't most people here hate Goldberg because he ended Bret's career?
|
|
Hiroshi Hase
Patti Mayonnaise
The Good Ol' Days
Posts: 30,755
|
Post by Hiroshi Hase on Dec 2, 2007 7:45:19 GMT -5
I actually don't really have anything against Goldberg. I thought he was okay at best. However, I still dislike how he was booked in the Elimination Chamber in 2003..when he eliminated about 3 or 4 of WWE's top guys in about 3 minutes..and of course, the debacle of a match at WM XX..Other than that, I was fine with everything else. I thought it was great booking, he was a monster that just went through HBK/Jericho/Orton in minutes and the crowd loved every bit of it as well.
|
|
|
Post by skillz on Dec 2, 2007 8:14:48 GMT -5
Yay! I'm gonna go off topic and just state an observation. Since we all hate Warrior so much (bigot, no workrate), and Goldberg (overrated, no workrate), why is this the fourth thread this week we've had about Warrior and the second or third one about Goldberg? Do we really despise them so much, that we feel the need to talk about them four days out of seven? Because this is Wrestlecrap where that which sucks is celebrated? I think you mean "where anything that is/was popular is mocked". I'll never understand how fans here can ignore popularity, charisma, and drawing ability (among other things) in favor of chain wrestling when we're dealing with a fake sport. The crowds were hotter for Warrior and Goldberg than for any Steven Regal or Chris Benoit match you'll ever find. Chain wrestling appeals to maybe 1% of the mainstream wrestling population, otherwise we would have seen more of it in the WWF/E over the last, say, two+ decades.
|
|
mrjl
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,319
|
Post by mrjl on Dec 2, 2007 10:59:58 GMT -5
Because this is Wrestlecrap where that which sucks is celebrated? I think you mean "where anything that is/was popular is mocked". I'll never understand how fans here can ignore popularity, charisma, and drawing ability (among other things) in favor of chain wrestling when we're dealing with a fake sport. The crowds were hotter for Warrior and Goldberg than for any Steven Regal or Chris Benoit match you'll ever find. Chain wrestling appeals to maybe 1% of the mainstream wrestling population, otherwise we would have seen more of it in the WWF/E over the last, say, two+ decades. While I liked Warrior since I discovered his attitude I'd say he had a lot of suck in him. And the thing with chain wrestling is look at the occasions where a popular wrestler who doesn't normally do that sort of thing gets into a chain wrestling match. I don't think you see a lot of people booing him. So basically the idea is every match could be a great match if you let these people show off all their skills. As for me personally, I like it when it looks like it really hurts. That means I the matches of anyone who can make me believe their moves.
|
|
Hiroshi Hase
Patti Mayonnaise
The Good Ol' Days
Posts: 30,755
|
Post by Hiroshi Hase on Dec 2, 2007 13:04:59 GMT -5
I think you mean "where anything that is/was popular is mocked". I'll never understand how fans here can ignore popularity, charisma, and drawing ability (among other things) in favor of chain wrestling when we're dealing with a fake sport. The crowds were hotter for Warrior and Goldberg than for any Steven Regal or Chris Benoit match you'll ever find. Chain wrestling appeals to maybe 1% of the mainstream wrestling population, otherwise we would have seen more of it in the WWF/E over the last, say, two+ decades. While I liked Warrior since I discovered his attitude I'd say he had a lot of suck in him. And the thing with chain wrestling is look at the occasions where a popular wrestler who doesn't normally do that sort of thing gets into a chain wrestling match. I don't think you see a lot of people booing him. So basically the idea is every match could be a great match if you let these people show off all their skills. As for me personally, I like it when it looks like it really hurts. That means I the matches of anyone who can make me believe their moves. I rarely see fans getting on their feet for chain-wrestling in WWE. ROH, maybe, but not in the E.
|
|
Jack
Team Rocket
Posts: 903
|
Post by Jack on Dec 2, 2007 13:29:25 GMT -5
Booking didn't screw Goldberg and Warrior didn't screw the Warrior.
Fans should accept that it's very hard if not nigh impossible to constantly book well for anyone over a period of years. Guys like Hogan and Austin were so over they could have been (and in reterospect probably were) in a hundred stinkers (in terms of angles) that they could over-ride them. But most guys aren't that lucky.
Someones reading these boards you'd think that people believe that every character ever to main event should never ever be allowed to have their popularity or relevence wain, but they all do to varying degrees.
Goldberg once he lost that undefeated streak wasn't ever going to reach the peaks of his popularity again, and it HAD to end the fans like it or not were beginning to tire of him. They couldn't just carry on with it with their fingers in their ears shouting "lalalala" and hope that the fans all went away. But as soon as they did get off that bandwaggon and tried to do something else everyone screams "You're killing Goldberg, booo bad booking".
Warrior simply burned out and didn't have longevity, which was more his fault that the companies.
|
|
mrjl
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,319
|
Post by mrjl on Dec 2, 2007 13:42:07 GMT -5
Booking didn't screw Goldberg and Warrior didn't screw the Warrior. Fans should accept that it's very hard if not nigh impossible to constantly book well for anyone over a period of years. Guys like Hogan and Austin were so over they could have been (and in reterospect probably were) in a hundred stinkers (in terms of angles) that they could over-ride them. But most guys aren't that lucky. Someones reading these boards you'd think that people believe that every character ever to main event should never ever be allowed to have their popularity or relevence wain, but they all do to varying degrees. Goldberg once he lost that undefeated streak wasn't ever going to reach the peaks of his popularity again, and it HAD to end the fans like it or not were beginning to tire of him. They couldn't just carry on with it with their fingers in their ears shouting "lalalala" and hope that the fans all went away. But as soon as they did get off that bandwaggon and tried to do something else everyone screams "You're killing Goldberg, booo bad booking". Warrior simply burned out and didn't have longevity, which was more his fault that the companies. Once Goldberg lost his streak they stopped booking him like he was the rightful champion and he was still a monster. Warrior's longevity was hurt by constantly leaving companies and killing any momentum he ever had.
|
|
|
Post by chunkylover53 on Dec 2, 2007 14:46:27 GMT -5
After Goldberg raped Elizabeth, I lost all respect I had for him. Plus, don't most people here hate Goldberg because he ended Bret's career? Goldberg DID NOT rape Miss Elizabeth in storyline or real life. That was the original angle, but Goldberg opposed it, so they reduced it to stalking. About the match that ended Bret Hart's career. You have to realize, it wasn't completely Goldberg's fault. Bret Hart wrestled against doctors orders when he had a few injuries. As the old saying goes, you if don't want to get attacked by a lion, don't go into the safari. How does that relate to Bret's career ending? Well, you do the math. Plus, at least Goldberg apologized for his actions and they became friends after that. Everyone here bashes Goldberg for ending Bret Hart's career, but I don't see anyone down talk Owen Hart for ending Steve Austin's career(in the long run). The guy screwed up a pile driver, left him paralyzed for a few months, and NEVER apologized for it. Is it because he is a member of the Hart family and an IWC favorite adding to the fact that he's no longer with us? I know if CM Punk ended someone's career he would get just a slap on the wrist, where as John Cena would be lynched beyond belief, no matter how they try to handle the situation in the end. Those are just my thoughts though.
|
|