I remember when I used to watch the Royal Rumble back when I was a kid, I would love it every time they would throw a few statistics in there, they would tell you the amount of times someone had won when entering at a certain number, what the record for the quickest elimination was, how close someone was to beating the record for longest time in a rumble or the most eliminations, it just seemed to add to the spectacle of it all.
So am I talking about the Royal Rumble? No it just seemed like a good way to start this one sided conversation, lets face it that's what a blog post really is, it is me talking to you my reader, I just talk and talk at you and sometimes if I am very lucky you might leave me a response. The response could be that you agree with me, that I have taught you something or made you think about something or you could be telling me that I am an idiot that you don't agree with me, that I am talking crap but in truth there could be an argument for saying that any response is a good response in a way? How is this relevant well it is because I want to talk about the match between Bill Goldberg and Brock Lesnar which just took place at Survivor Series , for those of you who haven't seen it well basically Goldberg crushes Lesnar. The entire match can be described as Lesnar picks up Goldberg and throws him into a corner, Goldberg then pushes Lesnar over, spears him twice jack hammers him and pins him match over with only 2 minutes of actual wrestling time and 1 move performed by Lesnar and 5 by Goldberg if you count the push, the 2 spears, the jack hammer and the pin as moves. Now the internet is obviously full of people debating this match, who won, who should have won, if it should have gone down the way it did, how it makes the two men look so I figured I should give my opinion on it all.
For a start I am not going to be talking about Brock being a legitimate MMA fighter and saying ''oh man he could kill him'' I don't care about what either man has or can do outside of the world of wrestling I just want to talk about them as wrestlers. Looking at wrestling go back and look at a lot of Goldberg's old matches and they were basically short squash matches in which the guy was a monster who beat people up and did it quickly, his matches seldom went that long and he seldom was subjected to a real competitive worker going all out to try and make a match look like a believable struggle, if you want to see his limitations then I strongly recommend you watch Goldberg versus William Regal, its not a long match but Regal really does put him through his passes on the one hand it makes Goldberg look a little bad in places but I think it actually makes his win all the sweeter and shows with some work he could have been capable of more than we have seen from him. Brock has had a lot of squash matches where he just power moves people and quickly puts them to bed, but if you watch some of the matches he has had you can see that with his amateur wrestling background he is actually capable of doing a whole lot more, just watch some of his matches with Kurt Angle if you want to see a good example of what he is really capable of the man can do the power moves but he can also be very technical and surprisingly agile for a big guy. I have to admit that I think Brock is the better wrestler and that he is actually capable of 5 star matches under the right circumstances, in fact I would rate some of his with Angle that highly, I also love the match where he lost the belt to Eddie Guerrero, yes he lost but it was a great match and matches are pre-determined and it takes 2 athletes working hard to make them feel real.
The thing is though that wrestling is both entertainment and a business, you can say Brock is better on paper or that with his MMA skills he should be able to rip Goldberg's head off but is that the best outcome to provide the most entertainment value to the most people and is it going to be best for business? You can claim its not realistic but then look at most of the entertainment we consume, are films like Rambo 3 realistic where one man seems to be able to almost single handedly defeat the armed forces of an entire country and be back home in time for tea? Of course not sometimes you have to accept something whether it is likely or even possible in order for a piece of entertainment to work to its full potential. You need to factor in the story they are trying to tell and the facts at hand. Goldberg has not properly wrestled for a long time, he apparently minorly injured himself in a recent spot on TV and even when he was at his prime he wasn't exactly known for his long matches, so allowing him to finish things off quickly minimising the potential aggravation to any injury's he might have recently sustained was a good move. If Brock had been the one to win he would have had to have done at least a few powerful looking moves to a potentially currently fragile Goldberg risking the chance of hurting him which goes against the wishes of both the WWE and Goldberg as he has signed up to appear at the next few main events. It might make Brock look weak but this is not irreversible, you can have him face Goldberg again latter when he is physically more able and regain his honour, there are so many ways you can make a whole story out of this.
The match was kind of disappointing but I think you need to take a step back and look at the bigger picture, this match and its outcome kept everyone safe and left the book open for another chapter, not only that but it has everyone talking about it and that kind of heat is good, you know what they say no publicity is bad publicity.