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.