PDA

View Full Version : Is Goldberg the Undertaker's WM27 Opponent?



Rich Cranium
10-29-2010, 12:57 PM
Goldberg has recently stated that he would "face the Undertaker in a NY minute". Jim Ross even said if all the stars are aligned correctly that it could happen although he's not sure if he's right for UT. Obviously since Lesnar is out of question, Goldberg vs. UT would generate a huge payday. BTW, I'm sure it would also cost WWE a huge payday to make it happen. Thoughts?

SilverGhost
10-29-2010, 01:01 PM
Lol

At first it appeared to me as Goldust xD

Anyways, I don't think Goldberg is Taker's opponent but I would like to see that match happen!

Belzova
10-29-2010, 01:02 PM
It would be a win-win. They would lose a lot of money but get even more back for making the match happen. What bothers me is that we all know UT would win. </3

SilverGhost
10-29-2010, 01:04 PM
It would be a win-win. They would lose a lot of money but get even more back for making the match happen. What bothers me is that we all know UT would win. </3

Yeah, unless creative says this time Goldberg beats Taker.

Rich Cranium
10-29-2010, 01:09 PM
Lol

At first it appeared to me as Goldust xD

Anyways, I don't think Goldberg is Taker's opponent but I would like to see that match happen!

Hey, if they can't get Goldberg, Goldust is readily available at a discount.

Belzova
10-29-2010, 01:10 PM
Hey, if they can't get Goldberg, Goldust is readily available at a discount.

Did you know they are brothers? *kidding*

SilverGhost
10-29-2010, 01:15 PM
Did you know they are brothers? *kidding*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzne-3jx2Ng&p=175D010AD412C52F&playnext=1&index=38

Goldust meets Goldberg!

(Though no love for Silver T.T)

SilverGhost
10-29-2010, 01:15 PM
Hey, if they can't get Goldberg, Goldust is readily available at a discount.

Goldust vs Taker!

Why the hell not? :)

Robstar
10-29-2010, 02:36 PM
Please allow me to invent some infinite wisdom on the spot. No. Fucking. Way.

Why? Why should Goldberg be allowed to waltz back into not just WWE, but the bloody main event of their premiere showcase PPV, undoubtably getting paid a shitload and waltzing back off into the sunset at his leisure? What sort of message does that send to the rest of the roster?

Let's for a moment take a look at Goldberg's wrestling career. The man was fortunate - for whatever reasons - to receive possibly the biggest, most intense single push ever seen in the industry. Most of the matches in his 'streak' were just plain squashes, meaning his work rate was bugger all. He never had to work his way up the same way so many others had to and I'm pretty certain he was promised from the beginning he'd be pushed all the way to the top, effectively cutting in line.
Goldberg has no interest if he is not a top guy - you can believe that. The Rock gets so much criticism for walking away from the business yet Goldberg did the same and the fans continue to be fascinated by him. Goldberg was also very ordinary in the ring and a stiff worker to boot.

So, to main event Wrestlemania 27? Only to lose? What's the point of that? To end the streak? Again, what's the point of destroying something like that just to walk away again? There isn't one.
The only way I can see this working convincingly would be if Goldberg signed a 1 year deal with WWE and they build it up for Wrestlemania 28. C'mon Bill, give something back! :D

FaceOfSpades
10-29-2010, 02:36 PM
Goldust vs Taker!

Why the hell not? :)

i thought the same thing...remember the rivalry? only thing i didnt like was that it was pretty gay (wwf language=bizzare) but if they could seriously get goldust over as the heel he once was that would be epic. it angers me knowing it will never happen but at least i have svr

Mr. McMahon
10-29-2010, 02:45 PM
It just doesn't make sense. Goldberg was a babyface his whole career, why would he challenge Undertaker out of all the guys on the roster? I don't see how it can fit with any storyline. If anything, Goldberg should face Austin (who mentioned he can still wrestle) seeing as Austin stunned Goldberg on WM20. They can use that as a storyline to turn Goldberg heel, that he was humiliated & embarrassed by Austin on the biggest stage of them all after a victory against a very tough opponent.

The storyline could be that Goldberg doesn't want his last moments in the ring to be of him getting stunned by Austin, so he challenges him to a match at WM, with Brock Lesnar as special guest referee. It would all make sense.

Besides Goldberg vs Austin has been a dream match for over 10 years, it would make more more than Goldberg vs Taker.

Taker will either face Sheamus, Cena or Kane. Actually for a change I wouldn't mind seeing Undertaker in the MITB match. It would be more interesting and hard for him to keep his streak since he now has 8-9 opponents and everyone wants to win that match, not only the briefcase but also taker's streak.

SilverGhost
10-29-2010, 03:23 PM
It just doesn't make sense. Goldberg was a babyface his whole career, why would he challenge Undertaker out of all the guys on the roster? I don't see how it can fit with any storyline. If anything, Goldberg should face Austin (who mentioned he can still wrestle) seeing as Austin stunned Goldberg on WM20. They can use that as a storyline to turn Goldberg heel, that he was humiliated & embarrassed by Austin on the biggest stage of them all after a victory against a very tough opponent.

The storyline could be that Goldberg doesn't want his last moments in the ring to be of him getting stunned by Austin, so he challenges him to a match at WM, with Brock Lesnar as special guest referee. It would all make sense.

Besides Goldberg vs Austin has been a dream match for over 10 years, it would make more more than Goldberg vs Taker.

Taker will either face Sheamus, Cena or Kane. Actually for a change I wouldn't mind seeing Undertaker in the MITB match. It would be more interesting and hard for him to keep his streak since he now has 8-9 opponents and everyone wants to win that match, not only the briefcase but also taker's streak.

Oooh Mr.McMahon is here(sarcasm but in a funny way)

Anyways, a Goldberg/Austin feud is a good idea but I don't see it as a big money maker(other than that stunner that Goldberg sold at WM 20 and use it as a revenge factor). If anything, this match would be the match LEADING to the main event. And lol for Lesnar being the guest ref xD

A 10 year dream match huh? I like it but as I said, I don't think it will sell alot.

We had discussed on who Taker should face. I can say IT SHOULDN'T BE CENA. Too obvious. Kane had his shots with Taker. Sheamus is a great candidate. Or McIntyre if he puts his hair on the line xD

Mr. McMahon
10-29-2010, 03:31 PM
They can involve Lesnar as the guest referee easily. If its Austin vs Goldberg, Lesnar comes back but will he screw over Austin (they guy that embarrassed him during his last match, or will he screw over Goldberg (the guy that cost him the WWE title and who defeated him). It would make money. This time the roles are reversed. It shouldn't be the main event match, just a dream match (something WM has been lacking since Rock/Hogan).

If Cena goes heel, he should face Taker. Drew isn't ready yet to main event mania with taker. It has to be a star who has made a huge impact and can be taken seriously. Drew hasn't had any feuds with any 'huge' stars like Edge, Jericho, Cena etc... he needs to be put over by a big big name. Sheamus would make sense since HHH & Cena put him over. Another name that comes to mind is Jericho.

Even HBK would work. This time HBK can say that he doesn't have anything to loose, he doesn't want a match, he wants a fight. It would make perfect sense. Taker puts his career/streak on the line, where as HBK is fully focused this time and has nothing to put on the line.

Robstar
10-29-2010, 03:37 PM
I still maintain that encouraging older stars to come back for 'One Big/Last Match' is a bad idea and disrespectful to every other performer currently employed there. And anyway, isn't the stars of yesteryear hogging the spotlight what so many are bagging TNA for?

As for Austin/Goldberg - who would win? It's lose-lose; except for Vince. It would make a tonne of money SG, if handled correctly.

SilverGhost
10-29-2010, 03:38 PM
They can involve Lesnar as the guest referee easily. If its Austin vs Goldberg, Lesnar comes back but will he screw over Austin (they guy that embarrassed him during his last match, or will he screw over Goldberg (the guy that cost him the WWE title and who defeated him). It would make money. This time the roles are reversed. It shouldn't be the main event match, just a dream match (something WM has been lacking since Rock/Hogan).

If Cena goes heel, he should face Taker. Drew isn't ready yet to main event mania with taker. It has to be a star who has made a huge impact and can be taken seriously. Drew hasn't had any feuds with any 'huge' stars like Edge, Jericho, Cena etc... he needs to be put over by a big big name. Sheamus would make sense since HHH & Cena put him over. Another name that comes to mind is Jericho.

Even HBK would work. This time HBK can say that he doesn't have anything to loose, he doesn't want a match, he wants a fight. It would make perfect sense. Taker puts his career/streak on the line, where as HBK is fully focused this time and has nothing to put on the line.

At the first part, I see where you are going. I would work. Fun to watch xD

I forgot to mention that. Heel Cena vs Taker is a match I want to see. Jericho vs Taker.....that happened already right? But Jericho now vs Taker I would like to see. Sheamus vs Taker would be very physical. I would pay to see that only if Sheamus was a bit more hated(popular)

SilverGhost
10-29-2010, 03:41 PM
I still maintain that encouraging older stars to come back for 'One Big/Last Match' is a bad idea and disrespectful to every other performer currently employed there. And anyway, isn't the stars of yesteryear hogging the spotlight what so many are bagging TNA for?

As for Austin/Goldberg - who would win? It's lose-lose; except for Vince. It would make a tonne of money SG, if handled correctly.

I am seeing the picture now. It would make sense but as you said it "if handled correctly". It needs months of build up to make this work.

Robstar
10-29-2010, 03:50 PM
I am seeing the picture now. It would make sense but as you said it "if handled correctly". It needs months of build up to make this work.

Right. That's one of the reasons I think a 'Taker/Goldberg match for this WM would seem weak. If they haven't decided on his WM opponent by now, I'd be very surprised. My money is on Kane, considering the restraint on time once he comes back to finish his feud with Kane and then start building something for Wrestlemania? Cutting it fine I'd say. If they keep Undertaker on a light program to ensure he doesn't get injured again before WM, they can rekindle the Kane/Taker feud to lead up to that. But Kane needs to keep dominating UT until at least January. That's how I would write it.

TNA 'The very best'
10-29-2010, 03:56 PM
Please allow me to invent some infinite wisdom on the spot. No. Fucking. Way.

Why? Why should Goldberg be allowed to waltz back into not just WWE, but the bloody main event of their premiere showcase PPV, undoubtably getting paid a shitload and waltzing back off into the sunset at his leisure? What sort of message does that send to the rest of the roster?

Let's for a moment take a look at Goldberg's wrestling career. The man was fortunate - for whatever reasons - to receive possibly the biggest, most intense single push ever seen in the industry. Most of the matches in his 'streak' were just plain squashes, meaning his work rate was bugger all. He never had to work his way up the same way so many others had to and I'm pretty certain he was promised from the beginning he'd be pushed all the way to the top, effectively cutting in line.
Goldberg has no interest if he is not a top guy - you can believe that. The Rock gets so much criticism for walking away from the business yet Goldberg did the same and the fans continue to be fascinated by him. Goldberg was also very ordinary in the ring and a stiff worker to boot.

So, to main event Wrestlemania 27? Only to lose? What's the point of that? To end the streak? Again, what's the point of destroying something like that just to walk away again? There isn't one.
The only way I can see this working convincingly would be if Goldberg signed a 1 year deal with WWE and they build it up for Wrestlemania 28. C'mon Bill, give something back! :D

could not agree more with you, pointless waste of money for one night only.

SilverGhost
10-29-2010, 03:57 PM
Right. That's one of the reasons I think a 'Taker/Goldberg match for this WM would seem weak. If they haven't decided on his WM opponent by now, I'd be very surprised. My money is on Kane, considering the restraint on time once he comes back to finish his feud with Kane and then start building something for Wrestlemania? Cutting it fine I'd say. If they keep Undertaker on a light program to ensure he doesn't get injured again before WM, they can rekindle the Kane/Taker feud to lead up to that. But Kane needs to keep dominating UT until at least January. That's how I would write it.

This makes sense. Though keeping the interest level is a task.

Rich Cranium
10-29-2010, 03:58 PM
I feel the UT/Kane feud is stale and besides, Kane is already part of UT's streak victim's list. I'd say a heel Cena, Sheamus, or Barrett would suffice.

Good point about Goldberg not giving back just like the Rock.

SilverGhost
10-29-2010, 04:02 PM
I feel the UT/Kane feud is stale and besides, Kane is already part of UT's streak victim's list. I'd say a heel Cena, Sheamus, or Barrett would suffice.

I was going to say that but yes. Keeping a stale feud interesting is quite a task. The three choices I agree completely.

Mr. McMahon
10-29-2010, 04:04 PM
I'm betting money on Lesnar. Vince would be pissed off to see taker break kayfabe and do an interview at UFC, that too with Michelle on his side, unless its all part of Mr. McMahon's master plan to have Lesnar vs Taker which I think it is. There was no reason for Taker to even do that interview or ask Lesnar 'wanna do it' in public, he could have done it privately. There is definitely something big planned behind all this.

Offcourse Dana White, The Interviewer, JR would say its never gonna happen, you really think they would spoil it for us and actually tell us 'yeah its something we are working on'. Don't be too naive, you never know the amount of $$$ McMahon would pay to keep Dana's mouth shut till WM season. Why would anyone admit anything right now, its way too early. Good job on Dana White playing the role

cato79
10-29-2010, 04:09 PM
Even when I've posted that my candidates to face Taker at WM27 are Sheamus and Heel Cena...

Watching Nexus interfere on the Buried Alive Match makes me wonder if that will lead to a Taker - Barrett feud that could end up at "The greatest of them all"... I must state that on my perspective, Barrett is far from ready to a big match like that one...

Concidering that timewise, a new feud with Sheamus or Cena might be unlikely, Barrett scenario could been already set...

SilverGhost
10-29-2010, 04:10 PM
I'm betting money on Lesnar. Vince would be pissed off to see taker break kayfabe and do an interview at UFC, that too with Michelle on his side, unless its all part of Mr. McMahon's master plan to have Lesnar vs Taker which I think it is. There was no reason for Taker to even do that interview or ask Lesnar 'wanna do it' in public, he could have done it privately. There is definitely something big planned behind all this.

Offcourse Dana White, The Interviewer, JR would say its never gonna happen, you really think they would spoil it for us and actually tell us 'yeah its something we are working on'. Don't be too naive, you never know the amount of $$$ McMahon would pay to keep Dana's mouth shut till WM season. Why would anyone admit anything right now, its way too early. Good job on Dana White playing the role

I am with you. I believe that it was an inside job. :O

Maybe now, Vinnie Mac and Dana White must be celebrating with champagne with their business decision.

Robstar
10-29-2010, 04:22 PM
That's crazy talk! You are completely ignoring the one element that decides a Lesnar-Taker match and that's Lesnar. He wouldn't do it. I just can't believe that he would risk being perceived as weak or less than by running the risk of being accused of "running back to fake fighting because he couldn't handle MMA". It just doesn't sound like Brock at all.

Dana White is NOT Vince McMahon. He doesn't promote in the same way and he has money to make off Lesnar and it would be completely insane for the UFC to involve itself in any way with pro wrestling. Undertaker and many other wrestlers have been showed at UFC events plenty, simply because they are noteworthy fans.

Lesnar will never wrestle again IMO.

SilverGhost
10-29-2010, 04:35 PM
That's crazy talk! You are completely ignoring the one element that decides a Lesnar-Taker match and that's Lesnar. He wouldn't do it. I just can't believe that he would risk being perceived as weak or less than by running the risk of being accused of "running back to fake fighting because he couldn't handle MMA". It just doesn't sound like Brock at all.

Dana White is NOT Vince McMahon. He doesn't promote in the same way and he has money to make off Lesnar and it would be completely insane for the UFC to involve itself in any way with pro wrestling. Undertaker and many other wrestlers have been showed at UFC events plenty, simply because they are noteworthy fans.

Lesnar will never wrestle again IMO.

And the heat between Taker and Lesnar would go unsolved. You know Brock is in for the money. I wouldn't be surprised that WWE would pull big bucks just to get Lesnar to wrestle one more time.

But everything that happened was just too much to be a coincidence. Lesnar losing too fast is kinda fishy too me.

cato79
10-29-2010, 04:36 PM
I'm betting money on Lesnar. Vince would be pissed off to see taker break kayfabe and do an interview at UFC, that too with Michelle on his side, unless its all part of Mr. McMahon's master plan to have Lesnar vs Taker which I think it is. There was no reason for Taker to even do that interview or ask Lesnar 'wanna do it' in public, he could have done it privately. There is definitely something big planned behind all this.

Offcourse Dana White, The Interviewer, JR would say its never gonna happen, you really think they would spoil it for us and actually tell us 'yeah its something we are working on'. Don't be too naive, you never know the amount of $$$ McMahon would pay to keep Dana's mouth shut till WM season. Why would anyone admit anything right now, its way too early. Good job on Dana White playing the role

I must add that Mark Calaway did at least another 2 interviews that same night to different channels and Websites....

SilverGhost
10-29-2010, 04:42 PM
Even when I've posted that my candidates to face Taker at WM27 are Sheamus and Heel Cena...

Watching Nexus interfere on the Buried Alive Match makes me wonder if that will lead to a Taker - Barrett feud that could end up at "The greatest of them all"... I must state that on my perspective, Barrett is far from ready to a big match like that one...

Concidering that timewise, a new feud with Sheamus or Cena might be unlikely, Barrett scenario could been already set...

Barrett seems more suitable since Nexus was part of the buried alive match.

Robstar
10-29-2010, 04:44 PM
I must add that Mark Calaway did at least another 2 interviews that same night to different channels and Websites....

And further refused to comment on the issue between him and Lesnar. If it was a work, it would have been the perfect opportunity to build hype - but he didn't and that speaks volumes.

I am actually pissed of with you SilverGhost for being so naive about this. You think he threw the fight? Holy shit, did you see the whipping Cain gave him? Brock has WAAAAAY too much ego for that. Because now you're suggesting that UFC are engineering stories and that's just ludicrous. MMA is a cash cow at the moment and doesn't need wrestling and would, in fact be damaged by associating itself in this way, running the risk of being shunned by serious MMA fans. Dana White will make plenty of money regardless without being involved in a gimmick

TNA 'The very best'
10-29-2010, 04:49 PM
Barrett seems more suitable since Nexus was part of the buried alive match.

i cant see any other reason for them to get involved except for this, maybe title vs title,altho i doubt they will let a newbie be in a title unification match.

SilverGhost
10-29-2010, 04:53 PM
And further refused to comment on the issue between him and Lesnar. If it was a work, it would have been the perfect opportunity to build hype - but he didn't and that speaks volumes.

I am actually pissed of with you SilverGhost for being so naive about this. You think he threw the fight? Holy shit, did you see the whipping Cain gave him? Brock has WAAAAAY too much ego for that. Because now you're suggesting that UFC are engineering stories and that's just ludicrous. MMA is a cash cow at the moment and doesn't need wrestling and would, in fact be damaged by associating itself in this way, running the risk of being shunned by serious MMA fans. Dana White will make plenty of money regardless without being involved in a gimmick

I have seen the same fight as you have seen. But after thinking about it(Note: I told only one person what I thought about the Velasquez/Lesnar fight in college) I believe that it kinda was inside job. I saw the ass kicking. But I am not saying its true. But even you must admit in that fight Lesnar was SLOPPY AS HELL. Also I am not saying it was a story, there could have been some backdeals going on.

Though we are just speculating here.

SilverGhost
10-29-2010, 04:55 PM
i cant see any other reason for them to get involved except for this, maybe title vs title,altho i doubt they will let a newbie be in a title unification match.

This is true....

Robstar
10-29-2010, 04:57 PM
I know we're speculating ;). We just disagree and that's alright.

Rich Cranium
10-29-2010, 05:03 PM
Yeah, there's no way in hell Brock threw the fight. Lesnar's defense was full of holes that night that were not intentional. I also agree about Dana. He is mad rich and doesn't need a WWE payday that could or actually would result in a downward spiral for Dana if people find out he "hiding secrets".

SilverGhost
10-29-2010, 05:19 PM
Yeah, there's no way in hell Brock threw the fight. Lesnar's defense was full of holes that night that were not intentional. I also agree about Dana. He is mad rich and doesn't need a WWE payday that could or actually would result in a downward spiral for Dana if people find out he "hiding secrets".

I don't know, maybe all the Cain promo stuff was to throw me off. I explained to Rob about it. But I know Brock will get that belt back.

Robstar
10-29-2010, 06:26 PM
He'll give it a shot in any case but I am doubting his chin. He needs to work more on handling strikes and worry less about his wrestling. If they hadn't rushed him into the title picture maybe he could have worked on those holes through fights. It's a crazy scene in UFC as far as title contention - Brock was what 3 and 1 when he got Couture and Velasquez had to wait until he was 8-0? I can't work out their ranking systems ;)