Most Disappointing Wrestling Matches

[MacGuyV]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Jack Bando, why did you think Goldberg-Nash killed Goldberg forever? I mean, eventually he had to lose, and I think that him losing by a taser didn't diminish anything about him being invincible. If he had won it back after a few months from Nash, I think he would've been just as popular...but yeah, it was silly to do that with Hogan.

[/ QUOTE ]

It did severe damage to him though at minimum. Afterwards in WCW, he won the US title for a day, won the heavyweight title for a day (match considered unsactioned), and won the Tag Titles for a week.

His run in WWE was half decent. Go unefeated for half the year, lose to HHH. Win the WHC title, hold it for two months.

The thing is, he doesn't have a great moveset, so he needs to use style and charisma over substance. If you're booked as a wrecking machine, and then you get beat up twice in a month, what's left?


[/ QUOTE ]

I never really understood why he took so much grief for his moveset. He was no Hart or HHH, but he was no worse of a technical wrestler than Hogan, Warrior, or Rock.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's not really about being technically proficient, or Chris Benoit would be king of the universe. Rock looked good in the ring, and sold his opponent's offense as well as anyone in history. Watch Rock take a stunner, it looks like he was hit with a 12-guage. Hogan knows how to tell a story in the ring, and brings a lot of emotion to his best matches. Warrior, ok he sucked. But Goldie never had any ability to do anything in the ring other than spear jackhammer spit roar.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough - I guess I have just always hated the Rock for some reason. If I remember correctly the spinebuster was about his only non-finishing move. I don't think anybody touches Flair in the "selling offense" department, but maybe he was great at it and I just don't remember.