View Full Version : Does Goldberg Belong in the WWE Hall-of-Fame?
Triple H apparently doesn't think so:
WWE superstar Triple H was recently interviewed by SBNation Atlanta while in town to hype WrestleMania 27 tickets going on sale last week.
During the interview, Triple H took a few shots at former WCW and WWE star Bill Goldberg. When asked about his favorite opponents, Triple H responded:
"For me, from my singles career, would probably be Rock and obviously Shawn. Between there I had a lot of hodge-podge guys, which weren't really what you'd call classics. The Goldbergs and guys like that."
Goldberg is a former Atlanta Falcons NFL player and made his name in the Atlanta-based WCW promotion. When asked wether Bill Goldberg deserved to be inducted into WWE's Hall of Fame in Atlanta during WrestleMania 27 weekend, Triple H responded with:
"Bill's trying to get into the Hall of Fame. If there's a rumor about him coming back, he probably started it. I've not seen any mention of his name."
Goldberg has now responded to Triple H's comments, writing on Twitter:
"I read HHH and HBK’s views on the #WWE HOF….everyone is entitled to their own opinion.They do have a point if induction is based on tenure"
Interesting.
While the point of not having enough tenure in the WWE is a good one, it is easily reneged by the fact that A: Pete Rose is in the fucking WWE HOF and he was NEVER an active wrestler, and B: Goldberg is a former World Heavyweight Champion in the WWE, has a big (if not bad) WrestleMania match on his resume, and his run in WCW is not only historic, but both a huge part of what drove WCW to defeat the WWF for so long, and a huge part of why the company fell apart (by that I mean killing him off with the Starrcade/Fingerpoint of Doom situation).
What do you all think?
Does Goldberg deserve to be in the WWE Hall of Fame, based on their criteria? Absolutely.
Does Goldberg deserve to be in a "legit" pro wrestling Hall of Fame? Absolutely. Why? The man was on top of the business during the hottest period it ever saw. He was known by wrestling fans and non-wrestling fans alike. The man doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if he couldn't wrestle like a Dean Malenko or couldn't talk like a Steve Austin. The fact of the matter is that he was one of the biggest draws in wrestling history, no matter how short that window was (about a year).
Does Goldberg deserve to be in the WWE Hall of Fame, based on their criteria? Absolutely.
Does Goldberg deserve to be in a "legit" pro wrestling Hall of Fame? Absolutely. Why? The man was on top of the business during the hottest period it ever saw. He was known by wrestling fans and non-wrestling fans alike. The man doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if he couldn't wrestle like a Dean Malenko or couldn't talk like a Steve Austin. The fact of the matter is that he was one of the biggest draws in wrestling history, no matter how short that window was (about a year).
These are essentially my same feelings as well.
So it begs the question, what is it that Triple H and apparently Shawn Michaels, think about the situation that draws them in the other direction?
Okay, so I just noticed the entire interview is posted in another thread.
HHH: Bill's trying to get into the Hall of Fame. If there's a rumor about him coming back, he probably started it. I've not seen any mention of his name.
HBK: You want to move on into the future. It's tough to not go back and get some big-name guys here and there, but I don't know about any of the older WCW guys. It might be good for a one-shot deal but where do you go from there? As a company, you're trying to move into the future. It'd be like bringing Michael Jordan back.
MT: Yeah, that didn't work out too well.
HBK: There's a time when you just have to make a decision to just move on.
HHH: As far as the Hall of Fame goes, it's tough. We have a unique business, and we try to do a legitimate Hall of Fame. We try to honor the guys that deserve it. To the guys that go in, it's something special. I heard Hogan shit on it, but I don't think anything's special to him except for money. Like, if you called Michael Jordan to put him into the Basketball Hall of Fame, and he said, "All right, but I'm only gonna show up if I get to play for the Bulls next year." We get that all the time. We call a guy to honor him in the Hall of Fame, and he goes, "I want to do an angle. I want a one-off. I need a hundred grand." So when you say, "What about Goldberg?", no offense to Bill, but you've got guys like Bruno San Martino that were legends with longevity that should be in there, but they're holding out because they think they've got one more run. Just using Bill as an example, how many years did he wrestle? Not many.
HBK: To me, he's not even in the ball park. Not because he's not talented, but greatness doesn't happen in a few years. Greatness is established over a long period of time. We try to promote people and get them over, but you can't do it that quickly. In our line of work, there are other qualities that make somebody viable besides just whether they're tough or not. In every other line of work -- like if you're a lineman who can't play, everybody knows you can't play.
Even with these arguments, I gotta go with the Pete Rose example as a prime example of why they are total bullshit.
"We have a unique business, and we try to do a legitimate Hall of Fame."
Get the fuck out of here.
ron the dial
11-16-2010, 07:06 PM
i love how they try to make the hall of fame seem so exclusive and important. i mean, fuck, if koko b. ware can make it, goldberg definitely should.
Loose Cannon
11-16-2010, 07:09 PM
yea, it's bogus
"Greatness doesnt happen in a few years"
Warrior, The Rock and Lesnar would be a good counterpoint.
Ruien
11-16-2010, 07:17 PM
"Greatness doesnt happen in a few years"
Warrior, The Rock and Lesnar would be a good counterpoint.
Going to go out on a limb and say Warrior and The Rock have at least double the years Goldberg does in the mainstream wrestling business.
Lesnar is not going to be put into the hall of fame.
But does Lesnar deserve it, quitting aside?
Also, I'd say Goldberg and Warrior have about the same. Goldberg had about 6 (97-2004, one year hiatus or so) and Warrior had about 7 (87-92, 96, 98).
Ruien
11-16-2010, 07:22 PM
Nope, if Tom Brady quit after his first superbowl would he end up in the hall of fame for football? Nope.
Now I realize the WWE and professional sports are different, but for the hall of fame the same logic should be used. (Yes they are undeserving people in the hall of fame, but we are discussing the longevity here. Pete Rose was a celebrity that got screwed out of his baseballs hall of fame).
But does Lesnar deserve it, quitting aside?
I would say so, he did everything there was to do all in those two years, KOTR, Rumble winner, World Champ.
Also Ruien, The Rock and Goldberg had around the same amount of time in wrestling.....
edit - nvm Xero said it
Nope, if Tom Brady quit after his first superbowl would he end up in the hall of fame for football? Nope.
Now I realize the WWE and professional sports are different, but for the hall of fame the same logic should be used. (Yes they are undeserving people in the hall of fame, but we are discussing the longevity here. Pete Rose was a celebrity that got screwed out of his baseballs hall of fame).
Lesnar quit after his second Super Bowl.
Ruien
11-16-2010, 07:26 PM
Two years would not be enough to get into the hall of fame. Longevity has to be a huge factor, not just the impact made.
glanville6
11-16-2010, 07:28 PM
Does Goldberg deserve to be in the WWE Hall of Fame, based on their criteria? Absolutely.
Does Goldberg deserve to be in a "legit" pro wrestling Hall of Fame? Absolutely. Why? The man was on top of the business during the hottest period it ever saw. He was known by wrestling fans and non-wrestling fans alike. The man doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if he couldn't wrestle like a Dean Malenko or couldn't talk like a Steve Austin. The fact of the matter is that he was one of the biggest draws in wrestling history, no matter how short that window was (about a year).
I do agree with the pro wrestling HOF, but WWE? Again, I agree with your point but personally I'd prefer only good WWE performers in there. But it has already gotten to the point where it doesn't matter since, as said, Celebs who have done nothing for the business are in.
I could care less if he gets in or doesn't.
But does he belong? I lean towards no.
WWE's trying to be a general pro wrestling hall of fame, though, not just WWE. That's why guys like Gorgeous George and Verne Gagne are in it.
Savio
11-16-2010, 07:39 PM
Not any time soon no
itsmeJD
11-16-2010, 08:10 PM
I feel like eventually Goldberg should be inducted, but due to his lack of longevity, I wouldn't make him a first ballot hall of famer. His accomplishments, however, can't be denied. I'd vote him in, just not before a few others who had similar accomplishments and the staying power as say "Macho Man" Randy Savage.
KayfabeMan
11-16-2010, 08:29 PM
For HHH to use Bruno Sammartino's name as a reference to someone who is 'holding out for another run' is totally on purpose and is totally bullshit.
Sammartino isn't / wasn't holding out for money, for another run, for any of that. He was holding out for RESPECT, which clearly by watching RAW last night is not something McMahon likes to give the older talents.
Watching guys like Duggan, Tatanka, etc. and idiots like Dusty Rhodes make asses out of themselves for the enjoyment of Vince McMahon is somewhat the idea of what they'd be having Bruno do if he were to crawl back to them like the others have.
jskinnyg
11-16-2010, 08:42 PM
Does Goldberg deserve to be in the WWE Hall of Fame, based on their criteria? Absolutely.
Does Goldberg deserve to be in a "legit" pro wrestling Hall of Fame? Absolutely. Why? The man was on top of the business during the hottest period it ever saw. He was known by wrestling fans and non-wrestling fans alike. The man doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if he couldn't wrestle like a Dean Malenko or couldn't talk like a Steve Austin. The fact of the matter is that he was one of the biggest draws in wrestling history, no matter how short that window was (about a year).
Sadly... I agree... There are plenty of wrestlers in the HOF with a 3 or 4 move set... When he was hot, he was hot...
Innovator
11-16-2010, 08:47 PM
Fuck and no
For HHH to use Bruno Sammartino's name as a reference to someone who is 'holding out for another run' is totally on purpose and is totally bullshit.
Sammartino isn't / wasn't holding out for money, for another run, for any of that. He was holding out for RESPECT, which clearly by watching RAW last night is not something McMahon likes to give the older talents.
Watching guys like Duggan, Tatanka, etc. and idiots like Dusty Rhodes make asses out of themselves for the enjoyment of Vince McMahon is somewhat the idea of what they'd be having Bruno do if he were to crawl back to them like the others have.
Playing Devil's advocate for Vince here, in all honesty, they were only doing and saying the things that they used to do and say back in their heydays. Yeah, Duggan running around yelling "HO!" and waving a 2x4 with a flag on it through the air is fucking goofy by today's standards, as is Tatanka doing his Indian spin dance backstage, but it's part of their gimmick. Call it a lack of respect if you want, but for RAW IS RETRO Night, it all seemed pretty fitting and I enjoyed it all and didnt find it disrespectful to them in the least.
If you expected a glitzy, everyone in nice suits and ties, paying respect to the old guys sort of thing, then you were obviously disappointed, but that's what the HOF Induction is about.
Well, they could have been in matches doing their gimmicks instead of being used as a sideshow.
I do agree with you completely on the Sammartino thing though.
To me, the whole thing with HBK and Triple H talking down on Goldberg being in the HOF just comes off as elitist bullshit with a strong hint of jealousy.
FIRST, don't flame me for saying HBK and HHH might be jealous of Goldberg. Both men have had incredible careers in the WWE and have earned their respective future spots in the WWE HOF. Comparably, both men have had far more epic wrestling careers than Goldberg, period.
HOWEVER, that doesn't mean they might not be just a little bit jealous of how HUGE Goldberg became in such a short period of time - a period of time when his popularity meant more than just a big push for Goldberg, but also meant a tipping of the scales in the Monday Night Wars. Goldberg was a gigantic part of WCW's success during the Attitude Era. I'm not sure if anyone has had such a meteoric rise in the wrestling industry. In 1997-99, Goldberg was EVERYWHERE, and not just in wrestling, but in the media as well.
My suggestion here is that any jealous toward Goldberg is based on the fact that his career and legacy are renowned throughout the wrestling industry, that he rose to the top of both the card and the industry at an incredible speed and gained immediate credit with fans everywhere, but most importantly, that he did these things in such a short amount of time while Triple H and Shawn Michaels both took years to reach the top, and even then, it's arguable that neither man ever did or will reach the plateau of popularity that Goldberg did in WCW.
Imagine you're a car salesman, and you spend 5 years at a particular agency climbing the ranks to the top and being named Top Salesman, MVP, etc. And then another guy comes in and does the exact same things in 1 year. Though you would have to respect the man's abilities and accomplishments, that respect would not be without a hint of animosity as well.
Well, they could have been in matches doing their gimmicks instead of being used as a sideshow.
Right. Because I know I wanted to see Dusty Rhodes and Tony Atlas work a match.
Better than Santino going over a legit tag team with a finger poke...
Better than Santino going over a legit tag team with a finger poke...
At least it wasn't "Of Doom" and to the chest?
:shifty:
Okay, I give you that one, and only barely, as I'm about 99% sure that Tony Atlas vs Dusty Rhodes would've been more unwatchable than a Naked Mideon match.
And we also got to see the awesome Swagger/Bryan match, which definitely shouldn't have been dismissed for any kind of Retro match.
KayfabeMan
11-16-2010, 09:43 PM
Well, they could have been in matches doing their gimmicks instead of being used as a sideshow.
This.
I definitely did not expect anything glitzy, etc. - especially from where it comes from - but like Xero said, there is no reason that some of those guys couldn't have worked matches. Hacksaw, Tatanka, etc. could have worked.
Also, skits are one thing - but ridiculous obsessions with everyone dancing and acting overly mentally handicapped are complete wastes of time and in reality are embarassing. Vince knows it, and he does it to show what kind of 'power' he wields over those mentally or financially desperate enough to 'need' him.
KayfabeMan
11-16-2010, 09:50 PM
Playing Devil's advocate for Vince here, in all honesty, they were only doing and saying the things that they used to do and say back in their heydays. Yeah, Duggan running around yelling "HO!" and waving a 2x4 with a flag on it through the air is fucking goofy by today's standards, as is Tatanka doing his Indian spin dance backstage, but it's part of their gimmick. Call it a lack of respect if you want, but for RAW IS RETRO Night, it all seemed pretty fitting and I enjoyed it all and didnt find it disrespectful to them in the least.
If you expected a glitzy, everyone in nice suits and ties, paying respect to the old guys sort of thing, then you were obviously disappointed, but that's what the HOF Induction is about.
The thing is, those things are only presented as goofy because WWE chooses to present them that way. Tatanka never just danced around backstage for the amusement of the crowd, like a sideshow freak. Hacksaw was always a goofballish character, but never over-exaggerated like he's one step away from a drool cup.
I feel like for RAW is RETRO, or whatever, they came off as the entire history of the WWE was incredibly lame - when infact, if you look at it properly - it's moreso today's product that is the worst of it's history.
To me, they took a chance to show today's generation a positive sample of superstars of the past while still maintaining a fun and entertaining environment, and threw it down the toilet.
KayfabeMan
11-16-2010, 09:51 PM
ALSO, not to shit over the entire night - because Piper came off great for his spot, as did Mae Young, who is great in her role.
Fignuts
11-16-2010, 09:58 PM
Think a lot of the resentment people seem to have towards Goldberg has to do with the lack of respect he's shown toward his peers, and even the business as a whole. No secret that the guy has a pretty swelled head.
KayfabeMan
11-16-2010, 10:38 PM
Think a lot of the resentment people seem to have towards Goldberg has to do with the lack of respect he's shown toward his peers, and even the business as a whole. No secret that the guy has a pretty swelled head.
I agree with this as well, though coming from Michaels and HHH is :rofl:
Jeritron
11-16-2010, 11:57 PM
I don't see why people always bring up Pete Rose and other celebrities as blemishes on the HOF. They are obviously in the HOF as celebs and promotion. It's not the same as the wrestlers.
I think Goldberg should go in, even if he wasn't around long and isn't a great wrestler. He was quite famous. It is, after all, a Hall of Fame.
I'm sure a lot of the "boys" and people in the industry won't like it, and I can see why, but it doesn't really matter.
The Naitch
11-17-2010, 12:00 AM
Triple H is still pissed that he had to do THE JOB
Jeritron
11-17-2010, 12:04 AM
I feel like for RAW is RETRO, or whatever, they came off as the entire history of the WWE was incredibly lame - when infact, if you look at it properly - it's moreso today's product that is the worst of it's history.
That's debatable. I'm not saying the current product is the high point in their history by any means, but there is still some quality stuff that comes out of it.
I think it's far better than the overall product in 94-96.
Bret, Shawn and only a couple others were a high point of that era. And make no mistake, they were a very high point. Still, the rest of the product was pretty awful. You'd get good main events, but there was a seriously lacking midcard. Plus you were getting Undertaker vs Damian Demento for Raw main events.
They spent more time shilling merchandise and storylines than they do now, and the overall effort was just pretty shit. It's exactly why WCW was able to gain ground like they did.
It should also be noted that the poor quality of that era was the fault of the WWF. Shawn and Bret often take a lot of shit for not being draws, or whatever, but I think it's more a case of them having to carry the company during a huge decline.
If anything, they should be praised for their drawing power since they were the only reason to watch.
Emperor Smeat
11-17-2010, 02:40 AM
I'd say yes since he was influential and popular in WCW right around the time the Monday Night Wars really heated up and his "streak" was one of the biggest events for a while in wrestling at the time.
He had a short career at the top but at the same time didn't end up over doing the years like a Flair, Foley, or Hogan so less down years on his career. His WWE career was too short although that was due to a few reasons with some being his fault.
Perfect time to include him is the rumored WCW themed Hall of Fame year although I can see his attitude and demand for stuff end up hurting his case more than if a few wrestlers dislike him.
Rammsteinmad
11-17-2010, 05:12 AM
I think Goldberg definitely should go in, but I think they should wait a few more years and get some other people in there first.
Also, if they want to be a general wrestling Hall of Fame, then Sting needs to go in there before Goldberg.
RiX1024
11-17-2010, 07:51 AM
C'mon like everyone says Koko B Ware is in the Hall of Fame why shouldn't Goldberg? I'd count him in, he's been a drawing power in WCW and a tad in WWE, he fcked himself up by leaving the promotion not WWE.
Evil Vito
11-17-2010, 08:57 AM
<font color=goldenrod>Yes. Fuck you if you think otherwise.
Of course now that Trips has publicly lobbied against it he'll probably not get in. Douchebag.</font>
Anybody Thrilla
11-17-2010, 09:00 AM
Even with these arguments, I gotta go with the Pete Rose example as a prime example of why they are total bullshit.
Pete Rose is obviously just in because he can't get into MLB's hall of fame. He's also in the Cincinnati Cyclones hall of fame, a local hockey team. He's probably in a bunch of hall of fames that he had nothing to do with, just as a nod to him. He's a bad example for you to get upset about.
Now Koko B. Ware...that's an iffy one.
Yes.
Your job as a wrestler is to get over. Full stop. No questions.
It honestly doesn't matter how athletic you are as long as you have a "look". It doesn't matter if you can't wrestle for shit (look at Hogan). The one sole purpose of a wrestler is to get over/draw money.
There is nobody in their right mind that would say that Goldberg didn't do either.
And hell, why should the guy be punished for doing that in a year? Cos it took HHH 7 years to do it by himself? Fuck that.
erickman
11-17-2010, 05:42 PM
well if trips does not want him in the wwe hall of fame he is not getting in, trips is pretty much running the company.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.