Austin vs. Goldberg

**Mr. C** · 03-26-2010, 06:50 PM

Vince McMahon should�ve paid Goldberg anything he wanted to come in for the Invasion. Goldberg vs. Stone Cold Steve Austin in 2001 would�ve been money in every way possible. To this day, I don�t understand why they didn�t at least do that. What would Austin/Goldberg at SummerSlam drawn as a buyrate? Insanity. If people had faced reality and simply swallowed their pride, the revenue that this angle could�ve generated would�ve made everyone involved a lot of money. If Goldberg only wanted to work one date a week, who cares? Austin vs. Goldberg would�ve provided such a return on investment that it wouldn�t matter. Vince would�ve had to pay out some money for sure, but even if he signed Goldberg to a deal, would that really have drove the company into the ground?

03-26-2010, 06:50 PM	#1
Mr. C Ghost town Posts: 1,192	Austin vs. Goldberg Vince McMahon should�ve paid Goldberg anything he wanted to come in for the Invasion. Goldberg vs. Stone Cold Steve Austin in 2001 would�ve been money in every way possible. To this day, I don�t understand why they didn�t at least do that. What would Austin/Goldberg at SummerSlam drawn as a buyrate? Insanity. If people had faced reality and simply swallowed their pride, the revenue that this angle could�ve generated would�ve made everyone involved a lot of money. If Goldberg only wanted to work one date a week, who cares? Austin vs. Goldberg would�ve provided such a return on investment that it wouldn�t matter. Vince would�ve had to pay out some money for sure, but even if he signed Goldberg to a deal, would that really have drove the company into the ground?