New York Region, Fourth Round: Hell in a Cell: (8) Goldberg vs. (4) Sting

[klunderbunker]

The following contest is a fourth round match in the New York Region.

This match takes place in Madison Square Garden, New York City, New York.

It is a Hell in a Cell match.

Rules: In this contest the match ends by pinfall or submission and the match takes place in the 20 foot high Hell in a Cell cage.

#8 Goldberg

Vs.

#4 Sting

This contest is one fall with a 60 minute time limit. The match will take place in a 16 x 16 ring with no ramp leading to it. Any traditional managers for either competitor will be allowed at ringside.

As for voting, vote for who you think would win this match based on the criteria you choose. Some suggestions would be (not limited to): in ring ability, overall skill, their level of influence at the highest point in their career, ability to connect with the crowd, experience in major matches or simply personal preference etc.

The most votes in the voting period wins and in the case of a tie, the most written votes wins. There is one written vote per user, meaning if a poster make ten posts saying Bret should win that will count as a single vote. In the event of a second tie, both men are ELIMINATED, no questions asked. Only winners advance.

Voting will open in 48 hours and will be open for five days and all posts must be non-spam. You may use the 48 hours to present your cases as to why either competitor should/should not win.​

 

[Nate DaMac]

I was thinking that the only thing that might sway this in Sting's favor would be the gimmick. Unfortunately, this did him no favors. A Hell In The Cell match is essentially designed to keep others from interfering and determine a winner straight up. But Goldberg never needed help to beat Sting before, and I see no reason why he couldn't do it in a cell. Goldberg has minimal experience in a Cell like environment. He dominated an Elimination Chamber match that he undoubtedly would have won if not for Evolution's interference.

Sting is an Icon in the industry, that is not debatable. But he never competed with dominance at the level Goldberg did. I'm sorry, but there is no way I can put Sting over here.

 

[El Rev sXe]

No idea, I juts watched a matche between these two and in ended in no contest :suspicious: Stupid Steiner brothers. I don't know who could win taking in count the match stipulation. Maybe it's time to play the "influence at the highest point in their career" card. I hate to do that. I need more reading, more arguments.

 

[wrestlingfan]

I'll have to say Goldberg also. Goldberg's physical dominance and intensity will severely weakne Sting in this match. Sting may've bene the bigger star but it may only taeka spear from Goldberg through the cell wall or a jackhamemr off the top through the cell to finish off the Icon.

 

[The Crock]

Although Sting may be one of the all-time greats, based off of Goldberg's dominance over all of WCW during his run there, I just have to give the win to him. The brutality and physicality of this match also go in favor of Goldberg. Sting would definitely put on a great contest, but I see this ending the way almost every Goldberg match ended, with Goldberg out on top. Also, like Nate said, Goldberg has a bit of an experience factor here over Sting. Although the Elimination Chamber isn't a Hell in a Cell match, it is quite similar. In fact, Goldberg dominated the match the entire time until Triple H had Ric Flair throw him a sledgehammer which he used on Goldberg to retain his title. Goldberg will take this match, no doubt.

 

[jmt225]

Are you guys insane?

Here's a match during Goldberg's winning streak that he had with Sting. It's easily one of Goldberg's greatest matches, first of all, but second and most importantly, look at the outcome:

[YOUTUBE]o03WPFTerI0[/YOUTUBE]

Now, keep in mind, that was Goldberg at his absolute PEAK, and Sting on the decline on his career, yet Sting STILL had the match won before Hogan stuck his nose where it didn't fucking belong.

The fact is, if the red and black Wolfpack Sting could handle Goldberg like he did in that match, then the surfer Sting would absolutely slaughter Goldberg. The surfer Sting matches Goldberg in strength, and surpasses him in speed, agility and technical ability.

Plus, ignoring the kayfabe point of view... Sting is one of the greatest, most iconic wrestlers of all time, while Goldberg was a flash in the pan who received the biggest push in history without actually ever earning it.

Please do the right thing and vote for Sting, people. There's absolutely no argument that one could make that could ever justify voting for Goldberg, other than you're either a huge Goldberg mark from way back in the day, or that you want to vote for bald headed guys in the tourney. But that's literally it.

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

I cannot find a solid reason to vote for Sting, and it's really pissing me off. Sting, without a doubt, is the better professional wrestler, in nearly every aspect. But Sting hasn't beaten Goldberg, while Goldberg basically destroyed him in 1999 at Halloween Havoc.

However, Sting was far past his prime, so it's hard for me to really hold that against him. During his prime, Sting took out some heavy hitters (Vader, The Great Muta, Ric Flair, Lex Luger, Cactus Jack, Sid, and Nikita Koloff). I can't find video of either event right now, but I know for a fact Sting pinned Hulk Hogan in at least two cage matches (possibly three), one in Boston (not too long after Starrcade '97) and one in Tampa (1998). Hogan wasn't in his prime, but he didn't lose all that often in WCW at that point in time.

I would also like to point out that Sting has had amazing success in Steel Cage matches. How amazing? Undefeated, in one-on-one steel cages matches, until his run with TNA. That's..amazing. Goldberg had his share of success in cage matches, but not like Sting.

I'm not sure I can vote in this one. Sting was very dominant during his prime, and Goldberg was even more so. However, during his prime, Goldberg beat a lot of guys in WCW when they were nowhere near their prime. Keep that in mind.

We'll see what happens, but for now, I really can't go either way.

 

[Shocky]

Goldberg was a monster, no doubt, but I can't see him winning this match against an in his prime Sting.

Has everyone forgotten the big match record of Sting? I want to say he's somewhere around 15-2 or better at Starrcade/Bound For Glory. In a big match, only the Undertaker has out performed the Stinger.

Goldberg has power, and a bulldozer mentality. Could Goldberg beat Sting, no doubt, but I think the strength factor is getting over played. Both men are essentially equals in size. I think Goldberg outweighs the Stinger by 10 pounds, or something very minimal.

In their primes, this would have been a match to see, but as Nick pointed out, I'm pretty sure during his prime Sting never lost a cage match. I'm going with the Stinger.

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

Yup, everyone's hitting nails on the heads, but I think what counts here is endurance. As much as I wanna say Sting, something about being in a HIAC makes me think a bloodied Goldberg will take it eventually. And there's no way I see Good Ole' Billy tapping out to anybody.

Much to my chagrin, it has to be Goldberg.

 

[jmt225]

Yup, everyone's hitting nails on the heads, but I think what counts here is endurance. As much as I wanna say Sting, something about being in a HIAC makes me think a bloodied Goldberg will take it eventually. And there's no way I see Good Ole' Billy tapping out to anybody.

Much to my chagrin, it has to be Goldberg.

If endurance is what counts for you, then your vote should go to Sting.

Seriously, what's the longest match Goldberg has ever had? Sting went 45 minutes with Ric Flair, what about Goldberg? I think the longest I've seem him in there was against HHH at Unforgiven in that shitty match where Goldberg beat him for the World Title. That match was 15 minutes.

Goldberg has not once proven he has endurance, whereas Sting has that match with Flair on his record, plus plenty of other very long matches against very tough wrestlers, so I don't know what compelled you to actually give the endurance edge to Goldberg since Goldberg's gas tank has never really been tested. For all we know the guy would die if in there longer than half an hour, since bookers never trusted him enough to give him a match anywhere close to that duration.

If endurance is your main criteria for voting in this match-up, then go with the person who has PROVEN he has endurance (Sting), not an assumption (Goldberg).

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

No but that's the thing. I'm not saying will have a decent long match. Odds are it will be crappy till he hits the Jack-Spear combo in the end. But he has had long matches with Hunter and a few in WCW. Also an HIAC match is almost always extended substantially by the venture around the cell to add the seconds and make it longer. Then there tables and chairs to be found, so Goldberg is ok killing time here.

He can last when he has to last, but it won't be sweet on the eyes. Sting will do his end-all to make it interesting, but the other point that I brought up in the 1st post is taking over my rebuttal here, i.e: I don't see Goldberg tapping.

And the Scorpion Death Drop is the most unbelievably weak finisher in the history of man and space. So don't bring that up jmt.

 

[jmt225]

No but that's the thing. I'm not saying will have a decent long match. Odds are it will be crappy till he hits the Jack-Spear combo in the end. But he has had long matches with Hunter and a few in WCW. Also an HIAC match is almost always extended substantially by the venture around the cell to add the seconds and make it longer. Then there tables and chairs to be found, so Goldberg is ok killing time here.

He can last when he has to last, but it won't be sweet on the eyes. Sting will do his end-all to make it interesting, but the other point that I brought up in the 1st post is taking over my rebuttal here, i.e: I don't see Goldberg tapping

Did you not watch the match I posted? Sting had the fucking match won... it was tap out or pass out. The same would happen here.

Also, what is Goldberg's history with Cage matches, anyway? I remember one with Christian on Raw, but Christian was a jobber at that point so it doesn't really count.

Sting, on the other hand... well, Sting has participated and been successful in multiple War Games, the closest to a Hell and a Cell match there was in WCW. So once again, edge goes to Sting.

And the Scorpion Death Drop is the most unbelievably weak finisher in the history of man and space. So don't bring that up jmt.

Uhh... no, it's not. For it's time, it was a creative and neat finisher for Sting to quickly drop someone. Not to mention it's kept guys like The Giant (Big Show) down. It might not severely hurt someone, but it will keep them down for 3 seconds, especially if Sting does it on a foreign object like a steel chair or the steps, which will be available in a Hell in a Cell match.

Sorry man, but there's simply not one logical argument that can be made for Goldberg here. When the tail end of his WCW career version of Sting can beat Goldberg during his peak's ass like he did in that video I posted, then you just have to believe that the Stinger in his prime would have done MUCH more damage to Goldberg were they to face off.

 

[Slyfox696]

And the Scorpion Death Drop is the most unbelievably weak finisher in the history of man and space. So don't bring that up jmt.

I wasn't going to post here, but this is easily the stupidest comment made so far in this thread.

How the fuck is taking someone and slamming them on the BACK of their head weak? How fucking stupid can you be to think that's weak? Do you have any concept of the word "concussion"? Do you have any idea how many pro football players get concussions because they get slammed on the back of their heads?

You're telling me a move which simulates the same movement as to what gives more concussions in sports than any other movement is weak, but the Jackhammer, which is basically a modified power slam WITHOUT the benefit of the same force a powerslam has, isn't?

I'm sorry, but that's just stupid.

 

[FunKay the Inevitable]

Not sure which way to go. Sting is deadly inside the cage as has been proven time & time again, but he's fighting one of the most powerful guys to ever wrestle in Goldberg. Goldberg destroyed people left right and centre during his undefeated streak and beyond, but his legacy doesn't match Sting's, nor does he have quite the same resume as Sting. The gimmick favours neither in my opinion as Sting's record is second to none in cage matches and Goldberg locked inside Hell in a Cell is a scary thought. Not sure which way to go, but I'm leaning towards Sting.

 

[Nate DaMac]

Are you guys in insane

I've had doubts, but the doctors seem to think I'm ok.

Here's a match during Goldberg's winning streak that he had with Sting. It's easily one of Goldberg's greatest matches, first of all, but second and most importantly, look at the outcome:

[YOUTUBE]o03WPFTerI0[/YOUTUBE]

Now, keep in mind, that was Goldberg at his absolute PEAK, and Sting on the decline on his career, yet Sting STILL had the match won before Hogan stuck his nose where it didn't fucking belong.

Yeah...... no. Goldberg was far from out of it and was extremely close to the ropes. He showed signs of being able to power out of it earlier, and seemed like he was regrouping to do it again. He wasn't fading, he wasn't showing signs of tapping.

The fact is, if the red and black Wolfpack Sting could handle Goldberg like he did in that match, then the surfer Sting would absolutely slaughter Goldberg. The surfer Sting matches Goldberg in strength, and surpasses him in speed, agility and technical ability.

Excuse me while I scoop my skull fragments up off the floor. Did you.. Did you just say Surfer Sting surpasses Goldberg in strength? Speed and agility, maybe, Technical ability, definitely, but strength. Abso-fucking-lutely not. Besides, are you going with Wolfpac Sting or Surfer Sting here? If you have to combine two different eras of Sting to make a legit case for him to go over, It kind of hurts the credibility of your argument.

Plus, ignoring the kayfabe point of view... Sting is one of the greatest, most iconic wrestlers of all time, while Goldberg was a flash in the pan who received the biggest push in history without actually ever earning it.

So what exactly qualifies a person for deserving a push? The crowd going nuts for him and getting behind him wasn't enough? Sorry John Cena, your push doesn't count because Edge was really popular at one point and he was there longer.

Please do the right thing and vote for Sting, people. There's absolutely no argument that one could make that could ever justify voting for Goldberg, other than you're either a huge Goldberg mark from way back in the day, or that you want to vote for bald headed guys in the tourney. But that's literally it.

Or how about the fact that I'm not going to blatantly disregard all of the work that KB, Shocky, or whoever else put into developing this tournament and making it interesting by ignoring the gimmick matches. Goldberg has been in an elimination Chamber match, that yes, he lost, but He absolutely dominated until HHH brought in a fucking Sledgehammer. Sting hasn't done anything to make me think that he could combat that.

Also, for anyone thinking that Goldberg needed help to beat Sting, I present to you:

[YOUTUBE]9Ik9LmtReDs[/YOUTUBE]

A pretty damn conclusive argument for the opposition.

I am in no way a Goldberg mark, but as a 9-10 year old kid you bet your ass I was. Even still, I was always a bigger Sting mark. I remember as a kid watching the match that you posted and being so pissed off that Sting didn't win.

So no, I'm not voting for Goldberg because I'm a mark for him, I'm doing it because I'm being objective. At no point is his career would Sting go over Goldberg at his peak.

 

[jmt225]

I've had doubts, but the doctors seem to think I'm ok.

Well after reading this post, man, I would recommend you go have another check-up as soon as possible.

Yeah...... no. Goldberg was far from out of it and was extremely close to the ropes. He showed signs of being able to power out of it earlier, and seemed like he was regrouping to do it again. He wasn't fading, he wasn't showing signs of tapping.

Bullshit.

Sting had the fucking match won when he sat back. There was absolutely NO WAY Goldberg was ever getting out of that positioning.

Youtube comments can be ******ed sometimes, but this is the top comment on the video, with 13 people giving the guy a Thumb's Up:

Alright I give Goldberg his credit. He is incredible. But my man Sting had his ass beat. He was struggling with the Scorpion for a minute, but he smartly stood up re hooked it and sat back down on him. Therefore even though he wouldn't tap, he'll pass out to the pain Like Hart did Austin. Sting is the best in the business.

That dude is 100% correct. It was tap out or pass out... no other choice. Sting had the match fucking won and anyone who thinks differently is being EXTREMELY biased to justify their reasoning for voting Goldberg.

Excuse me while I scoop my skull fragments up off the floor. Did you.. Did you just say Surfer Sting surpasses Goldberg in strength? Speed and agility, maybe, Technical ability, definitely, but strength. Abso-fucking-lutely not.

Dude, reread my quote... I said MATCHES, which means I think they were equal. I didn't say Sting surpasses Goldberg in strength, but matched Goldberg's strength at one time in his career, which he absolutely did (at least, kayfabe he certainly did and there's no arguing it). All you have to do is watch Sting's matches with Vader and Avalanche/The Shark (Earthquake from the WWF) to see how strong the guy was.

Besides, are you going with Wolfpac Sting or Surfer Sting here? If you have to combine two different eras of Sting to make a legit case for him to go over, It kind of hurts the credibility of your argument.

Surfer Sting is Sting in his prime, so of course I'm going with him.

I'm just bringing up Wolfpack Sting because Wolfpack Sting had Goldberg beatdown once upon a time, and Surfer Sting was far superior to Wolfpack Sting in every way, so logic tells us that Surfer Sting would dominate Goldberg even more than Wolfpack Sting did.

So what exactly qualifies a person for deserving a push? The crowd going nuts for him and getting behind him wasn't enough? Sorry John Cena, your push doesn't count because Edge was really popular at one point and he was there longer.

What qualifies someone deserving a push is hard work and dedication, something John Cena has and Goldberg never did. There's a reason why Cena's top push has lasted for almost ten years, while Goldberg's barely reached a year, so please don't put those two names in the same sentence, because it's a down right fucking insult to Cena to actually compare a chump like Goldberg to an incredible talent/hard worker like John Cena.

Or how about the fact that I'm not going to blatantly disregard all of the work that KB, Shocky, or whoever else put into developing this tournament and making it interesting by ignoring the gimmick matches. Goldberg has been in an elimination Chamber match, that yes, he lost, but He absolutely dominated until HHH brought in a fucking Sledgehammer. Sting hasn't done anything to make me think that he could combat that.

Sting fucking won WAR GAMES... what more proof do you need that he could survive this environment? For fuck's sakes, dude, 50-YEAR-OLD Sting had fucking WARS with Abyss in TNA... why wouldn't prime Sting be able to hang in this kind environment? What you're saying makes no sense whatsoever.

Also, for anyone thinking that Goldberg needed help to beat Sting, I present to you:

[YOUTUBE]9Ik9LmtReDs[/YOUTUBE]

A pretty damn conclusive argument for the opposition.

Bullshit it is, because Goldberg is facing the horribly booked heel version of Sting from the late nineties when Sting was over 40-years-old. No, he's going against PRIME Sting in this match. Sting during his prime proved himself time and time again to be one of the greatest, strongest, and most resilient athletes to ever step foot in a pro wrestling ring, and he did it for YEARS. Goldberg did it for one measly year, and during the biggest peak of that year, Wolfpack Sting had the man fucking beat and if it weren't Hogan, Sting would have been the one to end the streak, and he would have done it CLEAN.

Also, what a cheap tactic to bring that piece of shit match up in the first place, man. I mean, I guess we should start looking at Hogan's heel work and start using that shit against him, since most of the time he acted like a coward who couldn't beat up a 5-year-old girl. Shit let's judge Cena while he was a heel since he loss to Billy fucking Kidman. Get the fuck out of here with that shit, man.

It's just a coincidence that the ONE time Sting heeled it up in WCW, it was to be fed to Goldberg, which just showed the ******ation and incompetence of WCW's booking at the time, and if you decide to use that as part of your argument why Goldberg would beat Sting here... well, then, that just puts your logic of the wrestling business up there's with late WCW's.

So no, I'm not voting for Goldberg because I'm a mark for him, I'm doing it because I'm being objective. At no point is his career would Sting go over Goldberg at his peak.

If you were really being objective you'd take the blinders off and see that the Wolfpack Sting had Goldberg defeated before interference came, and that if the Wolfpack Sting could do that to Goldberg, than the prime Sting would do much, much worse to the guy in this kind of environment.

 

[CH David]

I'm going to go with Sting. Why? Stinger was an insane specimen when he was the Surfer Sting. Undoubtedly his strength could at least match Goldberg, and his speed and agility was certainly better than Goldberg. I mean just look at this jumping ability. It's at the 3:00 mark.

[YOUTUBE]d42Fi-Eqff4[/YOUTUBE]

Can Goldberg jump like that? Well it's possible, but I never saw it, so I'm just going to say he didn't. If we go with experience, and bring up the Elimination Chamber, well that's great. He was only in one Elimination Chamber match, and lost. He was also in that Triple Cage match in WCW, and lost. But he won a Cage match against Chris Jericho so there is that.

Sting has been in multiple War Games matches which is more similar than the Elimination Chamber, and equal to the Triple Cage. But this isn't about grabbing stuff of cages or having pods in the match. This is one on one and would be quite entertaining.

Goldberg was undefeated for a year and 3 months. Sting was the franchise of WCW. Fuck it, I'm going with Sting. Surfer Sting was insane, and I love watching his old matches. Goldberg was a powerhouse, I won't deny that, but I just can't see Surfer Sting losing to Goldberg. Goldberg gets caught in the Scorpion Death Lock and taps or passes out.

 

[SavageTaker]

What can I say here that hasn't already been said? Overall, he is a great wrestler and I don't think anyone can deny that. He can go from being a high flying type wrestler to being a brawler and he could even be a technical wrestler when need be. Also, aside from being able to wrestler several different types of styles, he had amazing stamina and resiliency. He could go toe-to-toe with some of the best the business has ever seen for more than 40 minutes and he did so with the likes of Ric Flair on several occasions.

Not only is he an amazing wrestler, he is also very accomplished having held the NWA and WCW world heavyweight champions on many occasions. He's also held the TNA world title when he was past his prime and he has also had several reigns with the tag team titles in both WCW and TNA and he has also held the US Champion on two occasions.

I just don't see how people can vote against Sting when he is overall a great wrestler and is very well decorated. He's been involved in some of the most legendary feuds ever with guys like Flair and the NWO. He could definitely defeat Goldberg in any sort of environment no matter what the stipulation (in this case, a match he's never wrestled in but has experience being in similar type matches) is because he is just that damn good.

Vote Sting!

 

[GrandSword]

I hate this match has come so early in the tournament. I was hoping we would have had Sting or Goldberg go up against guys like Taker or Shawn Michaels .. but the WCW boys are being forced to take each other out.

Kayfabe Goldberg is an absolute beast and to be honest the way he was booked back in the nineties I don't see anyone beating him. Not Lesnar, not Hogan, not Undertaker, not Muta, even not Misawa... Goldberg was invincable but most IWCers hate the man and for him to beat Sting and then only be jobbed out when he faced a WWF guy would really piss me off...

Goldberg would win, but as a Sting mark I would vote for him to keep him going in the tournament.. because Goldberg winning would probably be lost on the many WWF faithful on these boards...

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

I am going to have to give this one to Goldberg. Looking at the fact that he is down 19-7 in the scoring right now, I don't think this extra vote will have much of an effect in the end.

Sting is his prime was awesome, no doubt about it. However in a HIAC match, the Devils playground, I think Goldberg has the edge. In HIS prime, he was an absolute wrecking machine, capable of destroying anyone. He has the power to dominate Sting, using the cage as a weapon and breaking Sting in half with the spear. At his peak he was able to Jackhammer the Big Show, cleanly beat Hollywood Hogan and went over 100 matches without a slip up, building a phenomenal winning streak.

Sting has the advantage of endurance as Goldberg never really had any long matches, but that was only because he beat the shit out of people very quickly. I would expect Sting to teast Bill in this one, definitely give him one of (if his THE) longest matches of his career, but I think that the early damage Goldberg would inflict on Sting would be the crucial factor, as a winded Sting with damage to his mid section would be easy prey for a 2nd Spear.

Jackhammer to end this after 23 minutes

 

[UltimateHitman]

I gave it to Sting. And my reasoning is a little different.

How many guys have been built up as beasts, or monsters, or unstoppable forces, just for the face, or opposition, or even "underdog" to find a weakness, or a way to defeat them? Isn't that how all big monsters end up? Then, after the build up and that pay-off victory, all of a sudden they're beatable.

Bundy, Khali, Zeus, Taker, Kane, Snitsky, Earthquake, all these big, huge "monsters" were made to look unbeatable yet, after they were taken down, after that initial first defeat they lost on a regular basis.

And the reason they lost was because a weakness had been found. Somebody who appeared as though they couldn't take a big monster down defied the odds and did it. And this is no different.

Sting is definitely the smarter wrestler, the more ring savvy, the more technical of the two. He would get knocked around, sure, but he'd move out of the way of a spear to allow Goldberg's head to ricochet off the cell. Probably more than once. He would adapt to his element, find ways to inflict damage, and neutralize Goldberg. Hell, after he bounced his head off the cell a bazillion times, he'd then take out his legs to the point Goldberg would have to fight from the mat because he wouldn't be able to stand.

I see Stinger defying the odds here after a long, hard fought battle, and using his smarts to come out on top.

 

[El Rev sXe]

Once again, I have finally made up my mind, even if he's losing, I have to go with Goldberg. Basically Sting is the better wrestler, (promo wise, mic skills, as a technician, high flyer, legend, legacy, draw etc.) however in one thing I think Golberg is better: he is more vicious. As far a hell in a cell match concerns, being vicious and brutal is almost mandatory. Goldberg doesn't even need weapons to be like this. I know how good can be Sting as a wrestler, but man Goldberg has seriously kicked some ass'es in the past including the cerebral assasin Triple H.

 

[ThUnDeRpHoEnIx]

Once again, I have finally made up my mind, even if he's losing, I have to go with Goldberg. Basically Sting is the better wrestler, (promo wise, mic skills, as a technician, high flyer, legend, legacy, draw etc.) however in one thing I think Golberg is better: he is more vicious. As far a hell in a cell match concerns, being vicious and brutal is almost mandatory. Goldberg doesn't even need weapons to be like this. I know how good can be Sting as a wrestler, but man Goldberg has seriously kicked some ass'es in the past including the cerebral assasin Triple H.

The only reason Sting hasnt kicked HHH's ass all over the arena is because Sting hasnt gone to WWE or even when it was the WWF.

I gave this one to Sting.Goldberg would but up a good fight but Sting would overcome the odds and win around the 40ish minute mark when Goldberg taps to a Scorpion Death Lock.

 

[Tastycles]

Sting would win this. Goldberg was a beast in WCW, but he actually had a patchy record in gimmick matches - winning just over half. Obviously, that's a good record, but compared to his regular match record, that's quite poor. Sting on the other hand lost few gimmick matches, and had a lot of impressive and seemingly unlikely wins, such as against Hogan in no fewer than 3 cage matches. Goldberg could only narrowly defeat Sting without the gimmick at a point when Sting was on the decline, even if still very good. I expect Goldberg would put up a hell of a fight, but I think Sting would take it.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

I gave it to Sting. And my reasoning is a little different.

How many guys have been built up as beasts, or monsters, or unstoppable forces, just for the face, or opposition, or even "underdog" to find a weakness, or a way to defeat them? Isn't that how all big monsters end up? Then, after the build up and that pay-off victory, all of a sudden they're beatable.

Bundy, Khali, Zeus, Taker, Kane, Snitsky, Earthquake, all these big, huge "monsters" were made to look unbeatable yet, after they were taken down, after that initial first defeat they lost on a regular basis.

And the reason they lost was because a weakness had been found. Somebody who appeared as though they couldn't take a big monster down defied the odds and did it. And this is no different.

Sting is definitely the smarter wrestler, the more ring savvy, the more technical of the two. He would get knocked around, sure, but he'd move out of the way of a spear to allow Goldberg's head to ricochet off the cell. Probably more than once. He would adapt to his element, find ways to inflict damage, and neutralize Goldberg. Hell, after he bounced his head off the cell a bazillion times, he'd then take out his legs to the point Goldberg would have to fight from the mat because he wouldn't be able to stand.

I see Stinger defying the odds here after a long, hard fought battle, and using his smarts to come out on top.

What exactly is Goldberg's weakness? Tasers? It hasn't been shown what his weakness is so how is Sting going to capitalize? Goldberg has had his legs taken out before and still won.