I put a lot of effort into this post. It isn't really long, but I thought it out before I wrote it down.
What do you think?
The who beat who argument is ridiculous in this situation. When Goldberg was in his prime he had great people to work with such as Sting, Hogan, Luger and several others. Yes, he did beat them and that is truly the point. But I come to you with this, you can't hold it against Cena for not beating Hogan, Sting, Luger, Nash, and many more. Ultimately, Cena wrestled in a different era, and he's never had the "stars" to work with. But Cena has beaten the best during his tenure in the WWE.
This whole thing boils down to size, strength, speed, and even stamina. If I can recall, Goldberg never wrestled a lengthy match. Cena on the other hand has. The longer this match goes, the more it favors Cena. Cena has wrestled in an hour long match, 20 minute matches and probably matches that have gone close to a half an hour.
Cena has always been pushed as the underdog, or the person who is against all odds. Cena has taken out streaks, such as Umaga or Khali. Cena has beaten the best in his era, such as HHH, Edge, and even HBK. Cena has never been manhandled, and that was basically Goldberg's specialty. This match can go either way, but I will be voting for John. I think when it is all said and done, he will have a bigger legacy where he has beaten the biggest stars of his Era. Goldberg's prime lasted roughly four years, and you can say Cena's prime is going on roughly five years. I say Cena wins this match with an AA after a nice back and forth match.
What do you think?