Was Giant Gonzalez Really That Bad?????

[Whatsinaname696]

Well he couldn't wrestle well at all, true, but as has been said, his run in wcw was a lil better because he was in better health and he had NO training.. Andre was great as THE giant when he came in but as happens with most huge guys, once they start going downhill they go down FAST, with good reasons (look em up if ya don't know) same will prolly happen with Khali if it hasn't already (haven't watched wwe in quite awhile) the only reason big show is diff is NOT because of his ability granted he has gotten a TON better from when he started way back when, but he is no ring master, the fact the he has gotten better and kept his health (miraculously to me) which kept him around the business for quite awhile is why he seems so much better, so Gonzalez, while not being the best ever is a staple of wrestling that continues to this day, and the fact that pretty much everyone watchin back in the day remembers him is def something, in Pro Wrestling being remembered for better or worse is still being remembered and is worthy of some respect (excluding Arquette, Leno, Russo and pretty much every "star" that ever attempted to go to the ring)

 

[The Eighties]

The thing to remember is in 93 Taker himself was a special attraction, not the great match having mainstay of the title scene that he has been for the last decade plus. He was a zombie character that mostly stalked opponents around the ring and choked them, he had the legendary rope walking spot and the flying clothesline as his big spots that displayed his athletic ability, but for the most part he stayed within the zombie character.

Gonzalez debut at the Rumble was one of those wrestling moments that is executed so well that it sticks, it is the spectacle and awe of the entertainment side of sports entertainment, the problem with Gonzalez was that despite his size he looked weak and couldn't even pull off a credible looking beat-down, which harmed the angle to a large degree. However I really don't think the plan was to have him around very long as he was so limited once Taker had beaten him he was done as a commodity.

 

[The Ace of Knaves]

Yeah, I'm siding with those in the "not that bad" camp. I can't believe the lack of respect that I'm seeing from some of you. Obviously, I'm a fan of Jorge Gonzalez. He moved pretty well in WCW as El Gigante. By the time he was brought into the WWF, he was already having health problems. You can't blame him for being a bad wrestler. It's not like he trained in Stu Hart's dungeon. His match at WM9 against The Undertaker was entertaining. That's all it needed to be.

Right before he left the WWF, he was turned face. He was going to feud with Adam Bomb, who was managed by Harvey Wippleman. In my opinion, it would have been another entertaining series of matches. He was over with the fans (type in Gonzales and Adam Bomb at YouTube; listen to the crowd's reaction).

I was deeply saddened when Jorge passed away, and I'm a little disappointed by some of the stuff I'm reading in this thread.

Wow, this is the first time I've ever seen someone called The Undertaker's worst match ever to be 'entertaining'. I know we're entitled to our own opinion, but this is weird to say the least.

To be fair, Undertaker was usually exponentially more talented than the dudes he had to feud with in the early '90s. Gonzalez. Kamala. Bundy. He tried his best, but not even sweet fancy Moses could have had a good match with Gonzalez, who was none other than the ex-WCW star "El Gigante" dressed up like a Sasquatch. This match was so boring that even the birds flew over Caesar's Palace upside down. That's right, because there was nothing there worth "s**tting on."

Yes, he beat Giant Gonzalez, but by DQ. After the seventy foot tall giant decided to resort to using chloroform! What giant wrestler uses chloroform? What the…? Giant Gonzalez is easily one of the worst wrestlers in WWE history. In terms of skills, he makes The Great Khali look like Bret Hart in comparison. His moves consisted of a punch, a body slam, and the claw. His selling of moves consisted of the patent "Giant Gonzalez all purpose bug eye selling"

I mean come on, giving The Undertaker the most horrible performance in his legendary career is something that even a godlike must try to do, but Gonzales gave it effortlessly (literally).

 

[The Ace of Knaves]

I see this opinion a lot. You have to keep in mind where Taker was at that point in his career. Now that we see what Taker has become it's easy to look back and wish he wrestled Savage or Hart at mania. That's not where his character was in 1993. A match with Savage wouldn't have made sense. Giant Gonzalez was an appropriate opponent for Undertaker at the time. I don't know why this guy gets such a hard time for an eight month run. The only reason he had the rematch at SummerSlam is because Mr. Hughes left the company so quickly. Gonzalez was supposed to get attention with his size, not his ability. That's exactly what happened. It's not like they put the title on him.

Then again, Taker was fairly young at that time. A match against Hogan or Savage would have pushed him further, especially considering Hulkamania was starting to fade at that time. Maybe a legendary feud against The Undertaker was what WWE needed to keep the Hulkamania momentum alive, not some crappy tag team match on their biggest event.

The Undertaker, at the time, wasn't nearly as good as he is now (like fine wine, he's gotten MUCH better with age). A lot of it is due to a combination of experience, his in ring gimmick evolving, his schedule reducing, and his recent infatuation and influences with UFC and Mixed Martial Arts.

And not to mention a match with Gonzales or Savage wouldn't have been an ABSOLUTE CRAP!! What was the WWF thinking bringing with such a horrible wrestler as Giant Gonzales? Vince should have given Hogan as ‘Taker’s opponent!! Surprisingly, Hogan never got a problem jobbing to The Undertaker (Survivor Series 1991 and Judgment Day 2002). Vince could have given ‘Taker a rub by defeating Hogan in Hogan’s last WrestleMania during his first tenure in WWE, but as we knew it, for Vince, ‘Taker vs worthless giants is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more preferable than ‘Taker vs greats!!! Undertaker vs Mark Henry at WM 22 looks like Shawn Michaels vs Bret Hart at WM 12 compared to Undertaker vs Giant Gonzales at WM 9. Oh, it's true. It's damn true!

 

[The Brain]

Then again, Taker was fairly young at that time. A match against Hogan or Savage would have pushed him further, especially considering Hulkamania was starting to fade at that time. Maybe a legendary feud against The Undertaker was what WWE needed to keep the Hulkamania momentum alive, not some crappy tag team match on their biggest event.

The Undertaker, at the time, wasn't nearly as good as he is now (like fine wine, he's gotten MUCH better with age). A lot of it is due to a combination of experience, his in ring gimmick evolving, his schedule reducing, and his recent infatuation and influences with UFC and Mixed Martial Arts.

And not to mention a match with Gonzales or Savage wouldn't have been an ABSOLUTE CRAP!! What was the WWF thinking bringing with such a horrible wrestler as Giant Gonzales? Vince should have given Hogan as ‘Taker’s opponent!! Surprisingly, Hogan never got a problem jobbing to The Undertaker (Survivor Series 1991 and Judgment Day 2002). Vince could have given ‘Taker a rub by defeating Hogan in Hogan’s last WrestleMania during his first tenure in WWE, but as we knew it, for Vince, ‘Taker vs worthless giants is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more preferable than ‘Taker vs greats!!! Undertaker vs Mark Henry at WM 22 looks like Shawn Michaels vs Bret Hart at WM 12 compared to Undertaker vs Giant Gonzales at WM 9. Oh, it's true. It's damn true!

You are not looking at this through 1993 eyes. Hulk Hogan vs. Undertaker does not make sense for WrestleMania IX. Hogan hadn’t wrestle since WrestleMania VIII and was brought back to spike the buy rate for WM9. Putting Taker against the most popular guy in company history in his comeback match would not have done Taker any favors as a face. Remember Taker still had the slow methodical style back then. It’s not like he was putting on classics with others and Gonzalez held him back. We weren’t suddenly going to see the MMA style Taker or the Taker who flies through the air. You just have to accept things for what they were back then. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m guessing you weren’t watching WWF in 1993.

I know you want to go back and rewrite history based on how meaningful Taker’s streak has become. The streak was not planned. Vince wasn’t thinking about giving Taker legendary opponents at the beginning with the idea that it would look better on his resume 15 years later. He was doing what made sense at the time. Shawn Michaels has the Mr. WrestleMania nickname but some of his early opponents were The Orient Express and Haku & The Barbarian. Same thing with Take early in his career.

I’ll say it again; Giant Gonzalez was the right opponent for Taker at the time. The match had good hype and looked good on paper. The match exposed Gonzalez as a bad worker (which wasn’t a surprise) and he was hardly used again.

 

[Somewhat Large Gonzalez]

As someone else pointed out, seeing Gonzalez as a child puts things in a completely different light. I was 8 years old at the time, and I couldn't believe what I was seeing. I was transfixed whenever Gonzales was on-screen. Hell, I was even transfixed when he made a bumbling appearance on Live Wire and scared the crap out of Todd Pettengill. It was awesome.

I should note that I've always been fascinated by giants, and I consider myself to be an expert on the subject. Robert Wadlow was the tallest man in medical history, standing at 8'11. He wouldn't have made a good wrestler, but if he was born 50-60 years later and debuted in the WWF as Vortex or The Destroyer (or something like that), thousands upon thousands of people would have tuned in just to stare at him. That's the role that Jorge filled, and he filled it well.

 

[The Ace of Knaves]

You are not looking at this through 1993 eyes. Hulk Hogan vs. Undertaker does not make sense for WrestleMania IX. Hogan hadn’t wrestle since WrestleMania VIII and was brought back to spike the buy rate for WM9. Putting Taker against the most popular guy in company history in his comeback match would not have done Taker any favors as a face. Remember Taker still had the slow methodical style back then. It’s not like he was putting on classics with others and Gonzalez held him back. We weren’t suddenly going to see the MMA style Taker or the Taker who flies through the air. You just have to accept things for what they were back then. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m guessing you weren’t watching WWF in 1993.

Well, I admit I started watching in 1996 (Wrestlemania 12), but I also watched a lot of DVDs and videos from early 1990's and stuff (mostly from when Taker debuted).

Well, Hogan's match with Taker at Survivor Series 1991 weren't MMA vs MMA either, but who can deny it was memorable? If it was memorable in Survivor Series, I don't see why it can't be memorable at Wrestlemania. Honest.

I know you want to go back and rewrite history based on how meaningful Taker’s streak has become. The streak was not planned. Vince wasn’t thinking about giving Taker legendary opponents at the beginning with the idea that it would look better on his resume 15 years later. He was doing what made sense at the time. Shawn Michaels has the Mr. WrestleMania nickname but some of his early opponents were The Orient Express and Haku & The Barbarian. Same thing with Take early in his career.

The thing is, since Wrestlemania X Shawn had constantly gotten great performers to face at Wrestlemania. Diesel, Bret Hart, Stone Cold, Chris Jericho, Triple H, Chris Benoit, Kurt Angle, Vince McMahon, John Cena, Ric Flair, and Undertaker himself twice.

While The Undertaker? Vince had this need to somehow ruin his Wrestlemania momentum. After Gonzalez, he ruined it even more with Bundy. Taker started gaining some credibility by defeating Diesel, Sid, and Masked Kane but had to be ruined by Boss Man.

And the credibility was built again with Triple H and Ric Flair only to be smashed by Big Show and A-Train, and further followed by Unmasked Kane in an abortion of a match. And then he had to push Randy Orton, followed by Mark Henry (to oblivion).

And after Batista, Edge, and Shawn Michaels twice, now he feels this needs to push Wade Barrett.

I'm sorry, but taking over giants or pushing younger stars don't do jack to give The Streak enough credibility to speak of.

I’ll say it again; Giant Gonzalez was the right opponent for Taker at the time. The match had good hype and looked good on paper. The match exposed Gonzalez as a bad worker (which wasn’t a surprise) and he was hardly used again.

Don't forget to add: And the match also turned out to be The Undertaker's worst match of all time. It's fact, mate.