Fourth Round: Hell in a Cell - The Undertaker vs. Bill Goldberg

[klunderbunker]

This is a Fourth round matchup in the Toronto Region.

Rules: This is a standard Hell in a Cell match. You can win by pinfall or submission but the fall must take place in the ring and the ring only.

Location: SkyDome, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

The Undertaker

Vs.

Goldberg

​

Voting is open for 4 days.

 

[IrishCanadian25]

Goldberg FTW.

This match would play out similar to the Lesnar / Taker match, with Goldberg being intense enough to put the Deadman down for the count. Goldberg in his prime - well, basically his entire career was a prime - he was not intimidated or afraid of anyone, eliminating one of Taker's main weapons. Goldberg is one guy Taker also isn't stronger than, and Goldberg is even more agile.

Taker also doesn't have a great record in HIAC. Give me Goldberg here!

 

[Alex]

Well Lesnar beat Undertaker in Hell In A Cell and Goldberg beat Lesnar so law of averages says Goldberg wins, plus Undertaker's record in Hell In A Cell aren't good and as IC25 said Goldberg is scared of no-one eliminating Taker's mind games. So Goldberg

 

[BOSS Productions]

Goldberg will take this , for all the reasons IC25 has mentioned.

Goldberg can out power Taker easily and well even though HIAC is Taker's "match" , he sure as hell loses in it a lot , Goldberg can dominate this match and win , Goldberg takes it without a doubt.

Like IC25 also said , this match would be much like the Lesnar/Taker match up , where Goldberg is able to out last Taker and eventually beat him.

 

[Ferbian]

I'm gonna go with Goldberg here as well, while it's Undertaker's "home advantage" thing and everything, it's not gonna work on Goldberg, just like IC said, Goldberg is just like Lesnar, who ripped Undertaker a part inside the Hell in a Cell, which is gonna happen just the same with Goldberg.

It's gonna be a grueling match, but in the end, the winner is quite so obvious.

Goldberg wins, with a devastating spear!

 

[The Underking]

I see this match being incredibly similar to the Edge vs. Taker match. Edge battles hard with incredible moves but just at the end Berg loses. Plus to the people who are saying he has a bad record in Hell in a Cell.

The Undertaker vs. HBK: I think we can cross out Kane running in and interfering.

The Next was a tag hell in a cell crappy match that went no contest. Taker being partnered with Steve against Kane and Mankind.

Then Undertaker defeated Mankind in one of the biggest matches of all time in ring of course.

Taker then beat Big Boss man easily.

Then was the six man hell in a cell were a believe Taker had a broken arm or it was in the Lesnar one not sure. Anyways Taker wasn't involved in the finish being on top of the cell after pushing off Rikishi.

Then Brock beat him Taker i belive clean but who didn't Brock beat at this point of his career.

Taker then came back and beat Randy Orton in the cell in a great match.

Then Batista beat Taker after Edge interfeared.

One Year later Taker meets Edge in the cell and sends him to hell.

Finnaly to end the history lesson Taker beats CM Punk in a squash match.

Final Record 5-4-1 as far as I'm concerned thats a winning record and the only clean one was Brock and like I said there who didn't lose to him at that point.

 

[Ferbian]

I see this match being incredibly similar to the Edge vs. Taker match. Edge battles hard with incredible moves but just at the end Berg loses. Plus to the people who are saying he has a bad record in Hell in a Cell.

Edge is nothing compared to Goldberg, Goldberg is a fucking beast, where as Edge only has the same finisher, Goldberg destroyed everything in his path, leaving him with a, how many weeks winning streak? something Edge never achieved.

The Undertaker vs. HBK: I think we can cross out Kane running in and interfering.

Yes so Undertaker has the upper hand for the most of the match, only to be overpowered by the new coming dominant rookie, guess what, Goldberg's prime was being a new coming DOMINANT rookie at levels Kane never could imagine.

The Next was a tag hell in a cell crappy match that went no contest. Taker being partnered with Steve against Kane and Mankind.

Two lesser talents against one hell of a force, and Steve Austin, and it still went to a no-contest, what does that say about Undertaker? being paired with the meanest toughest son of a bitch against a gimmick match talent and Kane, and still not being able to win it.

Then Undertaker defeated Mankind in one of the biggest matches of all time in ring of course.

Again, a gimmick match talent, as far as I recall, Mick Foley spend a lot of his career jobbing out to talent, didn't he?

Taker then beat Big Boss man easily.

A mid-card talent at best, nowhere near a feature.

Then was the six man hell in a cell were a believe Taker had a broken arm or it was in the Lesnar one not sure. Anyways Taker wasn't involved in the finish being on top of the cell after pushing off Rikishi.

He still lost it, against the more dominant forces of WWE during that time, that doesn't fare well for Undertaker if he can't hang with the dominant forces of WWE in his own gimmick match.

Then Brock beat him Taker i belive clean but who didn't Brock beat at this point of his career.

Exactly, Brock Lesnar beat Undertaker, Brock Lesnar lost to Goldberg, Brock Lesnar was the WWE version of Goldberg in brutality and push, yet Goldberg was more intense and lost fewer matches.

Taker then came back and beat Randy Orton in the cell in a great match.

A mid-carder at that time, sure he had won a world championship, but he didn't become a true main event guy until 2007.

Then Batista beat Taker after Edge interfeared.

That one may very well be true, but looking at the statistics, it's still a loss for Undertaker, and Batista has defeated Undertaker in other matches, and still, Batista is no Goldberg.

One Year later Taker meets Edge in the cell and sends him to hell.

Already addressed, Edge is no Goldberg.

Finnaly to end the history lesson Taker beats CM Punk in a squash match.

CM Punk isn't a powerhouse, he was made to job out to him, and even if he wasn't made to job out to him, CM Punk doesn't have half the intensity and brutality behind his matches as Goldberg has during his prime.

Final Record 5-4-1 as far as I'm concerned thats a winning record and the only clean one was Brock and like I said there who didn't lose to him at that point.

And again, Goldberg is a fucking beast compared to Brock Lesnar, far more successful with winning matches, defeating big names like Hulk Hogan, yes you heard it, fucking Hulk Hogan!

 

[The Underking]

Yeah Taker's already beat Hulk fucking Hogan alright. AS for the fact of Goldberg here he lost to Kevin Nash if I remember Taker beat Kevin (Diesel) at one of the WM's. So for you're point Taker > Nash > Goldberg.

 

[Ferbian]

Yeah Taker's already beat Hulk fucking Hogan alright. AS for the fact of Goldberg here he lost to Kevin Nash if I remember Taker beat Kevin (Diesel) at one of the WM's. So for you're point Taker > Nash > Goldberg.

At Starrcade, Goldberg's undefeated streak was ended at 173 victories when he lost his title to Kevin Nash after Scott Hall made a run-in and shocked Goldberg with a cattle prod

Kevin Nash didn't win without interference and the use of dirty tactics as well, Undertaker defeated Diesel, Kevin Nash at a point where Kevin wasn't (to my consideration) in his prime at all, Kevin was in his prime during the NWO days, where Kevin only defeated Goldberg through cheating.

As you can see, Goldberg went undefeated for a little over a year, and 3 years worth of weekly matches (if we would say that Goldberg only wrestled once a week, obviously he didn't since he made his debut in 1997 and got defeated through dirty tactics in 1998)

So by definition, if we're to play the game that beating someone makes them > then Undertaker would most likely only be able to defeat Goldberg through dirty use of tactics.

 

[The Underking]

Great. Taker also went undefeated for over a year then he beat one Hulk Hogan for the WWE Championship. Plus the last time Taker lost clean was back in 2008 so if were going to use the heel tactics excuse answer Taker only losing to heel tactic and an undefeated Vlad.

Plus if I remember an out of prime Taker beat a Prime Triple H at Wrestlemania (Big Match setting equal to a Tournament to crown the best of the best) who bet Goldberg continously if I remember pulverising him to a pulp thanks to Evoloution while Taker destroying La Familia.

 

[Ferbian]

Undertaker defeated Hulk Hogan with interference from Ric Flair.

Goldberg was defeated by interference, which one do you really think is the superior one there? think before you answer please.

Undertaker wasn't out of his prime in 2001, at least not from my point of view, he was still going strong during his American Bad Ass gimmick, Undertaker got out of his prime around the 04-05 period if you ask me, started it in 96-97 (long time I know, but that's my consideration to say the least, I guess a prime is arguable)

And sure you can say that he wasn't beaten cleanly in that period of time, but he was beaten, this is a hell in a cell, last time I checked, rules need not apply.

 

[gd]

Great. Taker also went undefeated for over a year then he beat one Hulk Hogan for the WWE Championship.

He didn't win 173 matches in a row though. That's unheard of.

Plus the last time Taker lost clean was back in 2008 so if were going to use the heel tactics excuse answer Taker only losing to heel tactic and an undefeated Vlad.

False, he lost to Big Show quite cleanly on Smackdown last year. I mean, he knocked him the fuck out. You can't use the "he hasn't lost since blahblahblah" argument much either with Taker, considering he's taken so much time off.

In 2010, he's only had 8 singles matches, including clean wins over Rey (midget), Drew McIntrye (silly looking hair and a rookie), HBK (ok, that was a good one), CM Punk, and Swagger. Another one of his matches was a countout victory against Edge last week when he didn't have to do anything. He also had a draw against Triple H and a loss against Jericho. What's that, a loss? But Taker never loses, rabble rabble rabble. If you can lose to Jericho, you can lose to Bill freakin' Goldberg.

Plus if I remember an out of prime Taker beat a Prime Triple H a Wrestlemania (Big Match setting equal to a Tournament to crown the best of the best) who bet Goldberg continously if I remember pulverising him to a pulp.

Actually, Goldberg is 3-0 all time against Triple H in singles matches, which were all in the WWE, so it was out of Goldberg's prime as well. Not sure where you're going with this one.

Also, let me add like I have every round that Taker would be another average big man if it wasn't for the gimmick, which is all he is. Just because he's magical and can sit up it doesn't mean he's unbeatable. It's Goldberg who didn't lose.

Would also appreciate it if people neglected to mentioned Bill's recent failure's on the Celebrity Apprentice. Let's keep this to wrestling, people.

 

[CobraVenom]

The Undertaker mark has given me a headache.


I'll go with Goldberg here. Don't get me wrong. I love Taker, but I don't think he can beat Goldberg. Goldberg is that big badass that nobody fucks with unless they are a glutton for pain. Undertaker has his mysticism and his mind games, yes. It isn't enough unless he hits Bill with a lightning bolt.

 

[The Underking]

My final hit to the Goldberg being unstoppable thing: Bret Hart.

Bret Hart has beaten Taker though thanks to Shawn whacking him with a chair. Then again Bret beat Goldberg three times straight so much for being unstoppable big kruptonite. Plus he was kncoked out by steel thier surrounded by steal whats stopping him from whacking him continously. Better yet the Hells Gate Taker locks it's in Game Over for Goldberg. And I know Goldberg isn't stonger then Mark Henry so no powering out no DQ's.

 

[Thriller Ant]

My final hit to the Goldberg being unstoppable thing: Bret Hart.

Bret Hart has beaten Taker though thanks to Shawn whacking him with a chair. Then again Bret beat Goldberg three times straight so much for being unstoppable big kruptonite. Plus he was kncoked out by steel thier surrounded by steal whats stopping him from whacking him continously. Better yet the Hells Gate Taker locks it's in Game Over for Goldberg. And I know Goldberg isn't stonger then Mark Henry so no powering out no DQ's.

My cat could make a better argument than this. This makes absolutely no fucking sense. So what if Bret Hart beat both Goldberg and Taker? Goldberg was a monster. Taker loses most of his gimmick matches. Goldberg will win this with the Spear and Jackhammer.

 

[gd]

My final hit to the Goldberg being unstoppable thing: Bret Hart.

So one guy had his number while he beat literally everyone else? Your point?

Bret Hart has beaten Taker though thanks to Shawn whacking him with a chair.

Hart also beat Taker a few months later in England. No Shawn Michaels there.

Then again Bret beat Goldberg three times straight

Not sure, but I think a few of those wins were pretty shady. If not, like I said, it's one guy.

so much for being unstoppable big kruptonite.

I assume you're cleverly referring to kryptonite, as in the thing that hampered Superman. The one and only thing that hampered Superman. Meaning nothing else stopped him. So Hart can stop Goldberg, but no one else can. At least, according to you.

Plus he was kncoked out by steel thier surrounded by steal whats stopping him from whacking him continously.

Umm, what is this? Goldberg got hit by a steel chair and it hurt him? I'm not sure, but I'm pretty sure steel chairs hurt Undertaker as well.

Better yet the Hells Gate Taker locks it's in Game Over for Goldberg.

Or better yet, Goldberg jackhammers the shit out of him.

And I know Goldberg isn't stonger then Mark Henry so no powering out no DQ's.

Mark Henry is a jobber, while Goldberg isn't. So there's that.

 

[The Underking]

The Spear into a plate of steal for the guy above me knocked for a one two three. Same thing would do the trick again jack hammer and spear. Hulk kicks out. One Tombstone over to Hulk. So one finisher is more lethal then two of his opponents add the choke slam, last ride, and Hell's Gate game over though your argument just inspired me to do something.

Anyways better finisher: Taker.

 

[CobraVenom]

The Spear into a plate of steal for the guy above me knocked for a one two three. Same thing would do the trick again jack hammer and spear. Hulk kicks out. One Tombstone over to Hulk. So one finisher is more lethal then two of his opponents add the choke slam, last ride, and Hell's Gate game over though your argument just inspired me to do something.

Anyways better finisher: Taker.

Hopefully he inspired you to stop posting lame excuses about how Undertaker can beat Goldberg. Half of what you write, I can't understand. The other half is nothing but a head scratcher.

The spear into a plate of steel? I'm assuming you mean the Bret incident in which wasn't really a match to begin with. Bad reason.

Hulk kicks out of what? Did Hogan kick out of the spear and jackhammer? If so, could I see proof? I don't remember that happening.

Finally, whoever has the better finisher is ultimately irrelevant.

 

[Thriller Ant]

The Spear into a plate of steal for the guy above me knocked for a one two three. Same thing would do the trick again jack hammer and spear. Hulk kicks out. One Tombstone over to Hulk. So one finisher is more lethal then two of his opponents add the choke slam, last ride, and Hell's Gate game over though your argument just inspired me to do something.

Anyways better finisher: Taker.

Did it ever occur to you that Goldberg may not have needed more than the two finishers because they work? We've seen guys kick out of the Last Ride and chokeslam hundreds of times and Goldberg, as far as I know, has never tapped out so I'm not too worried about the Hell's Gate. Face it: Undertaker has no chance in this match. Just stop embarrassing yourself and let it go.

 

[Vintage Nick]

Underking, please come up with better arguments dude, you're getting schooled here

Anyways, this is one good match and I expect it will go almost the same as Lesnar vs Undertaker. The question here is though, who will win? Sure Goldberg is one tough son of a bitch, but Taker has the most experience in Hell in a Cell here. Undertaker may have lost a few, but won a majority of his HIAC matches.

Knowing Goldberg, he will bring everything to the table and dish it out to Undertaker either piece by piece or all in one bite. However, Undertaker is known to come back from being dominated and win the match. He is also quite clever in bringing out his arsenal of moves (see his Hell's Gate trick).

But like I said, Goldberg is one tough son of a bitch and will not go down easily. I really don't know how this will go, but I still voted for Undertaker. I'd pay to see this though at Wrestlemania.

 

[ScreaminNormanSmiley]

The Spear into a plate of steal for the guy above me knocked for a one two three. Same thing would do the trick again jack hammer and spear. Hulk kicks out. One Tombstone over to Hulk. So one finisher is more lethal then two of his opponents add the choke slam, last ride, and Hell's Gate game over though your argument just inspired me to do something.

Anyways better finisher: Taker.

goldberg and hulk faced in one match and one. hes one of only four people undefeated against hulk in singles matches, know whos not on that list? taker. who actually needed interference and a chair to beat hogan with the tombstone your claiming is so superior to the spear and jackhammer. which wasnt needed for goldberg to beat hogan.

also you talk about undertakers 5-4-1 record at hell in a cell bein a winning record, your right, but its still not good, deffinatley not good enough to make a case at that giving taker the edge.

 

[The Underking]

Did it ever occur to you that Goldberg may not have needed more than the two finishers because they work? We've seen guys kick out of the Last Ride and chokeslam hundreds of times and Goldberg, as far as I know, has never tapped out so I'm not too worried about the Hell's Gate. Face it: Undertaker has no chance in this match. Just stop embarrassing yourself and let it go.

Yeah that's why when I put Goldberg not being able to get a pin on Hulk with both and Taker using one put him out FACT. As for the Last Ride and Choke SLam at this point they are the in between of a finisher and a signature depends on the person. The has no chance just really killed for me your argument no chance thats exactly what wrestling mostly all about the underdog. No Chacge means incredibly high chance see Sheamus for that.

Plus you're telling me Lex Luger and Buff Bagwell can beat Berg but Taker can't that some fucked up shit.

Finally, whoever has the better finisher is ultimately irrelevant.

Cobravenom out of all the crap (BAd Arguments) I have never done it that stupidly. Saying a Finisher is irelevent is like saying a gun is irrelevent in a war.

Plus here it is for the Hulk never kicking out.

He leads with the Spear. He waits on the opposite side of the ring, waiting for his opponent to get up and turn around. When they do, he charges at them like a linebacker in football, tackling them to the ground. Then, in a move called the Jackhammer, after doing the Spear, he picks his opponent up over his head, legs up in the air, then slamming them to the ground, covering immediately for the pin. Only once has anyone kicked out of a pin following this combo of moves,and it was due to a timing issue during a six-man tag match done to Hollywood Hulk Hogan and was supposed to be interrupted by Kevin Nash who was outside the ring at the time.

Source: http://www.popstarsplus.com/wrestling_men_billgoldberg.htm

So yeah that both killed and helped my argument. You know what screw it hope the blind marks vote for Taker. Fucking people who retire early.

 

[Thriller Ant]

Yeah that's why when I put Goldberg not being able to get a pin on Hulk with both and Taker using one put him out FACT. As for the Last Ride and Choke SLam at this point they are the in between of a finisher and a signature depends on the person. The has no chance just really killed for me your argument no chance thats exactly what wrestling mostly all about the underdog. No Chacge means incredibly high chance see Sheamus for that.

Plus you're telling me Lex Luger and Buff Bagwell can beat Berg but Taker can't that some fucked up shit.





Cobravenom out of all the crap (BAd Arguments) I have never done it that stupidly. Saying a Finisher is irelevent is like saying a gun is irrelevent in a war.

Plus here it is for the Hulk never kicking out.



Source: http://www.popstarsplus.com/wrestling_men_billgoldberg.htm

So yeah that both killed and helped my argument. You know what screw it hope the blind marks vote for Taker. Fucking people who retire early.

So now your argument is that Hulk Hogan got pinned by a Tombstone onto a foreign object, but he kicked out of the Spear and Jackhammer because of Nash's shitty timing? Look, give it up. Goldberg was an unstoppable machine. Undertaker is overrated and isn't good in gimmick matches. This is an easy of a match as you will find in the 4th round of the WZ Tourney.

 

[Adam08]

I am voting for Goldberg here Undertaker is a legendary and is one of my favorite wrestlers. But I just can't see him get past a guy who was pushed as a unstopable monster.Granted some of the guys Goldberg beat are jobbers but like people said above it was unheard of at the time with a undefeated record like that. I see this as a hardfought match but eventually a spear which can come out of know where would take out Undertaker eventually.

 

[CobraVenom]

Cobravenom out of all the crap (BAd Arguments) I have never done it that stupidly. Saying a Finisher is irelevent is like saying a gun is irrelevent in a war.

My God you are an idiot. I didn't say finishers were irrelevant. I said who has the better finisher is irrelevant. Learn to read, fuck stick.

I also find it ironic that you talk shit about me having bad arguments when you can't get off Taker's jock. All you have brought to the table is fanboy bullshit. When you cease to be a fanboy, you can post in my direction again.