5 Positives & 5 Negatives Ahead Of Brock Lesnar Vs. Goldberg

We’ve kind of touched upon this one already, but I wanted to expand upon this idea and point out that pitting Lesnar against Goldberg has been the perfect use of two special attraction guys.

Booking a part-timer against a full-time talent is sometimes a lose-lose situation; either the full-timer loses and looks like a bit of a chump, or that part-timer is beaten and their big return becomes a big bust. On the other hand, this arrangement of part-timer vs. part-timer essentially removes that kind of conundrum.

Take Lesnar’s WrestleMania XXX win over The Undertaker for example: that provided us with probably the most shocking moment in all of WWE history, and yet it didn’t make ‘Taker any less of a legend. Compare that with the days when CM Punk was losing to a whole host of part-time stars—The Rock, Lesnar, The Undertaker—and then had to turn up the following night, brandished a loser, while the part-timers swanned off back home. To me, one of these options looks far more desirable than the other one.

Obviously the part-timers have earned that right to swan off, but that’s a story for another day. Here, the point is that by pitting one special attraction against another special attraction, we get a blockbuster match-up and nobody on the main roster suffers from short-sighted booking that might damage their stock in the long-term.