8 Reasons Why Goldberg Vs. Lesnar Was Completely Terrible For Business

3. It’s Way Too Late To Make A Difference

It’s a bit comical that Vince McMahon, and perhaps Triple H, thought this was a good way to end a pay-per-view main event in 2016. Because if this was such a great idea, then why didn’t Hunter job like that for Goldberg in 2003, when it could have actually meant something?

Goldberg was a full-time talent then, and was on TV in a weekly role. But at Unforgiven of that year, in their first big singles match, the two went 15 minutes. So basically, Goldberg was just like every other wrestler on the roster, which isn't what got him over in WCW. What took them so long to learn that lesson?

Hell, I’d love to see Triple H now willing to sacrifice himself to an up-and-coming talent in under two minutes. He took on Roman Reigns in 27 minutes at Mania 32, when a loss in a fraction of that time would have put Roman over far more effectively. But that would have meant that Hunter would look incredibly weak...which is kind of exactly what they did to Brock. Brock, though, is a bigger draw than Hunter. In fact, he’s the biggest draw the company has. Or at least he was.

Unless they book the follow-up to this angle flawlessly, they threw away a lot of money by not letting someone else benefit from it.