it makes sense to think, using the music example, that currently popular groups and songs would rank high on the list for the simple fact that they are currently popular.
i do not, however, see why that should (should!) impact legacy; other than current "hits" bumping legacy hits due to there only being a single item for each rank
to me, a proper music chart would ignore fat axl, or slash-less guns, or whatever, and instead focus on the terms of the GNR band in the context of its run. similarly, an alltime top ten video game list will (should) always include pacman or super mario bros, despite the jokey adventures and add-ons since. i'm giving this wrestling list that same "proper" benefit of the doubt, i guess.
brock never lived up to the hype or promise, and bailed far too early to be ranked high enough. perhaps at the time he could have been on the list (not anywhere towards the good spots) but i don't think now.
goldberg, however, has a clear moment in time where he was exceptionally prominent. and despite his seizure-giving, carshow-hosting ways of late, i think his moment in the ring need to be viewed in the context of his time. obviously, with years worth of retrospect and hindsight you can see what he's done since and let that sway your votes, but a real list (which i guess is a retarded concept in and of itself) should force perspective, and there's no denying his enormity in the business.
