|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Jun 5, 2011 18:43:27 GMT -5
Seriously, Booker was the most over face on Raw after Shawn Michaels at the time(HHH had already burried Kane and RVD), and their whole feud was built for Booker to take down the villian and to reach the top of the ladder and become the WHC. Sadly, we all know how Hunter managed to change Vince's mind on a Booker title run and Hunter won the match.
Hunter simply didn't need the title during the months following WM19. As we know, he went on to feud w/ Kevin Nash and HBK over their past friendship. Throughout the whole HHH/Nash feud, the world title seemed to be a non-factor. They were fighting because HHH turned on Nash and HBK, and the world title was essentially a non-factor during this feud. The feud didn't need the title, and had Booker won, he could have easily feuded w/ Jericho for a few months over the title before dropping it back to HHH. Instead, the WHC meant nothing during the HHH/Nash feud and Booker jobbed to Christian for a few months before winning the IC title for a few weeks.
Anyone else think that it made absolutly no sense for HHH to have gone over Booker T at WM19?
|
|
|
|
Post by mikey1974 on Jun 5, 2011 18:48:32 GMT -5
i must admit,i thought Booker would win it....
didn't i read somewhere that the finish WAS changed,and because of Booker's knee injury during the match they switched it to HHH retaining?
|
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Jun 5, 2011 19:02:28 GMT -5
i must admit,i thought Booker would win it.... didn't i read somewhere that the finish WAS changed,and because of Booker's knee injury during the match they switched it to HHH retaining? I've heard that Booker was schedualed to win the match, but Hunter convinced Vince that Booker wasn't over enough(not true), and to keep the title on him for a future Goldberg/HHH feud. Sadly, the WHC meant nothing during Hunter's feud w/ Nash and Booker could have used a few months run w/ the title. Then he could have droped it back to HHH for his feud w/ Goldberg. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 17, 2024 17:37:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2011 19:10:05 GMT -5
To be honest, I think Booker's run would have sucked anyways. Triple H was hated that year due to always going over, mainly against former WCW employees. With him winning you had the fued with Nash to focus on next. Who would Booker have face off against if he had won? Sure more matches against H, but there were not many top heels for him to go against. Perhaps a fued with Jericho. But it would have been a lackluster run.
|
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Jun 5, 2011 19:20:02 GMT -5
I agree that there would have been a lack of heels for him to face, but HHH and Nash only feuded for like 3 months, so Booker could have had a decent feud w/ Jericho for a while, or even a face vs face feud w/ HBK, before dropping it back to HHH. My problem w/ how it all went down is that HHH didn't need the title against Nash. The feud was never about the title so it seemed like it was wasted during the HHH/Nash feud.
|
|
|
|
Post by DTP. on Jun 5, 2011 21:05:34 GMT -5
To be honest, I think Booker's run would have sucked anyways. Triple H was hated that year due to always going over, mainly against former WCW employees. With him winning you had the fued with Nash to focus on next. Who would Booker have face off against if he had won? Sure more matches against H, but there were not many top heels for him to go against. Perhaps a fued with Jericho. But it would have been a lackluster run. Exactly. There wouldn't have been enough credible feuds. When you think 'Booker vs Jericho' you think 'midcard match for RAW'. RAW is the top brand in the company, and you have these two going for the belt, it's not exactly going to bring in much profit. Especially not in the days of brand exclusive pay-per-views. Now if Booker was a heel, different story. |
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Jun 5, 2011 21:16:12 GMT -5
To be honest, I think Booker's run would have sucked anyways. Triple H was hated that year due to always going over, mainly against former WCW employees. With him winning you had the fued with Nash to focus on next. Who would Booker have face off against if he had won? Sure more matches against H, but there were not many top heels for him to go against. Perhaps a fued with Jericho. But it would have been a lackluster run. Exactly. There wouldn't have been enough credible feuds. When you think 'Booker vs Jericho' you think 'midcard match for RAW'. RAW is the top brand in the company, and you have these two going for the belt, it's not exactly going to bring in much profit. Especially not in the days of brand exclusive pay-per-views. Now if Booker was a heel, different story. True, but you could also blame this lack of stars on Raw because of HHH's dominance over the show. Whenever a face got popular, he was sure to kill their momentum. W/ heels, he never let any other heel even get a shot w/ a title run on Raw while he was dominating at the time. Personally, when I hear Booker T vs Jericho, I don't think mid-card match, but I agree that at the time it wasn't exaclty a main event match either. Something in between, but I blame that more on HHH dominating Raw from 2002-2005. But a Booker/Jericho feud wouldn't even have to be the top feud on the show. HHH/Nash could have still dominated the show, just like the HHH/HBK feud was the top feud on Raw in 2004 even though Chris Benoit was the WHC. I'm not a HHH hater. I actually am a fan of his, but during this time, it always annoyed me that he hogged the spotlight and never really let anybody else get a shot to lead Raw until he took time off in 2005. A clean win over HHH at WM19 would have made Booker T an instant main-eventer. Instead, he became just another "victim" of HHH. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 17, 2024 17:37:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2011 6:29:36 GMT -5
HHH and the Billion $ Boobjob did a lot of "mind changing" for Vince in 2003.Booker should have been given the chance to show what he could have done.
however I think the biggest sin was Summerslam 2003.how Vince was convinced that a Goldberg win that night was not a good thing Ill never know.
plus HHH was actually injured.ridiculous
|
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Jun 6, 2011 8:34:12 GMT -5
I totally agree w/ the SummerSlam 2003 thing. While I feel that Booker was "screwed-over" more than Goldberg, Goldberg was hot as hell going into that elimination chamber match. The fans in the arena were going nuts for Goldberg, and the majority of wrestling fans wanted to see him dominate that night and take the title. It was the perfect scenario. W/ HHH hurt, it was obvious that Goldberg should have won. Goldberg dominated the match, eliminated three guys w/out breaking a sweat, and then HHH beat him.
HHH must have done some major politicing because that loss totally killed Goldberg's momentum IMO. This is where I believe that his short WWE career began to go downhill. When he won the title a month later, it seemed to be missing something because Goldberg had already lost to HHH once before.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnny Wrestling on Jun 6, 2011 8:40:04 GMT -5
I totally agree w/ the SummerSlam 2003 thing. While I feel that Booker was "screwed-over" more than Goldberg, Goldberg was hot as hell going into that elimination chamber match. The fans in the arena were going nuts for Goldberg, and the majority of wrestling fans wanted to see him dominate that night and take the title. It was the perfect scenario. W/ HHH hurt, it was obvious that Goldberg should have won. Goldberg dominated the match, eliminated three guys w/out breaking a sweat, and then HHH beat him. HHH must have done some major politicing because that loss totally killed Goldberg's momentum IMO. This is where I believe that his short WWE career began to go downhill. When he won the title a month later, it seemed to be missing something because Goldberg had already lost to HHH once before. And it wasn't just because he lost, but they way he did. |
|
|
|
Post by K5 on Jun 6, 2011 8:41:02 GMT -5
i remember being shocked when he lost.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 17, 2024 17:37:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2011 10:11:04 GMT -5
I agree that he should have won that wrestlemania match too I can't see him not winning due to lack of openents as plenty of oponents was around at this time for Booker to feud with like Hogan, Angle, Brock, Taker, HBK, Rock, Austin, Jericho even Lance Storm I would have enjoyed any of those matches.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 17, 2024 17:37:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2011 10:43:27 GMT -5
I totally agree w/ the SummerSlam 2003 thing. While I feel that Booker was "screwed-over" more than Goldberg, Goldberg was hot as hell going into that elimination chamber match. The fans in the arena were going nuts for Goldberg, and the majority of wrestling fans wanted to see him dominate that night and take the title. It was the perfect scenario. W/ HHH hurt, it was obvious that Goldberg should have won. Goldberg dominated the match, eliminated three guys w/out breaking a sweat, and then HHH beat him. HHH must have done some major politicing because that loss totally killed Goldberg's momentum IMO. This is where I believe that his short WWE career began to go downhill. When he won the title a month later, it seemed to be missing something because Goldberg had already lost to HHH once before. And it wasn't just because he lost, but they way he did. exactly.he was outsmarted and humiliated......in front of his hometown crowd.it made no sense whatsoever to me.and he looked weak as hell for it.I agree he never recovered-his one on one win over HHH was flat and deflated. a lot of people say that a win here would have hurt Bill but it wouldnt.HHH was the last man out of the pods......he hadnt faced anyone he was fresh-they could even have worked his injury angle into this......and obviously the way for Bill to lose the title was at RR04 after Lesnar interfered. but ol Snout Spouts ego wouldnt permit that |
|
|
|
Post by done on Jun 6, 2011 11:21:24 GMT -5
HHH is just a title hogger!
|
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Jun 6, 2011 23:07:46 GMT -5
It's just mind boggling how HHH basically killed off any and all potential main eventers on Raw from 2002-early 2005. Chris Benoit was the only guy to really "win" a feud w/ HHH in that time, but even when Benoit had the WHC, HHH and HBK were still the top guys on the show while Benoit was like a third-wheel champion. Shelton Benjamin got a few wins over HHH, but by the end of 2004, even he was jobbing to Hunter on Raw and was never seen as a serious world title contender.
In that time span, HHH won feuds over RVD, Kane, HBK, Scott Steiner, Booker T, Kevin Nash, Goldberg, Eugene, William Regal, and Randy Orton, and in the process burried most of these guys. HBK was the only one who came out on the losing end of a feud w/ HHH at the time to not look that bad. Simply losing to someone does not mean that your burried. Alot of times loosing to a "bigger" star can be a good thing. Instead, the way alot of HHH's feuds played out ended up burrying his opponents, especially Kane, RVD, Eugene, Goldberg, and Booker T.
|
|
