|
|
Post by Kill Em' All on Nov 3, 2019 21:34:28 GMT -5
We all know WrestleMania 19 and what went down. Let's disregard that. Where would we see Booker's title run go and how long as well as the direction we would of went in? I personally feel Triple H would of just got back the title by Bad Blood imo.
|
|
TheEvilDoink1987
Main Eventer
Joined on: Feb 22, 2010 21:37:52 GMT -5
Posts: 2,816
|
Post by TheEvilDoink1987 on Nov 3, 2019 21:41:00 GMT -5
I really think that WrestleMania XIX was the time to pull the trigger on a Booker T title reign as he was never more over. Unfortunately, timing is everything and there was no shot he would interrupt the Triple H "reign of terror."
If he did win the belt at WrestleMania that year, I agree he would have dropped it back to Triple H on the next PPV.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Brain on Nov 3, 2019 22:01:08 GMT -5
Yeah I couldn't see him holding the belt for too long. JDay the absolute latest.
It's a shame he didn't win the belt at that Mania but I was glad they gave em a run with it in 06 during his King Booker run.
|
|
|
|
Post by hbkbigdaddycool on Nov 3, 2019 23:29:47 GMT -5
Looking back now, it seems like in 2003 that the WWE (maybe even more so Triple H) was putting his final nails into the coffin that was WCW.
He beat Scott Steiner, he beat Booker T, he beat Kevin Nash, he beat Goldberg. All former WCW Champions right before the company closed. I am sure he would have loved to have had Jeff Jarrett there to beat him too.
It's hard to say if Booker was ready to be the main guy on Raw at that time. That was an interesting time for the WWE. The two main guys in Austin and Rock who were the main guys just two years earlier, were either retired or off making movies. Was Booker a big enough name in the WWE ring to be the main guy in 2003?? It's debatable.
However, even a one month reign wouldn't have hurt.
|
|
|
|
Post by K5 on Nov 4, 2019 0:12:06 GMT -5
rather it was a short one month reign or not, he clearly should’ve won. even as a kid I was blown away that he didn’t after the build up.
would be like watching rocky 1 and Apollo winning by knockout.
|
|
|
|
Post by keegandimitrijevic01 on Nov 4, 2019 6:10:51 GMT -5
The story was there for him to win. When Booker lost, the whole crowd deflated. At least Rock/Austin and Kurt/Brock saved the day, but Booker should've really won. I could've seen him retaining it once and maybe dropping it at Badd Blood
|
|
|
|
Post by theoutlaw1999 on Nov 5, 2019 19:04:22 GMT -5
I would've been a great moment but not worth a 1 month reign.
When he finally won in 2006 it was special because we had waited 5 years and his reign was pretty good.
|
|
|
|
Post by JokerFC on Nov 7, 2019 11:36:45 GMT -5
The title Booker won in 2006 meant considerably less than the title he would've won in 2003 IMHO. I would have liked to see him win it too....I find WM19 a very deflating event because of that & Rock vs Austin.
As others have said it was crazy he didn't win after that buildup….really weird.
|
|
|
|
Post by hbkjason on Nov 7, 2019 16:48:02 GMT -5
I remember the match being boring and very disappointing and this is from someone who really likes both guys. I was shocked when Triple H pinned him. He took forever to make the pin so I thought for sure Booker T was going to kick out. As odd as it was not putting Booker T over in this feud, I must admit when I look back to 2003, I would have rather Kevin Nash take the belt even if it was just for a month than Booker T.
I know the easy claim is that Triple H did not want to lose, but this was the first WrestleMania with two world title matches so I wonder if they just did not want both major titles to change hands on the same show?
|
|
|
|
Post by Kill Em' All on Nov 8, 2019 0:36:02 GMT -5
The title Booker won in 2006 meant considerably less than the title he would've won in 2003 IMHO. I would have liked to see him win it too....I find WM19 a very deflating event because of that & Rock vs Austin. As others have said it was crazy he didn't win after that buildup….really weird. I disagree, I think the World Title was treated was equal level of importance until 2010-2011. It still continued to main event and headline events up and until 2010. I think SmackDown in 2006 was just garbage, and Booker was one of few things with any interest. I would much rather tune into Raw in 2006. |
|
|
|
Post by JokerFC on Nov 8, 2019 10:58:58 GMT -5
The title Booker won in 2006 meant considerably less than the title he would've won in 2003 IMHO. I would have liked to see him win it too....I find WM19 a very deflating event because of that & Rock vs Austin. As others have said it was crazy he didn't win after that buildup….really weird. I disagree, I think the World Title was treated was equal level of importance until 2010-2011. It still continued to main event and headline events up and until 2010. I think SmackDown in 2006 was just garbage, and Booker was one of few things with any interest. I would much rather tune into Raw in 2006. Thats why I said IMHO man...to each their own. |
|
