Quote:
Originally Posted by Noid
Thank you!
Anyone who thinks Triple H vs. Booker T at WrestleMania XIX was a good piece of business is a fucking moron. Anyone who thinks Triple H's long run with the belt, beating down far more interesting babyface acts was a good piece of business just needs to look at their ratings compared to SmackDown's.
That's not a blast at Triple H, by the way. That's just the reality of RAW '02-'05.
Dumbest thing said in this thread: "The long term money match in 2003 was with Goldberg, and I believe when the time was right, they put the strap on Goldberg"
Bwahahahaha!
|
So how should Booker T vs HHH went down at 19? Did you just not like the finish? Did you think Flair shouldnt have kept getting involved so HHH could just win clean? How would you have improved the piece of business? Booker go over clean?
Which other babyfaces did he "beat down" during that time? RVD I'm assuming? Was it okay that he beat The Hurricane? Or was he right on the cusp of headlining as well?
Sorry, in your mind, what was the long term money match for HHH in 2003 if not Goldberg? Or was it the timing that you didnt like? You already had Booker T or RVD beating HHH, so really I guess the long term match would be something like Booker T vs Goldberg? Dont forget Goldberg is going to leave the WWE in a few months, so if you put him over everyone, you might be left with no eggs in your basket. But I'm sure you already thought of that.