Hot Wrestling Takes So BAD They'll MELT Your Brain
2. Bruce Prichard Defends The Triple H Vs. Booker T Storyline
The Triple H Vs. Booker T programme is widely regarded as one of the worst things the company has ever done, which is some achievement, since WWE has also explored incest and murder and necrophilia and slut-shaming and heavily pushed Austin Theory.
The gist, if you were lucky enough to have not lived through it, was that Triple H said Booker T wasn't there to win the big one but rather to entertain people and dance with his "nappy hair" and his "suckas".
And then Triple H proved himself right by hitting Booker T with the match-winning Pedigree and taking 23 seconds to make the cover. If there was ever a time to do the happy ending, it was on March 30, 2003. But no.
Widely regarded, not universally, since Bruce Prichard defended it on his 'Something To Wrestle' podcast. His co-host Conrad Thomson to his credit was having none of it.
Prichard claimed that the idea - and it was a horrible one in 2001, so let's do it again two years later! - wasn't to book the racist to win (!) but to instead prove that the "ex-WCW guys" were not on Triple H's level.
Which is rather unconvincing, since Triple H didn't throw a dollar at Scott Steiner or Goldberg and told them they were only in WWE to dance for him.