Booker T

[Grimmas]

Discuss here.

[El-P]

Mediocre worker at best. Overrated in every regard. Kinda like RVD with less cool moves. I take the Sandman over Booker any day.

[North South]

I can honestly say i have never seen a Booker T match that has entertained me.

 

I think he's a flat-out bad worker due to fact that i've never enjoyed a single match he's ever had. I guess when your brother is Stevie Ray and he's far worse than you, people are going to think your good. But most of us know that's just not true.

 

Again, another guy i nominated as there were people who did like him back in the late '90's. A reason to discuss him.

[BillThompson]

I like Booker, but not enough to consider him a top worker. Too sloppy and formulaic, never all that memorable.

[Dylan Waco]

There was this weird period where some people treated him like he was a top tier worker which was insane. At his best he could be very good but he was RARELY at his best to the point where I couldn't even tell you what his peak was. Possibly 98 as I remember liking the Benoit matches, but who knows how much of that was Booker. I did like that he was a guy who had multiple finishers in an age where not everyone did, but he really lacked any other individual trait as a worker to set him apart. I agree with the argument that being paired up with the awful Stevie Ray made him look better than he was, but I will say that he was a guy that got over as a face and a heel on his own at times. On the other hand, even in dying days WCW - as bad as it was - he was never the best guy in the promotion. I think mediocre is too strong a term for him (though I can absolutely see that label fitting him), and I guarantee there are lots of people around the web who would include him in top 100's, but he's nowhere near a top 100 guy for me. Honestly I'd rate him below someone like Jerry Sags.

[soup23]

There was this weird period where some people treated him like he was a top tier worker which was insane. At his best he could be very good but he was RARELY at his best to the point where I couldn't even tell you what his peak was. Possibly 98 as I remember liking the Benoit matches, but who knows how much of that was Booker. I did like that he was a guy who had multiple finishers in an age where not everyone did, but he really lacked any other individual trait as a worker to set him apart. I agree with the argument that being paired up with the awful Stevie Ray made him look better than he was, but I will say that he was a guy that got over as a face and a heel on his own at times. On the other hand, even in dying days WCW - as bad as it was - he was never the best guy in the promotion. I think mediocre is too strong a term for him (though I can absolutely see that label fitting him), and I guarantee there are lots of people around the web who would include him in top 100's, but he's nowhere near a top 100 guy for me. Honestly I'd rate him below someone like Jerry Sags.

 

I think this is definitely 98 and a lot has to do with presentation but I think Booker held his own. He has the Superbrawl double shot and also the GAB double shot that really got him over in a "hardest working man in the company" type of way. I think the Saturn match from Superbrawl is a good look for Booker as that was as entertaining as anything else Saturn did in WCW minus the Fall Brawl 98 Raven match and maybe the Goldberg Spring Stampede match. I also think his King Booker run is underrated as he was competent there. I guess I like Booker more than the consensus of comments here but I still don't see him having a chance at my top 100.

[WingedEagle]

There was this weird period where some people treated him like he was a top tier worker which was insane. At his best he could be very good but he was RARELY at his best to the point where I couldn't even tell you what his peak was. Possibly 98 as I remember liking the Benoit matches, but who knows how much of that was Booker. I did like that he was a guy who had multiple finishers in an age where not everyone did, but he really lacked any other individual trait as a worker to set him apart. I agree with the argument that being paired up with the awful Stevie Ray made him look better than he was, but I will say that he was a guy that got over as a face and a heel on his own at times. On the other hand, even in dying days WCW - as bad as it was - he was never the best guy in the promotion. I think mediocre is too strong a term for him (though I can absolutely see that label fitting him), and I guarantee there are lots of people around the web who would include him in top 100's, but he's nowhere near a top 100 guy for me. Honestly I'd rate him below someone like Jerry Sags.

 

Don't often agree with Dylan, but I think he hit the nail on the head here, minus the Sags point (though a couple Nasty matches are probably better than any single output of Booker's career, but fewer and further between for me. Aside over). He may be better than Tenzan but I can't even think of a few Booker performances that top the Akiyama matches or his best vs. Kojima/Kawda during that period.

[SomethingSavage]

I'm a huge fan of Booker, but his best traits lie in the "character" and showmanship department for me. I loved him in the King Booker phase. It was glorious in its sheer ridiculousness.

 

Also dug that period of popularity where it seemed like he might actually be a breakout superstar for them back in '02. For awhile there, Booker was everywhere. People love to talk about Fandango'ing & the Yes chants carrying over into stadiums and other sports... but Booker's "Five" gesture, spastic head shake, and Spinaroonie deal was making the same rounds back then.

 

So yeah. I know Booker's "emergence" kind of came in '98, and I guess I can see why people will refer to that as his most talked-about & widely praised work. But I don't know. I'm not sure I'm even convinced that was his best in-ring stuff either. Have to review some of the later Benoit matches in the 'E - for the US Title, along with his tag run alongside Dustin and later Eddie. I enjoyed both at the time.

 

Not sure I'll even be involved with any list, but if I were? I doubt Booker would make even my Top 100, but the guy's personality & presence is what made me a fan anyway. Strictly judged on the body of work output, I'm not sure he SHOULD rank very highly on anyone's list though.

[Matt D]

I think a JBL/Booker T comparison might be interesting. I wasn't really watching as much during their main event WWE eras though.

[Timbo Slice]

I like the JBL/Booker comparison, too. They were presented well and did the most with their pushes, but more often than not, the wrestling never matched up unless they were partnered with someone better (Benoit for Booker, Eddy for JBL). I don't see it.

[JerryvonKramer]

When I was watching mid-90s WCW PPVs a few years ago I'd DREAD the inevitable long-ass Harlem Heat match, they were like the mid-90s version of The Wild Samoans or something, fucking awful.

 

Honestly, when Chad and I get there with WTBBP, Harlem Heat are one of the things I am not looking forward to most. Much more than Dungeon of Doom. Only redeeming feature is the slight sub-text in all of their promos that they'd just been double teaming Sherri.

[shoe]

The dude won't be making my list. He was a good hand in the ring. With the right opponent could have a really good match. Way too many great wrestlers.

[elliott]

Booker's an interesting guy. I don't particularly like him as a wrestler, but I think he's just dripping with natural charisma & presence & I would've pushed the hell out of him as early as 95-96 and put him in every position to break out as a singles star. On paper I like his offense, but I often find his matches to be a little disjointed as sometimes he takes a bit too long setting up & actually executing his moves. Kind of a less garbagy RVD almost? But not to that extent. I dunno, there's just something a little off. I think he looks fine on the lower end of a list for a 90s & 00s US based fan & worth renominating, but he's just not someone I'm considering. But he's a first round draft pick for untapped potential imo.