Wrestling Forum : WWE, TNA, ROH, Wrestling Videos, Women of Wrestling Forums - View Single Post - Would one World Title really be better for WWE?

View Single Post

Old 11-16-2012, 06:57 AM   #11 (permalink)
nevereveragainu
Humbled
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,096
nevereveragainu 101 - 250nevereveragainu 101 - 250
Default Re: would one world title really be better for wwe?

Quote:
Originally Posted by wrestling immortal View Post
ive been reading this forum the last few months, and people have recommended switching back to only one world championship, but if you think about it, would it really be better for the company. Heres my thoughts:

switching back to one title could help them build the mid card a hell of a lot better, then it is now, you have a really crappy midcard roster of wrestlers which are supported with lack of storyline and poor booking. The talent in the mid card is great though, there many future champions in this company.

there would be less imidiate pushing for the world title, over the last 5 years this has been a habit which really has killed many wrestlers in the long term, we had guys like jack swaggers, sheamus and alberto del rio winning the world title in a very short period of time, and other guys like wade barret, tensai etc getting pushed to the moon with no meaning, and in the long term suffered from it, sheamus suffered after his first world title reign, but now is back to the top, jack swagger really plummeted from the top after his reign, alberto delrio no one really cares about him now after this year after losing so many times to sheamus, tensai is now a jobber really.

lets start with the negatives, i really dont believe they can switch to one world title, mainly because of how large the roster is, it is a lot larger then tna, so i dont think they can go back to one title.

the guys deserving pushes such as sheamus, daniel bryan, wade barret etc would barely ever get a push to the world title if you ask me, john cena as the face of the company he would probably get the world title at least once a year. and these guys as said before sheamus, daniel bryan,christian, etc would probably not get too many opportunities to win the world title. I honestly dont think guys like sheamus,miz and christian would be a world champion yet if there was only one title.

i think they would have to cut one of the brands off, if they did this most likely smackdown, because you cant have two brands, with one brand having no world title, and having nothing to show that somebody is on the top if they arent holding a world title.

i would personally say i wouldnt cut it into one world title, because mainly of the john cena reason and also because of the size of the roster.
my friend, titles are good when LITTLE TO NO-ONE holds them, they are suppposed to be on the best and only the best

opputunities?! TITLES DON'T MAKE WRESTLERS CREDIBLE, IT TAKES WRESTLERS TO MAKE WORLD TITLE CREDIBLE

talk to anyone outside of the pro wrestling bubble and they get turned off immediantly because unless it something simple for the sake of quality control like "The Heavyweight title" and the "Super heavyweight title" two world titles dishonor the idea of titles existing to begin with

I DONT CARE THAT ITS BECAUSE WWE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT SCHEDULES IT DOESNT MAKE IT RIGHT

Last edited by nevereveragainu : 11-16-2012 at 07:05 AM.
nevereveragainu is offline   Reply With Quote