Having two world titles in a single company never made sense. Plus the Ketchup Belt would actually be very fitting, if the title was called WWE Raw Championship, since red is Raw's color.
Yeah but in that case, you'd always leave one brand without a champion. If Ambrose is a dual-brand champion, and he's feuding with Styles on SmackDown, that means that Raw remains without a top champion for a time. And in reverse. So I think each brand needs to have its own top champion who'll be constantly present, but the wrestlers who hold the titles should be champions of their respective brands, not both being champions of the world. Or the universe.
So, making the new belt just a red version of the WWE World Title belt is "lazy", but calling the 2 titles "Raw Championship" and "Smackdown Championship" is better than having something new and different?
As far as I'm concerned, I don't really much care about the name of the title or the appearance of the belt. I actually like the "red brand" belt just fine. Keeping the main title belts similar makes perfect sense, as they want to have them seen as equal. As much as people on WF deny it, the "Big Gold" old WCW World Title belt has been devalued to the point of no return, being put on people like Swagger and used as a mid-card belt with less prestige than the IC title.
They needed something new and fresh, The Universal Title achieves that.
People can moan all they like, the belt and the name are here to stay. Try maybe focusing on ... I dunno, the wrestling for once?
Would help a little bit, but really, no matter what they name it, it'll be generic, and it should be generic as long as it ties into the company in some capacity.
No issue with one champion although much better to have the own champions on one brand, 14 years ago roster was split and it was Raw become hybrid nitro with Triple H having his reign of terror..While Smackdown was the training ground for Brock Lesnar as their foundation for the future by feeding him the likes of Kurt Angle, Big Show and Undertaker..
As for today, I have no more issues on title names although it adds more credibility as long it was "booked right and strongly"..
19 ppv's and you want a champion to headline that 19 shows lol
I'll still be calling them that anyway. In the first brand split I didn't even know which title or lineage is on which brand. Just called them Raw title and Smackdown title like I will do now.
Is the Universal title meant to be a bigger win/more prestigious, than the wwe title now? Cos obv universe bigger than world? Or is the wwe title still the daddy? They've not really specified.
In a perfect world, one should not be viewed more valuable than the other. Of course, the WWE Championship has the lineage behind it while the "Universal" title is just getting started. If we are supposed to take each show seriously as a 'separate brand' then both should hold 'presitge'.
Of course proper booking will dictate that, and its up to WWE to book them as prestigious. Eventually, people will start to value one over the other.
The initial novelty factor of the brand split is definitely wearing off for me now, and the reasons I thought it was dumb back in the day are becoming clear again.
LOL @ having two world titles in one promotion. Not to mention the NXT title, which is watering things down even more since its ceased to be an obvious developmental role and is now being held by guys who could walk into the main roster title scene tomorrow.
Retire the midcard belts. Instead of intercontinental and us titles introduce RAW and Smackdown championships which should be the only way to grant a chance at a match with the top dog and his wwe championship. Make the champion defend his belt both on raw and smackdown against their chosen champions. For the big 4 ppv get the raw and smackdown champions to fight it out on the preceding ppv. IMO this way everyone will strive to get their own show's title, so they can get a shot at the big prize. Currently the midcard is terrible and most of the title shots make no sense.
The naming of the belts does devalue their prestige, I said this yesterday. If you have a "SD Women's Champion" and a "WWE Women's Champion" then the Smackdown belt just looks like a minor leagues title in comparison, purely by name. So since there is no going back with this brand split now they may as well rename the RAW belts the same, keep everything as balanced as possible.
The belts are supposed to be equivalents. Unless you want to be really fussy and say Universe is a larger place thus making the title better.
SD / RAW
WWE World Champion / WWE Universal Champion
WWE SD Womens Champion / WWE RAW Womens Champion
WWE SD Tag Champions / WWE RAW Tag Champions
Intercontinental Champion / United States Champion
? / WWE Cruiserweight Champion
Universal Championship isn't the same thing of the Intercontinental Championship?
"Smackdown Women's Championship" and "SmackDown Tag Team Championship" are stupid and made the divisions weak. Now they looks like an B show, even that they has a better product.
Raw and Smackdown champion sounds awful to me. Nobody sounds like a world champion or a even a maineventer with those monikers.
Floating champions would have been better but then they'd miss the occasional episode or house show. Arguably this would be a good thing making the champions feel special. Unfortunately WWE always sacrifices story telling and drama for their rigid corporate formula.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Wrestling Forum
23.4M posts
266.5K members
Since 2002
A forum community dedicated to all Wrestling enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about WWE, AEW, Ring of Honor, Impact and all forms of professional and amateur wrestling.