I think the guys from Voices of Wrestling had a good point in that it's mostly the newer generations of fans who have this concept of deserving something in Wrestling. If you were born in the early to mid-90's or the 2000's you pretty much have very little idea of the concept of what Wrestling was. If that is, you hadn't already researched the past era's of the NWA, AWA, WWWF, Japan, etc. or present Indy and Japan for that matter.
Thus the idea of the title being nothing more than a trophy for hard work is something these people connect too. The FACT is, and it is a FACT, these people who "GET THEIR TURN," rarely if ever benefit. The title itself doesn't benefit at all. Titles in Wrestling, in the history of Pro-Wrestling, are pretty much props, but if booked right can be just as important as anything you see in real fighting, boxing, and so on. The title match can draw a crowd. The title match can draw money. That is the importance of a title. Wrestling is about money. IT's the art of making money in a way. The art of making people buy tickets to see fake, yet artistic, physical confrontations between Wrestlers.
No fault of there own, but American Alpha, Naomi, and Bray Wyatt don't draw a fucking thing. If Hogan didn't draw, he wouldn't have been champ. If Austin or Rock weren't draws they wouldn't have been champ.
Another thing to take in consideration is that many guys back then didn't want to be champ. They didn't want to carry the thing around. They wanted to be the best or be stars without being champ. Many legends were like Jake the Snake, Scott Hall, Roddy Piper, Curt Hennig(yes he was AWA champ). So if they were fine with it, if you can still remember those guys names, if those guys are still legends, then why does your guy have to be champ in todays environment? IF Bray was so great then he could have been huge without the title. Naomi too.
Instead WWE's way of thinking is that a title will enhance a talent and it doesn't. It's not true. And it's not a recent mistake, WWE has been giving titles away for years with little effect. And it's the very reason the titles mean nothing now.
Yet you can tell these things to people until your blue in the face, and they'll still mark out for their personal favorites when they should know that it's not a good thing. I gave a grin when AA won the tag titles, and immediately knew that nothing would come of their title reign. Nothing has. I knew Zigglers big IC win would go to shit, and I know Bray Wyatt is nothing more than a transitional champion. He's getting a necessary push on Smackdown, just as Corbin is, because WWE has no true Main Eventers on Smackdown. Cena is part time. AJ will be gone after Mania. Orton and Bray will be it. Bray only being a main eventer because WWE says he is.
In NJPW there is a guy named Naito. Naito was very much like Roman Reigns. A better worker than Reigns, yet pushed to the moon, given big wins. Got the shot at the title at the Dome. There was one big problems, like with Reigns, fans rejected him. They disliked him so much they actually voted the IWGP Title match to go on before the IC Match at Wrestle Kingdom that year. Which was main evented by Nakamura and Tanahashi.
Eventually Naito left to go on a excursion to CMLL. There he got inspiration from a man named Rush, who was also turned on by fans. Naito turned heel, found a gimmick inspired by the group he joined in CMLL, and took it back to Japan with him. Naito is now one of the biggest stars. He draws sell outs. He is also the IWGP Intercontinental Champion.
Naito is so big that he doesn't even need a title to get over. They gave him the belt because he can keep that belts momentum going, a belt that only had real success with Nakamura holding it. With Naito the belt is still looked at as a major title. With Naito the belt main events. With Naito the title means something.
That's what you want in your champions, friends. IF you think that's wrong or old school thinking you're wrong. Just plain wrong, and thing you know it's wrong because you see how the other way fails time and again.