Why this can't work:If this is the direction you guys are going to, then it's worse for the WWE title. If it's just one world title, 2 or 3 guys would be holding the belt per year, since the WWE is planning on making more long term reigns. The top stars won't benefit from this. They will hardly get the title, they'll be like Roddy Piper.
You say this like it's a bad thing. Guess what, title or no title... Piper is a legend. So is Jake The Snake. So is Ted DiBiase. So is Mr. Perfect. So is Rick Rude. None of those guys won the belt when the WWF was at it's peak and yet each of those guys would go onto become wrestling immortals. Hulk Hogan was the champion because Hulk Hogan was the face of the company. Simply put, putting Hogan on the video game cover would sell more video games than putting someone like Piper on the cover. Hogan was their ace, so Hogan was their champion. Pure and simple. The problem is that titles have been devalued so much that people here actually believe everyone deserves one. That's not how it works. This isn't the Oprah Show. "YOU GET A TITLE! AND YOU GET A TITLE! AND YOU GET A TITLE! AND HEY THIS GUY IS REALLY GOOD HE GETS A TITLE!"
The title is reserved for the absolute best of the best. The ones that can actually carry the company and/or at least someone that can hang
with someone that can carry the company. The main program of the show must
feature someone who the crowd will pay to see. If you're not that guy, then you don't belong in the main program and you don't deserve the world championship.
But in this current climate when titles are handed out like gift baskets? It doesn't matter. Jack Swagger was champion for christ sakes. The Miz fucking headlined Wrestlemania as the WWE champion. If that's not a sign that the WWE needs to completely alter their approach to titles, then I don't know what is.
- World Title
- IC Title
- Tag Titles
That's all you need. That's all you've EVER needed.