Would one World Title really be better for WWE? - Page 6 - Wrestling Forum : WWE, TNA, Debate League, Wrestling Videos, Women of Wrestling Forums
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #51 of 60 (permalink) Old 11-16-2012, 09:53 PM
Little Poppa Pump
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,169
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
       
Re: Would one World Title really be better for WWE?

They dont need two champions to run house shows. They used to run house shows with the IC champ on top plenty of times. I think one world champion is best.
Wrestling02370 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #52 of 60 (permalink) Old 11-17-2012, 06:46 AM
Learning to break kayfabe
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 32
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
Re: Would one World Title really be better for WWE?

its good idea
givexa is offline  
post #53 of 60 (permalink) Old 11-17-2012, 07:00 AM
Humbled
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,096
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
   
Re: Would one World Title really be better for WWE?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marty Vibe View Post
I really cannot see how people can defend the concept of a company having two world champions. Fuck it, let's have two world tag team championships while we're at it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by new_year_new_start View Post
If they can't build stars with 2 world titles, how on earth are they going to build stars with just 1?!
ITS THE OTHER WAY AROUND!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adyman View Post
Get rid of SD! and WHC. Who's with me?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil_Mc_90 View Post
Eliminating one title would not fix the current product however it is a step I'd like to see taken. Think how much bigget Punks reign would have been if over the last year he had beaten all the guys in both title pictures.
thats a different topic for as different day

Quote:
Originally Posted by TripleG View Post
Ha ha, thanks for the props man.
WATCH YOUR TOUNGE HEADLINER

This is father fudgin' NYG4LIFE123 auntie plucker

apart from Foolkiller99 he is the GOAT of Youtube Shooters

Quote:
Originally Posted by RFalcao View Post
The WH title makes no sense without brand split
THEN GET RID OF THE PIECE OF TIN, man
nevereveragainu is offline  
post #54 of 60 (permalink) Old 11-24-2012, 07:28 PM
Acknowledged by SCOTT STEINER
 
Defei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,471
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
         
Re: Would one World Title really be better for WWE?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TripleG View Post
Yes.

The label of being a World Champion has been heavily diminished over the last few years, largely because they are much easier to get now. How can you say becoming a World Champion is that big of a deal when there is another guy in the company claiming to be World Champion? It is really weird and nonsensical, and the silliness is only enhanced by the fact that the whole reasoning for have two World Champs (the brand split) is pretty much abandoned now. It is like having an AFC Champion & NFC Champion but no Super Bowl (yes I have made that analogy dozens of times before, but I am sticking with it). I don't want a 1A and a 1B. I want an unquestioned Number One Best in the company.

Having two World Titles also makes it twice as easy to get one. When I was a kid, if you didn't win the Royal Rumble, that was that. Better luck next Wrestlemania. Nowadays, if you lose the Royal Rumble, ITS OK! You can still get a title shot in an Elimination Chamber match the next month or you can just win a Battle Royal on TV and go for the other World Title at Wrestlemania. It really doesn't matter and takes a sense of value to big victories to get to the World Title out of the equation. When one door closes, one immediately opens up. Heck look at DB this year. He loses at Wrestlemania in 18 seconds, then he loses to Sheamus again a month later. OK, so he is out of the World Title picture. But wait! He beat Jerry Lawler in 2 minutes so now he's Number one contender for the other WWE Title! It is that easy! And when guys like a complete unknown in Sheamus (back in 09) and Jack Swagger wind up winning World Titles, it really takes away what it means to be one and takes away the idea that it is a hard mantle to reach.

And lets say right now CM Punk is clearly number one and whoever the World Title holder happens to be is Number 2. Fair enough as it is certainly the case at the moment. However, why would anybody want to go for the red headed stepchild World Title when they could go for the real big boy belt? And why doesn't the WWE Champion care at all that there is another guy running around claiming to be World Champion? They don't even seem to care. I remember when Ric Flair came into the WWF in 1991 with the WCW Title and he basically told Hogan that he was the REAL World Champion and he wanted to prove it. Having two World Champions in one company was a controversy that needed to be settled, and it eventually was at Royal Rumble 92. Now it is just like everyone is totally cool spreading the wealth and sharing the spotlight instead of achieving something grand that nobody else can have.

And with the World Title being such a secondary belt, you are creating a bunch of World Champions that ARE NOT main eventers. If I have anyone tell me that Mark Henry is a main eventer after being "World Champion" I am going to scream. The guy held the unimportant belt. That's it. Sames goes for guys like Swagger, Ziggler, & Daniel Bryan who were all World Champions and yet strangely found themselves in midcard & even opening match situations constantly. So yes, we have a World Title, which is supposed to be the ultimate achievement for a wrestler, being reduced to just being a midcard title. It is so backwards. Here's my question. Why can't they do that with the IC or US Title (we only need one of those too by the way). If they elevated the IC Title up to the midcard status of the World Title and then got rid of the World Title so that the WWE Title can stand as the undisputed ultimate prize, then we'd be much better off as far as championships go and things would make a lot more sense.

The ONLY defense I have heard for having Two World Titles is with House Shows. Having two World Titles allows them to split the groups up and tour different areas. Well, they did that when I was a kid. The best example was in the Hogan/Warrior days where they had the Hogan crew & the Warrior crew. They didn't need two World Titles to achieve that. They just created big stars to carry the load. And at this point, I imagine the WWE brand will bring in those devoted fans regardless, and more casuals would be more attracted to the guys they typically see as the biggest like the Punks & the Cenas rather than the far less interesting Sheamus & Big Shows on the other side of the coin.
QFT.


Defei is offline  
post #55 of 60 (permalink) Old 11-24-2012, 07:40 PM
L-DOPA ~
 
Melisandre of Asshai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: London, UK
Posts: 5,122
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
                     
Re: Would one World Title really be better for WWE?

Quote:
Originally Posted by wrestling immortal View Post
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.
main roster I don't think is bigger than what it was during the attitude era so it could definitely could still work. Size of the roster doesn't matter too much when it comes to championships.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wrestling immortal View Post
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.
You can be pushed and have a credible position on the card without the title. You can have main event feuds also that do not include the title. Its just a matter of creative and booking. Sure it does have an effect certain guys not being able to become world champion but then the cream of the crop should be the only ones holding the world title to begin with. If you ask me, I don't see Sheamus or Miz as world champion material at all.

They could make it work, they would just have to change their booking philosophy and not just be geared to pushing people by putting them in the title picture. They did it in the past, no reason why they can't do it now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wrestling immortal View Post
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.
The brand split pretty much died this year, they still officially have it but it really doesn't factor anymore so this shouldn't really be a problem.



MUSTANG
Melisandre of Asshai is offline  
post #56 of 60 (permalink) Old 11-24-2012, 08:22 PM
Moron
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 69
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
   
Re: Would one World Title really be better for WWE?

should be one more.
william_dautrive is offline  
post #57 of 60 (permalink) Old 11-24-2012, 09:18 PM
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
new_year_new_start's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 659
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
     
Re: Would one World Title really be better for WWE?

People on here bitch and complain that guys don't become world champions enough as it is, with one less belt that's only going to make things worse.

new_year_new_start is offline  
post #58 of 60 (permalink) Old 11-24-2012, 09:25 PM
My Name Is God (I Hate You)
 
Honey Bucket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Tits
Posts: 7,331
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
                     
Re: Would one World Title really be better for WWE?

Quote:
Originally Posted by new_year_new_start View Post
People on here bitch and complain that guys don't become world champions enough as it is, with one less belt that's only going to make things worse.
What a great idea. While we're at it, let's give everyone on the fucking roster a WWE title run. We don't want to make those internet fans all unhappy now, do we?

"Yes, I can hear you Clem Fandango!"
Honey Bucket is offline  
post #59 of 60 (permalink) Old 11-24-2012, 09:45 PM
Learning to break kayfabe
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 128
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
   
Re: Would one World Title really be better for WWE?

A lot of good points have been brought up already so I'll try and not sound too redundant. They should merge the WHC/WWE title, merge the IC/US title, and bring back either the cruiserweight or tv title, and keep the one tag title. So a total of 4 titles and merge the two brands together but still have 2 big shows, RAW as the A-Show and Smackdown as the B-Show and use the B-Show to primarily build up your lower-mid to mid-card guys.
JohnyCrown is offline  
post #60 of 60 (permalink) Old 11-24-2012, 11:01 PM
Try being informed instead of just opinionated.
 
Aficionado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Red Deer, Alberta
Posts: 2,932
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
                     
Re: Would one World Title really be better for WWE?

It all comes down to gate revenue. From a company standpoint, they probably want to end all house shows with some kind of World Title on the line since they know their cards would appear even more lackluster without one. This is due to them not having big enough household names that could carry a card without being seen as Champion like they have in the past.

That was one thing about the Attitude Era I liked the most. The Title structure. It had something for everybody. It's just hard to get 2 World Titles over when they are being showcased on both shows. It's hard enough to get both Mid-card Titles over these days. Either separate the two Brands entirely or unify and pick up the pieces of a damaged era that should have ended years ago.
Aficionado is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome