Wrestling Forum banner
1 - 8 of 8 Posts

· Banned
Joined
·
6,748 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I mean this only in regards to the Intercontinental, and United States titles respectively. How I see it the most common complaint about these two titles is lack of concern for them. One of the major problems I feel that these two titles has would be lack of progression with the times. People need something to associate with those titles, and they have nothing.

In order to place some prestige back in to holding these titles I have come up with some new stipulations that come with being IC, or US champion. Let me start by saying that both titles have to be defended at all PPV's except MITB, the Royal Rumble, and Elimination Chamber. First, whomever are the champions of both titles come Royal Rumble should have a one-on-one match for the 30th slot. This creates a reason to want to challenge for either title come Royal Rumble because the champion(s) of either title would now have a great shot at winning the Rumble, and moving on to WM to challenge the world champion(s). Making it ok for top notch stars like Orton, or Punk to possibly hold one of those two mid card titles.

Another stipulation that could work would be that after 3 successful title defenses the champion receives a number one contender's match for the world title at a PPV the month of their #1 contenders match. No more than one title match per month forced by the GM should also be a rule. Receiving a number one contender's match doesn't guarantee anything, and I happen to like this do to the uncertainty of that match. The question would be who would be the "other guy"? The star feuding with the current champion, or another top notch "main event" name?

Both champions should also have the right to have automatic slots in any MITB match, and to make things interesting there could even be angles made up in which someone else challenges them for their MITB PPV slot. They should also allow for the title holders to fight under their own stipulations once they have held the title for more than 6 months. Meaning if they hold on to the title long enough to see the Royal Rumble they could end up challenging for the 30th slot entrance again, or another MITB slot, or Elimination Chamber match.

This type of "Making your own rules" after 6 months rule makes sense because it then brings light to the fact that the star has had the title 6 months, and now if they are heel the matches they have could work in their favor. However should they go over the line the GM has the right to use their power, and force possibly an unfavorable match back at them. While at the same time for the "face" character this type of power could help nudge a "heel" turn, or better yet keep people guessing whether, or not the "face" character will fall to temptation, and use their "right to their very own match clauses", or go the route of an honest champion playing it neutral?

What do you all think?
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
83,359 Posts
The suggestions are cool but they mean absolutely nothing. WWE could defend both titles every week if they chose too...but they don't. It's sad, because they could easily be defended, especially on PPV's.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
379 Posts
I really like the idea of getting a title match after holding the title for a certain amount of time, or successfully defending it enough times, but i'm not sure how I feel about the ppv stuff.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
379 Posts
The suggestions are cool but they mean absolutely nothing. WWE could defend both titles every week if they chose too...but they don't. It's sad, because they could easily be defended, especially on PPV's.
I would love to see them defended more, but not so often that there isn't time to build feuds.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,766 Posts
The first 3 suggestions make the belts out to be stepping stone and less than the World Title.
also the last one would only work in some situations.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top