[boozeco2005]

Personally I don't think they should. Why? Because they are the top dog on the block, they have the most money and more often than not they have the most talented wrestlers in the industry. IMO 3 belts just aren't enough for the amount of wrestlers they have. I like it just the way it is. And yes I agree like most people that the booking for the WHC has been pretty terrible over the past couple of years, but it that a reason to get rid of it? No, because that can be fixed. Anyways, what do yall think?

 

[Kratosx23]

If you want to have one new star every 15 years, then go for it! Of fucking course not, morbid idea.

 

[#Mark]

If you want to have one new star every 15 years, then go for it! Of fucking course not, morbid idea.

Who was the last star that the WHC made? The belt is damaged goods now. Might as well unify the two titles at this point.

 

[Shenroe]

Personally I don't think they should. Why? Because they are the top dog on the block, they have the most money and more often than not they have the most talented wrestlers in the industry. IMO 3 belts just aren't enough for the amount of wrestlers they have. I like it just the way it is. And yes I agree like most people that the booking for the WHC has been pretty terrible over the past couple of years, but it that a reason to get rid of it? No, because that can be fixed. Anyways, what do yall think?

:clap

 

[dxbender]

The WHC division needs a boost big time,but WWE doesn't seem to want to give them one. But if the WHC goes, then WWE will only have the WWE title picture with any story behind it. And no WHC means the belt is gone too!

I wouldn't mind the titles being unified, if the IC title became more prestigious because of it(so we could see something like Orton vs Punk for the IC title) and the WWE title was the WHC design but modified to say WWE on it.

 

[DanielBryanFan94]

Never liked 2 world titles, 1 great achievement, 1 great champion, that's how it should be, been wanting this since they started the having 2 different champions permanently which was in September 2002, since 2002 I've been wanting one champion,

that is 11 years and a month, time to do it already.

 

[MachoMadness1988]

The WHC is kind of like a lesser version of what the IC title was 10-15 years.

Last time a WHC match main evented a PPV? Without looking I think it was Breaking Point 2009. It's not building stars and it's not a big deal anymore. The WHC has been a joke or an after thought most of the time since Swagger cashed in.

Unify those bitches. This also automatically makes the IC and US title mean more.

 

[austin316 G.O.A.T]

Two shows.Two titles.

THE WHC needs to made prestigious though

 

[sesel]

Two shows.Two titles.

THE WHC needs to made prestigious though

This.

 

[Gretchen]

Two shows.Two titles.

THE WHC needs to made prestigious though

Agreed.

All in all, however, expect this thread to be met with a shower of "Yes, they should definitely be unified." responses, OP.

 

[NO!]

If they don't plan on going back to the brand split, then yes they should be unified.

 

[Mifune Jackson]

More wrestlers makes the WWE World Title even MORE prestigious and isn't really a good reason to have two World Titles, IMO.

There's only ONE Royal Rumble winner.

There's only ONE WrestleMania main event.

And also, in 2013, there's realistically only ONE real world title, and that's the WWE Title. Even when Punk was under Cena, it was still worth more than the WHC.

Yeah, Cena could win the WHC, which would elevate the belt, but the main storyline centers around the WWE Title and if Cena wins the WHC and gets involved in that, then we're going to have two belts in one angle and ultimately, one of those championships is going to be more important.


I don't mind the idea of two secondary titles. Wrestling organizations have had those for decades, but there should be only ONE top guy.