Wrestling Forum banner

Why Not Unify All The Belts?

1212 Views 11 Replies 10 Participants Last post by  bigbuxxx
Ultimate path to unification:

1. Bryan beats Sheamus and becomes US Champ

2. Bryan beats BNB and becomes the IC Champ

3. Bryan has a handicap match with the Usos and wins the tag team titles by himself

4. Bryan beats Paige for the Women's Champ at WM XXXI


That would force DB to carry around 7 belts.

Now back to all seriousness. Why did they unify the 2 main titles? Why does that make sense? What is the right number of titles? Should the consolidation stop or continue?

I really don't get what's driving the consolidation of titles? Thanks for any explanations you may have.
See less
Ultimate path to unification:

1. Bryan beats Sheamus and becomes US Champ

2. Bryan beats BNB and becomes the IC Champ

3. Bryan has a handicap match with the Usos and wins the tag team titles by himself

4. Bryan beats Paige for the Women's Champ at WM XXXI


That would force DB to carry around 7 belts.

Now back to all seriousness. Why did they unify the 2 main titles? Why does that make sense? What is the right number of titles? Should the consolidation stop or continue?

I really...
See more
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

· I'm Sa-Sa-Sleepy, boff!
Joined
·
3,512 Posts
They need to split up the two main titles.. They have enough talent right now to split the titles up. Having Randy Orton unify the titles didn't do much for his character and was pointless.

I think they should have
WWE Championship
World Heavy Weight Title
IC Title
Tag Titles
and the Divas title
 

· Banned
Joined
·
2,118 Posts
Ultimate path to unification:

1. Bryan beats Sheamus and becomes US Champ

2. Bryan beats BNB and becomes the IC Champ

3. Bryan has a handicap match with the Usos and wins the tag team titles by himself

4. Bryan beats Paige for the Women's Champ at WM XXXI


That would force DB to carry around 7 belts.

Now back to all seriousness. Why did they unify the 2 main titles? Why does that make sense? What is the right number of titles? Should the consolidation stop or continue?

I really don't get what's driving the consolidation of titles? Thanks for any explanations you may have.
I am not sure if you are new to wrestling so sorry if I patronize but originally there was only ONE world title for the WWE- the WWE title. The person who had this was THE MAN. Anyways when WCW went out of business and WWE bought them out, they had a gigantic roster. I mean it was ridiculously rich and talented. So talented that they had a brand extension and had the WWE title for THE MAN of Smackdown and the WHC as THE MAN of Raw. This worked ok until around 2007 when the roster got smaller, as guys started to retire and the more popular stars left. Now in 2014 there is so little star power that Smackdown cant sell itself using its own roster so they have basically gone back to pre brand extension and have just 1 THE MAN. This IMO is a better idea becuase the WHC is effectively meaningless without the brand extension.

Edit: If I had my way I would abolish the IC and US titles as they are pointless. They don't have any requirements, eg a foreigner can be US champ & as such are inherintly meaningless props. Instead I would replace them with a hardcore title and maybe the X division title if they buy out TNA. Atleast those two titles have a seperate genre so to speak that makes them plausable.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
2,941 Posts
A world title (Top of the roster)
A second tier title (Middle of the roster)
A third tier title (Bottom of the roster)
A tag title
A woman's title

If you had a thriving Junior Heavyweight division, I would say have a Jr. Title & a Jr. Tag, but WWE has neither so it isn't necessary.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
223 Posts
The Raw/SmackDown brand split is no more, thus having 2 world titles is unnecessary.

A world title (Top of the roster)
A second tier title (Middle of the roster)
A third tier title (Bottom of the roster)
A tag title
A woman's title

If you had a thriving Junior Heavyweight division, I would say have a Jr. Title & a Jr. Tag, but WWE has neither so it isn't necessary.
^Yep.

Without the WHC, the WWE really needs to elevate that Intercontinental championship as the clear secondary title. Back in the day, the likes of Jericho and Benoit would have epic ladder matches for that belt. Really almost seemed as important as the main title.

US championship could be third tier, much like the European championship was. Right now it seems to be on equal footing with the IC, making both belts kinda pointless.

COULD bring back the Cruiserweight or Light-heavyweight titles if they plan to keep having these midget matches. Let's hope not.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
32,941 Posts
Two World titles is pointless without a proper Brand Extension. Personally, I think the number of titles they have right now is perfect, just need to establish a more consistent hierarchy. I'd have it like this:

WWE World Heavyweight: main-eventers
IC: upper midcarders
US: midcarders

And then you have your Tag and Divas divisions.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,101 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
I am not sure if you are new to wrestling so sorry if I patronize but originally there was only ONE world title for the WWE- the WWE title. The person who had this was THE MAN. Anyways when WCW went out of business and WWE bought them out, they had a gigantic roster. I mean it was ridiculously rich and talented. So talented that they had a brand extension and had the WWE title for THE MAN of Smackdown and the WHC as THE MAN of Raw. This worked ok until around 2007 when the roster got smaller, as guys started to retire and the more popular stars left. Now in 2014 there is so little star power that Smackdown cant sell itself using its own roster so they have basically gone back to pre brand extension and have just 1 THE MAN. This IMO is a better idea becuase the WHC is effectively meaningless without the brand extension.

Edit: If I had my way I would abolish the IC and US titles as they are pointless. They don't have any requirements, eg a foreigner can be US champ & as such are inherintly meaningless props. Instead I would replace them with a hardcore title and maybe the X division title if they buy out TNA. Atleast those two titles have a seperate genre so to speak that makes them plausable.
Thanks for the explanation.

I've been watching wrestling since the end of Bruno's career. And I get all the history part. Just wasn't sure why the need to consolidate now. I get that the roster is smaller, but it also seems to be at an inflection point where it's getting better.

And with so many guys with promise, why take away titles now when they could be used to promote so much of this talent that's up and coming?

I would have better understood the consolidation 5+/- years ago when the roster was small and the talent was limited. But with today's talent about to explode, I don't get it.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
2,941 Posts
The Raw/SmackDown brand split is no more, thus having 2 world titles is unnecessary.



^Yep.

Without the WHC, the WWE really needs to elevate that Intercontinental championship as the clear secondary title. Back in the day, the likes of Jericho and Benoit would have epic ladder matches for that belt. Really almost seemed as important as the main title.

US championship could be third tier, much like the European championship was. Right now it seems to be on equal footing with the IC, making both belts kinda pointless.

COULD bring back the Cruiserweight or Light-heavyweight titles if they plan to keep having these midget matches. Let's hope not.
Yeah, that's why I would just have

WWE Title
IC Title
US Title
Tag Title
Woman's Title

Basically what they have now, but they gotta elevate the belts & make them meaningful. They also need to choose the direction they are gonna go in. If you keep the word Heavyweight in the title, your implying size whether you want to or not. I'm not one of those people, I feel a promotion's top title should be an Openweight one. But if you really wanted to showcase your Lightweights & have a World Heavyweight title, you gotta give the Juniors a title and make it seem important.

You don't see the lightweights in WWE pulling off too many high risk moves non-stop, they do a few spots but the emphasis of their offense isn't usually in the air which is why I feel like a belt would be pointless. You don't need another title when the match is gonna be worked the same as your other ones.

I also wouldn't mind women having a tag title belt as well, WWE has so many shows and it's all fantasy booking in my head, but I would do it. They have a good portion of divas that don't do much, I would do that.

I don't understand the way WWE works cause they make the organizing of titles & the building of matches for those titles seem like it's extremely difficult. But it's really not, I feel like they could easily do it - I just feel like it's not important to them, titles kinda take a backseat to the other stuff they do. Which is fine I guess, but wrestling is one of those weird things cause everything seems "better" when the title picture is done well. Even though Kayfabe is dead & wannabe "smart" fans rule the internet and audience, the title belt just adds excitement even when people don't realize it.

It's like the cherry on top, yeah you need substance - but it just adds that little bit of extra something to the match & feud that puts it over the top.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
18,856 Posts
Without a brand extension, having two "main" belts was stupid. Especially when one of them was a main event title in theory but a midcard title in practice... And they'd add it to guys' total WWE championship counts as if they were equal but they weren't.
 
1 - 12 of 12 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