Wrestling Forum banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
353 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Of the last 5 years, the World Heavyweight Championship was passed around way too often

here are the top 5 longest reigns in the last FIVE YEARS:

1. Kane (154 days)
2. Undertaker (140 days)
3. Batista & King Booker (126 days)
4. Edge (105 days)
5. Kurt Angle (82 days)

Anyone else feel that the world title is not as meaningful as it should be?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
452 Posts
Kelly Kelly knows what its like to be passed around, ask her
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
19,291 Posts
I think the WWE Championship is worse, when it comes to changing hands too much... Cena - Punk - Rey - Cena - Punk - Del Rio - Cena, since July?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,677 Posts
how about the fact that john cena has won the title 3 times in the past 3 months
I agree. The WWE championship is just as bad as the World Heavyweight championship in regards to frequent title changes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,677 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,130 Posts
how does a title lose prestige with constant title changes it just shows anybody can win that title any given night it makes the main event scene more competitive than if a guy dominates and holds on to the title for like 10 months

UFC for example has had a hard time having their LHW(205 lbs) champ defend the title even once because the division is so competitive
 

·
Asuka
Joined
·
96,222 Posts
how does a title lose prestige with constant title changes it just shows anybody can win that title any given night it makes the main event scene more competitive than if a guy dominates and holds on to the title for like 10 months

UFC for example has had a hard time having their LHW(205 lbs) champ defend the title even once because the division is so competitive
You know, that's what I've always said. I'd rather have the title change hands all the time than have Cena hold it for 2 years like he did at the beginning of his run, because it buries the rest of the division.

The IWC always says the titles lack prestige, and then they go apeshit whenever their favourites win the fucking thing. Right, they totally mean nothing. :rolleyes: I'll wager a bet that when Daniel Bryan wins the WHC, the title "lacking prestige" is gonna be the furthest thing from the minds of Internet fans.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
601 Posts
how does a title lose prestige with constant title changes it just shows anybody can win that title any given night it makes the main event scene more competitive than if a guy dominates and holds on to the title for like 10 months
It loses it's prestige because it becomes less of an accomplishment and more of a handout. It doesn't help that the damn thing is on the line every three weeks either. It's kind of hard to care when it's won and lost so frequently.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
601 Posts
^yes fixable by having randy and cena hold the title for 12 months

you want that?
It depends. Do I think I would enjoy watching Cena win 30 title matches in a row? No. That would get boring and stale... and it's not believable.

But if title defenses were less frequent and there were only like four or five a year? And Cena managed to hold onto it over the course of that year? That would be just fine with me. Because now when the title changes hands it would actually mean something for a change.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,042 Posts
It depends. Do I think I would enjoy watching Cena win 30 title matches in a row? No. That would get boring and stale... and it's not believable.

But if title defenses were less frequent and there were only like four or five a year? And Cena managed to hold onto it over the course of that year? That would be just fine with me. Because now when the title changes hands it would actually mean something for a change.
while I agree that titles change hands too frequently, the problem isnt in the fact that theyre on the line too frequently. Things like putting the title on the line at Raw/Smackdown will get the WWE their needed viewers, and these matches can be used to further plotlines. There is no problem with a guy holding a title for an excessive period of time as long as he isnt portrayed as a superhero. The WWE has lost their way in what it takes to have a champion hold a belt and look human at the same time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
601 Posts
while I agree that titles change hands too frequently, the problem isnt in the fact that theyre on the line too frequently. Things like putting the title on the line at Raw/Smackdown will get the WWE their needed viewers, and these matches can be used to further plotlines. There is no problem with a guy holding a title for an excessive period of time as long as he isnt portrayed as a superhero. The WWE has lost their way in what it takes to have a champion hold a belt and look human at the same time.
Sorry, I disagree. It never used to be like that and the only reason they started doing that was because they had to compete with Nitro on a weekly basis and it was kicking their ass.

Title matches should occur no more than five times a year... preferably at major PPV events. Having title matches regularly and on weekly television further blurs that line between Monday Night RAW and Wrestlemania.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,483 Posts
Of the last 5 years, the World Heavyweight Championship was passed around way too often

here are the top 5 longest reigns in the last FIVE YEARS:

1. Kane (154 days)
2. Undertaker (140 days)
3. Batista & King Booker (126 days)
4. Edge (105 days)
5. Kurt Angle (82 days)

Anyone else feel that the world title is not as meaningful as it should be?
Have you not been you watching raw that title gets passed around like a hot potato
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
I definitely think they change hands too quickly. I mean Dolph Ziggler and Rey Mysterio won it for 5 minutes. Its a disgrace and destroys the lineage of true superstars that have held it. Its poor writting from the backroom as far as I am concerned; if the top brass want the belt on Cena don't have Mysterio win it in the first instance. If you want to say Mysterio has won the WWE championship then at the very least give him a decent run at the top.

And for god sake get rid of the awful WWE belt. It's hiddeous. Do the WWE execs not read these forums???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,571 Posts
Both titles get passed around like a hot potato as one poster put it. It's a damn shame.

I HATE the fact that there are 2 superstars who the show is centered around. Heaven forbid Cena or Orton get seriously injured and have to be out for months, what ya gonna do then WWE? I wish the title actually meant something, sure give your golden boys the title but when they lose it don't have them regain it 3 weeks later...it's so stupid, it's a disgrace to the history of these titles.
 

·
Escalator Temporarily Stairs
Joined
·
8,793 Posts
The titles haven't had prestige or credibility for a long time; they're just props that serve one of two purposes.

1. To make you pay attention to the person/team holding them.
2. To serve as a transition between one legitimate focal point of the product and another.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top