Wrestling Forum banner

1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
206 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
these months at least...

now kane, being a smackdown champion, you dont seem too prestigious because you only have a weakened Undertaker to worry about. and you'r not even fighting 4 the belt but 4 sibling rivalry and the powers of hell. the rest of the roster isnt powerful enough for u. ADR against kane/undertaker? plus i dont even remember how Undertaker keeps earning all these title shots. same can be said for y2j and rey reigns.

now orton, being a raw champion, you have the entire Nexus to worry about, plus nexus cena, sheamus, the MITB holder, the upcoming triple H... so being the WWE champion is better because you really have to earn your way in to get a shot. you are up against the odds and every ppv u retain ur championship u prove that you have the skills to preserve your reign. same cand be said for cena and sheamus reigns

the strength of the roster determines the power of the championship belt it has. a weak roster means your only champion coz u dont have the competition.

i just had this idea with all these championship talk we are having.

BTW: why is triple coming back for ONE NIGHT ONLY? how are they going to play this storyline wise?
 

·
Asuka
Joined
·
96,380 Posts
The belts mean the same thing, they're interchangable, but the WWE Championship has always meant a little more, since it's the company's official world championship. At the end of the day though, whichever belt is on Raw is the one people treat more seriously.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
206 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
i wish it was more balanced out, creative treating the WHC more sriously. when jack swagger held it and then rey and kane, it doesnt feel like the old WHC undertaker and edge were battling for and the championship hardy and punk fought for. they didnt even include the WHC match for the wrestlemania 26 promos.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,981 Posts
these months at least...

now kane, being a smackdown champion, you dont seem too prestigious because you only have a weakened Undertaker to worry about. and you'r not even fighting 4 the belt but 4 sibling rivalry and the powers of hell. the rest of the roster isnt powerful enough for u. ADR against kane/undertaker? plus i dont even remember how Undertaker keeps earning all these title shots. same can be said for y2j and rey reigns.

now orton, being a raw champion, you have the entire Nexus to worry about, plus nexus cena, sheamus, the MITB holder, the upcoming triple H... so being the WWE champion is better because you really have to earn your way in to get a shot. you are up against the odds and every ppv u retain ur championship u prove that you have the skills to preserve your reign. same cand be said for cena and sheamus reigns

the strength of the roster determines the power of the championship belt it has. a weak roster means your only champion coz u dont have the competition.

i just had this idea with all these championship talk we are having.

BTW: why is triple coming back for ONE NIGHT ONLY? how are they going to play this storyline wise?
Dude, Kane almost got zapped by Taker's lightning. Frickin' lightning > Nexus. I personally think the WHC belt has more prestige than the WWE title belt, more history and less tacky.
 

·
Sax Legend of Sax Legend on YouTube
Joined
·
1,254 Posts
The belts mean the same thing, they're interchangable, but the WWE Championship has always meant a little more, since it's the company's official world championship. At the end of the day though, whichever belt is on Raw is the one people treat more seriously.
thank you for wording it exactly like this. the question is asked over and over which belt is better and people just don't seem to get it
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,807 Posts
Dude, Kane almost got zapped by Taker's lightning. Frickin' lightning > Nexus. I personally think the WHC belt has more prestige than the WWE title belt, more history and less tacky.
The World Heavyweight Championship has MORE history than the WWF/E title? LOL.

Let me see, one title was created about 2-3 years into this millenium - the other dates back to 1963. Oh, and before you return with some shit about the WCW title - the belt is designed the same, but it is NOT the same title.

Anyway, Pyro pretty much summed up this thread - Raw's title = better title - whichever of the two belts that may be at the time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
206 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
at wrestlemania 24 they made it seem like the WHC of smackdown was better, even the PPVs after that.

but no debate here... most of the time the Raw championship is the best.

and that lightning thing they did at smackdown? i didnt like it. i always like the more realistic storylines. i loved Undertaker vs Kane up until Kane was teleporting at Raw.
 

·
DAVID OTUNGA's Personal Assistant
Joined
·
9,748 Posts
did someone just use a case for lightning making one title more awesome than the other? :lmao you don't see that every day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,981 Posts
The World Heavyweight Championship has MORE history than the WWF/E title? LOL.

Let me see, one title was created about 2-3 years into this millenium - the other dates back to 1963. Oh, and before you return with some shit about the WCW title - the belt is designed the same, but it is NOT the same title.

Anyway, Pyro pretty much summed up this thread - Raw's title = better title - whichever of the two belts that may be at the time.
Dude read my post again, I said the BELT first of all, second, the WWE mentions past WCW as holding that very WHC title, so yeah it is kind of the same title. The WWE belt looks like some tacky hunk of junk you'd get out of a cereal box.

did someone just use a case for lightning making one title more awesome than the other? :lmao you don't see that every day.
I'm talking about Taker and Kane vs. Wade Bore us and Randy Boreton matches. Hellfire, the Darkside and lightning vs. a temper tantrum throwing champion and Pee Wee Herman on steroids.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,847 Posts
The World Heavyweight Championship has MORE history than the WWF/E title? LOL.

Let me see, one title was created about 2-3 years into this millenium - the other dates back to 1963. Oh, and before you return with some shit about the WCW title - the belt is designed the same, but it is NOT the same title.

Anyway, Pyro pretty much summed up this thread - Raw's title = better title - whichever of the two belts that may be at the time.

Yeah normally the WHCs lineage began in 2002 with HHH.........However I'm not sure that's the case anymore, at least for the sake of that WHC DVD they recently came out with. On that DVD, the lineage was dated back to the NWA, in which case it's more prestiguous than the WWWF title.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
661 Posts
Yeah normally the WHCs lineage began in 2002 with HHH.........However I'm not sure that's the case anymore, at least for the sake of that WHC DVD they recently came out with. On that DVD, the lineage was dated back to the NWA, in which case it's more prestiguous than the WWWF title.
Maybe for the sake of argument we can say that WHC's lineage may be dated back to NWA days, but how that justifies dismissing the prestige of WWE title is beyond my understanding.

The WWE title history contains some of the biggest legends and draws of all times. Seriously a list containing the names of Buddy Rogers, Bruno Sammartino, Hulk Hogan, Randy Savage,Ric Flair, Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, Steve Austin, The Rock, The Undertaker,Triple H, John Cena looks inferior to you in some way? I am not saying the NWA championship history didnt have the legends and biggest names of the era but I dont think WWE title is any less prestigious to any other wrestling belts
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,164 Posts
Can't take the wwe title seriously when i look at it i see a piece of junk and not the prestigious history. So the world title all day for me regardless of who's champion at least it looks like a world title not some crappy toysrus product.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,847 Posts
Maybe for the sake of argument we can say that WHC's lineage may be dated back to NWA days, but how that justifies dismissing the prestige of WWE title is beyond my understanding.

The WWE title history contains some of the biggest legends and draws of all times. Seriously a list containing the names of Buddy Rogers, Bruno Sammartino, Hulk Hogan, Randy Savage,Ric Flair, Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, Steve Austin, The Rock, The Undertaker,Triple H, John Cena looks inferior to you in some way? I am not saying the NWA championship history didnt have the legends and biggest names of the era but I dont think WWE title is any less prestigious to any other wrestling belts

I agree with what you're saying. I never dissmissed the prestigue of the WWE title, honestly they are both equal in my book. I just think the general consensus between wrestling purists is that the NWA was the 'wrestling' belt, and it also has a longer lineage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
386 Posts
these months at least...

now kane, being a smackdown champion, you dont seem too prestigious because you only have a weakened Undertaker to worry about. and you'r not even fighting 4 the belt but 4 sibling rivalry and the powers of hell. the rest of the roster isnt powerful enough for u. ADR against kane/undertaker? plus i dont even remember how Undertaker keeps earning all these title shots. same can be said for y2j and rey reigns.

now orton, being a raw champion, you have the entire Nexus to worry about, plus nexus cena, sheamus, the MITB holder, the upcoming triple H... so being the WWE champion is better because you really have to earn your way in to get a shot. you are up against the odds and every ppv u retain ur championship u prove that you have the skills to preserve your reign. same cand be said for cena and sheamus reigns

the strength of the roster determines the power of the championship belt it has. a weak roster means your only champion coz u dont have the competition.

i just had this idea with all these championship talk we are having.

BTW: why is triple coming back for ONE NIGHT ONLY? how are they going to play this storyline wise?



Where did you hear this? Is this common knowledge that I've missed?
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top