Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: Title Unification: A Good Idea?

  1. #1
    Banned AnnaLove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Haifa, Israel
    Age
    26
    Posts
    367

    Question Title Unification: A Good Idea?

    For me personally, I'm ok with two World Championships and I'm ok with a unifcation at some point. If I had to pick one or the other, I'd probably go for unifying the titles at this point.

    Since brand exclusivity for Raw & SD! is pretty much dead, and has been really for almost a year now, so, on the surface, having two World Championships no longer really seems to be necessary. Allegedly, however, one main of the main reasons why they've kept the titles separate is the belief that SD! having its own World Championship helps sell tickets to house shows. I think there's some truth to that after all. When's the last time the WWE had a house show in which a World Championship wasn't on the line?

    While the brand split is pretty much dead, the WWE is still ultimately able to, usually, run two different house shows in two different areas a day. There's no reason why they couldn't keep doing so without the WHC but, again, the WWE feels that each brand needs its own top strap for house show purposes. There might be some degree of truth in that. SD! is already viewed as the less important show as it is, so taking away their World Championship might only further that view.

    But, to be honest, I'm sure WWE could come up with some idea that could work. One less World Championship could mean that SD! could really be used to put a huge spotlight on one of the mid-card titles.

    If a unification does happen, which I do think it will at some point, then I expect one of two scenarios:

    1. The WWE Championships absorbs the World Heavyweight Championship with the WHC ultimately being retired. The WWE Championship has always been the top title of the company no matter what. The odds of WWE doing the opposite are damn near astronomical as the WWE Championship is the title created by Vince, Sr. almost 50 years ago. That title is linked to the history of the company in a way that no other title on the roster is.

    2. The WWE & World Heavyweight Championships are unified into a single, brand new championship with its own lineage. This scenario is also unlikely, but one that I do like to some degree. Vince is going to have to step down eventually for one reason or another, so the creation of a brand new World Championship, maybe calling it simply the WWE World Championship, could be seen as starting things off fresh. This would create a lot of buzz and interest because wrestling without the WWE Championship, in all honesty, is something that many people would never happen.

    I don't look for either title to be gone for a long while, but I do believe it'll happen someday.

  2. #2
    Banned ToXiCiTy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,801

    Default Re: Title Unification: A Good Idea?

    So you are going to continue watching? Ok, the question. No, they shouldnt unify the titles. It gives midcarders something to chase for ( WHC ) and it separates the two shows from eachother.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    160

    Default Re: Title Unification: A Good Idea?

    They shouldn't have TWO World Titles if there is no brand split. And it makes no sense to have a "World Title" be booked like a midcard title. Midcarders should be going after the Intercontinental Title.

    If a guy like John Cena can main event without sniffing the title picture, then you don't really need a world champion for both house show tours. Just have a really over and really popular guy on the tour that the WWE Champion isn't on.

    I know that the World Heavyweight Title is supposedly the "new Intercontinental Title", but we've recently had main event caliber talent holding the actual Intercontinental Championship. Why not keep the IC belt on upper level guys like Miz, Sheamus, or Del Rio, who carry the belt around and make it look "important".

    And since SmackDown isn't even equal to RAW anymore, the Intercontinental Champion could headline SmackDown's house shows, OR a high profile Tag Team Title pairing like Kane & Daniel Bryan would suffice.

    The way that WWE works needs to be restructured. If they work on getting EVERYONE over, then WWE won't have to rely on using the belts as draws or having an extra World Title as a prop.

    The problem with the World Heavyweight Championship is that we see so many guys as "World Champions" on paper yet they aren't really being given the ball because the WWE Championship, as well as special attractions whenever they are around will always be treated as more important. The World Heavyweight Championship is pretty much a charity title or a consolation prize, and it cheapens the belt a bit.

    I know some people will throw out the "X would never be World Champion if there was only one belt". There are legends who have never been WWE Champion. Not everyone gets to be a World Champion. At the same time, the wrestlers deserve to matter, even if they never get the belt. With the way that World Titles are handed out, it makes the guys who haven't had a world title look like even bigger chumps because they can't win the belt despite there being TWO of them.

    Plus, having ONE World Title woudl allow a wider variety of contenders, instead of seeing the same two-three guys feuding for months.



    Ideally there should be:

    ONE Top Championship: The WWE Championship, for the top guys in the company

    ONE Secondary/Upper Mid-Card Championship: The WWE Intercontinental Championship, for those upper midcarders on the verge of breaking through to the main event, or the main event guys who can't fit in the WWE Title picture, but WWE wants them to stay relevant.

    ONE Tertiary/Lower Mid-card Championship: Currently it seems like the United States Title fills this role. This belt would be for the pure midcarders who won't be in a high profile angle any time soon.

    One or more "niche" titles/titles with special stipulations: ex. Cruiserweight Title, Hardcore Title.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    718

    Default Re: Title Unification: A Good Idea?

    The IC and US titles are supposed to be the mid card titles to chase.

    I agree that having two world titles when the brand extension is dead is pretty pointless. Unify the belts, get rid of the WHC (it's been a joke for years anyways), bada bing bada boom.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    160

    Default Re: Title Unification: A Good Idea?

    Even WITH the Brand Split, the WWE Champion should be the "Champion of the WWE", not just the Champion of one show.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Las Vegas via Bay Area
    Age
    36
    Posts
    964

    Default Re: Title Unification: A Good Idea?

    somebody posts a new version of this thread about once a week..... & No they should not unify the titles , the two titles are fine the way they are... ..

  7. #7
    Banned AnnaLove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Haifa, Israel
    Age
    26
    Posts
    367

    Default Re: Title Unification: A Good Idea?

    Quote Originally Posted by BATISTA_CenA View Post
    somebody posts a new version of this thread about once a week..... & No they should not unify the titles , the two titles are fine the way they are... ..
    Fine the way they are? The World Heavyweight Championship has barely any contenders outside of the Sheamus-Big Show-Randy Orton triangle. And the WWE title is currently having the same issue with CM Punk-John Cena-Ryback triangle...

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Las Vegas via Bay Area
    Age
    36
    Posts
    964

    Default Re: Title Unification: A Good Idea?

    check out all the other versions of this thread , it's explained every other week... ..

  9. #9
    @CheapTequila Stefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Age
    25
    Posts
    6,251

    Default Re: Title Unification: A Good Idea?

    Next year is the 50th Anniversary of the WWE Championship. And they're going to market that to death.

    NO WAY are WWE getting rid of it for a new title lineage. They already screwed themselves with the tag team titles 10 years ago be renaming the original WWE Tag Team Titles the World Tag Team Title, and bringing in a new WWE Tag Team Title for SmackDown. That's why the current Tag Team Titles only go back 10 years, they're the SmackDown ones, and they couldn't rename the old ones back to WWE Tag Team Titles.

    They retired the Women's Title just because it was older than the WWE Title.

    WWE Title stays, World Title goes. Maybe by WM30. Other titles stay as they are though.
    LETS GO XENA! XENA SUCKS!

    /r/womenswrestling

  10. #10
    Best In The World BaraaKhalaf92's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Age
    21
    Posts
    524

    Default Re: Title Unification: A Good Idea?

    I'm totally with the unification of the world titles....

    The mid carders should chase the IC & US titles, not a world title...
    The WHC being a mid card title is the main reason why the IC and the US titles are being relegated these days to a low carder championships...

    It's pathetic to see the title that HHH & HBK fought inside the brutal Elimination Chamber to get in 2002 being considered now as a mid card title, and the title which was once held by Eddie, Beniot and many other legends being "given" to a joke low carder like Santino....
    Fave 6:

    1 & 2- CM Punk & Dean Ambrose (Don't Know who I like more LOL)

    3- The Miz
    4- Damien Sandow
    5- Daniel Bryan
    6- Antonio Cesaro

  11. #11
    Ambassador of Asgard thedude's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    2,277

    Default Re: Title Unification: A Good Idea?

    I would dump the World Heavyweight Championship and do a unification tourney like they had in 2001 featuring Cena, Punk, Bryan, and Sheamus with Bryan ultimately beating Cena to unify the titles.

    They had Raw and Smackdown before the brand split in 1999, 2000 and 2001 with one world title so its not like they never had two shows and one world title before.

    -Fresh Prince-
    Chief Ass Whooper of Sorry Sons of Bitches! - Stone Cold Steve Austin

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    718

    Default Re: Title Unification: A Good Idea?

    The WHC has been good for a "last run" type belt for guys over the years (Taker, Kane, HBK), while still keeping the WWE Title prestigious, but it's run its course.

  13. #13
    COYG Todd's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Wales
    Age
    24
    Posts
    15,120

    Default Re: Title Unification: A Good Idea?

    If you unify the titles, the workload for the champion becomes much greater. If you want WWE to give these guys days off, as they do now, to avoid burnout, you have to keep the titles separate and spread the workload. The WHC is just a prop to sell house shows now. It has taken the place of the old IC title.

  14. #14
    MO to the G to the UNS! BadNewsFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Seattle Washington
    Posts
    2,050

    Default Re: Title Unification: A Good Idea?

    The WWE champion doesn't have to show up everywhere all the time....in the old days he wasn't even always on the TV shows...some of you guys act like there never was one champion before.

    This one champ thing was the way it worked for 50 years...it can work again now, and should happen.

  15. #15
    COYG Todd's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Wales
    Age
    24
    Posts
    15,120

    Default Re: Title Unification: A Good Idea?

    In the old days the IC title had immense prestige. Prestige that rivals or perhaps even betters the World title right now. If you merged the world titles there would be a huge void between world title and the modern IC title. Prestige isn't easy to build up.

    In the old days the IC title would headline the show if the world champion wasn't booked. You still need a prop to sell these house show main events. That's why the World title works perfectly as an second title, it has basically replaced the IC title.

  16. #16
    MO to the G to the UNS! BadNewsFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Seattle Washington
    Posts
    2,050

    Default Re: Title Unification: A Good Idea?

    Quote Originally Posted by Todd View Post
    In the old days the IC title had immense prestige. Prestige that rivals or perhaps even betters the World title right now. If you merged the world titles there would be a huge void between world title and the modern IC title. Prestige isn't easy to build up.

    In the old days the IC title would headline the show if the world champion wasn't booked. You still need a prop to sell these house show main events. That's why the World title works perfectly as an second title, it has basically replaced the IC title.
    You're right about the IC title of old...in the Mr.Perfect days, it was more prestigious.

    But all that means is they just need to build that prestige back up...and they would do it easily once all the guys who go after the current WHC started chasing the IC title.

    Imagine this Show/Sheamus feud if were treated the same as an IC title feud...that would make it sooooo much better IMO.

    Again this has all worked before and could easily work again now.

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    160

    Default Re: Title Unification: A Good Idea?

    Quote Originally Posted by Todd View Post
    In the old days the IC title had immense prestige. Prestige that rivals or perhaps even betters the World title right now. If you merged the world titles there would be a huge void between world title and the modern IC title. Prestige isn't easy to build up.

    In the old days the IC title would headline the show if the world champion wasn't booked. You still need a prop to sell these house show main events. That's why the World title works perfectly as an second title, it has basically replaced the IC title.
    But they CAN give the IC Title that prestige. Just put the belt on someone that the fans still see as a big deal.

    When Miz was Intercontinental Champion, he made the title look important because he still carried himself like a top star (even if they did turn him into a jobber). If you put the IC Title on someone else in the upper echelon, it'll help make the belt mean something. Give the IC Title to someone like Sheamus or Daniel Bryan, or Ryback.

  18. #18
    Best In The World BaraaKhalaf92's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Age
    21
    Posts
    524

    Default Re: Title Unification: A Good Idea?

    Quote Originally Posted by TempestH View Post
    But they CAN give the IC Title that prestige. Just put the belt on someone that the fans still see as a big deal.

    When Miz was Intercontinental Champion, he made the title look important because he still carried himself like a top star (even if they did turn him into a jobber). If you put the IC Title on someone else in the upper echelon, it'll help make the belt mean something. Give the IC Title to someone like Sheamus or Daniel Bryan, or Ryback.
    Yea seeing the title with DB would be just awesome...
    Fave 6:

    1 & 2- CM Punk & Dean Ambrose (Don't Know who I like more LOL)

    3- The Miz
    4- Damien Sandow
    5- Daniel Bryan
    6- Antonio Cesaro

  19. #19
    BATISTA_CenA I was!
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Las Vegas via Bay Area
    Age
    36
    Posts
    726

    Default Re: Title Unification: A Good Idea?

    My lord can this thread be made more times? , No they shouldn't unify the titles , everything is all good with a title on each show... ..

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    718

    Default Re: Title Unification: A Good Idea?

    Quote Originally Posted by B/D/C . . NasH View Post
    My lord can this thread be made more times? , No they shouldn't unify the titles , everything is all good with a title on each show... ..
    Except they have BOTH titles on BOTH shows.

    The reason they were made in the first place was so both RAW and SD! had their own champs and both rosters had a top belt to chase. Now both rosters co-mingle on a weekly basis like nothing.

  21. #21
    Senior Member Darkmania's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    In the true North - Strong and Free!
    Posts
    6,070

    Default Re: Title Unification: A Good Idea?

    It's too bad the WWE tried it's best to make a joke of the IC title. Now they kind of need the WHC. That being said they have Sheamus and Big Show showing up on RAW all of the time so it is mostly for house shows. If they had kept up the value of the IC title I would have liked to have seen the IC title defended on one show, the USA on the other, and then the WWE champ moved between shows based on what feud he is in.


    Thanks JV for the artwork!!

  22. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    160

    Default Re: Title Unification: A Good Idea?

    Quote Originally Posted by Darkmania View Post
    It's too bad the WWE tried it's best to make a joke of the IC title. Now they kind of need the WHC. That being said they have Sheamus and Big Show showing up on RAW all of the time so it is mostly for house shows. If they had kept up the value of the IC title I would have liked to have seen the IC title defended on one show, the USA on the other, and then the WWE champ moved between shows based on what feud he is in.
    All they have to do is put the Intercontinental Title on someone the fans see as a big deal. They should've never given the belt to Kofi. They should've kept it on The Miz or given it to some other World Title caliber wrestler.

    What I think would be good is drafting all the big ticket guys on the RAW brand officially, and all of the midcarders to SmackDown officially (utilizing the more over midcarders like Ryder, Santino, Brodus Clay more often), while having the top guys randomly appear on SmackDown. Treat the main eventers like the "guest stars" of SmackDown and heavily advertise their appearances to bring in ratings and sell tickets. The IC Title would always be on someone who's a huge deal in the eyes of the fans (Sheamus, Miz, Big Show, Ziggler, etc.) who would headline the SmackDown tours.

    The U.S. Title is pretty much like the European or WCW Television Title now. It's a third tier belt now for the pure midcarders

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •