metylerca
King Koopa
Loves Him Some Backstreet Boys.
Don't be alarmed.
Posts: 12,477
|
Post by metylerca on Dec 25, 2007 20:29:53 GMT -5
And how would this help anything? If it was such a joke, then Jeff Hardy wouldn't sarcastically smirk when he is forced to defend the title just like how Shawn Michaels did in 1997 with the European Title? Wasn't the title contested in a ladder match two weeks ago? I think it's dumb to compare WWE's treatment of titles to TNA's or ROH, those are indy wrestling companies IMHO. Truth is, they (WWE) have 3 shows; 2 of them are 2 hours. Both of the two hour shows have 3 Titles on them, save for the Women's title on RAW. I think they do a decent job overall of keeping all of the titles meaningful for the most part. I'm sorry that it isn't 1987 anymore and the IC Title doesn't mean as much. Look at it this way, the WWE Title meant less and less with constant title switches, until JBL, and then Cena had long reigns with them. The ECW Title has a feel of importance to those who watch ECW because CM Punk is the featured star. I don't exactly see Jeff Hardy going up against Charlie Haas every week and jobbing. I see him main eventing, and they never fail to mention he's the IC Champion. What more could you want? Sure, MVP comes out and gloats about being US Champ and better than everyone, but that's because he's a heel. Face champions don't work as well for smarks in the long run, save for some occasions, and this is an example of it. I'm sure if it was someone the IWC loved as the IC Champ, this thread wouldn't exist, but since it isn't..... -metylerca
|
|
Godhand
Team Rocket
The feel good poster of the year
Posts: 803
|
Post by Godhand on Dec 25, 2007 20:34:16 GMT -5
And how would this help anything? If it was such a joke, then Jeff Hardy wouldn't sarcastically smirk when he is forced to defend the title just like how Shawn Michaels did in 1997 with the European Title? Wasn't the title contested in a ladder match two weeks ago? I think it's dumb to compare WWE's treatment of titles to TNA's or ROH, those are indy wrestling companies IMHO. Truth is, they (WWE) have 3 shows; 2 of them are 2 hours. Both of the two hour shows have 3 Titles on them, save for the Women's title on RAW. I think they do a decent job overall of keeping all of the titles meaningful for the most part. I'm sorry that it isn't 1987 anymore and the IC Title doesn't mean as much. Look at it this way, the WWE Title meant less and less with constant title switches, until JBL, and then Cena had long reigns with them. The ECW Title has a feel of importance to those who watch ECW because CM Punk is the featured star. I don't exactly see Jeff Hardy going up against Charlie Haas every week and jobbing. I see him main eventing, and they never fail to mention he's the IC Champion. What more could you want? Sure, MVP comes out and gloats about being US Champ and better than everyone, but that's because he's a heel. Face champions don't work as well for smarks in the long run, save for some occasions, and this is an example of it. I'm sure if it was someone the IWC loved as the IC Champ, this thread wouldn't exist, but since it isn't..... -metylerca I agree with you for the most part. But do you have to act like such an arrogant anti-smark?
|
|
metylerca
King Koopa
Loves Him Some Backstreet Boys.
Don't be alarmed.
Posts: 12,477
|
Post by metylerca on Dec 25, 2007 20:35:39 GMT -5
And how would this help anything? If it was such a joke, then Jeff Hardy wouldn't sarcastically smirk when he is forced to defend the title just like how Shawn Michaels did in 1997 with the European Title? Wasn't the title contested in a ladder match two weeks ago? I think it's dumb to compare WWE's treatment of titles to TNA's or ROH, those are indy wrestling companies IMHO. Truth is, they (WWE) have 3 shows; 2 of them are 2 hours. Both of the two hour shows have 3 Titles on them, save for the Women's title on RAW. I think they do a decent job overall of keeping all of the titles meaningful for the most part. I'm sorry that it isn't 1987 anymore and the IC Title doesn't mean as much. Look at it this way, the WWE Title meant less and less with constant title switches, until JBL, and then Cena had long reigns with them. The ECW Title has a feel of importance to those who watch ECW because CM Punk is the featured star. I don't exactly see Jeff Hardy going up against Charlie Haas every week and jobbing. I see him main eventing, and they never fail to mention he's the IC Champion. What more could you want? Sure, MVP comes out and gloats about being US Champ and better than everyone, but that's because he's a heel. Face champions don't work as well for smarks in the long run, save for some occasions, and this is an example of it. I'm sure if it was someone the IWC loved as the IC Champ, this thread wouldn't exist, but since it isn't..... -metylerca I agree with you for the most part. But do you have to act like such an angry anti-smark? Merry Christmas
|
|
Godhand
Team Rocket
The feel good poster of the year
Posts: 803
|
Post by Godhand on Dec 25, 2007 20:36:46 GMT -5
I agree with you for the most part. But do you have to act like such an angry anti-smark? Merry Christmas Happy hannukah
|
|
metylerca
King Koopa
Loves Him Some Backstreet Boys.
Don't be alarmed.
Posts: 12,477
|
Post by metylerca on Dec 25, 2007 20:43:15 GMT -5
Merry Christmas Happy hannukah Happy Festivus. haha But yes... it is true, I hate when every 3 days some wiseguy acts like he knows how the wrestling business runs. It's always the same remarks as well, 'make ______ heel and he's a God.' 'HHH buries everyone!' and my favorite one, but strictly prohibited to Youtube, 'TNA is great, WWE is gonna be out of business in 2 years!!!'.. but with more profanity. When I see something like such, it irks me because for one, they think they know what they're talking about when really it is just someone thinking turning televised wrestling into 2 hour matches with all heels and no backstage segments or secondary titles is the answer.
|
|
|
Post by Palatial Regalia on Dec 25, 2007 20:47:55 GMT -5
The only midcard belt worth having is a TV title.
|
|
Godhand
Team Rocket
The feel good poster of the year
Posts: 803
|
Post by Godhand on Dec 25, 2007 20:49:09 GMT -5
Happy hannukah Happy Festivus. haha But yes... it is true, I hate when every 3 days some wiseguy acts like he knows how the wrestling business runs. It's always the same remarks as well, 'make ______ heel and he's a God.' 'HHH buries everyone!' and my favorite one, but strictly prohibited to Youtube, 'TNA is great, WWE is gonna be out of business in 2 years!!!'.. but with more profanity. When I see something like such, it irks me because for one, they think they know what they're talking about when really it is just someone thinking turning televised wrestling into 2 hour matches with all heels and no backstage segments or secondary titles is the answer. Eh its cool. Im not on this forum enough too see most of that crap. That show would be an entertaining train wreck though ;D.
|
|
metylerca
King Koopa
Loves Him Some Backstreet Boys.
Don't be alarmed.
Posts: 12,477
|
Post by metylerca on Dec 25, 2007 20:49:33 GMT -5
The only midcard belt worth having is a TV title. I haven't seen one of those in a while... if they gave ECW a Television Title, that'd work wonders for.. say.... Stevie
|
|
metylerca
King Koopa
Loves Him Some Backstreet Boys.
Don't be alarmed.
Posts: 12,477
|
Post by metylerca on Dec 25, 2007 20:50:55 GMT -5
Happy Festivus. haha But yes... it is true, I hate when every 3 days some wiseguy acts like he knows how the wrestling business runs. It's always the same remarks as well, 'make ______ heel and he's a God.' 'HHH buries everyone!' and my favorite one, but strictly prohibited to Youtube, 'TNA is great, WWE is gonna be out of business in 2 years!!!'.. but with more profanity. When I see something like such, it irks me because for one, they think they know what they're talking about when really it is just someone thinking turning televised wrestling into 2 hour matches with all heels and no backstage segments or secondary titles is the answer. Eh its cool. Im not on this forum enough too see most of that crap. That show would be an entertaining train wreck though ;D. Perhaps so entertaining, people just might watch.
|
|
Ace Diamond
Patti Mayonnaise
Believes in Adrian Veidt, as Should We All.
mmm...flavor text
Posts: 36,043
|
Post by Ace Diamond on Dec 25, 2007 20:51:16 GMT -5
And how would this help anything? If it was such a joke, then Jeff Hardy wouldn't sarcastically smirk when he is forced to defend the title just like how Shawn Michaels did in 1997 with the European Title? Wasn't the title contested in a ladder match two weeks ago? I think it's dumb to compare WWE's treatment of titles to TNA's or ROH, those are indy wrestling companies IMHO. Truth is, they (WWE) have 3 shows; 2 of them are 2 hours. Both of the two hour shows have 3 Titles on them, save for the Women's title on RAW. I think they do a decent job overall of keeping all of the titles meaningful for the most part. I'm sorry that it isn't 1987 anymore and the IC Title doesn't mean as much. Look at it this way, the WWE Title meant less and less with constant title switches, until JBL, and then Cena had long reigns with them. The ECW Title has a feel of importance to those who watch ECW because CM Punk is the featured star. I don't exactly see Jeff Hardy going up against Charlie Haas every week and jobbing. I see him main eventing, and they never fail to mention he's the IC Champion. What more could you want? Sure, MVP comes out and gloats about being US Champ and better than everyone, but that's because he's a heel. Face champions don't work as well for smarks in the long run, save for some occasions, and this is an example of it. I'm sure if it was someone the IWC loved as the IC Champ, this thread wouldn't exist, but since it isn't..... -metylerca I completely agree with you. I think Jeff's long run, even if not filled with defenses, has done good for the IC title because of the fact that he's currently number 1 contender for the world title...something that IC Champions used to be upon either getting or shortly after losing the belt.
|
|
|
Post by dh03grad on Dec 25, 2007 21:36:47 GMT -5
It would be absolutely moronic to abolish the IC title. Theres never any more than 4 guys in a world title picture. What the hell would everyone else fight over? That would mean more stress on a writing staff to find motivations to create feuds. Which is the purpose of championships in the first place. The last time the IC title meant anything to myself was during Orton's reign. He had feuds over the belt with other over wrestlers, along with clean victories during title defenses went a long way in re-adding prestige to the belt. The belt only means as much as the WWE wants it to mean. Look at Shelton's run with the belt a few months later, no real storylines. His title defenses were treated with decreased significance. As a result, when he finally lost the belt, it was a 'so what' moment. Jeff Hardy's current reign does crap for the title as he never defends it and it is rarely even mentioned. He needs to drop it to Kennedy soon. He is a mid carder with relative importance. He needs a spark to push into the main event to stay. Have him get a lengthy run with the IC title, and use him to not only push him into a main event heel, but also put over a Cody Rhodes or DH Smith along the way.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Dec 25, 2007 21:48:58 GMT -5
I disagree.
|
|
adamclark52
El Dandy
I'm one with the Force; the Force is with me
Posts: 8,139
|
Post by adamclark52 on Dec 25, 2007 22:14:30 GMT -5
I can remember 5 years ago when they did abolish the IC title and the internet was up in arms over it. I say keep it. Jeff can resume defending it after he's done losing at the Royal Rumble.
|
|
|
Post by casualobserver on Dec 25, 2007 22:15:41 GMT -5
Awww that's your solution for everything.
|
|
|
Post by joeman on Dec 25, 2007 22:17:39 GMT -5
It would be absolutely moronic to abolish the IC title. Theres never any more than 4 guys in a world title picture. What the hell would everyone else fight over? That would mean more stress on a writing staff to find motivations to create feuds. Which is the purpose of championships in the first place. The last time the IC title meant anything to myself was during Orton's reign. He had feuds over the belt with other over wrestlers, along with clean victories during title defenses went a long way in re-adding prestige to the belt. The belt only means as much as the WWE wants it to mean. Look at Shelton's run with the belt a few months later, no real storylines. His title defenses were treated with decreased significance. As a result, when he finally lost the belt, it was a 'so what' moment. Jeff Hardy's current reign does crap for the title as he never defends it and it is rarely even mentioned. He needs to drop it to Kennedy soon. He is a mid carder with relative importance. He needs a spark to push into the main event to stay. Have him get a lengthy run with the IC title, and use him to not only push him into a main event heel, but also put over a Cody Rhodes or DH Smith along the way. The only other title that makes sense to have, as someone mentioned below, is the TV title since it has different rules than the World title. With the Television title, and Jericho did use this in one storyline with Goldberg, a wrestler can legitimately claim he is the real champion since he works harder than the World champion due to the fact that he works a lot more matches. That or a Crusierweight belt, which can be treated as important as the Heavyweight belt, if the WWE wants to since it has a restriction that only someone 200+ or under can win the title. I don't care if the IC title has any meaning or not, which a lot of people responding with post where it has any meaning or not, but the fact that there is no differentiation between the two belts as far as function goes makes the IC title redundant. With the IC belt, it is basically World Heavyweight title0lite, and KAYFABE wise no one would want a secondary belt. Anyone can challenge for the IC title, much like anyone can challenge for the Heavyweight title. I don't think it is fair calling TNA and ROH indy threads also. TNA has been on TV for more than 3 years and ROH has their own PPV. The only thing I see ROH being indy is the fact that wrestlers can go to other indy feds and wrestle, but that is about it. Again, my beef with the IC title is for Kayfabe reasons, not because it can help a certain wrestler move up the ranks.
|
|
|
Post by darthpipes on Dec 25, 2007 22:40:16 GMT -5
The official death of the WWF Intercontinental Championship was the St. Valentine's Day Massacre on February 14th, 1999. On that day, Val Venis became the IC Champion. Val was always entertaining but he was a mid-card act and him winning the title began a downward spiral for the belt. Soon, hasbeens and terrible wrestlers like Road Dogg, Goldust, and The Godfather would hold the title. A mid-card Owen Hart was supposed to win the title as The Blue Blazer but we know what happened there. Then Jeff Jarrett, who had spent the past year tag teaming and mid-carding, dominated the IC title scene. The IC title never recovered. Up until February of 1999 is was a prestigious title but soon afterwards ceased to be.
Orton had a strong run with the title but that's about it.
|
|
|
Post by darthpipes on Dec 25, 2007 22:49:54 GMT -5
That argument has no merit. The IC title is supposed to be the secondary belt.
Funny thing is though...even though the IC Champion was perceived much more strongly years ago and was treated with more respect, before Bret Hart it served as a springboard for very few wrestlers. With the exception of Randy Savage and the Ultimate Warrior, the IC title is as high as the wrestlers got in the WWF. Santana, Murocco, Rude, and Hennig never went any higher and Morales had already been world champion many years earlier. After Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, Steve Austin, and The Rock were successfully able to use the title as a springboard to the World Championship.
|
|
|
Post by joeman on Dec 26, 2007 0:06:57 GMT -5
That argument has no merit. The IC title is supposed to be the secondary belt. Funny thing is though...even though the IC Champion was perceived much more strongly years ago and was treated with more respect, before Bret Hart it served as a springboard for very few wrestlers. With the exception of Randy Savage and the Ultimate Warrior, the IC title is as high as the wrestlers got in the WWF. Santana, Murocco, Rude, and Hennig never went any higher and Morales had already been world champion many years earlier. After Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, Steve Austin, and The Rock were successfully able to use the title as a springboard to the World Championship. I feel that mentioning the Warrior thing is relevant, since in kayfabe the IC title was always looked down when compared to the World title. How can a person carry something with prestige knowing that he is beneath everyone who is the World Title picture? You do made a good point about the IC holders in the 80's, and that is the reason why I said the IC title had a place in 80's. Hogan was unbeatable, and rarely wrestle, so it is important for fans to see another championship being defend on Saturday Night's Main Event. The World title is defended on RAW every month, something twice, which makes the IC title redundant. Keep in mind that you rarely see a former World Heavyweight champion go after the IC title. The reverse is always true. The only times this happened when Triple H won the belt, and that was because he was partners with Austin, the current holder of that time. The Ric Flair example from 95-96 is another rare example.
|
|
|
Post by chunkylover53 on Dec 26, 2007 1:21:12 GMT -5
The IC Title was unified with the World Heavyweight Title 5 years ago and everybody(including myself) on the internet were complaining. Face it, not everybody can be World Champion, so let them have something. IMO, what helped the IC title look more important was when The European Title was around. It was a stepping stone towards the IC title, which was good considering how stacked the roster was back then. With the roster split, I can't see how the Euro-Title can fit into the equation nowadays, but back then it worked well. I see the World, IC, and Euro title as a good example of the ladder system(and can still work with just the former two). It helps you advance. Not everybody can start in the Main Event. That's what the IC title is for.
|
|
littlenaitch
Dennis Stamp
Stylin' and Profilin'
Hall of Famer!!
Posts: 4,160
|
Post by littlenaitch on Dec 26, 2007 1:37:44 GMT -5
The official death of the WWF Intercontinental Championship was the St. Valentine's Day Massacre on February 14th, 1999. On that day, Val Venis became the IC Champion. Val was always entertaining but he was a mid-card act and him winning the title began a downward spiral for the belt. Soon, hasbeens and terrible wrestlers like Road Dogg, Goldust, and The Godfather would hold the title. A mid-card Owen Hart was supposed to win the title as The Blue Blazer but we know what happened there. Then Jeff Jarrett, who had spent the past year tag teaming and mid-carding, dominated the IC title scene. The IC title never recovered. Up until February of 1999 is was a prestigious title but soon afterwards ceased to be. Orton had a strong run with the title but that's about it. Val had only been in the company for about a year when he won his first Intercontinental title. He was over with the crowd and was putting on good matches.
|
|