MasonK565
El Dandy
Biggest Damian Wayne fan on FAN.
Posts: 8,577 
|
Post by MasonK565 on Dec 30, 2009 12:25:20 GMT -5
Well the Udnertaker is enjoying the longest World Title reign since Edges 105 day reign back on December 16, 2007 to March 30, 2008.
Since then not one reign has passed the 90 day mark, the two closest was John Cena with 84 days, and Undertaker with his current reign that will likely last longer.
Is it just me or should this World Championship be used a little better, as in longer, more important reigns rather than short 40 something day reigns?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dynamite Kid on Dec 30, 2009 12:32:01 GMT -5
Both the big titles are being tossed like an inmate's salad lately.
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,039
Member is Online
|
Post by Mozenrath on Dec 30, 2009 13:08:17 GMT -5
Eh, it needs to be a mix. There should be long reigns, but the occasional short reign would keep it from becoming boring or predictable. Too much of either is a bad thing.
|
|
MasonK565
El Dandy
Biggest Damian Wayne fan on FAN.
Posts: 8,577
|
Post by MasonK565 on Dec 30, 2009 13:21:11 GMT -5
Eh, it needs to be a mix. There should be long reigns, but the occasional short reign would keep it from becoming boring or predictable. Too much of either is a bad thing. I agree. There are just so many short reigns, its ridiculous. |
|
Turd Ferguson
Hank Scorpio
John Cena: Colossal Douche
Posts: 7,402
|
Post by Turd Ferguson on Dec 30, 2009 13:38:34 GMT -5
Well considering that 'Taker was supposed to have a sustained title reign dating back to '07, but he kept getting injured, this time seems to be pretty on the money.
|
|
Big L
Grimlock
Posts: 13,883
|
Post by Big L on Dec 30, 2009 15:33:24 GMT -5
Eh, it needs to be a mix. There should be long reigns, but the occasional short reign would keep it from becoming boring or predictable. Too much of either is a bad thing. What he just said |
|
|
|
Post by Mayonnaise on Dec 30, 2009 15:43:57 GMT -5
Eh, it needs to be a mix. There should be long reigns, but the occasional short reign would keep it from becoming boring or predictable. Too much of either is a bad thing. Exactly. I know people on this board do not like ROH but, the way they book the title is something WWE should look at. I mean, people were shocked after the belt went from Danielson's 16 month reign to Homicide having maybe a month or 2. I am not saying that bouncing back and forth is the key or having year + reigns in the WWE would work (I don't think they do) but, WWE seems to be in a period where they need a title change every month after coming off of one where they didn't want any. Variety is the spice of life. |
|
SAJ Forth
Wade Wilson
Jamaican WCF Crazy!
Half Man-Half Amazing
Posts: 27,214
|
Post by SAJ Forth on Dec 30, 2009 23:17:57 GMT -5
Well to be fair, Big Gold was tossed around quite a bit this past Summer, but I'm glad their starting do go a different way with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by KingPopper on Dec 31, 2009 0:14:45 GMT -5
I had to look up if Batista won the title this year, I guess he did for two days... I figured he did but I got confused in the mix of Orton/HHH/Cena mess. Smackdown was almost as bad.
Long reigns are fine so are short ones as long as they serve a story. I use to be able to name every title change from like Hogan winning in his first championship till like 2003, I couldnt even tell you the title history from this year, its like they were playing hot potatoe. Thats why Sheamus winning seems like a breath of fresh air.
|
|
bob
Salacious Crumb
The "other" Bob. FOC COURSE!
started the Madness Wars, Proudly the #1 Nana Hater on FAN
Posts: 78,293
|
Post by bob on Dec 31, 2009 0:22:19 GMT -5
Well the Udnertaker is enjoying the longest World Title reign since Edges 105 day reign back on December 16, 2007 to March 30, 2008. Since then not one reign has passed the 90 day mark, the two closest was John Cena with 84 days, and Undertaker with his current reign that will likely last longer. Is it just me or should this World Championship be used a little better, as in longer, more important reigns rather than short 40 something day reigns? [/b] that's mainly because when it was introduced on RAW Triple H had a death grip on it www.wwe.com/inside/titlehistory/worldheavyweight/ |
|
|
|
Post by hajimenoippo on Dec 31, 2009 1:37:21 GMT -5
Eh, it needs to be a mix. There should be long reigns, but the occasional short reign would keep it from becoming boring or predictable. Too much of either is a bad thing. Exactly. I know people on this board do not like ROH but, the way they book the title is something WWE should look at. I mean, people were shocked after the belt went from Danielson's 16 month reign to Homicide having maybe a month or 2. I am not saying that bouncing back and forth is the key or having year + reigns in the WWE would work (I don't think they do) but, WWE seems to be in a period where they need a title change every month after coming off of one where they didn't want any. Variety is the spice of life. TV, PPV, and overexposure and the demands of the audience don't provide this. |
|
Bub (BLM)
Patti Mayonnaise
advocates duck on rodent violence
Fed. Up.
Posts: 37,742
|
Post by Bub (BLM) on Dec 31, 2009 1:41:15 GMT -5
Well considering that 'Taker was supposed to have a sustained title reign dating back to '07, but he kept getting injured, this time seems to be pretty on the money. Until he injures himself again and has to hotshot the title to a transitional champion. Par for the course for the old fart. |
|
|
|
Post by Young Game on Dec 31, 2009 14:57:33 GMT -5
WHC Reigns?
NO.
Luther Reigns.
Why don't you give him somma dis turkey?
|
|
Mac
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 16,502
|
Post by Mac on Dec 31, 2009 15:05:33 GMT -5
At this point theres been so many guys who have held the title so many times and beaten so many of the other guys who've held it so many times that the titles dont really mean much. Thats why we have gimmick PPVs now, ways to try to make the same guys beaten the same guys they beat before beat them in a different way.
|
|
