|
Post by dada3345 on Aug 31, 2010 21:37:51 GMT -5
BAD IDEA. its gonna be just liek the 80's til about 2001 when they only had 3 titles and everyone else was a jobber So Jake The Snake and Ted DiBiase were jobbers?
|
|
|
Post by mrwednesdaynight on Aug 31, 2010 21:44:34 GMT -5
Right now, I think they have it about right with the belts. After the Woman's Title is Unified, I think we will be about where we need to be on titles. Five years ago, when they hardly had enough guys I cared about to fill one roster, I would have agreed that the titles should be unified. But right now, there is hardly enough tv time for all the guys they have on the roster or are going to be bringing up through Florida. If the complaint is that the IC belt doesn't mean much, blame the writers. There are enough guys between each show that the fans want to see that putting the IC belt and a feud over it in a prominent feud should not be that difficult. Same thing on Raw. Miz has so much going on right now, there are at least five guys I can think of who should be US Champ instead. Really, it comes down to lazy writing. Lately, title reigns have been longer and more memorial for most of the major titles. I perfer that to the hot potato method of the Attitude Era.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2010 22:18:55 GMT -5
As I've said many times - the day they unify the World and WWE titles is the day I stop watching. Did you not watch before 2002? Started in 1998, but WWE drags their ass on elevating people enough with two titles. Plus it makes it much harder to drop a show if it's not entertaining me since I'd still have to keep track of what's going on with the titles.
|
|
|
Post by s l i k on Aug 31, 2010 22:24:15 GMT -5
This seems unlikely.
|
|
|
Post by The Genesis of KoOS on Aug 31, 2010 22:34:36 GMT -5
For the people who keep going back to the 80's and 90's....the roster back then was smaller. If there is on World Title among all of this talent, people will be complaining that a lot of guys won't ever get to be a World Champion at that rate.
|
|
Cranjis McBasketball
Crow T. Robot
Knew what the hell that thing was supposed to be
Peace Love and Nothing But
Posts: 41,905
|
Post by Cranjis McBasketball on Aug 31, 2010 22:37:39 GMT -5
Please let this be true. FINALLY.
Waaaaaay too many titles.
|
|
Gus Richlen Was Wrong
Patti Mayonnaise
Metal Maestro: Co-winner of the FAN Idol Throwdown!
Fun while it lasted
Posts: 38,466
|
Post by Gus Richlen Was Wrong on Aug 31, 2010 22:39:52 GMT -5
no, just please, no.
i am really hoping that the tag titles are re-split and that the "unifacation" of the women's and diva's titles does not really happen.
|
|
|
Post by s l i k on Aug 31, 2010 23:01:08 GMT -5
I'd be down for the WWE and World Titles being unified, and the IC and US titles being renamed the RAW and SMACKDOWN championships.
|
|
SEAN CARLESS
Hank Scorpio
More of a B+ player, actually
I'm Necessary Evil.
Posts: 5,770
|
Post by SEAN CARLESS on Aug 31, 2010 23:32:30 GMT -5
For the people who keep going back to the 80's and 90's....the roster back then was smaller. No it wasn't. In fact, in 1997, their darkest hour financially, their roster was bigger than RAW, SD & the former ECW (WWE version) combined. Same with 1986-1991. Seriously. They had more dudes in that WM 14 tag team battle royal than they do on SD total right now. This "there's more guys now" thing is total revisionist history and fear-mongering. I sometimes wonder how many fans were even watching during either golden age, and how much of the seeming backlash is a bi-product of ignorance as to how things used to (successfully) work. (fuller tag & IC title divisions, for example.). I can understand if people LIKE the way that it is. But to say everyone would get fired, and everything would be terrible and wouldn’t work is discounting the proven history & track records of eras infinitely more successful than this two-brand/ two world champion one we currently have.
|
|
|
Post by The Genesis of KoOS on Sept 1, 2010 0:19:22 GMT -5
For the people who keep going back to the 80's and 90's....the roster back then was smaller. No it wasn't. In fact, in 1997, their darkest hour financially, their roster was bigger than RAW, SD & the former ECW (WWE version) combined. Same with 1986-1991. Seriously. They had more dudes in that WM 14 tag team battle royal than they do on SD total right now. This "there's more guys now" thing is total revisionist history and fear-mongering. I sometimes wonder how many fans were even watching during either golden age, and how much of the seeming backlash is a bi-product of ignorance as to how things used to (successfully) work. (fuller tag & IC title divisions, for example.). I can understand if people LIKE the way that it is. But to say everyone would get fired, and everything would be terrible and wouldn’t work is discounting the proven history & track records of eras infinitely more successful than this two-brand/ two world champion one we currently have. Okay then, let me reword it. There are more talented, none"enhancement" workers on the roster now than before. Not to mention, back then there were more tag team specific wrestlers than there are now. Back then you have Hogan as your top face and Hogan's feud of the month. Now you have Cena as the Hogan, but you also have guys like Orton, Hunter, Edge, Jericho, Sheamus, Taker, Kane, Mysterio, etc. who are all being pushed as top guys. Then you have guys like Miz, Morrison, Kofi, Drew, Ziggler, etc who are guys that wouldn't get much leverage into main event spots until half of those guys leave and even then it won't be guaranteed. Then considering the fact that WWE is the only "major" promotion around, some of those guys don't have an NWA to go to in order to become a main event person. Keeping both titles intact allows them to distribute talent and allow an easier access to the spotlight.
|
|
Cranjis McBasketball
Crow T. Robot
Knew what the hell that thing was supposed to be
Peace Love and Nothing But
Posts: 41,905
|
Post by Cranjis McBasketball on Sept 1, 2010 0:38:01 GMT -5
No it wasn't. In fact, in 1997, their darkest hour financially, their roster was bigger than RAW, SD & the former ECW (WWE version) combined. Same with 1986-1991. Seriously. They had more dudes in that WM 14 tag team battle royal than they do on SD total right now. This "there's more guys now" thing is total revisionist history and fear-mongering. I sometimes wonder how many fans were even watching during either golden age, and how much of the seeming backlash is a bi-product of ignorance as to how things used to (successfully) work. (fuller tag & IC title divisions, for example.). I can understand if people LIKE the way that it is. But to say everyone would get fired, and everything would be terrible and wouldn’t work is discounting the proven history & track records of eras infinitely more successful than this two-brand/ two world champion one we currently have. Okay then, let me reword it. There are more talented, none"enhancement" workers on the roster now than before. Not to mention, back then there were more tag team specific wrestlers than there are now. Back then you have Hogan as your top face and Hogan's feud of the month. Now you have Cena as the Hogan, but you also have guys like Orton, Hunter, Edge, Jericho, Sheamus, Taker, Kane, Mysterio, etc. who are all being pushed as top guys. Then you have guys like Miz, Morrison, Kofi, Drew, Ziggler, etc who are guys that wouldn't get much leverage into main event spots until half of those guys leave and even then it won't be guaranteed. Then considering the fact that WWE is the only "major" promotion around, some of those guys don't have an NWA to go to in order to become a main event person. Keeping both titles intact allows them to distribute talent and allow an easier access to the spotlight. Because upper mid card talent is bad? That's almost always where the most talented wrestlers are. Keeping both titles around lowers the value. The more champions you have, the less they all mean. Titles should be given to wrestlers based on drawing power, overness and talent. Not because it's your turn.
|
|
|
Post by The Genesis of KoOS on Sept 1, 2010 0:46:22 GMT -5
Okay then, let me reword it. There are more talented, none"enhancement" workers on the roster now than before. Not to mention, back then there were more tag team specific wrestlers than there are now. Back then you have Hogan as your top face and Hogan's feud of the month. Now you have Cena as the Hogan, but you also have guys like Orton, Hunter, Edge, Jericho, Sheamus, Taker, Kane, Mysterio, etc. who are all being pushed as top guys. Then you have guys like Miz, Morrison, Kofi, Drew, Ziggler, etc who are guys that wouldn't get much leverage into main event spots until half of those guys leave and even then it won't be guaranteed. Then considering the fact that WWE is the only "major" promotion around, some of those guys don't have an NWA to go to in order to become a main event person. Keeping both titles intact allows them to distribute talent and allow an easier access to the spotlight. Because upper mid card talent is bad? That's almost always where the most talented wrestlers are. Keeping both titles around lowers the value. The more champions you have, the less they all mean. Titles should be given to wrestlers based on drawing power, overness and talent. Not because it's your turn. Where did I say upper midcard talent is bad? I said there is no room for opportunity for other guys to become champ, because there are already so many huge established stars that would be put into the title picture. People complain enough about the main event scene and the lack of establishing new guys in it. Do you think Sheamus or Wade Barrett could get into the title picture if there was one World Title and have Cena, Orton, Jericho, Edge, Taker, Kane, Rey, etc. vying for that one title? And once again, there is no WCW/NWA, there is no AWA, hell there is no WCCW. The closest thing is TNA and they can't even sell out Expo Centers half the time. When you're the only big name promotion in town and have a roster full of huge names, having two World Titles can be helpful.
|
|
|
Post by Shaun2k5 on Sept 1, 2010 0:58:31 GMT -5
For the people who keep going back to the 80's and 90's....the roster back then was smaller. If there is on World Title among all of this talent, people will be complaining that a lot of guys won't ever get to be a World Champion at that rate. But thats what we want. Not everyone should be a champion in their career. Many greats came and went without championships and yet we remember them as legends. Why should we have a US Title that means nothing? Why should we have two champions of the company when only one is ever truly the face of the company? Sorry to the Matt Hardys and Christians of the world but they aren't World Champion material. They shouldn't be winning titles as a thank you or getting reigns to fill the cracks. The company title should be above everything else. It should be the most prestigious thing any wrestler wants.
|
|
|
Post by The Genesis of KoOS on Sept 1, 2010 1:04:41 GMT -5
For the people who keep going back to the 80's and 90's....the roster back then was smaller. If there is on World Title among all of this talent, people will be complaining that a lot of guys won't ever get to be a World Champion at that rate. But thats what we want. Not everyone should be a champion in their career. Many greats came and went without championships and yet we remember them as legends. Why should we have a US Title that means nothing? Why should we have two champions of the company when only one is ever truly the face of the company? Sorry to the Matt Hardys and Christians of the world but they aren't World Champion material. They shouldn't be winning titles as a thank you or getting reigns to fill the cracks. The company title should be above everything else. It should be the most prestigious thing any wrestler wants. No, what people want are FEWER title reigns. As in, Edge should not be a 20 time World Champ...Triple H should not be a 50 time Champ. There is also a difference between being a main eventer, getting title shots, and actually WINNING the damn thing. My whole point, which seems to be going over heads, is that for countless years we have complained about seeing the same main events over and over again with the same people. Right? Well it will get worse if there is only one major title to be fighting over.
|
|
|
Post by flatsdomino on Sept 1, 2010 1:20:42 GMT -5
I'd be down for the WWE and World Titles being unified, and the IC and US titles being renamed the RAW and SMACKDOWN championships. That's the ONLY way i would approve of it being done, is a total restructuring of the title system instead of just spreading champs across brands. Hell, just reboot everything the night after WM27 if they're gonna go through with this. Have it be the beginning of a new era, like the night after WM14. Maybe even make Triple H the new authority figure, to put a new face on it all. Have the IC title become the Championship of Smackdown, the US title become the Championship of Raw, the way the WWE and WHC AND the IC and US titles function now, for each show. Introduce new title belts across the board that night, strip the IC and US champions, and have tournaments on each show that culminate in the crowning of the first-ever Raw and Smackdown champions. However, they wouldn't be treated as the Undisputed WORLD Championship, as the Unified WH/WWE Champion is. That way, you'd create a hierarchy of champions where the champions of each brand defend their titles regularly, and are first in line for a shot at the World Champion, but also have to defend their own belts on thier own shows against EVERYONE (remember, there's no midcard belts anymore), making it harder for them to just go after the Undisputed Champion, who wouldn't defend his belt that often, making his title defenses (he doesn't have non-title matches) THAT much more special, like they were in the 80's. It'd sort of be like the NWA champion going to territories to wrestle their champion, putting his belt on the line. In addition to a further separation of the brands (except for the unified champs who are the only real crossover) I'd go with a "Ranking" system like TNA has to rank contenders, like if the Power 25 meant anything, to pick the number one contender to the Undisputed Champion. The Raw and Smackdown champions would be included in the ranking, so that they don't get the immediate first shots at the Undisputed Champion all the time. the vast majority of the time the Raw and Smackdown belts would be on the line and changing hands, but when the Undisputed Championship is put on the line, it's a HUGE deal, because the rarity of title defenses for it and the even further rarity of title changes make that belt MEAN something. Essentially, this system would also make WWE much more wrestling based in the process, and the value of that title would be HUGE. And it'd be exempt from MITB because that's brand-specific now, and this title would NEVER change hands that cheaply. Anyone who holds it is immediately on the level of a Hogan, Austin, Rock, Undertaker or Cena in terms of status, as the belt doesn't change hands very often, and is given a big-fight atmosphere when it's defended. That would go a long way in restoring the WWE title as the "Crown Jewel" of sports entertainment. ONLY the Royal Rumble winner is allowed to get an immediate boost to the position of #1 contender, and the Raw and Smackdown champions are both allowed to enter the Rumble. Now, I'm not saying this what I want to happen, the best thing that could happen, or what would happen, BUT, if the titles are unified, I'd say the way to go would just be to restructure the whole system and change the way the game is played, just like the brand split did almost ten years ago now. It's time for a new era, and a reboot of the way things are done in WWE...and I think this direction would be quite interesting to see play out, and may increase interest in the shows themselves.
|
|
MolotovMocktail
Grimlock
Home of the 5-time, 5-time, 5-time, 5-time 5-time Super Bowl Champion 49ers-and Wrestlemania 31
Posts: 13,958
|
Post by MolotovMocktail on Sept 1, 2010 1:21:59 GMT -5
No it wasn't. In fact, in 1997, their darkest hour financially, their roster was bigger than RAW, SD & the former ECW (WWE version) combined. Same with 1986-1991. Seriously. They had more dudes in that WM 14 tag team battle royal than they do on SD total right now. This "there's more guys now" thing is total revisionist history and fear-mongering. I sometimes wonder how many fans were even watching during either golden age, and how much of the seeming backlash is a bi-product of ignorance as to how things used to (successfully) work. (fuller tag & IC title divisions, for example.). I can understand if people LIKE the way that it is. But to say everyone would get fired, and everything would be terrible and wouldn’t work is discounting the proven history & track records of eras infinitely more successful than this two-brand/ two world champion one we currently have. Okay then, let me reword it. There are more talented, none"enhancement" workers on the roster now than before. Not to mention, back then there were more tag team specific wrestlers than there are now. Back then you have Hogan as your top face and Hogan's feud of the month. Now you have Cena as the Hogan, but you also have guys like Orton, Hunter, Edge, Jericho, Sheamus, Taker, Kane, Mysterio, etc. who are all being pushed as top guys. Then you have guys like Miz, Morrison, Kofi, Drew, Ziggler, etc who are guys that wouldn't get much leverage into main event spots until half of those guys leave and even then it won't be guaranteed. Then considering the fact that WWE is the only "major" promotion around, some of those guys don't have an NWA to go to in order to become a main event person. Keeping both titles intact allows them to distribute talent and allow an easier access to the spotlight. The better alternative would be to keep the top talent like Cena, Edge, HHH, Orton, etc. limited on TV appearances and have them appear only on ppv. This way, their matches are made a lot more special, and the fans tuning in every week can get behind more midcard guys who will pick up steam with more exposure.
|
|
|
Post by The Genesis of KoOS on Sept 1, 2010 1:25:09 GMT -5
Okay then, let me reword it. There are more talented, none"enhancement" workers on the roster now than before. Not to mention, back then there were more tag team specific wrestlers than there are now. Back then you have Hogan as your top face and Hogan's feud of the month. Now you have Cena as the Hogan, but you also have guys like Orton, Hunter, Edge, Jericho, Sheamus, Taker, Kane, Mysterio, etc. who are all being pushed as top guys. Then you have guys like Miz, Morrison, Kofi, Drew, Ziggler, etc who are guys that wouldn't get much leverage into main event spots until half of those guys leave and even then it won't be guaranteed. Then considering the fact that WWE is the only "major" promotion around, some of those guys don't have an NWA to go to in order to become a main event person. Keeping both titles intact allows them to distribute talent and allow an easier access to the spotlight. The better alternative would be to keep the top talent like Cena, Edge, HHH, Orton, etc. limited on TV appearances and have them appear only on ppv. This way, their matches are made a lot more special, and the fans tuning in every week can get behind more midcard guys who will pick up steam with more exposure. But we both know that wouldn't happen.
|
|
Cranjis McBasketball
Crow T. Robot
Knew what the hell that thing was supposed to be
Peace Love and Nothing But
Posts: 41,905
|
Post by Cranjis McBasketball on Sept 1, 2010 1:26:20 GMT -5
But thats what we want. Not everyone should be a champion in their career. Many greats came and went without championships and yet we remember them as legends. Why should we have a US Title that means nothing? Why should we have two champions of the company when only one is ever truly the face of the company? Sorry to the Matt Hardys and Christians of the world but they aren't World Champion material. They shouldn't be winning titles as a thank you or getting reigns to fill the cracks. The company title should be above everything else. It should be the most prestigious thing any wrestler wants. No, what people want are FEWER title reigns. As in, Edge should not be a 20 time World Champ...Triple H should not be a 50 time Champ. There is also a difference between being a main eventer, getting title shots, and actually WINNING the damn thing. My whole point, which seems to be going over heads, is that for countless years we have complained about seeing the same main events over and over again with the same people. Right? Well it will get worse if there is only one major title to be fighting over. A guy wearing a shiny belt to the ring doesn't make me want to see anyone more or less nor does it make me feel it's a "main event". John Morrison and the Miz could have just as good a match going second as they could being on 5th and having it to be over a shiny belt.
|
|
|
Post by wwebrandon2007 on Sept 1, 2010 13:28:52 GMT -5
[quote Miz has so much going on right now, there are at least five guys I can think of who should be US Champ instead. Really, it comes down to lazy writing. Lately, title reigns have been longer and more memorial for most of the major titles. I perfer that to the hot potato method of the Attitude Era. [/quote] There's a US Championship? When was It last defended anyway? When he won it back after Bret got the GM position?
|
|
|
Post by chaimwitz on Sept 7, 2010 22:14:18 GMT -5
BAD IDEA. its gonna be just liek the 80's til about 2001 when they only had 3 titles and everyone else was a jobber So Jake The Snake and Ted DiBiase were jobbers? well, when u dont hold a single wwf title......
|
|