Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2013 18:01:40 GMT -5
I've wanted those belts unified forever, hell the original brand split killed my interest in wrestling. But lately, the WWE title just feels like an untouchable, incredible achievement. Since Punk won it from Del Rio at Survivor Series '11, that title has meant more than it has in a long, long time. Even when it wasn't main eventing shows, Punk was booked very strongly, and it was known that he was the man to beat in the WWE.
Meanwhile, the World title has lost it's luster, but it's still a coveted title. When Big Show, Randy Orton, Sheamus, Mark Henry, Dolph Ziggler, and Alberto Del Rio are fighting over a belt, it means something. But those guys are fighting over what has become a clear second to the WWE title, which makes the WWE title look great. Sacrificing some of the WHC's juice has helped them re-establish the WWE title as THE prize in pro-wrestling.
Maybe WWE does know best sometimes.
|
|
BigWill
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 16,619
|
Post by BigWill on Apr 30, 2013 18:05:06 GMT -5
The WWE title has always been seen as the prize in pro-wrestling. It never needed re-establishing.
|
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Apr 30, 2013 18:18:37 GMT -5
The WWE Championship doesn't feel like an "untouchable achievement" to me. To me it feels like more like the World Heavyweight Title exists to placate their upper level wrestlers. Like WWE doesn't want them headlining shows, but still want to present them as "top guys".
The presence of a second world title enables them to keep the WWE Title revolving around the golden boys and no one else. It's "okay" to keep the WWE Title on Cena/Punk because everyone else has this other "world title" to go after to keep them satisfied.
Someone else on this board even described the WHC as "It's for everyone they like who isn't Cena".
I found this post on another board that best describes the state of the WHC and the SmackDown brand as a whole:
"SmackDown is like a graveyard for failed pushes. Sheamus, ADR, Swagger, and then guys like Orton, Show and Henry who can't be involved in major feuds on Raw for whatever reason. It's like a vortex, these guys aren't good/relevant enough for the main event but for whatever reason WWE still wants them to be stars, so they stick them on SmackDown where they can be protected for no reason and compete in meaningless filler feuds with one another in a seemingly endless cycle.
If they are going to persist with this then what they need is for everyone involved to be in the hunt for the WHC. At the moment Ziggler, Del Rio and Swagger are the only people in the WHC picture, while everyone else wrestles meaningless matches seemingly oblivious to whatever else is happening and uninterested in the title. It's ridiculous that a guy like Orton hasn't had a title match for 18 months and doesn't seem to care. Sheamus dropped the title to Big Show and now seems to have forgotten that it exists. At some point the sitcom writers lost sight of what they were trying to achieve and now the show is written like a sitcom, with the characters only really interacting with whoever they happen to be feuding with at that time, and one of these feuds happens to contain the WHC. It also doesn't help that the show is used solely as a vehicle to try and promote a single stale, substandard face. First it was Orton, then Sheamus and now Del Rio. The show is entirely centered around making one of these guys look good, meaning that it's extremely predictable and tedious. We talk about Cena being shoved down people's throats on Raw but Smackdown is far worse in that regard, it's pretty much just become a vain attempt to retain credibility for guys that they know wouldn't be able to hack it in the true main event scene on Raw."
|
|
PKO
King Koopa
Posts: 12,613
|
Post by PKO on Apr 30, 2013 18:40:40 GMT -5
I think this is a good point. The WWE title feels bigger now than it has for years to me.
I also really like having the WWE title as "THE" title and the World title one step below. They just need to get rid of one of (or unify) the US/IC titles and focus that division so it gives the midcard something to sink their teeth into. I don't like that they've both become enhancement titles to make the World Title scene look good; "Here comes the US/IC champion, time for him to lose to Alberto, Dolph, Swagger, Sheamus, Orton or Show".
|
|
BigWill
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 16,619
|
Post by BigWill on Apr 30, 2013 18:49:36 GMT -5
I think this is a good point. The WWE title feels bigger now than it has for years to me. I also really like having the WWE title as "THE" title and the World title one step below. They just need to get rid of one of (or unify) the US/IC titles and focus that division so it gives the midcard something to sink their teeth into. I don't like that they've both become enhancement titles to make the World Title scene look good; "Here comes the US/IC champion, time for him to lose to Alberto, Dolph, Swagger, Sheamus, Orton or Show". That really wouldn't work, having 2 world titles and 1 midcard title. Despite the Heavyweight Title still being treated as bellow the WWE Title, the superstars that go after it are still booked as main eventers. The way you're proposing it, there'd end up being more people treated as main eventers than as midcarders, as you'd have to cut the midcard division in half, because there's only one card between them. And it makes no sense having twice as many main eventers as midcarders. |
|
BigBadZ
Grimlock
The Rumors Are All True
Posts: 13,923
|
Post by BigBadZ on Apr 30, 2013 18:49:44 GMT -5
I don't see being WHC as a prestigious accomplishment at all. It's been very well known that the WHC is a long ways away from the WWE title but I can't remember a time when I wanted to see someone become WHC. IMO, the structure of importance goes like this:
Cena feud
Undertaker WM streak match(not year round obviously)
WWE Championship
WWE title Money in the Bank
World Heavyweight Championship
Don't get me wrong, I think the physical WHC belt is the best looking title belt and the belt's history is mostly amazing but in WWE, it's nothing. I think the last straw for me was when HBK wanted the rematch with Undertaker and said he was going to win the Royal Rumble so he could face Undertaker, not about winning the WHC.
|
|
PKO
King Koopa
Posts: 12,613
|
Post by PKO on Apr 30, 2013 19:38:52 GMT -5
I think this is a good point. The WWE title feels bigger now than it has for years to me. I also really like having the WWE title as "THE" title and the World title one step below. They just need to get rid of one of (or unify) the US/IC titles and focus that division so it gives the midcard something to sink their teeth into. I don't like that they've both become enhancement titles to make the World Title scene look good; "Here comes the US/IC champion, time for him to lose to Alberto, Dolph, Swagger, Sheamus, Orton or Show". That really wouldn't work, having 2 world titles and 1 midcard title. Despite the Heavyweight Title still being treated as bellow the WWE Title, the superstars that go after it are still booked as main eventers. The way you're proposing it, there'd end up being more people treated as main eventers than as midcarders, as you'd have to cut the midcard division in half, because there's only one card between them. And it makes no sense having twice as many main eventers as midcarders. That's already basically the case now anyway. The midcard titles are hardly used to highlight the midcard and more as a tool to make the World Title scene look good. They're superfluous and it's sad. The midcard is proabably at its worst point since I started watching WWE. I'm not looking at the World Title as a main title. The WWE is the main title. The World Title is presented as important, but it ain't a main title and hasn't been for a while. It's esentially what the IC title was when it was important, and I like that. It feels like a title that a big guy like Sheamus or Big Show would want, and yet it feels like a guy like Kofi could feasibly win it given a chance. Ideally I would have: WWE Title - for the Main Eventers World Title - for select Main Eventers and Upper Midcarders US/IC Title - for select Upper Midcarders and Midcarders Tag Titles - for the Upper Midcarders and Midcarders There would be blurring between the divisions. There would be guys who would go solely for each title (ie. Cena sticks to the WWE Title) but then a guy like Sheamus could go for the WWE or World Title, Kofi could go for the World or US/IC Title etc. Really, I like what they're doing with the WWE and World titles, it's the US and Intercontinental titles that need work, but then we get more into how WWE is screwing over half of it's roster which is a separate issue to the title picture. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2013 20:13:07 GMT -5
One thing I'd like to see them do is get rid of the WWE title Money In The Bank match. It would further put over that belt, you can't win it on some bs cash-in like Del Rio and Miz did. Keep the MITB for the WHC and use it to springboard someone into contention for that title, someone they want to push that hasn't done much in a while. It would also give that title an identity and a sense of chaos. In turn, drop the whole pretense of "which title will the Rumble winner go for?" when the WWE title is such an obvious choice. Del Rio and Sheamus winning the Rumble and curtain-jerking Mania hurt the Rumble's stock.
|
|
|
|
Post by keepinitreal365 on Apr 30, 2013 20:20:42 GMT -5
One thing I'd like to see them do is get rid of the WWE title Money In The Bank match. It would further put over that belt, you can't win it on some bs cash-in like Del Rio and Miz did. Keep the MITB for the WHC and use it to springboard someone into contention for that title, someone they want to push that hasn't done much in a while. It would also give that title an identity and a sense of chaos. In turn, drop the whole pretense of "which title will the Rumble winner go for?" when the WWE title is such an obvious choice. Del Rio and Sheamus winning the Rumble and curtain-jerking Mania hurt the Rumble's stock. How did Del Rio and Sheamus winning the rumble and being in the opening match at WrestleMania hurt the Rumble's stock? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2013 20:28:26 GMT -5
One thing I'd like to see them do is get rid of the WWE title Money In The Bank match. It would further put over that belt, you can't win it on some bs cash-in like Del Rio and Miz did. Keep the MITB for the WHC and use it to springboard someone into contention for that title, someone they want to push that hasn't done much in a while. It would also give that title an identity and a sense of chaos. In turn, drop the whole pretense of "which title will the Rumble winner go for?" when the WWE title is such an obvious choice. Del Rio and Sheamus winning the Rumble and curtain-jerking Mania hurt the Rumble's stock. How did Del Rio and Sheamus winning the rumble and being in the opening match at WrestleMania hurt the Rumble's stock? Used to be that winning the Rumble meant you were in the main event of WrestleMania, you were the focus of everything. For them, they won the Rumble to wrestle for a secondary title in the first match. That makes winning the Rumble not feel as important. |
|
|
|
Post by keepinitreal365 on Apr 30, 2013 20:33:41 GMT -5
Ok i see your point.
|
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Apr 30, 2013 21:12:01 GMT -5
The World Heavyweight Title can't even get top billing on its own brand anymore. Either Sheamus/Henry/Orton/Show, or random Shield antics (sure its involving Undertaker but still) are more important than the title. The WHC sucks up all the contenders for the other titles. Ditch it and disperse Orton, Sheamus, Show, Henry, Ziggler, Swagger, and Del Rio between the WWE and IC Title scenes. Keep the U.S. Title (or ditch it and bring in a new belt), for the likes of 3MB, Santino, Ryder, etc. to fight over.
|
|
|
|
Post by CourtesyFlush on May 1, 2013 3:50:46 GMT -5
The world title is garbage. WHC is the equal of the ECW championship belt when ECW was on the SYFY channel . Does anyone remember ECW on SYFY? Yea, Matt Hardy had that belt. Cased closed. The belt is truly beneath Dolph Ziggler. He finally gets his big moment and he gets it by pinning a mid carder! Its a mid card belt now, sad but true. WWE has no respect for the belt, why should we? I remember asking myself, how can Swagger and Mark Henry be "HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPS"?! Ohhhhhhhh, it's because that belt don't count no more. RIP WHC.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on May 1, 2013 4:35:44 GMT -5
The WHC damages both the WWE Championship and the IC title. It dilutes the significance of the former, and occupies a space as the secondary title that the latter should fill. WWE need to get rid of the WHC because it's detrimental. The US title also needs to go. WWE basically only needs three titles, the WWE Championship, the IC title, and the Tag Team titles. I exclude the women's title because it's meaningless and WWE will never take it seriously.
|
|
blues
Team Rocket
Posts: 931
|
Post by blues on May 1, 2013 6:02:31 GMT -5
Rank belts in pro wrestling after prestige please? Does any belt in any other organization even beat the US title in WWE? Right now it does not really feel that way.
|
|
|
|
Post by WBL a.k.a. Mountie II on May 1, 2013 11:21:08 GMT -5
Rank belts in pro wrestling after prestige please? Does any belt in any other organization even beat the US title in WWE? Right now it does not really feel that way. You've got to consider, however, that a lot of the US title's 'prestige' comes from a different federation. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2013 18:30:33 GMT -5
Rank belts in pro wrestling after prestige please? Does any belt in any other organization even beat the US title in WWE? Right now it does not really feel that way. You've got to consider, however, that a lot of the US title's 'prestige' comes from a different federation. The way they're using the WHC is pretty much how WCW used the US title. Guys like DDP, Giant, Luger, Booker T, and Bret Hart held it. It was a title for main eventers that weren't the main focus at that time. I do wish there were a few more people involved in the WWE title picture besides Cena/Punk/legends/random dude that month, but I have come around to the function of the WHC. With a few tweaks it could be even better, they still have to figure things out in the post-brand split era going forward. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2013 18:42:37 GMT -5
Another reason why the WWE Championship feels so important is because the champion is usually the only champ on the show who's actually booked correctly. They open/close nearly every show, win a majority of their matches, are involved in storylines that actually matter and are only made to look weak when needs be.
Compare that to the World, US or IC Champs who are jobbing out every other week in non-consequential matches and the difference is huge.
|
|
|
|
Post by Can you afford to pay me, Gah on May 1, 2013 19:06:49 GMT -5
The WWE title has always been seen as the prize in pro-wrestling. It never needed re-establishing. Not really true. The World title was the title the first couple of years into the draft. Look at 2003 to 2005 which belt was being the feature title? It didn't change until Cena became champion and went to Raw with it. Because Cena became the face of the WWE. Before that outside of WM XIX The WWE title wasn't the belt. Just remember which belt was in elimination chambers and ext in the early going. For a while they where about even until really when Edge retired. Think about WM 24 which title was in the ME and which title match was talked about Taker vs. Edge or HHH vs. Cena vs. Orton? Yeah nobody hardly takes about that match when you think about that show. Its the Taker match and the Flair/HBK match. |
|
agent817
Fry's dog Seymour
Doesn't Know Whose Ring It Is
Posts: 21,263
|
Post by agent817 on May 1, 2013 19:07:45 GMT -5
This comment of mine gets no-sold all the time, but does anybody remember how back in the early-to-mid 2000s, it seemed like the world heavyweight title had more prestige? Think about it. The main event at Wrestlemania XX was for the world title, same with WM21. Also, the fact that kayfabe-wise Chris Benoit came to Raw after winning the Royal Rumble to compete for the world title. It was almost as if they glorified the world title over the WWE title. I could only guess because the world title was on Raw during that time and Raw IS the A-Show.
Now that I think about it, how much prestige did the world title have back in 2008? It was on Raw during that time, right?
|
|
