Is there an optimal title reign length ?

[cornettesracket]

Stemming from the excellent longest lineage title thread and having seen the lists that people put up and my own recollections of the lengths of those reigns, my question to the great and good of FAN, is is there an optimal length of a reign ? 

I mean we have the one extreme of Bruno holding the WWF title for literally a decade in two reigns, and he only had two reigns because he voluntarily gave up the first one and took a break.  Backlund held it for multiple years also.

You had gagne and bockwinkel holding what some would say was the third worlds title in the AWA(and what we consider a world title is a whole other thread), for years on end. 

The was the NWA title where both the funks said “f*** this” and dropped it because being the travelling NWA champ was okay for a while but not long term. 

I realise that these titles and Reigns were in a different era in both wrestling and the world in general, but then we had the other extreme in the Monday night wars where both the WWF and WCW worlds titles were passed around on a whim. 

So, after what has been a long set up, I’m curious if there is a happy medium and if so what do posters think it is ?

[sunnytaker]

i would say 5 or 6 months is a good enough length title run. gives the champ a chance to work a title program the other top names on the heel/face side without dropping into multiple rematches or building up someone that clearly has no chance for the sake of putting a title match on.

anything less and you miss out on match opportunities unless they cram multiple title defenses a month to squeeze everyone in which doesn;t leave time for a feud to build. too long and either the same people are fighting multiple matches or people out of left field start getting title shot that have never been presented to be at that level previously.

[Mozenrath]

It depends on what you want, but I guess I'm fond of 90 days or so for a midcarder, 4-6 months for a world champion.

[thecrusherwi]

I think it depends on the reign. As long as the champion is over and there are available feuds to go to, I don’t think there is a set length. Like some reigns feel too long at four months. Some can go for over a year and still feel fresh. I think when you’re running short on challengers and/or when the champion is getting stale you need to think about getting it to someone else. Or if you just want to spice up the storyline. Austin probably wouldn’t have been any less over had he held the title for 2 or 3 years at a time, but I think taking it off him for a few weeks here and there really ramped up the heat.

[the2ndevil]

Generally, 4 months. Six at a stretch.

[The Summer of Muskrat XVII]

No, there isn’t. It should start when it needs to start, it should end when it’s right to end it. There’s no hard and fast timeline with it

[Cyno]

There are shorter reigns can feel fillery and longer reigns I wish lasted even longer. It depends on the how and not how long.

[Hypnosis]

Roster size and overall roster age should probably factor in as well with title reign lengths.

[Bo Rida]

6-9 months. More than 6 feels significant and an accomplishment but avoids the sense of being stretched out like a year plus run.

Of course it depends on how many hours of shows the promotion produces.

[Deleted]

There are way too many factors. A place like NJPW can get away with having a longer champ due to the lack of shows they do but it means that a "short" title reign of 3-6 months probably only has 1-2 defenses and sort of makes the champion look weaker than they would in another promotion where 6 months would seem like a decent length.

I'd argue the amount of shows/matches/defenses they have as champ is an easier metric to judge but even then it's truly dependent on way too many factors. It'd be like arguing what's the ideal length of a song or movie. It's hard to choose as it's so dependent on the content of the reign.

[David-Arquette was in WCW 2000]

Apr 8, 2022 19:01:31 GMT -5 thecrusherwi said:

I think it depends on the reign. As long as the champion is over and there are available feuds to go to, I don’t think there is a set length. Like some reigns feel too long at four months. Some can go for over a year and still feel fresh. I think when you’re running short on challengers and/or when the champion is getting stale you need to think about getting it to someone else. Or if you just want to spice up the storyline. Austin probably wouldn’t have been any less over had he held the title for 2 or 3 years at a time, but I think taking it off him for a few weeks here and there really ramped up the heat.

Yeah, I think Austin could easily have held the Title from winning it off Shawn to losing it at maybe Rock Bottom in December and it wouldn't have hurt his run at the top at all.

However, even though Austin lost the Title twice in 1998 they were both under screwy circumstances and this just fuelled his fire and got the crowd behind him even more.

Austin has proved that he didn't need to Title to stay popular or remain relevant. Hell, one of the biggest pops ever was Austin interfering in a match for the belt. Him just showing up was enough.

[fw91]

Depends on the logic of it all.

[Some Baritone guy IS REDEEMED!]

Depends on the wrestler. Some people can carry the belt for a year+ some can't.

Punk's 434 day long reign was widely regarded as one of the best WWE title runs in recent memory, while Roman and Lesnar's long title reigns have been polarizing to say the least.

On the other end of the spectrum Triple H's early 2000 title run was highly acclaimed in spite of only being a 4-5 month run. Anytime he got an extended run with the belt the reign was derided as boring.

It all depends on the strengths and weaknesses of the performer.

[Lizuka #BLM]

Depends on the needs of the story, though personally I think 3 to 6 is the golden period of enough to do some nice things with it and be memorable but short enough to not get too old.

Though I do think if you're doing a continuous week after week story then year long holding patterns should absolutely never happen.

[Bad Moon]

Until the next guy is ready. That's it, that's the only rule.