Post by joeman on Dec 27, 2007 17:39:50 GMT -5
badstreetusa said:
The WWE Intercontinental Title is one of the top 10 most respected championships of all time. It was always used as a steppingstone for guys WWE thought could make the next step in their careers (ex. Macho Man, Warrior, HBK, HHH) and also as another belt to add prestige to mid card level workers. The belt was contested in some major matches over the years, headline matches like Santana vs. Valentine, Muraco vs. Snuka, Bulldog vs. Bret, Henning vs. Bret and was treated as a huge deal all the way up until the Attitude era. Once WCW was bought out, the IC belt simply became another title in the deep pool of belts. The IC belt was not invented due to anything that had to do with Hulkamania, it was around long before Hogan, and was a major piece of the early 80's WWF puzzle. The belt has a long history with some of the greatest workers of all time holding and defending it at major PPV shows. I believe the IC belt needs to be not only kept, but reestablished as a major title. Hardy has done a good job of holding the belt but now that he has been moved into the main event circle, he should drop it to the next guy in line, Kennedy or someone along that line.IT existed before Hulkamania, but it main purpose was for a person with a title to show up on house shows when the World champion is there. During Hulkamania, this was extremely important.
Also, it was not a steppping stone for new main eventers the first person went up to World status was Macho Man, and this was 8 years after the belt was made.
Lastly, someone mentioned there is no distinguishable function between the IC and World belts, which is stupid for wrestlers to fight over kayfabe wise. At least when regional promotions still existed, a US title meant that the title is fought in the US while the World title is fought everywhere. Also, during that time, there was ranks. Nowadays, bookers arbitrary pick who becomes IC or World title holders based on inside judgement on whoever is "over."