The Argument Against Unification

[Hawk Hart]

I wrote an article for the main site last week that got published today and I thought it would make a fun discussion, sample below.

At the end of Sunday night’s Survivor Series pay per view, the WWE gave fans something they haven’t seen in over a decade. No, not a lackluster WWE title match, it was the tease of one unified WWE Champion. As World Heavyweight Champion John Cena and corporate chosen WWE Champion Randy Orton faced off and raised their titles aloft in Boston, the implications reached further than the TD Waterhouse Arena as WWE fans worldwide wondered if the long rumored Title Unification bout was indeed in the world. As message boards lit up with many theories regarding what will happen, some plausible and some less so, but one thing was clear, the ubiquitous response from the WWE Universe was that unification is a good idea. But is it really? Would unifying the World Heavyweight and WWE titles be a decision that would best serve the interests of the company as a whole or do the answers lie elsewhere?

[Crimson]

WHC is redundant so I'm all for unification. The whole point of having the two titles was for the "two brands" and the company having two different tours for each brand. Since there's no brand extension anymore there really is no reason to have two parallel titles.
Both the Women's and Tag Titles have already been unified so it was only a matter of time.

[CATCH_US IS the Conversation]

WWE shouldn't have to half heartedly present the illusion that upper midcarders are main eventers to get them over and have them be taken seriously. That's pretty much what the World Heavyweight Championship is. WWE hasn't given up the pretense that the World Title is a top tier championship. It's just that the people competing for the WHC don't have as much star power as the ones competing for the WWE Title. We're supposed to think that the guys competing for the WHC are "top tier" talents. You even stated so when you said "World Heavyweight Champion" sounds like a more impressive accolade and that WWE should continue to trick fans into thinking upper midcarders are top guys when they really aren't. WWE can't decide whether it's a top title, or an upper midcard title. They want to have their cake and eat it too and have it be both.

If WWE wants to put talents over as potential stars, then they need to be interacting with top level talents, not segregated on an entire tier below them. Cody Rhodes would make a fine world champion. But if he's he's isolated in a bubble, and stuck feuding with Swagger and Fandango, then it really doesn't mean anything. He's just a world champion on paper.

[KobashiChop]

When there was an iron curtain between the brand, a 2-championship system worked. Now it just seems daft. retire the Big Gold Belt.

[CATCH_US IS the Conversation]

Having two world titles only enforces the idea that the midcard doesn't matter.

[Amazing Kitsune]

While it will never be perfect in the WWE, less titles means that the titles that they keep around become more important. It's also important to realize that for most of the history of there being two main event titles--only one of the titles has really been *the* main event title.

[Baldobomb-22-OH-MAN!!!]

there is literally no reason (no good one anyway) to have 2 world titles. the brand extension is over, and having 2 guys both running around acting like their belt is the one that matters makes the accomplishment of being a world champion meaningless and one belt inevtiably ended up looking like a second rate belt that did no favors for anyone who won it. the last guy who benefited from the WHC was Daniel Bryan, and with him you could argue he benefited in spite of having it.

[Baldobomb-22-OH-MAN!!!]

Dec 6, 2013 13:15:51 GMT -5 CATCH_US IS the Conversation said:

WWE shouldn't have to half heartedly present the illusion that upper midcarders are main eventers to get them over and have them be taken seriously. That's pretty much what the World Heavyweight Championship is. WWE hasn't given up the pretense that the World Title is a top tier championship. It's just that the people competing for the WHC don't have as much star power as the ones competing for the WWE Title. We're supposed to think that the guys competing for the WHC are "top tier" talents. You even stated so when you said "World Heavyweight Champion" sounds like a more impressive accolade and that WWE should continue to trick fans into thinking upper midcarders are top guys when they really aren't. WWE can't decide whether it's a top title, or an upper midcard title. They want to have their cake and eat it too and have it be both.

If WWE wants to put talents over as potential stars, then they need to be interacting with top level talents, not segregated on an entire tier below them. Cody Rhodes would make a fine world champion. But if he's he's isolated in a bubble, and stuck feuding with Swagger and Fandango, then it really doesn't mean anything. He's just a world champion on paper.

plus as we've seen, once that belt ends up around a guy's waist, WWE suddenly gets very gunshy about actually demoting him if it doesn't work out. so you have guys like Ziggler, Del Rio and Swagger (and Miz for WWE titles) who'd all make great midcarders (though Ziggler does deserve better) butwho still feel like feuding with midcarders is now somehow "beneath" them and actually moving them down seems like a terrible thing to happen to them. plus because they had 2 belts they acted like world title runs could be handed out like candy. we had an "everyone's a 'main eventer' so no-one is" product.

[Todd Pettengill]

The only reason to keep the WHC around is to boost house shows. Casual fans & families like going to a show where a World Championship is "on the line."
However, currently they really can get away with one World Title headlining the "A" live events, and have the Tag Titles be the main event for the "B" show.

[Boo!]

I'm all for it. Hopefully this'll be the opportunity they need to really promote the IC belt as something special. So many undeserving guys have held that belt over the years. There was one time when you have to be someone to get it, either in the main event or soon to be. Savage, Warrior, Edge, Jericho, Bret, Austin, Rock. And so on.

Recently, while some good guys have had it, a few times it's been passed around among guys who, with the greatest of respect to them, don't cut that particular mustard. Santino, Jackson, Cody Rhodes, Kingston, Axel - guys who aren't getting further than they've got. Scrapping one of the world titles once more elevates the secondary championship.

Soon the IC title may be sought after by the likes of ADR, Cessaro, Big Show, Punk, Ziggler, Rollins. Guys that either have been or soon will be top-level main event guys. It's a real opportunity to make the two belt holders (WWE and IC) real credible individuals that you're able to promote as opposed to having two world titles, one a consolation prize (much of the time) and an IC belt passed around people who probably half the people who buy tickets to the show won't even remember that they hold it unless reminded.

[Todd Pettengill]

Dec 6, 2013 14:56:43 GMT -5 Boo! said:

I'm all for it. Hopefully this'll be the opportunity they need to really promote the IC belt as something special. So many undeserving guys have held that belt over the years. There was one time when you have to be someone to get it, either in the main event or soon to be. Savage, Warrior, Edge, Jericho, Bret, Austin, Rock. And so on.

Recently, while some good guys have had it, a few times it's been passed around among guys who, with the greatest of respect to them, don't cut that particular mustard. Santino, Jackson, Cody Rhodes, Kingston, Axel - guys who aren't getting further than they've got. Scrapping one of the world titles once more elevates the secondary championship.

Soon the IC title may be sought after by the likes of ADR, Cessaro, Big Show, Punk, Ziggler, Rollins. Guys that either have been or soon will be top-level main event guys. It's a real opportunity to make the two belt holders (WWE and IC) real credible individuals that you're able to promote as opposed to having two world titles, one a consolation prize (much of the time) and an IC belt passed around people who probably half the people who buy tickets to the show won't even remember that they hold it unless reminded.

I don't think the IC title will be elevated as much as the Tag Belts will be. The Tag Division is pretty damn good right now, and we've all heard the rumors of Triple H being high on restructuring some focus back on to tag team competition. It makes a lot more sense for "B" shows to be headlined by the Tag Champs.

[Boo!]

Dec 6, 2013 14:59:18 GMT -5 Todd Pettengill said:

Dec 6, 2013 14:56:43 GMT -5 Boo! said:

I'm all for it. Hopefully this'll be the opportunity they need to really promote the IC belt as something special. So many undeserving guys have held that belt over the years. There was one time when you have to be someone to get it, either in the main event or soon to be. Savage, Warrior, Edge, Jericho, Bret, Austin, Rock. And so on.

Recently, while some good guys have had it, a few times it's been passed around among guys who, with the greatest of respect to them, don't cut that particular mustard. Santino, Jackson, Cody Rhodes, Kingston, Axel - guys who aren't getting further than they've got. Scrapping one of the world titles once more elevates the secondary championship.

Soon the IC title may be sought after by the likes of ADR, Cessaro, Big Show, Punk, Ziggler, Rollins. Guys that either have been or soon will be top-level main event guys. It's a real opportunity to make the two belt holders (WWE and IC) real credible individuals that you're able to promote as opposed to having two world titles, one a consolation prize (much of the time) and an IC belt passed around people who probably half the people who buy tickets to the show won't even remember that they hold it unless reminded.

I don't think the IC title will be elevated as much as the Tag Belts will be. The Tag Division is pretty damn good right now, and we've all heard the rumors of Triple H being high on restructuring some focus back on to tag team competition. It makes a lot more sense for "B" shows to be headlined by the Tag Champs.

I dont think it makes more sense at all. Tag champions have never really drawn money unless you go back to DX or Road Warriors before them but the number of tag champs that were draws are very few and far between where as you can put the IC belt on people already proven box office once you get rid of the secondary world title.

The IC belt always headlined the B shows back in the day. I don't think tag team wrestling draws. It can be entertaining and there have been some great tag teams but it's always been the singles wrestlers that are mainly responsible for getting people to part with their cash.

[Deleted]

Dec 6, 2013 15:21:36 GMT -5 Boo! said:

Dec 6, 2013 14:59:18 GMT -5 Todd Pettengill said:

I don't think the IC title will be elevated as much as the Tag Belts will be. The Tag Division is pretty damn good right now, and we've all heard the rumors of Triple H being high on restructuring some focus back on to tag team competition. It makes a lot more sense for "B" shows to be headlined by the Tag Champs.

I dont think it makes more sense at all. Tag champions have never really drawn money unless you go back to DX or Road Warriors before them but the number of tag champs that were draws are very few and far between where as you can put the IC belt on people already proven box office once you get rid of the secondary world title.

The IC belt always headlined the B shows back in the day. I don't think tag team wrestling draws. It can be entertaining and there have been some great tag teams but it's always been the singles wrestlers that are mainly responsible for getting people to part with their cash.

Well we can look at the indies or even TNA for more modern stats. The card with the exciting tag team match as the main event usually draws a bigger gate or sells more DVD's. Lots of DVD's and PPV's were sold in the 1999 - 2001 to see the legendary gimmick matches between The Hardy's, Edge & Christian, and The Dudley's then the IC title scene.

Plus it's easier to build up the tag team titles as the second most important title but possibly the hardest title to win then the IC Championship. Have a tag team that constantly beats everyone and is extremely entertaining to boot to have constant matches of the nights. The tag team is so good they could easily beat the super team or Cena and Punk because they dont have the same chemistry and teamwork skills like the tag team champions.

They sort of did that with The Shield that those three guys based on teamwork can beat any super team thrown in because they are one collective unit. They lose every singles match but they never lost when it counted. The streak was so impressive that the first team to beat The Shield was the third biggest accomplishment you could do in 2013 (only behind winning the WWE Championship and beat The Undertaker at Wrestlemania) You could argue that Daniel Bryan being the first guy to beat The Shield was a more important win for his career then winning the WWE Championship

I just think there is more interest and appeal in watching the best tag team in the world that even the two best single stars teamed up together can't beat then the guy who is the midcard champion who may or may not be a future main event player

[BayleyTiffyCodyCenaJudyHopps]

I think a unified world title is just what the midcard needs right now. There should be three tiers in WWE:
- the lower midcarders reaching for the top midcard title
- the upper midcarders that feud for that midcard title, can hang with main eventers (sometimes) and are inches away from capturing a WWE world title
- the true main eventers
And right now, there's a weird ass fourth tier competing for the WHC but not being treated as if they're on the level of the main eventers, and it skunks up the whole prestige dynamic.

World title reigns shouldn't be treated as "test runs" for midcarders like Swagger and Ziggler (I sadly say this as a Ziggler fan) anymore, they need to be exclusive to whoever WWE is fully ready to commit to and put in main events for a period of time. Ideally, it should be possible to become a Hall Of Famer without winning the WWE Title, as so many did before (Piper, Snuka, Dibiase, etc), and with a stronger IC title in the WHC's place, that can be possible again.

[Starshine]

IMO less is more when it comes to title belts. I don't think everyone should get a turn. Which is why I don't agree with people who say they should keep the World Title for guys not on the top tier level. It means more when the belts aren't traded around so widely, because when we do get someone finally winning it, it means that much more than what we've had in recent years.

I don't think Roddy Piper's career suffered because he never got a top title run. Same thing with Scott Hall. Those guys were good enough that they didn't need pity runs to bolster their careers. In most cases having one top belt means a more focused tier system, where the guy who holds it is truly the top guy in he company without any "yeah, buts" floating around.

[xxshoyuweeniexx]

I don't mind just having one world title, since yes, their should only be one for one company. When the brand split was enforced very strictly, then yeah it made sense. But over the years it just became really clear that the "B Show" gets the "B Title" and the "B plus level talent" (Thank you Steph and Hunter).

I think they've been preparing for this for a while now though. WWE's problem for years is that they couldn't book a good nontitle feud, for ANYONE outside of the leftover Attitude Era gyus and a few main eventers (by few I mean Cena and Orton). With stuff like Miz and Kofi, The Shield, The Wyatts, Tons of Funk/Truth Woods, etc, they're actually having feuds with each other. It's not every single guy, but it's a start.

[Todd Pettengill]

Dec 6, 2013 15:21:36 GMT -5 Boo! said:

Dec 6, 2013 14:59:18 GMT -5 Todd Pettengill said:

I don't think the IC title will be elevated as much as the Tag Belts will be. The Tag Division is pretty damn good right now, and we've all heard the rumors of Triple H being high on restructuring some focus back on to tag team competition. It makes a lot more sense for "B" shows to be headlined by the Tag Champs.

I dont think it makes more sense at all. Tag champions have never really drawn money unless you go back to DX or Road Warriors before them but the number of tag champs that were draws are very few and far between where as you can put the IC belt on people already proven box office once you get rid of the secondary world title.

The IC belt always headlined the B shows back in the day. I don't think tag team wrestling draws. It can be entertaining and there have been some great tag teams but it's always been the singles wrestlers that are mainly responsible for getting people to part with their cash.

Many Tag Team matches have headlined the card at "A & B" shows in the past. Throw two hot Singles Stars against the Tag Team Champions, and tickets get sold.

[angryfan]

I see both sides. Two titles will inevitably lead to one being seen as "lesser". However, unlike Attitude Era, New Generation, or Rock 'n Wrestling, there is the "WWE title" bubble where maybe five guys are considered worthy of title shots. In every other era, if you held the IC belt, you were the number one contender, and were "almost at the top".

Now? Now if you're not Orton/Cena/Triple H/Punk, no one is even seen as a contender. The WHC is the new IC title, you're the "almost there" guy.

They can (or should be) draws, guys who can headline a show. Razor Ramon, Jake Roberts, Savage, Steamboat, we had Austin-ROck feuds that drew huge cash that had NOTHING to do with the top title. Hell, put the belt on a Val Venis, D'Lo, Angle, HBK in the early 1990's, and you had a guy who, while they may not have the big belt, were in the same breath with "the guy".

Frankly, if they're insist on the WWE belt being, in essence, the exclusive prop of 2 guys, with a third in the Randy Savage position, then you have to have a secondary title (call it anything you want) for anyone else to seem like they matter in the slightest.

[bob]

2 shows, 2 belts

[kamero00]

Go back to the brand split. As a fan, I really don't want to see Cena and Orton on every show.

Put Punk on Raw(it's always going to have the higher ratings), and put Cena on Smackdown(his star power will carry the show).

When Orton took Edge's spot on Smackdown, the ratings dropped so terribly, that they had to kill the brand split.


Plus with the brand split, we actually got to see new wrestlers once in a while.