|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Dec 19, 2013 22:20:51 GMT -5
Main event champ Midcard champ Tag team champ(s) This idea that everyone gets a belt for showing up, or being a good sport or being in a specific niche division just undermines everything. There should be one champ for each category. Otherwise they don't mean anything. At one point there were two world champions, a US champion, a hardcore champion, an IC champion, world tag champions, WWE tag champions, a woman's champion, a Diva's champion, light-heavyweight champion, cruiserweight champion, European champion... ..hell I'm not entirely sure I didn't hold at least two of them at any one time myself. You can't have belts flying around that overlap. If the US title is the midcard belt, then what about the IC, and visa-versa. Does one cancel each other out, are they both equal.If so, which one is the best? From a narrative and selling stand point you need to have ONE guy identified as the guy to beat. Not two or three a show in an absurd game of "No, I'm Spartacus" There's a two sides to this coin, imo. On one hand, I do agree that not everyone gets to be a champion. However, I also think that every wrestler should "matter" to varying degrees and absolutely no one should be made to look completely worthless. While I hate the "Everyone Gets a Trophy" mentality, at this point so many guys have held titles that it makes the guys who haven't look bad. When there are that many haves, it makes the havenots look that much worse. Imo, It just reflects badly that the likes of Curtis Axel, Ezekiel Jackson, David Otunga, or Bo Dallas (I suggested giving him the proposed new title because imo it's the only way his current gimmick will work on the main roster) have held championships and someone like Alex Riley or Damien Sandow hasn't. I'm not sure if we can go back to having only two singles titles.
|
|
|
Post by RedSmile on Dec 19, 2013 22:21:15 GMT -5
That'll make it stand out. Also, why not have it defended only on dates which contain a number to be decided as and when? I would make it the "workhorse championship" where the belt has to be defended weekly.
|
|
Chip
Hank Scorpio
Slam Jam Death.
Posts: 5,185
|
Post by Chip on Dec 19, 2013 22:23:31 GMT -5
I think two midcard singles titles is fine as long as you gimmick one of them, with how often Big E and Ambrose wrestle there's really no reason why one can't be a TV title as some have suggested.
|
|
|
Post by Starshine on Dec 19, 2013 22:28:27 GMT -5
That'll make it stand out. Also, why not have it defended only on dates which contain a number to be decided as and when? I would make it the "workhorse championship" where the belt has to be defended weekly. I think that would be too much. They'd be better off with something more flexible like having at least two defenses within a calender month. If you had weekly defenses then you run into two problems. Firstly for a guy to have a longish reign he'd have to go through a whole lot of fluff defenses which would probably end up being rating killers. Especially when you consider that the roster isn't nearly big enough to really keep a long term reign like that fresh meaning that you're either left with a long dull reign, or constant hot shot switches. Secondly, you trap the guy in a position where he can't really do anything outside of the title defenses. Remember when TNA tried it with Devon? It didn't work, and it just led to a bunch of forgettable matches for a middling, go nowhere reign.
|
|
MolotovMocktail
Grimlock
Home of the 5-time, 5-time, 5-time, 5-time 5-time Super Bowl Champion 49ers-and Wrestlemania 31
Posts: 14,007
|
Post by MolotovMocktail on Dec 19, 2013 22:29:58 GMT -5
No, it's fine with the IC as the upper midcard title and the US as the lower midcard title.
|
|
|
Post by RedSmile on Dec 19, 2013 22:31:25 GMT -5
I would make it the "workhorse championship" where the belt has to be defended weekly. I think that would be too much. They'd be better off with something more flexible like having at least two defenses within a calender month. If you had weekly defenses then you run into two problems. Firstly for a guy to have a longish reign he'd have to go through a whole lot of fluff defenses which would probably end up being rating killers. Especially when you consider that the roster isn't nearly big enough to really keep a long term reign like that fresh meaning that you're either left with a long dull reign, or constant hot shot switches. Secondly, you trap the guy in a position where he can't really do anything outside of the title defenses. Remember when TNA tried it with Devon? It didn't work, and it just led to a bunch of forgettable matches for a middling, go nowhere reign. You space the defenses out during the week. One would be a PPV, another would be RAW, another ME, another on SD. That's four. Can be easily done, without overdoing it.
|
|
jdsnelson
Don Corleone
Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
Posts: 1,714
|
Post by jdsnelson on Dec 19, 2013 22:31:31 GMT -5
I think they should both stick around. Elevate the IC title to what the WHC was (and what the IC title was in the 90s) and the US title can be the lower/midcard belt.
|
|
|
Post by Starshine on Dec 19, 2013 22:33:06 GMT -5
I think that would be too much. They'd be better off with something more flexible like having at least two defenses within a calender month. If you had weekly defenses then you run into two problems. Firstly for a guy to have a longish reign he'd have to go through a whole lot of fluff defenses which would probably end up being rating killers. Especially when you consider that the roster isn't nearly big enough to really keep a long term reign like that fresh meaning that you're either left with a long dull reign, or constant hot shot switches. Secondly, you trap the guy in a position where he can't really do anything outside of the title defenses. Remember when TNA tried it with Devon? It didn't work, and it just led to a bunch of forgettable matches for a middling, go nowhere reign. You space the defenses out during the week. One would be a PPV, another would be RAW, another ME, another on SD. That's four. Can be easily done, without overdoing it. But then how do you build to a big defense? You can't put any time into it, otherwise the next one will be meaningless. Or do you just have the same match every week?
|
|
mizerable
Fry's dog Seymour
You're the lowest on the totem pole here, Alva. The lowest.
Posts: 23,475
|
Post by mizerable on Dec 19, 2013 22:34:03 GMT -5
Let me just add, that in my perfect world of how many titles are available, I would have;
WWE title WWE tag team titles WWE IC title WWE US title WWE Cruiserweight title WWE Diva's title
This almost follows what I liked from the Attitude Era. Certainly, the belts changed hands too often, but I did find myself caring a lot when someone won the title. When they did way with almost all the titles when Triple H "unified" them all, it made the roster feel like less of a damn...and put no more emphasis on the World title. The same can be said now. Even if you eliminated the US title...the IC title isn't going to look more prestigious, especially when you have a heavy undercard that has nothing to do. Bring back the Cruiserweight title, and then you have a great hierarchy when it comes to giving direction to a lot of directionless guys.
As someone pointed out earlier, the only problem that was faced by WWE in recent years was the imaginary important World title. Now that that's gone...everyone's role should fall into place. If you're a main eventer and not feuding for the title, you'll still get main event feuds. That isn't going to happen for undercard guys. Eliminating undercard titles eliminates undercard feuds.
|
|
|
Post by RedSmile on Dec 19, 2013 22:37:53 GMT -5
You space the defenses out during the week. One would be a PPV, another would be RAW, another ME, another on SD. That's four. Can be easily done, without overdoing it. But then how do you build to a big defense? You can't put any time into it, otherwise the next one will be meaningless. Or do you just have the same match every week? You use time limit draws, enhancement talent, and build it towards the PPVs.
|
|
EyeofTyr
Hank Scorpio
Strange and Mystical
Posts: 5,744
|
Post by EyeofTyr on Dec 19, 2013 22:39:09 GMT -5
Get rid of the US title, it's useless beyond devaluing the others and continuing to enable WWE's bad habits when it comes to their mid-card titles and their mid-card in general.
|
|
|
Post by Starshine on Dec 19, 2013 22:45:38 GMT -5
But then how do you build to a big defense? You can't put any time into it, otherwise the next one will be meaningless. Or do you just have the same match every week? You use time limit draws, enhancement talent, and build it towards the PPVs. But you can't keep doing that long term otherwise it becomes too predictable. If you could space out the defenses more, but enforce them more regularly than any other title, you still get the same result with a more flexible booking strategy in play and more long term booking options. Like if you tie up the champion defending the belt every week, you also have to put time into building up a challenger. You can't just randomly give guys title matches, because then the belt loses importance. So you then have to put extra time into building up the challenger, within the same week he's defending the title. If you don't do that then it feels like everyone gets a shot for nothing. Plus the novelty of seeing a title match every week would wear off pretty quickly once fans sussed out who did and didn't have a shot of winning. They already do now. But if you complicate that with a new challenger every week it just compresses and multiplies that problem and you have a belt no one really cares about.
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Dec 20, 2013 4:25:29 GMT -5
Without better writing to actually create real feuds instead of 'I wont dis belt' 'u cant hav dis belt' 'LET'S FAGHT' I'm gonna go with no.
|
|
nate5054
Hank Scorpio
Lucky to be alive in the Chris Jericho Era
Posts: 7,016
|
Post by nate5054 on Dec 20, 2013 5:46:48 GMT -5
The US Title is beyond worthless now. I had to wiki it a few days ago to realize that Ambrose has it.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Dec 20, 2013 16:22:20 GMT -5
Yes.
WWE doesn't need two mid-card titles.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2013 16:30:45 GMT -5
I'd be all for them having two titles to give midcard guys something to do.
BUT - if this is as much as they're going to do with the US title, there's no point in even having it.
|
|
JCBaggee
Hank Scorpio
Writer, streamer. I used to write for CBR but then they fired everyone who cared about their writers
Posts: 6,788
|
Post by JCBaggee on Dec 20, 2013 18:16:00 GMT -5
Adding a new title like a Cruiserweight title doesn't help things. If we're really dying to get a tertiary belt on the program, then the NXT Champion should be allowed to defend on Smackdown once in a while.
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Dec 20, 2013 18:19:25 GMT -5
Adding a new title like a Cruiserweight title doesn't help things. If we're really dying to get a tertiary belt on the program, then the NXT Champion should be allowed to defend on Smackdown once in a while. I think kayfabe wise, it defeats the purpose of developmental if the NXT Champion comes to the main shows and defends the belt against main roster guys.
|
|
JCBaggee
Hank Scorpio
Writer, streamer. I used to write for CBR but then they fired everyone who cared about their writers
Posts: 6,788
|
Post by JCBaggee on Dec 21, 2013 1:51:29 GMT -5
Adding a new title like a Cruiserweight title doesn't help things. If we're really dying to get a tertiary belt on the program, then the NXT Champion should be allowed to defend on Smackdown once in a while. I think kayfabe wise, it defeats the purpose of developmental if the NXT Champion comes to the main shows and defends the belt against main roster guys. Make it out to be a reward. NXT Champ holds the belt so many days, he gets to defend on TV. Not necessarily against a main roster guy; this is a good opportunity to try out some new hands on TV and see how the crowd reacts to them on a national level. The point is, there's an opening for an extra belt floating around. NXT is not a big secret in kayfabe; it's mentioned, we know it exists, and I wouldn't be surprised to see another NXT Rumble where the winner gets a spot in the Royal Rumble this year. Why not take advantage of the system if you really want another belt floating around as opposed to creating a whole new tertiary title with a haphazard legacy and no existing division?
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Dec 21, 2013 2:14:20 GMT -5
I think kayfabe wise, it defeats the purpose of developmental if the NXT Champion comes to the main shows and defends the belt against main roster guys. Make it out to be a reward. NXT Champ holds the belt so many days, he gets to defend on TV. Not necessarily against a main roster guy; this is a good opportunity to try out some new hands on TV and see how the crowd reacts to them on a national level. The point is, there's an opening for an extra belt floating around. NXT is not a big secret in kayfabe; it's mentioned, we know it exists, and I wouldn't be surprised to see another NXT Rumble where the winner gets a spot in the Royal Rumble this year. Why not take advantage of the system if you really want another belt floating around as opposed to creating a whole new tertiary title with a haphazard legacy and no existing division? While I like some of the aspects of the developmental system, a BIG thing that bothers me is that WWE seems to puts too much creative focus on developmental to while neglecting certain talents on the roster. It seems as though if you're not upper midcard or higher, newly called up (or working with a newly called up guy), or a regular on NXT TV, you just aren't worth Jack shit. There's have a whole tier of guys being neglected. To me it seems like the only guys that gain any benefit from the NXT Title floating around on main roster TV are the developmental guys. Anyone who has already on the main roster doesn't seem to gain anything from it. What does the NXT Championship mean for guys like Santino, or Slater? We've seen main roster guys compete for the NXT Belts in the past, but they're largely treated as warm bodies rather than legit contenders, even guys in the midcard to upper midcard like Sandow or Cesaro. You see Kidd, Sandow, Cesaro, Jinder, Gabriel, or Riley (or in the case of female performers, Alicia Fox or Natalya) in a #1 contenders match or a title match for any of NXT's championships and you already know that they're going to lose because there's no point in them winning, and that takes the drama out of the match. There needs to be a title for them.
|
|