There are 9 titles in the WWE

[The Ichi]

How can anyone say there aren't enough??? I never know who half of the champions are most of the time because I never see them defend the belts.

[tequilamokinbrd]

My Idea?


Raw:

WWE Champion
IC Champion
WWE Tag Champions

Smackdown:

World Heavyweight Champion
US Champion
World Tag Champions

ECW:

ECW Heavyweight Champion
WWE Women's Champion
WWE Cruiserweight Champion





The Women's and Cruiserweight belts could still be challenged for by non-ECW wrestlers, but the belts stay on ECW, so if you win one, you stay with the belt and the guy you beat goes to either Raw or Smackdown, depending on where you were at the time that you challenged him.






Yeah, that's what'd I'd do.

[Joekishi]

Women's title is just for the women. So that stays.

Otherwise I think all the titles for the shows are just enough. I think all title holders should hold the titles they hold.

[JMA]

Ideally, I'd like to see five championships: The Undisputed Championship, the Intercontinental Championship, the United States Championship, the Tag Team Championship, and the Women's Championship. And the championships could be defended on all the shows too.

[Deleted]

I think they should unify the WWE and World Heavyweight Titles, as well as the Tag Team Titles.

Raw gets the Intercontinental Title.
Smackdown gets the United States Title.
ECW gets the ECW title and the revived Cruiserweight Title(since most of the cruiserweights wrestle there anyway.)
The unified World Title is defended on Raw and Smackdown.
The Tag Team and Women's titles are defended on all 3 shows.

[chunkylover53]

I would tone it down to 4 or 5 titles, all interpromotional.

Undisputed
Intercontinental
European(if a third-tier belt is needed)
Tag Team
Womans

[nealo]

theyve got rid of the CW ttle and bringing in another. probably hardcore for ecw!

[A Platypus Rave is Correct]

I have no problem with a world champ on each brand, so the number is fine with me.

However, if they drop one set of tag titles I wouldn't shed any tears.

[perpetualn00b]

Hmmmmm.....

Undisputed Title (defended only on PPV)
Intercontinental Title (RAW exclusive)
US Title (SmackDown! exclusive)
ECW Title (ECW exclusive)
Women's Title (interbrand)
Tag Titles (interbrand)
Television Title (interbrand)

Seems to cover all the bases.

[Randy Barber 4-Life]

curryman said:

How can anyone say there aren't enough??? I never know who half of the champions are most of the time because I never see them defend the belts.

Same here, especially the tag champs. But I just don't think the amount of titles is the problem. Each show has two hours a week, that's more than enough time to build three separate title feuds. More titles than time isn't the problem, it's that there are people in charge that don't know what to do with anything but the main belt. Trimming down the belts isn't addressing the real problem, it just makes it less noticeable.

[Hassan bin Sober]

1. Unify the WWE, World, and ECW belts into one undisputed WWE title.

2. Get rid of ECW brand (it's going to happen anyway).

3. Unify the 2 tag belts.

4. Get rid of the US and IC belts (nothing more than a cheap prop these days)

5. Get rid of Crusierweight belt. (Maybe replace it with something similar to TNA's X Division)

6. Keep Women's title.

7. Create 2 new belts: RAW CHAMPIONSHIP and SMACKDOWN! CHAMPIONSHIP

8. Have the 2 new belts be THE main title for their respective brands.

9. Put Undisputed WWE title on the line only once a year at Wrestlemania. Match would be between current RAW Champ, Smackdown! Champ and winner of Royal Rumble. Previous WWE champion does NOT get to automatically defend title next year (basically it would be like MLB).

[Jay Peas 42]

No, no, no. You are looking at it all wrong. How many Superstar Tiers are there, then you work on the titles. Titles are just plot devices, something to fight over. There are
1. Raw Main Eventers.
2. Smackdown Main eventers.
3. Raw Midcarders
4. Smackdown Midcarders.
5. Raw Tag Team Division
6. Smackdown Tag Team Division.
7. Crusierweight Division.
8. Raw Women's Division.
9. Smackdown Women's Division.
10. ECW Singles
11. ECW Tag
12. ECW Vixens
13. King of the Ring Court (Special)

The real questions are;

1. What is the mininum and maximum number of wrestlers needed to support a tier?
2. Which tiers are too shallow or too deep and require either consolidation or division?

Having said that, I think that the World Title should be consolidated. The World Title should only be defended at the Main Event of a Pay Per View, and brand PPVs are gone, leaving three main events, which doesn't work. You also don't have that many main eventers, given us title reigns like the Great Khali, which should never happen.

I think that the Tag Team Division and Women's Division should be consolidated. If they are not consolidated, there should be one roving champion. It worked in the NWA, and it would freshen the title reigns. People would pay more to see Beth Phoneix beat up, say, Victoria, than see her beat up Mickie James again.

[HRH The KING]

Merge the brands.

Yeah, it means I'll have to see HHH twice a week, but if that means I won't have to see Snitsky at all, I'll willing to make that trade.

Then, all you need are the following:

1- A heavyweight title
2- A mid-card title
3- A tag team title
4- A lighter weight title

5- A hardcore title for everyone who doesn't fit into the other four divisions.

Women could still wrestle, but would have no title.

[Real Folk Bruce]

WAY WAY too many. They need to seriously trim the titles. If their
wasn't a brand-extension I would push for 4 titles.

World Championship,Intercontinental,Tag titles,Womens titles.

[bigmackdaddy]

WWE title + World Heavyweight title + ECW title = WWE World Title

US title + Intercontinental title = WWE North American Title

Wold Tag-Team title + WWE Tag-Team title = WWE World Tag Title

Eliminate the Cruiserweight title

Keep the Women's Title

[carter 15]

Four titles will not work with roster split. It's easy to say their is way too many titles when you look at the list, but counting the fact that the WWE roster is twice the size it was during its "Glory" days, for the most part it's needed.

Though imo, i do think one of the Tag Team Titles could be gotten rid of. Just limit the Tag Division to one brand, making neccessary depth for a good division.

[Throwback]

each brand has a heavyweight champ, a mid carder champ and a "special champ" (crusierweight and womens)

I think that's just enough.

[default]

I think there's enough. Two hours a week is enough for four titles. One hour is enough for one or two. They just need to better utilize some of their titles and divisions is all.

[The Summer of Muskrat XVII]

When you have a roster of upwars of a hundred people, you should easily be able to get 9 belts over. I not that there is to many belts, it's that creative doesn't know/doesn't want to push the titles properly on a consistant basis. Because really, if you have only 3 or four belts, 5 hours of television a week, that gives 3 or 4 title fueds, and the rest a bunch weakly written grudge matches. They need the titles to give the midcarders a reason to fight, otherwise we get crap like when someone spilled coffee on Kane and it became a huge feud

[Joekishi]

the US title is the best booked title in WWE, if it wasn't for MVP's heart condition stunting his fued with Hardy, I think the fact that he's US champ would be more important than his tag tiitle run.