Kane - 2 Time World Champ Now?

[CharismaInjection]

Would this be considered an actual title reign that Kane has deserved for so long?

[Pardeep 619]

Technically he is now a 2 time world champion. I'm not sure that this will be the title reign that he deserves (although Kane is long overdue a world title reign), but hey at least he's been champion longer than his first title reign.

[RVDmark]

I remember a report a while back that they wanted to put a title on Kane and he refused. Maybe this is his thankyou run, but on ECW so he is not taking the spotlight away from the younger guys, which he wqs quoted as saying.

[Londoner]

Technically he is now a 2 time world champion. I'm not sure that this will be the title reign that he deserves (although Kane is long overdue a world title reign), but hey at least he's been champion longer than his first title reign.

Heh, my thoughts exactly.

[Fox]

I'm sorry, but this new ECW Championship is not a world title. it's a brand title; little more than the European Title of the WWF, the TV Title of WCW, or the Hardcore Title in WWE.

To call John Morrison, Chavo Guerrero and CM Punk "ex-World Champions" is ludicrous.

[Loose Cannon]

agree with Fox.

[Rob]

I agree but technically it's a world title because they call it one.

[4 knuckles up]

I'm sorry, but this new ECW Championship is not a world title. it's a brand title; little more than the European Title of the WWF, the TV Title of WCW, or the Hardcore Title in WWE.

To call John Morrison, Chavo Guerrero and CM Punk "ex-World Champions" is ludicrous.

Well, the ECW Championship is a world title in regards to its history, i'd guess. Granted, its pedigree at the moment, with former champions such as the ones you mentioned, makes it feel more like a brand title, but each guy that held the belt was a talented worker. I think at the very least, you'd argue they each deserved some recognition. If not for talent, then for effort (And in the case of Chavo, perhaps as a reward of sorts for his long history of solid work).

Perhaps what i'm trying to say, is that the ECW title has the prestige, certainly. I think now, its up to Kane. If he does well in the ring, and is booked against some decent opponents who seem like a legit threat, then there isn't a reason why the his run with the belt will be no less great to watch than Ortons, or Takers.

Personally, ECW isn't that bad to watch. With Morrison and the Miz having a good run as tag champs, solid mid-carders like Elijah and Shelton, a promising looking Kofi Kingston- Not to mention old schoolers like Dreamer and Richards. ECW isn't the piece of shit brand that people like to make it out to be. Kane's potential title run should be no different.

[Theo Dious]

I remember a report a while back that they wanted to put a title on Kane and he refused.

Pfft, why would you mention something that takes away from people's ability to slander WWE?

[The Optimist]

It's close. They're beginning to talk about Kane's first win again, so it's what it is. Hopefully it's the first step to completely legitimizing the title to everyone. Really, I didn't think that Morrison/Punk/Chavo were bad champions, but it's hard to see it being more important than a midcard title since it got torn off Lashley.

[Theo Dious]

If Christian is a former World Champion because of his time in TNA, then Morrison, Punk, and Gurrerro are former World Champions due to ECW.

[Jeritron]

But at least thats the top belt of a promotion. I agree with you on some level and see what you mean, but the way the ECW title is it's more like the IC or US title than the World belts

[Mr. Nerfect]

It's really hard to judge the ECW Championship. When the belt debuted in the WWE, it was definitely a third World Championship. Rob Van Dam was announced ECW Champion along with being WWE Champion. It put the belts on equal grounds, in a way. Then when Big Show won the ECW Title, it was still the "ECW World Championship."

Bobby Lashley became ECW Champion, and the belt suffered its first blow. Lashley was getting pushed, and was involved in major angles, but it just didn't feel accepted as a World Title reign. The belt then traded back and forth between Vince McMahon (who I can't see holding a singles title that isn't a World Title) and Bobby Lashley again. Chris Benoit was then lined up to become ECW Champion.

If Chris Benoit had gone ahead and won the ECW Championship at Vengeance last year, there is no doubt in my mind that it would still be considered a World Championship. I also believe the ECW brand would be in a much better place, and that a few ECW Title matches (like Chris Benoit vs. CM Punk, for example), might have had the chance to close a few PPVs. Alas, that didn't happen, and Johnny Nitro was chosen to be ECW Champion, as he was the only guy on ECW with any kind of resume on him.

I truly believe the belt got lowered in status around this time because of the whole Chris Benoit incident. This is a carny business, with a lot of weird traditions. I think Benoit being lined up to be the next ECW Champion, and then doing what he did, kind of triggered the WWE devaluing the belt, a bit. The belt went to CM Punk, but didn't feel like the World Title win it would have if he had won it from Benoit, and the WWE actually put him on somewhat even ground with MVP in a Champion vs. Champion Match.

Chavo Guerrero then won the title, and I have no clue what the WWE was trying to accomplish. Now that Kane is the ECW Champion, I think that they are considering it a World Title again. I think they are also getting over the whole Benoit thing, too. I marked out on SmackDown! when Kane and The Undertaker were made to look like equals. Not only because Kane looked like the main eventer he should, but because the ECW Champion looked equal to the World Heavyweight Champion.

The ECW Title was marred by a lot of "first-time World Champions" winning it. Bobby Lashley, John Morrison, CM Punk and Chavo Guerrero are all great talents, but there wasn't really appropriate build with them to make them seem like World Champions when they won the belt. Hell, CM Punk didn't win a single championship before he won the ECW Title. They're all sort of in the same position JBL was when he won the WWE Championship out of nowhere from Eddie Guerrero. Was JBL a World Champion? Well, I guess you had to technically accept him as such, but it just seemed weird.

JR recently said in one of his recent blogs that the ECW Title is probably on par with the Intercontinental Championship and United States Championship. I think he is selling it short. The belt is at least higher than those, but before World Title status (semi-World Title status, if there ever was). I consider it a World Title, though.

[4 knuckles up]

It can be very easy to look a gift horse in the mouth, as the saying goes. When you have a belt thats recent history includes John Morrison, CM Punk, and Chavo, you can either go the route of: "What do these young guys do for the belt." or "Wow, the WWE pushed some talent to a world title postion."

I prefer the later.

[Loose Cannon]

I can't believe this is even an argument. I can't stand this whole brand thing. I couldn't stand it when there were two brands and I can't stand it even more now that there is 3.

The belts mean nothing anymore to begin with, but how prestigious can any title or show be when there are 3 "World Champions" within the company? It was stupid having two guys with World Titles, but now there is 3 running around.

The Brand thing worked the best when Lesner had ONE CHAMPIONSHIP and appeared on ALL SHOWS. The brand has done nothing but destroy the value of the real World Title.

Now we have this ECW Title that has been won by a bunch of midcarders in the WWF. Yes, they are all midcarders. Some even lower then midcarders to be honest. I don't care how much talent they have. Lots of guys have talent. That doesn't mean they deserve to be called a World Champion.

[Mr. Nerfect]

I can't believe this is even an argument. I can't stand this whole brand thing. I couldn't stand it when there were two brands and I can't stand it even more now that there is 3.

The belts mean nothing anymore to begin with, but how prestigious can any title or show be when there are 3 "World Champions" within the company? It was stupid having two guys with World Titles, but now there is 3 running around.

The Brand thing worked the best when Lesner had ONE CHAMPIONSHIP and appeared on ALL SHOWS. The brand has done nothing but destroy the value of the real World Title.

Now we have this ECW Title that has been won by a bunch of midcarders in the WWF. Yes, they are all midcarders. Some even lower then midcarders to be honest. I don't care how much talent they have. Lots of guys have talent. That doesn't mean they deserve to be called a World Champion.

Chavo Guerrero gets the main event treatment occasionally on SmackDown!. I agree that it is ridiculous just springing up more World Championships, but I don't see how a case can't be made for the ECW Title being at World Title level. I mean, was it ever a World Title?

If the answer is yes, and guys like Jerry Lynn can be considered World Champions, why not Chavo Guerrero?

I also did some research, and it does turn out that the ECW World Championship became the ECW Championship when Johnny Nitro won it. So that is where the line would probably be drawn between it being recognised as a World Title or not.

[Loose Cannon]

the Smackdown Title is not at World Title level imo either if you want to know. The only title that matters and means anything is the one that's on the show with the biggest guy in the company right now. The guy they push hard not just inside the ring, but outside the ring. The other two titles are just "hey we have two other timeslots during the week that need to have World Titles too" titles

[Mr. Nerfect]

the Smackdown Title is not at World Title level imo either if you want to know. The only title that matters and means anything is the one that's on the show with the biggest guy in the company right now. The guy they push hard not just inside the ring, but outside the ring. The other two titles are just "hey we have two other timeslots during the week that need to have World Titles too" titles

I'm not completely disagreeing with you. I'd rather they had one World Champion for all three brands, too. I mean, I don't know which is meant to sound like it means more "WWE Champion" or "World Heavyweight Champion." Can't we just have the "WWE World Heavyweight Champion?"

Just to clarify, though, with the SmackDown! Title being on The Undertaker, and headlining WrestleMania, and the WWE Title being on Randy Orton, and him facing a "mid-carder" on RAW in Matt Hardy, has that effected your opinion of it at all? What about when it was the title on RAW?

Is it just the WWE Title full-stop, because of its history, or is it whichever belt is on the flagship show? Do PPVs then go into account? If so, it's probably worth pointing out that I don't think the WWE Championship has closed a PPV since No Mercy last year, when Randy Orton won the Last Man Standing Match. Survivor Series was the Hell in a Cell Match, Armageddon was Edge winning the title, The Royal Rumble was the Rumble, No Way Out was the RAW Elimination Chamber, and WrestleMania was Edge/Taker.

It seems the WWE changes their title focus every three years. I'm not going to be surprised if The Undertaker and Randy Orton swap shows in the rumoured upcoming draft.

[Loose Cannon]

honesly, I just see Raw as the flagship show. Monday night has been wrestling night for the last 15 years. The very top guy in wrestling tody, John Cena, is on Raw.. Minus Taker, the most over guys in the company are on Raw. HHH, HBK, Orton. Raw is just the more high profile show and thus Raw's World Title is "The Title"

I wish Taker would throw down his Title and just come to Raw, along with Edge, Batista and CM Punk. And just have everyone else go back and forth between the 3 other shows fighting for mid card belts

[FourFifty]

Since I have the infamous Kane mask tattoo, I'll take what I can get.

TWO TIME WORLD CHAMPION!!!! YEAAAAA!

[Mr. Nerfect]

honesly, I just see Raw as the flagship show. Monday night has been wrestling night for the last 15 years. The very top guy in wrestling tody, John Cena, is on Raw.. Minus Taker, the most over guys in the company are on Raw. HHH, HBK, Orton. Raw is just the more high profile show and thus Raw's World Title is "The Title"

I wish Taker would throw down his Title and just come to Raw, along with Edge, Batista and CM Punk. And just have everyone else go back and forth between the 3 other shows fighting for mid card belts

That's fair enough. A perfectly reasonable way to look at it. If you're going to take one title from a company, it might as well be the one they put forward first.

[DaVe]

Can't we just have the "WWE World Heavyweight Champion?"

Yeah, or 'Undisputed Champion', which I always liked the name of. 3 brands, 1 champion.

[Destor]

The belt kicked ass too.

[FourFifty]

Can't we just have the "WWE World Heavyweight Champion?"

Yeah, or 'Undisputed Champion', which I always liked the name of. 3 brands, 1 champion.


....Know Your Role, please quote me on my view for the brand split since no one seems to understand....



3 Brands, 1 champion, is a GOD DAMN STUPID FUCKING IDEA!!!!!
It was bad when Lesnar was the undisputed champ and Lesnar was money on his own. I'm not going to talk about the bad storylines like the GM of one brand try to get that guy onto his show and his show only. I'm not going to talk about how you'll see Cena vs HHH, Cena vs The Undertaker, and Cena vs CM Punk all in one week because there's someone from each brand gunning for that one title. I'm not going to talk about how you'll get 5 hours of the same bullshit Randy Orton promos and restholds, or 5 hours of The Undertaker's scary lights. I'm not going to talk about how we'll get burnt out on the one champion in no time flat.


However, the cost to get that one superstar from point A to point B every week would mount up. One week Raw could be on the east coast, SmackDown/ECW is in the midwest. The champ has a match on Raw, and needs to cut a promo on SmackDown because the title should be the focal point of the main event on every show. Gotta wrestle on Raw, then on SmackDown/ECW. Let's not worry about house shows. He'll be too god damn burnt out to do a show in front of a bunch of people for no reason.
You have extra time on the road, which will be boring. There's a good chance this one guy will go alone because very few people will be hopping from brand to brand on a weekly basis.

So let's not worry about how we'll get bored with the same champion. We're bitchy enough as it is with three titles. Making one title would just cause us to bitch more about seeing the exact same shit. Let's worry about the well being of the man you want to put this burden on.

[Destor]

But the WWE title doesn't have to be the vocal point on every show. The mid card titles would be like the RAW title. it would be elevated (hopefully) to the point where it could carry the interest of the show so you wouldn't HAVE to make all three shows about the big one as the champ could only realistically have one fued on one brand at a time.

[Loose Cannon]

who said anything about having the champ guy on three brands? anybody who thinks the stupid and moranic (yea both of them) scenerio you just brought up would work is pretty dumb. Obviously, having the champ appear on all 3 shows every week would get dull.

[FourFifty]

For every slackass that will not read a post that is over 5 lines long, allow me to sum up the next post.

One major title won't work because the midcard sucks.
Even if WWE fixes the midcard and goes down to one title the guys at the main event level will have a harder time since there's a tighter space.
WWE shouldn't give solid main eventers midcard titles becasue it makes them look weak.


who said anything about having the champ guy on three brands? anybody who thinks the stupid and moranic (yea both of them) scenerio you just brought up would work is pretty dumb. Obviously, having the champ appear on all 3 shows every week would get dull.


I believe that's what'll happen if there's only one major title, and I blame it on the midcard.
The WWE doesn't have a stong enough midcard to support a main event IC or US title feud. This is by no means the wrestler's fault. It's the writers and the bookers. There's a lot of talent there, but you can't mine gold without the right tools.

So let's just have Cena, HHH, and The Undertaker in the main event scene for this. ECW is having a main event rivalry over who spilt the coffee on Kane this time to start a feud because nobody really cares about ECW. Guys like Orton, Edge, JBL, and Batista who have already been world champion will look weak with a smaller title (Hell, I feel the that way about Jericho right now). The IC and US titles are just place holders right now. Having both the US and IC champion in the money in the bank made it clear that they're just midcard titles.

In a few years I could see the WWE having just one major title and one or two more smaller titles IF the WWE can build up their midcard. The ECW title could be the WWE Hardcore title, and just do what they did with the hardcore title with the WHC title. Champion vs Chamion, winner is the WWE champion.

And one thing no one thinks of.... If you have ONE major title, think of the pissed off wrestler's you'll have. One major title means one main event, with about a dozen people who can fill it. Everyone will be trying to argue their way into that scene, and it'll be the NWA championship committee all over again. Bookers, writers, and wrestlers will push for their guy to have that title.
Edge, HHH, Cena, Orton, Jericho, JBL, The Undertaker, and others will all want that main event title. That'll be the title that says "I support this company on my shoulders." You'll have a lot of pissed off people who can't get near that title because it'll be an even tighter space.
One could say "It's a show, deal with it." However I'm sure everyone is out there to make money, and you don't sell merchandise from the midcard (upper midcard, yea, but just the midcard, not these days).

[Destor]

It's debatable, but I'm not going to get in a theoretical debate.

[Afterlife]

Is it the ECW World Title or the ECW Heavyweight Title?

[Destor]

Just ECW Title

[Afterlife]

Then I'd consider him a Two-time Heavyweight champ.

[El Fangel]

In my opinion.

World Heavyweight > WWE > ECW > IC > US

That is all.

[Afterlife]

Sounds about right. :y:

[El Fangel]

Really, I dont think the ECW title is a mid-card title, its just the worst of the world titles.

[Afterlife]

I think "worst" is a negative term. How about "Least Prestigious"?

[El Fangel]

I think "worst" is a negative term. How about "Least Prestigious"?

Works for me.

I think it was the same case as the WHC. When it first arrived I thought of it as the second prize in the business, now I wiew it as the top prize even though its on Smackdown. (could be due in part to it not fucking spinning.

[Afterlife]

LOL I hear that, brother. As I said before, give it time and Vince's ECW will be able to hold its head just as high as Raw and SD.

[Loose Cannon]

lol "the worst of the World Titles"

does anybody else see how stupid that sounds. exactly what is wrong with having 3 world champions

[Destor]

lol "the worst of the World Titles"

does anybody else see how stupid that sounds. exactly what is wrong with having 3 world champions
there isn't anyhting stupid about it. there's always been three since I can remeber. NWA > AWA > WWF. ECW > WWF > WCW. WWE > WHC > ECW. these kinds of things have always been said.

[Loose Cannon]

yea, I knew someone would bring that up. But they were different companies. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't see Raw, Smackdown and ECW as being different companies. All the titles are under the WWE wing. Having 3 World Title and Two (or is is 3, I dunno) Tag Titles just degrades and limits the drawing power of the titles. Belts should have value to them and when you have so many, they are meaningless pieces of tin.

[Destor]

But it does exactly what they intended it to do, creates competition. In a kayfabe sense look at the discussion above us. People were arguing of which band has the superior title. you can go to any forum and you'll see this debate happening every other week.

Now for my money it was damn sure a much more credible argument back in the 80's but it's the same argument. To be fair, it's just the same as comparing JCP titles to GCW titles, they were both governed by the NWA, and shared a lot of talent on special occasions. but they had seperate entitties.

Thats the WWE's goal and they get a lot of people to treat it in a very simialr way.

[The Optimist]

Ultimately, the illusion of competition is better than the lack of it. In a perfect world, ECW, Raw and Smackdown would be different brands in a much more strict sense of the word and actually try to compete with each other.

Does the TNA title mean more or less than the ECW title?

[Loose Cannon]

A lot More imo.

but yea, Destor makes a great point and I see what he's saying. I would like to see the WWE position one of the World Titles as the better of the three so you give the wrestlers the ultimate goal to aim for instead of just saying "well, I can go after 1 of 3 titles and still be a World Champion", you know?

[Destor]

Yeah one superior title is the way to go. The NWA title compared to the Mid-Atlantic chmpionship. When the NWA champion wasn't around he was the man. But once the big dog showed up he was put in his place. I'd like the WWE to work like that.

[Loose Cannon]

exactly. :y:

[Loose Cannon]

by the way, I'm making your DVD tonight and hopefully shipping it tomorrow or def Tuesday

[Destor]

Sweetness

[Lux]

Having 3 World Title and Two (or is is 3, I dunno) Tag Titles just degrades and limits the drawing power of the titles.

Theres only Two Tag titles, The World Tag Team belts and the WWE Tag belts, WWE Tag belts where brought in around 2002 when Steph was general manager after the World Tag belts went to and stay on Raw, i see how it makes sense to have two tag belts though, World Tag on Raw for them and WWE Tag for Smackdown/ECW, it works with those two

[The CyNick]

The bottom line, as dumb as it is, Kane, Chavo, Cm Punk and whatever other guys have held the ECW title are just as much former world champions as Undertaker or Triple H are.

People who have been on here a while, may already know how I feel about the whole multiple world title thing. Ive never liked it. I'm with LC that it was better when Brock was the one World Champion and went between both shows.

I'm not against the idea of "brand" champions, as long as there is one overall World Champion. So in otherwords you would have like Big Gold Belt, the ECW title and say the IC title on RAW as the "champions" of the brand. But there is one champion (WWE Champ) who reigns over the rest as the "World Champion" and goes over each show.

Doing it that way almost re-creates the old territory days. So you would have the champion only on your brand every couple of months, and he could either fued with the brand (territory) champion or other top guys.

The problem with the WWE structure is that to make that work, they would need to see all brands as equal. Clearly they have a order of RAW then Smackdown and finally ECW. That will never change unless Smackdown got on a major network or something, which likely isnt happening.

So you're stuck in a scenario where WWE will always load up RAW, and if they did have a "World Champion" he would be on RAW virtually every week.

The other option they could do is just be clear that the WWE Title and therefore the champion of RAW is the top prize. Make it that when you will the title on ECW, its like you could be promoted to SD or RAW. Or if you win the title on SD, you're ready to step up to face the top guys on RAW. I mean thats basically how it is in reality, they just cant say it because it makes SD and ECW look 2nd and 3rd rate, which would potentially hurt their ratings (at least in theory).

But regardless, they have definately made being a "world champion" mean very little. I mean at this rate, between the brands, a guy like Randy Orton will likely become a 35 time world champion.

[Testicle]

If Christian is a former World Champion because of his time in TNA, then Morrison, Punk, and Gurrerro are former World Champions due to ECW.

No, the belt that Christain won meant alot more than the WWECW title. He was carrying a company, Morrison and Punk are not.

Noid stated that, "If the answer is yes, and guys like Jerry Lynn can be considered World Champions, why not Chavo Guerrero?"

Becasue Jerry Lynn was a main event wrestler in 1999 and 2000 and was carrying a company, so was Mike Awesome, Credible and Corino.

I connect a level of a title to the quality of matches that are being performed for it. The matches that took place in ECW were much better that those that are done today.

[Afterlife]

Sure; but the current ECW has matches that shame Raw and SD.

[Loose Cannon]

match opinions are in the eye of the beholder

[Kane Knight]

No, the belt that Christain won meant alot more than the WWECW title. He was carrying a company, Morrison and Punk are shit.

[Savio]

I'd consider it a world championship that had non world championship caliber Champions. It sucks Benoit commited suicide because he found out he'd be ECW Champ.

[Kane Knight]

I consider it the Velocity Championship. I mean, they've even effectively unified the rosters, so...

[Mr. Nerfect]

No, the belt that Christain won meant alot more than the WWECW title. He was carrying a company, Morrison and Punk are not.

Noid stated that, "If the answer is yes, and guys like Jerry Lynn can be considered World Champions, why not Chavo Guerrero?"

Becasue Jerry Lynn was a main event wrestler in 1999 and 2000 and was carrying a company, so was Mike Awesome, Credible and Corino.

I connect a level of a title to the quality of matches that are being performed for it. The matches that took place in ECW were much better that those that are done today.

But how is that any different from CM Punk carrying 60 minutes of wrestling a week, as well, with merchandise sales, advertising and the like being a responsibility placed on his shoulders? RAW, SmackDown! and ECW all fall under the WWE banner, yes, but that is an hour of TV each week with its own brand name that belonged to Punk for a while.

I think people are dismissing the ECW Title a little bit. I'd definitely assume it is more prestigious than the TNA World Heavyweight Championship. What is the story behind that belt? Kurt Angle won it, Sting held it for a few days, and Angle then won it back. The ECW Title at least has its history dating back to the old-school ECW days, and has been showcased to a larger audience (henced presented as a "World Title" to a larger audience).

[Mr. Nerfect]

I'd personally love to see the WWE Championship, World Heavyweight Championship and ECW Championship unified into a WWE World Heavyweight Championship to hover between the three brands. The Intercontinental Championship then becomes permanently the property of RAW, and the United States Championship becomes the permanent property of SmackDown!. Bring back the ECW Television Championship to Sci-Fi, and maybe change its name to the "WWE Television Championship." Then you have a secondary exclusive title for each brand.

I think the World Tag Team Championship and WWE Tag Team Championship should be unified into the WWE World Tag Team Championship, just to tidy things up. The separate belt idea is good, in theory, but unifying them would make tag team wrestling look a little more prestigious for a while. At least until the WWE fucks it up.

The Women's Championship can then move around the brands at will, as well.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Unify the belts at "Vengeance: Night of Champions." The original Vengeance marked the unification of the WWF and WCW Championships, and it is meant to be, well, a "night of champions."

[Afterlife]

match opinions are in the eye of the beholder

Don't misinterperet the word "opinion".