PDA

View Full Version : ECW/Hardcore title?

SIDRA
03-14-2009, 04:56 PM
Discussion, should the Hardcore title be brought back for ECW?

http://freepages.misc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~rberko1/Wrestling/WWF/Belts/hard.jpg

Should the ECW title be defended under the 24/7 rule?

Should the Hardcore title be unified with the ECW title?

:pThe new title is so big, it should do as much damage as a sledgehammer shot when hit with it. :p

Opinions?
Juan
03-14-2009, 04:57 PM
Naw
Xero
03-14-2009, 04:59 PM
No. It was a fun concept but doesn't fit in with the current product.
Supreme Olajuwon
03-14-2009, 05:03 PM
Should the Hardcore Championship be brought back? Absolutely.

Should the Hardcore Championship be brought back under the 24/7 rule? No.

Should the Hardcore Championship be unified with the ECW title? No. What would be the point of even bringing it back?
Xero
03-14-2009, 05:05 PM
If anything, just do the ECW title matches under "Extreme" rules. I don't (logically) understand why they don't do that, truthfully.
Supreme Olajuwon
03-14-2009, 05:08 PM
Give Jamie Noble the title and let him go nuts. A new hardcore division would be perfect for guys like Knox, Umaga, Haas, and other guys who don't have any direction but have the ability to be entertaining.
Xero
03-14-2009, 05:09 PM
We don't need another title anywhere. Too many as it is.
Supreme Olajuwon
03-14-2009, 05:11 PM
If it stays exclusively on ECW I don't see that being a problem.
SIDRA
03-14-2009, 05:48 PM
Should the Hardcore Championship be unified with the ECW title? No. What would be the point of even bringing it back?

To unify it with the ECW title. Then have the ECW title defended under hardcore/extreme rules afterword.

It would make a good storyline, give a reason why the rules changed for the ECW title, and keep the title count down.
Xero
03-14-2009, 05:49 PM
The Hardcore title is already unified with the IC title (I think). There's zero point in bringing it back.
SIDRA
03-14-2009, 05:54 PM
The Hardcore title is already unified with the IC title (I think). There's zero point in bringing it back.

Yeah, RVD did it I believe. Like I said really just bring it back as a storyline leading to the ECW title being defended under HC/Extreme rules.
mike adamle
03-14-2009, 06:03 PM
bring back the european title and give it some meaning!
Ruien
03-14-2009, 06:16 PM
Rather just have Tommy Dreamer win the title and then claim its under hardcore rules. Would make for a nice first promo, after winning the belt.
thedamndest
03-14-2009, 06:45 PM
Are Edge and Mick Foley still co-champions? Vince is lucky Mick didn't go to TNA with the belt.
Jeritron
03-14-2009, 06:57 PM
Who will be next to join the elite club?
thedamndest
03-14-2009, 07:02 PM
I would love to see 49 year old Michael Polenko hold the ECW title. He's 49 years old, playing in a rock band, and in the best shape of his life.
Savio
03-14-2009, 07:02 PM
I think a hardcore title could be nice for ECW. gives some newbies something to hold before they get the ECW title.
screech
03-14-2009, 08:01 PM
I would love to see 49 year old Michael Polenko hold the ECW title. He's 49 years old, playing in a rock band, and in the best shape of his life.

He could bring his Bowflex to the ring with him ala Crash and the scale.
Kane86
03-16-2009, 02:01 AM
I think the ECW title should only be contested under extreme rules come on its tradition.
FourFifty
03-16-2009, 04:47 AM
I would love to see 49 year old Michael Polenko hold the ECW title. He's 49 years old, playing in a rock band, and in the best shape of his life.

Not sure if WWE wants anyone with a bow flex on the roster just yet.
Not Booked
03-16-2009, 07:42 AM
Not sure if WWE wants anyone with a bow flex on the roster just yet.

You don't think Michael Cole would have one?
Krimzon7
03-16-2009, 08:53 AM
Fuck the hardcore title, it has been shat on enough. They need to bring back the TV Title, and have it defend at every ECW taping. THAT'S how you put young talent over.
Jeritron
03-16-2009, 09:04 AM
That's basically what the ECW title is. A TV title. To be honest, that's what I think it should be referred to as
Krimzon7
03-16-2009, 09:07 AM
Ok, then the stip should be added that it should be defended at every taping. That's how the greats were groomed. The IC, and US straps were used to build young talent, no?
Jeritron
03-16-2009, 09:11 AM
Yes and no.

The IC and US titles should function as the IC and US titles. That's simple, and it doesn't have much to to with this discussion or ECW in general.

The ECW title is fine functioning the way it is. Whether it is defended or not on every taping, it is used to groom stars and the holder of it is active nearly every week. It is defended often on free television, and can change hands just as easily on TV as PPV.
Having it defended at every taping by definition adds nothing to it's current capacity. It works just as well as it is right now, and that will only become a hassle and limit other types of matches and their outcomes.
Mr. Nerfect
03-16-2009, 11:23 AM
If ECW got another title, I'd like to see the ECW TV Title brought back. Some say there are too many titles as it is, but with ECW only having one official belt (OK, currently they are in position of the World Tag Team Championship, but they are only schematics), I think they could use a belt for guys like DJ Gabriel, Tyson Kidd and Ricky Ortiz to fight over. When a guy debuts on ECW, it's straight to their "World Championship," with no proper stepping stone.

A TV Title could put the ECW Title into perspective a bit more. Having a TV Champion that is ranked with the US and IC Champions could make the ECW Title look much higher than those two belts, which is where I think the WWE wants it.

I've been saying for a while that I also wouldn't mind seeing a "WWE Television Championship" that goes between all three brands, ranked as a different sort of belt to the IC and US Titles (probably below it, sort of like the European or WCW TV Titles were), with the concept of the belt being that it was defended at all televised WWE events, including PPVs.

For example, John Morrison could be the first champion. He defends the belt on RAW, then he does so that week on ECW, and then he does so again on SmackDown!. This continues until he drops the belt to whoever (let's say Finlay), who does the same thing again.

This would be good, because it helps a talent pay their dues. Having a guy work every television show is something that could really help flesh out the dedication of talent. The WWE were worried that MVP was going to take his ball elsewhere, so they gave him that losing streak gimmick. Fine, I guess, but you could also put the TV Title on the guy, and really test how much he is able to put into the business.

The whole novelty of the belt would be "how long will this guy last?" That's always there with the other championships, to a certain degree, but defending the belt at every show would raise a count, but holding the belt forever would be more noticeable than say what Shelton Benjamin has done with the US Title.

It may burn some talent out, but you could remove them from house shows, and a lot of guys work all three shows, anyway. John Morrison, The Miz and Kane do this frequently, and I get the feeling they want to showcase Evan Bourne that way.