View Full Version : IYO: The World Heavyweight Championship
http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z83/joshlmendoza_2007/wwe%20champions/KurtAngle-2006-WorldHeavyweightCham.jpg
Is the World Heavyweight Championship slowly losing it's importance. Although billed as being equivalent to the WWE's WWE Championship, it is no secret that the World Heavyweight Championship is being laid off the main event scenario for quite a while.
Don't get me wrong. It has been a part of the so called "co-main event" styling of the WWE over the year 2011, but it has never been the last match on the card for any major event of the current year, other than that of Super Smackdown Live.
In your opinion: Has the World Heavyweight Championship lost it's importance when compared to the days when it was held by wrestlers such as Triple H, Shawn Michaels, Bill Goldberg, the Undertaker and that guy from Alberta?
Here are the results for this year's pay per view World Heavyweight title bouts:
Royal Rumble: Edge (c) defeated Dolph Ziggler via pinfall (opener).
Elimination Chamber: Edge (c) defeated Rey Mysterio, Wade Barrett, Big Show, Kane and Drew McIntosh in an Elimination Chamber match (second match on the card).
Wrestlemania XXVII: Edge (c) defeated Alberto Del Rio via pinfall (opener).
Extreme Rules: Christian defeated Alberto Del Rio in a ladder match to win the World Heavyweight title for the first time in his career (third last on the card).
Over the Limit: Randy Orton (c) defeated Christian via pinfall (third last on the card).
Capitol Punishment: Randy Orton (c) defeated Christian via pinfall (third last on the card).
Money in the Bank: Christian defeated Randy Orton (c) via dq to win his second World Heavyweight Championship. (second last on the card).
SummerSlam: Randy Orton defeated Christian (c) via pinfall to win the World Heavyweight Championship. (second last on the card).
P. S. Is anyone digging the ruby coloured back of the World Heavyweight Championship?
St. Jimmy
09-01-2011, 05:47 PM
It hasn't been important for a long time. Christian winning it did it no favors.
I remember a certain member comparing it to the status of the Intercontinental title in the 80s.
St. Jimmy
09-01-2011, 05:50 PM
Yeah, I remember when Honky Tonk Man would lose it every show and then win it back at the next one.
St. Jimmy
09-01-2011, 05:51 PM
Oh wait, that never fucking happened. He held it for 454 days instead.
St. Jimmy
09-01-2011, 05:52 PM
Then he lost it for a day to Dolph Ziggler or Jack Swagger.
St. Jimmy
09-01-2011, 05:52 PM
Oh no wait, that never fucking happened either.
It hasn't been important for a long time. Christian winning it did it no favors.
I believe that they are trying resurrect it's image by gifting it to Mark Henry as a token of their appreciation for hanging around for so long.
Pretty much the same for every belt, not just WHC.
St. Jimmy
09-01-2011, 05:54 PM
Pretty much the same for every belt, not just WHC.
They've been doing a good job making the WWE title look important. Even the transitional WWE title reigns look legit most of the time.
<iframe width="560" height="345" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ekzZYIZMb48" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Just give him the damn title :'(
St. Jimmy
09-01-2011, 05:56 PM
the Internet Championship has a better track record than the WHC right now. Sad.
Lock Jaw
09-01-2011, 06:01 PM
In your opinion: Has the World Heavyweight Championship lost it's importance when compared to the days when it was held by wrestlers such as Triple H, Shawn Michaels, Bill Goldberg, the Undertaker and that guy from Alberta?
Most of the names you have mentioned were from when it was on RAW. The belt on RAW is always going to be their "main" belt.
Most of the names you have mentioned were from when it was on RAW. The belt on RAW is always going to be their "main" belt.
As a matter of fact, I remember Jim Ross calling it "the richest price in our industry".
Joesgonnakillyou
09-01-2011, 07:00 PM
You answered your own question in your first post.
IMO It's not the most important title, but it's still important.
captaincharismark
09-01-2011, 07:40 PM
It hasn't been important for a long time. Christian winning it did it no favors.
WTF? Christian is a credible champion, but WWE always screws him over from a booking standpoint. Not his fault that WWE treats the WHC as being inferior to the WWE Title.
Names that made the WHC lose it's credibility would be guys like David Arquette and The Great Khali....
Most of the names you have mentioned were from when it was on RAW. The belt on RAW is always going to be their "main" belt.
This.
Personally, I do see the WHC as "below" the WWE Title and I think it's booked as such. But I could care less about it's "importance" (or how the champion is booked) when there are matches like the ones Christian and Orton have been having.
captaincharismark
09-01-2011, 08:09 PM
Yeah, as long as the fueds for the WHC are interesting and good, the WHC will be as prestigious as the WWE Title imo...
Aguakate
09-01-2011, 08:21 PM
The WHC lost its "importance" a long time ago...
...it's been playing second fiddle to the WWE Title for YEARS now.
Rammsteinmad
09-01-2011, 08:25 PM
Whichever title is on Raw will be the WWE's main title.
However, the World Championship has always been my favourite belt. Since it's days in WCW. It perfectly symbolizes what a world championship should look like.
Aguakate
09-01-2011, 08:27 PM
Triple H was the WWE Superstar who really gave prominensce to the WHC...
...when he was Champion, or a contender, is when the WHC was at its best.
St. Jimmy
09-01-2011, 09:26 PM
WTF? Christian is a credible champion, but WWE always screws him over from a booking standpoint. Not his fault that WWE treats the WHC as being inferior to the WWE Title.
Names that made the WHC lose it's credibility would be guys like David Arquette and The Great Khali....
He won in it a ladder match after Edge distracted Del Rio.
He won it by being KICKED IN THE BALLS.
FFS, Seriously. Be a mark for someone credible.
Yeah, as long as the fueds for the WHC are interesting and good, the WHC will be as prestigious as the WWE Title imo...
Unless they're making Christian look "bad", right?
XCaliber
09-01-2011, 11:10 PM
This is because SD isn't the flagship program plain and simple as that when the WWE Championship was on that show it was same case.
captaincharismark
09-02-2011, 03:49 PM
Unless they're making Christian look "bad", right?
What exactly would you consider "burying" a character to be??? Cause IMO, having him win the belt, and lose it two days later is burying a character. Then, doing a long, drawn out fued, where week after week, his character is being sold as the guy who can't beat Orton one on one. Another form of burying a character. Not to mention the fact that his heel turn gave him zero momentum or any sort of upper hand in the fued. Again, making the fued look pointless and another way of making Orton look superior to Christian.
Seriously, sometimes I wonder why WWE marks can't see the obvious. And that is, for years, WWE has buried Christian and will continue to do so. Of course, most fans here wouldn't know a talented guy if they saw one. According to fans here, Daniel Bryan sucks and he's IMO one of the most talented new comers to step foot in WWE in a while. Coincidentally, he's also being buried in the form of Cole's commentary and in most of his matches...
captaincharismark
09-02-2011, 03:51 PM
He won in it a ladder match after Edge distracted Del Rio.
He won it by being KICKED IN THE BALLS.
FFS, Seriously. Be a mark for someone credible.
Spoken like a true WWE mark.....
If you wanna mark out ignorantly and not reconize flaws, go ahead. As for me, I tend to appreciate wrestlers that are more talented than the guys WWE tries to force down my throat.
drmayberry7
09-02-2011, 06:29 PM
Jack swaggers reign didn't help the belts credibility either
Anybody Thrilla
09-02-2011, 06:58 PM
Jack Swagger's reign was fine.
captaincharismark
09-02-2011, 07:03 PM
Jack swaggers reign didn't help the belts credibility either
Much like Christian, Jack Swagger's reign was fine, it was shitty booking that fucks up the credibility of the WHC. One minute he was in the main events, and the next he can't win a match on Superstars. It's no wonder WWE can't find the next breakout star with such inconsistency. Either someone deserves to be in the main events or they don't. How credible does the belt look if someone who held it a year ago can't win a match now???
St. Jimmy
09-02-2011, 11:02 PM
Seriously ABT? Really?
You don't want to argue about Swagger's World title reign with ABT and Guru Dave.
Shisen Kopf
09-03-2011, 12:08 AM
Jack Sthwagger was a horrible champ. I don't get why the guy is still around. He looks awkward in the ring, has that lisp and basically has no mic skills at all. I'd rather have Chris Masters in the Federation than swagger.
Yeah, I remember when Honky Tonk Man would lose it every show and then win it back at the next one.
Oh wait, that never fucking happened. He held it for 454 days instead.
It was Xero Limit 126 who compared the World's Heavyweight title to the 80's Intercontinental title belt. I am pretty sure that he wasn't referring to title reigns when he was comparing them. As a matter of fact, he was comparing the prestige of the belts.
Stickman
09-03-2011, 01:01 AM
Alot has to do with who the champ is. Id say right now its the number one belt because del rio is wwe champ
Rammsteinmad
09-03-2011, 01:15 AM
What exactly would you consider "burying" a character to be??? Cause IMO, having him win the belt, and lose it two days later is burying a character. Then, doing a long, drawn out fued, where week after week, his character is being sold as the guy who can't beat Orton one on one. Another form of burying a character. Not to mention the fact that his heel turn gave him zero momentum or any sort of upper hand in the fued. Again, making the fued look pointless and another way of making Orton look superior to Christian.
Seriously, sometimes I wonder why WWE marks can't see the obvious. And that is, for years, WWE has buried Christian and will continue to do so. Of course, most fans here wouldn't know a talented guy if they saw one. According to fans here, Daniel Bryan sucks and he's IMO one of the most talented new comers to step foot in WWE in a while. Coincidentally, he's also being buried in the form of Cole's commentary and in most of his matches...
Oh come on not this again. Christian has been involved in a World Championship match the last five PPV's in a row, four of which against Randy Orton, WWE's #2 guy after Cena.
And how is Bryan being buried? The guy is 5'10, 190lbs. What do you want from him? A 183-match win-streak? The guy is supposedly set for a World Championship match at Wrestlemania, and week in and week out is consistently putting on excellent matches. Yes, he's losing these matches. But he's losing them to the likes of Del Rio and Christian, both champions of their respective brands. Just because Daniel Bryan has stated he's cashing in at Wrestlemania, you can't suddenly have him become an invincible Superman-esque character.
I thought the Christian-Orton fued was top drawer despite the "burial" of Christian (who is my favourite wrestler). With that said, no need to argue with ccm any further.
I also thought Swagger was excellent as champ. His promos were hilarious and his matches were good. He suffered from "First Time Champ Syndrome" where they wouldn't put him over strongly (see Benoit's run, Punk's first, etc) and that effects perception of him/his run. Also, from what I gather, very few people here even watch SmackDown on a regular basis (I'd wager even less people back then) so they're ill-informed at best.
Savio
09-03-2011, 01:34 AM
WHC has always been second fiddle to the WWE championship ALWAYS!
Mr. Nerfect
09-03-2011, 02:14 AM
Whatever title is on RAW will be the main focus of the WWE. Sometimes I do wish they'd let World Heavyweight Title matches close shows, but whatever. That's just the way it is. Christian has also been a fine champ, and has been perfectly elevated by his World Title wins. He could realistically win the World Heavyweight Title at any time, in my opinion, as they've put him over as a guy who is consistently in the hunt -- and he's proven himself a reliable main event worker. If Orton hurt himself tomorrow, they might consider giving the belt to Mark Henry -- but Christian would be an equally logical choice.
And, as long as the WWE tells you it's a World Title, the big gold belt is going to have significance. They couldn't even keep up telling us the ECW Title was a World Title after the Benoit stuff happened. The WWE doesn't "accidentally" put the World Heavyweight Title on anybody. They've tried to use it to elevate guys in the past (Jack Swagger, CM Punk, The Great Khali, etc.) with mixed results -- but they have also tried that with the WWE Championship (Sheamus' sudden title win).
Next year at WrestleMania, it's very likely that the World Heavyweight Title will be involved in the best in-ring match on the card, so that should be a boost for it.
Anybody Thrilla
09-03-2011, 03:14 AM
Seriously ABT? Really?
I didn't like the fact that Swagger went from extreme jobber to Mr. Money in the Bank in one fell swoop. I didn't like that he dethroned Jericho on a SmackDOWN! to become champ. However, once he was champ, he was in some good, entertaining matches, and he delivered some very solid promos. I liked his time at the top of the blue brand, and if you forgive everything that I just mentioned, his actual "reign" was more than passable. He went over some big names in decent fashions and he really felt like he belonged there when the belt was around his waist.
Anybody Thrilla
09-03-2011, 03:17 AM
I thought the Christian-Orton fued was top drawer despite the "burial" of Christian (who is my favourite wrestler). With that said, no need to argue with ccm any further.
I also thought Swagger was excellent as champ. His promos were hilarious and his matches were good. He suffered from "First Time Champ Syndrome" where they wouldn't put him over strongly (see Benoit's run, Punk's first, etc) and that effects perception of him/his run. Also, from what I gather, very few people here even watch SmackDown on a regular basis (I'd wager even less people back then) so they're ill-informed at best.
I just wanted to say that I watched Smackdown regularly during Swagger's entire reign.
Anybody Thrilla
09-03-2011, 03:23 AM
That promo when Swagger had all of his life achievements in the ring with him was classic. You know you'd order a 'Swaggie' sandwich if you saw it on a menu.
Anybody Thrilla
09-03-2011, 03:24 AM
Honestly, I'd go as far as to say that the most recent feud to do the most significant amount of damage to the validity of the WHC was Edge v. Kane.
That's what I mean, his promos were comedy gold. Even the stuff with his "dad". And the Swagger Soaring Eagle was classic.
Honestly, I'd go as far as to say that the most recent feud to do the most significant amount of damage to the validity of the WHC was Edge v. Kane.
Ha. I was gonna bring that up.
drmayberry7
09-03-2011, 09:43 AM
I think swaggers reign was alright but now with him losing and being in the mid card and superstars it doesn't help the belts cred
Anybody Thrilla
09-03-2011, 12:34 PM
I really doubt people still even associate Jack Swagger with the WHC.
Anybody Thrilla
09-03-2011, 12:39 PM
Think about it this way...a sports team that sucked one year could feasibly win the championship the very next year...and then fade back into obscurity the year after that. Does that make the championship look weak, or does it make it feel like it's anybody's game?
WWE is put forth to us as the absolute BEST wrestlers in the world, so anybody under contract there should be able to win against anyone at any time. Some are better "on paper" than others, but no one should ever be counted out. People have hot and cold streaks, and it's really not that weird.
screech
09-03-2011, 12:44 PM
I loved the Swagger Facts.
Loose Cannon
09-03-2011, 12:46 PM
Think about it this way...a sports team that sucked one year could feasibly win the championship the very next year...and then fade back into obscurity the year after that. Does that make the championship look weak, or does it make it feel like it's anybody's game?
WWE is put forth to us as the absolute BEST wrestlers in the world, so anybody under contract there should be able to win against anyone at any time. Some are better "on paper" than others, but no one should ever be counted out. People have hot and cold streaks, and it's really not that weird.
you know that's actually a really good way to look at it. agree :y:
Ruien
09-03-2011, 02:13 PM
Think about it this way...a sports team that sucked one year could feasibly win the championship the very next year...and then fade back into obscurity the year after that. Does that make the championship look weak, or does it make it feel like it's anybody's game?
WWE is put forth to us as the absolute BEST wrestlers in the world, so anybody under contract there should be able to win against anyone at any time. Some are better "on paper" than others, but no one should ever be counted out. People have hot and cold streaks, and it's really not that weird.
That was a really surprising read and it made a whole lot of sense. Pretty sure I will view John Cena as the Lakers from this point forward.
Mr. Nerfect
09-03-2011, 10:55 PM
Jack Swagger's World Heavyweight Title reign was pure gold. I thoroughly enjoyed it, and I look forward to Swagger's next shot in the main event. Or for him to win the United States Title and have a huge All-American American American Celebration.
Savio
09-04-2011, 02:22 PM
So Jack Swagger is The Mavericks and Mark Henry is Lebron.
Anybody Thrilla
09-04-2011, 03:15 PM
Basically
That was a really surprising read and it made a whole lot of sense. Pretty sure I will view John Cena as the Lakers from this point forward.
I thought Cena was the Yankees according to Punk?
I think the World Heavyweight Title has lost its prestige over the years - it really hasn't meant anything since Triple H last held it and lost it to Batista at Mania 21. It's sad, but true.
Obviously that has a lot to do with the fact that it was on RAW during that time, around the waist of the "biggest name in the company", and since then its been relegated to Smackdown, which will always be regarded as the second tier show. I believe it regained some steam when CM Punk was feuding over the World Title against Jeff Hardy, and then while Undertaker held it and feuded with Edge, but after that, the list of champions is pretty weak.
Rey Mysterio, Kane, Dolph Ziggler, and even, I'm sorry to say, Christian holding the World Title (and being treated as a fluke champion) have not done anything to help raise the level of respect surrounding the World Title. Say what you want about those guys, but when Kane, who has been beaten by just about everyone, is holding the "richest prize in the industry", you have to question whether or not its really that important or not.
I also believe that its lost prestige recently due to the amazing angle surrounding the WWE Championship with Cena, Punk and now Del Rio. I'll actually be kind of surprised if they don't go ahead and unify the championships at Mania.
Unify the WWE and World Heavyweight titles and acknowledge the big gold belt as the Undisputed title. Or just get a new belt. What I am getting at people is that we need to get rid of the spinner belt.
Anybody Thrilla
09-05-2011, 01:59 PM
But it doesn't spin anymore.
Theo Dious
09-05-2011, 07:18 PM
Yeah you know, I can't for the life of me figure out why a company would treat a title they acquired from a rival company with less prestige than their own title. Or, of you're the kind of goof who can't accept that the WHC IS the WCW title, (http://www.wweshop.com/item/the-history-of-the-world-heavyweight-championship-dvd/DVDMedia/35-00683) we're at least talking about a title less than ten years old vs the title that was the company's crown jewel for decades. The question in my mind has always been why has it ever been placed above the WWE title?
But it doesn't spin anymore.
I know. Poor choice of words. But then again it was refereed to as the spinner belt all across the globe by the elite members of the IWC.
Anybody Thrilla
09-06-2011, 08:24 PM
Elite? Like who?
Anybody Thrilla
09-06-2011, 08:25 PM
I honestly think that the 'spinner' belt looks fine now that it doesn't spin, but I really wish it said "CHAMPION" on it and not "CHAMP". Looks tacky.
Elite? Like who?
Really?
I honestly think that the 'spinner' belt looks fine now that it doesn't spin, but I really wish it said "CHAMPION" on it and not "CHAMP". Looks tacky.
I couldn't agree more.
<iframe width="560" height="345" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ekzZYIZMb48" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Just give him the damn title :'(
http://www.ultimatesportstalk.com/wrestling/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/mark-henry-wins-title.jpg
So glad that Mark Henry got to be the World's Heavyweight Champion. :)
Big Vic
08-01-2012, 11:19 AM
Now a mtach with John Cena is more prestigious than the WWE title.
Anybody Thrilla
08-02-2012, 03:13 PM
Now a mtach with John Cena is more prestigious than the WWE title.
That is a tad silly, but you've at least got to give them some credit for attempting to keep Cena away from the title for as long as they have. It feels like Punk's current direction will be touching upon the point you're making here, and it could potentially be very interesting.
Emperor Smeat
08-02-2012, 05:02 PM
I think its due to two things with one being RAW being the self-proclaimed "flagship" show of the WWE and the WWE title was always going to have more significance than the World title.
Only reason the World title had any high significance was due to Triple H owning it and its resemblance to WCW's Big Gold belt.
Once the WWE title got drafted to RAW, the World title basically became like Smackdown for most of the Brand Split Era where the WWE rarely puts any real focus on the title. It really became noticeable how almost every ppv had the World title match occur first and being relegated to show openers quite a few times unlike never with the WWE title.
The only time a WWE Championship match opened a PPV was at this year's Elimination Chamber.
Destor
08-03-2012, 02:00 AM
FYI: 3rd last on the card is called the "Feature"
Anybody Thrilla
08-03-2012, 07:52 PM
Makes sense, as the second to last match is probably a piss break before the main.
Savio
08-04-2012, 09:35 AM
Thats why the Second to last match is usually a match with the womens title on the line
Didn't Punk defend his WWE title against Jericho second last at this year's Wrestlemania?
Anybody Thrilla
08-04-2012, 01:25 PM
Wrestlemania is different. Even if that match was there, there were two shitty performances from Flo Rida and Machine Gun Kelly to play the role of piss break. You're not going to get that every month...thankfully.
I still didn't hate Flo Rida's performance :o
Anybody Thrilla
08-04-2012, 01:28 PM
It's OK to be gay. We're still friends.
Mr. Nerfect
08-04-2012, 09:23 PM
FYI: 3rd last on the card is called the "Feature"
I didn't know that. Thanks for sharing that info. Is there anything else you can teach us about card structure? I've been really interested in that lately -- the perfect template to a top-to-bottom good show.
To me, an opener should be a hot match to get the crowd pumped with acts people know, that are over, but won't steal the show too early. In my opinion, Kofi Kingston & R-Truth, Santino Marella, Rey Mysterio or Christian would make the great opening act for a PPV, because they are over, entertaining workers and could win a match to get the show off to a "rolling start."
Your main event is clearly the match that people want to see. On television, I can understand why they've given such importance to John Cena segments. I do think that they could get away with making the technical last match on PPVs CM Punk's matches or even Sheamus'. People have already bought the PPV, so you can safely put on the WWE Champion or World Heavyweight Champion you are trying to establish and make them feel "important."
In the modern era, the "Feature" match seems like it is your "semi-main event" or something that might involve The Undertaker at WrestleMania. Something special that you aren't going to hang your show on. Randy Orton, at this stage of his career, seems like a feature performer, as do World Heavyweight Title matches. I do think that some shows could really benefit with a WWE Tag Team Title match being the feature bout, or just a really strongly built blow-off to a great feud. Jericho and Ziggler, if it weren't SummerSlam coming up, would be a great feature match, I think, with that positioning on the card making the victory seem more important for either man than it would if placed in the opening slot.
Cool-off spots are important, and I have a feeling that at this year's SummerSlam, Heath Slater will end up getting beaten down by a legend or Shell-Shocked by Ryback in that spot.
I've gone off on a bit of a tangent, but card structure really interests me. It's definitely an important part to presenting a good show that you don't hear discussed much around here, despite "such and such should be the main event."
Mr. Nerfect
08-04-2012, 09:36 PM
To get back on topic, I think something working against the World Heavyweight Title is that the brand split no longer matters. Don't get me wrong -- that's not a complaint -- I'm getting used to RAW and SmackDown being open playgrounds for any member of the WWE roster. What I think hurts the World Title, though, is that if SmackDown guys like Daniel Bryan and Randy Orton can technically challenge for the WWE Title, and RAW guys can win the Intercontinental Title, then they all exist in open water and thus the company has got two open divisions claiming to crown "The Best in the World." It makes no sense, and could even be confusing to casual fans.
Unification can't really happen until after WrestleMania next year. The Rock will be challenging for the WWE Title at the Royal Rumble and Dolph Ziggler has a shot at the World Title. I guess that Ziggler could use his shot, become the champion and then we could get title unification in time for The Rock to challenge the one champion of the WWE at the Royal Rumble. Personally, I think it would add importance to a "World Title match." It'd also be more gruelling if the Elimination Chamber PPV were the final test for the WWE Champion before WrestleMania. Maybe next year's could even be for the right to challenge The Undertaker at WrestleMania? It'd be a fresh concept for the PPV, since if The Rock wins the WWE Title, then he probably won't be working an Elimination Chamber match, although that would be cool.
The flip-side is, while I would get behind an Alberto Del Rio or Dolph Ziggler World Title reign, I can't really see a reason to end Sheamus' current run just yet. He's been the World Champion for months, but he's still steam-rolling ahead. There are potential PPV matches with Randy Orton, Wade Barrett and maybe even Rey Mysterio waiting. With the brand split being looser, you could even have Sheamus vs. Big Show, which would not be pretty, but Sheamus going over Show would still mean something. Sheamus vs. Christian in a TV match would be entertaining, and I think that given the right build, Sheamus vs. The Miz, who would be "taking the Intercontinental Title into the main event" would be a great story for a one-off PPV encounter between the two.
I'm actually all for Sheamus remaining World Heavyweight Champion until WrestleMania. I think it should be there that Dolph Ziggler cashes in and becomes the new World Champ. After that, I think it should be time to either consider unifying the titles, or going back to a stricter brand regiment. I think RAW could even remain three hours with an exclusive RAW roster. SmackDown would just go back to being the wrestling show with a smaller roster, RAW could feature longer matches with performers like Daniel Bryan, CM Punk and Christian featured on the brand, or more "divisions" could be given time, like specific segments to boost the tag team, women's and mid-card divisions. You could even give some NXT guys some time on the main show. Whatever it is, I think it could work. If that remained the same, I'd be all for the World Heavyweight Title sticking around.
When it comes to SmackDown exclusivity, you have a bunch of talent that I think would really benefit from being "SmackDown exclusive." Rey Mysterio and Alberto Del Rio, for example, always seem to be better used on SmackDown, which also does well with the Hispanic audience historically, which suits everyone just fine, it seems. While he is getting accustomed to the WWE style, the taped environment of SmackDown would be the perfect place for him to hone his skills. Hunico is also an act that I could see appealing to Hispanic audiences given the right twist, and his style would fit the show, so keep him and Camacho there and you have a mid-card act and potential tag team. Randy Orton has two suspensions to his name, so moving him out of the RAW spotlight and onto SmackDown where there isn't so much pressure would be a wise move, I think. While he is growing as a main event babyface, SmackDown could be Sheamus' stomping ground. There are many more that you could make exclusive to the show, but I think that would be a great way to make the show mean something again, and justify it having its own World Title.
Destor
08-04-2012, 09:43 PM
I didn't know that. Thanks for sharing that info. Is there anything else you can teach us about card structure? I've been really interested in that lately -- the perfect template to a top-to-bottom good show.
To me, an opener should be a hot match to get the crowd pumped with acts people know, that are over, but won't steal the show too early. In my opinion, Kofi Kingston & R-Truth, Santino Marella, Rey Mysterio or Christian would make the great opening act for a PPV, because they are over, entertaining workers and could win a match to get the show off to a "rolling start."
Your main event is clearly the match that people want to see. On television, I can understand why they've given such importance to John Cena segments. I do think that they could get away with making the technical last match on PPVs CM Punk's matches or even Sheamus'. People have already bought the PPV, so you can safely put on the WWE Champion or World Heavyweight Champion you are trying to establish and make them feel "important."
In the modern era, the "Feature" match seems like it is your "semi-main event" or something that might involve The Undertaker at WrestleMania. Something special that you aren't going to hang your show on. Randy Orton, at this stage of his career, seems like a feature performer, as do World Heavyweight Title matches. I do think that some shows could really benefit with a WWE Tag Team Title match being the feature bout, or just a really strongly built blow-off to a great feud. Jericho and Ziggler, if it weren't SummerSlam coming up, would be a great feature match, I think, with that positioning on the card making the victory seem more important for either man than it would if placed in the opening slot.
Cool-off spots are important, and I have a feeling that at this year's SummerSlam, Heath Slater will end up getting beaten down by a legend or Shell-Shocked by Ryback in that spot.
I've gone off on a bit of a tangent, but card structure really interests me. It's definitely an important part to presenting a good show that you don't hear discussed much around here, despite "such and such should be the main event."
You're right on most counts.
5-7 is typically perfect number if you dont have a super show going on with enough hype to keep the crowd into it. You want to have your open be your best match between the bells or at least whats your best match on paper. If its a company that the work rate is most over than your second best match opens. Opens should never have strikers the show needs to build into those kinds of workers/matches so clean wrestling with a good pace is what you like to get out of your open. Get the crowd popping. you can build to strikers but its difficult to build intensity backwards and keep people caring.
Second match is usally the one you have the least faith in. Hopefully the lead in from the open hides its flaws.
Feature on bigger shows is what in most cases would be your semi. Typically if you have a true double main event the first main is going on feature with a match to cool down the audience on semi so you dont blow the crowd up.
with main you want what ever is drawing the kids last. the kids are going to stay interested as long as what they want to see the most hasnt happend yet. once they've seen what they came to see they'll likely space out and become bored. kids suck lkie that. the parents have to stay enthused for the sake of their kids. plus one would hope they're smart enough to enjoy the matches that are for them when they happen and not give a shit about minor details like "why is my kids favorite in the main event?"
with indy shows you have intermissions so that plays a factor in what tone you want a match to have based off how it reflects the intermission but those are the major things.
Mr. Nerfect
08-04-2012, 10:14 PM
Thanks Destor. :y:
That's pretty much along the lines of what I was thinking. Out of curiosity, which major event do you think had the best card structure? I ask because I was looking at WrestleMania X-7, which many consider to be the greatest WWE PPV of all-time, and the match order was as follows:
1. Chris Jericho vs. William Regal for the Intercontinental Title
2. Tazz & The APA vs. The Right to Censor
3. Raven vs. Big Show vs. Kane for the Hardcore Title
4. Test vs. Eddie Guerrero for the European Title
5. Kurt Angle vs. Chris Benoit
6. Chyna vs. Ivory
7. Vince McMahon vs. Shane McMahon in a Street Fight
8. Edge & Christian vs. The Hardy Boyz vs. The Dudley Boyz in a TLC Match for the WWE Tag Team Titles
9. Gimmick Battle Royal
10. The Undertaker vs. Triple H
11. The Rock vs. Stone Cold Steve Austin for the WWE Title
The main event is obviously in the right place. The opening match was, in my opinion, the best choice for opener. Jericho was super-over at the time, and Regal was a great heel foil to get beaten in 8 minutes after a good showing. I'll stop talking about how over acts were in 2001, because they all were -- but keeping in mind that they were certainly connecting with audiences, APA & Tazz vs. RTC was probably the match that was most "just there" on the card.
Destor
08-04-2012, 10:31 PM
Man im too indescisive to ever pick "best ever" of anything. But that's a great card. If you look how they place comedy between the gimmicks and the big semi and main they have too kinda reset the tempo. And the placement of the womens match after all the work rate. constantly changing the flavor of the show keeping it fresh across 11 matches. Great card.
CM Punk broke my heart last night when he presented his view on the World's Heavyweight Championship.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Ov7wjQkD1S8#t=5m42s" frameborder="1" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Anybody Thrilla
09-05-2012, 08:46 AM
He wasn't wrong, though.
Saving Grace
09-07-2012, 03:31 PM
When they introduced the brand division and the WWE title went to one brand an the WHC went to another brand, there was gonna be a #2 title and a #1 title regardless no matter what. WHC is in essence the resurrected WCW title, so naturally its going to take a backseat to the WWE title which has been in the company since the get go. Vince would never have it any other way and it will never be any other way. Whoever has the WWE title is #1 and the WHC is #2 plain and simple. Next topic discussion please.
Anybody Thrilla
09-07-2012, 03:34 PM
Ha, why are you mad about it though?
Cool King
09-07-2012, 03:36 PM
CM Punk broke my heart last night when he presented his view on the World's Heavyweight Championship.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Ov7wjQkD1S8#t=5m42s" frameborder="1" allowfullscreen></iframe>
I noticed Sheamus was getting a bit flustered during that promo and he looked uncomfortable.
Saving Grace
09-07-2012, 04:01 PM
Ha, why are you mad about it though?
not mad about it, its simply a concept that any half decent wrestling fan who has been following the business since probably 1998 plus should be able to figure out with relative ease. Closes the loop on the discussion at that point. WHC is the WCW title, Vince buys the fledgling company and then has the rights and acess to the title name, likes and rightness so why not use it? But why make it overshadow the belt that made your company what it was. Being WWE champion means you are the flagship of the company. The WHC simply means lets see how you might draw at the top, plain and simple, no anger invovled in the post, was just a point blank observation that everyone should clearly see
Anybody Thrilla
09-07-2012, 04:21 PM
Seemed angry when you said the topic should just be over after your post. Especially considering other people have already made that same point in this thread.
When they introduced the brand division and the WWE title went to one brand an the WHC went to another brand, there was gonna be a #2 title and a #1 title regardless no matter what. WHC is in essence the resurrected WCW title, so naturally its going to take a backseat to the WWE title which has been in the company since the get go. Vince would never have it any other way and it will never be any other way. Whoever has the WWE title is #1 and the WHC is #2 plain and simple. Next topic discussion please.
I know. But didn't the WWE Championship take the "backseat" when Triple H was running with the World Heavyweight Championship? The World Heavyweight Championship did make it to a few pay-per-view main events when Edge, Undertaker, Punk and Jeff Hardy were holding it. I even remember Jim Ross calling it as "the most prestigious prize in the business" and nothing was more significant than that belt.
I understand that the WWE Championship is the top prize. But I like to entertain the idea that both the belts are of equal importance (in my head :'().
Anybody Thrilla
09-07-2012, 04:37 PM
I noticed Sheamus was getting a bit flustered during that promo and he looked uncomfortable.
I noticed that too. I think it was partially because what Punk was saying was right, and also the fact that he was getting booed as a face. He didn't really have any legs to stand on in Punk's home town.
Savio
09-07-2012, 08:57 PM
Can't wait wait till Zig takes his title
crusnik
09-07-2012, 09:18 PM
Rather have the WHC as the #1 belt..cause that title has been around longer than the wwe belt,has more history.
DAMN iNATOR
09-08-2012, 05:17 PM
<iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ekzZYIZMb48" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="345" width="560"></iframe>
Just give him the damn title :'(
IT'S STILL REAL TO HIM, DAMMIT!:'(:shifty:
James Steele
09-08-2012, 09:10 PM
The WHC was clearly the #1 championship in WWE when it debuted until 2005 when Cena won the WWE Championship and they swapped Batista to SmackDown! and Cena to RAW.
Anybody Thrilla
09-09-2012, 03:14 AM
Good point.
Savio
09-09-2012, 08:36 AM
The WHC was clearly the #1 championship in WWE when it debuted until 2005 when Cena won the WWE Championship and they swapped Batista to SmackDown! and Cena to RAW.Not quite, when Brock had the WWE Championship it was Number 1.
Savio
09-09-2012, 08:37 AM
Good point.
=========================================================
Although I will say that WHC was number one beginning in the Summer of 2003.
Gertner
09-09-2012, 08:45 AM
not mad about it, its simply a concept that any half decent wrestling fan who has been following the business since probably 1998 plus should be able to figure out with relative ease. Closes the loop on the discussion at that point. WHC is the WCW title, Vince buys the fledgling company and then has the rights and acess to the title name, likes and rightness so why not use it? But why make it overshadow the belt that made your company what it was. Being WWE champion means you are the flagship of the company. The WHC simply means lets see how you might draw at the top, plain and simple, no anger invovled in the post, was just a point blank observation that everyone should clearly see
It's not 'the business" IT"S SERIOUS BUSINESS!
=========================================================
Although I will say that WHC was number one beginning in the Summer of 2003.
Yeah. It remained in the main event picture till John Cena brought the WWE Championship to RAW in 2005.
There were a few times when the belt main evented shows. Like when Batista defeated Booker for the strap at Survivor Series, Edge-Taker series, Championship scrambles, Punk-Jeff Hardy rivalry, Jericho-Shawn feud etc.
I believe it started losing the "main-event" spot when Edge won it for the last time.
owenbrown
09-09-2012, 11:47 PM
I think it lost some of it's luster when it was somehow vacant from WM20 until SummerSlam 2004 :shifty:
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.