The current state of all the championships in WWE [Archive]

10-01-2012, 05:52 AM

Utilize this thread to discuss the current state of each and every championship in WWE.

Are titles slowly losing their importance?
Should a title bout close each and every pay-per-view?
Is the World Heavyweight Championship slowly losing its prestige?
Is it high time for the WWE to introduce a new belt to represent the WWE Championship?
Are the butterfly belt and the elongated coin like spartan belts one of the most ugliest belts in the company's history?
Should the United States Championship and the Intercontinental Championship be unified?

Feel free to post your opinions :wave:

The following are the current reigning champions

The Divas' Champion Eve Torres

http://www.wwe.com/f/reign/image/2012/09/eve642.jpg

The United States Champion Antonio Cesaro

http://www.wrestleenigma.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/antonio_cesaro2.jpg

The Intercontinental Champion The Miz

http://prowrestlingpowerhouse.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Miz-Intercontinental-Champion.jpg

The WWE Tag Team Champions - Team Hell No

http://www.wwe.com/f/reign/image/2012/09/NOC12_Photo_058.jpg

The World's Heavyweight Champion Sheamus

http://quickwrestlingnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/sheamus-champ.jpg

The WWE Champion CM Punk

http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/c0.25.600.286.83274021352/p843x403/222155_317050708393036_18895488_n.jpg

And here is a picture of John Cena with a lamb

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m3np7eiL8a1qfgkwk.jpg

Rammsteinmad

10-01-2012, 06:11 AM

I don't think the titles are losing their importance so much as there are too many titles on one show.

A lot of people over the years have complained about the United States and the Intercontinental championships not being as prestigious as they use to be, and I put this down to two things; us growing older, and the fact that there are two world championships, meaning that the "secondary" title has now become the third or forth most relevant belt.

I think the biggest problem with making the belts mean something is having them all on one show. If Raw and Smackdown stayed seperate brands, the world and midcard championships would have more meaning. Sadly, since it's well and truly finalized that Smackdown is now the B-Show, all their top stars appear on Raw, and vice versa, kinda defeating the purpose of having two world champions and two midcard champions.

So if people think the Intercontinental title has lost it's importance, it's not so much that they don't care about it anymore, but it's more the case that the World championship is now the #2 title.

Kinda wish WWE would either drop the world championship, or at least make the brand split more legit again. I love the big gold belt, but yeah, it's just too many titles on one joint roster.

Rammsteinmad

10-01-2012, 06:12 AM

Also, the current line-up of champions is pretty sweet. :y:

10-01-2012, 06:17 AM

Mike The Metal Ed once made a very good argument that there were way too many titles during the attitude era but all of them had interesting story lines going on.

Rammsteinmad

10-01-2012, 06:32 AM

That's a valid point, but also applies to about 80% of the roster, not just the champions.

drave

10-01-2012, 07:25 AM

This thread reminds me of Punks now famous rant about the title(s) and how they have little to no meaning. Matter of fact, it kinda fits in with his rant last week on Raw telling Cena that he would NOT get another shot b/c he has has numerous shots for no reason other than being Cena and there are plenty of other guys in the back that are deserving of the same opportunity.

I think that is kinda the problem with titles. They are put on people (sometimes) for no real reason at all. I do enjoy that Punk has held the title for such a lengthy time, kinda validates it a bit more. I think both MAJOR titles should be booked with more importance, as should all titles.

Seeing the US and IC titles merge would be a good thing, if you could have a champ appear on both shows. It would give the mid-carder more exposure, and given enough time maybe that "push" to get up to main-event level. Once that happens, drop the IC title, move on to the World/WWE picture.

MoFo

10-01-2012, 10:02 AM

The WWF Tag Team Champions are getting the biggest push atm so I'd say those are the most meaningful.

10-01-2012, 10:13 AM

The WWF Tag Team Champions are getting the biggest push atm so I'd say those are the most meaningful.

The WWF (aka' World) Tag Teams titles were retired in 2010.

Keith

10-01-2012, 10:28 AM

The WWE Championship

Big Vic

10-01-2012, 11:13 AM

John Cena, seriously he has been in every mainevent this year bar 1. Wrestling John Cena is the most prestigious thing.

Ruien

10-01-2012, 11:27 AM

The divas belt decides what piece of eye candy I will have for the next month.

Rock Bottom

10-01-2012, 02:22 PM

Cena.

They're working on the belt, though.

Pintint

10-01-2012, 02:28 PM

Jawn Cena with a lamb.

Pintint

10-01-2012, 02:28 PM

And every PPV should end with a WWE title match.

Pintint

10-01-2012, 02:28 PM

Unless it's taker's streak at mania

drave

10-01-2012, 02:48 PM

And every PPV should end with a WWE title match.

Couldn't agree more. I think since things turned "sports entertainment" (versus wrasslin') so very long ago, stories seem to take precedence, which is sad. I guess in the age where peoples attention span seems to be less than 5 mins, that is what is needed to succeed.

Many of what Punk's comments said about the WWE Title being irrelevant are incredibly true. Even the counterpoint that Cena made, asking him how many PPV's he main-evented since holding the title made sense. Instead, we get "attractions" like HHH vs Lesnar, Lesnar vs <insert job here>, or Rock vs <insert job here>. I get the Rock is good for business, but if he comes in and wins the title @ Rumble, that would be wank.

#1-norm-fan

10-01-2012, 03:10 PM

Mike The Metal Ed once made a very good argument that there were way too many titles during the attitude era but all of them had interesting story lines going on.

Yeah, it doesn't have to do with two many titles. It has to do with giving a reason for each title to exist.

There are two "main event" titles but there isn't even really a roster split anymore. Even when there was, I feel like there should always be ONE title to signify THE top guy in the company.

The IC Title can serve as the title to signify the brink of the main event. A stepping stone to the main event scene. The US Title can be the equivelent to what the TV title in the early days of WCW and the European title in it's early days was. A lower card title to be the first step for someone to reach upper mid-card status. The tag and divas title obviously just signify who's at the top of each division.

If they ever were to actually get back to the roster split, you could elevate the US and IC titles to signify the top guy on each brand and you could have one WWE World Heavyweight Champion who goes between brands and is THE guy in the company.

It doesn't matter if they have twice as many titles. As long as they don't just exist for the sake of existing and actually have reason for people to aim for them.

#1-norm-fan

10-01-2012, 03:15 PM

And every PPV should end with a WWE title match.

It should in theory. You have to bring it up to that point and make sure the guy holding it can main event any show against anyone and not have the PPV end on a match that's at a lower level of anticipation than the match before it.

People complained so much about Cena main eventing over Punk but it was always the right move. The dumb idea wasn't main eventing with Cena. The bad idea was not making Punk look like he should be main eventing. The way he was being booked and multiple wins over Daniel Bryan wasn't doing it. Cena was more over than the title, therefore Cena should have main evented over the title.

drave

10-01-2012, 03:30 PM

People complained so much about Cena main eventing over Punk but it was always the right move. The dumb idea wasn't main eventing with Cena. The bad idea was not making Punk look like he should be main eventing. The way he was being booked and multiple wins over Daniel Bryan wasn't doing it. Cena was more over than the title, therefore Cena should have main evented over the title.

Exactly. Cena has been built to be this era's MEGASTAR and most people, despite in-ring excellence and promos, simply don't get the chance because Cena is an established household name that almost everyone recognizes. I take nothing away from Cena's work rate, our out-of-the-ring accomplishments, just tired of the SSDD "i get beat on, do a stupid slam, 5k Shuffle AA (or STF) and then 1-2-3. Good for business (overall), bad for fans that have been around a bit.

If only Punk could have kept the roll from the 1st "pipebomb", confrontation with HHH at Comic Con (I think it was) and kept that sort of momentum going. Although, the way his character has developed over the past few weeks is nothing short of amazing. From calling out Lawler (mainly his reasoning for doing so) all the way up to how it is fleshing out with the current feud.

Rammsteinmad

10-01-2012, 03:31 PM

Nicky Fives

10-01-2012, 03:31 PM

younger viewers buy into Superstars when they have a belt..... If Cena hadn't had the belt for so long, he wouldn't have been as popular.....

#1-norm-fan

10-01-2012, 03:38 PM

How the fuck did this entire Cena/Rock/Lesnar being bigger than the WWE title fucking begin? I swear when I was a Rammsteinlad the heavyweight title bout of any company was THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IN THE ENTIRE WORLD!!! Regardless of who else was on the roster.

Having two world titles pretty much ended the prestige. It was a steady downfall from there. Once guys like Jack Swagger could win Money in the Bank and become a World Champion, it was over. Basically once WWE decided that throwing the title on 2nd rate guys to try to get them over while the real stars seemed to have "better things to do" was a good idea.

Emperor Smeat

10-01-2012, 03:51 PM

Current order probably is Cena, WWE Title, and World for most important right now. After that the Tag belts seem to be #4 right now considering the decline of the IC belt since Rhodes 1st reign.

Then again the WWE and World titles can be swapped around considering it all depends which title is on RAW because of RAW being the "flagship" brand rather than the prestige of the belt itself.

XCaliber

10-01-2012, 06:07 PM

Most of the time i'd say that it's WWE Championship which currently applies.

Are titles slowly losing their importance? YES!
Should a title bout close each and every pay-per-view? YES!
Is the World Heavyweight Championship slowly losing its prestige? YES!
Is it high time for the WWE to introduce a new belt to represent the WWE Championship? YES!
Are the butterfly belt and the elongated coin like spartan belts one of the most ugliest belts in the company's history? YES!
Should the United States Championship and the Intercontinental Championship be unified? YES!

SlickyTrickyDamon

10-01-2012, 11:01 PM

US Championship and IC should stay seperate. I would even bring another mid card title or two in the fray (if they decide to actually have title matches on tv and ppv for them.)

Damndirty

10-01-2012, 11:19 PM

The plastic one that came with my toy.

#1-norm-fan

10-02-2012, 02:44 AM

Should the United States Championship and the Intercontinental Championship be unified? YES!

It doesn't make sense to have two "World titles" and one midcard title.

Big Vic

10-02-2012, 09:23 AM

Having two world titles pretty much ended the prestige. It was a steady downfall from there. Once guys like Jack Swagger could win Money in the Bank and become a World Champion, it was over. Basically once WWE decided that throwing the title on 2nd rate guys to try to get them over while the real stars seemed to have "better things to do" was a good idea.
Yeah they took the money in the bank concept and used it the wrong way instead of giving it to established stars they gave it to upper mid carders, kinda started with Punks first reign.

Swiss Ultimate

10-02-2012, 09:34 AM

XCaliber

10-02-2012, 04:33 PM

It doesn't make sense to have two "World titles" and one midcard title.

It would be unbalanced yeah but the same could be said about the tag straps and to a much lesser extent the Diva's titles which apparently they are focusing more on. They could always bring back the Euro Championship back too in one of their places or bring back the Cruiserweight for all I care. It's not as if the brands mean anything now tbh I'm not even sure which belt that each one supposedly owns it since Miz and Cesaro since they appear on both shows.

Skippord

10-03-2012, 02:59 AM

what a cute lil' lamb

#1-norm-fan

10-03-2012, 03:06 AM

It would be unbalanced yeah but the same could be said about the tag straps and to a much lesser extent the Diva's titles which apparently they are focusing more on. They could always bring back the Euro Championship back too in one of their places or bring back the Cruiserweight for all I care. It's not as if the brands mean anything now tbh I'm not even sure which belt that each one supposedly owns it since Miz and Cesaro since they appear on both shows.

IC Title is Smackdown
US Title is Raw

The Miz is a "Raw superstar"
Cesaro is a "Smackdown superstar"

Mr. Nerfect

10-06-2012, 07:02 PM

I think the ending of the brand split has made it kind of uncomfortable to have two "World Titles." I think both CM Punk and Sheamus are doing a fantastic job as champions, but I kind of feel that there is absolutely no reason for both of those titles to exist at the same time any more.

Heyman

10-06-2012, 07:17 PM

-United States and IC Titles should be merged
-WWE/World titles should be merged.

Less is more.

#1-norm-fan

10-06-2012, 07:18 PM

Both titles still exist because Raw and Smackdown still travel separately for house shows. So having a world title for each brand means world title matches being hyped for both brands' house shows.

Heyman

10-06-2012, 07:42 PM

Correct you are. I forgot about that.

However - most fans know today that titles (especially world), never change at House Shows.

An IC title match at a House Show that had a chance of changing hands as opposed to a World Title match that didn't could possibly draw more interest......especially if "less is more" approach was implemented and current main-eventers such as ADR and Sheamus feuded over such a title.

Heyman

10-06-2012, 07:44 PM

I'd even go as far as saying that the World title on Smackdown is pretty much what the Intercontinental title was back in 1998.

The current IC and US titles are what the European titles were back then. All other current singles titles have less significance than the old hardcore title and slightly more significance than the old lightweight title from the attitude era.

#1-norm-fan

10-06-2012, 07:53 PM

Heyman

10-06-2012, 08:02 PM

Taker it Easy

10-06-2012, 09:16 PM

Line up them boys who voted fer Johnathan Cena out back and taker their heads. What up with you peoples?

drave

10-07-2012, 10:48 AM

That's why I like the idea of having a US Championship that is "brink of main event" status for the Smackdown brand and an IC Championship that is "brink of main event" status for the Raw brand while one World Champ rules over everything.

You can still draw on house shows with upper-tier title defenses while having the World Champ go back and forth. I don't think it would hamper house shows to much and it would make the product better by making all title defenses that much more "must see" because it means something.

This. With this being the time where WWE desperately needs to establish new stars, the IC / US Title would be the perfect "stepping stone" if you will, much like the IC title was back in the late 80's early 90's. It was generally accepted that the IC title holder was the "next in line" so to speak.