This is by and large the problem. With the exception of wanting to position Reigns as the new Cena, and "arguably" having Seth as champ (they could be doing better with him to solidify him as credible instead of this "chickenshit puppet" vibe he's putting out now), they don't keep pushing guys. They may end up with a decent program or a good jumping off point for someone's career, but when it ends, they let that person fuck right off the face of the earth, and any spark cools down for essentially no reason.

Its also one of the major reasons why NXT is great. Tossing out the training aspect of the green talent and merely focusing on the character devolpment, they are essentially doing it right. Guys can't be on TV every week, but most of the ones that aren't don't dissappear from the world for 3 months or so after a feud. Anyone not directly in title contention is :gasp: FEUDING WITH SOMEONE ELSE!

It doesn't have to be steep constant upward movement, but there should be constant movement from any traction, period.

Nobody will ever become any kind of draw if they stay irrelevant, and nobody will ever maintain relevance if they don't keep exposure/reason for fans to give a shit. Nobody will get behind someone who loses ALL the time, especially if they lose all the time and there is no rhyme or reason for it. At least when they finally got on board with giving DB the WrestleMania spot, his constant losing was the direct result of an angle where he was constantly blatantly screwed in bouts he clearly had won, put in handicap matches, and jumped. Wade Barrett keeps losing because... well, I guess because he's a jobber now.

Nearly anyone can be saved (I refuse to apply this to Eva Marie, because they are still dead set on letting the most dangerous orange face since Evil Otto into rings on TV until she inevitably Droz-es someone instead of letting her train without pressure and overexposure and HOPE she gets good enough to con fans into liking her later on), and Wade is no exception.

And I really hope they are not still on this "go out there and take it" nonsense with the majority of the talent... because that makes little to no sense when you have no leverage in rocking the boat. If they call your bluff and say "you'll do this and like it", it isnt like you can say "fuck you" and go to WCW. It also is no way of telling if you're being "tested" or not. If guys can get shit on and/or shitcanned for things like being on the receiving end of racisim, or being the boyfriend that was cheated on, who would want to say no to going down to the ring in a lime green tutu and a marching band hat because creative somehow thinks that will work?

Actually, yeah...he IS.

http://i2.ytimg.com/vi/yF9JhjfrWlI/mqdefault.jpg

Lesnar was never at the level he is now in terms of wrestling. MMA Brock drew more PPVs, but in terms of wrestling, I think he's on a level he's never been to.


Rollins and Reigns are still stars though. Rollins will be headlining fir 10 years plus, unless he does sowing stupid.

Well hopefully all of his crops grow nicely.

Different time. They had the joke second world title. Look at the champs since they put the titles back together. No jokes, all studs. The title means something to me now. More than at any point since HHH busted out the big gold belt in 2002.

Fully agree its been cleaned up. I hated having two titles, it totally shit all over the meaning of being champion and insulted fans. With rollins you get the feeling he won't be left in ziggles purgatory after he loses the title. Sheamus and henry and dolph still trying to recover from that cycle though i was sayibg

Yeah and some people may not agree, but I never saw those guys are true world champions. To me there was always one of the champs that was clearly the real world champion (usually the guy with the WWE title) and the other guy was a secondary champion.

Ì agree it's way way better with only one champ and I do believe Rollins will not be hurt when he finally does drop the championship.

I would argue that the WWE title was a secondary title to the WHC from Eddies title win on February 15, 2004 to Summer 2005.

Definitely. 20 was headlined by the big gold belt title fight. Even 21 it was still the focal point. I would it flipped when John went to RAW.

For the most part after that the gold belt was the secondary prize, especially when it was exclusive to SD.

Two titles was shit, and even worse with that spinner belt. Total desecration

Two titles wasn't shit in and of itself. It was clumsily handled. If they were dead set on the brand split, having a two champion system was amazing. But they constantly put the focus more on one than the other. Once one started meaning more, they swapped it to RAW. When guys started getting over, they got shipped to RAW and/or appearing on both shows. WWE has had a problem with focused balance for awhile. They will focus on ONE feud, ONE singles championship (most likely WHC, but not neccessarily) and ONE auxiliary division, such as Divas, Tag, or (Cruiserweight or Hardcore when they were a thing.) That's a possible three areas of focus, and everything else is left to rot. Sometimes, that feud they focus on is part of one of the second two areas, so it is only TWO points of focus.

The only real problem was trying to incorporate ECW into the mix. They already were proving they weren't really willing to commit to the idea of having two separate yet equal Heavyweight Champions on separate shows that could be billed as attractions so adding a third and then just treating that one like the bastard stepchild title made things worse.

Hell, there are times they don't even seem to commit to a single WHC system.

Wade Barrett is more likely to be saved than Damien Sandow.

This thread needs more saving:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gEd-zjllgFM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Cena's spinner belt was bad enough, but then guys like Edge got their own custom belts. Nothing worse than an imitation of an already piss-poor belt design.

I want to see this tandem continue with Sheamus, with both men being positioned as threats that are upping their game. Give them Rusev, Owens & Stardust as partners at Survivor Series and have them go over The Rock, Reigns, Ambrose, Ziggler & Cesaro. Barrett and Sheamus can then face Reigns & Ambrose in a Chairs Match at TLC. Reigns and Ambrose can win that match, but Barrett and Sheamus work together at the Rumble and rack up quite a few eliminations. At some point, two babyfaces (Reigns & Cena?) work together and get them out.

Ambrose beats Sheamus for the Money in the Bank briefcase at Fastlane. Maybe Reigns beats Barrett? Both guys find their way into the Andre the Giant Memorial Battle Royal, and maybe the match even comes down to the two guys fighting each other?