Because they tried it before and to be perfectly honest, it was terrible. It made for breif entertaining viewing when the GM's were arguing over the Champion - but that was mainly because of the two GMs and their storylines at that time. Vickie Guerrero and Steph arguing over the Champion? Nah thanks. One high pitched voiced bitch per show thanks.

Too many top guys/egos now. You really think Dancing Dave or Trips are going to take a backstep and feud over the US title or something instead of the big/spinny belts. Never going to happen.

Enough people round here bang on about how the roster split created stars. Batista, Cena erm....yeah. Those two. One title and many of the youngsters/deserving guys get lost in the shuffle as Cena vs Batista part 8902932 takes place. Where would Orton go? Would be subjected to the overused already '8 man battle royal'/tournament to face John Cena every Monday after the PPV?

Punk, Kennedy, MVP, Christian, Regal - upper midcarders that could step up to main event would have little or no chance of doing so anymore. You want to see promising stars leave or start to phone it in - then this is the way of doing it. I'd imagine that talent morale would drop through the floor at the thought of this. Hell, Christian left because he was told he'd be midcard for life in a two title situation...where would the others go?

Say Batista off Raw is facing Cena for the Undisputed Title at a PPV. What happens on SD during that build up? Cena turns up and beats MVP, Carlito, Jeff Hardy in that three weeks whilst on Raw they build their feud. Batista might 'invade' SD and attack him a couple of times. Not much for SD viewers to buy into that month. Then the next month it happens on Raw. One cross brand title will not work on a brand split. It would make one show a month boring, unless every PPV has a triple threat match as the main event.

This idea only has any way of working (imo) if you had the brands working as one against each other. But then, you are back to the ego problem, the big star problem and you are pretty much getting rid of the brand split.

I don't get this whole "it didn't work last time" thing. Yeah, it was clunky last time, but who says it'd play out exactly the same? You actually have supporting titles now, and a belt floating between both brands would be far more special.

The egos, you might have a point with, but guys like Jeff Hardy got a crack at the title then. It may drive home the point of ECW being more of a "younger wrestler league," but guys would ultimately get built-up more. Sure, Triple H has an ego, but he's not WWE Champion right now, is he? He's learned to bow-out from time-to-time. And a guy like Mr. Kennedy could get as much mileage out of headlining house shows and main eventing PPVs for one brand as IC Champion as he could being World Heavyweight Champion in a two-man act.

Back to ignoring after this, I swear. But I'm curious as to why you think ascribing things to me when I clearly said otherwise, then using "I am ignorant" as a defense was a good idea.

Things would go much smoother if you read what I had to say before bitching me out.

Merry Christmas.

The thing is, it's the way the titles being booked that makes them look weak, not the titles themselves. Just combing the titles isn't going to magically make the booking better. In fact, I believe with good booking this problem of the two titles looking weak would disappear.

I didn't bitch you out, bitch. Maybe you should have read the bit about me not bitching you out. Again...KK...bitch.

Booking better could put the WWE through another boom period and find that star with potential and turn them into a cash generating giant. Great booking would be fantastic, but the thing with the US and IC Titles is that the WWE isn't booking them properly, and they're probably not about to unless given a reason.

Did I say something about ending the brand split? Where did I say that?

True, but again, is the WWE really going to do this? The World Heavyweight Championship has changed hands how many times in how many months? Unifying the World Titles would at least freshen the product up, have one guy stand tall for at least one moment, and would probably have the WWE go "fuck, we better do it right this time."

Well, you'd hope so, anyway.

Getting unifying the mainevent titles doesn't elevate the lower midcard.

Didn't say you did. But the only way to unify the world titles without leaving a brand out of ppvs and making it pointless to watch for a month or longer is by ending the brand split. I was arguing why the brand split is needed. These points are all connected.

I'd also like to say a lot of the argument seems to assume a fair and equitable split. I doubt that's ever going to be the case with a single shared title. Imagine Triple H or John Cena holding the title for a protracted period. It's easy if you try.

It's also going to lead to the same four challengers across multiple brands. This is most probable. I know if you slap on rose-colored glasses, it's easy to disregard that the roster split was supposed to fix the main event scene, and it really didn't. It's easy to pretend they won't push the same guys on both brands, but they've done that on and off during the roster split, and there's ample reason to believe they will do it again if they have a single big belt.

There's no real reasoning that dictates it'll be any more fair than the usual round of WWE booking, save for wishful thinking.

Unifying the titles would logically create a vacuum that would need to be filled by elevating the IC Title/US Title, which shouldn't be counted as the "lower card."

I completely disagree on the point about the brand split ending.

Of course John Cena or Triple H would hold the belt for elongated periods of time. That goes on now. You switch over to the other show and it's happening there, too. The thing is, you still have ECW and the WWE is creating enough stars in guys like Jeff Hardy to warrant shifting things up and putting the title on him.

And then there's the full pressure of the champion having to carry the shows. If ratings go down because Cena or Triple H are boring as champion, then the WWE would be forced to make some changes.

It may not happen right away, but I think things would become slightly more diplomatic over time, out of necessity. But I'm just playing devil's advocate. It's only guess work you can do in this situation.

I just had to look up who was US Champ, I couldn't remember if it was still Shelton Benjamin. Simple fact is, the damage is done to those titles. The vast majority of fans don't give a shit about them anymore. When was the last time Regal defended the IC title ffs? He sits around at ringside doing nothing every week? The characters involved with certainly the IC scene (I dont know about SD) are so poorly booked, and given 20 minutes a week to build that scene. If they had any sense, they'd give the IC title to Cody Rhodes TONIGHT, so at least it got seen on screen for a larger amount of time on Raw.

It's all a fabulous idea, elevating the midcard titles - but to what? Can you honestly see the likes of Trips and the rest feuding over it? Orton vs Batista at Wrestlemania for the IC title? Never. Going. To. Happen.

I don't see what your top paragraph has to do with anything, really. Cena and Batista are champions all the time. Triple H hasn't been champion for two whole months? Really? How long was he champion before then?

Also, I explained why it could conceivably become more diplomatic. The WWE is in crunch time, and if they put all their eggs in one basket, and it doesn't work, it's time to get a new basket. There is shared responsibility in the current WWE landscape, so Triple H failing as champion means we could see it just two months later.

And my point is that the US Title and IC Title shouldn't be lower card titles. Not that they aren't. Although, I would definitely argue that William Regal, CM Punk and Shelton Benjamin are not lower card wrestlers.

If it's never going to happen, then it won't happen, and it renders this whole conversation moot. Would it be so bad if it did happen? Also, Regal has been sick, which is why he hasn't been wrestling.

And if the damage has been done to the US and IC Titles, then couldn't one make a case for the damage already being done to all the other titles?

Well, they're not. But taking what you said as if it were fact, and that they presently are, then why is that a good thing?

Excuse me while I branch off topic for a second..

Noid, although I have watched BDC and KK rip into with a smile why are you seriously jumping on every and I mean EVERY post they make in this thread? Do you want them to rip you a new asshole? Do you cum in your pants when you go to your User CP and see they have just replied to a post you made?

I'm discussing the topic with them? This is the most civil they have been, and it's quite refreshing to actually discuss wrestling with them.

Kane Knight... BDC... please stop this cease fire now. He is using words like "civil" and "refreshing" :mad:

Nazis.

This thread and discussion are officially over now, right?

You're welcome, Lux. :D

I've said that many times, and consistently. When they started constaly having guys from other shows do "guest spots", the facade of brands became limp at best. It destroys the scenario, and then things like cross brand matches at ppvs, which should be huge, end up being absolutely nothing special. I've also stated the draft should only be done every 3-5 years.

The Tag Titles situation further blurs that messy line. It suggests that anyone from ECW can just go wherever he wants for a tag title shot, because ECW isn't "real". Same with the US title being on ECW with Benjamin for so long. It shows that you don't need to belong to a roster to be eligible for the rosters prize. It makes no sense, and looks really haphazard.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY HITLER!!!!!

Someone please summarize this entire thread for me, I don't feel like reading. D:

Yes but put a little more emotion into it, he thinks you guys care enough about him to not be "as" cruel as you have been.

:cool:

What's this "it would freshen up storylines" and "lower titles will become relevant" bullshit coming off of? Logic? Past experience? Or did we just make it up?

Because really, it smells like bullshit to me. Unifying the titles wouldn't be enough incentive for WWE to do any of that, to be honest.

It's really no different from how things worked in 2002, until HHH was handed the World belt.
I think it could work nicely. It'd be a return to titles meaning something. It'd not only make the WWE title mean more as the lone top belt, but it'd in turn help the IC and US championships.
They should do the same with the Tag Team titles too.

I don't see how it's a bad thing at all. It's better than the current state of things, and although it's not as good as one singular brand/promotion, it is a step in the right direction. It seems to be happening slowly.
First, it was the sharing of talent and rosters more generously from brand to brand.
Then the PPVs being merged.
Now, the titles.
It's only a matter of time before it all ends up under one tent again, if these steps continue.

Even if 2 brands having access to one world title is a bit of a clusterfuck, it's LESS of a clusterfuck than 3 world champions running around at PPVs and supershows.
If they're going to have tri-brand ppvs, which they have to do to business and talent depth, there needs to be one world title and less shared importance on the card.

If the champion is going to be on all the shows, so will his compettitors. There'll be interweaving fueds.
Main events will be far better. The pool of challengers will increase, and matchups will be less repetitive.
I think it's a great idea on all counts.

The title situation and the distribution of power and prestige regarding belt holders and status is a big mess, no matter what discourses we all take.
Some of us might mock the ECW title, and others might defend it. Some may prefer the Raw belt to the Smackdown belt, or the WWE belt to the Big Gold belt.
Everyone has an opinion on the current setup with titles, but the bottom line is it's confusing and controversial at the very least. I think no matter how you slice it, it's flawed as it is.

I say, simplify, and restore meaning to THE world chamiponship. Whether it's defended on one universal brand, or two coexisting brands is really just another can of worms. Making some progress with this problem is better than none at all.