I remember when the WHC/WWE title used to mean something
 

Nowadays, it just gets tossed around like Rhiannon at a party full of black people

It doesn't mean anything these days anymore. Swagger held it, now Kane.

They need to unify the WWE and WHC into the Undisputed title or whatever

On a side note, I'm surprised they're still using the "Cena spinner belt" as the current model. I know it doesn't spin right now, but you know what I mean.


Discuss

The spinner belt does suck.

Agreed, I hate the spinner... Who the hell likes anything with a spinner nowadays?

what I meant to say is that they're still using the same general design, minus the spinning. When you look at the WWE title, its' associated with John Cena

It's like what if they still used the smoking skull belt as the WWE title

I miss the undisputed title.

It was kinda awkward though. If Rock was the Undisputed Champ, and faced the challenger, Undertaker (who was restricted to SD!) who would Rock feud with while he was on RAW?

I remember they had this problem back in 2002

I remember a couple one off matches Rock had, one with Eddie.

good thing about this though, let's say the Undisputed Champ was feuding with a guy from SD! On SD! the focus could be on the UC. Meanwhile on RAW, they could use that time to showcase an IC or US feud. Hell, it could even be a HBK vs. Undertaker type deal (when no title is involved)

The two separate world titles made a lot more sense when Raw and Smackdown held brand exclusive PPV's. Now that PPV's are all inclusive one undisputed title could be a possibility. I agree with The Naitch in that if you unite the titles, not only do you add value to the World Title but the US and IC titles will also increase in value.

I don't even think you need to merge the roster for the undisputed title to work. Just allow that champion to roam between shows as "THE" champion and proceed with business as usual.

The spinner belt looks like something a gay pimp would wear.

I think it would help if they focus raw on the world title and since smackdown is clearly the b show, use that to focus on a secondary title (u.s. or intercontinental). the divas and womans titles are irrelevant with their current talent so no adjustment needed. The tag champs should go from show to show giving teams time to develop and not just get shots because they show up or are slapped together. If either show needs an extra title they can just create a tv title.

Eh, I like the fact that there's two titles. The roster is too topheavy to have only one title, and sticking that one title on Raw would make Smackdown seem too inferior.

Plus, reason SD is so weak now is because its still on MyNetwork. Come their move to SyFy I'd bet that it'll get beefed up.

I do agree though that the titleholders do look weak though...I attribute it to them not being the main focus of the show really.

Id rather they enforced the brand split again, i think going back to one top title would end up with the main event growing stale. No way Swagger or Sheamus would have won the belts if there was only the undisputed title. I agree with snowden though, if the belts were the main focus they wouldnt look as weak.

Redesign the WWE Title like you did the Tag belts and unveil it at NOC.

The WWF belt meant a lot.The WWE belt is a toy and disgusts me. The WHC is awesome and the most classic looking.

i think they will keep the spinner kids like it, gives them something to do before matches, spining that belt.

I think they need to redesign the belt so it's not a spinner. Let Cena use the spinner as his personal custom belt next time he wins the damned thing.

IF the shows are going to have two top belts, they need to emphasize brand division. Go back to branded PPVs, with only the "major" PPVs being cross brand. Drop it to a single MITB winner, so "jumping brands" is a big deal. And for crying out loud, the focus of the shows should be the title holder. He shouldn't be marginalized for other feuds. Back your damn champs.

Pretty sure the belt doesn't actually spin anymore.

The two main titles means more opportunity for guys who may not be able to have their run (deserved or not) with the top belt. The problem, in my view, stems for two things; too many title switches per year and the title being put on the back burner for other feuds.

I understand that 8 to 9 month long title reigns grow stale for plenty of reasons, but the fact that guys like Edge, Cena, Batista, and hell even Orton have amassed the high number of title reigns they have despite being in the main event for only the better part of five years is ridiculous.

You look at Bret hart's first two title reigns, and the second one started a year after the first one ended. They built his character up for a whole year before putting him back in the main event. These days, Cena loses the belt, and ends up winning at least one more time before Mania. To me, winning that often and losing it that often only dilutes the title's meaning and prestige.

The latter half of my reasoning is evident right now on Raw. Nexus is the "it" feud in the company on Raw right now. Meanwhile the WWE title has been relegated to the midcard. This is the company's name bearing title. It is the top championship in the company and is featured on the flagship show, yet they reduce its importance because their biggest star has other things to take care of. Shouldn't be this way.

The rate of title wins bother me the most. 13 years ago during SummerSlam '97 when Bret Hart won the WWF championship for the 5th time it was a huge deal. The WWE wouldn't stop talking about it and threw it in the fans' faces every chance they had. Why? Because no one else on the roster had held the belt that many times. And that cemented Bret Hart as "the best there is....bla blah."

These days, a wrestler can win the world title 5 times in one year. It's a joke. Between the two current world titles, Cena has been world champion 9 times in the WWE (7 WWE and 2 WHC). Meanwhile HBK, who is considered "officially" as one of the greatest wrestlers ever was only world champion 4 times (3 WWE and 1 WHC). And his WHC reign was a joke. He won it in his second match back from his 4 year retirement, successfully defended it one time against Jeff Hardy) and LOST by disqualification. Then lost the belt to Triple H in the big PPV rematch. Cena has been champion more than twice as much as Shawn, but his skills and his legacy won't even touch HBK's or Bret's.

The title means absolutely nothing. Hell, it doesn't even main event PPVs half the time now.

I like that.

And think about all the new matches/fueds it could spawn.

Bring back this belt in my opinion, at least it had credibility to its look and the lineage of champions who actually wore this belt make it the choice IMO:

http://www.highspots.com/images/imag...d_attitude.jpg

I wish they would occasionally let someone hold both belts without unifying, sort of like they did with the tag titles until now. That guy could only defend each respective title in it's brand sanctioned match like they do in boxing.

I remember those days when it was important. It's a shame that the WWE devalued their titles and talent.

I'm really disappointed about the devaluing of the titles. Regardless of what people think about the NWA Title, it is still THE title, in my opinion. Just like the AWA title would be if it was still around. It is this way to me because these titles were/are the sign of someone who is truly the best. The title should never be some merchandise piece. Fuck the fucking spinner. Give me the legendary 10 lbs of gold

As dated as it is. I really dig kayfabe and I really dig "territory" wrestling.

I'm glad someone agrees with me.