So with the Tag Titles Unifying...
 

Do you think we're gonna go back to the days of 1 WWE Champion, 1 Intercontinental Champion, 1 Women's Champion, and 1 Tag Team Champion?

Or, will this idea be blown all to hell.







Discuss Dammit!

One can hope, but it's doubtful tbh

I'm almost certain they're gonna ditch the whole split roster deal altogether and hail it as some revolution or something.

Well, with DJ Gabriel...it could be Dance Dance Revolution!

I hated the early days of having one champion on two rosters because it made things very messy and confusing. Either the champions rivals would appear on both brands, therefore destroying any concept of a brand split, or the champions would have two fueds going on at once, which is not only confusing but actually kinda shit as well.

Same for any of the other titles.

To be honest there is so much useless talent that doesn't get used or isn't really needed that if they wanted to they could end the brand split now and have a decent enough, mixed roster to work with.

What's this intercontinental title?

I dunno how they'd do it, cos there really wouldnt be a point to ECW. Like there is now, btu at least there is a belt on there. They'd have to scrap that and then just have either 2 sets of belts for the 2 remaining or if they have one sets of belts, sack some people. Or create stables to keep peeps happy.

The tag titles and women's titles should be unified, but as long as the roster split is at least claimed to be active, each show needs a World title. But I don't see the roster split lasting too much longer, as it's already basically a moot point.

ditto dude, I like the Tag Titles Unifying. Hell there is hardly ONE tag division, how the hell can we justify having two titles???

I say keep the brandsplit and the two world championships but merge everything else and allow everyone but the world champions to cross over.

In kayfabe, title matches/feuds lock down the champion and the challenger to one brand until it's over. If a champion loses, their contracts are set with the brand on which they lost the title.

This way it allows for wrestlers to get from one brand or another with a logical explanation.

I don't mind inter-brand mixing from the Rumble to Mania, though. In fact, it makes sense (from the Rumble standpoint, anyway). Maybe unlock the rosters either until the week after Mania or until the draft.

Here's how I see things...

Keep two main event titles (WWE and WHC), two mid card titles (IC and US), one set of Tag Champions that can cross over (WWE), one women's champion (women's title), keep the ECW title, and bring back the Hardcore title (24/7 rules).

I would also like single brand ppvs come back so WWE can book shit properly instead of rushing every month. Keep the major ppvs (and No Way Out) as All Branded, put ECW on Raw ppvs, rehire Vince Russo and Paul Heyman (on a VERY SHORT LEASH!!!!), make Hayes the head writer for Raw, Sign El Generico, and don't put so much focus on arm chair booking because I'm sure this shit is harder to do in real life with huge egos and a lot of money on the line.

Ole!

I really think they just realized that there is no point in having two Tag Titles when there are so few tag teams. Two womens title still makes "sense" because there are so many divas in the company. I highly doubt this means any big significant changes to the title line-up or the brand split - they've spent way too long building up this RAW/SD! thing that they won't pull the plug on it yet.

I think the end came when they realised that the only two tag teams they were using were both champions.

By the way do you think that we might be about to see inter-gender tag team titles? They seem to have more mixed tag teams than they have had typical male tag teams for a long time.

I have too much respect for you to lie to you. I stopped reading your post at that point.
No, having two womens titles does not make any sort of sense. You have a lot of eye candy that can do a basic bump and sometimes a body slam, but very few wrestlers. Also women's wrestling, in today's market, is not a draw. Just put the best female wrestlers on one show, kill the Diva's title, and put the rejected soft core porn actress on the other shows.

Jazz and Tommy Dreamer :love:

Since there isn't any teams, this isn't a bad idea.

I don't think that all the titles are going to unify. However, the Tag Team Titles unifying is great. This opens up the Tag division again and we may see the titles defended more often and possible given more time. Maybe PPVs?

Having two Divas titles does make sense at the moment, what doesn't make sense is having so many Divas to warrant two titles.

I didn't know they were unifying the tag titles. sweet. I hope they unify other titles.

I've said on here many times that I hate all these titles and I know I'm in the minority, but I loved in when Brock had the one World Title and appeared on two shows. Obviously that ain't happening for many reasons, but I never liked having two World Champions, because you don't truly have a #1 guy

FourFifty, you're a pretty big douche. Of course having two womens titles makes sense when there are something like 19 divas. Two tag titles for about four tag teams is ridiculous, though.

Did they ever confirm this or is it just an assumption?

It's on the WWE.com website.

Did not realize that.

I doubt they're going to unify the rosters, and unifying the belts would suck quite a bit with split rosters, so I hope they don't unify all the titles. The Tag Team titles are okay, I guess, since there's really no division to begin with.

Out of the 19 divas, how many can really wrestle and how many can draw? You know, what a non-diluted champion should be able to do.

I hear Natalya draws a pretty mean cat. Has realistic whiskers and everything.

That's not the point. The point is that the divas are there and the tag teams are not. You're not exactly wrong, but you are a bit dillusional.

Wait a minute! What if the unification match at WM ends in a double countout/double DQ???

That's what I'm calling.

:'(

:n: (My first thumbs down post)

You're doing it wrong.

The post wasn't related to the previous thread Xero dude.

The quotations around the word "sense" wasn't enough for you?

Still did it wrong.

Whatever. :o

:o