Thread: QUESTION - Could ECW work as a "niche'd" show? (i.e. devoted to Cruiserweights, etc.)
View Single Post
Old 11-04-2009, 03:29 AM   #33
Heyman
Father of Hinduship
 
Heyman's Avatar
 
Posts: 21,083
Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAMN iNATOR View Post
Uh, hello? Undertaker is the top guy on SD! right now, and I know your view is that the big gold World Heavyweight Championship means more prestige for guys who have held it while on RAW, presumably because that's where Eric Bischoff first introduced it as a main event title in the WWE.
No. My view is that the RAW Heavyweight Championship is more prestigious than that of Smackdown's, due to the way that the WWE themselves have positioned it.

Why do you think the WWE moved Jeff Hardy over to Smackdown, as opposed to letting him stay on RAW back in 2008? Why do you think guys like Edge, Big Show (post 2003), Booker T, RVD, Rey Mysterio, etc. all become world champions on shows OTHER than RAW?

Why do you think that for most Wrestlemania's, the RAW main-event is the final match on the card? (and that whenever Smackdown has the 'final title match' on the card, it always involves Undertaker winning?).


Quote:
However, (NEVER thought I'd see myself type this next part) I must agree with Juan that it doesn't really matter which show holds the WWE title and which one holds the World Heavyweight title. By using your very same logic as a devil's advocate thing here, I could, although, inaccurately, biasedly (if that's even a word) say that the World Heavyweight Championship is more prestigious on SD! because the first time it was held by someone on SD! it wasn't awarded to them, the way Triple H's title was by Bischoff. Doesn't make it true.

When you take a good hard look at who was on what brands when they won the World title, I think you'd have to admit that your statement that the World title is more prestigious on RAW than on SD! is utterly ridiculous.
RAW is the clear cut #1 show and the World title (whichever World title it is) is always THE #1 belt whenever it is on RAW. Period.

As much as we want guys like Jeff Hardy, CM Punk, etc. to be seen in the same light as Cena, Orton, Batista, and Triple H, the WWE does see them as such....and does not regard them as such.


THIS is what needs to be changed in my opinion.

Winning a world title does not hold as much significance nowadays as it once did....especially if this world title victory comes on Smackdown (CM Punk), ECW (Christian), or even on RAW if one is positioned as a transitional champ (Jericho). The one TRUE thing that really matters, is if you are pushed as THE #1 guy in the company (and this is no longer synonymous with being world champ).

The ONLY way a guy be a legit #1 guy in the company right now (i.e. the "face" of the company), is if they have a lengthy World Heavyweight title reign......on RAW.....AND a 100% clean victory is obtained over Triple H.

This is why guys like John Cena and Dave Batista became as big as they did. It's also one reason why Chris Benoit's victory in 2004 was so huge (although unfortunately for Benoit, he was pushed as a transitional champ).

It is also the reason why Edge, as many World titles as he's won, and as much of the man that he is, has NEVER been considered to be the "#1 guy in the company" at any point in his career. I truly hope that changes within the next few years.
Heyman is offline   Reply With Quote