|
Having only one champion can still work. In fact it was working in 2002, the last really good PPV number the WWE did was Brock challenging for the Undiputed title against Rock, since the split the PPV numbers have went south (except for Mania and Rumble, but even those numbers haven't been as good as they were).
The whole idea behind having one champion is that you hopefully create one champion that means something, whereas now they pretty much have two titles that mean nothing.
In terms of confusion I dont really buy that theory. All you have to do is keep the champ on one show in months where there is a brand specific PPV. So, for example in February he would be working on SD, then in April for the next RAW only PPV he will be on RAW. Nothing confusing. If anything it helps some storylines drag out longer, because say something starts on SD between the champ and a SD guy, but then he goes over to RAW on a brand specific PPV month, that gives you a month to tell the fans that the guy on SD wants to kick the champs ass. Then when he finally comes back to SD the fued should be pretty hot.
That said I dont think they plan on going back to one champ anytime soon, but I can see how it would be beneficial to the company.
|