Quote:
|
Originally Posted by BasicThuganomics
OK, SummerSlam 2002 was not just built around the main event of Brock vs. Rock. That was one of the best cards for a PPV that we have seen in a long time. HBK/HHH, Rey vs. Kurt, RVD vs Benoit and so many other great matches that took place that night. Decline in PPV buyrates can also be because of the general decline in viewers that has been happening ever since 2001. WMXIX was a better show though perhaps, but my point is still that there hasn't been very many PPV's recently that are nearly as good as SS2002 was.
Having one champ is going to make the guy holding it more credible than 2 champs, But I am saying that having one champ will not matter if HHH is still holding down guys on both shows, and the title isn't booked properly. WWE is still capable of making two champs be credible if they would stop doing stupid things with whoever is champ. (like having Sparkplugg be the #1 contender for example)
As, for having the champ appear on one show a month. This seems like a really bad idea to me personally. Whatever show the champ is not on is not going to be taken as seriously while there is no Heavyweight Champion. CyNick, you don't actually think that fans will want to watch a show when there is no true champion representing that show do you? I like your idea of highlighting secondary titles while the Champ is away on the other show. But the WWE is more than capable of doing that now, and it still doesn't happen.
I don't think your idea is all that bad. But I think that with two seperate shows, having two champs would be better if the WWE would just do a better job of making the titles seem more valuable.
|
What I mean with SS 02 is that the promotion of the PPV was based on Brock and Rock doing those workout vignettes and saying these two guys are fighting for the Undisputed Championship. The fact that they had some really strong matches on that show had nothing to do with how many people ordered the show. And in terms of ratings between then and now, thats not really the point, because the PPVs directly after SS 02 had a big drop and they have been doing about the same numbers since then.
I totally agree that if Hunter were to hold guys down thats going to be a problem, but that irrelevant to this discussion. I mean I could argue having two separate champs is bad because Scott Stiener could hold one title and A-Train could hold the other. That would be bad, but we have to stick to the topic. Again, I agree HHH holding people back is bad, but thats besides the point.
SD last week didn't have Brock on the show, and I thought it was a pretty solid show. Again, the key is to build up the secondary titles to a point where the guys holding them are main eventers on their own. I mean for me, and this is just my opinion the RAW title has no value to me. It wasn't won in any sort of competition and there was no angle to strip Brock of half of the Undisputed title. So to me its about as meaningful as the Million $ title from back in the day. So in my view RAW hasn't had a World Title since the last time Rock was there when he was champ in 2002. But even with that in mind, RAW has still had some good shows since that time. So I dont think a lack of a World Champ for a month is going to hurt a show, so long as the secondary title holders have been built up to a level where they can carry the show. It would be kinda like in ECW where they had RVD as TV champ, but he was more over, and worked more main events than Taz or anyone else who was the World Champion.