|
I'm a bit indifferent to the idea of merging the titles again. PPVs are sold on main events and the importance of the Championship (in the fans eyes) that's being competed for (along with feuds etc). Having one Champion and one Championship to be shooting for does create this importance, especially when there's two brands and two rosters.
I like the idea of the Champion being assigned to a show if it's their month's PPV. This creates a routine and something that the crowd should be able to understand. It would be interesting to compare the numbers between shows with and without the Champion appearing. Also, should for example John Cena be feuding with Triple H for the strap, but HHH is on Raw for their PPV month - the hype can build for an impending feud between Cena and HHH (especially if Cena is determined to be the #1 contender). Of course, if HHH then drops the strap at the Raw PPV, Cena is left with unfinished business but it creates possibilities for the future.
What having one Champion would do is decrease the sheer quantity of World title matches on WWE TV, which I believe would be a good thing. Do your ratings on the impending hunt/chase for the title and only OCCASSIONALLY for the title matches themselves. If WWE Championship matches take place less frequently there would be an added sense of importance. If the US/IC belts were then used to bridge the gap and ALWAYS given the main event TV slots when they're on the line, then that WWE title match suddenly becomes a huge deal (like in the Hogan-era).
It could also create a real sense of competition for both brands, as when one brand is on it's OFF-month, a number contender must be determined for the following month. Knock Out Tournaments, Round-Robin leagues, Battle Royales etc can all be used occassionally to determine this.
There's potential in it but I don't think WWE would treat it in that way. I don't mind there being two Champions, but as a mark the Championship just don't seem as important and special as they used to.
|