TPWW Forums - View Single Post - Enough Already...The truth of the World Heavyweight Title

**The CyNick** · 08-11-2004, 04:56 PM

Nobody would ever dispute the lineage of the WWE title, which is currently defended on Smackdown and held by JBL.

The disputed title is the title Benoit holds on RAW.

I feel stupid for trying to make sense of something the WWE doesn't even care about, but what the hell. My take on it is that Benoit carries around a belt that physically looks like the old WCW title, but DOES NOT carry its lineage.

WCW went out of business really in 2001 with Booker T as the last WCW Champion, then the WWE took over and WCW ceased to exist. Now, I can see making a case that WCW continued on in the WWE as a "separate" organization. In which case, WCW as a brand died at SurvSer 2002, and therefore the last WCW champion under that logic would have been The Rock.

From that point onward they started to call the WCW title the "World Heavyweight Championship". From there the title gets merged with the WWE title and becomes the Undisputed WWE Championship.

When Steph brought Brock over to SD exclusively Bischoff created a World Title for RAW and used the Big Gold Belt. Now to me that makes the SD title no longer "undisputed" but it still carried the lineage of the World Title (WCW) and the WWE title. There was no WCW at the time, so nobody would have the right to strip Brock of the WCW part of the title and certainly not Eric Bischoff.

Therefore, the World Heavyweight Championship as its known today on RAW has no history prior to 2002. I know they've done pieces where they talk about that belt going back to 1900 or whatever BS they shoot, but to me that makes no sense whatsoever. Because nobody has the power to split up the lineage of the title that is on SD.

Look at it this way, the version of the tag titles on SD is never claimed to have the same history of the old WWF tag titles or the WCW tag titles. It was created and has its own history exclusive to SD. The "real" tag team championship belts are on RAW because they carry the lineage of both the WWE and WCW tag team titles. Just because SD created new titles, doesn't mean they get to take the lineage of another title. And as such, the RAW world heavyweight title cant lay any claim to the WCW heavyweight title just because they use the same physicial belt.

The IC and US titles are a little more complicated because the IC title was merged with the RAW World Title. To me, the RAW World Title is actually the IC title (with the US/Hardcore and Euro titles merged) and the current version of the IC title is a new belt with no history before 2003 or whenever they brought it back. Ditto for the version of the US title on SD.

But like I said, this stuff is stupid because WWE never bothered to make sense of it when it was going down.

08-11-2004, 04:56 PM	#6
The CyNick Make the IWC Great Again Posts: 8,922	Nobody would ever dispute the lineage of the WWE title, which is currently defended on Smackdown and held by JBL. The disputed title is the title Benoit holds on RAW. I feel stupid for trying to make sense of something the WWE doesn't even care about, but what the hell. My take on it is that Benoit carries around a belt that physically looks like the old WCW title, but DOES NOT carry its lineage. WCW went out of business really in 2001 with Booker T as the last WCW Champion, then the WWE took over and WCW ceased to exist. Now, I can see making a case that WCW continued on in the WWE as a "separate" organization. In which case, WCW as a brand died at SurvSer 2002, and therefore the last WCW champion under that logic would have been The Rock. From that point onward they started to call the WCW title the "World Heavyweight Championship". From there the title gets merged with the WWE title and becomes the Undisputed WWE Championship. When Steph brought Brock over to SD exclusively Bischoff created a World Title for RAW and used the Big Gold Belt. Now to me that makes the SD title no longer "undisputed" but it still carried the lineage of the World Title (WCW) and the WWE title. There was no WCW at the time, so nobody would have the right to strip Brock of the WCW part of the title and certainly not Eric Bischoff. Therefore, the World Heavyweight Championship as its known today on RAW has no history prior to 2002. I know they've done pieces where they talk about that belt going back to 1900 or whatever BS they shoot, but to me that makes no sense whatsoever. Because nobody has the power to split up the lineage of the title that is on SD. Look at it this way, the version of the tag titles on SD is never claimed to have the same history of the old WWF tag titles or the WCW tag titles. It was created and has its own history exclusive to SD. The "real" tag team championship belts are on RAW because they carry the lineage of both the WWE and WCW tag team titles. Just because SD created new titles, doesn't mean they get to take the lineage of another title. And as such, the RAW world heavyweight title cant lay any claim to the WCW heavyweight title just because they use the same physicial belt. The IC and US titles are a little more complicated because the IC title was merged with the RAW World Title. To me, the RAW World Title is actually the IC title (with the US/Hardcore and Euro titles merged) and the current version of the IC title is a new belt with no history before 2003 or whenever they brought it back. Ditto for the version of the US title on SD. But like I said, this stuff is stupid because WWE never bothered to make sense of it when it was going down.