Quote:
|
Originally Posted by OpusCroakus1
Well, there was something like this.... the "King of the Ring" tournament.
|
If you read my earlier post you would have noticed that I said something different than the King of the Ring Tournament. Plus the King of the Ring never meant you were the best, more of an up and comer to look out for in the future. This would be a title that people who suck like Mable, and Billy Gunn wouldn't be able to win.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by OpusCroakus1
I want to thank everyone who's posted their ideas and opinions here.... we've got a pretty good conversation going.
Well, I very much agree with the opinion that a "Raw Champion" and a "Smackdown Champion" is NOT a good thing.... it was a nice novelty for a while, including having a Wrestlemania where both titles were seperatly contested..... but I think it would be a BIG mistake to have that happen at Wrestlemania XX again. At the biggest show of the year (the "decade" WM) there should be ONE Champion.
I also like the idea of the "Brand" championships being the IC and the US.... both are very prestigious, and having them be the ultimate "brand" prize would make sence....
I also have been of the opinion that the "Contendership Rankings" should be made more important, and that the race to be "Number One Contender" should be emphisized..... And having one WWE Champion going from show to show would help that.....
So, I still say.... Main Event at Wrestlemania XX - Double Jeopardy Match... Match 1 for the "World Heveyweight Champ." / Match 2 for the "WWE Championship"... both matches going on at the same time in the same ring, anybody can attack anybody else, but they can only acheve victory by defeating the person they're matched up against, and when both matches have reached a decision, the match would contune between the two winners untill one was left.... to be crowned the Undisputed Champ.
Of course, this could have a Bichoff/Raw vs Heyman/SD buildup.... etc...
I really think this is the best possible setup... especially for the "biggest Wrestlemania of them all"....
|
You have your opinion and I've said all that I can think of on the topic of one or two titles. I like your idea about making the race for the #1 contendership more important. It is a good idea, whether there are one or two titles. But your "double Jeopardy" main event sounds really bad IMO. I don't want to see a 4way cluster**** for the main event followed by a Interbrand match that isn't going to have a good build up besides the idea of RAW vs Smackdown. I think the main event of Wrestlemania is something that should be between two superstars who have legitimate heat between each other fighting for the championship. Not just two champions who happen to end up facing each other out of nowhere without any build up between them whatsoever. Even if the titles were United, then I don't think it's a good idea to do it at WMXX. WWE already has a good fued going between Brock and Benoit that could deliver a 5star classic if given the chance as the main event for WMXX. If you've seen my posts, you realize I want to see this match for the main event. I just don't think the WWE would be able to build up a reason why the titles need to be Unified and to have time to build up a good fued for the main event. Brock vs Goldberg is another obvious choice. But the match will not be that good I think. Lesnar can carry Goldberg to a good match I'm sure, but the main event of WMXX needs to be AWESOME, not just good.
But yeah this whole discussion basically comes down to personal preference. Whether or not you think having one champion with two seperate rosters is good or not. I of course have stated that seperate rosters should equal seperate champs IMO.