Annoying feud advancement

[Anybody Thrilla]

One thing that's been happening a lot in the past few years is the use of the tactic where someone gets a non-title match against a champion, wins the match, and becomes the number one contender. The most recent example of this was Monday night with Mark Henry beating The Miz.

Now I don't know about you guys, but I think that once a guy is the champion, he shouldn't EVER be beat in singles competition unless he is losing the belt. If they wanted to feud Mark Henry with The Miz, why not have Henry face somebody like Cody Rhodes or Ted DiBiase in a number one contender's match for the US title and keep Miz and Henry apart until their actual title match?

I see what they're trying to accomplish. People are supposed to believe that Henry will win the US strap in an EVENTUAL title match because he did, in fact, beat the champion...but if he beat the champion, shouldn't be be the fucking champion already? Back in the day, the only non-title matches were against jobbers who had no chance in hell. The only reason they were non-title was because the guy obviously didn't deserve a crack at the belt. I would like to see champions defend the title EVERY SINGLE TIME they get in the ring. They'd get WAY more over, I feel.

Anyway, that's my rant. What are your thoughts on this? Are there any other ways of feud advancement that annoy you personally? Discuss them all here!