Do titles still actually mean anything anymore?

**Franchise** · 11-24-2014, 12:56 AM

I've felt this about the titles for some time.

I guess it began back at WM 18 when Rock v Hogan overshadowed the main event and then again at WM 26 when Taker v HBK (with his career on the line) headlined the card and then Rock v Cena at WM 28.

Perhaps it began when we had the brand extension and both the WHC and WWE title around.

But it just feels the titles don't mean so much anymore. The person holding the title is a part-timer who comes and go as he pleases as per his contract. The US and IC titles with their long and distinguished histories lack the prestige they once had. They were also stepping stones for the rising stars towards the main title but we've had the likes of Kofi Kingston hold the title and never progress to main-event status and then people like Santino..

The tag-team division I will give some credit for and I guess the Divas championship serves its purpose.

But for the other three.....do they really mean anything? Even when he isn't holding the belt John Cena is still the big star and regardless of who wins the Royal Rumble, the WWE title match isn't going to headline WM31.......after tonight it couldn't possibly be anything other than Sting v Triple H.....unless in some bizarre story-writing, Triple H is some how holding the WWE title at the time.

Title matches are meant to be exciting and those winning the titles are either big stars or getting the push towards the main event.

What do you think?

11-24-2014, 12:56 AM	#1
Franchise Posts: 357	Do titles still actually mean anything anymore? I've felt this about the titles for some time. I guess it began back at WM 18 when Rock v Hogan overshadowed the main event and then again at WM 26 when Taker v HBK (with his career on the line) headlined the card and then Rock v Cena at WM 28. Perhaps it began when we had the brand extension and both the WHC and WWE title around. But it just feels the titles don't mean so much anymore. The person holding the title is a part-timer who comes and go as he pleases as per his contract. The US and IC titles with their long and distinguished histories lack the prestige they once had. They were also stepping stones for the rising stars towards the main title but we've had the likes of Kofi Kingston hold the title and never progress to main-event status and then people like Santino.. The tag-team division I will give some credit for and I guess the Divas championship serves its purpose. But for the other three.....do they really mean anything? Even when he isn't holding the belt John Cena is still the big star and regardless of who wins the Royal Rumble, the WWE title match isn't going to headline WM31.......after tonight it couldn't possibly be anything other than Sting v Triple H.....unless in some bizarre story-writing, Triple H is some how holding the WWE title at the time. Title matches are meant to be exciting and those winning the titles are either big stars or getting the push towards the main event. What do you think? Last edited by slik; 11-26-2014 at 10:17 PM.