There Might Be A Single World Title Again

[Jeritron]

Originally Posted by .44 Magdalene What's this "it would freshen up storylines" and "lower titles will become relevant" bullshit coming off of? Logic? Past experience? Or did we just make it up? Because really, it smells like bullshit to me. Unifying the titles wouldn't be enough incentive for WWE to do any of that, to be honest.

How would it not? If there's one world title, there are more contenders and thus less repetition in the matchups. They'd have to make a strong effort.
It's speculation, but it's based in logic.

Also, with less titles the IC and US titles would account for more. There'd be less room in the main event for as many talents to be used at once.

There is past experience to base this of off. Did you watch wrestling in 2002, or in any of the years prior to that?

[.44 Magdalene]

Originally Posted by Jeritron How would it not? If there's one world title, there are more contenders and thus less repetition in the matchups. They'd have to make a strong effort. It's speculation, but it's based in logic. Also, with less titles the IC and US titles would be used more often, and less wrestlers would be pushed into the world divisions. There is past experience to base this of off. Did you watch wrestling in 2002, or in any of the years prior to that?

If there's one world title, your contenders consist of former contenders for both old titles--in other words, instead of HHH, Taker, Edge, etc going for one title and John Cena, Batista, JBL etc going for the other, all of those guys would go for one. There's less repetition in a very vague sense, I guess, since now we could watch John Cena and HHH go at it oh wait.

In fact, they could make less effort because they now have an excuse for just throwing random guys together. You can have Batista and Taker fight over the title. Brand split? Reasoning? Psh, Taker wants his shot. There's no real reason to think this would drive home the plot development.

Less wrestlers getting pushed to the world division doesn't really mean more credibility for the midcard belts. They're going to be defended once every so often (like usual), and once per PPV (like usual). It'll hurt the credibility of a show overall to not have the main belt up for grabs, but an IC title doesn't automatically become a main event belt just because the real main event belt is on the other brand

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by Jeritron How would it not? If there's one world title, there are more contenders and thus less repetition in the matchups. They'd have to make a strong effort. It's speculation, but it's based in logic.

The same argument was presented for the roster split. It was "based on logic" then, too. And yet, here we are, arguing the opposite as logical.

[Jeritron]

Originally Posted by Kane Knight The same argument was presented for the roster split. It was "based on logic" then, too. And yet, here we are, arguing the opposite as logical.

Well, the roster split worked in 2003, in my opinion. The problem is that now they're in limbo. The ppvs are merged, and half of the rosters are merged, so why not the titles?
They really have to committ one way or another, and I feel at this point committing to one title is the better step.
There's really no chance of them going back to strict roster splits and lone-brand PPVs. So, I feel as though they should go with this title merger, rather than sit on the fence like they're doing now.

The brand/title/ppv system circa 2003 may be > the proposed change. The brand/title system circa 2000 may be > the proposed change as well.
But, the brand/title/ppv system right now is far worse than how it would be if this proposed change is adopted, IMO.