Wrestlemania XX Main Event

[Vastardikai]

Hate to interject myself into this interesting conversation, but I have an example of something from the past to use as an example to back up CyNick:

If memory serves, the NWA World Heavyweight Champion was a travelling Champion. Every region had their own personal Regional Champion and was their Main Eventer. They also built up guys who were deemed as a legitimate challenge to NWA World Heavyweight Champion, and he would face that person. There was prestige in being the World Heavyweight Champion, and the region he came from definitely got a rub from that person being the champion (we're the best region, as the champion is from here, etc etc.).

I think it would be quite possible that WWE could do that with one Champion, and have the US and Intercontinental Championships be the Brand Specific secondary Titles.

[BasicThuganomics]

Originally Posted by Vastardikai Hate to interject myself into this interesting conversation, but I have an example of something from the past to use as an example to back up CyNick: If memory serves, the NWA World Heavyweight Champion was a travelling Champion. Every region had their own personal Regional Champion and was their Main Eventer. They also built up guys who were deemed as a legitimate challenge to NWA World Heavyweight Champion, and he would face that person. There was prestige in being the World Heavyweight Champion, and the region he came from definitely got a rub from that person being the champion (we're the best region, as the champion is from here, etc etc.). I think it would be quite possible that WWE could do that with one Champion, and have the US and Intercontinental Championships be the Brand Specific secondary Titles.

Well this is a public forum, so if you have something to add, feel free. You give a good example, and I am not arguing the fact that being the Champion of the WWE is more prestigious than just being the champion of RAW or Smackdown. But I personally am just not in favor of having one champion that goes back and forth between two shows. I think that if the rosters are seperated, then they should actually remain seperate . The more I think of it, I really am in favor of my idea to have a champion that is similar to what the SuperBowl champion is for the NFL. Have a tournament or something to set up the main event for Wrestlemania where it might not even be between the two current champions and won't even be for the world title necessarliy. But the winner has bragging rights of being called the best in the WWE for an entire year. I dunno, I haven't actually thought that idea out all the way through, but you get the basic idea?

[The Duck]

I'm a bit indifferent to the idea of merging the titles again. PPVs are sold on main events and the importance of the Championship (in the fans eyes) that's being competed for (along with feuds etc). Having one Champion and one Championship to be shooting for does create this importance, especially when there's two brands and two rosters.

I like the idea of the Champion being assigned to a show if it's their month's PPV. This creates a routine and something that the crowd should be able to understand. It would be interesting to compare the numbers between shows with and without the Champion appearing. Also, should for example John Cena be feuding with Triple H for the strap, but HHH is on Raw for their PPV month - the hype can build for an impending feud between Cena and HHH (especially if Cena is determined to be the #1 contender). Of course, if HHH then drops the strap at the Raw PPV, Cena is left with unfinished business but it creates possibilities for the future.

What having one Champion would do is decrease the sheer quantity of World title matches on WWE TV, which I believe would be a good thing. Do your ratings on the impending hunt/chase for the title and only OCCASSIONALLY for the title matches themselves. If WWE Championship matches take place less frequently there would be an added sense of importance. If the US/IC belts were then used to bridge the gap and ALWAYS given the main event TV slots when they're on the line, then that WWE title match suddenly becomes a huge deal (like in the Hogan-era).

It could also create a real sense of competition for both brands, as when one brand is on it's OFF-month, a number contender must be determined for the following month. Knock Out Tournaments, Round-Robin leagues, Battle Royales etc can all be used occassionally to determine this.

There's potential in it but I don't think WWE would treat it in that way. I don't mind there being two Champions, but as a mark the Championship just don't seem as important and special as they used to.

[The CyNick]

Just want to point out that there are a lot of good points being brought up, its rare you see a decent discussion on here anymore.

BTW, just so its clear, the Summerslam build was mainly around Brock and Rock, yeah they did throw in some HBK-HHH promos, but the vast majority of the spots were the training pieces.

Anyway, I didn't want to bring up the NWA title thing because I didn't know how many people followed NWA back in the day, but thats basically how I think the title should be booked. RAW and SD would have their IC and US champs who would main event, but then when the Undisputed Champ comes in, its a big deal.

The main problem I have with the two world titles is when they have them both on the major PPVs. Wrestling shows should build to a climax, and when you have one world title match, and then another, its hard to get excited and feel the same level of importance for just the one title.

And then the other thing is that you run out of main event matches very quickly. Especially with say Hunter, who has pretty much ran through the entire RAW roster. I mean with Mania coming up, I cant think of a plausible opponent for him on RAW, that we haven't see a million times, or for poilitical reasons wont happen. At least with one champion you create a lot more fresh matches with the champion going between shows.

Personally I felt that Mania would be a good time to at least try to see how the Unified title thing would work. Let one champion go between both shows, and do that for a few months, and then see what happens business wise. If you see some problems, then they could always do an angle to split the titles, which at least would create some controversy.

[OpusCroakus1]

Originally Posted by BasicThuganomics The more I think of it, I really am in favor of my idea to have a champion that is similar to what the SuperBowl champion is for the NFL. Have a tournament or something to set up the main event for Wrestlemania where it might not even be between the two current champions and won't even be for the world title necessarliy. But the winner has bragging rights of being called the best in the WWE for an entire year. I dunno, I haven't actually thought that idea out all the way through, but you get the basic idea?

Well, there was something like this.... the "King of the Ring" tournament.

[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"...

[BasicThuganomics]

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.

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.

[The CyNick]

Its looking like the main event could be Benoit vs Hunter

[blake639raw]

Originally Posted by The CyNick Its looking like the main event could be Benoit vs Hunter

Where have you heard this? Details?

[The CyNick]

Originally Posted by blake639raw Where have you heard this? Details?

Its putting information from a few sources (mainly the Observer) and adding 2 and 2 to make 4.

Basically, the two matches that consistantly have been rumoured and continue to be, is Kane vs Taker and Brock vs Goldberg.

Another rumour started some time last week or the week before that the WWE was thinking of having the RR winner be from Smackdown, but then challenge the RAW Champ (Hunter) instead of the SD champ. This was confirmed as being a discussed plan in the Observer this week. Furthermore, the Observer is also saying the working plan is still to have Brock vs Goldberg and it would be for the SD title.

Also, after watching SD a couple of weeks ago it looked like they were setting up Benoit to recreate Ric Flair's achievements by going a full hour to win the Royal Rumble in order to make him a superstar.

So it stands to reason with the WWE wanting to do Brock-Goldberg, that they would have Benoit win and then challenge for the RAW title. Also consider that the winner of the Rumble gets the last match at Mania. So it also stands to reason that the WWE would want Benoit capturing his first "WWE" title as the last match at Wrestlemania. This would be a better choice in terms of match quality (and since its likley Brock as a heel will go over in this match) over Brock-Goldberg and more importantly from a political standpoint you know Hunter will want to be in the top spot at the biggest show in WWE history. This scenario would please Hunter, which is obviously very important.

None of this is confirmed 100%, but all the pieces seem to fit. You add that to the fact that they have decided to hold off the Orton turn on Hunter to go with the Rock n Sock tag match, and it makes even more sense.

Another piece of news from the Observer was that apparently all the top matches for Mania were laid out over a month ago, and all the angles are being set up so that those matches will have as much steam as possible going into the show. So, thats good news.