Should The TV Title Be Brought Back? (Under these rules)

[RemyRed]

Rules for WWE Television Champion

Must defend belt on all shows, even Velocity and Heat. Anyone who holds the title will still officially be part of their roster, when they lose the belt they return to being exclusively on their show.

The new television title would be crowned via battle royal or tournament in which 4 starts are selected from each show to compete in on one of the PPVs.

Anyone think this idea could work?

Great idea, but I doubt it will happen.

[loopydate]

Nope. There are already eight titles, half of which aren't being used properly. We don't need a ninth.

[HeartBreakMan2k]

No. I'm not so sure a wrestler would be to thrilled having to travel seperately from the rest of the roster, especially considering he'd have to wrestle twice a night two nights a week, and probably would still have to do the odd house show. Plus it screws the idea of Smackdown and Raw being two seperate brands.

[HeartBreakMan2k]

Originally Posted by loopydate Nope. There are already eight titles, half of which aren't being used properly. We don't need a ninth.

[LK]

What loopydate said

[RemyRed]

By HearBreakKid2k2 No. I'm not so sure a wrestler would be to thrilled having to travel seperately from the rest of the roster, especially considering he'd have to wrestle twice a night two nights a week, and probably would still have to do the odd house show. Plus it screws the idea of Smackdown and Raw being two seperate brands.

It doesn't screw the idea of Smackdown and Raw being two separate shows, only one person will be travelling bewtween them. And if the belt is used properly, imagine the amount of exposure one would recieve holding this belt. If given to the right wrestler or a newcomer looking to make a name for himself, it could elevate their status quickly wouldn't it?

Originally Posted by loopydate Nope. There are already eight titles, half of which aren't being used properly. We don't need a ninth.

True there are eight titles, but you only see 4 for each brand, this one would be a universal title that you could see on both, so if a fan favorite on Raw obtained the belt and thus had to defend it Thursday on Smackdown, wouldn't it help Smackdown's floundering ratings and lead for some interesting matches?

[loopydate]

Originally Posted by RemyRedAssassin True there are eight titles, but you only see 4 for each brand, this one would be a universal title that you could see on both, so if a fan favorite on Raw obtained the belt and thus had to defend it Thursday on Smackdown, wouldn't it help Smackdown's floundering ratings and lead for some interesting matches?

No, I don't think it would. For starters, if a RAW superstar held the TV Title and beat the top contender from SmackDown, it would make SmackDown look even weaker than it already does.

WWE needs to concentrate on making the belts they already have look like they mean something, as opposed to bringing in a new one. Once the Cruiserweight, WWE Tag Team, and Women's Titles are built up properly, then they can think about bringing in a new one.

A ninth title will only bury the ones they already have even worse.

[RemyRed]

Quote: Originally Posted By loopydate No, I don't think it would. For starters, if a RAW superstar held the TV Title and beat the top contender from SmackDown, it would make SmackDown look even weaker than it already does. WWE needs to concentrate on making the belts they already have look like they mean something, as opposed to bringing in a new one. Once the Cruiserweight, WWE Tag Team, and Women's Titles are built up properly, then they can think about bringing in a new one. A ninth title will only bury the ones they already have even worse.

How would it make Smackdown look weaker? It's not like they'd be beating the whole roster of the other brand, just one person, it wouldn't make the brand weaker in my opinion, just give more credibility to the current title holder. Plus as a TV Championship, the holder would represent both brands for however long they'd hold the belt.

[The One]

Only if Randy Orton was the first, last, and only Champion (that way I can watch Mr. RKO on every show )

[Mayo]

Originally Posted by RemyRedAssassin How would it make Smackdown look weaker? It's not like they'd be beating the whole roster of the other brand, just one person, it wouldn't make the brand weaker in my opinion, just give more credibility to the current title holder. Plus as a TV Championship, the holder would represent both brands for however long they'd hold the belt.

Vince wants to keep the brands as distinct as possible right now, so I don't think that he would be willing to do this. I think that after realizing that the undisputed world championship idea meant that one wrestler had to do twice as many shows, he probably found it rather unfair. It doesn't make sense to do this with only one title, much less a TV title, so Vince either has to do it with all titles or do it with none.

It would also not be too easy to create feuds between guys from Raw and Smackdown because they don't interact on a regular basis and so there isn't much real tension between the brands. Using lame reasons for feuds such as "Show A is better than Show B so I'll kick your ass!' or "I never liked you, and I'm better than you, so let's fight" would look stupid.

Besides, good luck getting the belt from Hacksaw Jim Duggan.

[Favre4Ever]

I think its a good idea, but as loopydate said, not until they get all their other shit together. If I trusted the writers not to half ass this , it would be cool, but thats not the case.

[Sephiroth]

Nope, i think it's a good idea but, like Loopy said we don't need a new title.

[The Mackem]

Originally Posted by Funky Fly Besides, good luck getting the belt from Hacksaw Jim Duggan.

Did he not sell it on Ebay or something?

[The Ravishing One]

Yeah i think he did, along with his blue tights. *smells $500 tights*

[Heyman]

Originally Posted by RemyRedAssassin Rules for WWE Television Champion Must defend belt on all shows, even Velocity and Heat. Anyone who holds the title will still officially be part of their roster, when they lose the belt they return to being exclusively on their show. The new television title would be crowned via battle royal or tournament in which 4 starts are selected from each show to compete in on one of the PPVs. Anyone think this idea could work?

Hmmmmm..........

I actually love the idea (atleast the theory behind this idea). It would be a FABULOUS way to get a mid-card wrestler 'over' (since I'm assuming that a "mid-card" wrestler would be the holder of such a belt, he'd be getting twice as much TV time as every other superstar).

The PPV idea is also a good one..............because atleast you have some "interpromotional" stuff going on.



If it was up to me, I'd highly consider this idea:

-Get rid of both the U.S. and Intercontinental title (or unify these belts to make a "TV title" belt). The title holder has to appear on all shows.

-Make the World titles unified as well (the Undisputed champ must also appear on both shows).

Not only does this create more interpromotional feuds (which would be good for ratings IMO....atleast short term), but it would serve as a way of REALLY establishing a mid-card wrestler..........or a new world heavyweight champ, as a household name!


Great idea.

[Heyman]

Originally Posted by Heyman Hmmmmm.......... I actually love the idea (atleast the theory behind this idea). It would be a FABULOUS way to get a mid-card wrestler 'over' (since I'm assuming that a "mid-card" wrestler would be the holder of such a belt, he'd be getting twice as much TV time as every other superstar). The PPV idea is also a good one..............because atleast you have some "interpromotional" stuff going on. If it was up to me, I'd highly consider this idea: -Get rid of both the U.S. and Intercontinental title (or unify these belts to make a "TV title" belt). The title holder has to appear on all shows. -Make the World titles unified as well (the Undisputed champ must also appear on both shows). Not only does this create more interpromotional feuds (which would be good for ratings IMO....atleast short term), but it would serve as a way of REALLY establishing a mid-card wrestler..........or a new world heavyweight champ, as a household name! Great idea.

Now just imagine - if one day on RAW (maybe a few weeks from now), John Cena showed up just out of the blue.....and challenged the Intercontinental champion to a "winner take all" match (and made the "TV title" stipulations).


-Cena could be considered the "top-face" in the entire company.

If that's the case, then wouldn't it make sense to get him on TV as much as possible? (and see him feud with people that you've never seen before?). Cena, as TV title champ, could have "run-ins" with Triple H backstage......or Orton for that matter. Regardless - it would be interesting as hell.

[RemyRed]

Exactly what I was thinking, and I think would help out Smackdown! a great deal ratings-wise.

[Pepsi Man]

When I first read this, I thought it said, "Should TV Title rules be brought back?"

And I thought, "That's not a half bad idea." Remember the old ten minute time limit that they kept fighting to on WCW Saturday Night and WCW World Wide along with WCW Main Event? Bring that kind of match back.

[Gouda]

Those TV title matches with the time limit were great. Wasn't it 15 minutes though?

[Pepsi Man]

Originally Posted by Gouda Those TV title matches with the time limit were great. Wasn't it 15 minutes though?

Maybe, but I coulda sworn I remembered Regal always retaining via "ten minute time limit draw".

[Heyman]

Originally Posted by Pepsi Man Maybe, but I coulda sworn I remembered Regal always retaining via "ten minute time limit draw".

So when you speak with your mom on MS...er I mean Yahoo messenger, does she also say, "sorry son........the ten minute time limit has been reached. I'm ending our conversation!" (and then proceeds to temporarily block you for the next few weeks ).

[Pepsi Man]

Originally Posted by Heyman So when you speak with your mom on MS...er I mean Yahoo messenger, does she also say, "sorry son........the ten minute time limit has been reached. I'm ending our conversation!" (and then proceeds to temporarily block you for the next few weeks ).

That just has so much to do with the TV Title and wrestling in general that I think you deserve a Slammy for that.

[John la Rock]

WCW and ECW are DEAD

[Mr. Nerfect]

Originally Posted by John la Rock WCW and ECW are DEAD

So?

I'd LOVE to see the WWE bring in a new title and name it the "WWE Television Championship" and have to defended on all televised events, and televised events only. Think of Rhyno winning the title at the Royal Rumble, then appearing on every PPV and every show for the next six months. The title wouldn't be recognised as a RAW or SmackDown! belt as such, but rather Vince McMahon's opportunity belt. Give it a new history, and have it defendined amongst the lower-mid card. So keep it below the IC Title and US Titles in term of credibility, but keep it strong enough so the idea of a IC vs. TV vs. US champ would be interesting.

The wrestlers shouldn't be too disgruntled, as this allows them to have four televised matches per week, allows them to get recognition, some strong wins, and they wouldn't need to do house shows, but if/when they did it would be a MAJOR thing.

The TV Champ would almost alienate himself from both packs of wrestlers storyline-wise, and it really could be desireable for the talent to actually want to win this championship. It would create unlimited possibilites as far as storylines go. I can see a wrestler playing the face on RAW and the heel on SmackDown! or something like a wrestler winning say the US Title on SmackDown! while they're a RAW superstar with the TV Title, then when they lose the TV Championship, they are forced to forfeit the IS Championship, leading up to a massive tournament. I can even see the Television Champion winning the IC Title and then defending it on SmackDown! as well, just as a taunting of their skills. Maybe one year the TV Champ could win the Royal Rumble, and tease main event title matches on both brands.

I love this idea as the possiblities are endless, and it really would be original, and shouldn't damage the current brand-exclusive title scene.

[Sting Fan]

It was 15 or 25 definately not 10 minutes.

I am pretty sure it was 15 though, that was what mnade the Booker vs. Benoit best of 7 so good, it was about 14 minutes of pure action and speed for every match.

Good times.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Originally Posted by Sting Fan It was 15 or 25 definately not 10 minutes. I am pretty sure it was 15 though, that was what mnade the Booker vs. Benoit best of 7 so good, it was about 14 minutes of pure action and speed for every match. Good times.

I think they should really have time limit matches on the "B" shows. Hire some seperate writers, and allow them to do whatever they want to the sub-shows. Maybe they could even being back the WWE European Championship to RAW, and create a new WWE Television Championship for SmackDown!, and you can have them on the "B" shows on a weekly basis?

[Eunos]

no.. work with what you already have.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Originally Posted by Eunos no.. work with what you already have.

But this is a NEW idea that requires a NEW Championship (if it was to be carried out). The only other option I can think of is the IC Title and the US Title being held by one person (but not unifyed so to speak), and defended on both brands together with the wrestler who wins them appearing on both brands.