Kane - 2 Time World Champ Now? - Page 2

**Destor** · 04-06-2008, 10:41 AM

But it does exactly what they intended it to do, creates competition. In a kayfabe sense look at the discussion above us. People were arguing of which band has the superior title. you can go to any forum and you'll see this debate happening every other week.

Now for my money it was damn sure a much more credible argument back in the 80's but it's the same argument. To be fair, it's just the same as comparing JCP titles to GCW titles, they were both governed by the NWA, and shared a lot of talent on special occasions. but they had seperate entitties.

Thats the WWE's goal and they get a lot of people to treat it in a very simialr way.

**The Optimist** · 04-06-2008, 02:07 PM

Ultimately, the illusion of competition is better than the lack of it. In a perfect world, ECW, Raw and Smackdown would be different brands in a much more strict sense of the word and actually try to compete with each other.

Does the TNA title mean more or less than the ECW title?

**Loose Cannon** · 04-06-2008, 07:29 PM

A lot More imo.

but yea, Destor makes a great point and I see what he's saying. I would like to see the WWE position one of the World Titles as the better of the three so you give the wrestlers the ultimate goal to aim for instead of just saying "well, I can go after 1 of 3 titles and still be a World Champion", you know?

**Destor** · 04-06-2008, 07:38 PM

Yeah one superior title is the way to go. The NWA title compared to the Mid-Atlantic chmpionship. When the NWA champion wasn't around he was the man. But once the big dog showed up he was put in his place. I'd like the WWE to work like that.

**Loose Cannon** · 04-06-2008, 07:54 PM

exactly.

**Loose Cannon** · 04-06-2008, 07:55 PM

by the way, I'm making your DVD tonight and hopefully shipping it tomorrow or def Tuesday

**Destor** · 04-06-2008, 08:02 PM

Sweetness

**Lux** · 04-07-2008, 04:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loose Cannon

Having 3 World Title and Two (or is is 3, I dunno) Tag Titles just degrades and limits the drawing power of the titles.

Theres only Two Tag titles, The World Tag Team belts and the WWE Tag belts, WWE Tag belts where brought in around 2002 when Steph was general manager after the World Tag belts went to and stay on Raw, i see how it makes sense to have two tag belts though, World Tag on Raw for them and WWE Tag for Smackdown/ECW, it works with those two

**The CyNick** · 04-07-2008, 11:22 AM

The bottom line, as dumb as it is, Kane, Chavo, Cm Punk and whatever other guys have held the ECW title are just as much former world champions as Undertaker or Triple H are.

People who have been on here a while, may already know how I feel about the whole multiple world title thing. Ive never liked it. I'm with LC that it was better when Brock was the one World Champion and went between both shows.

I'm not against the idea of "brand" champions, as long as there is one overall World Champion. So in otherwords you would have like Big Gold Belt, the ECW title and say the IC title on RAW as the "champions" of the brand. But there is one champion (WWE Champ) who reigns over the rest as the "World Champion" and goes over each show.

Doing it that way almost re-creates the old territory days. So you would have the champion only on your brand every couple of months, and he could either fued with the brand (territory) champion or other top guys.

The problem with the WWE structure is that to make that work, they would need to see all brands as equal. Clearly they have a order of RAW then Smackdown and finally ECW. That will never change unless Smackdown got on a major network or something, which likely isnt happening.

So you're stuck in a scenario where WWE will always load up RAW, and if they did have a "World Champion" he would be on RAW virtually every week.

The other option they could do is just be clear that the WWE Title and therefore the champion of RAW is the top prize. Make it that when you will the title on ECW, its like you could be promoted to SD or RAW. Or if you win the title on SD, you're ready to step up to face the top guys on RAW. I mean thats basically how it is in reality, they just cant say it because it makes SD and ECW look 2nd and 3rd rate, which would potentially hurt their ratings (at least in theory).

But regardless, they have definately made being a "world champion" mean very little. I mean at this rate, between the brands, a guy like Randy Orton will likely become a 35 time world champion.

**Testicle** · 04-07-2008, 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarthTedious

If Christian is a former World Champion because of his time in TNA, then Morrison, Punk, and Gurrerro are former World Champions due to ECW.

No, the belt that Christain won meant alot more than the WWECW title. He was carrying a company, Morrison and Punk are not.

Noid stated that, "If the answer is yes, and guys like Jerry Lynn can be considered World Champions, why not Chavo Guerrero?"

Becasue Jerry Lynn was a main event wrestler in 1999 and 2000 and was carrying a company, so was Mike Awesome, Credible and Corino.

I connect a level of a title to the quality of matches that are being performed for it. The matches that took place in ECW were much better that those that are done today.

**Afterlife** · 04-07-2008, 12:30 PM

Sure; but the current ECW has matches that shame Raw and SD.

**Loose Cannon** · 04-07-2008, 12:39 PM

match opinions are in the eye of the beholder

**Kane Knight** · 04-07-2008, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Test4champ

No, the belt that Christain won meant alot more than the WWECW title. He was carrying a company, Morrison and Punk are shit.

**Savio** · 04-07-2008, 01:59 PM

I'd consider it a world championship that had non world championship caliber Champions. It sucks Benoit commited suicide because he found out he'd be ECW Champ.

**Kane Knight** · 04-07-2008, 02:06 PM

I consider it the Velocity Championship. I mean, they've even effectively unified the rosters, so...

**Mr. Nerfect** · 04-08-2008, 02:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Test4champ

No, the belt that Christain won meant alot more than the WWECW title. He was carrying a company, Morrison and Punk are not.

Noid stated that, "If the answer is yes, and guys like Jerry Lynn can be considered World Champions, why not Chavo Guerrero?"

Becasue Jerry Lynn was a main event wrestler in 1999 and 2000 and was carrying a company, so was Mike Awesome, Credible and Corino.

I connect a level of a title to the quality of matches that are being performed for it. The matches that took place in ECW were much better that those that are done today.

But how is that any different from CM Punk carrying 60 minutes of wrestling a week, as well, with merchandise sales, advertising and the like being a responsibility placed on his shoulders? RAW, SmackDown! and ECW all fall under the WWE banner, yes, but that is an hour of TV each week with its own brand name that belonged to Punk for a while.

I think people are dismissing the ECW Title a little bit. I'd definitely assume it is more prestigious than the TNA World Heavyweight Championship. What is the story behind that belt? Kurt Angle won it, Sting held it for a few days, and Angle then won it back. The ECW Title at least has its history dating back to the old-school ECW days, and has been showcased to a larger audience (henced presented as a "World Title" to a larger audience).

**Mr. Nerfect** · 04-08-2008, 02:49 AM

I'd personally love to see the WWE Championship, World Heavyweight Championship and ECW Championship unified into a WWE World Heavyweight Championship to hover between the three brands. The Intercontinental Championship then becomes permanently the property of RAW, and the United States Championship becomes the permanent property of SmackDown!. Bring back the ECW Television Championship to Sci-Fi, and maybe change its name to the "WWE Television Championship." Then you have a secondary exclusive title for each brand.

I think the World Tag Team Championship and WWE Tag Team Championship should be unified into the WWE World Tag Team Championship, just to tidy things up. The separate belt idea is good, in theory, but unifying them would make tag team wrestling look a little more prestigious for a while. At least until the WWE fucks it up.

The Women's Championship can then move around the brands at will, as well.

**Mr. Nerfect** · 04-08-2008, 02:54 AM

Unify the belts at "Vengeance: Night of Champions." The original Vengeance marked the unification of the WWF and WCW Championships, and it is meant to be, well, a "night of champions."

**Afterlife** · 04-08-2008, 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loose Cannon

match opinions are in the eye of the beholder

Don't misinterperet the word "opinion".

04-06-2008, 10:41 AM	#41
Destor I am the cheese Posts: 51,467	But it does exactly what they intended it to do, creates competition. In a kayfabe sense look at the discussion above us. People were arguing of which band has the superior title. you can go to any forum and you'll see this debate happening every other week. Now for my money it was damn sure a much more credible argument back in the 80's but it's the same argument. To be fair, it's just the same as comparing JCP titles to GCW titles, they were both governed by the NWA, and shared a lot of talent on special occasions. but they had seperate entitties. Thats the WWE's goal and they get a lot of people to treat it in a very simialr way.

04-06-2008, 02:07 PM	#42
The Optimist Planet Races The Moon Posts: 2,376	Ultimately, the illusion of competition is better than the lack of it. In a perfect world, ECW, Raw and Smackdown would be different brands in a much more strict sense of the word and actually try to compete with each other. Does the TNA title mean more or less than the ECW title?

04-06-2008, 07:29 PM	#43
Loose Cannon I'm all there is Posts: 31,811	A lot More imo. but yea, Destor makes a great point and I see what he's saying. I would like to see the WWE position one of the World Titles as the better of the three so you give the wrestlers the ultimate goal to aim for instead of just saying "well, I can go after 1 of 3 titles and still be a World Champion", you know?

04-06-2008, 07:38 PM	#44
Destor I am the cheese Posts: 51,467	Yeah one superior title is the way to go. The NWA title compared to the Mid-Atlantic chmpionship. When the NWA champion wasn't around he was the man. But once the big dog showed up he was put in his place. I'd like the WWE to work like that.

04-06-2008, 07:54 PM	#45
Loose Cannon I'm all there is Posts: 31,811	exactly.

04-06-2008, 07:55 PM	#46
Loose Cannon I'm all there is Posts: 31,811	by the way, I'm making your DVD tonight and hopefully shipping it tomorrow or def Tuesday

04-06-2008, 08:02 PM	#47
Destor I am the cheese Posts: 51,467	Sweetness

04-07-2008, 11:22 AM	#49
The CyNick Make the IWC Great Again Posts: 8,922	The bottom line, as dumb as it is, Kane, Chavo, Cm Punk and whatever other guys have held the ECW title are just as much former world champions as Undertaker or Triple H are. People who have been on here a while, may already know how I feel about the whole multiple world title thing. Ive never liked it. I'm with LC that it was better when Brock was the one World Champion and went between both shows. I'm not against the idea of "brand" champions, as long as there is one overall World Champion. So in otherwords you would have like Big Gold Belt, the ECW title and say the IC title on RAW as the "champions" of the brand. But there is one champion (WWE Champ) who reigns over the rest as the "World Champion" and goes over each show. Doing it that way almost re-creates the old territory days. So you would have the champion only on your brand every couple of months, and he could either fued with the brand (territory) champion or other top guys. The problem with the WWE structure is that to make that work, they would need to see all brands as equal. Clearly they have a order of RAW then Smackdown and finally ECW. That will never change unless Smackdown got on a major network or something, which likely isnt happening. So you're stuck in a scenario where WWE will always load up RAW, and if they did have a "World Champion" he would be on RAW virtually every week. The other option they could do is just be clear that the WWE Title and therefore the champion of RAW is the top prize. Make it that when you will the title on ECW, its like you could be promoted to SD or RAW. Or if you win the title on SD, you're ready to step up to face the top guys on RAW. I mean thats basically how it is in reality, they just cant say it because it makes SD and ECW look 2nd and 3rd rate, which would potentially hurt their ratings (at least in theory). But regardless, they have definately made being a "world champion" mean very little. I mean at this rate, between the brands, a guy like Randy Orton will likely become a 35 time world champion.

04-07-2008, 12:30 PM	#51
Afterlife So fucking sexy. Posts: 20,100	Sure; but the current ECW has matches that shame Raw and SD.

04-07-2008, 12:39 PM	#52
Loose Cannon I'm all there is Posts: 31,811	match opinions are in the eye of the beholder

04-07-2008, 01:59 PM	#54
Savio Spammy Certified Posts: 46,124	I'd consider it a world championship that had non world championship caliber Champions. It sucks Benoit commited suicide because he found out he'd be ECW Champ.

04-07-2008, 02:06 PM	#55
Kane Knight Ron Paul 4 EVA Posts: 152,467	I consider it the Velocity Championship. I mean, they've even effectively unified the rosters, so...

04-08-2008, 02:49 AM	#57
Mr. Nerfect Posts: 61,564	I'd personally love to see the WWE Championship, World Heavyweight Championship and ECW Championship unified into a WWE World Heavyweight Championship to hover between the three brands. The Intercontinental Championship then becomes permanently the property of RAW, and the United States Championship becomes the permanent property of SmackDown!. Bring back the ECW Television Championship to Sci-Fi, and maybe change its name to the "WWE Television Championship." Then you have a secondary exclusive title for each brand. I think the World Tag Team Championship and WWE Tag Team Championship should be unified into the WWE World Tag Team Championship, just to tidy things up. The separate belt idea is good, in theory, but unifying them would make tag team wrestling look a little more prestigious for a while. At least until the WWE fucks it up. The Women's Championship can then move around the brands at will, as well.

04-08-2008, 02:54 AM	#58
Mr. Nerfect Posts: 61,564	Unify the belts at "Vengeance: Night of Champions." The original Vengeance marked the unification of the WWF and WCW Championships, and it is meant to be, well, a "night of champions."