There Might Be A Single World Title Again

[Lux]

Point being there is no PPV in March that warrents him to label it a Raw month.

[thedamndest]

They should axe the Divas title, at which point there is NO REASON to have the Divas on SD wrestle except for maybe the occasional inter-gender match involving females managers/valets, and definitely use those sparingly. I am pretty sure the point of the Divas title is to draw women, and that they figure the better the can glorify the women wrestlers with a title the better the chances of diversifying the audience. The fact is, they only have enough talent to fill one show's worth of good women's wrestling, and even that is pretty much the same four or five women.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Originally Posted by BigDaddyCool The US and IC titles are lower card titles, titles for the lower card to feud over, thus giving the lower card something to do, and a stepping stone for them to rise up the roster. By making them uppercard titles, they are moot. There are already 2 uppercard/mainevent titles. A single world title would not make the undercard more relevant, in fact it would push the undercard off the back burn and into the trash. The undercard and the undercard titles are like tire on a car, and currently the tire is flat. You are trying to repaint the car, put in a new engine, and upgrade the stereo by unify the mainevent title. None of that addresses the problem of the flat fucking tire. Paying attetion to the undercard, booking matches with rising stars and veterans that aren't going anywhere is the key, not ignoring it an fucking up the mainevent.

William Regal is closer to being an upper mid-carder than a lower card wrestler. If you're referring to the undercard being everything but the main event, then fine, but considering that Regal won the King of the Ring this year, and CM Punk held two World Titles at some point in 2008, calling them "lower carders" is dismissing them a bit. Shelton Benjamin main evented PPVs this year, and has always been someone the WWE has flirted with pushing.

The car analogy is pretty horrible, but I'll address it anyway. OK, you repaint the car, put in a new engine, upgrade the stereo, and you still have a flat tire. True. But then all you have to fix up is a flat tire. The next time you save up, you can address that problem, and get something road worthy.

We both agree that the car needs a new tire. Let's drop that argument. All I am saying is that I think the order the WWE could fix things up could very well start from the top and work down. You're just saying it needs to be the other way.

[Mr. Nerfect]

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.

It's a counter-point to whole issue of "THEN ONE BRAND WOULDN'T HAVE ANYTHING!!1"

Logically, if one brand had a program with the World Champion going for a month, the other brand would book heavily around the programs in other positions on their card. For example, booking a really strong US Title or WWE Tag Team Title match, as well as a #1 Contender's bout.

You can't argue that the main event scene would be more restricted with only one World Title in one breath, and then convinably argue that talent wouldn't then flood the IC Title scene, for example.

That's completely ignoring the fact that you'd still have the "technically a World Title" in the ECW Championship left, which means a few more main eventers might go there, and lend it some credibility and depth.

Originally Posted by BigDaddyCool I fail to understand how the current title situation is confusing? Cena is the WHC, Jeff Harvey is the WWE Champion, Matt is the ECW champion, which is less in status to the WHC and WWE champion. Regal is IC, Shelton is US, Beth is Women's, Miz and Morrison have the Raw Tag titles, The Colons have the Smackdown Tag Titles, and some dumb hooker Undertaker is fucking has a big metal butterfly. How is that confusing?

It's not so much confusing anyone but the WWE, and the history they present. Triple H is a twelve-time WWE Champion when chasing the WWE Title, and a twelve-time World Heavyweight Champion when chasing the World Heavyweight Title. He is neither, but it's easier for the lazy WWE to present it as such.

Granted, I switch off when he is on television, but I'm fairly certain no one in the WWE made a big deal out of John Cena winning the big gold belt for the first-time ever at Survivor Series. It's like they just counted it as one more onto his blinged out WWE Title wins.

You and Afterlife are correct when you say they either need to polarise the brands a lot more, or just unify them. Right now, however, the concern those backstage are showing for how the titles look seems legitimate, to me.

Originally Posted by The Franchise How will this not lead to anyone not named Triple H, John Cena or Batista being lucky to even participate in a title match?

When the fans revolt, begin to tune out, ratings drop and PPV buys go down. Yes, it is a sadist point of view from the outside, but with one World Title between RAW and SmackDown!, it puts so much more importance on the programs, which means that when we do get a dud champion, they are slightly more exposed as such.

The WWE can tolerate John Cena getting booed, because on SmackDown!, Jeff Hardy is getting cheered. When John Cena is on both RAW and SmackDown! getting booed, things would logically get a little more tense. Eventually the WWE will go to the fresh moves that increase ratings (for example, putting the
Title on Edge or Jeff Hardy), and then find they go back down when Triple H takes the title off them. Then they might go up again when Jericho gets the belt. Completely hypotheticals, of course, and while it won't be a quick process, eventually the WWE would need to bank behind someone who can actually make them money.

Originally Posted by Kane Knight Clearly, the problem is that we haven't considered it, not that we don't believe it likely given the booking over the past several years. I mean, let's be realistic. It sounds great through rose coloured glasses, but it's basically an argument of "if WWE does everything the exact opposite of what they've been doing for years, this will work." Which would be awesome. It also would make the merging of titles completely superfluous, as they've be able to actually book exciting feuds for the existing belts and main eventers on the show as-is. Either way, it's a major hand-wave.

I get what you're saying, but c'mon. One of the biggest "anti-unifying" arguments out there is "better booking would make two titles work." The difference between saying that you want good booking after the titles have been unified and good booking now, is that one would come after a major change potentially making the WWE more vulnerable if they don't get into gear; and the other just randomly comes about for no good reason at all.

Being realistic, of course the WWE is going to have trouble with booking. That's probably a huge part of the reason Vince is not going for the idea, and why it won't happen. His babies will be exposed as paper-thin non-draws, and he might actually have to start booking properly. Right now Vince McMahon has a clutch and an excuse not to.

[Fox]

I remember when Undertaker was the Undisputed World Champion and he wrestled on both Smackdown and RAW. I thought that it was a great working system, and was very disappointed when Brock took the belt to SD for good and they introduced the big gold belt.

I think it could certainly work again. The main thing is that there could no longer be a "RAW writing staff" and a "Smackdown writing staff." For the gimmick of having just the one main World Champion, both shows would need to be written together to make it a cohesive WEEK for the champion and the shows - not one storyline for him on RAW and another unrelated storyline for him on Smackdown.

It is a great idea though because having two world champions just isn't working. In my opnion, the last time the two belts looked legit equal was at WrestleMania 20.

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by Noid We both agree that the car needs a new tire. Let's drop that argument. All I am saying is that I think the order the WWE could fix things up could very well start from the top and work down. You're just saying it needs to be the other way.

And your way, they're driving without a tire.

working on other issues first is great, if your car is in the garage. If it's on the road, the first thing you need is for it to be street worthy. If work on the body but ignore the flat tire or fail to maintain the brakes, it might as well be a fancy paperweight.

WWE needs to institute changes from the foundation up before it starts dressing things up on the outside.

[Legend Killer]

Originally Posted by Fox I remember when Undertaker was the Undisputed World Champion and he wrestled on both Smackdown and RAW. I thought that it was a great working system, and was very disappointed when Brock took the belt to SD for good and they introduced the big gold belt. I think it could certainly work again. The main thing is that there could no longer be a "RAW writing staff" and a "Smackdown writing staff." For the gimmick of having just the one main World Champion, both shows would need to be written together to make it a cohesive WEEK for the champion and the shows - not one storyline for him on RAW and another unrelated storyline for him on Smackdown. It is a great idea though because having two world champions just isn't working. In my opnion, the last time the two belts looked legit equal was at WrestleMania 20.

LOL, Big Gold Belt

Let me clarify, so John Cena winning the WWE Championship at WM 21 wasn't on the same caliber as Batista winning the World Heavyweight Championship, go back and watch that Royal Rumble beforehand, they were both legit and equal that year. However, whatever title Cena holds tends to be the greater of the two.

[Fox]

Originally Posted by LegendKiller2007 LOL, Big Gold Belt Let me clarify, so John Cena winning the WWE Championship at WM 21 wasn't on the same caliber as Batista winning the World Heavyweight Championship, go back and watch that Royal Rumble beforehand, they were both legit and equal that year. However, whatever title Cena holds tends to be the greater of the two.

JBL's title reign was shit, which dimmed Cena's victory in their epic 7-minute battle for the WWE championship.

Batista's win was nice, but his victory was nowhere near the caliber of the Chris Benoit victory the year before, for numerous reasons. in my opinion, the title belts have both fallen in legitimate value since then, and not due to the people wearing them, but due to the way they are treated by the people writing the shows.

[XL]

Originally Posted by Fox I think it could certainly work again. The main thing is that there could no longer be a "RAW writing staff" and a "Smackdown writing staff." For the gimmick of having just the one main World Champion, both shows would need to be written together to make it a cohesive WEEK for the champion and the shows - not one storyline for him on RAW and another unrelated storyline for him on Smackdown.

Just out of interest, what would the champion do on SD if he's fueding with a Raw guy?

The parametres we're trying to establish are that we keep seperate shows - in fact we make them more seperate - but have one champ working on both.

Let's say Raw gets the first shot at the belt, thus every week on Raw the Number One Contender and the Champ interact, then, come Friday, the champ ships off to SD, but what does he do there? We can't build him a seperate fued there - it'll get too confusing. So surely he/the company are just going through the motions by having the champ appear on Friday's show.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Originally Posted by LegendKiller2007 LOL, Big Gold Belt Let me clarify, so John Cena winning the WWE Championship at WM 21 wasn't on the same caliber as Batista winning the World Heavyweight Championship, go back and watch that Royal Rumble beforehand, they were both legit and equal that year. However, whatever title Cena holds tends to be the greater of the two.

John Cena was no doubt over at this period in time (I remember already being sick of him, but people were so keen to see his reign end), but there is no doubt in my mind that Batista was the bigger of the two. He was a phenomenon at this point in time.

I think the WWE made a huge mistake by taking the United States Title off Cena heading into his match agaisnt JBL. The US Champion stepping up to face the WWE Champion could have made a good story that would have made sense going on earlier in the show. But I digress.

Originally Posted by XL Just out of interest, what would the champion do on SD if he's fueding with a Raw guy? The parametres we're trying to establish are that we keep seperate shows - in fact we make them more seperate - but have one champ working on both. Let's say Raw gets the first shot at the belt, thus every week on Raw the Number One Contender and the Champ interact, then, come Friday, the champ ships off to SD, but what does he do there? We can't build him a seperate fued there - it'll get too confusing. So surely he/the company are just going through the motions by having the champ appear on Friday's show.

He could actually defend the belt on RAW. With SmackDown! guys staying on SmackDown!, and RAW guys staying on RAW, while John Cena is feuding with Randy Orton on RAW, he could be defending the belt in big TV matches on SmackDown!, while RAW would be more for the angle side of things.

It would all really depend on the circumstances of the feud, though.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Originally Posted by Kane Knight And your way, they're driving without a tire. working on other issues first is great, if your car is in the garage. If it's on the road, the first thing you need is for it to be street worthy. If work on the body but ignore the flat tire or fail to maintain the brakes, it might as well be a fancy paperweight. WWE needs to institute changes from the foundation up before it starts dressing things up on the outside.

You're the one always going on about being realistic. Come on now, do you really see the WWE suddenly saying "let's work on our foundations!"

Assuming that a change like this did force planning out of the WWE (which it would), then they can get it street worthy while it is in the garage. I see no real reason it could not work. The whole "ratings dropped last time" thing is complete bullshit. The titles have never been unified for the purposes of having a "Super Champion" between the brands. Last time, as I said earlier, they went in with one champion, had belts floating around everywhere, so it wasn't even special. They were also getting used to the brand split as a whole concept.

Face it -- the WWE needs something to trigger a catharsis. It's not going to happen automatically. Like the art of acting, wrestling seems to be at its best when it's reacting to something. The Attitude era was pretty much a response to what was going on in WCW at the time. You know when the WWE has been most interesting in recent years? When the WWE's plans go astray, and John Cena or someone gets injured, so they have to think about pushing someone like CM Punk.

That need to react is not going to be caused by TNA or ROH. It may as well come from the WWE itself, but that means they might actually have to take a risk, or something. Yeah, the WWE can be stupid, but even they are going to think things through. "OK, so we unify the WWE and World Heavyweight Championship...then what?" "Well, we need to make these divisions stronger." "I see, yes, that does make sense. "What is this sense you are talking about? We should try it more often."

If you think the WWE are going to go into this blind -- even taking into consideration that they are the WWE -- I think you are kidding yourself.

[XL]

Surely by defending the belt week in, week out on SD against random contenders takes away from being the official Number One Contender on Raw? How can you put someone over with a win in a N.O.C. match if 4 days later they're handing out shots to random guys at will.

Granted it would lead to an interesting angle if say 'Cena' were to lose the belt on SD costing 'Orton' his N.O.C. slot. But it hardly seems worth the hassle and confusion for one throwaway angle.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Originally Posted by XL Surely by defending the belt week in, week out on SD against random contenders takes away from being the official Number One Contender on Raw? How can you put someone over with a win in a N.O.C. match if 4 days later they're handing out shots to random guys at will. Granted it would lead to an interesting angle if say 'Cena' were to lose the belt on SD costing 'Orton' his N.O.C. slot. But it hardly seems worth the hassle and confusion for one throwaway angle.

Personally, if I were locked in for a PPV title shot, I don't think I'd care what happened to "Cena." The match on RAW wouldn't be for a "#1 Contender's" position, but rather "Winner Gets a Title Shot at Backlash" type thing (for example).

But that wouldn't be every month. You could occasionally have the WWE World Champion just do a month of "filler" main events on SmackDown!, teaming with the faces against the heels, to help hype their matches for the PPV.

I agree that brand exclusive PPVs became a bit watery, but with a stronger Champion to carry them, the ECW brand there to help out each month, and more and more focus on things like the IC/US and World/WWE Tag Titles, they could do the whole "brand alternation" things with PPVs, so that while the Champion is busy on RAW one month, the guys on SmackDown! can build to their shit two months in advance.

[XL]

Don't get me wrong I'm not against the brand exclusive PPVs and would much prefer they move towards stronger and more rigid brand identities in general. I even think that brand exclusive PPVs could work better than they did last time round - providing they maintained strong builds for the whole card.

However, I just can't see how one champ for both shows can work logistically unless you have the challenger follow the champ across the brands - which further negates the seperate and more rigid brand identities that we're striving for.

Sadly I don't think its an even remotely workable scenario.

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by Noid You're the one always going on about being realistic. Come on now, do you really see the WWE suddenly saying "let's work on our foundations!"

I said "What they need," not "what they are likely to do."

[Mr. Nerfect]

Originally Posted by Kane Knight I said "What they need," not "what they are likely to do."

You make the same mistake with me all the time. I will say this, though: What they need to do applies to the situation. Having one World Title changes the situation, and what they need to do will change.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Originally Posted by XL Don't get me wrong I'm not against the brand exclusive PPVs and would much prefer they move towards stronger and more rigid brand identities in general. I even think that brand exclusive PPVs could work better than they did last time round - providing they maintained strong builds for the whole card. However, I just can't see how one champ for both shows can work logistically unless you have the challenger follow the champ across the brands - which further negates the seperate and more rigid brand identities that we're striving for. Sadly I don't think its an even remotely workable scenario.

The WWE recently blurred their brand lines to the point where John Cena was often working SmackDown! matches for the hell of it. It'd pretty much be like that, I assume. You can have the guy float over to SmackDown! and work a match with MVP, or someone, do an interview the next week, do a main event tag the next.

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by Noid You make the same mistake with me all the time. I will say this, though: What they need to do applies to the situation. Having one World Title changes the situation, and what they need to do will change.

I don't; you have a tendency to infer things which I don't say.

Superficial changes are superficial. They don't really generate the kind of changes WWE needs. Your previous line of reasoning falls apart because WWE will address the superficial and then treat it as though the product is fixed. IE, repairing the stereo, but not repairing the engine. Which brings us back to ground zero, as does this current line of reasoning.

In all likelihood, this change is being considered because it's something they can do superficially to appease the fans.

[Destor]

Originally Posted by Kane Knight I don't; you have a tendency to infer things which I don't say.

Get over yourself.

[James Steele]

KK, how can you type these things without laughing at the sheer stupidity of the statements?

[XL]

Originally Posted by Noid The WWE recently blurred their brand lines to the point where John Cena was often working SmackDown! matches for the hell of it. It'd pretty much be like that, I assume. You can have the guy float over to SmackDown! and work a match with MVP, or someone, do an interview the next week, do a main event tag the next.

Likening something they are doing now (with a world champ on each show) to something they would have to do in a new scenario with a new set of "rules" is surely pointless, no?

Especially given that your referencing the blurring of brand lines that many would want made more defined than they currently stand.

Unless someone can plot out a convincing and cohesive schedule of shows for a 4 month span of Raw, SD and PPVs where we have one champ for 2 brands I'm never gonna buy it. Noid?

[Mr. Nerfect]

Originally Posted by Kane Knight I don't; you have a tendency to infer things which I don't say. Superficial changes are superficial. They don't really generate the kind of changes WWE needs. Your previous line of reasoning falls apart because WWE will address the superficial and then treat it as though the product is fixed. IE, repairing the stereo, but not repairing the engine. Which brings us back to ground zero, as does this current line of reasoning. In all likelihood, this change is being considered because it's something they can do superficially to appease the fans.

There have been dozens of times I have said "this is what I think they should do, but this is what I think they will do," and you have gone off about how it's not going to happen, blah blah. If I take your responses to that out of context, maybe you should word them better? Where I come from "that's unrealistic" means "that's unrealistic."

I actually think you are right about this being considered because it is a superficial change...to a degree. If you read the original post, many backstage are unhappy with how the WWE have treated the IC Title, US Title, World Heavyweight Title and WWE Title, and they want some kind of changes. They won't come superficially.

But that's ultimately why the idea won't be passed. Vince McMahon doesn't have to make any changes to his product, because John Cena, Rey Mysterio, Batista, DX and The Hardys are selling enough t-shirts to keep the company afloat, apparently. Why would he put actual effort into his programming when he can just put it in autopilot?

So this whole discussion really becomes moot on the basis that nothing is going to change, anyway. Why even discuss the hypotheticals?

[Mr. Nerfect]

Originally Posted by XL Likening something they are doing now (with a world champ on each show) to something they would have to do in a new scenario with a new set of "rules" is surely pointless, no? Especially given that your referencing the blurring of brand lines that many would want made more defined than they currently stand. Unless someone can plot out a convincing and cohesive schedule of shows for a 4 month span of Raw, SD and PPVs where we have one champ for 2 brands I'm never gonna buy it. Noid?

Not really, because Cena floating between RAW, a brand he was involved in imminent storylines on, and SmackDown!, where he was just there for appearances sake, would pretty much be the basic principle of a floating World Champion between the brands.

Also, the whole concept of a floating champion complete disintegrates the notion of completely separate brands. The champion is going to need to float if he is going to be on both RAW and SmackDown!. But here is a potentially schedule for a month of RAW and SmackDown!'s dual-brand booking:

Week One:
RAW is getting the WWE Title shot at Backlash, so they have a Battle Royal in the main event. Meanwhile, John Cena squashes a wrestler not in the BR in a mid-card match. Shawn Michaels wins the Battle Royal.

SmackDown! sees the WWE Champion, John Cena and ECW Champion, Matt Hardy team up to face heels Edge and Umaga. Matt Hardy is pinned by Umaga, setting up an ECW Title Match between the two for Backlash.

Week Two:
John Cena and his opponent at Backlash, Shawn Michaels, team up to face Randy Orton & Cody Rhodes. The faces pick up the win when the Backlash challenger gets the win.

On SmackDown!, Edge says that with his victory over both the WWE and ECW Champion last week, he should be next in line for a WWE Title shot. Vickie Guerrero puts him in a #1 Contender's Match against Triple H at the PPV.

Week Three:
Shawn Michaels defeats a random heel like JBL, while John Cena does the same with someone like Kane.

Shelton Benjamin, who is the United States Champion, announces that he will be defending the US Title against Jeff Hardy, who has never held the belt. John Cena teams with Jeff Hardy to face Shelton and his tag team partner, MVP. The heels actually get the win when Edge costs Cena the match, which allows the US Champion to pin the WWE Champion, raising the stakes of his match.

Week Four:
The champions and challengers for the World Titles at Backlash are swapping around opponents for RAW. John Cena is facing Umaga and Matt Hardy is facing Shawn Michaels. Cena beats Umaga with some help from Matt Hardy, and Matt Hardy defeats Shawn Michaels via disqualification when Umaga attacks him.

SmackDown! sees Matt Hardy and Jeff Hardy team up to face Umaga and Shelton Benjamin. The US Champion and Samoan Bulldozer win when Shelton pins Matt after some heel shenanigans. Cena commentates a main event tag team match pitting Edge & Big Show against Triple H & The Undertaker.

Backlash:
Edge defeats Triple H to become SmackDown!'s next challenger for the WWE Title, Matt Hardy defeats Umaga to retain the US Title, Jeff Hardy beats Shelton Benjamin to win the US Title, John Cena beats Shawn Michaels to retain the WWE Title.

That was just off the cuff with little to no thought put into it, but it's there for you to review.

[Sting Fan]

Off topic really but reading this thread it strikes me that probably the lst time I tuned in week in week out to watch what was happening with the World Title was when Taker was doing his Biker gimmick and took the belt off of Hogan.

In that reign we had the whole Dreamer bullying thing (disgusting but I always hoped Dreamer would fight back) we had Taker vs. Jeff Hardy Ladder match, and we had Taker losing in what I am pretty sure was a damn fine three way match.

As much as I have enjoyed reigns since (Benoit, Eddie and Angle spring to mind) I think that was probably the last reign where the Main event title was the selling point to me.