So what would you rather do- Bring back the Hardcore title or up the IC title?

**FourFifty** · 06-24-2008, 08:31 PM

So what would you rather do- Bring back the Hardcore title or up the value of the IC title?

With the Hardcore title you'll have some people bitch about how there's another title. However, the Hardcore title isn't a dime a dozen gold strap that's used as a place holder. It has a style of its own that all but promises some great, brutal spots. It's also great for some comedy spots.
This kind of title can open the show with a championship match (IE- Crash Holly), put a title fued in the midcard where the belt means something (more on that later), and with the right wrestlers you can even put it in the main event (like Edge vs Foley, or any TLC match).
It'll help get wrestlers from all three brands over with the 24/7 rule, and it could help bring in a fresh faces. "Bah Gawd! That's Ron Killings! He just won the Hardcore title, and he's not a WWE superstar!"
The Hardcore title is one of my favorite titles of all time. There were some great matches, wonderful skits, and fond memories.

....However, the IC title has been around for a while, and used to be a huge draw. Great champions have used the IC title as a stepping stone. HHH, HBK, Bret Hart, Steve Austin, The Rock, and more. Now the IC title is just a midcard title that people forget about. You won't see the WWE champion or the World Heavyweight Champion cut a promo without the title. Jericho has come out many times since getting the title without his title, as if to say "Well who cares about the IC title anymore?"
The IC title should have more value to it. Come on, it hasn't been on the line at WrestleMania for how many years?

So one or the other- Bring back the Hardcore title or bring value to the IC title?

**The Optimist** · 06-24-2008, 09:59 PM

To be honest, Jericho even holding the IC title is pretty retarded. We all know this, but he was the first Undisputed Champion. Holding the title is a step or two backwards for him and obviously wasn't totally intended since he got it from Hardy after his drug suspension.

In short, using Jericho's time as IC Champion as a yardstick to measure its value doesn't make much sense.

**Mr. Nerfect** · 06-24-2008, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Optimist

To be honest, Jericho even holding the IC title is pretty retarded. We all know this, but he was the first Undisputed Champion. Holding the title is a step or two backwards for him and obviously wasn't totally intended since he got it from Hardy after his drug suspension.

In short, using Jericho's time as IC Champion as a yardstick to measure its value doesn't make much sense.

Actually, believe it or not, I think Jericho won the IC Title before Jeff Hardy was suspended. The switch happened, then Jeff came back positive for drugs. That's the story Jericho and Hardy tell, anyway.

I think the switch was done because Hardy was going to win Money in the Bank, and having a guy edge his way into the main event while serving as Intercontinental Champion makes the latter quite forgettable. In fact, it had been happening with Hardy for months, as he was chasing the WWE Title as IC Champion, and he rarely defended the belt.

Jericho was a main event talent, too, but since returning, he had little momentum (the WWE did their best to destroy it), and I think the IC Title was thrown on him as a way of saying "Look, this guy can still win titles and is relevent." Now Jericho, with his heel turn, is entering a similar position to Jeff Hardy: He's moving up the card and leaving the belt behind. He needs to drop it soon.

**thedamndest** · 06-24-2008, 10:17 PM

IC Title, provided it goes back to looking like this:

**Theo Dious** · 06-24-2008, 11:02 PM

God, it isn't even funny how much better that old belt was.

**Mr. Nerfect** · 06-24-2008, 11:16 PM

I personally don't like the old belt as much as I should. But yeah, I'd bring value to it. I'd like to see Kane and Chris Jericho have a bit of a tussle as to who the top champion of RAW should be, but I get the feeling we'll have either the WWE Championship or World Heavyweight Championship back on the red brand after Night of Champions.

But yeah, a name too big holding the belt makes it seem like an afterthought even more so than a nobody holding the belt. Jericho, right now, should have his eyes set on winning a World Title. I'd have him hand the belt off to Lance Cade, not because he doesn't want it, but because he doesn't need to prove himself like Cade does, and LC gets a solid run with the belt, taking on all-comers, trying to make an impact.

**El Fangel** · 06-25-2008, 01:07 AM

<--- Hardcore Title Mark

Voted Up the IC

**MCEazy** · 06-25-2008, 02:34 AM

IC title easily, who the fuk can u say won the hardcore title and used it to become a huge star because of it in the long run? Bobcore?! Raven?!!! Steve Blackman!!?? Bossman!!?? or maybe Crash holly?! The only guy to hold this title and be considered a true legend in this biz is mick foley and he was already well established way before getting the belt.

**Cooler Tom Schuler** · 06-25-2008, 02:55 AM

The Hardcore title was not for "using to become a big star", it's not that kind of title, but there are a few former Hardcore Champions that've had decent careers.

Mankind, The British Bulldog, Tazz, Kane, Jericho, Big Show, Jeff Hardy, RVD, Undertaker, Kurt Angle, Christian, Booker T, JBL all held the title.

The point of the title is to put on entertaining matches...which...shouldn't that be the whole point? I love the hardcore title, though I hated the 24/7 rule. I think it could be great if brought back and just throw in temporary 24/7 stipulations like "Until Raw ends tonight the hardcore title is up for grabs." There should be no more 22-time champions, though.

**MCEazy** · 06-25-2008, 03:16 AM

My point was CTS, that choosing between bringing back the hardcore title and trying to up the value of the IC title is a no brainer.

Everybody you mentioned there with the exception of harvey, christian and angle had already established themselves as superstars, whereas the likes of Henning, Honkey tonk, HBM, Savage, steamboat, Razor, Hart, bulldog, rock, hhh, angle, jericho and others winning the IC title have been able to shape and progress their careers.

Sure hardcore matches were fun and sometimes awesome during the whole 24/7 era, but WWE needs to bring value back to the IC title to help establish up and comers for eventual main event status.

**Cooler Tom Schuler** · 06-25-2008, 04:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MCEazy

My point was CTS, that choosing between bringing back the hardcore title and trying to up the value of the IC title is a no brainer.

Upon rereading your post I now see that you completely failed at making that point.

Quote:

Everybody you mentioned there with the exception of harvey, christian and angle had already established themselves as superstars, whereas the likes of Henning, Honkey tonk, HBM, Savage, steamboat, Razor, Hart, bulldog, rock, hhh, angle, jericho and others winning the IC title have been able to shape and progress their careers.

The problem is that the HC title isn't for building to a main event career. It's a lower-midcard/midcard title, used for building up to that upper-midcard/main event career. There are a lot of former IC champs who didn't amount to anything either, that was their peak.

Quote:

Sure hardcore matches were fun and sometimes awesome during the whole 24/7 era, but WWE needs to bring value back to the IC title to help establish up and comers for eventual main event status.

But it's not mutually exclusive anyway, you'll notice I voted for re-prestiging the IC title. However, the hardcore title certainly served an excellent purpose which, if done well, can definitely be beneficial again.

**Mr. Nerfect** · 06-25-2008, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cooler Tom Schuler

But it's not mutually exclusive anyway, you'll notice I voted for re-prestiging the IC title. However, the hardcore title certainly served an excellent purpose which, if done well, can definitely be beneficial again.

Then you two are in agreement. MCEazy was never saying that the Hardcore Title was fun, or that it was designed to create major stars, he was just saying that between getting back a "fun belt" and making a serious belt actually serious, it should be a no-brainer what the priority should be. You both voted for IC Title, notice?

The Hardcore Title never bothered me when it was around, but I seem to remember it being more disliked than it currently is. Having 22-time Hardcore Champions is ridiculous. Personally, if they did bring the belt back, I think there should be a "Hardcore Title Permit" given out the wrestlers, where they can only win the belt so many times.

For example, Stevie Richards can sell himself as a 20-something time champion. As his only other accomplishment in professional wrestling is holding the ECW Tag Team Championship twice (I think, I'm not too sure), there should be a limit of like five times a referee can count the Hardcore Title win for him.

Someone who has actually won World Championships, like Big Show, could be allowed to win the Hardcore Title upwards of that, as he deserves to have a high championship count.

And yes, it is messy, but the belt is messy one way or another.

**El Fangel** · 06-25-2008, 03:33 AM

I think of the Hardcore title as something for lower-midcard, and upper midcarders/main eventers to squabble over when the world title/IC race was getting too crowded.

**Heyman** · 06-25-2008, 03:38 AM

I'll be in the minority here, but I would MUCH rather bring back the Hardcore title (24/7). Few reasons:

1) It would create for many intriguing side storylines (i.e. think Crash Holly back in the day....or Al Snow/Hardcore Holly/Road Dogg).

2) It would get more guys on TV in a shorter amount of time (which could then potentially leave more 'over' guys to get more TV time. The WWE did this very well during the Attitude era).

3) With more belts in the company, the IC title no longer has the same prestige as it once did. It's now a redundancy.

For me - I would greatly prefer the Hardcore title (24/7)...no question.

**The Optimist** · 06-25-2008, 04:48 AM

The Hardcore title isn't for pushing, it's for the lols. Which it brings on its good days.

**Heyman** · 06-25-2008, 05:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Optimist

The Hardcore title isn't for pushing, it's for the lols. Which it brings on its good days.

Exactly. The Hardcore Title (24/7 rule in-tact) serves as an excellent side storyline from the more important ones (i.e. comic relief). Furthermore - it allows far more wrestlers to get TV time (all at once) on a more consistent basis.

The problem with the IC title nowadays, is that "deadweight" wrestlers often become champs (i.e. people that have had main-event pushes, and have been 'pushed back' to the mid-card level....case in point, Chris Jericho). On the other end of that, wrestlers that are far too below the main-event level (or have no chance of realistically beating a World champ) also hold titles such as the IC and US belt.

For me personally, I think the WWE has too many belts....belts of which that are NOT very unique.

Personally - I'm intrigued at the idea of there being a "triple threat" belt (where every single match with this belt on the line, is in a triple threat match).

Heck - replace the IC title with the "triple threat belt". Have a "fatal four-way" belt as well (similar to the European title from yester-year).

**Lux** · 06-25-2008, 05:05 AM

I miss the old hardcore title days, some funny ass moments, great matchs and all of it meshed well, i miss laughing while watching wrestling... when i watch i should say, the lol factor kept me tuned in

**The Optimist** · 06-25-2008, 05:07 AM

They'd replace the US Title before the IC Title.

**Cooler Tom Schuler** · 06-25-2008, 05:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Optimist

They'd replace the US Title before the IC Title.

Okay?

**Londoner** · 06-25-2008, 05:13 AM

I would rather do both tbh. Only maybe they would have to have the hardcore title on ECW. Cause 1) it makes sense and 2) it might actually make that show interesting.

**The Optimist** · 06-25-2008, 05:28 AM

Matt/Kofi/Benjamin/Sydal not interesting. Lol.

**Londoner** · 06-25-2008, 05:29 AM

Would have matt/benjamin fighting over the ecw title.

**Londoner** · 06-25-2008, 05:31 AM

yeah that comment confused me to.

**NoRoolz** · 06-25-2008, 06:21 AM

Hardcore title for me.

If done right, can liven up the whole undercard. The 24/7 rule was one of the key elements of the attitude era IMO, as it ensured that even matches involving Crash Holly, Mideon, Gangrel, Hardcore Holly, Pete Gas and Faarooq were of interest.

**The Optimist** · 06-25-2008, 06:28 AM

The discussion is about the IC title, but Heyman is talking about replacing a title with this crazy Triple Threat Title buisness. They'd replace the US title, which is an old WCW title before ditching all of the Intercontinental championship's history.

**Mr. Nerfect** · 06-25-2008, 08:39 AM

If the Hardcore Championship were revived, I'd make it something that wasn't defended 24/7, and I'd have the stipulation that it be defended in specialty matches. Matches like a First Blood Match, Ladder Match, etc. Occasionally you'd get something more toned down like a Street Fight, or Triple Threat. The championship would obviously not be defended every week, with the champion just needing to put it up within 30 days.

The Hardcore Champion would get the reputation of actually being someone hardcore, and that their matches were not safe, and that they were kind of a rebellious freak by the nature of their style.

If you want an inter-brand championship to change hands all the time, I'd go with a "WWE Television Championship." It would not carry the history of either the WCW or ECW TV Title, but would be the start of something new. The stipulation would be that every time the WWE was on TV, the WWE TV Champion would need to defend the TV Title. If the TV Champion misses a show, then they are stripped of the championship, and it is held up on the next show.

Reasons this could be a good thing:

* Anyone that holds the belt would need to work three televised matches a week. As they would normally be talent without much to do, wrestling becomes the point, so expect very wrestling oriented stories floating around the title.

* If working every televised show until you drop the title isn't paying your dues, I don't know what is. This would make a lot of veterans very happy if a young kid was given this task.

* It could lead to elevating a worker. Take Elijah Burke, for instance. The TV Title has never seen a TV Champion last more than a few shows before taking the loss. Burke holds the belt for a long time. He would look pretty damn nifty to the fans.

To avoid exhausting the talent, you could cut down, or even cut out, their house show schedule. A TV Champion working the house shows could take a fall at that event, and because the TV Title is not on the line, it could be used to set up a new challenger (the Hardcore Title, especially in later RAW years, was used at "live events" to try and boost the interest of those shows; a TV Champion losing when he's not on television could do the same thing).

Also, if you consider PPV TV, and seeing as all PPVs are tri-branded, you could have each General Manager throw two guys at the TV Champion frequently, which gives Heyman his "Triple Threat Title" idea.

View Poll Results: Bring back the Hardcore title or bring value to the IC title?
Bring back the Hardcore title	4	20.00%
Bring value to the IC title	15	75.00%
Keep everything the same	0	0%
Loose Cannon	1	5.00%
Voters: 20. You must log in or register to vote on this poll.

06-24-2008, 09:59 PM	#2
The Optimist Planet Races The Moon Posts: 2,376	To be honest, Jericho even holding the IC title is pretty retarded. We all know this, but he was the first Undisputed Champion. Holding the title is a step or two backwards for him and obviously wasn't totally intended since he got it from Hardy after his drug suspension. In short, using Jericho's time as IC Champion as a yardstick to measure its value doesn't make much sense.

06-24-2008, 10:17 PM	#4
thedamndest A Property of Matter Posts: 25,543	IC Title, provided it goes back to looking like this:

06-24-2008, 11:02 PM	#5
Theo Dious EATER OF HOT POCKETS Posts: 14,340	God, it isn't even funny how much better that old belt was.

06-24-2008, 11:16 PM	#6
Mr. Nerfect Posts: 61,530	I personally don't like the old belt as much as I should. But yeah, I'd bring value to it. I'd like to see Kane and Chris Jericho have a bit of a tussle as to who the top champion of RAW should be, but I get the feeling we'll have either the WWE Championship or World Heavyweight Championship back on the red brand after Night of Champions. But yeah, a name too big holding the belt makes it seem like an afterthought even more so than a nobody holding the belt. Jericho, right now, should have his eyes set on winning a World Title. I'd have him hand the belt off to Lance Cade, not because he doesn't want it, but because he doesn't need to prove himself like Cade does, and LC gets a solid run with the belt, taking on all-comers, trying to make an impact.

06-25-2008, 01:07 AM	#7
El Fangel ELF ANGEL Posts: 39,476	<--- Hardcore Title Mark Voted Up the IC

06-25-2008, 02:34 AM	#8
MCEazy Nowhere Man Posts: 1,718	IC title easily, who the fuk can u say won the hardcore title and used it to become a huge star because of it in the long run? Bobcore?! Raven?!!! Steve Blackman!!?? Bossman!!?? or maybe Crash holly?! The only guy to hold this title and be considered a true legend in this biz is mick foley and he was already well established way before getting the belt.

06-25-2008, 02:55 AM	#9
Cooler Tom Schuler Sleepy Bitch Posts: 6,336	The Hardcore title was not for "using to become a big star", it's not that kind of title, but there are a few former Hardcore Champions that've had decent careers. Mankind, The British Bulldog, Tazz, Kane, Jericho, Big Show, Jeff Hardy, RVD, Undertaker, Kurt Angle, Christian, Booker T, JBL all held the title. The point of the title is to put on entertaining matches...which...shouldn't that be the whole point? I love the hardcore title, though I hated the 24/7 rule. I think it could be great if brought back and just throw in temporary 24/7 stipulations like "Until Raw ends tonight the hardcore title is up for grabs." There should be no more 22-time champions, though.

06-25-2008, 03:16 AM	#10
MCEazy Nowhere Man Posts: 1,718	My point was CTS, that choosing between bringing back the hardcore title and trying to up the value of the IC title is a no brainer. Everybody you mentioned there with the exception of harvey, christian and angle had already established themselves as superstars, whereas the likes of Henning, Honkey tonk, HBM, Savage, steamboat, Razor, Hart, bulldog, rock, hhh, angle, jericho and others winning the IC title have been able to shape and progress their careers. Sure hardcore matches were fun and sometimes awesome during the whole 24/7 era, but WWE needs to bring value back to the IC title to help establish up and comers for eventual main event status.

06-25-2008, 03:33 AM	#13
El Fangel ELF ANGEL Posts: 39,476	I think of the Hardcore title as something for lower-midcard, and upper midcarders/main eventers to squabble over when the world title/IC race was getting too crowded.

06-25-2008, 03:38 AM	#14
Heyman Father of Hinduship Posts: 21,083	I'll be in the minority here, but I would MUCH rather bring back the Hardcore title (24/7). Few reasons: 1) It would create for many intriguing side storylines (i.e. think Crash Holly back in the day....or Al Snow/Hardcore Holly/Road Dogg). 2) It would get more guys on TV in a shorter amount of time (which could then potentially leave more 'over' guys to get more TV time. The WWE did this very well during the Attitude era). 3) With more belts in the company, the IC title no longer has the same prestige as it once did. It's now a redundancy. For me - I would greatly prefer the Hardcore title (24/7)...no question.

06-25-2008, 04:48 AM	#15
The Optimist Planet Races The Moon Posts: 2,376	The Hardcore title isn't for pushing, it's for the lols. Which it brings on its good days.

06-25-2008, 05:05 AM	#17
Lux The Rum Diary Posts: 13,841	I miss the old hardcore title days, some funny ass moments, great matchs and all of it meshed well, i miss laughing while watching wrestling... when i watch i should say, the lol factor kept me tuned in

06-25-2008, 05:07 AM	#18
The Optimist Planet Races The Moon Posts: 2,376	They'd replace the US Title before the IC Title.

06-25-2008, 05:13 AM	#20
Londoner One Of A Kind Posts: 22,178	I would rather do both tbh. Only maybe they would have to have the hardcore title on ECW. Cause 1) it makes sense and 2) it might actually make that show interesting.

06-25-2008, 05:28 AM	#21
The Optimist Planet Races The Moon Posts: 2,376	Matt/Kofi/Benjamin/Sydal not interesting. Lol.

06-25-2008, 05:29 AM	#22
Londoner One Of A Kind Posts: 22,178	Would have matt/benjamin fighting over the ecw title.

06-25-2008, 05:31 AM	#23
Londoner One Of A Kind Posts: 22,178	yeah that comment confused me to.

06-25-2008, 06:21 AM	#24
NoRoolz dave ain't here? Posts: 2,709	Hardcore title for me. If done right, can liven up the whole undercard. The 24/7 rule was one of the key elements of the attitude era IMO, as it ensured that even matches involving Crash Holly, Mideon, Gangrel, Hardcore Holly, Pete Gas and Faarooq were of interest.

06-25-2008, 06:28 AM	#25
The Optimist Planet Races The Moon Posts: 2,376	The discussion is about the IC title, but Heyman is talking about replacing a title with this crazy Triple Threat Title buisness. They'd replace the US title, which is an old WCW title before ditching all of the Intercontinental championship's history.

06-25-2008, 08:39 AM	#26
Mr. Nerfect Posts: 61,530	If the Hardcore Championship were revived, I'd make it something that wasn't defended 24/7, and I'd have the stipulation that it be defended in specialty matches. Matches like a First Blood Match, Ladder Match, etc. Occasionally you'd get something more toned down like a Street Fight, or Triple Threat. The championship would obviously not be defended every week, with the champion just needing to put it up within 30 days. The Hardcore Champion would get the reputation of actually being someone hardcore, and that their matches were not safe, and that they were kind of a rebellious freak by the nature of their style. If you want an inter-brand championship to change hands all the time, I'd go with a "WWE Television Championship." It would not carry the history of either the WCW or ECW TV Title, but would be the start of something new. The stipulation would be that every time the WWE was on TV, the WWE TV Champion would need to defend the TV Title. If the TV Champion misses a show, then they are stripped of the championship, and it is held up on the next show. Reasons this could be a good thing: * Anyone that holds the belt would need to work three televised matches a week. As they would normally be talent without much to do, wrestling becomes the point, so expect very wrestling oriented stories floating around the title. * If working every televised show until you drop the title isn't paying your dues, I don't know what is. This would make a lot of veterans very happy if a young kid was given this task. * It could lead to elevating a worker. Take Elijah Burke, for instance. The TV Title has never seen a TV Champion last more than a few shows before taking the loss. Burke holds the belt for a long time. He would look pretty damn nifty to the fans. To avoid exhausting the talent, you could cut down, or even cut out, their house show schedule. A TV Champion working the house shows could take a fall at that event, and because the TV Title is not on the line, it could be used to set up a new challenger (the Hardcore Title, especially in later RAW years, was used at "live events" to try and boost the interest of those shows; a TV Champion losing when he's not on television could do the same thing). Also, if you consider PPV TV, and seeing as all PPVs are tri-branded, you could have each General Manager throw two guys at the TV Champion frequently, which gives Heyman his "Triple Threat Title" idea.