I detest the mindset of the titles just being props. They are championships that reflect who the best in the federation (or the best in a division) is at that moment. Sure kayfabe comes into play, but if the titles were truly just props then anybody and I mean ANYBODY could win them. David Arquette and Vince Russo would win them again (luckily this is not WCW) or some random production guy no fan has ever heard of could win them. No, that is not how it works. Instead we see the very best emerge with the titles, kayfabe or not. The titles are crucial to the product and incredibly important. They give the wrestlers a reason to be out there in the first place.
Now as for the quality VS quantity issue.... Both of them are important. Guys like Cena, Orton, and Trips have held numerous world titles and many of those reigns were lengthy. It's important to have longer reigns, but I personally think having multiple reins is more impressive than only having one, no matter how long it lasted. Look at Edge. Most of his reigns were short, but he still went down in history as an 11 time World Champion. It's important to have lengthy AND numerous title reigns due to it being more impressive in the long run.
"And that's the bottom line, because DAGGER DIAS said so!"
Originally Posted by Bernkastel
Dagger is the John Cena of this site.