Reports on the main page today suggest this switch was done because WWE didn't want their two top Smackdown titles held by wrestlers with ostensibly the same gimmick. IF this is true, it shows an incredible lack of planning for WWE, firstly because why the hell did they allow it to happen in the first place if they were going to turn against the idea mere weeks later, but also because it *could* have laid the foundations for storylines for the rest of the calendar year, and goodness knows WWE is crying out for some actual forethought in its storylines
If you don't mind indulging me in some fantasy booking here:
Mahal, Owens and Rusev are currently positioned as Smackdown's top three heels (we'll get to Corbyn later), and all are currently performing variants on the anti-America gimmick. Given Smackdown is the 'land of the tag team main event' thanks to the Teddy Long era, im genuinely surprised we haven't yet had a six-man main event of Owens, Mahal and Rusev against Styles, Cena and Orton. We can then chop and change between the six, creating feuds that can take us to Survivor Series and beyond. The good thing is, we still CAN get this, just with AJ as US Champion instead of Owens.
Battleground: Owens v Styles; Rusev v Cena; Orton v Mahal
Summerslam: Owens v Styles final battle; Rusev v Orton; Mahal v Cena (Cena wins WWE Title)
Now I would have had the next part of this in the Autumn (Fall) ppvs but WWE have been slow to announce these and the two they have announced are both Raw branded events; however they have NOT yet announced Hell in a Cell, so let's assume that this event happens and it is a Smackdown ppv. I have previously earmarked how I think the WWE title picture will progress until Wrestlemania, so I will integrate that here.
Hell in a Cell: Cena beats Mahal in the Cell in their final rematch, before Baron Corbin cashes in Money in the Bank to become champion. This temporarily takes Cena out of the 'six pack' equation. In the meantime, we get Orton v Owens and Rusev v Styles, possibly with the latter being for the US title (personally I'd have had Styles win it at Summerslam, but again, I feel WWE have a lack of foresight in their 'planning'
Survivor Series would be Cena v Corbin (c), as would the Smackdown December ppv, to round out the year, and probably also feature rematches for Rusev v Styles and Orton v Owens, and at some point before the Royal Rumble, Styles would lose the US belt as I have him winning the title off of Corbin at the Rumble, and defending against Rumble winner Shinsuke Nakamura (who can tussle with Mahal in the Autumn whilst he's waiting for his shot) for the fans main event at Wrestlemania
What this does is create, using just 8 wrestlers, but following WWE's policy of feuds lasting at least two ppv matches, the entire top of the card storylines between now and Wrestlemania, and even better, *most* of the matches are fresh, at least to a WWE audience.
If they had a long-term plan written out like this or similar, it would then also allow the writers time to develop the under card more, which is one area I feel both shows are lacking, as they would have very little to do at the top of the card.
But I guess that's just a pipe dream
Feel free to scrutinise this path
I guess at least WWE have been sensible enough to pass the US title from the best heel in the company (IMO) to the best wrestler in the company (IMO), even if I feel it has been overly rushed and will lead to hot-potatoing