Hot potato, pass it on....

[TheICChampion]

So, since WrestleMania 30, we've seen the Intercontinental and Diva's championships change hands pretty frequently, as well as the WWE title, to a lesser extent. Now, I know that a lot of fans want to see change often, and don't necessarily have the patience to see a long title reign, despite just about everyone wanting to see Lesnar hold the WWE championship until 'Mania 31. But that mindset also somewhat seems to conflict with the desire to see titles regain their prestige. It's obviously not all about how long someone holds a title, rather how often they defend it and what programs they get put in as champion. This, I have no problem with. What I don't understand is why does WWE feel the need to switch the title back and forth between the superstars in the feud, especially in the case of Ziggler/Miz (Miz won in a battle royal at Battleground, Ziggler defeated Miz at SummerSlam, Miz then won the title back last night) and Paige/AJ (Paige won the title the night after 'Mania, AJ won the title back when she returned, Paige got the title back at SummerSlam, and AJ won the belt last night)? Does it make the title more prestigious? Or does it devalue it? Anybody know which is it and why this is happening?

 

[Mudlup50]

It devalues it, I think they do it to increase interest and to swerve us. I'm definitely not for it. If Miz needed it for some match with a face, then they should have let him keep it. Seeing Ziggler as champ for a month doesn't make me like Ziggler, it doesn't make me think the belt is more valuable. If anything it takes me out of the story, if Miz is better than Ziggler he should be for at least a season(like Fall), so it's almost like Miz doesn't deserve it. Ziggler is at his level or higher depending on the night. Plus they don't really have a feud, it's been winning the belt and the other being mad they lost it.

That being said, it's more acceptable in my eyes for the divas feud. There's at least a story built around it. They're not just fighting because of the belt, there's story too. That being said I would have preferred Brie hitting Nikki(triple threats are no DQ correct?) and Paige beating her for the win. Technically AJ didn't lose so the momentum from the feud continues. Or they could have given the belt to Nikki, I've said it before and I'll say it again, AJ/Paige will be a good feud with or without the belt, Bellas has just about everything helping it out and it's flopping bad. I mean you have Stephanie McMahon, Jerry Springer, an actually decent storyline(AJ/Paige doesn't have a good storyline at this point) and one dates the number 1 in the company and the other dates the number 2. So what I'm saying is they really screwed the pooch here, AJ winning it just continues her beef with Paige and unless they add something new to the feud I'm losing interest.

Now I think the underlying problem is Lesnar. Which I know sounds stupid but think about it. There's 5 belts and we're settling in for 7 months of Lesnar. They wanna keep interest and with most of us knowing 1 belt isn't moving they're trying to give us a smudge of belief that we could be wrong.

Plus we have to keep in mind that WWE wants people to renew their WWE Network, explains the bad finish to Cena/Lesnar and the 7 title changes on PPV in 3 months adds to that. Think if you're a kid "Mom I can't miss the next PPV, last month I missed AJ winning the belt and this month John Cena is going to beat Brock Lesnar! Plus there's Ziggler and the Usos who need to win their titles back!!!" Imagine if every belt stayed still for 4 months at a time, we'd very rarely see a belt swap at PPV. Maybe 1 per PPV.

All my points being said, I disagree completely!

 

[NegativeFeedback]

It devalues it, I think they do it to increase interest and to swerve us. I'm definitely not for it. If Miz needed it for some match with a face, then they should have let him keep it. Seeing Ziggler as champ for a month doesn't make me like Ziggler, it doesn't make me think the belt is more valuable. If anything it takes me out of the story, if Miz is better than Ziggler he should be for at least a season(like Fall), so it's almost like Miz doesn't deserve it. Ziggler is at his level or higher depending on the night. Plus they don't really have a feud, it's been winning the belt and the other being mad they lost it.

I think it had more to do with the fact that SummerSlam had way too many heels winning. Paige, Rusev, Seth, Bray and Stephanie all won back-to-back. That was 5 straight matches without a babyface win. If Miz had retained, the first and ONLY babyface win would have come over 2 hours into the show with Roman winning. That would have been absurd booking.

I for one think the show was too heel heavy even with Dolph's win. 5 straight heel wins is just too much.

 

[ccotreau1]

I think it devalues the title a bit, but sometimes, it is necessary (look at the WWE title when D-Bryan had it)

In the case of Ziggler, I have a feeling he may be going back towards the upper mid card, don't ask me why. That could be an explanation to why he held the title for only a month. Either that, or Ziggler did something to piss off management.

As far as Paige goes, I dunno if the WWE really feel comfortable with Paige holding the title for an extended length of time due to her "greenness" in the main roster. Yeah, she had a decent reign her first reign, but I think that was more of a test of how she can handle being champion on the main roster, and a chance to work with some of the top WWE divas

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Generally speaking, the IC & Divas Championships are really the only titles that've changed hands frequently for quite a while. WWE has played hot potato with the IC title between Ziggler & Miz since Wade Barrett was injured and Miz won the vacant title. I don't see a purpose in Miz winning the title again last night as it just continues a feud that's gone as far as it could. As far as the Divas Championship goes, I agree with the poster above in that it's something of a test for Paige. She's only 22 years old and there's still a lot of untapped potential in her. Even though she's been in the business for quite a while, since her mid teens, she's wrestled primarily for her parents' company and WWE is her first real step outside of the nest, so to speak.

The WWE World Heavyweight Championship hasn't really been the subject of hot potato when you think about it. Orton won the WWE Championship for the 8th time in late October last year and held it for about 5.5 months. Bryan won it from him at WrestleMania XXX, but had to vacate it due to injury, John Cena won the vacant title at Money in the Bank because he was the only one on the roster at the time who could've dropped it to Brock Lesnar without looking weak. Had Bryan not been injured, he would've at least held onto the title until SummerSlam.

The United States Championship has only changed hands once in the past 16 months, so hot potato most definitely can't be applied to it.

As far as the WWE Tag Team Championship goes, technically, WWE hasn't been playing hot potato with the tag titles for over 3 years now. While the title's relevance has only gone up within the past couple, with the exception of the New Age Outlaws 6th title run, every title reign since late August 2011 has lasted 100 days or more. Team Hell No held the titles for just over 8 months, Rollins & Reigns held the straps for just slightly less than 5 months and The Usos run of just over 6.5 months came to an end last night.

I agree that just switching the titles around devalues them, but it's a practice that WWE has moved away from quite a bit over the past few years. It can serve a purpose every once in a great while, such as what we saw with the Daniel Bryan storyline. While it may not have been intentional for Vince to push him, it still happened and it worked out in a way that made Bryan sympathetic while fans rallied around him because they were interested in seeing what happened.

At the same time, however, let's be honest because some complain about the titles no matter what. If they're not held long enough, the reigns are meaningless. If they're held for too long, some fans want someone new. If they're not defended X amount of times in a certain time frame, they're meaningless. If they're not defended on television often enough, people complain. If they're defended on television more than X amount of times, people complain. While I do personally dislike seeing hot potato played with titles, it's a pet peeve of mine, and while I do agree that it hurts their image, it's not as if WWE can ever actually win. I also agree that Vince could certainly do more to promote the titles' value as a whole more than what we see. Even so, I'm sure some would still find something to complain about. I mean, some people gripe because WWE hypes & pushes the WWE Network for God's sake, which is exactly what any company with any product is supposed to do. I wouldn't be at all surprised if such a push of the titles resulted in threads along the lines of "Why is WWE pushing the Divas Championship down our throats?" You can't be all things to all people and because of that, depending on who you are and what your personal preferences are at any given time, as I said, WWE can't win.

Every once in a great while, enough fans will seemingly get what they want, when they want it and exactly how they want it so they'll be content for a little while. That doesn't often happen, however, because it's rare that so many fans all seem to want the same thing. Daniel Bryan's main event push and title win is one those few "perfect" moments in several years. As for the rest of the time, to one degree or another regarding one complaint or another revolving around any of the titles at any given time, it's business as usual.

 

[TheICChampion]

The United States Championship has only changed hands once in the past 16 months, so hot potato most definitely can't be applied to it.

As far as the WWE Tag Team Championship goes, technically, WWE hasn't been playing hot potato with the tag titles for over 3 years now. While the title's relevance has only gone up within the past couple, with the exception of the New Age Outlaws 6th title run, every title reign since late August 2011 has lasted 100 days or more. Team Hell No held the titles for just over 8 months, Rollins & Reigns held the straps for just slightly less than 5 months and The Usos run of just over 6.5 months came to an end last night.

I never mentioned the U.S. or Tag team titles, by the way. That being said I agree with most of the stuff you said. That doesn't mean it's not at least kind of annoying, especially in the case of the IC title.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

It does not devalue it. Jesus Christ. In boxing/mma, titles flip back and forth frequently. I have no idea where this idea came that long title reigns "built credibility" came from but it's ridiculous. You need to pass it around at times to keep it interesting, and that also makes it mean more when someone actually does have a longer reign.

The IC title is fine. The characters actually care about winning it. That's the most important thing.

 

[shafe_41]

Who cares? You don't build value to a title by holding it for a long period of time. Look how long Ambrose held the US Title. He arguably made it worthless. I mean I get why the Shield held titles all at the same time... but they were so damn good... they didn't need the titles to make their feuds interesting. People cared what they were doing regardless. The man makes the title. The title doesn't make the man. When it makes the matches more interesting and the feud for the title more interesting, let it change hands as much as it needs to change hands.

When the superstars care about winning it and the feud is actually built around winning it, it's relevant. You're not just marching Curtis Axel out there on Raw against Kofi Kingston and calling it an IC Title match. That's what made the title so awful. Not constant changing-of-hands. I don't care if the entire roster holds the title by the end of the year. If it makes for entertaining matches, let's see it happen.

 

[TootsieBear]

What I'm thankful for is the great matches. But the feuds for the titles are very lackluster. Both the IC and US need to be promoted like the feud between Rollins vs. both Cena and Ambrose. Even the WWE title is hardly promoted on the RAW anymore.

 

[rerun406]

I think a big problem with the titles is that they aren't defended enough regularly .. and that can kill interest just as easily

there's a reason Ambrose's U.S reign was worthless, and it's not because of him, it's because Ambrose would go week after week after week without a title defense

and if the champ isn't defending his title, what value is it then?

 

[CM Steel]

The WWE is making wrestling interesting again. Their making both division's important again! I admit that the IC championship has been seen as a "hot potato" lately. It's been passes around more often than the old Hardcore championship. But atleast their making the IC title look important again ever since Cody Rhodes brought back the old model of the belt.

As for the Diva's title. The division still has alot to go and alot to grow to be brought back to the era where women's wrestling was top knotch. Trish & Lita main eventing RAW back in 2003 was a big thing and it could be done again by the right diva's if done right. But storyline's from Total Diva isn't the way to go about things.

 

[TheICChampion]

Thanks for helping me prove my point again last night, WWE. This is what I meant about 'hot potato'. So....what? Are they gonna have Ziggler drop the belt back to Miz next week? How many times are we going to see these guys win the title back? Did they go to Vince and say they want to break Jericho's record or something? If not then what's the point of all this?

 

[Dagger Dias]

Rapid title changes devalue a championship. They do absolutely nothing for it. You need lengthier title reigns full of strong title defenses by a good champion in order for more prestige to be brought back. Changes such as when we saw The Miz win on Night Of Champions sunday only for him to lose the belt right back to Dolph Ziggler on Raw are 100% pointless. How does that benefit the belt or even the wrestler? Give me a title reign where the champion goes through at least 4 challengers where each feud is booked to where the challenger gave a strong effort, while the champion retained in the end. Build up the wrestler who is meant to end up dethroning the champion during this time, so they can be viewed as a believable threat. This will greatly benefit the title and the wrestlers involved. Rapid title changes are even worse than the lengthy boring title reigns that lack good feuds. They end up being a waste of everyone's time and make the initial title change meaningless by having the new champion lose the belt back to the guy he won it from too soon. I hate it when things like that happen.

 

[MartialHorror]

I agree that these rapid changes are devaluing the belts. I don't see how anyone can benefit from this. Does winning the Intercontinental Championship or Diva belt mean anything anymore? You're probably just going to lose it in a week. WcW did this doing its final days and eventually people stopped caring who was champion.

I'm also concerned that the Miz is being booked as annoyingly weak. He lost nearly EVERY match to Ziggler between Summerslam and Night of Champions, finally getting a victory and losing it the next night. Isn't the point of a good feud to present the competitors as more-or-less equal? Otherwise, why would we bother watching it?