Ric Flair initially made his WWF career off his achievements outside the big one, and his "Real Champion" Gimmick was looked at a large success, so there's definitely times that recognizing titles outside WWF/E has worked for Vince and crew in the past, but WWE has to do everything in it's power to keep TNA where it's at. Making a casual fan Wikipedia R-truth and seeing "TNA" might make him watch an Impact, a random reference to a former world championship just gave TNA a possible fan. That scenario isn't really that hard to believe, as I've had a couple friends watch TNA over a wiki footnote or the likes.
Should WWE Recognize Achievements outside of its walls?
- Thread starter pag_v1
- Start date
Macho_King
Dark Match Winner
I'd say no way....Unless the WWE owns the rights and libraray for a company or like with original ECW when he was financially supporting the group and it was basically a terriitory/development for some of there green talent back then. It makes no sense at all to market or recognise anything at all to do with any competition no matter how small they may be.
AntiChristDeicide
Championship Contender
Ok for people that don't know, correct me if i'm wrong but Christian's championship reigns in TNA were NWA championship reigns. At lockdown 2007, he was champion and it was the NWA championship. If i remember correctly it was around 2008 that TNA changed its title belt from the NWA Championship to the TNA Championship. Anyways they should recognize titles that were won in other promotions, but if they did WWE would look like jackasses for not pushing R-truth and Christian.
Why? if you follow those people, you know. Who cares otherwise.
They acknowledge what is done within the walls of WWE and the affiliates that's all they care about
martymacfly said it all.
Why advertise something that isn't going to improve your own companies standing. And TNA is a third rate company so to say there "world" championship is a worthy title compared to say the WCW World Title or the NWA title that it originated from or say an AJP world title is laughable.
Hell WWE barely mentions it's own titles and what it's own performers have been doing outside of the ropes, whether they went somewhere else or not
and when's the last time you heard them even mention (on air) there own developmental territory/championships? They don't, they just say this person is a promising new talent that has been scouted.
But to note they do mention that a given superstar was a champion elsewhere if they are of high standing, they just don't mention where from or what there name was
If Sting had come over for instance, they'd recognize him as a multi time world champion or AJ would be recognized as a multi time champion. They just wouldn't mention TNA
Independant circuits don't count cause it doesn't get major exposure.
Final answer though, is it's a title, in this day and age, titles mean bugger all in WWE and TNA they are just temporary labels given to whomever is gonna be involved in a storyline at that time. They don't often mean, this guy/gal is in the best 2 for carrying the company.
R-Truth is not a champion, period. He's a joke
Christian atleast gave the TNA title a good run, i did enjoy him as champ there.
They acknowledge what is done within the walls of WWE and the affiliates that's all they care about
martymacfly said it all.
Why advertise something that isn't going to improve your own companies standing. And TNA is a third rate company so to say there "world" championship is a worthy title compared to say the WCW World Title or the NWA title that it originated from or say an AJP world title is laughable.
Hell WWE barely mentions it's own titles and what it's own performers have been doing outside of the ropes, whether they went somewhere else or not
and when's the last time you heard them even mention (on air) there own developmental territory/championships? They don't, they just say this person is a promising new talent that has been scouted.
But to note they do mention that a given superstar was a champion elsewhere if they are of high standing, they just don't mention where from or what there name was
If Sting had come over for instance, they'd recognize him as a multi time world champion or AJ would be recognized as a multi time champion. They just wouldn't mention TNA
Independant circuits don't count cause it doesn't get major exposure.
Final answer though, is it's a title, in this day and age, titles mean bugger all in WWE and TNA they are just temporary labels given to whomever is gonna be involved in a storyline at that time. They don't often mean, this guy/gal is in the best 2 for carrying the company.
R-Truth is not a champion, period. He's a joke
Christian atleast gave the TNA title a good run, i did enjoy him as champ there.
WZMember####
Pre-Show Stalwart
Its probably already been said but when WWE did their whole WWE Universe thing it wasnt just some social networking thing it had a deeper meaning.
Its The WWE Universe. Meaning...if it didnt happen in the WWE...it didnt happen at all. Its The WWE Universe these gimmicks, these characters and these storylines are all under the rules of The WWE Universe. It doesnt matter what anyone does before or after their WWE Runs.
The annoucers might slip up. JR might deny it but I think its pretty clear when you have all sorts of promotion pointing to it being a WWE Universe. From Welcome to the WWE Universe to the Fans of The WWE Universe to all the other quotes and one liners that they throw out there.
Sure, with SinCara they said he was from Mexico and all that but they also wanted you to believe that about El Gran Luchador. They told you about Daniel Bryan being popular on the internet but Cole made sure to tell you it didnt matter because he was never in the WWE.
Its The WWE Universe. Meaning...if it didnt happen in the WWE...it didnt happen at all. Its The WWE Universe these gimmicks, these characters and these storylines are all under the rules of The WWE Universe. It doesnt matter what anyone does before or after their WWE Runs.
The annoucers might slip up. JR might deny it but I think its pretty clear when you have all sorts of promotion pointing to it being a WWE Universe. From Welcome to the WWE Universe to the Fans of The WWE Universe to all the other quotes and one liners that they throw out there.
Sure, with SinCara they said he was from Mexico and all that but they also wanted you to believe that about El Gran Luchador. They told you about Daniel Bryan being popular on the internet but Cole made sure to tell you it didnt matter because he was never in the WWE.
A couple of things,
a) i am referring to the NWA/TNA Title as it was known at the time, when TNA broke away from TNA and it just became the TNA title that's not what I'm talking about. I did screw up by mentioning Booker T, as he only he only held the TNA Tag Titles and the TNA Legends Title (which we all know was a joke of a belt but again fact is he held it) but i mentioned him for another point i will get too.
I'm talking about a Title that is held by many legends of the industry, one that both Christian and R-Truth in TNA did hold, regardless of your opinions of R-Truth FACT IS he held that title, and is on the list of one of the most Prestige wrestling titles in History.
b) I'm not saying WWE should mention TNA by name, referring to them as former world champions is enough, i get that WWE doesn't want to acknowledge TNA directly and it shouldn't, Again other posters have mentioned they can acknowledge Ric Flair, if Sting or AJ Styles came over you bet they would acknowledge them as well, big names or not, Ricky Steamboat was a NWA champion, yet it is never mentioned on that he was IC, now the IC belt is all well and good, but Ricky Steamboat is one of the greatest in the world, yet they don't recognize him as a World Champion, because it never happened in WWE and that's wrong.
I mean a strong case for the mindset of Vince at times is this: not too long ago on RAW, Edge and Christian had a bit of a confrontation, and Edge was scripted to say (as i believe Edge being real life friends with Christian would recognize his history) "You have never been World Champion" (again as someone said they also ignored his WWE/ECW Championship, yet it is listed on WWE.Com), and Christian is response was scripted to agree with Edge, and acknowledge he wasn't when clearly he was. That is both Burial and Bullshit, and part of Vince as some said changing History to suit him.
I'm not saying also these guys should be billed as former World Champs as soon as they arrive either, but if they are going for a title shot why not have the announcers slide the reference in, it gives people a brief history lesson, and lets them know that they are championship material as it has been done before, and as always adds the extra momentum to their character. It ads depth, but also it is FACT, so why not use it.
I will agree WWE is good on acknowledging history outside of its walls but mainly AWA, WCW etc as other posters have said, but in regard to current superstars no, again they can mention Flair and his NWA title reigns, but not Christian? whether Ric flair is a bigger name then Christian or not shouldn't matter, again A World Champion is a World Champion, Period.
I know TNA is considered a joke to degree, and its holders of it's current TNA belt as someone posted are considered a bit of a joke to a degree as well, but again facts are facts, 2nd Promotion or not, when all is said and done the TNA title will also be recognized whether people like it or not. Same with ROH its belts are recognized. I don't know if any reads that PowerSlam magazine but they have a good list of belts they recognize as being World Champions, WWE, WCW, TNA, ROH, NWA, IWGP, AJPW, UFC, MMA and a few other promotions (as well as recognizing older belts like AWA etc) are included and i agree with their list, whether the company is run well or not it doesn't take away the FACT that holders in those companies have held them belts, respectively.
c) A good but small solution to this would be on Superstars individual profiles on WWE.com to list a proper Title History. I see no Problem with this, If WWE can advertise Mick Foleys TNA book: Countdown to Lockdown (which did no damage to WWE, and also opened up fans to tuning into TNA, more so then mentioning a TNA title, to counter act the marketing argument to a degree), then why not include actual history that WWE attempts to uphold (when it ain't changing facts), It's a small start but i would appreciate it as I'm sure many fans would.
Even list Booker T's Legends titles (as much of joke title it was Fact is he held it, it's part of his lineage), but in doing so people could also look up Daniel Bryan's history etc, again if they can mention TNA with Foley's book, or at times in their Former Industry News Section on the site, they were showing results of TNA Impacts and PPVs (i did look but noticed the Industry News section is gone, on the new WWE.com which is bad i liked that they were acknowledging wrestling as a whole when they did this, it was small attempt but as #1 company was the right thing to do, made WWE look like it legitimately appreciated wrestling worldwide, and added more prestige to its own company), then why not include actual History on these guys Profile pages, i cannot really see how this would hurt WWE, if anything they would look better for being a company that isn't biased in recognizing accomplishments, like Daniel Bryans, while they have slightly acknowledge it, its almost 11 years of his life his hard work they have taken away to a degree, same with others, that i don't agree with.
a) i am referring to the NWA/TNA Title as it was known at the time, when TNA broke away from TNA and it just became the TNA title that's not what I'm talking about. I did screw up by mentioning Booker T, as he only he only held the TNA Tag Titles and the TNA Legends Title (which we all know was a joke of a belt but again fact is he held it) but i mentioned him for another point i will get too.
I'm talking about a Title that is held by many legends of the industry, one that both Christian and R-Truth in TNA did hold, regardless of your opinions of R-Truth FACT IS he held that title, and is on the list of one of the most Prestige wrestling titles in History.
b) I'm not saying WWE should mention TNA by name, referring to them as former world champions is enough, i get that WWE doesn't want to acknowledge TNA directly and it shouldn't, Again other posters have mentioned they can acknowledge Ric Flair, if Sting or AJ Styles came over you bet they would acknowledge them as well, big names or not, Ricky Steamboat was a NWA champion, yet it is never mentioned on that he was IC, now the IC belt is all well and good, but Ricky Steamboat is one of the greatest in the world, yet they don't recognize him as a World Champion, because it never happened in WWE and that's wrong.
I mean a strong case for the mindset of Vince at times is this: not too long ago on RAW, Edge and Christian had a bit of a confrontation, and Edge was scripted to say (as i believe Edge being real life friends with Christian would recognize his history) "You have never been World Champion" (again as someone said they also ignored his WWE/ECW Championship, yet it is listed on WWE.Com), and Christian is response was scripted to agree with Edge, and acknowledge he wasn't when clearly he was. That is both Burial and Bullshit, and part of Vince as some said changing History to suit him.
I'm not saying also these guys should be billed as former World Champs as soon as they arrive either, but if they are going for a title shot why not have the announcers slide the reference in, it gives people a brief history lesson, and lets them know that they are championship material as it has been done before, and as always adds the extra momentum to their character. It ads depth, but also it is FACT, so why not use it.
I will agree WWE is good on acknowledging history outside of its walls but mainly AWA, WCW etc as other posters have said, but in regard to current superstars no, again they can mention Flair and his NWA title reigns, but not Christian? whether Ric flair is a bigger name then Christian or not shouldn't matter, again A World Champion is a World Champion, Period.
I know TNA is considered a joke to degree, and its holders of it's current TNA belt as someone posted are considered a bit of a joke to a degree as well, but again facts are facts, 2nd Promotion or not, when all is said and done the TNA title will also be recognized whether people like it or not. Same with ROH its belts are recognized. I don't know if any reads that PowerSlam magazine but they have a good list of belts they recognize as being World Champions, WWE, WCW, TNA, ROH, NWA, IWGP, AJPW, UFC, MMA and a few other promotions (as well as recognizing older belts like AWA etc) are included and i agree with their list, whether the company is run well or not it doesn't take away the FACT that holders in those companies have held them belts, respectively.
c) A good but small solution to this would be on Superstars individual profiles on WWE.com to list a proper Title History. I see no Problem with this, If WWE can advertise Mick Foleys TNA book: Countdown to Lockdown (which did no damage to WWE, and also opened up fans to tuning into TNA, more so then mentioning a TNA title, to counter act the marketing argument to a degree), then why not include actual history that WWE attempts to uphold (when it ain't changing facts), It's a small start but i would appreciate it as I'm sure many fans would.
Even list Booker T's Legends titles (as much of joke title it was Fact is he held it, it's part of his lineage), but in doing so people could also look up Daniel Bryan's history etc, again if they can mention TNA with Foley's book, or at times in their Former Industry News Section on the site, they were showing results of TNA Impacts and PPVs (i did look but noticed the Industry News section is gone, on the new WWE.com which is bad i liked that they were acknowledging wrestling as a whole when they did this, it was small attempt but as #1 company was the right thing to do, made WWE look like it legitimately appreciated wrestling worldwide, and added more prestige to its own company), then why not include actual History on these guys Profile pages, i cannot really see how this would hurt WWE, if anything they would look better for being a company that isn't biased in recognizing accomplishments, like Daniel Bryans, while they have slightly acknowledge it, its almost 11 years of his life his hard work they have taken away to a degree, same with others, that i don't agree with.
At the time R-Truth won the NWA title, it wasn't worth much more than any indy fed's top title. Acknowledging him as a 3 time world champion for winning the NWA title in 2002 is a bad idea. Same thing with Adam Pearce now days. The title has no strong promotion behind it and little prestige left.
I would consider NWA reigns 2006-2007 to be legitimate world title reigns.
Anyway, that's my opinion.
I would consider NWA reigns 2006-2007 to be legitimate world title reigns.
Anyway, that's my opinion.
This is nothing new with WWE. Going back as far as I can remember (early 80's) title runs for any wrestler outside then-WWF were never recognized regardless of the wrestler. This was the status-quo in WWE until Flair in 1992 and the whole "real World Champion" storyline and even then neither the NWA or WCW were ever mentioned by name. After Flair left, no mention of non-WWE accomplishments were ever made for any wrestler until Vince bought-out ECW and WCW and owned the intellectual rights to both trademarks and only then even began mentioning wrestlers' AWA runs.
But this switch came out of necessity rather than respect or homage to the old promotions. What forced Vince's hand was the fact that after he took over both ECW and WCW, he owned the rights to most of the characters and gimmicks, so, in essence and his mind, he owned their histories as well.
And you're seeing that today with all the documentary-type DVD that they're releasing on a very regular basis. None of these DVDs would have ever been possible had these "entertainers'" complete histories in the business nor been documented.
And besides, why would WWE feel the need to acknowledge TNA as a viable entity when half of TNA's own live audience at the Impact Zone at every TV taping and PPV feels and acts the same exact way???
But this switch came out of necessity rather than respect or homage to the old promotions. What forced Vince's hand was the fact that after he took over both ECW and WCW, he owned the rights to most of the characters and gimmicks, so, in essence and his mind, he owned their histories as well.
And you're seeing that today with all the documentary-type DVD that they're releasing on a very regular basis. None of these DVDs would have ever been possible had these "entertainers'" complete histories in the business nor been documented.
And besides, why would WWE feel the need to acknowledge TNA as a viable entity when half of TNA's own live audience at the Impact Zone at every TV taping and PPV feels and acts the same exact way???
I think the major problems when it comes to acknowledgment of titles of other companies is that its certain titles aren't as important case and point even though Christian was a long time ECW champion and a multiple time TNA champion they still use him as a man who has never won a world title, and ECW was their third brands main title I mean that does say a lot when you think about it. On the other hand guys like Taz, Tommy Dreamer, RVD were known as a world champion for winning the belt in the old ECW and new ECW...
I think if TNA were seen more seriously as competition than they might use it as a stepping stone but since Christian is the only real world champion from TNA to jump ship and come over they won't use TNA, same with ROH they will never use CM Punks time in ROH because they are a third rate company with barely any TV exposure...I mean look at Mystico and Alberto Del Rio they were champions in Mexico but neither of them will use that as a spring board to the top...
I think if you want to build someone as a main eventer already you either push them as a former champion in everywhere they've been or you push them on their own skills such as what they have done with Mystico/ Sin Cara...
I think if TNA were seen more seriously as competition than they might use it as a stepping stone but since Christian is the only real world champion from TNA to jump ship and come over they won't use TNA, same with ROH they will never use CM Punks time in ROH because they are a third rate company with barely any TV exposure...I mean look at Mystico and Alberto Del Rio they were champions in Mexico but neither of them will use that as a spring board to the top...
I think if you want to build someone as a main eventer already you either push them as a former champion in everywhere they've been or you push them on their own skills such as what they have done with Mystico/ Sin Cara...
I think the WWE only recognizes peoples' past accomplishments from territories that they now own. Specifically WCW and AWA. That way they aren't promoting another company. And yes, any exposure is promotion. Even if Vince McMahon got on tv and said "TNA sucks!" for 5 minutes, more people would tune in to TNA. So it's business smart for the WWE not to even mention that Christian or R-Truth held world titles (albeit they held the NWA WHC, not the TNA WHC).
While i agree with them not advertising TNA, and agree that any exposure is promotion, would that not include Countdown To Lockdown? Yes it isn't a belt its a book (and WWE most likely advertised it as it has WWE related content) But in Having the Announcers advertise it On the Air, and also Advertising it on WWE.Com have they not already exposed a fair bit of the WWE audience to TNA? (though TNA isn't specifically mentioned or talked about in the interview or mention, fans would have figured it out, i mean come on, anyone can use Google to figure out what its all about, and where Mick Foley is if they didn't already know) And sure it was more about plugging Mick Foley then TNA at all, but again come on.
http://www.wwe.com/inside/news/countdownwithfoleypage1
I am getting slightly off topic by referring to the book as this is about Title/Achievement Acknowledgement, but if they can advertise/acknowledge what was essentially more a TNA book, why can't they at least acknowledge former titles? (If it helps my argument/case I'll use it)
I'd be happy if they just Included a proper Chronological List of Title wins (or match wins like KOTR or the Royal Rumble etc) on each superstars Individual Pages on WWE.com, and again, I'm not saying these guys should be billed as former World Champs all the time, or even say TNA on WWE Shows (it's technically the NWA title they held anyway) but if they are going for a title shot why not have the announcers slide the reference in, it gives people a brief history lesson, and lets them know that they are championship material as it has been done before, and as always adds the extra momentum to their character. It ads depth, but also it is FACT, so why not use it.
They can acknowledge a book about TNA more so then WWE, by a current TNA star (i love Foley by the way) but not Titles that current WWE stars once held? Sounds wrong to me.
ok so i read through some of the posts and heres what i will say, i do agree with quite a number of people and say that tna title reigns should not be reconized. yes it may give somebody credibility, but look at this way. lets take r-truth for example. he is going to be booked jus the way he is already. if i was tna, i wouldnt want soembody saying, look, its r-truth a former tna world champ and here he cant even get good wins and is struggling in the midcard in wwe. in my opinion, that would make tna look weak as hell and their championship look even weaker. wow a former tna world champ is nothing more then a jobber in the e? well damn, maybe me personally can compete for tnas worlds title, sure i have no training, but what the hell, if the wwes opening act can win tnas title, maybe i can too. yeah that sounds stupid, but hopefully yall get the point im trying to make. some accomplishments are worth mentioning, and some arent.with russo writing and how he feels about actual championships. i wouldnt want to be reconized being a scriptedd champ for somebody that dont even value their championship anyway. now wcw or wwe or the original ecw, yes, because they stand by their championships and believe in them unlike tna who passes it around like a hot potatoe. and in closing i have a correction for blenord, booker beat ry mysterio at great american bash for the wwe world championship as king booka
strasaphere
Dark Match Jobber
This is something I have felt strongly in favor for for quite some time, The WWE has reconized the NWA world Heavyweight Championship reigns of Ric Flair, but refuses to reconize the Reign of Christian, I don't feel as strong for R-truth as I do for Christian, because they have never had him lie on National Television and say he has never held one of the most prestigious titles on the world today.
So, in conclusion. Ric Flair was reconized because of his WWE work, and Christian and Truth will both never be reconized due to their TNA Stay.
So, in conclusion. Ric Flair was reconized because of his WWE work, and Christian and Truth will both never be reconized due to their TNA Stay.
Jay_Dee_007
Dark Match Jobber
I understand the whole not mentioning adds credibility to the company, but what about the wrestler's credibility? Isn't part of the job of the wrestling company to put over the wrestler? If he has outside accolades, the company should mention them. It makes the wrestler look good, and thus gives the company credibility for landing such a wrestler.
Also, BLeonard, Booker T was a one-time World Heavyweight Champion in WWE as King Booker.
Also, BLeonard, Booker T was a one-time World Heavyweight Champion in WWE as King Booker.
In the old days, when kayfabe existed and the internet wasn't a driving force, I understood any show doing this. And to be fair, I can understand it now, especially with new gimmicks (R-Truth is not Ron Killings or K-Kwik the same way that Golga was not Earthquake or Avalanche - just because Truth doesn't wear a mask to cover it up doesn't mean it isn't new. See also: Ziggler - he'd lose all his heat if his past was bought up on any show, so with new gimmicks we let the past lie.)
This is also not a Flair or Booker situation. And I'm not even talking about the fact that they proved themselves at WWE as worthy Champions. No, it's because Flair as NWA and Booker as WCW Champions showed they were amongst the best in the world. WCW during the Monday Night Wars was beating WWF/E. Flair was as big a name as Hogan in the 80s. The World Champion needs to be recognised as the top of the business. Flair and Booker were, you could argue, in the position to be recognised that way. Now anyone holding any championship in any other show has not made it.
If you hold a WWE top title and go to another company, you get given a personalised belt. If you hold another title and go to WWE, you go to FCW and hope to make some dark matches. There is quite the gap in recognition in this industry.
This is also not a Flair or Booker situation. And I'm not even talking about the fact that they proved themselves at WWE as worthy Champions. No, it's because Flair as NWA and Booker as WCW Champions showed they were amongst the best in the world. WCW during the Monday Night Wars was beating WWF/E. Flair was as big a name as Hogan in the 80s. The World Champion needs to be recognised as the top of the business. Flair and Booker were, you could argue, in the position to be recognised that way. Now anyone holding any championship in any other show has not made it.
If you hold a WWE top title and go to another company, you get given a personalised belt. If you hold another title and go to WWE, you go to FCW and hope to make some dark matches. There is quite the gap in recognition in this industry.
Similar threads
- Poll