Which mid card title will stay?

[Miss Flawless]

Though, quite honestly, I think the belt sucks.

Agreed.

The belt sucks now. Remember when the Intercontinental championship meant the world to wrestlers? In the 90's, the guys held it like it was their life. Shawn Michaels, Razor Ramon, Bret Hart, ect., ect. The belt had so much prestige to it. But, I haven't seen anything like that since Austin threw it in a river? (or lake, I can't even remember right now.)

The U.S title was good. John Cena is a prime example. The Miz DOES NOT add prestige to this title. I think they should just keep the intercontinental title, and add more prestige to it. Make it more believable like it was in the 90's. Cause, quite frankly, I miss it.

 

[One to Remember]

Firstly because the IC title is A home grown title. It started in the WWWF, and Vince isn't going to throw away his company's title for a relic of WCW (and the NWA).

Secondly the IC title is supposed to represent that the title holder is the champion of both North and South America, as opposed to just the Unites States. The IC title has (by default) more prestige.

Thirdly of late the IC title has been booked far better than the US title... At the very least the IC title has been regularly defended in some pretty damn good matches since last year.

Okay well before there was a NWA U.S. title (Mid-Atlantic) the WWWF in 1963, 12 years before the NWA U.S. title's inception and 14 years before the WWWF I-C title's inception, had its own United States championship. The belt read WWWF U.S.A. Heavyweight title and was held by the likes of Bobo Brazil and Pedro Morales. At the time of their reigns they were both in their respective primes and had or would have World championship success in the same years as their reigns or very close. In 1975 when the current WWE U.S. title was created WWE was an NWA member..

How cute that your markish ass took the fictious Rio de Janiero tourney to heart. There was no South American title unified with Pat Patterson's North American title so technically the I-C title is esential the North American title which was a continental title which put it STRICTLY speaking on equal standing to the European title. If you want to argue about i could say that the United States covers more of a diverse area then North America because it includes lands in the South Pacific (American Samoa), Asia (Iraq's sovereignty was transfered in 2004, 1 year after the U.S. title's reactivation), and Oceania (Guam).
Furthermore since the South American title was fictious outright we can only go by the text book deffinition of "intercontinental" which provides the same redundancy issues as TNA'S Global championship. Both wors are synonyms for 'world" and that contradicts the fact that its a mid carder's title not a co-main eventers alternate title.

The I-C title has had its rough patches too and the U.S. title has had more glorious years. Would you call the matches in which the Godfather, Billy Gunn, and Val Venis "pretty damn good matches?" During the time of those reigns in WCW the U.S. title was being competed for by the likes of Sting, Bret Hart, Chris Benoit, Scott Hall, Goldberg, and other top names and World champions. Titles, even World titles have their off periods. Half of you people don't even know or comprehend that Jimmy Snuka was the first ECW champion.., the same lineage including the likes of Justin Credible.

As much as I don't like the design of the IC title either..Haven't since Austin threw it in the river.

The I-C title he threw into the river was the basic design of the U.S. title used in WCW at that time. It also was the same exact design as the ECW tag team titles at that point. It was a tired design, ripped strait from the NWA, And the designs before it (seen on Tito Santana), and the designs after it (seen on Shelton Benjamin) atleast had originality.

The name sounds better. The Intercontinental Championship. Sounds like something that can be defended/held by someone from anyone in the world at any place. The US title. Sounds like something that is strictly American.

See my above coments to the other fellow about why the name is stupid to any wrestling fan that likes logic as much as kayfabe..

Thread isntr about which one WILL stay, becuase obviously, its gonna be the IC. The WWE wouldn't get rid of one of its original belts for a WCW/NWA original, sorry.

I would prefer the US, mostly becuase the IC looks like shit. I hate that belt design. I would say the IC in general has been booked worse in the recent past, but has really revved up in the immeadiate past, with fueds between Mcyntire and Morrison, Rey and Jericho, and currently Doplph and Kofi.

So I would say the IC is probably the stronger of the two at this point, and should stay.

I think somewhere the guy in WWF management who thought up the light-heavyweight division is throwinghis arms up at your first remark.

Furthermore the U.S. title came a few years after the WCW U.S. title was unified into te I-C title. That means that instead of WWE choosing to bring back the North American, European, International, Hardcore or even World Martial-Arts title it chose a WCW title. It could had chosen its own U.S. title over WCW's also.
Furthermore WWE could had used a different desig then the NWA/WCW's "Big Gold" for its World heavyweight title. Maybe even a revamped version of the WWWF title "Superstar" Billy Graham held..

You can't deactivate a title due to a belt design issue. Before Miz, John Cena and MVP did a lot for WWE's U.S. title by defending it and elevating it. The Big Show too. Benoit.

Obviously it will be the IC title, but at the same time it should be. The IC Title has meant more in the annals of the WWE and has been an integral part of the company for almost 40 years. Throughout the history of wrestling the US title has meant just as much if not more than the IC title, but not in WWE. The IC title and title matches have been a part of such great moments in WWE's history and has played a part in some of its biggest moments, Jimmy Snuka/Don Muraco, Perfect/Hart, Savage/Steamboat,HBK/Razor the list goes on and on, it has been a huge stepping stone to the world title in the past and winning that title a lot of times meant that your time is coming.

In WWE its only been around 7 years and was only brought in because of the brand split in the first place.

Its just over 3 decades old.. Apparently all those NWA and WCW moments meant enough to WWE to reactivate the U.S. title out of thin air when they had EIGHT former WWWF/WWF titles to rectivate, one of which including the WWF Canadian heavyweight title!
All of the guys you mentioned except HBK and Savage are former U.S. champions. All except Muraco held U.S. titles in WWE/WCW's lineage.

If the I-C title meant so much why did Trips unify it into the WWF title and why was it thrown into a river? When Goldberg won the WCW World title he vacated th U.S. title ditto for Luger, Boker T. simply held both..

the US belt doesn't have the same prestigious history IMO because the NWA/ WCW had another secondary belt in the TV
Title and they also had a further singles belt in the Light Heavyweight/ Cruiserweight belt. For the most of the WWWF/ WWF title history, the only other singles belt was the IC belt.

The WCW TV title was never on par with the U.S. title.. It went TV then U.S. then World.. Or you start out as a light/cruzer then work yor way to U.S.

USA Heavyweight title, (1970–1975) · North American Heavyweight title (1979–1981) · International Heavyweight title (1959–1963,1982–1985) · Canadian Championship (1985–1986) · European Championship (1997–2002), Light heavyweight (1981/1997-2002). Jr. Heavyweight title (1967-85). From '87 to '96 it was the only secondary title, thats only 9 years out of 52 years of buisiness that Capitol Wrestling/WWWF/WWF/WWE has only ha the I-C title as its sole secondary singles title.

I feel like the WCW US title was equivalent to the WWF/E European title. And contrary to all the other posts, the IC title is my favorite design of any belt. The US title does have a cool, unique design, but I hope they never redesign the IC belt.

No it wasn't. The U.S. title was equal to the I-C title or the ECW TV title or the UWF TV title or Mid-South Championship Wrestling North American title or the WCCW TV title. The European title was on par with the WCW TV title or the WCCW Texas title..
Both belts have ugly succesors or predecessors. The I-C title is shaped like a maxipad on its side.. The U.S. title looks like a lepel pin..

How many US champions have gone on to become the WWE champion in the last 10 years compared to IC champions?

Thats not the U.S. titles fault. Benoit, Booker T, Big Show, and John Cena. Before WWE heritage jacked WCW in 2003 Austin, Slaughter, and Ric Flair. I am counting show because the day before his ECW brand title win Van Dam held the WWE title along side it..

How many former World champions held the U.S. title? Luger, Booker T., Bret Hart, Flair, Hennig, Sting, Vader, Steamboat, Stan "The Man" Hanson, Psycho Sid, Terry Funk, etc. How many I-C champs have become
World champs since 2003? Punk, Orton, RVD, Jeff Hardy. Can we even count Kane with an 8 year gap between his I-C title and World title? Did the I-C title elevate Christian to the NWA title or Nitro to the ECW Brand title?


I vot for both though because it makes no sense. Interbrand competing should be for world, tag and womens' titles only.

Although I do wish the WWE United States title should be deactivated because its too much for me to see the spoils of Monday Night Wars on WWE programing.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

Its just over 3 decades old.. Apparently all those NWA and WCW moments meant enough to WWE to reactivate the U.S. title out of thin air when they had EIGHT former WWWF/WWF titles to rectivate, one of which including the WWF Canadian heavyweight title!
All of the guys you mentioned except HBK and Savage are former U.S. champions. All except Muraco held U.S. titles in WWE/WCW's lineage.

If the I-C title meant so much why did Trips unify it into the WWF title and why was it thrown into a river? When Goldberg won the WCW World title he vacated th U.S. title ditto for Luger, Boker T. simply held both..

It was a typo no ones perfect (except for of course Mr. Perfect) the 3 and 4 are right beside each other. Sure they unified it with the World title, but its because they were experimenting with just having 1 singles title per show, but when the experiment failed they went back to what worked, it was a stupid mistake, WWE makes mistakes all the time.

The only reason they brought back the US title was because they wanted a mid-card title for each show so they brought back the one with the most prestige, certainly the US title meant more than the TV title or any other mid card title created, I'll admit, but all other mid-card titles the WWE used to have most of them lasted about a year or 2, none of them had a real long and prestigious history like the US title. Since they owned the rights to the US title it was the best title to bring back.

I also understand that most of the recent US title holders were also IC title holders, but the US title simply hasn't meant that much in the history of WWE (thats the key word there WWE), so the US title has only been apart of the WWE for 7 years, not over 30 years like the IC title has. I love the US title, I always have, but to scrap the IC title a title that has played apart in some of WWE's biggest moments for the US title, a title that was brought in because of the brand split is stupid. Why scrap a title that has meant so much to WWE for a title that hasn't meant much since it was brought into the WWE.

If they keep both titles I don't have an issue with that, but if they have to keep one then it should be the IC title.

 

[FitFinlay4Life]

The WCW TV title was never on par with the U.S. title.. It went TV then U.S. then World.. Or you start out as a light/cruzer then work yor way to U.S.

USA Heavyweight title, (1970–1975) · North American Heavyweight title (1979–1981) · International Heavyweight title (1959–1963,1982–1985) · Canadian Championship (1985–1986) · European Championship (1997–2002), Light heavyweight (1981/1997-2002). Jr. Heavyweight title (1967-85). From '87 to '96 it was the only secondary title, thats only 9 years out of 52 years of buisiness that Capitol Wrestling/WWWF/WWF/WWE has only ha the I-C title as its sole secondary singles title.

Wow - cheers for the history lesson. I never said the TV title was on a par with the US title (however, check the TV lineage and tell me JUST how far behind the US belt it is). I only pointed out that the NWA/WCW had two individual belts for all it's non-World Champ contenders to chase after during the years that matter.

Until the creation of the European Belt - the WWF (as the dominent force, not a territory) had ONE belt for all to aspire to if they were not in the World picture.

One final thing - yes, '87-'96 is 9 years but the dates you list are '86 and '97 - potentially 11 years and as I've mentioned, these years are when WWe was the dominent force with NWA/WCW trailing behind and no-one else even factoring!

On this criteria - the IC belt is more prestigious.

 

[One to Remember]

your undermining your own argument buddy. From the standpoint of a WWF fan it was a WCW created title, from a WWE fans standpoint its just the United States championship. Again the European title was 6 years old in 2003. The Light-heavyweight title was 22 years old in 2003. How can it have any prestige to a WWE fan if he didn't watch enough WCW or NWA to know anything about it?

The truth is the I-C title and the U.S. title don't mean anything anymore. I makes no sense for a WWE fan to remember WCW or WWF moments, they're just past it. We currently have a World heavyweight title that came out of thin air (there is a technical dispute with that but still) that was put ON PAR with the WWE title that was 29 years its senior and one year the United States championship. We have already established the WWE brass' logic is at best erratic.


P.S. Not trying to get shit started but how is it a typo if you are saying you meant to say it was almost 30 years old when its over 30 years old? it okay massa

 

[Poop Master Flex]

your undermining your own argument buddy. From the standpoint of a WWF fan it was a WCW created title, from a WWE fans standpoint its just the United States championship. Again the European title was 6 years old in 2003. The Light-heavyweight title was 22 years old in 2003. How can it have any prestige to a WWE fan if he didn't watch enough WCW or NWA to know anything about it?

The truth is the I-C title and the U.S. title don't mean anything anymore. I makes no sense for a WWE fan to remember WCW or WWF moments, they're just past it. We currently have a World heavyweight title that came out of thin air (there is a technical dispute with that but still) that was put ON PAR with the WWE title that was 29 years its senior and one year the United States championship. We have already established the WWE brass' logic is at best erratic.


P.S. Not trying to get shit started but how is it a typo if you are saying you meant to say it was almost 30 years old when its over 30 years old? it okay massa

The point I was trying to make is that most mid card WWE titles don't mean anything and never had, the European title and the Light Heavyweight title were never a big deal and yes the Light heavyweight title was 22 years old in '03, but it very rarely defended and wasn't even a part of the show for most of those years. The European title was just kind of there and like I said before people make mistakes, and if it makes you feel better yes the European title was 6 years old.

The IC title also sounds better, it has a more broader appeal, since the IC title came from the unification of the north american and south american title it covers a much broader area, the name in itself makes it sound more important.

I realize that most WWE fans these days haven't been watching WWE as long as fans like myself and most have only been around 5-10 years, that doesn't mean they should forget their history. WCW/NWA on the other hand is the loser in the war so who cares if the US title becomes inactive, it should have become inactive when they initially unified the titles in '01 (and here's another reason, the US title got unified into the IC title in the first place so why go against the grain) and quite frankly I didn't really want the US title in the WWE in the first place, I didn't care it was there but I don't like too many titles, which is why I'm happy this unification is happening across the board.

Lastly yes they did treat the World Title like it was just as important as the WWE title, but what title do you think will stay after Wrestlemania, you know the WWE title's staying, and even though they were treated as equals, for the most part the guy who had the WWE title was pushed and higher up on the ladder.

 

[hArdyPUNKmArk]

What should and will stay? The IC obviously. It’s WWE’s mid card belt and it has more history with the company. They’ll either unify them and make a brand new championship with a new name or they will just get rid of the US after unifying them and will then just use the IC belt. It makes sense to keep it as it’s a WWE belt from the beginning.

What I think should stay? The IC belt. I don’t really like the US belt’s look. I love how the IC belt looks and I’ve loved the feuds over it in the past 1-2 years. It’s been much better since Santino lost it. The feuds between Punk/JBL, JBL/Mysterio, Mysterio/Jericho, Mysterio/Ziggler, Morrison/McIntyre, McIntyre/Kofi and Kofi/Ziggler. The feuds have been pretty decent lately compared to the US belt which has been used more as a prop than the IC has been.

What would everyone think of them creating a brand new belt with a new name?

 

[One to Remember]

The point I was trying to make is that most mid card WWE titles don't mean anything and never had, the European title and the Light Heavyweight title were never a big deal and yes the Light heavyweight title was 22 years old in '03, but it very rarely defended and wasn't even a part of the show for most of those years. The European title was just kind of there and like I said before people make mistakes, and if it makes you feel better yes the European title was 6 years old.

The IC title also sounds better, it has a more broader appeal, since the IC title came from the unification of the north american and south american title it covers a much broader area, the name in itself makes it sound more important.

I realize that most WWE fans these days haven't been watching WWE as long as fans like myself and most have only been around 5-10 years, that doesn't mean they should forget their history. WCW/NWA on the other hand is the loser in the war so who cares if the US title becomes inactive, it should have become inactive when they initially unified the titles in '01

if no one remembers and no one reads the texts then esentially there is no history.
The NWA toils but it remains a sovereign entity. How is WCW A loser in the war though? Thats like if Alexander Hamilton had used his first turn in his dual to just shoot himself. Would it not then be stupid for Aaron Burr to claim victory and honor restored..? WCW's demise stemmed from internal not external forces. The U.S. title is older then the I-C title, its more historical Mr. History nut and the fact that its older then WCW by 15 years shows that the title transcends organizations.

(and here's another reason, the US title got unified into the IC title in the first place so why go against the grain) and quite frankly I didn't really want the US title in the WWE in the first place, I didn't care it was there but I don't like too many titles, which is why I'm happy this unification is happening across the board.

Thats out of context though because WWF's WCW U.S. title represented an enemy orginization withen the WWF. That made it distinct from the WWE United States Championship.. Everything has been unified into the I-C title, the European, WCW US, Hardcore, even another I-C title was unified into the I-C title.

How is it too many titles if SD! and Raw are effectively two federations? If your thinking in a WWE context you are out of touch and don't comprehend what a "brand" in WWE's context is..

Lastly yes they did treat the World Title like it was just as important as the WWE title, but what title do you think will stay after Wrestlemania, you know the WWE title's staying, and even though they were treated as equals, for the most part the guy who had the WWE title was pushed and higher up on the ladder.

What ever title with the luck of being Raw based is the top title, the first amongst equals.. Why are ou thinking one title is leaving after WM? Eitherway your blasting the U.S. title as being foreign when the WHC which is above your I-C title is the WCW World title. Ron Simmons is recognized as a former World heavyweight champion not a WCW champion by WWE.COM..

And if your not allowed to wrestle off your respective brand why eliminate the U.S. title? A Raw guy wanting to seek singles title would need to first be one half of the tag team champions to even be able to get an I-C title shot.

I don’t really like the US belt’s look. I love how the IC belt looks and I’ve loved the feuds over it in the past 1-2 years. It’s been much better since Santino lost it. The feuds between Punk/JBL, JBL/Mysterio, Mysterio/Jericho, Mysterio/Ziggler, Morrison/McIntyre, McIntyre/Kofi and Kofi/Ziggler. The feuds have been pretty decent lately compared to the US belt which has been used more as a prop than the IC has been.

What would everyone think of them creating a brand new belt with a new name?

Oh yeah because the I-C title looks better then a title that used to look like this this and this?

 

[Ferbian]

Honestly, knowing that both belts will be inevitably merged, I'd much rather keep the Intercontinental championship. Right now it definitely looks much better than the United States championship, also it's the premiere mid-card championship of the WWE/WWF throughout it's introduction. It's definitely more important to WWE, as well as WWE history compared to the United States Championship.

And of course, you can't discredit the fact that you loose the possibility of becoming a triple crown champion without it. But that's really something that could be adapted.

The United States championship wouldn't be too bad to keep around though instead of the Intercontinental championship, especially considering the patriotism of a big part of the WWE fans (I can only imagine though). But I also think that it kills a bit of the outside champions if you kill off the potential of being an Intercontinental champion.

All in all, I don't really care though which one is kept around. But if I had to choose, it would be the Intercontinental championship, for reasons stated above. Though I'm still all for keeping both of them, if that possibility was available in WWE, but obviously they've made up their mind, so time will show the results.

 

[One to Remember]

the more we debate the more its obvious that the U.S. title wil stay. We already have a WCW World title belt rip off, the Great American Bash, and now a U.S. title that has survived WCW by 9 whole years.. Its the U.S. title.. And take into consideration McMahon probably on some level views ECW, WCW, the NWA, AWA, and even World Class as parts of WWE. McMahon does not care about tradition anymore. Every thing that wasn't WWE hascome to be WWE. There is no more that "represents WCW and blah blah blah" anymore. And the Miz is gonna be a World champion at some poit so the U.S. title benefits from its holder at this point. Plus th U.S. ttle has ALWAYS been a number 1 contenders title not a mid card title. The U.S. title is a clear path to the World title in WCW and the NWA, The I-C title was in some cases the symbol of a declining career's conclusion or a physical manifestation of a lack of headway.. The U.S. title could NEVER be described with those words. Its already beaten the odds by being resurrected in a WWE owned wrestling world..

 

[CH David]

the more we debate the more its obvious that the U.S. title wil stay.

Where is your proof of this? This thread is all speculation of what will happen in the future. It isn't obvious to me, that's for damn sure.

We already have a WCW World title belt rip off, the Great American Bash, and now a U.S. title that has survived WCW by 9 whole years.. Its the U.S. title..

Yeah, the Great American Bash isn't around anymore. This year the event was Fatal 4-Way. So there goes that argument. The United States Championship was brought back in 2003, so it has only been back for 7 years past WCW getting bought.

And take into consideration McMahon probably on some level views ECW, WCW, the NWA, AWA, and even World Class as parts of WWE. McMahon does not care about tradition anymore. Every thing that wasn't WWE hascome to be WWE.

Lulz, are you saying that Vince doesn't have an ego anymore? Vince feels he is better than all of those, and will only take anything from them if it will make money (see ECW).

There is no more that "represents WCW and blah blah blah" anymore.

Perhaps. I'll believe that wholeheartedly when War Games makes an appearance, as that was one of the greatest matches from NWA/WCW, but that's another topic for another thread.

And the Miz is gonna be a World champion at some poit so the U.S. title benefits from its holder at this point.

Lulz.

If the Miz becomes a World Champion anytime soon it is because he won Money in the Bank, not because he was the U.S. Champion. However, I'll humor you with him being the U.S. Champion. What has he done with it? He's been champ since mid-June and has barely even cared about it. Hell his current gripe with Daniel Bryan isn't over the title, but personal pride. But I guess since someone who is literally just holding the title and may go on to win a World Championship due to Money in the Bank, makes it the best choice to stay. Riiiiight.

Plus th U.S. ttle has ALWAYS been a number 1 contenders title not a mid card title. The U.S. title is a clear path to the World title in WCW and the NWA

Yet WCW isn't around anymore, and the NWA isn't as prominent as it once was. The U.S. Title is a mid-card belt, just like the IC Title is now. Of the last 11 champions, as of right now, who has gone on to win a World Championship in the WWE after having won it?

The I-C title was in some cases the symbol of a declining career's conclusion or a physical manifestation of a lack of headway.. The U.S. title could NEVER be described with those words. Its already beaten the odds by being resurrected in a WWE owned wrestling world..

So when Rick Steiner, Lance Storm, General Rection, Mongo McMichael, or David Flair won the title, they were automatically going to be the number one contender for the WCW Championship? Get the fuck out of here with that shit.

Having said all of that, I think that the IC Title should stay simply for what it means to the company. One title that means a wrestler is on the up and up, and with Vince still in charge you look at what the IC Title did for wrestlers on the up and up. Randy Savage, HBK, Bret Hart, Triple H, The Rock. Sure you can fire back with what the U.S. Title did for Lex Luger, Sting, Ric Flair, Ricky Steamboat, and so on. But you have to remember that Vince still has his ego, and will only use something if it will make money, such a second World Title with the Brand Split, the Great American Bash, just to name a couple. The lineage it has with it being a 2nd tier championship in the WWE is what gives it the edge to me.

 

[One to Remember]

Where is your proof of this? This thread is all speculation of what will happen in the future. It isn't obvious to me, that's for damn sure.

The proof is the fact that WWE has a U.S. title period. 7 years is a quarter century in the mind of a WWE fan... It is as old as the I-C title b y that logic alone.

Yeah, the Great American Bash isn't around anymore. This year the event was Fatal 4-Way. So there goes that argument.

Neither is the King of the Ring, In Your House, or Armageddon or No Way Out. in the past 5 years we have seen many WWE ppv's phased out, some of which had been replaced by ECW and WCW pay per views of all things.

Yeah the winged eagle isn't aroud anymore either but the Big Gold is..

If the Miz becomes a World Champion anytime soon it is because he won Money in the Bank, not because he was the U.S. Champion. However, I'll humor you with him being the U.S. Champion. What has he done with it? He's been champ since mid-June and has barely even cared about it. Hell his current gripe with Daniel Bryan isn't over the title, but personal pride. But I guess since someone who is literally just holding the title and may go on to win a World Championship due to Money in the Bank, makes it the best choice to stay. Riiiiight.

Yeah exactly what I said.. I know his World title will derive from the briefcase The U.S. title benefits from being around the waist of someone who is about to be a World champion. The U.S. title is attached to the main event and world title scene which makes it upper tier by association. Yeah the I-C title is original but its just apart of the wwe package now it doesn't stick out. You talk about tradition and Raw doesn't even have red ropes anymore. Are you saying wrestler have never put themselves over their titles? Holly Hogan routinely vandalized the WCW title, DDP wore it backwards and never could lift it right side up.. Any title can be the subject of a wrestler's disregard. Its notthe death nail.

Yet WCW isn't around anymore, and the NWA isn't as prominent as it once was. The U.S. Title is a mid-card belt, just like the IC Title is now. Of the last 11 champions, as of right now, who has gone on to win a World Championship in the WWE after having won it?

It does not matter. The United States heavyweight title represented a rank not a tier in WCW. Of te last eleven? Did you not read my other post? 4 or 5 U.S. champs went on to WWE titles or WHCs. You do the I-C math now. The U.S. title was the visual manifestation of the no. 1 contender. Regardless of the fact that that was a practiced used in another organization it does givethe U.S. title some steam in WWE. WWE will take the best parts of its conquests and utilize that. WWE is willing to do that and Vince's ego has never interfered with that practice. Vince's 2000 ego is so different from his 2010 ego.. Get contemporary with your analysis man..

So when Rick Steiner, Lance Storm, General Rection, Mongo McMichael, or David Flair won the title, they were automatically going to be the number one contender for the WCW Championship? Get the fuck out of here with that shit.

Steiner February of '01. Gen. Rection, 2000. David Flair was awarded the title on july 5, 1999 by his father. It was no more unorthodox then Andre selling the WWF title to Ted DiBiase. Not soon after Flair was featured prominently in a World title tourney.. As far as the other guys are concerned WCW was not itself by the time they were champs, everything was falling to shAmbles. I am talking about when WCW was stable and had its bearings... As far as Storm was concerned he ran out of steam because he ran out of WCW because WCW ran out of time. It was evident Storm was moving through the ranks, he held three titles at once!

As far as Mongo was concerned he was supposed to be like Lawrence Taylor at wrestlemania or Goldberg, a former NFL star who came in and dominated. That did not work out.. What is the deal with Shane Douglas' I-C title reign or Khali's World heavyweight title run..? Every title has its bad holders. Jarrett was a sorry WCW World champ, Garvin was a sorry NWA World champ, Ron Simmons was not the greatest WCW champ, The Mountie did nothing for the I-C title either.

IC Title did for wrestlers on the up and up. Randy Savage, HBK, Bret Hart, Triple H, The Rock. Sure you can fire back with what the U.S. Title did for Lex Luger, Sting, Ric Flair, Ricky Steamboat, and so on. But you have to remember that Vince still has his ego, and will only use something if it will make money, such a second World Title with the Brand Split, the Great American Bash, just to name a couple. The lineage it has with it being a 2nd tier championship in the WWE is what gives it the edge to me.

Lets look at wrestlers on the down and down. What did the I-C title do for Ahmed Johnson, Rikishi, Billy Gunn,The Godfather, Kane, RVD, Christian, British Bulldogg, MARTY Janetty, Albert, Test, William Regal, Von Erich or Piper?

Why didn't your I-C title elevate the likes of Curt Hennig, Rick Rude, Roddy Piper, Rick Steamboat, or Shamrock, all very notable names? It reached a point were one wasn't the capturer of the I-C title, instead h was nestled with it. I think tat was evident as early as Pedro Morales.

The I-C title does not make money. Yeah you get a nice chunk of change of from replica belt sales but the I-C title does not effect WWE's bottom line.

 

[One to Remember]

i dont even understand what the op was even alluding to. he made it seem like at Night of Champions the U.S. champ would face the I-C champ and that never even happened. What evidence is there that the brand extension will even EVER end?

 

[zaculeh]

they need to keep both and make them brand specific and basically allow the US title to be the top of RAW and the IC title to be the top of SmackDown! and then the Unified WWE Title can be defended on both shows and they should have a number 1 contender from each brand

 

[SpoodBeest]

I voted for both to stay since the mid-card scene in the WWE is far too big to have all of them contend for one title. Things would get messy as many unfortunate wrestlers would get lost in the shuffle. The same things goes for the main event scene, too many guys that are best served competing for two belts on different shows. Or else in my opinion, many guys would get completely lost as they would be left out most of the time if there were only two singles titles in the WWE. The addition of two titles per singles division has opened the door for many stars and has only been proven beneficial over the past five years or so. So that takes care of how I truly feel.

Now onto which belt I prefer. That would have to be the United States title without a doubt. Not only is the nicer belt, I'm of course talking about it's design but within the last few years in WWE it has seemingly become the more prestigious title of the mid-card division. It's feuds are seemingly on a bigger scale, champions wear the belt with pride, and it's usually contested for over superstars you believe are in the league of the belt itself. The IC title has had plenty of joke champions since it's been around, something the US title has done a good job of not doing. In my opinion it is the far superior of the two mid-card belts not only in design but in it's appeal and overall prestige as well. But again I think the mid-card should keep the two belt shtick since it gives more guys the opportunity to compete for championship gold.

 

[manstis1804]

I think they might keep them both but I would vote for the IC title to stay. Its always been my favorite belt and recently prestige as been restored with some really great feuds involving Jericho, Misterio, Morrison, Ziggler, Kofi and McIntyre, all of which are main eventers or seen as future main event material by many. I know it went through a crappy patch, but I feel like the IC belt is slowly being re-established as the "workers'" belt, the title contested for by the best in-ring performers.