Who didn't deserve to be a Heavyweight Champion?

[D-Will316]

Let's specify this to just the WWE and World Heavyweight titles.
In your opinion who do you feel was a total mistake to put one of the 2 main straps on.
Here's my view:

Dolph Ziggler: Sure he's on his way to main eventing but his 15minute title run was sad and undeserving, at least at that point in time. Others may not count him as a former champion but it's in the record books so it's recorded as a fact.

Alberto Del Rio: I havent heard him really get any heat ever from the crowd. Ricardo gets more heat. He held the title twice and each reign was a month long. Good wrestler sure, but he didn't deserve it. Still doesn't, I'll be upset if wins the title again.

The Miz: I am not a fan of The Miz, at all, but when he cashed in money in the bank I was hoping he'd be in the main event and stay there. Month after month he fell down the ladder after losing it. Before filming his movie Miz was a jobber. It should stay that way.

Jack Swagger: Honestly, with the amount of heat he was getting, he could've been a top notch heel but the ball was drop so hard from him after he lost the title it was deflated. This is my choice for biggest mistake.

Notice how 3 out of 4 cashed in to become champion...

 

[Longtimeviewer25]

IM behind ya on Alberto Del Rio he was sorry i see him as no more than a mid carder at best

 

[LeviCook]

There has been a few pointless title reigns over the years and people who didn't deserve it. There has also been people who deserved it but wasn't able to have a good run; superstars like Jack Swagger, Alberto Del Rio, Dolph Ziggler, etc. Honestly i want to just take the easy answer and say John Cena. Yes Cena is a hard worker. Yes Cena deserved to be champion. But did he really deserve to be a 10 time world champion at this point in his career? I swear WWE will push someone with the title and when they finally decide to end their run they're like "Ok, back to Cena". That's the only thing they can resort to. If you don't believe me look back at the list of champions. You will see someones name, then Cena. Someone different, then Cena. And on and on.

 

[Radical Canadian Goose]

I enjoyed the reigns of Miz and Swagger. I do not believe that Zigglers reign should stay on the record and Del Rios pisses me off. I know that people are going to come on and trash Mark Henrys reign, but I thought that he was one of the greatest champs in recent memory.

My pick has to be Kane. How the hell did he win MITB and go on to take the title and have dull feuds for a couple months before relinquishing the title. I like Kane and all I just can't stand when he holds a title, he is just not a believable champ to me

 

[AndThat'sTheBottomLine]

It's got to be the Great Khali. Most definitely. He should've never ever ever been champion. He had a meaningless reign that nobody cared about. He should've been the most dominant monster in WWE history, instead he's losing matches to guys 1/3 his size. It's pathetic. He should've stayed gone from the WWE after he left. Swagger is a close second for me. He does nothing for me to care about him. Not then and not now. Great wrestler, horrible talker. Should never be main event.

 

[JJ15776]

I would like to request some clarity as to how we define "didn't deserve" the title, if there is such a standard. Is it based on how over(or not) they were at the time of the title win? Is it based on who they beat for the title? How they beat them? Is it based on what they did as champion? Is it based on what they've done since losing the title?

Dolph Ziggler would be a no brainer, had he actually been Heavyweight champion. But when you are *awarded* the title and lose it on your first defense 10 minutes later, that is not a title reign and you have not been Heavyweight champion. So he's off the list.

The Miz and Jack Swagger? The standard for them seems to be the last one - what they've done since losing the title - and I don't think that works for me. At the time they won the title, they were both rather deserving - The Miz especially so, and he even had a solid reign to boot. While I think he's now going to be a permanent fixture in his natural home of the midcard, I would assume that Jack Swagger will find his way back to the main event eventually.

Alberto Del Rio is a no brainer for me. He wasn't a main eventer when he won the title, he wasn't a main eventer while he was champion, and he hasn't been a main eventer since he lost it. He won it cheaply, he made 1 successful title defense in the 84 days he held the title(needing the help of 2 other wrestlers and an announcer), and as I said he's been worthless since he lost it. He fits all the criteria I laid out above. He's average in the ring, mediocre on the mic, all he has is a great look and an easy-to-play, guaranteed-heat-generator gimmick...wait, am I talking about Alberto Del Rio or Randy Orton? I digress.

The runner up for me, going back a ways, would be Vince McMahon. For obvious reasons. I can't think of anybody else that was as undeserving as ADR.

 

[TheLoneCharles]

Great Khali and it isn't even close.

At least guys like Del Rio, Swagger, Ziggler, and even Miz can wrestle and put on a match...their collective main weakness is/was lacking the ability to connect with the crowds as a believable champion.

Khali can't even connect with the crowds as a wrestler. You know it's bad when you are wrestling guys like Undertaker and a "you can't wrestle" chant is audibly heard during your main event. Now if that doesn't gradually kill the prestige of your World Title I don't know what will. Khali is good in comedic relief like Santino and Ryder...he shouldn't be near a ring even remotely touted as a credible threat.

 

[AndThat'sTheBottomLine]

I enjoyed the reigns of Miz and Swagger. I do not believe that Zigglers reign should stay on the record and Del Rios pisses me off. I know that people are going to come on and trash Mark Henrys reign, but I thought that he was one of the greatest champs in recent memory.

My pick has to be Kane. How the hell did he win MITB and go on to take the title and have dull feuds for a couple months before relinquishing the title. I like Kane and all I just can't stand when he holds a title, he is just not a believable champ to me

You're absolutely right with Henry. He was very believable as a champion. That's how he should've been his entire career. Much like Big Show should've been. I disagree with Kane. What killed him was him beating Austin in that first blood match and then lost the rematch after a week. Otherwise he's very believable as a champion. He could've had a championship run after he came in then feuded with Taker for the belt. He was almost unstoppable and putting the belt on him would've been very believable. Even now with him being resurrected it could work.

 

[OutsiderDX]

First we have to declare what qualities makes a man is "deserving".

I personally feel that is a person has a passion for the business, works hard to improve his trade, and as a performer has elevated his character to the point where people care, he is deserving.

Passion for the Biz : I would say to a degree everyone BUT The Great Khali has.

Worked Hard at his trade : again i don't think The Great Khali is spending hours in the ring to improve.

Character who connects : At the point they became Champion, i don't think Ziggler or Swagger or Alberto really had the fans caring much. The Miz, Khali and Vince all had pretty good heat and reactions.

I would declare The Great Khali as the most undeserving from the list. With Swagger 2nd for having so much potential but failing at every turn.

But i would never rag on the Great Khali. The WWE is the one who wanted to turn a part time actor, into a wrestler. He has just gone along with what he is told. The WWE knows his limitation in the ring and on the mic, yet they pushed him. He is a good company man who doesnt get in trouble, has a unique look, is able to open relations in the huge India market, and doesn't complain about his angles and character.

 

[Kizzani]

First off this is in Old school wrestling section and you add Miz, Swagger, Del Rio and Ziggler. All of which have barely tapped into wrestling in the WWE. But look at the names you added they hold no merit at all. When there have been so many worse wwe champions. As in the proper Place of Old School

Goldeberg- Mr Boring, Mr. No-promo, Goldberg did nothing but one stint as a Undefeated guy ( in a pre determined world). He was just a big boring guy like Ryberg.

Big Show- Seriously less than 1 day as champion that shows how stupid he is mr. flip flopper. heel/face/heel/face..rinse and repeat.

Yokosuna- This man was nothing but a big fat terd who could do almost nothing in the Ring. Everyone makes fun of Cena for his five moves, but Yoko had 2 stand and sit. Fat bastard.

Andre "the giant" - Again with the less than 1 day title runs. Andre was there for hogan to slam, he was nice the princess bride but as a wrestler he was slow and lame. ( similar to big show, except show can talk)

Vince Russo- Held the WCW title and held it for a week ( longer than Benoit)

David Arquette- Held the title for twice as long ( also longer than Benoit)

You can make a argument for everyone on your list except maybe Khali. But to even have a list of people you don't enjoy watching is lame. I am a Del Rio, Ziggler and Miz fan. But after years of watching morons get titles ( see list above) I understand it takes time for characters to mold to what they become ( see Cena). To have this is old school is pointless.

The anwser is simply other. Because even Vince deserves a title more than Russo or Arquette and because you list is just a complaint of those you dislike right now.

 

[Strife543]

Yokosuna- This man was nothing but a big fat terd who could do almost nothing in the Ring. Everyone makes fun of Cena for his five moves, but Yoko had 2 stand and sit. Fat bastard.

.

How dare you disrepect A legend i hope the rock finds you and rock bottoms u 100 times. Yokozuna was one of the greatest heels in the new generation era and worked his ass off to get a world title reign not to mention yokozuna has more than 5 moves and had an impressive reign not to mention great feuds and matches with the undertaker lex lugar and Bret hart.

Now the person who should never have held the World championship was Arquette. David isnt even a wrestler and it brought down the ratings in an interview Arquette himself said he did't want to be champion because the fans would get pissed off

The Great Khali was the worst world champion in WWE history. Khali only did some chops a body slam a chokebomb and sometimes a vice grip. The only reason why Khali was world champion is because he is a popular sports figure in India
If they hadnt made Jack Swagger a cowardly pain on the mic listening world champ then I would take his reign more seriously.

 

[akathelaw]

The Great Khali isn't a good enough wrestler, and at the time the crowd wasn't buying him. It would make more sense for his first WHC reign to happen now rather than back when it did. I still don't think he deserves it. He's stiff and unconvincing in the ring. I wouldn't be excited to see his match at a live show. Isn't that the point of being the champion?

 

[HBsam31]

I voted other, but The Great Khali is a very close second. If i recall he was given the title in a battle royal due to someone else getting injured? I can't quite remember the circumstances. My choice though is David Arquette. He was given the title to attract mainstream attention due to him having a silly movie coming out. That was kind of the last straw for me and WCW. Never was really sure what they were thinking with that one.

 

[HBKistheHOF]

1.) The Great Khali - Is nothing but a side attraction for his size. WORST WORLD CHAMPION EVER!

2.) Bob Backlund - I know his wrestling history, but this guy was the most annoying, uncharasmatic, boring, terrible, world champ ever next too khali, MAYBE EVEN WORSE!

3.) Russo/Arquette - Both Awful. I wasn't that big of a WCW fan to begin with, but I believe that when Russo became champ and it was evident there were politics backstage destroying the show, it was the final move to put WCW in the toilet. And after Russo had major power, I can't say I'm sorry.

4.) Jeff Jarrett - How this guy even got the IC title is beyond me. He is a JOKE! If it wasn't for his buddies backstage he would have never made it in the buisness!

5.) The Miz - Modern day Jarrett but just kisses McMahon's butt. Just awful!! Was NEVER main event material!

6.) McMahon - Nothing but a power trip. He isn't a "WWE Superstar" and never will be.

7.) Booker T/King Bookah - Maybe a single run or two as transitional champion but 6 TIME WORLD CHAMP?!?!?! He was NEVER even close to that good!!! Also King Booka was possibly the worst gimmick ever next to Bastion Booger.

*Daniel Bryan DESERVED the title but won it in the WORST WAY and had an AWFUL REIGN!

*Del Rio, Swagger, & Big Show are all transitional champions.

*Ziggler just had a stupid 15 second reign.

 

[Manof1,004Holds]

I enjoyed The Miz's title reign, and I might be in the minority but I liked Jack Swagger's reign. My pick is The Great Khali, the guy can barely move in the ring. I hated when they gave him the title, not only because he didn't deserve, but because he has the wrestling ability of a broomstick.

Also, he can't even speak english, I didn't like his manager either. Dolph Ziggler's 15 minute title reign and Alberto Del Rio's title reign were bad, especially Ziggler's, but they actually have wrestling ability. The Great Khali is a no-brainer for me.

 

[jacdnwarrior]

Vince McMahon was my pick. Yes I know it was rather symbolic and grand to see the owner with the belt, but quite frankly, I found it unnecessary. Stay out of the ring Vince.

Khali is tied with Vince or a close second. He looks horrible in the ring and he injures people. I understand his size and his background make him a choice to hold the belt, but his work in the ring makes it impossible for any one to think he is a worthy champ.

 

[shalliin]

First off this is in Old school wrestling section and you add Miz, Swagger, Del Rio and Ziggler. All of which have barely tapped into wrestling in the WWE. But look at the names you added they hold no merit at all. When there have been so many worse wwe champions. As in the proper Place of Old School

Goldeberg- Mr Boring, Mr. No-promo, Goldberg did nothing but one stint as a Undefeated guy ( in a pre determined world). He was just a big boring guy like Ryberg.

Big Show- Seriously less than 1 day as champion that shows how stupid he is mr. flip flopper. heel/face/heel/face..rinse and repeat.

Yokosuna- This man was nothing but a big fat terd who could do almost nothing in the Ring. Everyone makes fun of Cena for his five moves, but Yoko had 2 stand and sit. Fat bastard.

Andre "the giant" - Again with the less than 1 day title runs. Andre was there for hogan to slam, he was nice the princess bride but as a wrestler he was slow and lame. ( similar to big show, except show can talk)

Vince Russo- Held the WCW title and held it for a week ( longer than Benoit)

David Arquette- Held the title for twice as long ( also longer than Benoit)

You can make a argument for everyone on your list except maybe Khali. But to even have a list of people you don't enjoy watching is lame. I am a Del Rio, Ziggler and Miz fan. But after years of watching morons get titles ( see list above) I understand it takes time for characters to mold to what they become ( see Cena). To have this is old school is pointless.

The anwser is simply other. Because even Vince deserves a title more than Russo or Arquette and because you list is just a complaint of those you dislike right now.

Are you seriously dismissing Andre the Giant as only someone for Hogan to slam? You must be young, and have never seen any of his work. In his later years as injuries and his illness advanced, he became limitted, but try and look up his earlier work. He was a great worker for his size, able to climb the ropes, do leap frogs and drop kicks. Even Big Show when he started in WCW was a good ring worker, but he eventually lost the battle and put on weight himself, but still can put on compelling matches.

Their title reigns were not important in length, but as a reward for their years of previous work and the attention they brought to their opponents. Hogan would be nothing without Andre( that might not be a good thing). Others wouldn't be as impressive if it wasn't for Show letting them get over him.

Yokozuna was in a similar situation, but his title reign was deserving because while his size limitted his work, he did have years of training. He was a better in ring performer then some of the newer stars and most importantly, he could get a reaction from the crowd without doing crazy stunts that hurt himself or his opponents.

in the end, the worth of a champion is not the length of a reign, but the reaction of the crowd and his peers. If the crowd reacts properly (heat/pop for heel/face) and their peers are accepting and approving then who are we to say that they are underserved?

There have been those who did not deserve the title, but in the end, the fact that we even discuss and dispute their reigns are reason enough for them to have gotten that chance. This is ENTERTAINMENT, and their goal is to draw attention and keep it, and having us continue to discuss and refute and degrade the choices that were made is the main goal of the organization and system they have in place.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

I'm going to address all you morons who voted for Great Khali. The man is over 7 feet tall and weighs over 400 pounds. What in the blue hell do you want him to do? He's isn't going to fly around like Mysterio. Follow me closely and I hope you can keep up.

Khali's a big guy. Khali's a powerful guy. When he slams you, it really hurts. When he hits you, it really hurts. When he chops you, it really hurts. That is all he needs to do because it is effective. How people still do not get this, I will never understand. Besides, who else was there? People were complaining about Batista in title matches all the time even though he was still in the three matches in which Khali was champion. Kane is mediocre as always and I didn't see people clamoring for him. Khali was pretty much the only option and he is far from the worst champion.

 

[d_henderson1810]

You're absolutely right with Henry. He was very believable as a champion. That's how he should've been his entire career. Much like Big Show should've been. I disagree with Kane. What killed him was him beating Austin in that first blood match and then lost the rematch after a week. Otherwise he's very believable as a champion. He could've had a championship run after he came in then feuded with Taker for the belt. He was almost unstoppable and putting the belt on him would've been very believable. Even now with him being resurrected it could work.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I heard that Kane wasn't booked to even win the title at KOTR '98. Apparently, Austin was meant to retain, but they had to change the ending because, when Taker came in and hit Austin with a chair, he cut him hardway. Since Austin was bleeding so heavily, there was no choice but to change the ending on the spot (as it would be hard to fool the audience). Austin won it back the next night on "Raw" to continue the booking plans WWE had before the "First Blood" snafu.

 

[spiketbear]

Anyone who wasn't a wrestler winning the titles: Arquette, Mr. Mcmahon. But in the confines of this topic, I voted or McMahon. Either way, it devalues the title and disrespects the fans. We are aware it is predetermined, but we give the industry our ratings and money so we deserve a little respect. Having a non-wrestler winning what was supposed to be a title that only the strongest, fastest and slyest of all human beings could possibly win is going way beyond suspension of disbelief; it's just plain stupid. It's like George Clooney becoming MMA champion. It's a disgrace to the long, storied history of this industry.

 

[d_henderson1810]

1.) The Great Khali - Is nothing but a side attraction for his size. WORST WORLD CHAMPION EVER!

2.) Bob Backlund - I know his wrestling history, but this guy was the most annoying, uncharasmatic, boring, terrible, world champ ever next too khali, MAYBE EVEN WORSE!

3.) Russo/Arquette - Both Awful. I wasn't that big of a WCW fan to begin with, but I believe that when Russo became champ and it was evident there were politics backstage destroying the show, it was the final move to put WCW in the toilet. And after Russo had major power, I can't say I'm sorry.

4.) Jeff Jarrett - How this guy even got the IC title is beyond me. He is a JOKE! If it wasn't for his buddies backstage he would have never made it in the buisness!

5.) The Miz - Modern day Jarrett but just kisses McMahon's butt. Just awful!! Was NEVER main event material!

6.) McMahon - Nothing but a power trip. He isn't a "WWE Superstar" and never will be.

7.) Booker T/King Bookah - Maybe a single run or two as transitional champion but 6 TIME WORLD CHAMP?!?!?! He was NEVER even close to that good!!! Also King Booka was possibly the worst gimmick ever next to Bastion Booger.

*Daniel Bryan DESERVED the title but won it in the WORST WAY and had an AWFUL REIGN!

*Del Rio, Swagger, & Big Show are all transitional champions.

*Ziggler just had a stupid 15 second reign.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You say that Jeff Jarrett only got where he did on the back of others.

Hey, the guy founded a wrestling company! He didn't get the opportunity handed to him, he created the opportunity himself. And guess what, despite people running down TNA, it is still around one decade later. I don't know who you are referring to, as to him being helped out by others in forming TNA, probably other than his father , Jerry. But to criticise Jeff Jarrett's place in history because his father was a promoter is like saying that Triple H only got where he did in WWE by marrying the boss's daughter.

 

[Dr. Awesome]

I'd say Ziggler I wouldn't say that he's undeserving but a 15 Min title reign? C'mon it's pathetic. I'd say Rey's WWE Title reign is close 2nd. (In reality people may say is first WHC reign is only because of Eddie's death. I seem to read that a lot these days).

For the record I don't understand why people hate Khali so much though granted he wasn't great but it was different. People complain that Cena is the same repetitive shit yet when WWE does something different (Such as Khali as Champ) people complain. Some people are never happy.

 

[ProWrestlingFan]

Alberto Del Rio : Del Rio debuted in 2010, won the Royal Rumble in less than 6 months after debuting, then wins the Money in the Bank then becomes a WWE Champion with a lackluster reign of few weeks then loses the title then wins the title again.

In 1 year Alberto Del Rio won the Royal Rumble, Money in the Bank WWE Championship (2 Times) and yet people don't care about him.

 

[AndThat'sTheBottomLine]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I heard that Kane wasn't booked to even win the title at KOTR '98. Apparently, Austin was meant to retain, but they had to change the ending because, when Taker came in and hit Austin with a chair, he cut him hardway. Since Austin was bleeding so heavily, there was no choice but to change the ending on the spot (as it would be hard to fool the audience). Austin won it back the next night on "Raw" to continue the booking plans WWE had before the "First Blood" snafu.

How would they have done that? Kane had a mask and a freaking full body suit how would Austin have won that match?

 

[Nate DaMac]

I heard that Kane wasn't booked to even win the title at KOTR '98. Apparently, Austin was meant to retain, but they had to change the ending because, when Taker came in and hit Austin with a chair, he cut him hardway. Since Austin was bleeding so heavily, there was no choice but to change the ending on the spot (as it would be hard to fool the audience). Austin won it back the next night on "Raw" to continue the booking plans WWE had before the "First Blood" snafu.

That's ******ed. Anyone who actually saw the match could see that everything went as planned.

I'm not reading the stupid list or whatever, just going off of personal preference. Jeff Jarrett was a mid carder, is a mid carder, and should never be anything but a mid carder. He did not have the talent to be a world champion, and the only reason he has any reigns is because Vince Russo/lack of talent in the organization he was in. I understand him getting reigns in TNA, he founded the damn company. I'll never understand how he got anything in WCW though.