1 WWE World Champion, Or 3?

[Riddler Phoenix]

It should be one brand with one world title. Get rid of Ecw and have just RAW and Smackdown. Then you'd only have to deal with the major storylines twice a week. And don't put every rivalry on both shows. Have the biggest rivalries on both shows, and then let other wrestlers appear on one show per week. Maybe that sounds confusing. But it would work. For example, have Jericho and Orton feud every show, and have edge and taker feud every show. But then others like MVP and Mysterio appear on one show per week, but alternate which show, Raw and Smackdown. I think that would make the World Title be more important, as there's only one and it's constantly emphasized. Also, it would give time to the wrestlers who deserve by having them each appear once a week on whichever show.

Another thing to make this work would be to not give people titles over and over again. People like Batista and Cena have held World Titles at least 3 times in the past 2 years. I think that they should give more people oppurtunites at the title and have longer title reigns instead of multiple title reigns. It would give more wrestlers oppurtunities. Instead of giving Batista the title over and over again, have him lose it and have other people like MVP or Jeff Hardy or Kennedy challenge as well.

 

[RAW Is Jericho]

I would say only have 2 major championship belts, 1 for Raw (WWE champion) and 1 for ECW/Smackdown! (World Heavyweight Champion) seeing as ECW and Smackdown! travel together and how ECW and Smackdown! are using both of the rosters on both of the shows.

 

[Why Always Me]

This is how I would do it

I think it should be done in two stages, first of all unify the ECW title and the World Heavyweight Title, and merge Smackdown and ECW together.

Then Raw should announce that they have negotiated a deal with the USA network to make Raw 2 and a half hours long, and then Raw basically brags that it is better than Smackdown, as it is the flagship show, it's now longer (size matters) and it's live.

Smackdown responds by going back to Thursdays, going live, and then announcing that the USA network has also signed it to a two and a half hour slot. They also change the set-up, bring back the stage and have a new look.

The two brands then start going head to head, at one of the PPV's there is an 8 man tag team match, Raw's team of the WWE Champion, Intercontinental Champion and Tag Champions vs. Smackdown's team of the World Heavyweight Champion, United States Champion and Tag Champions.

Then the King Of The Ring is brought back, 16 stars from Raw and 16 Stars from Smackdown.

The rivalry between Raw and Smackdown goes back and forth, rating begin (hopefully) to push past 4.0 for both shows, hitting the 4.5 mark. Raw and Smackdown now begin to sell out again each week and and the next PPV, the two main events are for the WWE and World title respectively.

As the main event finished, the World Champion is celebrating in the ring, when the WWE Champion comes to the ring and makes the challenge for Summerslam, title vs. title to crown one true WWE title.

The belt to be used should be the one from the attitude era that the likes of Triple H, The Rock and Mankind won, just modified slighty so the name badge can be added, just like they did with the I.C. title.

On Raw the Tag chams from both shows make the same challenge, as do the IC and US champions.

Then Vince announces the split will end, titles will be unified and everyone is happy.

Heat and Velocity are to be used more, no re-caps of Raw and Smackdown, just an hour of wrestling with Tag Title matches, IC title matches and perhaps even a main event superstar appearing.

Thoughts?

 

[Steamboat Ricky]

This is how I would do it

I think it should be done in two stages, first of all unify the ECW title and the World Heavyweight Title, and merge Smackdown and ECW together.

Then Raw should announce that they have negotiated a deal with the USA network to make Raw 2 and a half hours long, and then Raw basically brags that it is better than Smackdown, as it is the flagship show, it's now longer (size matters) and it's live.

Smackdown responds by going back to Thursdays, going live, and then announcing that the USA network has also signed it to a two and a half hour slot. They also change the set-up, bring back the stage and have a new look.

The two brands then start going head to head, at one of the PPV's there is an 8 man tag team match, Raw's team of the WWE Champion, Intercontinental Champion and Tag Champions vs. Smackdown's team of the World Heavyweight Champion, United States Champion and Tag Champions.

Then the King Of The Ring is brought back, 16 stars from Raw and 16 Stars from Smackdown.

The rivalry between Raw and Smackdown goes back and forth, rating begin (hopefully) to push past 4.0 for both shows, hitting the 4.5 mark. Raw and Smackdown now begin to sell out again each week and and the next PPV, the two main events are for the WWE and World title respectively.

As the main event finished, the World Champion is celebrating in the ring, when the WWE Champion comes to the ring and makes the challenge for Summerslam, title vs. title to crown one true WWE title.

The belt to be used should be the one from the attitude era that the likes of Triple H, The Rock and Mankind won, just modified slighty so the name badge can be added, just like they did with the I.C. title.

On Raw the Tag chams from both shows make the same challenge, as do the IC and US champions.

Then Vince announces the split will end, titles will be unified and everyone is happy.

Heat and Velocity are to be used more, no re-caps of Raw and Smackdown, just an hour of wrestling with Tag Title matches, IC title matches and perhaps even a main event superstar appearing.

Thoughts?

Smackdown will.............never..............be able to compete with RAW.

A) Raw is a superior show: it has the more popular broadcasters, better talent, stronger tradition. Smackdown is on friday night...putting anything on friday night is just a concession that it's not going to succeed like a monday night show.

B) No one will ever buy into the brands feuding with each other. It's the same company run by Vince. They tried that thing with the Invasion angle. It didn't work.


WWE's best option right now is to keep doing what they are doing. I think they might actually be pushing some guys, and it seems like more and more that wrestlers are showing up on both brands. That could lead to the merger in the near future.

 

[IrishCanadian25]

B) No one will ever buy into the brands feuding with each other. It's the same company run by Vince. They tried that thing with the Invasion angle. It didn't work.

I agree with you in the context of "the way things are." I've climbed onto the old soap box a few times about how that "spirit of competition" could work with the right figureheads in place.

For one, WWE has driven the "wrestler vs authority figure" into the damn ground. For a time it was all three shows trying to be the next Austin vs McMahon. The horse they are beating isn't dead - it's not even a horse anymore. It's glue. McMahon vs Cena, Michaels, and HHH on RAW, Estrada vs Punk on ECW, and Undertaker and Batista vs Vicky Guerrero on Smackdown. Enough already.

When the competition did work, it was Eric Bischoff vs Stephanie McMahon. Eric supported the RAW roster and Stephanie the Smackdown roster. Fans could really buy the rivalry between the two. I feel that could be recaptured, but only if the figureheads allowed for a rivalry to be born. Raw is run by Eric Bichoff, Smackdown is run by JBL, and ECW is run by either Paul Heyman or Mick Foley. If Vince refuses to rehire Bichoff, then ask Steve Austin.

 

[Steamboat Ricky]

I agree with you in the context of "the way things are." I've climbed onto the old soap box a few times about how that "spirit of competition" could work with the right figureheads in place.

For one, WWE has driven the "wrestler vs authority figure" into the damn ground. For a time it was all three shows trying to be the next Austin vs McMahon. The horse they are beating isn't dead - it's not even a horse anymore. It's glue. McMahon vs Cena, Michaels, and HHH on RAW, Estrada vs Punk on ECW, and Undertaker and Batista vs Vicky Guerrero on Smackdown. Enough already.

When the competition did work, it was Eric Bischoff vs Stephanie McMahon. Eric supported the RAW roster and Stephanie the Smackdown roster. Fans could really buy the rivalry between the two. I feel that could be recaptured, but only if the figureheads allowed for a rivalry to be born. Raw is run by Eric Bichoff, Smackdown is run by JBL, and ECW is run by either Paul Heyman or Mick Foley. If Vince refuses to rehire Bichoff, then ask Steve Austin.

Nah, man. WWE needs something new. It needs something fresh. It evolved from the 80s superhero era into something new. The attitude era was so successful because it was revolutionary and it was something that the industry was not doing and/or hadn't seen before (except maybe ECW). It's time to turn over the industry again.

To be honest, I think it has to do with the name of the company. "WWE" is just awkward to say. I hate it, in fact. It doesn't sound like a wrestling organization, and I think that it could be serving as a detriment to the business. I think it is intelligent to explore the field of sports-entertainment, but I think it is necessary for the Federation to stay true to its wrestling roots.

I'd rather them go back to WWWF or simply "The Federation." Lose the "E" please.

It's time to revamp. Go in a new direction if the current storylines don't work out.

 

[MR.SCOTT]

Nah, man. WWE needs something new. It needs something fresh. It evolved from the 80s superhero era into something new. The attitude era was so successful because it was revolutionary and it was something that the industry was not doing and/or hadn't seen before (except maybe ECW). It's time to turn over the industry again.

To be honest, I think it has to do with the name of the company. "WWE" is just awkward to say. I hate it, in fact. It doesn't sound like a wrestling organization, and I think that it could be serving as a detriment to the business. I think it is intelligent to explore the field of sports-entertainment, but I think it is necessary for the Federation to stay true to its wrestling roots.

I'd rather them go back to WWWF or simply "The Federation." Lose the "E" please.

It's time to revamp. Go in a new direction if the current storylines don't work out.

The company has been in the process of reaping the rewards of its past dues, the company has evolved soo much that you cannot call it a wrestling organisation, wrestling only brings 70% of the wwe's revenue this year, the rest was braught in via music film and other sources of entertainment, the wwe has and always will be an entertainment company, it has a strong fan base until the someone or something comes up as a major competitor then the wwe will never make any refreshing changes and thats the truth, and as for the three belts, simple fact ecw is something interesting to watch i love ecw, i think the deal with ecw and smackdwon is a pile of crap, i would love to see the brand evolve into a stand alone company not the waterd down wwe product that it is now!
and as for people saying that tna is gonna be competition to the wwe i laugh at you, tna hardcore enthusiasts said that angle would bring in better ratings, im still waiting that to happen, they said that cage would bring in more fans, im still waiting for that to happen, they said that cornette and russo would usher a new era for tna (again still waiting) the fact is if the wwe aint broke they wont fix it they will stay with the current model as a business they have still remaind profitable and that is because they have always remaind constant

 

[SergioGel]

I am desperately waiting the day when the tri-brand ends and we move back to one WWE with two shows. but more importantly until they do away with all these titles. There needs to be just 1 WWE champion and give the belt alot more credibility. Plus it would promote much better feuds with meaning surrounding the title. Orton-HBK, Cena-Orton, Edge-Taker-Batista, for month after month gets redundant. Plus it would open up spots for mid-card wrestlers to have ligit matches. Does anyone really care about the US title or the ECW title, as they are just ways to glorify mid-card wrestlers. Less belts to me = ligitamacy and that is something storylines and the WWE need at the moment

 

[greer44644]

With there only being a couple undisputed champions in the wwe i think its time they unify all three titles back under the wwe title and end the brand extinsion it would make each title have a special meaning. and it could possibly pull the wwe out of there slump. lets face it since the exsintion the wwe is in a big slump so i say unify all three titles under one like they did with the wwe and WHC back in 2001. but what about the other tiles like the IC and US plus the tag titles what would become of them ?

 

[Amazing Shawn]

With there only being a couple undisputed champions in the wwe i think its time they unify all three titles back under the wwe title and end the brand extinsion it would make each title have a special meaning. and it could possibly pull the wwe out of there slump. lets face it since the exsintion the wwe is in a big slump so i say unify all three titles under one like they did with the wwe and WHC back in 2001. but what about the other tiles like the IC and US plus the tag titles what would become of them ?

People keep saying to end the brand extension. That is the worst thing you could do this would only cause more problems from the WWE.

Many talented wrestlers would be let go due to the fact that they would have absolutely no room for them. HHH, Undertaker, HBK, Batista, Edge, Jericho, Cena would be the only guys to get any attention. Talented wrestlers like MVP and Matt Hardy and Shelton Benjamin would be fired because they aren't going to serve any purpose.

There would be no new talent challenging for the title. We would see continuous feuds for the title and the company would have no superstar to rely on to carry the company or to be a huge superstar. We would be seeing Undertaker/HBK, Cena/Edge, HHH/Jericho over and over an pretty soon they will run out of things to do. The title would be the focus point and the other titles would be completely useless even more so then today.

 

[johncenalover23]

I think they should get rid of ecw roster and put it on raw or smackdown because its not working and they should focus on the 2 highest titles and put both mid card and the top wrestlers together. I want to see stars like carlito or jimmy wang yang win titles because they have so much opportunity and they could carry the title very well and I would love to see the feuds. So they should banish all the titles and keep the 2 world titles and the womens championship cuz the divas division is improving and now they actually wrestle and they wouldn't be anything if there wasn't a title for them.

 

[SergioGel]

The idea that uniting the brands and titles would mean no room for anyone else is rediculous. Since when does every feud have to be over a title? Guys like the Hardy Brothers were around when the same roster competed on Raw/Smackdown, and they will certainly be around if that was the case now. In fact, it would make for good shows as we wouldnt be seeing Hacksaw Jim Dugan come out for a three second squash match. As for having no superstar to carry the company, the company is trying to solve its problems by building the next hogan, instead they should be building complete shows and getting interest and ratings back up

 

[bowlinbing]

AH, I didn't read every single post, but If I may say that there is a good reason why the 'Top Dog' argument doesn't carry the water the proponents think that it does. Even when the WWE only had 1 World/Heavyweight championship belt. There were numerous 'Top Dogs' in pro-wrestling. Sure, fans 'knew' Autin was the 'Top Dog' but what about Goldberg? The difference between that era of multiple 'Top Dogs' and now is that one company controls all the belts... good or bad? who knows, but I know I would've loved to see and honestly booked Austin-Goldberg match in the late 90s-early 2000s. You can see that now, in 'Champion of Champions' matches, and other inter-brand work in the WWE. Just saying

 

[mike2307]

I didnt read all the posts, by i think its time to goto 1 world champion, and then have each brand have its on exclusive championship. Obvi the IC and US championships are already in place, but they don't mean anywhere near what they once did. I think you have one world champion and obvi thats gonna be coveted, way more then now with the three. And then you have the brand championship, which will make those titles so much more signifigant be a great way for WWE to push new stars cause after being the top guy on their brand they can go for a chance to be the companys top guy

 

[Slyfox696]

You see I would be for the whole one Title only thing, but really only if the WWE Operated in a similar way to how the NWA does (or used to). The problem the WWE have with having one belt is that when the Champion is say on Smackdown feuding with someone there is no top belt on either RAW or ECW, and knowing the WWE they would just keep the belt and Champion on RAW all the time anyway. The way the NWA did it would make far more sense, having Brand Heavyweight Champions (for instance the WWE: RAW Heavyweight Champion) and having one Undisputed World Championship. That way all the brands would have a title worth going for even if the World title was not on their brand. They could work it so only one of the Heavyweight Champions can get a title shot at the Undisputed Champion... this way they would have to make more Heavyweight Title Changes (and fucking TV change anyone?) to give the Undisputed Champion more opponents. This gives us one prestigious belt that can have a Champion for a long period of time and gives us three belts that can change hands a little more often.

That's a great idea, and I really like that one. It could make for some very interesting possibilities. Imagine having Orton feud with Hardy and then leave for Smackdown for another Undertaker feud. Meanwhile Cena and Triple H battle it out on Raw for the Raw championship.

If this were to happen, they would have to drop the Intercontinental and United States Championships I believe. Otherwise, each PPV would have 6 singles title matches, which devalues a title match.

Also, if they were to just kill the ECW brand, that would help as well, even in your scenario. It would limit the option for the Undisputed champion to cross to different brands, but it would bolster the rosters of the Smackdown and Raw shows.

 

[Testicular Claw]

I think there are far too many titles at the moment. Is there anybody that isn't brand new that hasn't won a title yet? I don't think the belts mean very much. There isn't enough star power to justify the amount of belts we have now IMO. I really think there should only be one belt at the moment. Maybe if they dropped the unite states championship and the intercontinental title and ecw it would work. To me though there can only be one real world champion in a company.

 

[Grubbs0621]

A few things need to change.

For one, go back to one brand.

Unify ECW/WWE/WHT Championships in a fatal 3 way.

Unify the Tag Titles.

Bring back the hardcore title, people love it.

Intercontinental and TV title get defended on TV and change hands sometimes. the World belt only at PPV with a rare exception.


Basically the late 90s belt system.

WWE Championship = WWF World Heavyweight Championship
Intercon. = Intercon.
European = US Title.
Hardcore = Hardcore
Tag = Tag

For now, I say leave out the cruiser belt since WWE doesn't seem to know how to utilize their cruiserweight wrestlers, but keep an open mind to it if they can get fast paced, exciting matches out of it.


However, we all know how much money decides things, and we won't be going to 1 brand anytime soon despite the fact it is really badly needly.

 

[Davi323]

I think they need to merge rosters entirely. Go back to a single brand, have both RAW and Smackdown become 3 hours to give everyone their TV time, merge the WWE and World belts into one, call it the WWE World Heavyweight Championship, using the big gold belt as the title, thus getting rid of the lame spinner belt...I don't mind so much having two different Tag belts, I liked it when WCW had US tag and World tag titles. There should be a IC title equivalent for tag teams, that you want to increase exposure for, but not give them the biggest belt. I would also eliminate the US title, as with a merged roster, it would be redundant. Plus, by eliminating two singles titles, (by merging WWE/World, and getting rid of US title) it makes the titles that remain more valuable.

so, in a nutshell:
-merge all 3 rosters.
-lengthen RAW and Smackdown.
-combine WWE and World Heavyweight belts. One champion, not two or three.
-rechristen one of the sets of Tag titles as US or IC Tag titles, becoming the Tag equivalent of a midcard championship.
-Keep the IC title, get rid of US title. US title is just a leftover belt from WCW anyway, and wouldn't be needed with a merged roster.

 

[dancing monkey]

I have been thinking that one championship belt is all that has been needed for quite some time. I am sick and tired of watching Cena/Orton/Hardy/Orton/Cena and then there is Taker/Bastita/Edge/Taker/Batista I think you get where I'm going with that. The WWE has been weakened for the long time now with the brand split I agree that the shows should merge and one title be up for grabs. With the stable of wrestlers they have one show would feature all good matches instead of one good match and 3-4 meh matches. If they merge that would open up the door for new and better storylines and would give a new life to wrestlers that right now are looking a bit tired. I think they should keep the one tag team belt and the IC belt also. There could be multi-layered competitions happening at the same time and wrestlers that previously haven't received a push might get one.

 

[HBK-aholic]

I think for the points I'm going to make, and for my opinions on this I need to say I think the WWE needs to go back to just one brand. I have always disagreed with the brand split, and I think for 1 company; the WWE, to have 3 brands and 3 championships is pretty stupid. Especially when the superstars from different brands rarely interact with each other. One brand means more feuds, more opportunities, more matches, more experience. Just in general the idea is so much better.

In my opinion there should only be one brand, and one world title, named the WWE championship. This would mean it would be a lot more prestigious and we would know he was on top of the company. Also to get the WWE championship it would be harder, which means we would have a champion that deserves it, not just because there was no one else for the positions.

The other titles should be gone, but the WWE should make more titles for other to aim at. Like the Intercontinental, almost like stepping stones to the Championship itself, and wrestlers would prove during these reigns and matches that they were suitable for the Championship, and it would stop a lot of people complaining about the champion, which is something we have a lot of trouble with now. The other titles wouldn't necessarily mean that that wrestler was then going to win the Championship nect, as that would just be predictable and have a lot of comaplaints. But the wrestlers could use this to try and show McMahon and the fans they deserve to be on top.

This also works for a lot of mid-carders who we know aren't going to get a huge push to be a main eventer. However these championships could be something certain wrestlers aim for. It wouldn't be as prestigous as the others but it makes things more competitive and gives some more feuds and interesting matches.
more opportunity for mayeb not 'main eventers'

 

[sammy j]

all brands merging together would be great, but let's work with what's in place at the moment.

wwe/WHC/ecw title: keep as is, we don't need a "unified" champ, everyone knows the wwe championship is a lot more prestigious than the ecw title, but ecw needs a belt for the show.

IC/US champs: basically.... give them some worth, have people chase them. one could say the US championship is more prestigious than the IC at the moment. why? compare the IC/US title pictures: matt hardy has basically said "i want the US championship" and is actively chasing it, everyone can tell it'd mean something if he won it. this implies that the championship means something, it has worth, and its an honour to be US champ. MVP is also always reminding us he's the champ, that its a prestigious title to have.

the IC's recent history? a guy from the crowd wins it, umaga squashes marella to get the title back, hardy wins it in a match with no build up or chasing of the title involved, and now that he's the champ he's shown not to care, that it means nothing and he'd much much rather have the wwe championship. if the champ himself puts no value on the title, why should the fans? if hardy's a main eventer now, he should drop the title (whoever wins it will be put over a long way due to hardy's push), and then someone should actually chase the damn thing, tell us they want it and that it means something.

tag team titles: there should be one tag title, simply because there arent enough teams for two sets of titles. plus if the tag teams altered between brands the crappier teams could be gotten rid of and we'd have a quality tag match on each show even if the champs weren't involved.

same goes with the cruiser title, there are more than enough cruiserweights who could chase the title and put on exciting high flying matches on all brands.

 

[tohasbo]

The problem with having 1 overall champion is that there would be a massive problem with that champion being on the road ALL THE TIME. It would wear that champion out. Friends of mine and myself included all came to a realization it wouldn't be a smart thing to do.

 

[bnn52]

Everyone in here has had great ideas, but the problem with one World Champion and getting rid of the other two, I dont know if 1, all of the fans would like it. Alot of fans enjoy title matches almost every week on tv, not me but I am talking about all of the kids who watch every week, who's parents buy every payperview and every toy and tshirt.

I am all for getting rid of ECW completely. Having a live draft of all the ECW superstars to either Raw or Smackdown. That would eliminate one main title. Then each show would have their respective main title, with one multi brand champion who can only be challenged at a pay per view. The US and IC titles need to stay because of their history, but like stated earlier, make them change hands more often between upper mid carders. And please unify the tag titles, I remember back in the old days when they actually meant something and there were great tag team matches. I also like the option of bringing back the Hardcore Title, but that would crowd the scene even more with title belts.

 

[doris008]

I agree,

They dont have enough title matches so therefore one person holds them to long.
for example the only time MVP defended his was against in one match against kane months ago and is going on one year with holding the title.

back in the day champions used to have to defend their titles in 30 days or be stripped. now you only see the wwe and world championships defended. the intercontirntial and tag teams once in a while. same with the womens championship. but the latter only like every other pay per view.

 

[RoyalSkull]

It's almost like the World Heavyweight title is a midcard belt and the ECW title is a cruiserweight belt. I mean don't get me wrong, Edge and Rey Mysterio are two great athletes, but it would make such a better midcard feud, not the focus of it's brand.
And look at the "ECW Championship". It's on a third rate show and is a third rate belt, which is exactly what the cruiserweight title has always been treated as.
It's impossible to put the same amount of focus on all three belts so of course one is going to come out looking better than the others. But it doesn't hurt to try either. I mean does anyone honestly care who has the WHC? Undertaker and Batista are the only credible face champions on Smackdown, and Edge is basically the only credible heel. Aside from these three guys, all we get is filler feuds with the likes of Mark Henry, Khali, and BDV.
I'm drunk.