A Real World Title

[CenaSux4Life78]

With 3 different brands for WWE, wouldn't it make sense to have just 1 World Title? You have a RAW champ, ECW champ, and Smackdown Champ, and 1 World Champ over all 3 brands. It would be similiar to how they used to do it with the Undisputed Title. My idea would be a tournement to crown the champion. The final would be the mainevent at Mania. Here would be the reps from each show, as rosters are now.


RAW
Randy Orton
John Cena
The Miz
MVP
HHH
HBK
Big Show
Mark Henry
Kofi Kingston
Santino

ECW
Christian
Ezekial Jackson
Goldust
Paul Burchill
Sheamus
Shelton Benjamin
Gregory Helms
Tommy Dreamer
Vlodomer Kozlov
William Regal

Smackdown
CM Punk
Undertaker
Batista
Rey Mysterio
Chris Jericho
John Morrison
Dolph Ziggler
Kane
Matt Hardy
R Truth

Now with those nominated Im not going to go down the list of who faces who and wins etc. But my picks for the fatel 3 way at Mania would be:

Shelton Benjamin vs Randy Orton vs Undertaker

My winner would be Undertaker

 

[Dysturbed]

I think that once the belt is won, it would need to have a certain kind of execution for what the champ does in order for people to not get annoyed with certain things.

Back in the day the undisputed champ usually had a primary feud on one brand and a secondary feud on the other in order to have their involvement on the other show mean more. Suppose that Orton is the undisputed champ and is feuding with Triple H but since he can appear on all three shows he is then on Smackdown having a minor feud with Edge in order to make his presumed appearances on Smackdown every week worth it. Say that Edge and Orton have a match a on Smackdown a few days before a ppv. It would be interesting if to our surprise the challenger (in this case Edge) wins the title and then would face Triple H as opposed to what was previously expected and hyped. The problem though would be that suddenly Orton would have no ppv match. Therefore situations like that would be unlikely meaning that the primary match would be the only significant one and the others would seem somewhat pointless to a lot of people


It wasn't that way when there was no split and wasn't that way when there used to be an undisputed title, but in this day and age I think that might be the case. There could be some benefits to just having one title as well but I think that even though a lot of people argue that having "two best" or "three best" people as opposed to one, it seems to me at least like it's a good idea to have the few champs instead of one under the current format.

I could be way off base with all of that.

 

[Super Crazy]

While on paper this idea sounds golden it will never work. And I mean never. Doing this would essentially make the World Heavyweight Championship and the WWE Championship into mid card titles. Then there would be two sets of mid card titles on two shows.

This basically boils down to the fact that you probably want the brand split to end. Having one potentially unified championship for all three brands with one champion that goes from show to show. It is a good idea and half the IWC goes on and on about this day in and day out. It will never happen though.

This would also stop the creation of newer stars. With one major championship again it would be harder to create new main eventers. The spotlight would be on Triple H and Orton and Cena and Batista all over again. Again this is something the IWC goes on about day in and day out. The only way to create new stars is two have the two brands. It is harder to build up 6 people being featured on all three shows rather then 6 people with 2 being on each show seperately.

Like I said I like your idea but it will never work. I like that you would have the Undertaker be the first man to have the belt although I don't think Taker would essentially want to be that man. If anything it should be given to someone who is on the rise or is fairly new to the main event that has only held a few championships.


It's best that the WWE stays in it's current format right now involving the championships as it would only hurt them to add more titles and try to feature more stars on each show as they already have a hard time with featuring the stars they have.

 

[beefthelegend]

plus it's a fail because you don't have Zack Ryder in the ECW tournament.

WOO WOO WOO You know it.

But yes, this idea is too flimsy because it would further disgrace the WWE/world titles, essentially making them mid card titles.

In a perfect world, this works. However...we live in anything but.

 

[Tyler44]

Yeah this has been a complaint by most wwe fans for about five years now. It would be cool because it would make becoming champion much harder, so when a new champion is crowned, people will actually care. I wish it happened, but very doubtful.

Now,if we all pretended this idea of the tournament for the 1 title (never heard an idea like that before) happened today, i would just have to disagree with your triple-threat. Yeah i can agree on Undertaker and Orton even though there are several possibilities, but Christian should be there instead of Shelton Benjamin. Christian is ECW right now. I watched ECW about 3 weeks ago, and noticed Christian is in the opening video at least on five different occasions. I realize you always need 1 person to carry ECW and that person should be in the opening many times, but also that 1 person should be in the triple-threat at Wrestle mania for the undisputed championship.

 

[johnbragg]

While on paper this idea sounds golden it will never work. And I mean never. Doing this would essentially make the World Heavyweight Championship and the WWE Championship into mid card titles. Then there would be two sets of mid card titles on two shows.

No, if they ever went towards this direction it would just be to unify the WHC and WWE titles. Then, every other PPV the No. 1 contender would switch from Raw to SD and back.

It would amp up the US and Intercontinental titles, as they would be the top title on each brand, in a way.

 

[Sean Valjean]

As much as I miss having one world champion, it simply wouldn't work now. The WWE is struggling to make new main-eventers with 2 world titles ( I don't consider the ECW belt a world title; just slightly above the US/IC belts).

It's always the same guys getting shots, and if there were only 1 world title it'd be nothing but HHH/Orton/Cena/Taker/Batista/Edge with Punk getting a shot here and there, if he's lucky. Punk and Jericho might not ever get a real title reignn again, and guys like Morrison, MVP, and Christian might not get a shot at all.

The biggest problem the WWE have right now is their failure to make new main eventers, and having only 1 world title would only make things worse.

 

[Adalam]

One world title in the WWE? Really? Is that the best anyone can come up with to save the WWE? For crying out loud just put someone new into the title boat and if they prove to be a solid main eventer and can really get over, then they captain the boat with the number one contendership being battled out by other main-eventers.

 

[The Gribbler]

I really don't think this idea would help, actually I am all for brand exclusive pay per views. Don't have one world title, have the builds to world title matches be about twice as long. But only have the feuds go for two pay per views or so or else itll just get tedious.

Seriously on brand exclusive pay per views:

1. More talent from each brand can be showcased, allowing them to get more exposure.

2. The feuds have a better build and don't seem so rushed.


3. It will lengthen title reigns (assuming that they don't start changing hands on smackdown, defeating the purpose of brand exclusive PPV) adding prestige to the champion holding the strap.

So on topic, no to a single world title, it really doesn't work.

Just My Opinion

 

[JBK2008]

Idea is nice, but 1 champion moving across all 3 brands? That's just too rough for one person ot manage. That's why there are 3 championships. Still nice idea but it would hurt the other two titles and hurt the value of those two.

 

[XgringolocoX]

I"m also of the opinion that this woudn't be such a good idea. I like one world champ better myself, but it just will never be the case again. Sadly I might add.
However, a tri-brand over a multi PPV leading to Wrestlemania tourne sounds like it could be interesting.
Oh, I hear the Brand only PPV thing but it doesn't work. A RAW PPV gets RAW viewers, SMackdown! thier viewers, ECW blah blah.. Combined PPVs gets all three cries ye god of cold hard cash. Sucks, but it'll never change.

 

[leroi]

i totally agree with the Gribbler but as i mentioned in my last posts it would be better if the undisputed tilte be defended in 4 ppvs/year and the title can also be defended in the brand it belongs to. The problem would also consist of determining who the num 1 contender is. Some would say to unify all three tiltles into one leaving us with the IC title and US tilte. Its complicated and would be difficult to implement but would be good for longer feuds. Imagine how big the 4 ppvs would be if that could happen.

 

[hermogenes]

Hey guys.

I too agree this wouldn't be a good idea, mostly due to the reasons already stated:
- too much to ask of one person (appear 3x per week while champions)
- it would imply too many title changes (hard to build long reigns again)
- hard to create interesting storylines for the title.

If WWE would consider something of the sort, I guess the only way would be to have each brand title be a number #1 contender sort of prize. For instance:
Let's assume:
- Christian ECW Champ
- Orton Raw Champ
- Taker SmackDown Champ
- Cena Undisputed Champ

step 1:
All the 3 brand champs fight a triple threat to crown a #1 contender for the Undisputed title.
step 2:
At the next PPV Cena faces... lets say Taker. At the same PPV we can have the remaining Christian and Orton defend their Brand championships from rising stars wanting to get into the Undisputed title scene. Also a smackdown match for #1 contender of that brands' title.
step 3:
If Taker loses, he has to defend his Smackdown title champ at the next Smackdown show. If he wins, the smackdown title is given to the new #1 smackdown contender (could create a story of run-ins from the new smackdown wannabe champ) and Cena would return to his brand titleless.
step 4:
Go back to step 1 and repeat

The Undisputed title would be a sort of Uber-Main Event.
The brand titles would be Main-Event (the people holding would still be considered the best in their brand)
Mid-Card titles would still be around for other talent to be developed.

Advantages:
- Formal way to do things
- Brand Titles could be used to push new talent:
Morrison for instance could hold the Smackdown title for a long time without ever really managing to break into the Undisputed title match. He would still come off as a strong competitor (defeating the likes of Batista and Punk to retain it) and establish himself in a higher ground.

Disadvantages:
- too many title matches to try and put into a PPV
- not much room for creative storylines
- Uber-Main Event would always be down to the same 4 people
- ECW's roster isn't really strong enough to compare a ECW champ to any other champ. It would do wonders for ECW nonetheless.

Some ideas that this cycle could create:
- the brand hosting the triple threat #1 contender match could be chosen "randomly" and create a streak where the host brand champion would always win the shot at the title...(until someday)

- everynow and then have the undisputed champion defend against all 3 in:
-- gauntlet match (who ever pinned the champion would remain in the ring)
-- elimination chamber (adding in mid-card title holders)

I wrote more than expected and its a bit confusing now that I read it but well...those are my 2 cents

 

[ABMorales787]

Huh? I thought the Mid Card belts were to raise talent? Good try but the idea is weird. If anything they should trim down talent big time until the have wrestlers for just one brand.

Or just two: WWE and ECW. WWE= Main Event. ECW=Development. Easy as that. Have the WWE and Intercontinetal titles on WWE. The ECW and U.S. belts on ECW. And The Tag Team and Womens titles be defended on both brands. Scrap Superstars and give ECW an hour and 45 minutes.

 

[King Patrick Star]

My ideas is somewhat similar to this, but with a little twist. I like the way the Undisputed Unified WWE World Tag Team Titles are now. Having, not one, but two Titles would really show dominance as Champions. My suggestion is to do this for all the current Titles and have all the Champions cross brands. This gives the Titles more “Prestige”, and also give importance to the Champions.

Undisputed Unified WWE ECW World Champion (later would be referred to as WWE Champion, but still represented by the WWE, World, and ECW Titles)

Undisputed Unified Intercontinental / United States Champion (later would be referred to as WWE Intercontinental Champion, but still represented by the IC and US Titles)

Undisputed Unified Women’s / Divas Champion (later would be referred to as WWE Women’s Champion, but still represented by the Women’s and Divas Titles)

Undisputed Unified WWE World Tag Team Champions (later would be referred to as the WWE Tag Team Champions, but still represented by the World Tag Team and WWE Tag Team Titles)

This would consolidate the WWE Titles from 9 to 4 and would remove the redundancy of the “same Titles” and make room for “specialty” Titles. If they do indeed add any of these, the Unified Titles would also show the level of importance by having 3 Belts for the World Champ, 2 Belts for the Mid-Card Champ, Woman’s / Divas, and Tag Team Champs, and 1 Belt for any of the lower level Titles like the European, Hardcore, TV, or even the Light Heavyweight / Cruiserweight Titles.

It’s just an idea.

 

[Kanye South]

This is a horrible idea. You noticed that through all of the Undisputed Title's lifetime, no rookie won the title except for Brock Lesnar and (arguably a rookie) Chris Jericho. And that's because he's fucking Brock Lesnar. And Jericho was a main-eventer in the fan's eyes anyway. Sure this title unification would raise "prestige" and "value", but let's be honest: who really gives a fuck about that? Nobody would benefit from this title unification. And for a company who everyone claims "can't make new stars", this sure as hell wouldn't do shit for that problem.

Oh, and Shelton Benjamin in the main event of Wrestlemania?

.

Hilarious.

 

[johnbragg]

A Unified World title could work, if done correctly.

Have one world champion appearing on both brands, defending only on PPV with SD and Raw taking turns naming contenders. This would give WWE Creative a nudge to mix the main event players with the very top of the midcard as wrestlers compete for the No. 1 contender spot. (This is the "if done right" part.)

Say Cena is The Champ. On Raw, MVP could realistically challenge Orton for the next RAW title shot. HHH, HBK, Big Show, the US Champion and Legacy might all have something to say about that, though. Get a hat, pull names, and face off in a tournament. MVP pulls an upset (or not) on the Big Show, and presto, Jimmy, an MVP-Big Show feud. MVP gives HBK all he can handle for close to 20 minutes on RAW before eating the Sweet Chin Music. Meanwhile Ted Dibiase wins out in the other bracket, and gets the win over HBK in the finals.

Feuds or mini-feuds generated with minimal thought by me: MVP-Big Show, Dibiase-HBK, Dibiase-Cena. And I didn't even book the other 3 quarterfinals or one semifinal.

For those who obsess over elevating the US and IC titles, keep those two separate and those titles become the faces of each brand.

 

[angry_panda]

It has been said before but the titles are just props these days, and as has been said many time an undisputed title wouldn't work and I agree with the people saying this.

The only reason to do this would be to have a "top dog" in WWE, and TBH its not really needed.

I do however think they missed a trick with Bragging Rights, It would be cool to have a "Smackdown Vrs Raw" PPV, I know they are planning on having some kind of Tag match at the end, with the winners of their respective matches facing off. However I think it would be better to have a true Bragging rights PPV, WWE vrs Heavyweight, IC vrs US, Divas Vrs Women's......Big Show Vrs Jericho

I know this is leaving out ECW, but it looks like they are planning on doing that in the Tag match anyway, and if the card looks a little thin, add some No1 contender matches/ECW matches in there to fill it out, or a ECW/Raw/Smackdown battle royal or tag match.

That way you can have a top dog/top brand without having to add another title.

 

[The Wolf]

The idea of making ONE champion is great, but make like the old days the WWE Heavyweight Champion of the World. The idea of the final match being at Wrestlemania is great. It should NOT be a triple threat it should be an ELIMINATION CHAMBER. The champion and number one contender of each show.

 

[Tastycles]

I don't think you hav looked at your wrestling history books recently have you? I'll sum up for you: there was an Undisputed Championship, then they got rid of it. Why? Simple.

If you've got two brands, with two sets of house shows, you need two champions. Why? Because people want to see champions. The Rock wasn't enough to be a draw on his own without the top champion, so what hope does CM Punk have? If you are saying in addition to the other titles, it will simply demean them.

Having an undisputed champion wouldn't really add to anything significantly, except maybe one main eventer's push, but what it would do is absolutely kill the house show attendance, and thus revenue, of whichever brand it isn't on.

Also, on a side note, Undertaker vs Orton vs Shelton Benjamin as your WrestleMania main event? You haven't been reading your booking skills books either, have you?

 

[Dave]

I think there is just too many glitches in the way this would work to ever really be successful.

I mean, on paper it looks really interesting and it looks like it provide people with a lot of good ideas and give people a good shot at winning a title. However, I just don't think that this is an idea that would ever really get off of the ground. One problem I encountered would be the defence strategy. With this being a one-off match at Wrestlemania, how would it be defended on a regular basis. One idea I came up with is to rotate the defence. One PPV the Champion defends against a Raw superstar and the next, he defends against a Smackdown superstar and so on and so forth. Still, then their is the problem of a feud only lasting a month and then being forgotten about. I like the idea but to be honest, I don't think it would work that well if put in to practice.