An idea to make Wrestlemania like the Super Bowl

[The Catacomb]

I was reading someones reply to some question and something stuck out at me. He said that there shouldn't be two championship titles on two shows and what other sport has two champions and then said the NFL has only one champion from the superbowl. It got me thinking, the WWE should do this to and have the undisputed championship defended once a year at Wrestlemania. Now here me out before you call it crazy, but, what if whoever holds the Intercontinental Championship and the U.S. Championship at the time of Wrestlemania got to fight to become the Undisputed Champion for the year. That person would still be the U.S. champ or I.C. champ after Wrestlemania , but would carry the Undisputed Champion name all through the year until the next Wrestlemania. At the pay-per-views, wrestlers would fight for the U.S and I.C. belts for they would become the main championship belts for each show. And when it comes time for Wrestlmania again, the two with the belts would fight for the next undisputed championship (whoever were lucky enough to have the belts at that time) along with the former year's champion in a triple threat match. It would bring the highest prestige for the U.S. and I.C. championship again and basically a yearlong storyline every year. And Wrestlemania would become the true superbowl of sports entertainment. Tell me what you think of this or what tweaks you want to make to this idea.

 

[Hulkster4Life]

The I.C and U.S title? are you kidding me, i thought u were talkin about the WWE Champion and Wold Heavyweigh Champion... but ur talkin bout U.S and I.C. are u kidding me, thats gay as hell

 

[Xfactor98]

Why is that Gay as hell.....I think its a good idea...The WWE is in need of fresh ideas right now....Some of the storylines going into Wrestlemania this year actually kinda suck....The Jericho/legends storyline to be exact....To bring the IC and US titles back a little presitage would be nice..I think it sucks to see the person holding the US title in the MITB...Luckily the took the IC title of of CM Punk b4 Mania....But they gave to JBL for a reason i surely don't know...But i think the idea above is a great one..wouldn't hurt for WWE to try something new like that...It would give some more creditability to the mid-card wrestlers..

 

[supergav67]

I agree,if WWE are gonna stick with multi brands (the way the Draft,s shaping up ,whose to say) & what better stage to have non unification Play Offs than the grandaddy off them all.Then again,it rather deflates the Rumble a bit like,.You can gub 29 other guys but all it gets you is a look in at NoWayOut or Backlash? .Then again,most superstar,ll take it.

 

[The Rob]

Why not have something simular to the King of the Ring tournament. Have one match at WrestleMania after a tournament on Raw, Smackdown and ECW to determine who is the WrestleMania champion or something. Then they could have that destinction all year long untill next years WrestleMania. That would make more sense than having a championship like the United States championship become Undisputed for one night only. There would be no point really to do that.

 

[ssvegita77]

OK I don't hate this idea but it is very flawed. First of all, what should the world champion do for the rest of the year? You win at Wrestlemaia and then seemingly get to sit on easy street? It kills the idea of the fighting champion, which I personally like. Also isn't it all really predictable after being champion for a whole year wouldn't we all be 100% sure of a title change at Wrestlemania? And what if not? We have the same champion for two straight years? Cena and HHH would love that shit.

Bottomline, the WWE's tagline of "anything can happen" goes right out the window. I honestly think that frequent title changes may be preferrable to no title changes. What is the belt really worth if it just remains stagnant? It wouldn't become a holy grail as much as it would just be an afterthought.

I think all the people behind this idea haven't really thought it through. However, if one were talking about fewer title defenses and/or an imposed method of having some kind of real #1 contendership method for title shots I'd be all for it.

 

[The Catacomb]

I agree,if WWE are gonna stick with multi brands (the way the Draft,s shaping up ,whose to say) & what better stage to have non unification Play Offs than the grandaddy off them all.Then again,it rather deflates the Rumble a bit like,.You can gub 29 other guys but all it gets you is a look in at NoWayOut or Backlash? .Then again,most superstar,ll take it.

Maybe, the winner of the royal rumble will go to Wrestlemania and make it a fatal four way for the undisputed championship. So you'll have the U.S. and I.C. champions, the prior year's Undisputed champion, and the Royal Rumble winner every year for the singular biggest prize of them all... the Undisputed championship and the claim of "being the man" for at least a year until the next Wrestlemania. Then maybe, the next pay-per-view will be tournaments to reset the U.S. and I.C. championships. Under this way, the I.C. and U.S. championships aren't for the mid-cards anymore. They can bring back the million dollar belt or T.V. titles back for that if they really want to have any championship for the mid-carders, but, I think that would dilute it all.

 

[The Catacomb]

OK I don't hate this idea but it is very flawed. First of all, what should the world champion do for the rest of the year? You win at Wrestlemaia and then seemingly get to sit on easy street? It kills the idea of the fighting champion, which I personally like. Also isn't it all really predictable after being champion for a whole year wouldn't we all be 100% sure of a title change at Wrestlemania? And what if not? We have the same champion for two straight years? Cena and HHH would love that shit.

Bottomline, the WWE's tagline of "anything can happen" goes right out the window. I honestly think that frequent title changes may be preferrable to no title changes. What is the belt really worth if it just remains stagnant? It wouldn't become a holy grail as much as it would just be an afterthought.

I think all the people behind this idea haven't really thought it through. However, if one were talking about fewer title defenses and/or an imposed method of having some kind of real #1 contendership method for title shots I'd be all for it.

That's a good point. That's why this idea needs tweaking. The idea is that the undisputed champion is the best of the best for a year and the U.S. and I.C. championships take place of the WWE and Heavywieght championships. The Undisputed one can fight for those belts too. I think the WWE could create storylines to keep it going. Plus, to beat "the man" would be a notch in anyones belt and so everyone would still be gunning for him. Maybe, six months after wrestlemania, create a pay-per-view that the undisputed champion had to defend that title to who held the I.C. or U.S. belts at that time. That would ruin the superbowl wrestlemania though. I don't know. Whatever tweaks you want to throw in there would be good.

 

[ivanb06]

i kinda like the idea.
it would be almost like the AFC vs NFC
or in baseball the NL vs AL

its just pretty much Raw vs Smackdown.
but i dont know about being the champion for a whole year.

 

[Mr Wrestlemania]

That sounds cool to us wrestling fans, but to the casual fan who turns it on once in a while to see if there's anything interesting or if they recognize anybody it will be ******ed. Assuming they catch a Raw in June, after that year's current Wrestlemania, they'll learn that all the rules have changed and they have to wait a whole year for a title match that matters? Why screw with a formula that works? I'd be afraid this kind of idea would alienate too many fans.

 

[attila]

...... World Champ vs. WWE Champ for year-long bragging rights?

 

[jazzua]

I agree, to an extent. The main issue is it would be a huge kick to the crotch of the ppv business. What you are implying for the two mid card belts is really nothing but a bunch of consecutive number one contender matches all year that culminates at WM. Even if SummerSlam is another Undisputed Championship match it leaves 10 ppv's with no real purpose. The Championship belts are there for drawing power essentially. Without them it would create a very bland situation for storylines and such.

I have thought since the brand split that the WHC and WWE champs should face off at WM. I know that leaves the Rumble out to dry but something could be done for that. I never considered it an Undisputed Championship match but it could easily be made that. You could have the winner's belt be crowned the Undisputed Championship. Such as, The WWE Undisputed Championship or the World Undisputed Championship. Then throughout the year anyone who beats the Undisputed Champion would become the new Undisputed Champion. That would continue until WM when the two Champs would face of again to declare who really is the top dog.

I just think that using the Intercontinental and US belts would kill it. At least this way you continue to have World titles that carry some form of purpose.

 

[Titch_HHH]

well the only way i could see something like this happening is when HBK retires and do it as a Mr. Wrestlemania like they are doing with the Ms. Wrestlemania this year

 

[ballin0812]

all they really gotta do is set up a king of the ring tournament with main event players, and whoever wins that will be crowned the champion ( or if you will: the superbowl champ of wrestling). then through out the year they hold qualifying matches for this one big tournament that ends at mania every year with the previous winner facing the winner of the tournament for the trophy/new belt or whatever.

it could work, but could get stale really fast.

 

[realblackhart]

i am leading to a KOR tourny idea. But this is what I say, there should be a KOR tournament and the winner faces the champion that the Royal Rumble winner didn't pick. The Tournament decides a World title match at WM but the Royal Rumble winner gets first dibbs on the champ he wants to fight.