Does CM Punk's ECW Championship Reign Count?

[CM Steel]

On RAW this past Monday. Michael Cole stated that CM Punk is now a 5X world champion in the WWE. But didn't CM Punk win the ECW championship back in the "new" ECW on SyFy before it got folded? I know that every wrestling fan didn't see the ECW championship as a real world title. But CM Punk did hold on to the original ECW title belt (with the blood on it) after defeating John Morrison for it on ECW one night.

And that same ECW belt was looked upon as a legit world title belt at the Cyber Sunday pay per view back in '06 when the Big Show was the ECW champion at the time. But later on the ECW championship got a new model as the ECW brand got even more watered down. At this time CM Punk was either on RAW or Smackdown winning world titles on each brands.

So really, is CM Punk a 6X world champion all in all?

 

[Uncle Sam]

Basically, all you need to know is two things:

1. The WWE used to recognise the ECW Championship as a world title on par with the WWE and World Heavyweight Championships. This was particularly obvious when Bobby Lashley was ECW Champion; he was in the ring as one of the potential world champions The Undertaker could choose to face at WrestleMania 23.
2. The WWE no longer recognises the ECW Championship as a world title. Christian's ECW title reign isn't recognised, and neither is Punk's. If Ezekiel Jackson is ever described as a former world champion, I'll have a stroke out of sheer surprise.

Me, I never really counted it as a world title. Maybe technically speaking, but anybody that actually considered it on the level of the "big two" is a slave to semantics.

 

[NegativeFeedback]

I consider it a world title. "World title" in WWE means it is the premier title on its brand. Just because the brand was weak, filled with up-and-coming-superstars doesn't change the fact the ECW Championship was the World title that was competed on its brand.

The weak roster of ECW shouldn't affect how we look at the title. When Jack Swagger was World Champion on Smackdown, the biggest threats he had to the title were Big Show, Kane and John Morrison... all former ECW Champions. Until The Undertaker came back, The SD roster was as weak as ECW ever was, but it didn't change our view of the World Heavyweight title.

Therefore, I believe all ECW World title reigns are considered real World title reigns. From Shane Douglas, to Rhyno, to Rob Van Dam, to Ezekiel Jackson (*sigh*). I know its hard to consider Ezekiel Jackson a World Champion, but its not like The Great Khali isn't one.

Obviously, holding the WWE Championship or World Heavyweight Championship is more prestigious than holding the ECW Championship, but that doesn't stop them all from being world titles. The NWA World Heavyweight Championship and TNA World Heavyweight Championship are both world titles, and I still think holding the ECW title would be better.

I'll put them in ranks of current prestige:

1. WWE Championship- Follows the history of the biggest wrestling company of the world from WWWF to WWF to WWE.
2. WCW Championship / WCW International Heavyweight Championship / World Heavyweight Championship- Follows the rich history of the Big Gold Belt from NWA to WCW.
3. ECW Championship- Follows the history from Eastern Championship Wrestling to their EXTREME counterpart and to the new WWE version which is probably the most known at a global level.
4. NWA World Heavyweight Championship- Probably the longest running world title in American pro wrestling history.
5. CMLL World Heavyweight Championship- Winning the world title in Mexico is a huge deal.
6. AAA World Heavyweight Championship- The second biggest wrestling company in Mexico, comparable to WWF and WCW in USA.
7. AWA World Heavyweight Championship- Follows the rich history of the AWA.
8. TNA World Heavyweight Championship- Second biggest wrestling company in the USA although the quality of the reigns are sh*t.
9. WWA World Heavyweight Championship (Mexico Version)- Big company in the 80's, although the company closed down, the title is still active.
10. UWA World Heavyweight Championship- Basically like the AWA of Mexico. It was a big company, but it closed down.
11. WWA World Heavyweight Championship (USA Version)- Tried to be the second biggest wrestling company in the USA and succeeded for a while until it closed.
12. ROH World Championship- It's sad that it's so low, but it just doesn't have that big of a following to be considered as important as the rest.

 

[Amarillo del Bosque Verde]

Honestly, not anymore. Maybe back when the title was still around, it could count. Plus Big Show and Bobby Lashley were built up as legit World Champs along with John Cena, King Booker, Batista, and 'Taker. But nowadays, no one will consider Chavo Guerrero, Matt Hardy, and Ezekial Jackson as former World Champs. Seriously. Ezekial Jackson. I will never consider him a former world champ. Ever.

 

[Aquaman6686]

I consider the 2006-2010 ECW Championship to be a legitimate World title. The original ECW Championship? Hell no. It was a regional title. It was rarely if ever defended on foreign soil, and the definition of a World title is a title that is defended around the world. The WWE version of the ECW Championship was defended in countries all over the world on WWE shows. For that reason, I consider Rob Van Dam, The Big Show, Bobby Lashley, John Morrison, CM Punk, Chavo Guerrero, Kane, Mark Henry, Matt Hardy, Jack Swagger, Christian, Tommy Dreamer, and Ezekiel Jackson to have held a World championship as a result of their ECW title reign. The Sandman, Sabu, Terry Funk, Shane Douglas, etc. - no. They may have held legitimate World titles elsewhere, but I do not consider the ECW Championship they held to be a real World championship.

 

[Dagger Dias]

ECW's championship does not count as a world title because it was never more than a midcard title. During the time that RVD, Big Show, and Lashley held it the title was more important than the Intercontinental and US Championships but it was never on par with the two world titles. The only reason they (kayfabe) gave Taker the option of facing Lashley in 2007 was to make the ECW Championship look more important than it really was.

Simply put, the ECW Championship was a world title in the real ECW but not in WWE's ECW because the brand was so inferior to the two main brands that its title was in between the world and secondary titles in terms of importance. No one, not even Big Show or Lashley, have an ECW title reign counted as an official world title reign. Therefore Punk's first world title win was in June 2008 when he cashed in MITB on Edge's World Championship, not his ECW Championship win.

 

[FlairFan2003]

The point is WWE does not count it that way - officially they considered ECW an off shoot, a side show, not a full fledged operation like WWE RAW or WWE Smackdown, therefore their version of the ECW championship does not count as a World Title. It's stil important that Punk had a reign, like winning the IC or US Titles, in WWE's eyes the ECW title was on par with that.

 

[Colamania]

Does the ECW Championship count? No.

What's the simplest way to show that WWE no longer recognizes the ECW belt as a World Championship? Well, that's simple, just 2 words. Mark. Henry.

The entire plug around Henry's current world championship reign is that "it took him 15 years to get there". He even said himself at some point during a promo, it took him 15 years to win his "first world championship". Exact quote - FIRST world championship. Mark Henry, a man who walked around with the ECW title for 2 or 3 months, has never been a world champion until this year. Proof positive - Chavo, Ezekiel, Matt, you were never world champions. Sorry guys.

 

[Kiefer-Zeus]

Technically if your counting all those World Titles above!

CM Punk is a 7 time World Champion WWE x 2, World Heavyweight x 3, ECW(WE) x 1 and ROH x 1

Its like Christian is a 6 time World Champion NWA x 2, ECW(WE) x 2 and World Heavyweight x 2


But for any more aguements here ya go from yours true Wikipedia.
On June 13, Paul Heyman, former ECW owner and newly appointed figurehead for the ECW brand, recommissioned the ECW World Heavyweight Championship to be the brand's world title and awarded it to Rob Van Dam as a result of winning the WWE Championship at One Night Stand 2006. Heyman had originally stated that either the WWE Championship or the World Heavyweight Championship would "become" the ECW World Heavyweight Championship if a competitor designated to the ECW brand became WWE Champion or World Heavyweight Champion at the event.[6] However, Rob Van Dam later declared that he would hold both titles simultaneously instead.[7] The title became known as the ECW World Championship in July 2006, and later simply as the ECW Championship in September 2007.

So im guessing anyone after CM Punk was not considered a World Champion!!

 

[The Hardcore Kid]

I consider the 2006-2010 ECW Championship to be a legitimate World title. The original ECW Championship? Hell no. It was a regional title. It was rarely if ever defended on foreign soil, and the definition of a World title is a title that is defended around the world. The WWE version of the ECW Championship was defended in countries all over the world on WWE shows. For that reason, I consider Rob Van Dam, The Big Show, Bobby Lashley, John Morrison, CM Punk, Chavo Guerrero, Kane, Mark Henry, Matt Hardy, Jack Swagger, Christian, Tommy Dreamer, and Ezekiel Jackson to have held a World championship as a result of their ECW title reign. The Sandman, Sabu, Terry Funk, Shane Douglas, etc. - no. They may have held legitimate World titles elsewhere, but I do not consider the ECW Championship they held to be a real World championship.

...Are you serious bro?

You really count the WWECW championship as a step up on prestige from the original ECW title? The original ECW was so much more meaningful than the minor-league WWE version it's not even funny. Also, your weak argument that world titles should be defended around the world...how often is the WWE/WHC Title defended on foreign soil? Once, maybe twice a year IF that?

 

[VinnieSunshine]

WWE's version of ECW as a whole doesn't count. ECW was made as a 3rd degree show to help elevate guys from FCW. From FCW you went to ECW, if you got over in ECW you went to Smackdown OR if you were extremely over you went right to RAW. The belt itself looked cheap and fake and could not be taken as a serious title. If ECW was still around I couldn't see ANY of the top guys holding it. The title was more of a lower mid-card title.

The WWE gave Matt Hardy the ECW title so THAT should tell you something. The title was merely more of a prop. John Morrison held it but even with all of his problems WWE didn't think he was good enough to be a TRUE champion.

Mark Henry made SOME headway with it and proved he could be a champion at some point. Lashley was the only guy at the time, in my opinion, that represented what a champion was. His matches with Umaga were good and he was decent on the mic.

Punk was good with it for what he was at the time. Jackson did not get a good enough serious run with it to prove he could be a champion. Christian did need the title, he was a top guy. WWE just put him there to punish him and at the same time put over some new guys.

WWE in the last few years since ECW became NXT has erased ECW. No mention of it (that I can remember anyway) has come up. They dont talk about Christian winning the title, dont talk about Swagger starting there, dont talk about Punk being on ECW at all...

ECW is just another forgotten chapter of WWE, kind of like NXT will soon be in another couple of years. Besides...you dont hear Michael Cole talk about starting on lower shows like Heat do you?

 

[J.J.]

WWE's version of ECW as a whole doesn't count. ECW was made as a 3rd degree show to help elevate guys from FCW. From FCW you went to ECW, if you got over in ECW you went to Smackdown OR if you were extremely over you went right to RAW. The belt itself looked cheap and fake and could not be taken as a serious title. If ECW was still around I couldn't see ANY of the top guys holding it. The title was more of a lower mid-card title.

The WWE gave Matt Hardy the ECW title so THAT should tell you something. The title was merely more of a prop. John Morrison held it but even with all of his problems WWE didn't think he was good enough to be a TRUE champion.

Mark Henry made SOME headway with it and proved he could be a champion at some point. Lashley was the only guy at the time, in my opinion, that represented what a champion was. His matches with Umaga were good and he was decent on the mic.

Punk was good with it for what he was at the time. Jackson did not get a good enough serious run with it to prove he could be a champion. Christian did need the title, he was a top guy. WWE just put him there to punish him and at the same time put over some new guys.

WWE in the last few years since ECW became NXT has erased ECW. No mention of it (that I can remember anyway) has come up. They dont talk about Christian winning the title, dont talk about Swagger starting there, dont talk about Punk being on ECW at all...

ECW is just another forgotten chapter of WWE, kind of like NXT will soon be in another couple of years. Besides...you dont hear Michael Cole talk about starting on lower shows like Heat do you?

Not to take away from the discussion but Cole started out hosting Livewire on Saturday mornings and doing interviews backstage on Raw before he became active on Heat. Shane McMahon got his first break on there.

Heat was designed just like Superstars is to give exposure to t
Wrestlers that weren't involved in any storylines a chance to stay relevant and serve as a pre-show for PPV's, youre writing it off like it was a failure.

I enjoyed ECW and often wonder why the Abraham Washington segment was never moved to Smackdown. We saw Kane, Henry, Christian and Big Show hold the belt. I dont consider it a heavyweight title because it was strictly an ECW World belt - the WHC and WWE title are defended on their respective brands but are not recognized as brand belts but WWE belts.

 

[Heartachetonight926]

WWE's version of ECW as a whole doesn't count. ECW was made as a 3rd degree show to help elevate guys from FCW. From FCW you went to ECW, if you got over in ECW you went to Smackdown OR if you were extremely over you went right to RAW. The belt itself looked cheap and fake and could not be taken as a serious title. If ECW was still around I couldn't see ANY of the top guys holding it. The title was more of a lower mid-card title.

The WWE gave Matt Hardy the ECW title so THAT should tell you something. The title was merely more of a prop. John Morrison held it but even with all of his problems WWE didn't think he was good enough to be a TRUE champion.

Mark Henry made SOME headway with it and proved he could be a champion at some point. Lashley was the only guy at the time, in my opinion, that represented what a champion was. His matches with Umaga were good and he was decent on the mic.

Punk was good with it for what he was at the time. Jackson did not get a good enough serious run with it to prove he could be a champion. Christian did need the title, he was a top guy. WWE just put him there to punish him and at the same time put over some new guys.

WWE in the last few years since ECW became NXT has erased ECW. No mention of it (that I can remember anyway) has come up. They dont talk about Christian winning the title, dont talk about Swagger starting there, dont talk about Punk being on ECW at all...

ECW is just another forgotten chapter of WWE, kind of like NXT will soon be in another couple of years. Besides...you dont hear Michael Cole talk about starting on lower shows like Heat do you?

They gave Matt hardy the title because he was one of the most popular superstars back in 2008, as much as people despise the guy in his current state, back in 2008 most people were actually pretty big fan's of the guy. But I agree that WWE management never saw much in him, but I do recall JBL raving about how he was "A Main-event waiting to happen". But I guess that's off topic.

If anybody watched ECW on Sci-fi in 2006, they consistently referred to it as a "World title". Using those exact words, it was the premier Championship of that brand, that makes it the world heavyweight title of that show. It wasn't until around the time Henry won it in 2008 that the WWE started to ignore it's status as a World title, it was still the premier championship of ECW, but any-time it was defended on PPV it wasn't even considered one of the Main-events. Simply a mid-card title defense. It was also evident when Jack swagger won the title, WWE never once referred to it as a legitimate World title victory, so when he won the actual WHC, it was acknowledged as his first world title, Same with Mark Henry now.

So I'm not sure you can count Punk's reign as ECW champ to be anything more than a mid-card title reign.

 

[VinnieSunshine]

Not to take away from the discussion but Cole started out hosting Livewire on Saturday mornings and doing interviews backstage on Raw before he became active on Heat. Shane McMahon got his first break on there.

Heat was designed just like Superstars is to give exposure to t
Wrestlers that weren't involved in any storylines a chance to stay relevant and serve as a pre-show for PPV's, youre writing it off like it was a failure.

Ok Mr. Technicality. You understand the point Im trying to make though. WWE is not going to go back and reference irrelevant stuff like that. Mark Henry's promo about how it took him 15 years to get a title...was there anything about having to wrestle on those shows are about how he suffered through lame-ass skits with Mae Young? No, he just talked about busting his ass to get where he is.

I wasn't knocking Heat...I never watched it. Yes I know it was supposed to be sort of like wrestling prelims before the PPV, doesn't mean WWE treated any better than what it was. Just like Superstars was supposed to be about mixing talent but then WWE pulled their top guys from showing up. Now you dont hear about Superstars, even though guys still wrestle on it, wether its online or on TV.

All I was trying to say is that WWE has made ECW a footnote in the books, just like all the other wrestling shows LIKE Heat.

 

[VinnieSunshine]

They gave Matt hardy the title because he was one of the most popular superstars back in 2008, as much as people despise the guy in his current state, back in 2008 most people were actually pretty big fan's of the guy. But I agree that WWE management never saw much in him, but I do recall JBL raving about how he was "A Main-event waiting to happen". But I guess that's off topic.

Yes I know he was popular and WWE pushed him at the mid-card level. What Im trying to say is that he was never going to be a main eventer in their eyes. Fans wanted him to have a title shot and wanted him to hold a championship other than a mid-card, so they sent him to ECW and gave him the title...a title that back then and to this day is pretty much meaningless.

Honestly though, if Hardy was sober and in good shape and still wrestling...could you HONESTLY see him main eventing RAW, PPVs, WrestleMania? I could never take him seriously as a main eventer...I could barely take Jeff seriously as a main eventer.

 

[King Patrick Star]

I consider it a world title. "World title" in WWE means it is the premier title on its brand. Just because the brand was weak, filled with up-and-coming-superstars doesn't change the fact the ECW Championship was the World title that was competed on its brand.

The weak roster of ECW shouldn't affect how we look at the title. When Jack Swagger was World Champion on Smackdown, the biggest threats he had to the title were Big Show, Kane and John Morrison... all former ECW Champions. Until The Undertaker came back, The SD roster was as weak as ECW ever was, but it didn't change our view of the World Heavyweight title.

Therefore, I believe all ECW World title reigns are considered real World title reigns. From Shane Douglas, to Rhyno, to Rob Van Dam, to Ezekiel Jackson (*sigh*). I know its hard to consider Ezekiel Jackson a World Champion, but its not like The Great Khali isn't one.

Obviously, holding the WWE Championship or World Heavyweight Championship is more prestigious than holding the ECW Championship, but that doesn't stop them all from being world titles. The NWA World Heavyweight Championship and TNA World Heavyweight Championship are both world titles, and I still think holding the ECW title would be better.

I'll put them in ranks of current prestige:

1. WWE Championship- Follows the history of the biggest wrestling company of the world from WWWF to WWF to WWE.
2. WCW Championship / WCW International Heavyweight Championship / World Heavyweight Championship- Follows the rich history of the Big Gold Belt from NWA to WCW.
3. ECW Championship- Follows the history from Eastern Championship Wrestling to their EXTREME counterpart and to the new WWE version which is probably the most known at a global level.
4. NWA World Heavyweight Championship- Probably the longest running world title in American pro wrestling history.
5. CMLL World Heavyweight Championship- Winning the world title in Mexico is a huge deal.
6. AAA World Heavyweight Championship- The second biggest wrestling company in Mexico, comparable to WWF and WCW in USA.
7. AWA World Heavyweight Championship- Follows the rich history of the AWA.
8. TNA World Heavyweight Championship- Second biggest wrestling company in the USA although the quality of the reigns are sh*t.
9. WWA World Heavyweight Championship (Mexico Version)- Big company in the 80's, although the company closed down, the title is still active.
10. UWA World Heavyweight Championship- Basically like the AWA of Mexico. It was a big company, but it closed down.
11. WWA World Heavyweight Championship (USA Version)- Tried to be the second biggest wrestling company in the USA and succeeded for a while until it closed.
12. ROH World Championship- It's sad that it's so low, but it just doesn't have that big of a following to be considered as important as the rest.

To sum it up, I pretty much agree with Feedback. The ECW Championship IS a World Title. It all really depends on your own perspective, but a World Title is a World Title is a World Title.

To elaborate on this, some people will say the ECW Title was a World Title in ECW, but not in WWECW (What!?). Some people will say it was a World Title in WWECW, but not in ECW (What!?). Some people say it lost its World Title status at December To Dismember 2006 (Maybe). Some people will say it lost its World Title status when the name changed from ECW World Title to simply ECW Title (This I don’t agree with at all). Some people view it as a step below the WWE and WCW / World Titles but a step above the Intercontinental and United States Titles (Technically, I do agree with this).

In my view, it is in fact a World Title. Jimmy SuperFly Snuka was the first ECW World Champion and Ezekiel Jackson was the last ECW World Champion.

As for the rankings of the World Titles:
1. WWE
2. WCW / World
3. TNA (only because it’s currently active)
4. ECW (only because it’s currently defunct)
5. NWA
6. ROH
7-1,000,000. Everything else.

 

[J.J.]

Ok Mr. Technicality. You understand the point Im trying to make though. WWE is not going to go back and reference irrelevant stuff like that. Mark Henry's promo about how it took him 15 years to get a title...was there anything about having to wrestle on those shows are about how he suffered through lame-ass skits with Mae Young? No, he just talked about busting his ass to get where he is.

I wasn't knocking Heat...I never watched it. Yes I know it was supposed to be sort of like wrestling prelims before the PPV, doesn't mean WWE treated any better than what it was. Just like Superstars was supposed to be about mixing talent but then WWE pulled their top guys from showing up. Now you dont hear about Superstars, even though guys still wrestle on it, wether its online or on TV.

All I was trying to say is that WWE has made ECW a footnote in the books, just like all the other wrestling shows LIKE Heat.

Their reigns as ECW champs are listed on their WWE biography. I think it should be listed as a eorld title reign regardless if its a defunct promotion. Booker T definitely didn't let us forget he was a 5 time WCW Champ.

 

[Hero_Kid]

I think any title thats been defended around the world and has the word world heavyweight in its title should be considered a world title just because it was the wwe sorry show doesnt mean it shouldnt count in my eyes it count so does

NWA World Heavyweight Championship
ROH World Championship
TNA World Heavyweight Championship
World Heavyweight Championship
WWE Championship
ECW World Heavyweight Championship
WCW World Heavyweight Championship

If you have won these it chould count wwe only count there world titles now and if thats the case ric flair is a 2 time champion having held the wwf twice http://forums.wrestlezone.com/images/smilies/lmao.gif:lmao:

 

[TheTruNoLimit]

I don't think it's considered a World Title as WWE quickly ended that drama when John Morisson won the gold... but the announcers seem to selectively include it in World Title reigns of other World Champions to bolster their figures. For instance, I can't recall how many times Michael Cole has referred to Kane as a 3 time World Champion. We all know he's had 1 WWE title and 1 World Title, so clearly they included the ECW title to bolster the stats.

 

[RkoZ420]

I believe at the very beginning of the WWE ECW in 2006 it was considered a World Title. Then I think around the time when Mark Henry won it and the belt got a makeover they stopped considering it a World Title and kind of took away all the other former ECW champions World Title reigns. But like someone already mentioned, WWE is very selective with these types of things and considers Kane a 3 time world champion when they feel like it.

 

[Heartachetonight926]

Yes I know he was popular and WWE pushed him at the mid-card level. What Im trying to say is that he was never going to be a main eventer in their eyes. Fans wanted him to have a title shot and wanted him to hold a championship other than a mid-card, so they sent him to ECW and gave him the title...a title that back then and to this day is pretty much meaningless.

Honestly though, if Hardy was sober and in good shape and still wrestling...could you HONESTLY see him main eventing RAW, PPVs, WrestleMania? I could never take him seriously as a main eventer...I could barely take Jeff seriously as a main eventer.

Well my opinion is a bit biased since I was a huge fan of them both for many years lol, so I better not answer that last question ;p

But I completely agree with what your saying, in many ways it felt like WWE gave the ECW title to guys who they almost felt sorry for, but knew they didn't have intentions of pushing to the moon.

 

[Defekt]

The ECW titles stopped being a world title when top tier guys quit competing for it.

For the sake of simplicity it is easier to reclassify all title reigns as secondary reigns, but in my opinion, the belt lost world title status in June 2007 when John Morrison won it.

Up until that point the ECW championship was held by RVD, Big Show, McMahon and Bobby Lashley. These guys were featured prominently in WWE storylines and pay per views, and the belt was treated with equal importance to the WWE and WHC titles.

In 2007 John Morrison won the vacant title and began feuding with CM Punk. Although both guys are big stars now, at the time they were low/mid midcarders. From this point on the title was never promoted like a world class title, and with the exception of Kane, was never held by a WWE main event star.

 

[VinnieSunshine]

Their reigns as ECW champs are listed on their WWE biography. I think it should be listed as a eorld title reign regardless if its a defunct promotion. Booker T definitely didn't let us forget he was a 5 time WCW Champ.

Thats because Booker T was relevant still as a WCW wrestler. They also use the WCW belt as Smackdown's WHC. Booker also had a LONG career as a champion. They recognize WCW because they still have WCW wrestlers on their payroll and used them greatly over the years.

ECW wrestlers were pushed out because 1) they couldn't truly wrestle and 2) were older than the rest of the roster.

Who actually from ECW went on to have a good career in WWE? RVD...where is he? Sandman, where is he? Dreamer? Shane Douglas?

WWE still has or has pushed Eddie, Mysterio, Jericho, Booker, Benoit, AUSTIN, etc. They ALL were players in WCW who went on in WWE and WWE recognizes their careers.

Christian is a 2x WHC only...they washed his ECW title. Henry too. If Matt Hardy was still here he wouldn't have held the title according to WWE.

MAYBE...maybe if orton or Cena held the title they MIGHT recognize it, but the ones who held the titles are irrelevant to what they have accomplished now.

ECW titles might be recognized on WWE.com...but not on TV for storyline purposes.

 

[avriltt234]

I think Wwe does not recognize Cm Punks run with the Ecw Championship for one simple reason, back then Mr McMahon, Triple H and Shawn Michaels all did not believe in Punk therefor did not want him to win the Championship or have any success it was Heyman who pushed Punk and gave him the championship. Then after Cm Punk won the title McMahon did not want to admit he was wrong.

 

[JaceEvans]

I consider the original ECW title a real championship before it was bought out by WWE but as soon as the WWE bought it I would say it's on par with the US/IC title, therefor in my opinion CM punk's title reign in the new ECW shouldn't be counted.