Does the WWE Need A Mid-Card Title?
- Thread starter WWEvsJosh
- Start date
Please learn to use better sentence structure and a period everyone once in a while!
ANYWHO...
Yes, WWE needs a mid-card title. That gives the people not in line for the major title something to do if they aren't involved in the tag scene or a ridiculous feud.
I like EastCoastFan's idea of having only one WHC in WWE and then making the mid-card titles (IC and US) Raw & Smackdown's show titles respectively.
Something not new in the last like eight years, WWE needs to make their tag division better if it is going to bother having tag titles.
BlueLightning
Dark Match Winner
They got rid of the mid-card titles in like, 2003, I believe. Intercontinental title was merged with the World Heavyweight or something. Needless to say, it kind of sucked.
Little Jimmy 93
Little Jimmy
Yes... If anything they need to focus on their mid-card feuds as of late. I was watching Great American Bash 2006 and Smackdown's mid-card feuds at the time were brilliant. Beniot-Finlay for the US Title was a classic in my eyes... Why can't they do the same now? I'm sure something like Rhodes-SinCara would make a brilliant match/feud for the IC title. Just have Rhodes bang on about how he used to hide behind the mask, but now he's free and Sin Cara needs to do the same and stop hiding... Blah Blah Blah... Brilliant feud. Have Rhodes cut a few promos, Cara interfere with the promos the way he did against Swagger n Sheamus when he debuted and sorted...
Im sorry i didnt know i was still in middle skool and i had to use "better sentence structure" on a freakin forum sorry if it bothers u so much that u have to go to lengths to say somethin about it like this is some freakin english class, i agree that there is no reason to even have tag titles if they are just gonna shit on the division but the only person we have to blame for that is vince. Vince for some reason doesnt like tag teams and doesnt think that they need to be focused on u kno since from like 1989-2006 the tag team division was amazing i everything has really gone down hill since the hart dynasty broke up from there they break up cryme tyme which was the only tag team i think in history to win like 3 number one contender matches and never a get a shot, funny how both big guys from both of those teams are no longer wit the company since the "higher ups" seem to believe u have to be big to be successful in wrestling.
TakerDakSide
Occasional Pre-Show
As of needing a single Mid-card title in the business, as of right now no. I'd wait 'till they're reay to unify all the titles into one of their respective cards. Knowing WWE with their unifly titles brigade they'll do it eventually but how?
It is conflicting to see two mid-card titles but w/the brand merger that shouldn't be much of a problem. As NOC I'd have the IC champ vs the US champ & re-name the title International Championship representing the world in the Mid-card. The move would be benefical for not only itself but for WWE going forward with unifying championships. After all it was done for the Women's & Diva's Titles forming into the Diva's Championship in one. I'd say the same could done for the WHC/WWE Titles.
It is conflicting to see two mid-card titles but w/the brand merger that shouldn't be much of a problem. As NOC I'd have the IC champ vs the US champ & re-name the title International Championship representing the world in the Mid-card. The move would be benefical for not only itself but for WWE going forward with unifying championships. After all it was done for the Women's & Diva's Titles forming into the Diva's Championship in one. I'd say the same could done for the WHC/WWE Titles.
I would actually keep the Midcard Titles but unify the World Titles.
And I would bring back the novelty titles as well. Maybe bring back the either the WWECW belt, but rename it the "WWE Extreme Championship" with the title constantly being defended in gimmick matches.
I would also bring back the Cruiserweight Championship, but have ALL cruiserweights compete for it regardless of current position on the card. There are certain people who could take the Cruiserweight Title whenever they aren't in the World title picture (i.e. Miz, Ziggler, Bryan).
And I would bring back the novelty titles as well. Maybe bring back the either the WWECW belt, but rename it the "WWE Extreme Championship" with the title constantly being defended in gimmick matches.
I would also bring back the Cruiserweight Championship, but have ALL cruiserweights compete for it regardless of current position on the card. There are certain people who could take the Cruiserweight Title whenever they aren't in the World title picture (i.e. Miz, Ziggler, Bryan).
Completely agree. Combine the main titles but make each of the mid-card titles actually be defended more then once every blue moon(how many times has Cody actually defeneded his title, realy)
Definitely. While the midcard titles aren't what they used to be, they can be a very important tool in building a talent up to the main event. Dolph Ziggler and The Miz are two fine examples -- they both held the United States Championship and dropped it when the time was right. Their lengthy reigns, which did wonders for the belts, gave them time to legitimize their characters and improve upon their glaring faults. The midcard titles are a way of testing the waters with a guy, a way of making him seem important while holding him over until the main event. Think about Cody Rhodes for a moment; what would he be without the Intercontinental Championship? His title reign (a la Ziggler and Miz) has built him up into the competitor he is now, it has prepared him for his eventual push.
In short, yes, the midcard championships are vital. They have long lasting roots and traditions attatched to them that are (alone) worth having an up-and-comer hold them. You can have all your midcarders in one big pool, but that would never replicate the value of the titles. It's a continuous cycle of putting people over that cannot be beat.
In short, yes, the midcard championships are vital. They have long lasting roots and traditions attatched to them that are (alone) worth having an up-and-comer hold them. You can have all your midcarders in one big pool, but that would never replicate the value of the titles. It's a continuous cycle of putting people over that cannot be beat.
The midcard titles should be exactly that, the midcard titles. What the WWE seems to do a lot these days is put a belt on a midcarder, and then immediately thrust them into the main event (i.e. Rhodes, Ziggler). The midcard champion seems to spend more time competing with the main eventers in non title matches than actually defending or feuding over their titles, and that's a big problem.
WWE definitely needs midcard titles. They are meant to serve the purposes of showing us what someone is like as a champion and when booked properly can be a great stepping stone from the midcard up toward the world titles. If they eliminated the midcard titles then nearly the entire roster would lose a title to go after. Not everyone makes it up to the main event level. Guys who are deemed "midcarders for life" still deserve to have a title to chase and win. The only option left would be to win Money In the Bank and there are only two winners each year.
One could argue that the midcard belts have lost too much prestige to be used anymore. Getting rid of them doesn't solve that issue. It would make the glass ceiling in between the midcard and the main event even larger if there were no midcard titles. How would we know what a wrestler would be like as champion, and would he even be believable in the role? Look at Rhodes for example. The Intercontinental Championship reign has helped him become a big deal. He could main event someday and likely will. Without midcard titles he might not be believable in the main event level. A midcard title reign elevates guys who might not otherwise make it.
One could argue that the midcard belts have lost too much prestige to be used anymore. Getting rid of them doesn't solve that issue. It would make the glass ceiling in between the midcard and the main event even larger if there were no midcard titles. How would we know what a wrestler would be like as champion, and would he even be believable in the role? Look at Rhodes for example. The Intercontinental Championship reign has helped him become a big deal. He could main event someday and likely will. Without midcard titles he might not be believable in the main event level. A midcard title reign elevates guys who might not otherwise make it.
King Patrick Star
K. O. T. R. 2007 - Team Undisputed
The WWE tried this in 2002 when they first unified the United States, European, and Hardcore Titles to the Intercontinental Title, then in turn unified the InterUnitedEuroHard (better than ContinentalStatesPeanCore) Title to the World Title.
I believe WrestleMania XIX would have been better if we had Stone Cold Steve Austin vs. The Rock and Shawn Michaels vs. Chris Jericho for the Intercontinental Title and United States Title. My point is, the Mid-Card Titles, as everyone has already stated, is important and necessary for the WWE to keep active.
Now, if the question was, does the WWE need the European / Hardcore Titles, the answer would be they could use them, but those 3rd Tier Championships are not necessary.
I believe WrestleMania XIX would have been better if we had Stone Cold Steve Austin vs. The Rock and Shawn Michaels vs. Chris Jericho for the Intercontinental Title and United States Title. My point is, the Mid-Card Titles, as everyone has already stated, is important and necessary for the WWE to keep active.
Now, if the question was, does the WWE need the European / Hardcore Titles, the answer would be they could use them, but those 3rd Tier Championships are not necessary.
