HoF clips talking about the person being an IC champ: does it mean anything anymore?

[Creepy Old Man]

Back in the 80's and 90's the IC title was amazing. At times I perceived it to be on par with the WWF title or higher. Hogan/Warrior was champion vs. champion in the WM6 main event; same goes for Survivor Series '92 with Bret/Shawn (albeit Shawn's title wasn't on the line). Hell, the IC title officially superseded the WWF title at SummerSlam '92 with Bret/Davey. The IC title was up for grabs in the main event of a couple of the In Your House pay-per-views, and countless Raw broadcasts (Bret/Rock was your headliner on March 31, '97, for example). On top of that, you had awesome guys like Savage, Steamboat, Rude, Curt, Kerry, Piper, Razor, Owen and Austin, who were spotlighted as major stars with a title that really mattered.

We've all seen the title's tragic decline since (ditto US title). We know that Curt being the longest-reigning champion of the 90's, or Razor being the first four-time champ was a massive deal back then, but what do audiences now think of it? Do fans just perceive it as WWE trying to hype up mediocre talents by pushing the fact that they won a worthless piece of tin? Or are viewers savvy enough to know - from the classic clips on TV and possibly their own research - that the IC title was a HELL of a lot more valuable back then?

 

[Jack-Hammer]

While I agree that WWE's attitude towards the IC title needs definite improvement, it's time to do away with this myth that the title was always held by the "best wrestler" in the company or that it was always the epitome of prestige.

When people go on and on about the greatness of the IC title, the same handful of names are always tossed about: Savage, Hennig, Hart, Rude, Warrior and a few others. Understandably so as they're examples of wrestlers of our childhood that we remember fondly who went onto be big main event stars or, arguably, should have gone onto be big main event stars. That's all well and good, but how about the guys who aren't generally remembered with such fondness? You know, the guys who were strictly mid-card guys and never really were or are looked at as major league players: Pat Patterson, Ken Patera, Don Muraco, Tito Santana, The Mountie, The British Bulldog, Goldust, Ahmed Johnson, Marc Mero, Val Venis, The Godfather, Ken Shamrock, D'Lo Brown, Chyna, Rikishi, Test and others.

How about all the hot potato runs with the IC title during the Attitude Era? There's some debate as to when the Attitude Era officially started, but I'm gonna use King of the Ring 1996 as a starting point and May 6, 2002 as the end as that's when WWE stopped officially using "Attitude" in various promotional spots. Between those two dates, almost 6 years apart, there were 48 different IC title reigns, 1 of which belonged to a woman named Chyna. Of those 48 runs, with only three of them lasted 100 days or longer. The last triple digit IC title run was Ken Shamrock's of 125 days that began on October 12, 1998 and there wouldn't be another one for more than 5 years until Randy Orton won the title on December 14, 2003.

I agree that WWE could do more to showcase the title and that it could be used in more constructive ways, but the title has rarely ever been this ultimate beacon of prestige during the 80s and 90s that some try to make it out to be. General misuse, or rather what most of us would deem misuse, of the title isn't something that's only happened within the last 10 years or so.

 

[iammikerodriguez]

The IC was always the title that the superstars of tomorrow first held. I LOVED the way the title was defended and how much value it had in the 80's and 90's.

I honestly believe the IC title lost it's luster right around the time that the King of the Ring PPV(I believe it was 2002) was made non-important. If you think about the King of the Ring tournament/PPV, some of the ones that won the tournament, went on to win the IC Belt or had held the IC belt just prior to it. Bret Hart, Owen Hart, Steve Austin, Triple H, Ken Shamrock, Kurt Angle and Edge just to name a few. The King of the Ring built up multiple midcard stars and made the chase for the IC title mean something. It gave a boost to legitimize contenders for the prestigious title.

I really hope someone in the WWE can bring back the value in the IC title (also, bring back the King of the Ring). I think the only way the IC belt gets its value back is by unifying it with the US title and having everyone chase the title. Have the title defended more often on Raw and Smackdown on a week to week basis. After all, it's always been known as the workhorse's champion.

 

[BillAlfonsos_Whistle]

Yes it means something.
It's a stepping stone "mid-card" title.
Just because there isn't a GREAT example of a guy who took that route in very recent history doesn't mean it never will again.


Guys who built their resumes with IC belt within 20 years = HHH, The Rock, Steve Austin, Jericho, Benoit, and Edge.


Pretty good list. Blame the idiots who book the WWE now-a-days for not respecting ANY belts let alone mid-card belts. Really my biggest gripe about modern day wrestling.

 

[Pedigree1]

I always remember the IC title being the No2 title in the company thus making the person holding it,the NO1 contender to the WWF/WWE title.. Its still a prestigious title,but the person holding it lately has been devaluing it little bit by little bit.. The IC Title was held in much regard in the 80's n 90's. Towards the end,thats when it started being chipped away IMO.

Having Chyna even hold it for one day was a disastrous move on the WWE's part.. Guys Like Val,Ken Shamrock,Ahmed Johnson had no business holding the title. That hurts the title some right there,when you play hot potato with it. I'm not advocating a 400 day reign but the fact,that you play hot potato with it hurts it a lot. Big E is a good champion not a great one,but a decent one. I have huge hopes for the IC title once its unified with the US title,its only a matter of time before it reaches the peak it once held.

 

[Creepy Old Man]

it's time to do away with this myth that the title was always held by the "best wrestler" in the company.

If my post read that way I didn't mean that. I listed some of the greats but it wasn't my intention to suggest that the IC title should be reserved for great workers or anything. Basically my concern is with WWE's treatment of the title. I can't remember the last time it headlined a pay-per-view or even meant anything meaningful.

 

[IT Factor]

The IC title has a great history, but the problem is it doesn't mean the same thing it used to. Being the IC Champion used to mean you were on the fast track for future greatness in the WWF[WWE] title picture or that you have peaked and couldn't go any higher. Either way, holding that belt meant almost as much prestiege as being WWF Champion. There were a lot of contenders gunning for that title and it made the belt that much more coveted.

Nowadays, being a mid-card champion[IC or US Champion] means very little. It is a belt that is overlooked and not used or defended very often. There aren't any real contenders and the divisions are both small. Maybe 2-3 guys beside the current champion. Not too big at all and that makes the prestiege for holding the belt very little. No one is gunning for that title thus it makes holding that title nothing more than a placeholder for those who are stuck like Kofi Kingston because they cannot go any higher. It is a real shame too, because holding that belt should be celebrated and treated as a big deal. Until WWE changes their shows and starts stacking their divisions and rounding them up with more contenders, it is pretty much useless to become the IC Champion. How many times has the IC Championship match been a big feature attraction? That tells you all you need to know about it and WWE have been complacent with their treatment of mid-card titles.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

here's the rub... the reason the IC title doesn't mean as much is not because it's the IC title or that they ditched it for a while... it's cos ALL titles are now little more than props, passed round like table salt.

Until Nash's reign, the IC title WAS the workhorse title like it or not... it was given to Diesel as a shortcut to the main event and from there it began to be used to elevate talent rather than "the best worker" which is when the title began to decline. It created a ridiculous conveyor effect where if you had the IC and weren't main eventing/World champ in 2 years you are perceived as a failiure, adding the US title merely diluted the value even more.

One thing WCW always had right was the titles were a strict heirarchy... US title was the same, generally a workhorse title... the TV title however was the one for the "quick get over" guys... WWE never quite managed to make the Euro title work in this way though they did come close... had they left it with Davey it would have worked better.

The rub I mention is that for the IC to EVER regain it's prestige they not only have to stop using it as that shortcut but rebuild it's prestige and talking it up in the way they did for Razor for example is a very important part of that. He was arguably, other than Jericho the last true "workhorse guy" to hold that belt. When it's Jericho's turn they absolutely have to mention the 9 times.

To me the logical way to do this to truly rebuild it is to get Jericho in and have him win the 10th at Mania... make it a massive deal and he holds it till the Rumble, defeating the winner of the Andre battle royal and all comers, even the WWE champion once... get back to that IC champ IS the #1 contender to the World belt. Jericho could easily headline Summerslam against Bryan in that way... then have him drop to someone else stellar... like an Orton or the like they hold it a while, drop to someone not quite stellar but a Reigns type who by then is ALMOST stellar... from there the title has it's prestige back within 1 year-18 months... if Reigns is IC champ next year, have Rock challenge him for it for example... from there the IC title would mean a massive amount more than it ever can with Big E or the next guy they want over holding it.

 

[whoopin' ass]

Depends on who it is and therefore the fan. If they are talking about a Randy Savage, chances are his fans are older so the remember when the title meant more. If they were inducting someone more recent, it doesn't matter as much. The only good part is who are they inducting from the last 15-20 years who only won the IC and not the WWE title? Razor is about it and he was around before that. But that is what is going to bite then in the future - 20 years from now when they look back at the post Attitude era for people, there won't be a lot of choices as they didn't push people and they didn't push the IC title to make it important.

 

[spaldoni]

The IC title was once a very prestigious title. It should be an important title again. A storyline is always better with a title involved so I don't get why they don't bring back good storylines and feuds surrounding the title. Heck during the heyday of Hulk Hogan, Tito Santana and Greg Valentine sold out arenas during their feud over the IC title, and that was without Hogan on the card. The ladder match with Razor and Michaels over the IC title is still talked about today. The IC title was the main point of that feud. Same goes for Savage/Steamboat at Mania 3, Piper/Hart at Mania 8, Perfect/Hart at Summerslam, Warrior/Rude etc. The IC title matches were always anticipated matches at the big events. It was the workhorse title. I really hope the WWE brings back the importance of the IC title.

 

[kadroan]

IMO, it doesn't mean anything anymore since the division is mismanaged. Last Monday and Wednesday's RAW and Main Event, respectively showed if you got the right people competing for the title it could mean something. Sheamus, Dolph Ziggler, Del Rio, Christian over the past few years have been forced by creative to world title contenders when it's obvious they're not.

However, if these guys, in addition to young guys like Bray Wyatt, Dean Ambrose and Roman Reigns competing for this title, it may could be like how it was during the days when Jericho, Angle and Benoit, Jarrett, D'Lo Brown used to fight over the title like it meant something.

 

[gotemo]

IMO, it doesn't mean anything anymore since the division is mismanaged. Last Monday and Wednesday's RAW and Main Event, respectively showed if you got the right people competing for the title it could mean something. Sheamus, Dolph Ziggler, Del Rio, Christian over the past few years have been forced by creative to world title contenders when it's obvious they're not.

However, if these guys, in addition to young guys like Bray Wyatt, Dean Ambrose and Roman Reigns competing for this title, it may could be like how it was during the days when Jericho, Angle and Benoit, Jarrett, D'Lo Brown used to fight over the title like it meant something.

These are the guys that should be fighting for this title. The problem in the past few years was having another second title in between the IC and the wwe title, that being the world championship. These guys are basically the second string for the world title feuds, they're not top guys but rather guys that can be dropped into short title feuds to carry a month or so during the minor PPVs. In the past these secondary stars would feuding for the IC titles and the IC champ was the gatekeeper for the main event. The brand split messed all that up and it's finally resetting itself now that the main titles are merged, the ranking vacuum is sucking the IC title back to the upper roster rather than it's lower midcard status. It's not meant to build new guys but rather should be used to solidify new guys ONCE they've earned it, basically it's a trophy to say "congrats you got over and aren't an interchangeable filler now".