How prestigious is the TNA World Heavyweight Championship?

[Kitten Cutter]

It all comes down to 3 points:

1. Does your top champion draw interest in his matches?

2. Does your top champion give you and the company the proper exposure?

3. Does your top champion represent your company well?

While the WWE Title has been argued about The Miz becoming champion, think about who and what he is: a lifelong fan of the WWE achieving his dream. He's like Edge, the guy who sat at WM 6 watching Hulk Hogan vs. The Ultimate Warrior. The Miz has gotten national attention, and he's not a criminal or a law breaker in any way, shape or form. We can knock the guy because he's from reality TV, but is he really worse than Jeff Hardy?

The point of this thread, though, is the TNA Championship, but I bring this up because we should compare Jeff Hardy to The Miz. No one can argue that the WWE Champion is a prestigious title because McMahon is always careful about who he puts the belt on. The World Heavyweight Title is less, but the style of the belt (the big gold belt) and history make it still prestigious in a lot of wrestling fans' eyes. The TNA title should be the crown jewel of TNA, and yet the champion rarely makes a live appearance, and he less rarely wrestles. In fact, since Jeff won the belt, he's been two televised matches total, and his third will be this Sunday. Even in Hogan's worst days as champion, he still showed up and ran his mouth about his opponent and ordered his minions to do his dirty work. When was the last time Jeff actually hit or even touched Matt Morgan?

The problem I have with the TNA World Heavyweight Title in 2010 is that even though we've had more constant champions, the belt has seemed almost hidden away. Since RVD was stripped of the title, we spent two months without a TNA champion and now a month plus with a champion who rarely shows up. RAW and Smackdown, whether you hate the storyline, hate the champion, or hate the show, you ALWAYS know who's on top. If someone new came to watch TNA, what would they see? A gothic Jeff Hardy speaking cryptic messages and carrying a very sad looking title. Hardy, despite all of his popularity, is not adding prestige to the belt. You'd think an immensely popular guy like Hardy, heel or not, would generate some buzz, but the ratings haven't changed and nothing new has happened. In addition, with the impending drug trial coming up, this is not the best time for Jeff to be a heel and top champion.

The only way to bring true prestige to the TNA Championship is to give the fans an epic match. Something that we all want to see. Jeff Hardy vs. Matt Morgan isn't going to create any buzz, and really, neither will Hardy vs. Mr. Anderson because we've seen it. We need a match and a moment that will get people buzzing to care about the company and about the title. Every wrestling company needs their top champion to either win in a epic moment, or a champion whom we cannot wait to be beaten in an epic moment. That brings prestige to your title.

 

[hatehabsforever]

Of course the TNA World Heavyweight Championship is prestigious. It is the top accolade in the company. People may sometimes be critical of the TNA product (I hear there are some such posters who come on here and complain about the TNA product occasionally), but whether you like it or not, the TNA WHC is the peak of the mountain in the company. It is the title whereby any professional wrestler who is unable to compete at a high level in the WWE, whether it be by their own personal choice, or because they were future endeavoured from WWE, or whatever, hopes to achieve.

Granted, it isn't as prestigious as either of the two major titles in the WWE, because the company as a whole does not have the same history, the same heritage, the same tradition, that the WWE has. But it still is their main focal point, and as such should be respected.

It's like the Montreal Alouettes winning the Grey Cup in the CFL. It still is a league championship in a professional football league, and as such, carries some prestige with it. Of course, it's not the Vince Lombardi trophy or anything, but it still is quite significant. There's no lack of prestige associated with being the top dog in a secondary company.

 

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

I've been reading the responses to this thread and majority are of the opinion that it ranks just below the WWE Championsship and the World Heavyweight Championhip in terms of prestige. But I cannot remember any occasion except AJ Styles run with the belt in 2009 when people were actually talking highly about the TNA World Heavyweight Championship belt.

I used to see forums and wrestling articles flooded with praise for the X-Division Championship and the Knockouts Championship. At different points of time fans have actually said how the X-Division belt or the Tag Team belt should be the major title in TNA. Now I can obviously see the fallacy in this arguement but still people do say so. They would not have said it if the TNA WHC was as prestigious as the X-Division belt at that time or the Tag Team belt currently. So why does this happen?

I do agree that the belt is as prestigious as the person holding it but it is also as prestigious as the fans of that particular promotion think it is.

 

[Tired0FthePeople]

Jeff Hardy does drugs. Hulk Hogan did steroids. RVD smokes weed. Steve Austin is a wife beater. Im not to sure if the fact that Hardy is a known drug user takes away from the TNA title. If so, then all the WWE titles have no prestige left due to Shawn Michaels, Lex Luger, Chris Benoit, Steve Austin and other drug abusers and batterers holding the title. Hardy held the World Title twice and the WWE title. Its not like he just started doing drugs this year.

 

[Shamalanighya]

NOT AT ALL!! Its the world title of a horse-shit organization. TNA is such an embarrassment it would be silly to think that their world title holds any type of credibility or prestige. TNA needs to just go away. I haven't watched an episode since that horrible idea to make "they" another Hogan heel turn. Blah! TNA means nothing so their world title means nothing.

Nice to see blind WWE (possibly ROH) marks on the IWC bash something with no facts or opinion, just mindless zombie rants. Saying the same ignorant things that they read on some site...


The thing is, the title was worth more than any title in TNA or WWE in early 2009 in my eyes. Consistently on PPV and weekly shows the title was on the line in amazing matches. Jan 4th, Genesis, Against All Odds, etc and so forth. Like the IC title in WWE, the TNA World title was hot, being used, and the best people were fighting over it.

But then something happened that killed AJ Styles and the TNA World title. Rob Van Dam won the title after being in what was it, 3 or 4 matches over a 24 hour period? He beat AJ, burying him into the mid card, and this amazing dream match was short sightedly put on tv. Rather than long term build on on PPV.

RVD mailed in several matches as the champ, having quite a few stinkers, add in bad booking by putting a 50 year old Sting vs a tired and not into it RVD. Keep having dream matches on iMPACT! in 7 minute matches, its all booking. Well, some of it is RVD because he really wasnt the "real" RVD.

Then TNA strips RVD of the title, ruining the top 10 rankings that made the title picture at the least interesting. TNA had Abyss basically murder RVD in the back with Janice, they strip RVD of the title, so they have a triple threat for the title at Bound For Glory. Here is my problem with that.

The former champion RVD was "medically cleared" to fight at Bound for Glory. So the title gets devalued when RVD beat the long reigning and amazing match having AJ on iMPACT! after wrestling umpteen matches; RVD mails in a bunch of matches in lackluster match ups, RVD gets stripped of the title due to contract issues by the way, TNA mishandled him. And now on top of all that RVD wrestles at the PPV his title is on the line.

Dont you think RVD should have, or wanted to be in the mix at Bound for Glory? Dont you think that makes sense, if you are going to no sell being killed by a 2x4 with nails in it, you would be in the title match? Ahh...

And now, the final nail in the coffin, Hogan and gang all together took the title and dropped it into a trash bin and debuted a new title. A purple pretty fun time World title that looks like those little crazy haired trolls would wear. Dont get me wrong, so far Jeff Hardy has been real good and he has a great character, but what TNA did when they ran that angle is start from scratch on a title that Joe, Sting, AJ, and Angle busted their asses to build. And in one moment of throwing it in the trash and debuting a silver and purple title, TNA killed all credibility and said, "We are starting over."

 

[StraightEdge for Life]

Is the TNA World Heavyweight Title prestigious? No. Here's why.

1. The TNA World Title has only been around since May 2007. (3 1/2 years)

2. Putting it on big names (Angle, Sting, Foley, RVD, and now Jeff Hardy) from big companies doesn't exactly mean it just prestigious.

3.Homegrown stars like AJ and Joe could have given it prestige, but both lost the belts in a cheap kind of way. For Joe, to lose it in a screw-job at their biggest event and for AJ to lose it to RVD on Impact after being the longest TNA World champ.

In the end, it will take time for the title to become a prestigious World title and will take less time if they continue to put the belt on WWE burnouts.

 

[Davi323]

The biggest problem with the TNA title that of all of the "big names" that have held it, how many have held it during the prime of their wrestling careers? Kurt Angle? No longer in his prime. Still a very good wrestler, but he is one neck injury away from being paralyzed. Sting? A decade removed from his prime. Mick Foley? A decade removed. RVD? Past his prime. Jeff Hardy? Given his legal status, giving him the belt was stupid, just stupid. How does it help the prestige of the title when the champion could have to vacate it to serve a prison sentence, especially since TNA knew about the legal troubles before ever giving him the belt? Out of all of the TNA champions, the only two that have won it while in their relative primes are the two that nobody outside of TNA knows who the hell they are, Samoa Joe and AJ Styles. Everyone who has held it that people outside of TNA may have heard of are past their primes, because time and time again, instead of building up their own stars, TNA signs stars made famous elsewhere in a desperate attempt to draw those few viewers who are still loyal to over the hill once-great wrestlers.

TNA fans love to complain about how the WWE misuses its wrestlers...yet, Matt Morgan hasn't held the title. Mr. Anderson hasn't held the title, the Pope hasn't held the title, Orlando Jordan hasn't held the title either. All of these guys were hyped up by the TNA Fanboys as being mistreated in the WWE, that they were god's gifts to wrestling, that they were putting on the best matches ever, blahblahblah...yet, who does TNA reward with their highest championship? Over the hill wrestlers who made millions and millions of dollars for someone else, instead of younger talent who could show the WWE exactly what they potentially missed out on.

Giving Mick Foley the belt doesn't prove anything to the WWE, giving the belt to a 40+ Sting doesn't prove anything either, but giving the belt to someone like Mr. Anderson, might though. His departure from the WWE is questionable, and is still young enough to prove his WWE doubters wrong. That is the kind of guy TNA should be giving the storyline to, not to old guys in a desperate attempt to draw in the viewers from 1998 who stopped caring about wrestling. You guys want nothing more than to find something TNA can rub in the WWE's face, so do it with someone who the WWE fans like myself can't rip the shit off of...You claim Pope, Anderson, Jordan, Morgan etc were misused by the WWE? Prove it. Give them the title, and let them run with it for awhile. Let them shine. You want to make it prestigious? Stop giving it to guys who were made famous a long time ago, in a company far, far away.

When Jeff Hardy gets sentenced to prison, how will that enhance the prestige of the TNA title? Knowing that Hardy has these legal issues before he ever signed, what purpose did TNA have in giving him the championship? Do they really believe that Jeff Hardy should be the face of TNA? Or was it just a poorly conceived attempt to extend the middle finger to the WWE?

As long as TNA continues to put their top title around the waists of old-timers and drug addicts, the title will never gain the prestige you want it to.

 

[MisterRob]

What exactly makes the TNA title prestigious? It's not just about the wrestlers who've held the title, but it's also about the quality of their reigns, the memorable feuds around/for that title, and also the quality of the people challenging the champion FOR the title. In fact, the quality of the challengers is a very important thing in defining what makes the championship prestigious.

TNA's champions have been a far past his prime Sting. So, a fifty year old man dominated the title scene for quite some time. TNA's product was saying to their audience that no one in TNA was at the level to dethrone a 50 year old Sting, clearly past his prime. Well, if anything that decreases the prestige and value of the title not raises it. Mick Foley is even worse in that regard then Sting, and had a short and meaningless title reign. That does nothing for the prestige or value of the title. AJ Styles and Samoa Joe aren't even stars, because TNA can't build or make them stars. RVD is also past his prime, and he had no meanginful feuds or memorable anything with the title except the way he lost it. Jeff Hardy, in my eyes, has devalued the prestige of the title through both the way he's been used with it (and the silly new title they have) and the fact he's a drug pushing felon-to-be. No, sorry, the people who have held the title might be "names" but that doesn't mean a thing, especially when you look beyond that initial name.

The challengers? They've either been past their prime wrestlers or guys people outside of TNA don't even know because they aren't stars, and they haven't been built as anything by TNA. Matt Morgan, Pope, Jay Lethal, Kazarian, these aren't exactly quality challengers that prove how prestigious it is to get the TNA title because the best wrestlers in the world are trying. The best wrestlers, by default, are in WWE trying to get their title(s), because the WWE is the place to be, which also makes their titles so prestigious in the wrestling business. That's just the simple truth, not personal opinion.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

Well, if this is about the TNA World Heavyweight Championship, as others have noted earlier, it's quite prestigious, certainly the single most prestigious in the company, as the only wrestlers to have held it have been Kurt Angle, Sting, Samoa Joe, Mick Foley, AJ Styles, RVD and Jeff Hardy — all of whom were well-deserving as world heavyweight champions, and all of whom had been former world heavyweight champions in prior companies to boot (sans AJ, who was only ROH Pure Champion).

The title, for the most part, has always been on the up-and-up, which is more than can be said for other belts in the company like the Legends Global Television title, and especially the X Division belt which has taken the single greatest fall from grace than any other in TNA.

 

[Mr. Artistic guy]

Is the TNA World Heavyweight Title prestigious? No. Here's why.

1. The TNA World Title has only been around since May 2007. (3 1/2 years)

2. Putting it on big names (Angle, Sting, Foley, RVD, and now Jeff Hardy) from big companies doesn't exactly mean it just prestigious.

3.Homegrown stars like AJ and Joe could have given it prestige, but both lost the belts in a cheap kind of way. For Joe, to lose it in a screw-job at their biggest event and for AJ to lose it to RVD on Impact after being the longest TNA World champ.

Point 2 is erroneous. Ric Flair was heavyweight champ in WCW, NWA and WWF, does that mean he didn't add prestige to the title depending on which company he was in?

And Point 3... like that's never happened in WWE. Let's be honest MITB keeps things interesting but it is such a short cut on the right night. It isn't like AJ didn't have a match to lose the belt, he had a fairy decent match (in length and quality) and lost the match itself. What was dissapointing was that it happened on impact the next night after a title defence with no hype of build or anything. But being serious, there has been far more dissapointing reign endings than either of the ones you mentionned, in the history of the WWF title. I mean surely bob backlund vs Diesel was far far worse?

 

[Davi323]

in defense of his point 2, the WCW title morphed out of the NWA title, so I don't know if its fair to treat the WCW reigns of Ric Flair as being from a completely separate company as the NWA.

Further, when Ric Flair won the WWF title, it had already been held by legendary wrestlers, who won it in their primes, not as has beens trying to extend their career. So even though Flair came over from a different comapny, they didn't give him the belt to try to add to the prestige of the belt, as TNA did with some of their titles. Flair's WWF run was just one in a lineage of champions that included Hulk Hogan, arguably the single biggest star in wrestling history, and Bruno Sammartino, who was as popular as it got when he wrestled.

Ric Flair was in his prime as well for most of his title runs. That is a significantly different situation from giving it to a 40+ year old Mick Foley, who can barely move in the ring, had been semi retired for a few years, and was grossly out of shape. What Flair did would be like if Randy Orton or John Cena quit the WWE and joined TNA. They would be in their primes, near the height of their popularity, and would definitely add to the TNA title's prestige, because of the timing. If Mick Foley, and Sting were 10 years younger, different story. If Kurt Angle hadn't suffered the neck injuries that limit him to being 80% as good as he would have been, it's a different story. If Jeff Hardy had been able to kick his drug habits, and could actually be the type of wrestler that could truly act as the face of TNA, it's a different story.

Under different circumstances, some of the same wrestlers would have enhanced the prestige of the TNA title, TNA's main problem with their title is their sense of timing, or more importantly, their failure to recognize when someone's time as champion has passed. It isn't the men that have held it, its the time they held it in their careers.

 

[jaceynightheat]

I think it's far more valuable than the IWC believes it is.

I'm often confused on the title history. Sometimes it counts TNA World Champions as people who held the NWA World Title in TNA - which is how it should be.

Here are people who have held it;

Ken Shamrock, Ron Killings/R Truth, Jeff Jarrett, A.J. Styles, Raven, Rhino, Christian, Sting, Abyss, Kurt Angle, Samoa Joe, Mick Foley, Rob Van Dam, Jeff Hardy.

I know TNA gets a lot of grief for using other companies known talent but WWF started out the same way. The TNA Originals have been pushed to the top but it doesn't help the ratings anymore now then it does with also using known people. Having big name guys hold the title help it out a bit to the casual fan. Honestly, who cares about the IWC? People will complain but will often still watch or at least follow the goings on. They more they appeal to casual fans the better the company will do.

Is the belt as prestigious as the WWE Championship? No. But it doesn't have the age & legacy of it either.

I'm not sure how the drug habit of Jeff Hardy makes him less valuable to casual fans. NOr do I see an issue with RVD smoking marijuana.

I agree with what someone said about it being timing that's TNA's problem.

When Raven first showed up in TNA, he was on fire. But he didn't get the belt until years after the fact & he was out of shape. Why? Guess Jeff Jarrett wanted to be champion longer.

Booker T another big name that came in with a lot of fans backing him. Did he get the belt? Nope. For whatever reason was turned heel & given the legends/global/television title. What does Booker T need with the secondary belt? This belt is the most misused imo, only 2 of the holders haven't been World Champions in TNA or else where.

Again with the timing, I think it's the story lines that make titles important. TNA is the premature ejaculation of professional wrestling. I remember seeing Angle come into TNA, really thinking Angle vs Joe could be something awesome. Almost 0 build up that could've been a long story.

 

[Mr. Artistic guy]

in defense of his point 2, the WCW title morphed out of the NWA title, so I don't know if its fair to treat the WCW reigns of Ric Flair as being from a completely separate company as the NWA.

Further, when Ric Flair won the WWF title, it had already been held by legendary wrestlers, who won it in their primes, not as has beens trying to extend their career. So even though Flair came over from a different comapny, they didn't give him the belt to try to add to the prestige of the belt, as TNA did with some of their titles. Flair's WWF run was just one in a lineage of champions that included Hulk Hogan, arguably the single biggest star in wrestling history, and Bruno Sammartino, who was as popular as it got when he wrestled.

Ric Flair was in his prime as well for most of his title runs. That is a significantly different situation from giving it to a 40+ year old Mick Foley, who can barely move in the ring, had been semi retired for a few years, and was grossly out of shape. What Flair did would be like if Randy Orton or John Cena quit the WWE and joined TNA. They would be in their primes, near the height of their popularity, and would definitely add to the TNA title's prestige, because of the timing. If Mick Foley, and Sting were 10 years younger, different story. If Kurt Angle hadn't suffered the neck injuries that limit him to being 80% as good as he would have been, it's a different story. If Jeff Hardy had been able to kick his drug habits, and could actually be the type of wrestler that could truly act as the face of TNA, it's a different story.

Under different circumstances, some of the same wrestlers would have enhanced the prestige of the TNA title, TNA's main problem with their title is their sense of timing, or more importantly, their failure to recognize when someone's time as champion has passed. It isn't the men that have held it, its the time they held it in their careers.

I see your point but in years to come I guarantee the percentage of guys will look back and say so who were the first guys to hold this belt.....WOAH Sting, Mick Foley, KURT ANGLE!, Jeff Hardy, RVD, maybe even AJ STYLES..... but most, and I have to stress the most part, most people wont go.. so how old was sting at the time....oh right 49 hmmmm thats pretty sucky. Most guys will just go wow, this title has got a pretty good lineage!, that is if TNA lasts lng enough for people not remember how old sting was at the time, and thats taking a lot for granted.

 

[onewayleeway69]

Point 2 is erroneous. Ric Flair was heavyweight champ in WCW, NWA and WWF, does that mean he didn't add prestige to the title depending on which company he was in?

And Point 3... like that's never happened in WWE. Let's be honest MITB keeps things interesting but it is such a short cut on the right night. It isn't like AJ didn't have a match to lose the belt, he had a fairy decent match (in length and quality) and lost the match itself. What was dissapointing was that it happened on impact the next night after a title defence with no hype of build or anything. But being serious, there has been far more dissapointing reign endings than either of the ones you mentionned, in the history of the WWF title. I mean surely bob backlund vs Diesel was far far wor

You dont like me awwwww shame hahaha
Like it or not big names win the titles and the more big names that win the same title makes it more prestigious...simple as.They give the belt prestige by giving it to superstars who are all ready former champs.Then they give to it the superstars who are ready to fill that spot once there at the same level. No matter what anybody says the belts have the history for proof and they cant loose any of that prestige.
What are you on?....Get a grip dude go watch ufc instead. baaa baaa baaa

 

[Tech N9ne]

I'd say it does not necessarily have a whole lot of prestige as far as a World Title goes. I do consider it a big win to become the TNA Champ. But, I think around the wrestling world and beyond, it does not hold the same prestige as being WWE or The World Heavyweight Champion does.

I would think it has a higher value than being the IC Champion or US Champion. It has more value than being ECW Champion in WWE did. Like I said, around the wrestling world I don't believe it is such an accomplishment. WWE will never recognize reigns from TNA like how TNA recognizes WWE title reigns.

 

[Mr. Artistic guy]

I didn't bad rep you because of your opinion, that was fine. It's because you said this...

All you snobs who say there nothing just because there in TNA are just that,snobs and shouldnt even watch wrestling because you guys are destroying it. THE WHOLE POINT OF IT BEING PRESTIGIOUS IS BECAUSE OF THE NAMES THAT HAVE HELD IT AND EACH TIME A LEGEND GRABS THAT BELT IT MAKES IT MORE PRESTIGIOUS NO MATTER WHAT YOU NEGATIVE SONS OF BITCHES THINK! Just look at that list end ov!

...despite the fact the majority of people were actually saying the same as you were. It just begs the question as to why your even here is your not listening to anyone else's opinion, because surely that's the whole point of being here, we all already know our own opinions...?

In fact judging by your sig I'd say you have a lack of faith in your own posting ability, it's almost like your expecting people not to like your opinion so you can pre-empitely shield yourself by calling anyone who doesn't like what you say an IWC sheep. I'll get a grip when you head ya head checked.