Is the US Championship redundant?

[DaNewGuy]

For years WWE had Championships which represented different parts of the world. The WWF Champion was top dog, the Intercontinental Champion (South America and North America) was next, then there was the European Champion. There was of course also the Tag Team and Hardcore Championships which represented different styles of wrestling, and the Womens Championship, , for the women.

The European title was unified with the Intercontinental Title on Raw in 2002. The Intercontinental Title now, in theory, represtents South America and North America and Europe. This leaves Asia, Oceania/Australaisa and Antarctica.

The United States Championship was approximate WCW's equivilent to the IC Title. In 2001 it was unified with the IC Title when Edge beat Test at Survivor Series. This makes the US championship redundant on two levels, firstly it is unified into the IC title, and secondly the United States was already part of North America.

I propose that the US Title either be unified with the Intercontinental (again) or replaced, either by a similar title, or something different such as the Hardcore or Cruiserweight Championships, or a lower level title such as a TV Title. Discuss.

 

[Tenebrous]

I understand the logic behind your argument but I think you're reading into this too much. In 2003, Stephanie resurrected the US title so that Smackdown would have a second tier championship. This is no different than the World Heavyweight Championship that was split from the Undisputed championship the year before. They wanted a title that would be equal to the IC title and of the previous titles--the Hardcore, European and Television titles were are lower tier belts so the only naturally choice was the US title. Having a second tier title that is held beneath the second tier title on the oppsosite show would devalue that show and that particular spot on the roster.

It used to be that who ever held the second tier title was automatically the number 1 contender since he was the "second in command" of the roster. Only JBL has exercised this in recent years (while US champion) during his feud with Rey Mysterio. So the belts may be redundant in name but not in application.

 

[LokiCobain]

The titles don't represent locations anymore, they just have those names for tradition sake. How could Rey hold the World HEAVYWEIGHT title? It's just a name now, so it's not really redundant as much as it is irrelevant.

 

[scott hammer cena]

i think kofi is holding the title with pride and deserves 2 be champ comeon he deserves this title for months seeing he misses out opportunities of being whc champ because at no way out he was messed about by wwe not being able 2 compete and at wm i think he should of won money in the bank



1 question :::: is shelton face or heel b because on superstars hes facing tyler reks who is face and 75% of crowd cheering benjamin tho need 2 know answer please

 

[Motor City Mayhem]

WWE doesn't go by that anymore. The Intercontinental Championship doesn't represent all those places, its just the name, the United States Championship came back because they wanted a Mid Card Belt for Smackdown!.

i think kofi is holding the title with pride and deserves 2 be champ

100% Correct my friend, Kofi Kingston deserves that Belt and has defended it like a true Champion, putting on great matches with anyone, and I can't wait to see Miz vs Kingston.

Bottom line is that the Titles name doesn't meen much anymore, Prime Example: ECW Title. "Extreme Championship Wrestling". You can figure it out yourselves.

 

[The Notorious Big.Pad.Dee]

I love that Kingston's the champ, but I hate the way they've booked him up in until recently. Being crushed by Big Show every week made the title look weak as well as the champion. But now it looks like Kingston is being considered a CHAMPION - not just a guy with a belt, and I agree with Eric - Miz vs Kofi will be great.

As for what the title represents, I believe that the WWE couldn't care less anymore. I think they just brought back the title that was the most prestigious for Smackdown, and out of the European title, Hardcore title and US title, there was only one winner.

 

[RicSpade]

Ok before I get into the problems with changing the United States title, and how its stupid to have it I want to point out a few points of origin.

During the days of the Alliance vs. WWE the WWE unified the US and Intercontinental title, that much is true, but your also forgetting that the WWE had unified all the other belts with the IC title when Kane held it only to have the IC belt unified with the heavyweight title, and then brought back a while later in that big tournament they held.

So resurrecting the United States title wasn't a out of the blue idea because it was apart of the unification with the IC title, but you have to understand why they chose the United States title in the first place.

The United States title was held by many top stars in the NWA and WCW, where the European title was held by the midcarders getting ready for a push, and the only thing that made it have any credibility was HBK, Triple H, and Owen having dealt with the title.

The hardcore title and the cruiserweight title aren't good choices now because of the wrestlers being split to where there was no depth for that pool of talent in the cruiserweight and the hardcore title doesn't fit with the PG rating and would make a good midcard title on ECW except the fact that there are only like 12 people on the roster.

and as for the TV title you would want that on all 3 brands and would make it more important than the heavyweight belts cause its on all 3 shows.

So call it bad if you want but when you break it down it makes more sense

 

[Tastycles]

I see your point, but you are most definitely reading into this too much. In all sports there are regional championships within a larger area. Take football, Barcelona are the European champions, but they aren't the English champions. It's the same thing here, you can have seperate US and Intercontinental Champions. After all, isn't the Americas part of the world, as in World Champion.

Anyway, as for an actual championship, it had been redundant until the end of MVP's most recent reign, but now it is the subject of actual feuds that aren't two dimensional, with various people seeking to establish themselves in the division. It's probably as healthy as it has been since the mid 90s, so there's certainly no need for change right now.

 

[Viola Moonlight]

Its time for koffee to get a cup of koffee and lose that title he had it too long he didn t deserve to have it that long!

First, its Kofi. Second, he has not held the title for a long time & he deserves the championship as he has proven his worth in the midcard for a long time now & can work in the ring. A great midcard wrestler who deserves his current title position. Thirdly, gain some knowledge & back up your responses before posting again.

Anywayz, to the original poster. The fact of the matter is that the WWE are not concerned with the names of the championships anymore. The supposed backgrounds of each title to where it represents have long flown out the door. They are now simply used as props on stage. Two womens championships, one tag team championship, two midcard tites, two top tier titles & one on-screen developmental title. That's it. It has nothing to do with who gets to hold what & who represents where. It just means that if you hold the title, you are being trusted to be the centre piece of a particular division.

 

[Super Crazy]

Koffee Kingston needs to lose that title but summerslam doesn thave him defending his US Title against Carlito! As well as Mickie James going head to head with Gail Kim!! That sux summerslam will be awful!

First off, it's Kofi, not Koffee, it's not even close to coffee, nor is it even pronounced the same way.

Second off, he doesn't need to lose the title. Him holding onto it is what is best right now. He has had great matches/feuds with the title. He is a great champion and he should hold onto it just a bit longer.