It's been 2 years....

[CyberPunk]

...since World Heavyweight Championship ceased to exist. In 2013, WHC was unified with WWE championship at TLC. The WWE World Heavyweight Championship became the sole world title since then. How do you think it has worked for WWE all things considered?

For me, WHC was more of an upper midcard title given to people who were at the cusp of main event. Even though it was promoted as a world title, it was never touted as equal to the WWE title. It was really what IC title should have been all these years. In fact, I won't be wrong if I said that a lot of people wouldn't have been called world champions if it wasn't for the WHC. People like Mark Henry, Christian, Dolph Ziggler, Jack Swagger etc would've never been called former world champion. It also helped inflate the number of world titles some people won over the years like Edge. Otherwise, do you ever think Edge would've been an 11 time world champion with only one world title?

How do you think it has been without the WHC? Do you miss it? Is WWE better off without it? Should it be brought back in future?

Discuss.

 

[Stone Cold Tea]

I definitely don’t think it should be brought back. It seems stupid having 2 world titles. Also there’s no brand split anymore so to have 2 world titles for 1 show is dumb. You cant disagree with the fact that the WHC in the end became everything that the intercontinental belt should be.

When it first came about the WHC was obviously a big deal and in my opinion the premier belt till Cena switched sides and brought the WWE belt to Raw. Most certainly the WHC has made world champions out of people who if there was 1 world title would never have been champions. In fact as I type this out it also occurs to me that 1 of the reasons the Intercontinental title lost prestige is because there was 2 world titles.

 

[AegonTargaryen]

1)Interesting subject. And trust me, I almost thought the thread would be about CM Punk after having read "it's been 2 years..". (Not that there's anything wrong with it! )

2)I agree with just about everything you said.

3)Edge being an 11-time champion is ridiculous, especially since Shawn Michaels, Kurt Angle(yes he was only in the WWE for 6 years but still) and The Undertaker were hardly 6-7 time champions. (Note that Michaels never won a world championship after 1998 except just once, at Survivor Series '02). The WWE/Smackdown writers were morons in how they booked the WHC between 2007-2010 with Edge winning it NINE times. No, he didn't deserve it. As talented as Edge was, I don't think he should've been more than a three-time champion regardless of whether there was a single title or two world titles in the 2000s.

4)I don't know about Dolph Ziggler, but I think Jack Swagger was talented enough to have won a world title. Christian, Mark Henry and Goldust(IMHO) should've at least won the world championship once, had there only been one world championship in the WWE. So them winning the WHC was fine. Christian deserved it.

5)If anyone should've stayed away from the WWE or WHC, it's guys like The Miz, Sheamus, and Alberto Del Rio. That's where your point of two titles leading into undeserving contenders winning the WHC comes into play.

6)The WHC was fine until 2010. Comparing it with the IC title is a bit of a stretch. Since there were two brands, the WHC was perfectly suited to Smackdown. In fact, the WHC had been pretty iconic between 2002-2008 with wrestlers like The Undertaker, Batista, Chris Jericho, Shawn Michaels(he looked amazing with the WHC) and Edge holding it. I just wish Sting was in the WWE in 2008 on Smackdown and won the WHC, and maybe battled The Undertaker at WM 24(or 25) for the WHC.

7)It's exactly when Edge and The Undertaker retired/semiretired in 2010/2011 that the WHC and Smackdown as a whole begun to deteriorate. Also, Batista quit the WWE and with Jeff Hardy(whom I think was the lousiest-looking wrestler besides Rey Mysterio as the WHC) gone, and CM Punk turning his focus on the WWE championship/John Cena, the WHC became somewhat of an IC championship.

8)I think the WWE should've retired/unified the WHC with the WWE championship either at Summerslam 2011(CM Punk vs John Cena), or at Survivor Series or TLC at least.

9)The WHC should never be brought back again because I think with the end of the brand extension and hardly 4-5 mainevent/heavyweight wrestlers who're deserving of a world title, two world titles don't make sense. After all, you wouldn't want Dolph Ziggler or Miz as champions do you? And just having a second world championship and giving it to either of Rusev, Del Rio or Sheamus won't make them world championship materials. The mainevent scene is bad enough right now with one world title and guys like SHEAMUS being the main focus of the show. Two world titles would constitute a disaster. Unless of course if they want to repeat 2011-2013, with feuds like John Cena-Del rio, Del Rio-Swagger that feel more like IC/US title feuds.

10)Lastly, I think we were lucky enough to see the title between 2002-2010 because not only did the WHC look iconic/picturesque in WCW and on Raw/Smackdown but also, most wrestlers who had held it looked awesome with it. My only regrets will be things like John Cena ever having been WHC, or Sting never winning it in the WWE, or Shawn Michaels never having had a long reign as WHC. To end on a sweet note, I'd have to say The Undertaker looked dazzling as WHC.

 

[NegativeFeedback]

If the World Heavyweight Championship didn't exist...

2002:

1. Brock Lesnar would've dropped the WWE Championship at Survivor Series 2002 to Shawn Michaels in the Elimination Chamber, not to Big Show in the dead dad feud.

2. Shawn Michaels would've dropped it to Triple H at Armageddon, and Triple H would've faced Brock at WrestleMania instead of Kurt Angle.

The net effect is Big Show, Kurt Angle and Triple H each lose a title reign.

2003:

1. Kurt and Brock still get their feud so Kurt wins the title at Vengeance, drops it back in the Iron Man on Smackdown. Just like IRL, the plan would be to build towards a big Goldberg vs. Brock WrestleMania main event for the title. But of course, Goldberg would give in his notice around December, and just like real life, they would need a back-up main event. Triple H beats Brock for the title at Armageddon so they can start building him as an opponent for someone else at Mania.

The net effect is 1 less reign for Triple H who held it for almost all of 2003 and none for Goldberg.

2004:

1. This comes down to WWE choosing between Eddie or Benoit to main event against Triple H at WM20. I think they stay the course, go with Benoit, and inject him into the HBK/HHH feud at Mania. Eddie sadly doesn't get the rub he deserved, but plenty of midcarders never did.

2. JBL will wear the US title during his rise on Smackdown which will be the main title going forward as Benoit stays feuding with Trips and others on Raw. Randy gets it at SummerSlam to break Brock's record and then drops it to Triple H who eventually vacates it so they can put it up in the Chamber at NYR.

The net effect is no reigns for JBL and Eddie, despite plenty of main events on Smackdown.

2005:

1. Now here's where I think things start to truly deviate from real life. Vince had already decided at this point that he wanted John Cena to be the new face of the company, but he also wanted Batista to be a top guy as well and wanted to build him up with that Mania main event. I'm guessing the WM21 main event goes on as planned, but someone beats Batista for the title during the summer so Cena can win it at SummerSlam. I think Triple H would be the one to do it, and they would build towards Batista vs. Cena at WM22.

The net effect in all of this is actually +1 reign for Triple H. It could be that they would go with some other transitional champ so Triple H can face Cena at Mania, but with him having jobbed to Brock, Benoit and Batista three years straight, I think they would take a break of putting him in the main event.

2006:

1. Batista gets injured right before he was supposed to win the Rumble for a 2nd time and WrestleMania plans go to shit. Edge had just beaten Cena for the title at NYR in a surprise cash-in and was supposed to lose it back at the Rumble for the big money match. What now? Well, with Eddie having passed away, I think WWE will go with the Rey push after all. Rey wins the Rumble, Edge stays champion and they add Orton or Angle, or both, to give it some star-power.

2. With RVD and the ECW angle happening in the summer, Rey needs to drop the title soon. They're not gonna have Cena destroy Rey after all that Eddie-momentum, so they have Rey drop it to Triple H who ends up being the one to put over RVD after interference from somebody, IDK who, possibly Vince or Spirit Squad or w/e, leading to the DX return for SNME and SummerSlam.

3. RVD gets suspended just as they were building to a big 3-way with Edge and Cena, so they end up doing the match on Raw, Edge wins, and Cena ends up getting the title back at Unforgiven to get back on top.

The net effect is 1 less reign for Angle, 1 less for Cena, 1 less for King Booker, 1 less for Batista and +1 for Triple H.

2007:

1. Batista would win the Rumble to finally get that money match with Cena, Shawn faces Rated RKO in 3-way or something, and Taker faces someone else. Maybe Benoit? Who knows.

2. Cena would go over and Batista would job at Mania just like real life. Cena would go on to continue his one year reign, all the way until he's injured. Now they need a plan for No Mercy. Well, here's the thing. Kennedy at this point still has his briefcase, and this becomes a good way to use it. He cashes in on the vacant title at No Mercy and they just give it to him. Triple H comes out, eggs him for a match, and Kennedy drops it back in the first 10 minutes of the show. Since Triple H was booked in a match with Umaga, and Orton was booked to face Cena for the title, Triple H then has to work both matches. He ends up beating Umaga and drops it to Orton.

The net effect is no new reigns for Taker, Khali or Batista, and no 2 new reigns for Edge. Add +1 reign to Kennedy who got that mini-reign instead of Orton! I debated whether or not Edge would have taken the briefcase off Kennedy anyway, but I don't think it was likely. The reason they did that was because Taker got injured and Kennedy was booked to cash in, but then Kennedy got injured, so they moved the cash in onto Edge. Without that booking, Kennedy's six week injury is inconsequential and he gets to keep the briefcase.

2008:

1. Cena comes back to win the Rumble, faces Orton at No Way Out, and they build to the big 3-way with Triple H at Mania. They'll find another way to do Taker/Edge and make it personal without the title.

2. Cena wins the title at Mania, because they weren't going to have Orton win clean in the actual main event. I don't know if Punk would still win MitB. He was given it so he can use it to get one of the titles back on Raw after they draft Triple H to Smackdown, but none of that is necessary here. I'd say Jericho wins the briefcase with the hope of cashing in for a heel turn on Cena or maybe even cashing in for the ECW title.

3. Cena drops the title to Triple H at some point so he can get back his wins for putting Cena over. Triple H moves to SD with the title because of the new network push, and Jeff Hardy starts his big feud with Jeff Hardy. Triple H drops it to Jericho instead of Edge at Survivor Series, and Jericho drops it to Jeff at Armageddon.

The net effect is two less reigns for Edge, 1 less for Jericho, 1 less for Batista, 1 less for Punk, and 1 less for Taker.

2009:

1. Edge beats Jeff at Mania for the title after the Matt Hardy turn, but he still drops it to Triple H in the Chamber. Nothing can stop The Political Assassin. He wants to main event Mania against Orton and he'll get it. Orton wins the Rumble, Triple H wins the Chamber, and we get the WM25 main event.

2. Jeff is way too over to not put the title on him at this point. Triple H drops the title to Edge at Backlash instead of Cena, and Edge gets to do the honors for Jeff at Judgment Day and One Night Stand. CM Punk's cash-in goes according to plan, and he gets to trade some title victories before retiring Jeff and then dropping the title to the Deadman for one final run.

3. This means Orton never got to have a reign of terror on Raw. Instead, he most likely would feud with Taker after he gets the title, but would never get the title.

The net effect is a lot. 3 less reigns for Cena, 3 less for Orton, 1 less for Batista, 1 less for Triple H, 1 less for Edge and 1 less for Sheamus. It's very likely that they might do the big "Edge loses one world title and wins the other" at No Way Out with the ECW title though. Maybe even build to an Edge vs. Christian match at Mania.

2010:

1. Edge might still come back for a face turn against Jericho, but no way it is for the title. With only 1 title scene in the company, Batista/Cena would have already been done a couple of times. Taker/Shawn is still main eventing, but Cena needs to be in the title picture. Either Cena wins the Rumble a 2nd time or they give the Rumble win to the ECW title contender. Either way, Cena gets a rematch with Batista who won the title in the Chamber after Shawn's interference.

2. Cena wins at Mania and Swagger loses his cash-in the next night to give some breathing room for the new MitB PPV. Cena retires Batista and soon begins a feud with Sheamus who injured Triple H. The Nexus happens, and they help Sheamus win at F4W. Orton is a face now, and he eventually gets the title. Miz then cashes in afterwards.

The net effect is none of the WHC title reigns. No Jericho, no Swagger, no Rey, no Kane and no Edge. 1 less for each of them.

2011:

1. Cena wins the Rumble for a whopping 3rd time, as he faces Miz at Mania. Barapadoo. The Rock/Cena WM28 main event is set up. Cena gets the title, the Summer of Punk happens, and Punk wins the title.

2. With all the SD guys eligible for the WWE title tournament, I doubt Rey wins. I'm thinking a heel would've won so Cena could give him his comeuppance when he takes the title later in the show. I can't say for certain who would get the rub here, but it could be Mark Henry, who is most likely not getting his title reign later in the year.

3. Punk comes back, beats Cena at Mania, the awful Nash stuff happens, Del Rio cashes in, Cena gets the title back, Triple H squashes Punk (smh) and Punk wins it back from Del Rio.

The net effect is two less for Christian who never gets to become World Champ, 2 less for Orton, 1 less for Big Show, 1 less for Dolph, 1 less for Rey, 1 less for Edge and 1 less for Bryan.

2012:

1. Punk faces Jericho in the mid-card which means Jericho certainly wins the Rumble. This time no Sheamus win thank God. Rock/Cena, Brock/Cena, Show/Cena, and Ace/Cena still main event though.

2. It's unrealistic to expect Punk to hold the title the whole year when there's only one, especially when they want to give Sheamus a Batista push as the face of Smackdown. I'm thinking Mr. Money in the Bank winner Dolph Ziggler beats Punk for the title, drops it to Sheamus, and then Sheamus drops it to a heel Punk so he can face Rock.

The net effect is 1 less reign for Big Show, 1 less for Del Rio and +1 for Dolph Ziggler. Cena didn't need to win MitB because they already did the "lost cash-in" angle with Swagger.

2013:

1. Cena beats Rock at WM29, and drops it to Daniel Bryan who is still most likely a sensation even without the 18-second loss at WM28. The Orton/Bryan catastrophic booking is probably left unchanged since nobody cared for the World title at this point.

The net effect is 1 less for Dolph, 1 less for Del Rio, and 1 less for Cena.

2014-2015:

1. The Batista return and Bryan replacement still happens. Punk probably still quits, even more pissed because he can't crack a main event with such a tight roster. Everything continues as it was today.

Anyway, overall, these are the biggest changes when it comes to title histories:

1. Edge is a 4-time World Champion instead of 11. 7 title wins never happened. Randy Orton is a 6-time World Champion instead of 12. 6 title wins never happened either. John Cena is a 10-time World Champion instead of 15. 5 of those never happened.

2. Batista is a 2-time World Champion instead of 6. Most of his big main event run would be second-fiddle to Cena.

3. The Great Khali, Goldberg, JBL, King Booker, Eddie Guerrero, Jack Swagger and Christian were never World Champions.

4. Triple H is a 12-time Champion instead of 13. Not that big a difference.

5. Kane, Big Show, Rey Mysterio, Alberto Del Rio and Dolph Ziggler only held the title once. Big Show had 3 stricken out, Angle, Del Rio and Rey had 2, and Dolph had one.

6. CM Punk and Daniel Bryan never got their "test runs" with their first MitB cash-ins. Same goes for Sheamus who didn't get that test run in Winter '10/'11.

7. Kurt Angle, Chris Jericho and The Undertaker all got 2 less reigns. Their collection of accolades are big enough that it doesn't make much of a dent.

8. Mark Henry never got his Hall of Pain reign, but he got a 2 hour reign before dropping it to Cena. Likewise, Kennedy got a 10 minute reign, but never got to a proper reign since he got suspended the next year, injured after that, and then fired after returning.

 

[Jeff Deliverer of Mail]

I give big props to the World Heavyweight Championship belt, formerly known as the WCW Heavyweight Championship Big Gold. It's by far my favorite championship belt design. The belt has elevated careers when the brand split was going on in WWE, theres no denying it. WWE wrestling careers and resumes have greatly improved with this title sitting there on the record. But, by the time it was melded into the WWE Heavyweight Championship, it didn't have a lot of meaning left to it. It was just an extra belt a wrestler had to carry around along side the WWE Belt. It was a useless prop by this time and the melding was perfect. I just wish the belt design melded into Big Gold instead of what is being presented today. (which isn't a bad design, I just don't like it as much)

The only way I'd want the World Heavyweight Championship to come back is if it is replacing the current design or there's such a huge roster that WWE has no choice but to reopen WCW and have a good brand split.

 

[KromyD]

I give big props to the World Heavyweight Championship belt, formerly known as the WCW Heavyweight Championship Big Gold. It's by far my favorite championship belt design. The belt has elevated careers when the brand split was going on in WWE, theres no denying it. WWE wrestling careers and resumes have greatly improved with this title sitting there on the record. But, by the time it was melded into the WWE Heavyweight Championship, it didn't have a lot of meaning left to it. It was just an extra belt a wrestler had to carry around along side the WWE Belt. It was a useless prop by this time and the melding was perfect. I just wish the belt design melded into Big Gold instead of what is being presented today. (which isn't a bad design, I just don't like it as much)

The only way I'd want the World Heavyweight Championship to come back is if it is replacing the current design or there's such a huge roster that WWE has no choice but to reopen WCW and have a good brand split.

I agree with this but dont think that would ever happen with it really being a WCW belt originally. WWE will keep things this way and try to put more prestige into the intercontinental title. In saying that, will having the strip on Brock Lesnar make it that more prestigious like how they wanted Daniel Bryan to hold it? Heyman & Owens could make for some very interesting promos.

 

[Mustang Sally]

That the common word in both WHC and WWE is 'world' accents our American love of excess. Now, everyone can be the best! Have we got a guy who's so unbeatable and held a title so long that it's grown boring at the top?

Great! We don't need to find a way to get him off his throne.....instead, let's create another championship so the two top guys can be 'the best.' Whoopie!

Professional boxing made this mistake over past decades.....and, in fact, makes WWE look conservative by comparison. They kept forming new sanctioning organizations, each having their own recognized 'world' champion. It became .....and remains.....ridiculous.

The reasons for doing it are obvious; Fans like championship matches.

By having more championships, there can be more matches for 'the biggest title of all!' Sure, the words 'world champion' lose their effect, but who cares as long as the guy shows up in the ring carrying his title belt?

Presumably, WWE got rid of the lesser of the two 'world' championships due to the brand split ending, right? But whatever their reason, it was the right way to go. If you want one guy looked at as the best, the group of people vying for it all should have only one title belt to go for.

 

[Dagger Dias]

WWE is better off without the big gold belt in the sense that it stopped needing two World Championships after the brand extension ended. The big gold World Heavyweight Championship felt like a glorified midcard title and many who held it didn't seem like true "World Champions". The prestige of that belt was lowered tremendously when at one point it really was on par with the WWE Championship. Having the belt OPEN Wrestlemania twice was a massive insult, especially considering the Royal Rumble winner picked that belt both times. You don't win the Rumble to OPEN Wrestlemania. What a joke.

The WWE's midcard is not doing as good now as it should be without there being two World Championships. The Intercontinental Championship should have begun receiving the same level of treatment that the big gold World Heavyweight Championship received after the unification. That never happened and up until this Owens VS Ambrose feud nothing happened that made the belt seem important, other than Bryan's win which was sadly cut short due to injury. I miss the great design of the big gold belt but in no way, shape, or form, does the WWE need a second World Championship again. There should never be a second World Championship again unless the WWE is in a spot where it has two equal brands again. So since I doubt there will be another situation where they buy another company as big as WCW, not gonna happen.

 

[No Count Pup]

Ratings have dropped significantly. Is it connected to the unified title? Possibly, but most one title advocates won't even consider the idea. The problem is WWE has to fill five hours of content a week. But much of that time if filled with wrestlers who are going nowhere. With a second world title there is something to fight for. I believe the loss of the WHC has stalled too many careers. Sure many will disagree with that idea but I don't see how one world title makes programming better at all.

 

[J.J.]

Ratings have dropped significantly. Is it connected to the unified title? Possibly, but most one title advocates won't even consider the idea. The problem is WWE has to fill five hours of content a week. But much of that time if filled with wrestlers who are going nowhere. With a second world title there is something to fight for. I believe the loss of the WHC has stalled too many careers. Sure many will disagree with that idea but I don't see how one world title makes programming better at all.

I see what you're saying...I just feel the stale booking has been the downfall for the ratings. Someone above pointed out the some of the world title reigns. It is ridiculous for Edge, Orton and Triple H to be world champions that many times especially in Edge's case in such a short period of time. I feel if anyone the value of the Big Gold belt was lowered.

The belt cause the other two singles belts to be irrelevant after the brands ended. Just look as recently as two years ago nearly - Dean Ambrose held the US belt for nearly a year with hardly any feuds or defenses. While the Intercontinental title floated around from Kofi to the Miz to Cody Rhodes and whoever. It just revolved around the same ones.

The only issue I have now is there's no true identity on where the IC and US title stands in rank. We all knew the European belt was below the IC but it seems harder to establish with these two belts. Kevin Owens carrying one, Del Rio carrying the other. IC should be the role of how people looked at the big gold belt.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

It's a matter of perception, like most things in wrestling much of the time. For me, the WHC was treated with similar prestige, sometimes outright equal prestige, during much of its existence. During the runs of Triple H, Shawn Michaels, Goldberg, Kurt Angle, Edge, Undertaker and various others through late 2010, the title seemed more like a main event championship. As is expected, some reigns & champs were more memorable and stronger than others, but that's how it is at any given time with any given title.

After Taker's last run with the title in late 2010, the title changed quite a bit as the booking of it and its overall prestige was consistently no longer on par with the WWE Championship. During that time, it began its transformation into what I personally saw as the new, unofficial, upper mid-card title. It certainly got better treatment than the IC and US titles at the time, though not what it did during the first 7 years or so of its existence.

Personally, I don't feel the need for the title to be resurrected. For years, numerous fans bitched about how having two World Championships depreciated the values of a main event title and it'd be no different a second time around. I don't see how it'll improve ratings because ultimately it's just a belt. It's always been about interesting booking and keeping fans invested in the wrestlers who're involved in the main event picture; the problem is that neither one is really happening right now and I don't see how introducing another title is going to magically breathe new life into WWE's numbers.

 

[Hem]

Heres what I think, the US title should be retired. The IC should be retired and then the WHC should be brought back. Initiate the brand split and truly divide the roster. They say there is no depth in the roster but the roster is full of immense talent who just need a chance to shine. Cena gets Raw, Reigns get SD. Owens as RAWs top heel and Rusev or Sheamus as SDs top heels. They need a definite roster if they split the roster.

 

[LBGetBack]

Having two world titles beyond the Alliance angle was so stupid. It made sense at that time since WCW was bought by WWF. It should've been over after Jericho won them both on the same night. They should've made a new belt right then and there, and went back to one champion. That they went with 2 "world champions" for over a decade is mind blowing. So dumb.

 

[N!CKALAS CAGE]

The World title should never be brought back unless there is another brand split. The WWE world heavyweight title and two midcard titles work at the moment.

And it's a myth that the World title was always treated as the number two title. During the brand split, despite Smackdown being a much better show the first two years, Raw was still viewed as the A-show, therefore whichever world title was featured on Raw was usually seen as the more important title.

From 2003-2011, the WWE title was featured in 5 Wrestlemania main events, and the World title was featured in 3, even though there were 6 Raw WM main events and only 2 Smackdown WM main events in that time period. 2010 was a split brand main event with Taker vs HBK, but the Raw championship match (Cena vs Batista for the WWE was second to last).

It wasn't until around 2011 when the brand split pretty much ended and the world title was officially the number two belt.

 

[whoopin' ass]

It needed to go. You can't have 2 top titles in the company and really, whatever title was on the same show that Cena was on was the top title. You mentioned how it was an upper midcard title - why can't the IC or US title be that title? That's part of the problem with wwe - they combined the 2 top titles but the midcard ones are still not important. wwe should be pushing the US for the lower midcard, IC for the upper midcard(and there would be a handful of guys who float back and forth) and then the the WWE World title for the main eventers. Getting rid of one title was a good start but they didn't really go any further like they should have.