Lets Unify the WWE title and WHC title

[The Mighty Tiger]

It seems to me that most of you guys that are opposed to this idea is just to damn use to how things are, or you guys could be in denial about who really is a main event player in WWE. There's only 9 true Main Eventers in WWE right now & two of them HHH/Undertaker or only part time players now & they more than likely wont be holding the titles anymore cause there's no point for them two anymore. So that makes 7 Main Eventers which means there is not enough talent to accommodate for two belts so IMO the belts need to be put back togather.

If there is only one belt then only the most talented guys would get pushed two the main event so that way we wont have so many ppl getting pushed before there ready. Guys would have more time to build themselves up in the midcard. If they still had a butt load of talent then I would disagree w/the idea of bringing both belts together, but in the current state of the company besides for the two title main titles every other belt seems meaningless. On top of that they make it so obvious that what ever belt is on Raw is the more important title. So whats the point of being champ on smackdown when you are displayed in the company as the 2nd champ on the 2nd rated show. If you are going to be 2nd to the Raw champ then you may as well be a mid card champ cause thats how WWE treats whatever belt is on smackdown most times, while the midcard & Tag belts are an afterthought. There use to be a time when no matter what championship the wrestler had he was important to a degree of course w/the world title being the most important, now they have two belts w/only enough superstars for one & you got guys that are not ready getting World Title reigns. Then when they company realize oh we fucked up he is not ready they drop the belt off that guy & give it back to a real Main Eventer which means the real top guys are getting more title reigns then what they should.

 

[iwinulose]

why unify the 2 titles? they have 2 shows, need 2 major titles. else have 1 jumbo sized show, and one major title. see what im getting at? to unify the wwe and WHC championship belts would be stupid and pointless. plus then we get 2 feuds and better matches.

 

[Azane]

Prestige of the title isn't gone from there being 2. Its from the fact that people like Edge or Cena are upto like 15 title reigns from the hot potato business.
Unifying them would just make us even more angry that our random superstar hasn't had the title for 5 minutes.

 

[dansaun77]

They should have a WWE Heavyweight Championship
WWE Intercontinental Championship
WWE TV Championshiop
WWE Tag Team Championship
WWE Womens title.

The TV to be defended on Raw or Smackdown every week, and this is the belt you put on your WORKERS, Bryan, Punk, Sin Cara, Mysterio. Whatever belt that is on, you stick the IC Title on the other show. The World title is on both shows, as are the tag and womens title. Champions should be made to look a big deal again

 

[CaptainZaltan]

Trying to build too many guys up at once usually means that all of them suffer. However, if the roster was combined again, it would actually mean something for someone like Sheamus to hold the Undisputed Championship. His reigns as WWE Champ are all but a distant memory now, and so is his push. A shame, as I feel he could be one of the top babyfaces in the company.

I agree that it's entirely a matter of opinion. But on this point, you could also attribute this to Sheamus just not being main event material yet. In a company with two champions, he still had to be demoted back to the midcard to make room for more over wrestlers like Orton. And there's no way of saying that the exact same thing wouldn't have happened with only one main event title. After all, Chris Jericho held arguably the most prestigious title in the history of wrestling, having won it by defeating the two most dominant wrestlers of the era in one night, and went on to defend that title at Wrestlemania. Yet, he was right back in the mid-card for years following. The supposed prestige of being the top guy did little for him, and it took years for him to claw his way back to the top. And Jericho is, and was, far more talented than Sheamus.

Most of the arguments on here in favor of reuniting the titles are based on two ideas: 1. Having two titles devalues both, and 2. Having two titles has resulted in wrestlers being pushed to the main event before they are ready.

The first is completely subjective; there's no evidence to suggest that having two champions has in any way hurt the WWE, or made it's champions less marketable. Correct me if I'm wrong, but neither John Cena nor Randy Orton have ever held an undisputed championship, yet are still arguably the most over and marketable wrestlers in the company. And they are only two representatives of a wave of main event talent that the WWE has managed to create in a fraction of the time it would have previously taken to do so. John Cena, Randy Orton, Rey Mysterio, CM Punk, Edge, JBL, Eddie Guerrero, Chris Benoit, Brock Lesnar, (and Jericho, if you consider that his previous undisputed title win had been all but forgotten) etc, all became champions during this period; few of whom have had an issue with credibility. And as for the storyline logic of having two titles, it really depends on how you look at it: If you think of the WWE as a pseudo athletic competition, than having two titles doesn't make much sense (but, as I said, neither would having midcard titles). If you recognize that RAW and Smackdown are supposed to be two separate and competing shows operating under a parent company (the WWE), than each having it's own title makes sense.

As for the second argument, that having two titles has resulted in wrestlers being pushed to the main event before they are ready? Well, rushing wrestlers to the main event is just the way the game is played nowadays. Compared to the decade + that wrestlers like Guerrero, Jericho and Benoit competed before reaching the top, wrestlers like Goldberg, Orton, Cena, Batista, Lesnar, and many others became world champions relatively quickly. And for the most part, that formula has worked. And it's that same formula that's led to the occasional failures, like Swagger and Sheamus. Personally, I'd prefer all wrestlers spend more time in the midcard before reaching ANY main event title. And there's no reason why that can't happen despite the presence of two belts. Still, given the success/failure ratio of the talent who have been elevated to a main event championship quickly, I doubt the WWE would bother doing so even with only one title.

 

[Soundwave]

Unifying the titles would lead to waaaaay too many triple threat matches. You would be stuck with having a #1 contender from Smackdown and one from Raw. It would just lead to a jumbled mess.

 

[GameOver]

Get over it, as much as it sucks, it's not gonna happen regardless.
They aren't going to merge the brands so they need 2 world champs.

If anything from all accounts they are gonna have more PPV's in other words 1 PPV per brand again so the need for the extra champ is even more prevalent.

What they need to do is utilise the seperate titles better. They have more then enough talent and air time, but they chose to rehash RAW stuff on Smackdown just using different characters and vice versa.

 

[UrbanDynasty]

Unifying the titles would lead to waaaaay too many triple threat matches. You would be stuck with having a #1 contender from Smackdown and one from Raw. It would just lead to a jumbled mess.

Not necessarily. What seems to me would be the best idea would be them having a smackdown number 1 contender and then a raw after that one has had their shot, a triple threat match would be nice to see once and a white but i have to agree it would get stale to see at every ppv.

 

[Nate DaMac]

I started trying to reply to this thread earlier but unfortunately my head exploded. Seems to happen a lot when I'm on here, actually. I should get that checked out.

Look, there has never been a company that has the amount of stars on their roster as the WWE has now. If you really were to unify these titles, the product would become as stale as it has ever been. Think about it, if they combine them then you will certainly have to deal with much shorter reigns. Is there any way that The Miz would have held onto this championship this long if everyone in the company was gunning for that title as opposed to just the Raw brand? Would there be any way that Miz would be wrestling for the World Title at Wrestlemania if there was only one title?

Frankly, the answer is no. All of these new guys that have been getting legit shots and reigns with the title would certainly not be getting them now as it would be too risky of a move. When you have 2 titles, you can take a chance on Miz being champion because Edge is holding down the fort with the other title and he is certainly a credible champion. Luckily Miz's reign hasn't been a bust for them but if not for his hard work and creative putting everything that they have behind him, it could have been a disaster. Luckily, they still would have had Edge to hold a world title match at Mania to save face, though I doubt it would be Del Rio getting the shot.

Think about this as well, I know that so many people want to see the likes of Christian and John Morrison get their hands on the World Championship, but can you honestly sit here and tell me that either would have the slightest chance in hell if there were only one title? It's not even possible. There are way too many other proven draws and main event talent to sit by the wayside and just take a huge risk on an unproven talent.

So for the good of the company, there is absolutely no reason to unify the championships. They need every tool they can to build stars for the new generation and taking one away would only hurt it.

 

[tripleddd]

Its been really interesting reading the various replies and comments !!!!
There isn't an arguement that convinces me of not unifying the belts. Yes I get the two different brands bit but I don't look at it as 2 rival companies ( it simply can't be as you keep getting some wrestlers popping up on Raw from Smackdown and vice versa) two different shows - yes absolutely. But does that mean we need 2 main event belts - No. The fact is having 2 main titles devalues the belt and the wrestlers acheivement, for instance Edge has won more titles than say the Undertaker does that mean hes truly better. and we dont need to go down the road of Undertaker doesn't need it etc etc.

I don't see the problem of having the no 1 contender on Raw vs the no 1 contender on smackdown - thats a ppv match in itself . Imagine survivor series 10 man tag team 5 from raw 5 from smackdown - winner becomes no 1 contender. I dont see the problem of a triple threat match . and lets be honest whoevers no 1 contender will turn up on which show the champ is and vice versa.
finally I think alot of the feuds have been rushed , this has meant that some wrestlers have won the title far too quickly , or weve seen the same match over and over again or weve seen the title change hands over and over again.
For instance lets say Edge wins his match at wrestlemania and then on raw challenges The Miz or Cena to find out who is the ultimate champion title vs title 4 ever. So on the next ppv you have that match and lets say Edge wins again at the same time you could have your money in the bank ladder match, and lets say Christian wins that . Edge vs Chritian for the undisputed wwe championship - it would blow us away !!!! Because it would mean something because there is a story because its been teased out

 

[Rinstone]

say this one champion is fueding with a Raw superstar. What does he do on Smackdown? He can't have 2 fueds going at once.
As long as there are 2 shows there will be 2 titles.
If the money ever stops roling in and WWE has to cut wrestlers down and have only one roster then you may see the 2 shows become one but you are only thinking of TV.
With 2 brands you have 2 touring groups. 2 tours generating 2 sources of revenue, 2 different networks paying for content, 2 champions needed to carry these 2 different brandsof the company.

Don't wish for 1 champion, that would equal 1 brand, which would equal less fans/wretlers out there.

 

[DMac84]

I agree with the OP. You need to unify the titles.

Having 2 "Champions" make them mean nothing. You have a Raw champion and a Smackdown champion. No one watches Smackdown anyway so its useless.

Its like another poster said... its like there is no superbowl or no world series... Just a AFC and NFC Champion... or American league / Nation League champion... but no true 1 champion.

I think its time to Unify the titles and make them mean more...

but with that, you need to unify the rosters too (which they should have never did in the first place). Having 2 separate shows, 2 separate champs, 2 seperate rosters... might as well just be 2 separate companies.

 

[3/4 Facelock]

Unifying the titles would not make them mean more or less. I don't even know what people mean by "make it mean more". Why? Because it's that much "harder" to get? That is a serious poorly thought-out bullshit sandwich.

No, what would happen with a unification would be a Merry-Go-Round of champions. The belt changing hands every other week because of how much talent there is on the roster.

THAT. IS. EXACTLY. WHAT. WOULD. HAPPEN. And you know it would too. It would be a revolving door and the talent would suffer because of it. Remember the 80s with Hogan holding on to the belt forever and ever? With the way the IWC is on this forum, you would all erupt with anger if a champion held on to the belt for longer than a month beacuse (insert wrestler here) is more deserving.

It is a foolish idea. One that would ONLY work if the WWE wiped out %50 of the locker room. That and only then is when you will get your wish for a unification.

Frankly, the idea of unification is bad and it's implementation would send the WWE back 15 years, and YES, that is a bad thing.

 

[FSWWE]

Alicia Fox, David Heart Smith, David Otunga, Gold Dust, Husky Harris, the USOs, Mark Henry, Michael McGillicutty, Michael Tarver, Primo, R-Truth, Skip Sheffield, Tamina, Ted DiBiase, The Great Khali, Tyson Kidd, Vladimir Kozlov, William Regal, Yoshi Tatsu, Zack Ryder, Chavo Guerrero, Chris MAsters, Curt Hawkins, Hornswoggle, JTG, Rosa Mendes, Trent Barreta.

Wow you just gave examples of people that arent in any sort of way to get a championship of any kind!!
So puting this jobbers
(apart of Skip Sheffield and Otunga that for me have a lot of potential) in the unemployment line, is better for the idea of having one major tittle in WWE??

Just a Question: Are you fucking insane?

Lets imagine, a PPV, one match that we always cares (despite the Jerry Lawler vs Miz -.-) its for the World Champions, that is for good, we all want to see the result of this match, we all want to see WHC and WWE championship than Randy Orton vs CM Punk, the championships are symbolic, they need to have one for each brand, even if they were on the same brand, it was GOOD!!, two guys the front runners, we dont know who is better than who!! Is just fucking insane when we finally see them clash, if you dont believe, go see Batista vs Cena at SummerSlam, i dont even remember the seeing the crowd more noisier than that!!

Another shitty idea that everybody is talking, is unifying the brands!!

WWE is the biggest pro-wrestling company of the WORLD, its not of USA, its from all the world!!

And guess what, is the only one, the only that have brand shows!!! (pure coincidence? guess not)
This guys want to transform WWE into TNA or ROH!! That things is fucking awfull compared to WWE!!!

And also, who from the IWC thinks that Barret will be World Champion at least in 2012? I Do!!

Do I want?? Of course I do!!
Morrison lover boys, do you think that JoMo deserves a WWE Championship reign?
I can answer for you and from 85% the IWC, YES HE DOES!!

Well, if WE HAVE the:

WWE World Champion​

Do you really think that any of those guys would own it?? If you do, you are crazy, not in a million years!!

What about Cena, Orton, Kane, Edge, Cm Punk, Big Show, Triple H, Rey Mysterio, Undertaker??
i dont know if you can count but for me this look like 9 Big Main Eventers Superstars that deserve more, because they are more marketable and wwe profits more with them then with newcomers and all alone can make a 1.30h show!!!!

I'm really enjoying the WWE right now!!!

Old Schoolers (When WWE wasnt two brands) where are you???
Come to that post, and give us your idea!!

WWE is better now or worst???
Two tittles give you more pleasure to really care about WWE or not???

The guys that agree with that thing go see TNA (that even SD! alone is better), and leave WWE alone!!


P.S
For people that dont see SmackDown, and only see RAW, please dont buy the PPV's, because what you want to see is just 60% of the PPV Matches!!
And of course you say that WWE is a shitt, well guess what WWE isnt only abou RAW!, and A LOT, but A LOT of people that SEE SMACKDOWN can say that they are really elevating the show and that sometimes is better then RAW from my point of view!!
Hey John Cena/ The Rock/ Undertaker/ JoMo came from SmackDown, so you just knew about their on RAW?? Please DIE!!


Edit: (dont count the Road to Wrestlemania, cause of course RAW as all the come backs)

 

[deforty]

NOO and Hell to the NO.

Why is my question and do you want to see Cena Monday and Friday? This is what hurt WCW was having the same people on Nitro and Thunder, it's the same as the lets combine the two brands. WCW had Hogan and the NWO on both shows until no one could take it anymore. If they would have left them off of Thunder I think we might be having a different topic, besides the crappy writing that took place at the end.

They need to keep the brand's separate and keep their own champions, thus allowing more rest for each brands superstars so as not to get injured. If we had Cena/Orton on every show within one month there would be 500 threads started about why do we need to see them so much, plus at the workrate that they would be required to do it might shorten their careers and add to the already growing list of injuries that each has already had.


They need to have a competition between each brand like Cena or Miz (whomever wins at WM) and Edge or Del Rio (same as before) have a best of 7 matches with the same guy each week or every other week, or every three weeks to drag out the story. For example, cena, miz, edge, or Del Rio could face lets say DBD for the first round. Have them both win or lose, this allows people who really are not being used get used and get a small rub from a couple of established guys. Have this go on for a while let them both have the same amount of wins or losses it doesn't matter. Then a final showdown at one of the ppv's. The same can be done with the US/IC title. Keep the respective challenges on each show and have raws champs do a pre filmed promo along with the smackdown champ doing the same that way we are not seeing them to much on each show.

This would get more people involved and still allow for developing story arcs within each brand. They also need to have the Tag-team title defended more on each show. They could have them defended every other week one on one show the other on the other, but get this with real teams not rag tag random people put together i.e. hart dynasty, uso's, bring back cryme tyme, E&C and any team they have at FCW and build them up, the ones from FCW have Vickie or Cole as their manager like a heenan or Mr. Fuji. Same with the diva's belt not this garbage with whatever show has won it have 20 matches with the same dumb diva's over and over and over again.


Unifying the titles will make them cut more guys and have less story arcs to follow. Hell i wouldn't mind them bringing back the Hardcore title in some capacity. They can bring the prestige back to the belts by making them all more important with good simple stories and pushes for the people. We don't need all the stuff from the AE to make it compelling, just a simple flow and story to help keep it moving yet while intriguing. I mean I find the cole/Lawler stuff more intriguing than almost anything else right now just because Cole would be a perfect manager like a Heenan or Mr. Fuji who can make you so mad that you want to hit him, plus its nice that SCSA is the guest ref which will help keep cole a little more honest, but not enough that he wont get help from someone. I mean I want Lawler to hit him so bad sometimes.

 

[tripleddd]

Alot of you guys are over simplyfying it making it harder than it is.
1. One wwe champion does not mean its going to be Cena Monday and Cena Friday - the champion only needs to do the one main show a week - sure he can appear on video on the other mmmmmmmmm a bit like The Rock is doing at the moment. and what is wrong with the champion alternating between the two...... errr none. Lets be honest having only one title gives cena the chance to be even more over with the fans if he spent a year being screwed out of the title or no 1 spot.
2. Having both wwe and whc champions has de valued both the us and ic title - the best thing thats happened recently is Sheamus holds the us title belt and should hold it for at least 6 months this builds some momentum for this character and will put him firmly in the main title hunt. Having him be a double wwe champion at this stage of his career was a joke. The WWE have forgotten how to build a character - i give you austin, The Rock, Angle, Benoit , Eddie as examples- they all won either or both of these titles before becomming wwe or whc champions. Look at the great matches for the ic title Benoit vs Angle - you can see Morrison Vs Bryan etc in the same mould
3. Apart from the obvious - is there enough talent - no - why because the characters haven't been built properly.
4. Would the one title get passed around like nobodys business - no - it doesnt need to - in fact having 2 titles has encouraged this - as their have been champions forced into the limelight far too early
5. Should the current main eventers like Big Show, Undertaker, Kane etc get one more shot, at the one title - yes of course most of them have got one more title in them.
6. We must cast our mind back a LITTLE and remember the fantastic matches that there were for the No 1 contender - many of these matches were on ppv - never dismiss the past as it influences our future - wwe included
7. The tag team titles would be improved by default - why because you would find that some main eventers would fall into this division for a small period of time and this would give a cross over for the brands which quite honestly is needed.
8. The brands are still the brands no1 contender on raw fights the no1 contender on smackdown simple to challenge the wwe champion - champion looses he stays in the loosing brand.
9. I could understand this brand business properly if the wwe continued with ECW as its a different name - we all know we are not stupid that raw and smackdown are both wwe .
10 bring back the hard core or create a wwe television title - yeah why not.
11. it would improve Smackdown we all know smackdown is classed as the second show if a few more main eventers were to appear it would raise smackdowns profile - a good thing - its no good saying the better wrestling is there without the personalitys
12 these are just a few reasons why i think to unify the title and remember who was the first undisputed champion Y2J defeating SCSA and THE ROCK in one night - the likes of Christian are ready for it - can you imagine christian defeating Edge for the wwe title - it would bring the house down.
Finally guys lets not be abusive to each other lets respect each others opinions ok

 

[DeadmanFan]

2. Having both wwe and whc champions has de valued both the us and ic title - the best thing thats happened recently is Sheamus holds the us title belt and should hold it for at least 6 months this builds some momentum for this character and will put him firmly in the main title hunt. Having him be a double wwe champion at this stage of his career was a joke. The WWE have forgotten how to build a character - i give you austin, The Rock, Angle, Benoit , Eddie as examples- they all won either or both of these titles before becomming wwe or whc champions. Look at the great matches for the ic title Benoit vs Angle - you can see Morrison Vs Bryan etc in the same mould

4. Would the one title get passed around like nobodys business - no - it doesnt need to - in fact having 2 titles has encouraged this - as their have been champions forced into the limelight far too early

This and this. These two are why I think there should only be one world title. Because the other belts are so worthless the WWE has had to put guys that they think might be good main eventers in the future into the world title scene or make them world champions themselves. Sheamus, Swagger, Ziggler, none of these guys were legit world champions, yet because the mid-card titles are so worthless there was no real stepping stone. Two world titles just ensures that one or the other is going to get passed around like a $10 ****e.

Have there be one world title, make there be big time feuds between the main eventers on both brands (if it gets continued) to decide the number one contender, or how about have them form tag teams and win the tag belts to try and gain leverage? Make the IC and US titles the main belts on either brand and give them some value. A heel champion could go on both brands and try and screw faces on both.

 

[deforty]

Alot of you guys are over simplyfying it making it harder than it is.
1. One wwe champion does not mean its going to be Cena Monday and Cena Friday - the champion only needs to do the one main show a week - sure he can appear on video on the other mmmmmmmmm a bit like The Rock is doing at the moment. and what is wrong with the champion alternating between the two...... errr none. Lets be honest having only one title gives cena the chance to be even more over with the fans if he spent a year being screwed out of the title or no 1 spot.

2. Having both wwe and whc champions has de valued both the us and ic title - the best thing thats happened recently is Sheamus holds the us title belt and should hold it for at least 6 months this builds some momentum for this character and will put him firmly in the main title hunt. Having him be a double wwe champion at this stage of his career was a joke. The WWE have forgotten how to build a character - i give you austin, The Rock, Angle, Benoit , Eddie as examples- they all won either or both of these titles before becomming wwe or whc champions. Look at the great matches for the ic title Benoit vs Angle - you can see Morrison Vs Bryan etc in the same mould

4. Would the one title get passed around like nobodys business - no - it doesnt need to - in fact having 2 titles has encouraged this - as their have been champions forced into the limelight far too early[/QUOTE

Sure is does Look at Nitro/Thunder and the very beginning of Raw/Smackdown. The biggest stars where on every show unless they were injured. Did we like it sure we did for awhile, we started to tune out when Hogan/NWO was on every show, but we didn't mind Rock and SCSA on both shows because they were fresh and young so it was fine. The majority of people get enough Cena on Raw following the history He would be on both shows and have a 5 year title reign ala Hogan with one belt or it will go the other way. We have two brands of heavyweight title contenders so the belt will change hands every two weeks devaluing the belts even more. I can also see having the brands split taken away it going the way of TNA with much of the talent being forgotten about and put on the shelf for months then all of the sudden they reappear and get the shit beat out of them by someone else they just acquired.

What championship did the Miz hold before winning the spinner belt? What championship did Cena hold before winning the Hvywt Championship. Yes there are great matches that can be made without having that belt we could still have Morrison vs Bryan without the belt and it would still be good. The problem is that they put to much focus on one division than the others. We get almost 1 hr to the heavyweights versus 1 hour for everyone else. Sometimes its fine but why not put equal times for each to allow the process to work and flow better.

As i mentioned above it could go two ways with this. 1. Cena will hold the belt for 5 years like hogan, samartino and the likes did before him. 2. the title will change hands every two weeks because of all the people in the hunt for the belt now. It also creates staleness and no one getting the push up also. No do I mind that the Tag and Diva belts were combined no because this is the weak link in WWE right now. No one cares about the diva's we all want Kong but she is not on tv yet until then no one cares about the diva's (on a side note i can not wait for kong to slap the attitude out of Maryse). We all want real tag teams and all we get is Sanlov, jerishow, showmiz, we want some good teams fighting for the belts like Hart foundation, Demolition, LOD, Dudleys, E&C..... The only good thing with the 80's was they had a real focus on tag matches and teams. This is what i want to see.


They can keep it interesting with good stories and better follow up. I fear the 80's in the fact that we have one champion for way to long like years and bury everyone that comes his way.

 

[Machianzo]

This and this. These two are why I think there should only be one world title. Because the other belts are so worthless the WWE has had to put guys that they think might be good main eventers in the future into the world title scene or make them world champions themselves. Sheamus, Swagger, Ziggler, none of these guys were legit world champions, yet because the mid-card titles are so worthless there was no real stepping stone. Two world titles just ensures that one or the other is going to get passed around like a $10 ****e.

Have there be one world title, make there be big time feuds between the main eventers on both brands (if it gets continued) to decide the number one contender, or how about have them form tag teams and win the tag belts to try and gain leverage? Make the IC and US titles the main belts on either brand and give them some value. A heel champion could go on both brands and try and screw faces on both.

Half of the belts job is to promote young up a commers (and get people to buy their merch.) I also hardly see how you can be a good world champion without a belt.

Now upwards on onwards with my argument. Zigger and Swagger did use mid card titles are stepping stones with Ziggler's IC reign and Swagger's ECW. Zigger would have made a great world champion. The thing is, they decided to screw him over. Now, if we had one belt, would that have helped? Hell no! It would make up and commers lives and careers even more difficult! The very reason Ziggler got such a short reign is becuase the E' is ushring Del Rio in. With even more people, things would become so much tighter around the belt.

As for not having it passed around so much, that didn't work so well the last time WWE tried it...I remember it getting pased around more than the championships do now, and thats with money in the bank. Two belts simply allow more vibrancy in the compnay, more chances for young tallent to prove themself, more exciting matches to be held.

As for the tag belts, that'd be trying to cure the disease by injecting what killed the tag division in the first place. A lack of proper tag teams. I remember when I was helluva pissed becuase E&C lost the titles to The Rock and Undertaker back in the day. In my opinion, the tag belts need to be strictly for wrestler who actually focus on tag wrestling, not just another mid card title to throw random main eventers/mid carders at when they have nothing else to do.

It also means for WWE, all their eggs are never in one basket. This too has its own set of pros and cons, but I feel the pros outweight any cons. The biggest pro for this is much the reason why I don't feel the brands should be united, in that if I don't like one champion, I don't have to watch him, I can just wait a couple of days. I don't want to watch another Cena title reign (and you're kidding yourself if with one title you don't think Cena would have a lot of the possesion) fine, I'll watch SD!

That brings me to another point, I'll round off my post becuase its starting to wonder a little. The WWE has united at titles at the times it could unite the titles. At time where they had more than one guy who could potentialy be the face of the company, and could be the champion or foil for said undisputed championship. Lesnar/Angle/Guerrero, Jericho/Rock/Austin/Taker. Right now? Cena and...Orton?. Since your post seems so heavily built against new guys holding this undisputed championship (see bolded) what is WWE supposed to do with so much of the young tallent that is already struggling? They're supposed to be in a youth movement, and there are already people whining about that. If its just left to WWE's current main eventers (which consist of Cena, Orton, Edge and Punk), with Cena who is unable to to turn heel, things would get pretty dull, pretty fast.

 

[FSWWE]

Hey better idea, why dont end up with the tittles???
They have no worth!!

I much prefer to see a random fight!!! Morrison and Bryan yupy!!

And the storyline: Wow so you think you are a better wrestler than me?? Lets do it!!

YEEEEEEEEY, we are going to see this EACH AND EVERY SINGLE TIME!!!
You people are dumb -.-'


Look at ECW, look at Superstars show!!

One with a crapy world tittle, and the other with another tittle!!
So what happened with both??

They were CANCELED!!! But made us happy right??

Shut Up!! You are being DUMBS!! DONKEYS!!! i'm sorry but you are being so STUPID!!!!

If you were associated with WWE, and your goal was to get profit!!
You would rather have two MAIN SHOWS, because i dont know if you saw the last pool, but people only vote for RAW, because they are fucking nostalgic and love retired wrestlers!!!

You can ask to every single one WWE Superstar what they prefer??
to have stupid feuds, in 5 years with a lot of guys for reasons sistematically LOOKED ALIKE and after that fight for the only tittle that for sure WE WOULDNT WANT HIM TO HAVE!!!

OR

Being put in ONE BRAND, WITH A MAJOR GOAL AT THIS BRAND, WINNING THE TITTLE!!

With that they only need one or two FEUDS to get it over with the fans, and make him Champion, doesnt worth the tittle down, with Miz, im sure that Daniel Bryan is never going to win the WWE Championship from him, and neither JoMo!! The true main eventers are the only ones who CAN!!

Miz wasnt a mid-card when he wins the tittle, YOU PEOPLE dont pay attention and think that know more than the Creative Team, but well he won
Tag Team Tittles, United States Championship, he was the leader of RAW Team, he even WON the money in the bank, he defeated Randy Orton 2 times for the WWE Champion!!

Well, if Guerrero have done that in his prime, you would consider him a GOD!!

Go suck on your mommy tits, because the old WWE is never going to be back!!
If you dont like it, YOU HAVE A LOT of other companys, and i bet my asshole that WWE isnt going to unite the tittles in the next 5 years, and if he does, will be for one guy only, and after that have some brand lover that takes one tittle away from him to give prestige back to the brand!!


YOU GUYS WANT TO END UP WITH THE WWE!!!
DO A THREAD

LETS END THE WWE!!!
DO A WFD is better WRESTLING FOR DUMBS!!

 

[tripleddd]

You see a good match doesn't have to have a title in it does it - we all know that the match we are all going to watch at wrestlemania will be Undertaker vs Triple H and even the last 2 years before that HBK vs Undertaker - so actually on the grandest stage of them all certainly for the last 3 years - the title hasn't been invovled and lets be honest lets look at the 2 title matches this year Cena vs The Miz was going no where until The rock got invovled and the whc match there certainly is a good chance it will become a triple threat match (which I beleive someone earlier posted its always going to be triple threat with one title) oops wrong on that one buddy.
My point being that there aren't enough main eventers, the titles been passed around to every Tom Dick and Harry - as a shock value bypassing the ic , us and tag titles (ok The Miz apart).
So my friend above me on this post with all your dumb dumb donkeys and everything else - you think about it - you may like your 2 titles because you don't like one champion and like the other - you like smackdown but you dont like Raw - you would still watch it.
And money - who sells the most merchandise Cena and Mysterio - are either of them champions - err no
And finally feuds - what are you on about feuds if written properly develop over weeks, months and sometimes years and no its not a case of im better than you.

 

[Serious Mozzarella]

This thread may have been posted before and if it has I apologise but I think that the wwe needs to unify the WWE title and the WHC title once and for all.We as fans really only need one undisputed champion.
The benefits are quite simple the No 1 contenders spot becomes more competitive. The US and IC titles become more prominent. The undisputed title will have more kudos. We as fans are always left wondering what if aren't we ?

Uh. No.

There are two different shows with two different sets of wrestlers. If we unified the WHC and the WWE title, we'd have a show with a completely non-existent title scene, and that would be stupid.

Perhaps this was one of those thoughts you didn't think through enough.

The two main titles are perfect the way they are.

 

[game3524]

Uh. No.

There are two different shows with two different sets of wrestlers. If we unified the WHC and the WWE title, we'd have a show with a completely non-existent title scene, and that would be stupid.

Perhaps this was one of those thoughts you didn't think through enough.

The two main titles are perfect the way they are.

Some of you guys are showing your youth or your memory is quite short. The World Champion would appear on both shows like he did early in the brand split.

Also, having one World champion helps both shows, especially Smackdown as you can setup big ratings matches on Friday. For example you can have Cena vs Punk, and winner faces Edge on Smackdown. I would love to see them do again, because it freshen up the whole main event scene and opens the doors for more feuds.

 

[Serious Mozzarella]

Some of you guys are showing your youth or your memory is quite short. The World Champion would appear on both shows like he did early in the brand split.

Also, having one World champion helps both shows, especially Smackdown as you can setup big ratings matches on Friday. For example you can have Cena vs Punk, and winner faces Edge on Smackdown.

Or maybe it was a terrible idea considering the two shows don't follow each other around the country. It's quite hard having to show up on Raw on Monday then fly across the country for a Tuesday night taping.

My age has nothing to do with the ability to use my brain.

I would love to see them do again, because it freshen up the whole main event scene and opens the doors for more feuds.

How would one single title scene be more fresh than two separate title scenes?

 

[game3524]

Or maybe it was a terrible idea considering the two shows don't follow each other around the country. It's quite hard having to show up on Raw on Monday then fly across the country for a Tuesday night taping.

My age has nothing to do with the ability to use my brain.



How would one single title scene be more fresh than two separate title scenes?

The Champion didn't not have to show up every show, and besides Taker made every show when he was the champ in 2002, and guys today show up often on both shows as it is.

The main event roster is much deeper with one title, you get far more combination of matches, two titles worked well when they had a far deeper roster. But they don't these days, so they have to recycle the same match ups over and over again.