One WWE Title Belt? Or Back To 2 Titles?

[closet_fan]

I've always found it odd that when Orton beat Cena for the titles, that the WWE never got rid of the BIG GOLD belt. I was sure once the titles were united, they would forgo the old BIG BELT and go with the newly-made "ROCK" belt since the championships were united. Yet, here we are with Bryan still carrying 2 belts.

So I ask:

Will there be a new championship belt, much like the old unified title?

or

Will there be a storyline where we get back 2 separate championships?

 

[jrush1978]

You can't say never in wrestling, easily there could be 2 championship belts at some point in time but hopefully no time soon. Also I must be the 1 person who digs the 2 bels, like when Ultimo Dragon showed up in WCW back in the day with the 8 belts or whatever it was, I think it looks impressive. I still assume when the novelty wears off of it being the unified championship they will be down to 1 championship belt but i'll be sad to see the big gold belt go for good.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

While it's possible they could go back to having two separate championships, I don't see it happening. Having two separate World Championships was the last reminder of the WWE brand split and with the brand split having been quietly ended for the better part of 3 years, there's no logical reason to have another World Championship.

When Raw & SmackDown! were essentially treated as two separate shows within the "WWE Universe", there could be logical reasons for each brand to have its own main event, mid-card, tag team and female championships. When the brand split was alive and well, there'd typically be a thread each week saying that the split needed to end and that there should only be one World Championship. Now that the split is dead and buried with only one World Championship remaining, some wanna go back to the way it was. And people wonder why WWE doesn't cater to the IWC.

As far as the title belts are concerned, I think they'll eventually only use a single title to represent the WWE World Heavyweight Championship. According to an interview Stephanie McMahon gave earlier this week, WWE intends to fully adopt the new logo by August. That's plenty of time for all the WWE championships to be created adorned with the new logo. For some of the titles, that may be the only changes while some may well be redesigned. For instance, as the official name of the WWE Title is the WWE World Heavyweight Championship, retaining the Big Logo design would look kinda cheap to me. A simpler, and probably less expensive, idea could be to merely keep the Big Gold Belt design to represent the title. The Big Gold Belt has the WWE logo and the words "World Heavyweight Wrestling Champion" engraved on it. But, seeing as how Vince wasn't the man to personally commission the creation of the Big Gold Belt design, and considering how much of a control freak Vince is, that probably won't happen. It's too bad because it's such an iconic title design.

 

[TheICChampion]

Keep the belt, re-design it, change the name. Legend's title, TV title, who-gives-a-damn title. Just do something with it or get rid of it. Better yet, why not separate them again and this time make it worth something. Give it to someone who can piss the fans off just by holding it. (No, not Del Rio, his heat is "just get the hell out of the ring and leave WWE already" heat) Sandow would've been a good bet had they not decided to unify the titles in the first place. "Be silent, please, your World Champion is about to speak! I said SILENCE! Your superior has decided to grace you with his presence and you should all be grateful!

 

[MMK]

They will go back to one title in August.

Why? Because that's when the current scratch logo will be completely phased out in favor of the new WWE logo currently being used for the network. Once they have the new logo, they'll need a new title as the current WWE title is still sporting the old scratch logo design.

My prediction: The new title will be revealed the RAW after Summerslam. It will be unveiled by Paul Heyman and presented to his client, and new WWE World Champion, Brock Lesnar.

 

[Blade]

The WWE brought in a second world title because it was in a very weird place in 2002. They had a lot of talent from the Attitude era that was sticking around, they had an influx of WCW and ECW talent, a few of whom were quite good, and they had the OVW class of 2002 ready to skyrocket to the top. The roster was huge and full of talent. That's why they had the brand split in the first place. And you can't have a brand split with just one world title.

In that sense, they needed two world titles for a while. Admittedly, the titles were unified a few years too late. But better late than never.

Either way, there won't be two world titles again, because they'll never be facing circumstances. If WWE buy TNA or ROH, and why would they, a lot of the talent would simply get released, bar one or two diamonds in the rough. There shouldn't be another world title until a company comes a long that's big enough, and has a world title with enough credibility, to genuinely challenge the WWE title. And there chances of that ever happening are very slim.

 

[Angels]

I'd say separate the belt, the WHC needs to be a belt that is not only considered important, but also a tool that can help increase the presence of other wrestlers, When you unite the belt, you have many wrestlers who were once top card now going to mid card like sheamus and alberto del rio and it just looks weird like they were demoted. Keeping the WHC and WWE championship separate would prevent that from happening I think.

 

[justinept]

They will go back to one title in August.

Why? Because that's when the current scratch logo will be completely phased out in favor of the new WWE logo currently being used for the network. Once they have the new logo, they'll need a new title as the current WWE title is still sporting the old scratch logo design.

My prediction: The new title will be revealed the RAW after Summerslam. It will be unveiled by Paul Heyman and presented to his client, and new WWE World Champion, Brock Lesnar.

I agree with all of this until the end. The likely outcome is that one new title is unveiled once the old logo is completely phased out - and that moment will likely occur around SummerSlam. Furthermore, I agree that the new belt will be unveiled for the new WWE Champion the night after SummerSlam. Where I differ is that the new champion will not be Lesnar. It will be Roman Reigns.

Don't lump me into the category of people who thinks the guy is ready at this moment - who wants him to be given the belt right now. I'm just of the mindset that 1) the current story points in that direction and 2) Brock Lesnar carrying the title through four B-level pay-per views (NOC, HIAC, Survivor Series and TLC) is NOT the way to maximize what is a contract centered around a very limited number of appearances.

The reason the story points in the direction of Reigns is because The Shield is acting as the psuedo-protectors of Daniel Bryan. Roman Reigns is the muscle behind the group, and thus, by extension, he's the muscle protecting Daniel Bryan from The Authority. The most dramatic action in this story would be for Bryan to be double-crossed by a friend...

Given that MITB is a few months away, and that Reigns is on the short-list of breakout stars, there's a good possibility that he walks out that event with the briefcase. Doing so would add a layer of distrust between Daniel Bryan and the muscle protecting him... It could also lead to a cash-in at SummerSlam once Reigns interferes to help Bryan defeat Lesnar (I'm sure that match WILL happen.) Costing Lesnar the title provides Lesnar and Reigns with a ready-made program that could culminate with Lesnar defeating Reigns for the title at The Royal Rumble. Lesnar winning the title at the Rumble works along the confines of his perceived schedule - and catapults him into the main event of WrestleMania 31, a place most of us assume he'll wind up after ending the streak this year.

------------------------------------------------------------------

All that said, the WWE should NEVER have two titles again. In fact, the WWE shouldn't even have two mid-card titles. There's simply no reason to have more than one world champion and one mid-card champion. Some argue that having just one title makes it harder for guys to get over, but I'll argue that anyone who needs a title to get over isn't worth the trouble - you get over, and then you get a belt; not the other way around!

Furthermore, the existence of multiple titles at each level hasn't worked in more than five years. The existence of the WHC made the IC and US belts completely worthless because any new talent with any potential bypassed the mid-card and was hot-shot to the WWE/WHC title picture. As a result, the mid-card belts were always held by guys who the WWE didn't know what to do with ... and the belts were made completely worthless because the writers didn't come up with anything for those champs after giving them the strap.

You want a solution to the "problem" of not having TWO world champions? Get rid of the US Title and place a higher emphasis on booking the IC belt. This tournament is a damn good step in doing just that. It adds value to the belt because, for the first time in years, actual-established superstars are vying for a shot at it. I remember a few years ago when Cody Rhodes held the IC Title and feuded with Randy Orton - they wrestled a series of matches, none of which saw the IC belt defended. The same thing happened last summer between Punk and Axel. What's it say about a belt when the top stars are feuding with the champions and never once care to ask the champ to put the belt on the line?! Seeing former champs like Sheamus, Del Rio, Henry and RVD - along with a guy like Cesaro, who we're pretty certain will be a world champ sooner than later - compete for a shot at Big E's belt is a welcome sign.

If the WWE continues that build, then you won't notice the lack of a second world title. The mid-card belt will simply fill the void like it used to.

 

[MC_Live]

They're still going on the novelty of a unified championship. Eventually, they're going down to one belt. And we won't be seeing anymore of the Big Gold Belt. Which is sad, because it's probably my favorite belt, ever. But I don't think they'll get rid of the WWE Championship so quickly. Yeah, they're going to use the new logo, but I'm not sure if they want to get rid of the brand new belt so fast. Only time will tell.

 

[Sexcellence of Sexecution]

Never again do I want to see two separate World Championships in the WWE. The brand split was terrible and I'm glad it's over. Having two "World" Titles doesn't help to push new stars, all it does is dilute the quality of World Champions, making it seem like less of an accomplishment. Beyond that, it's weird and confusing to new viewers who don't understand the point of there being one guy called the WWE Champion and another guy called the World Heavyweight Champion, especially when the brand split isn't enforced at all.

As for the current two belts thing, it will eventually be phased out and one new title will be created. With the WWE updating their logo, the current WWE Title belt design won't make sense anyways. It would be cool if they went back to the eagle belt design or the original undisputed title design, but it will likely be something new which I'm also fine with. Maybe it will be an amalgam of the current WWE Title belt and the Big Gold Belt. I hope they at lest keep some elements of the Big Gold Belt in the new title.

 

[rbv13]

While reading through this thread an idea popped into my head. Not saying I would want to see this happen but could be a possibility. One man walking around with two world titles and eventually one man walking around with the US and IC titles = the ultimate unification match. Just a crazy thought.

 

[whoopin' ass]

Because of how they run things now, I don't see the splitting the titles but I didn't think they would do that with Lesnar/HHH either so never say never. My guess is they will eventually get rid of the Big Gold Belt. If I remember right, Orton did come out a couple times with just the wwe title after they were combined so I think that was always the plan, they just didn't follow through(wwe now follow through? Never happens). I think at some point the Big Gold Belt will just disappear and they will go with that ugly wwe title.

 

[Reflection]

I personally always liked the idea of two championships rather than one... But as the people above mentioned, with the brand split dissolved, and Smackdown being made a C+ show, there wasn't any reason left to keep two World championships (of the same level/stature)...

But we should also keep in mind, that when the decision to unify the two titles were taken, there weren't many genuine main eventers whom the crowd bought into... We had John Cena, Randy Orton, CM Punk- whose form was deteriorating, and Daniel Bryan- who was still on the climb. Stars like Alberto Del Rio, Sheamus, Ziggler etc. can be called B+ players, who were competing for the WHC, and even when they won the WHC, they were never considered to be of the same level as the names mentioned earlier, even though the WHC apparently was of the same value storywise.

However, now we have stars like Roman Reigns, Bray Wyatt, Seth Rollins and Cesaro, whom we see as future WWE champions, Daniel Bryan has completed his climb to the top, John Cena and Randy Orton are still there, Batista and Triple-H have returned to action, and Brock Lesnar can come back any day and say he wants to compete for the WWE world heavyweight championship. Wouldn't it be more convenient if we had two world titles instead of one? It must be very difficult to book all of these people's sight and progression towards that one world title- which is the ultimate prize.

Or, how about splitting the WHC away from the WWE title, but using it (openly) as the number 2 title- the title that future WWE champions can have a run with, before competing for the WWE championship? The IC and U.S. titles have long lost their value, and giving them to Cesaro or Reigns would only hold the stars back in the mid-card (surrounded by mid-card-for-life wrestlers and main-event-rejects) and place extra burden on them to bring "prestige" back to the two dead titles. However, having a number 2 title would benefit the genuine future mega-stars, help creative write better plots, and give us fans more things to cheer for.

 

[bioshock]

Just 1 world title, I never liked there being 2 belts cause then you always had the dispute about who is the top guy, and even then it gives guys tomany title runs. Orton and Triple H don't get the 10+ title runs if there was only 1 belt. Plus 2 belts makes the IC and US belt look like total crap. IC belt already more meaningful with this tournament than it ever was while the WHC was floating around.

 

[Hem]

I suppose I'm against some of you when I say I prefer two belts. Let me explain, I think when there were two belts the WHC championship was a nice stepping stone/ major leauge title for those guys who probably wouldn't have been WWE Champion (especially now with Randy Orton, Cena, Batista, Daniel Bryan, and eventually Brock Lesnar all in the mix) guys like Ziggler, Del Rio and Sheamus could realy build SD! with the WHC if WWE truely followed the brand split.

However If WWE wishes to have just one main title than the IC championship must be treated as a championship rather than just a belt that Big E currently holds because we've seen it before that the IC Title has been held by some of the biggest future main eventers ever produced by the WWE.

A guy like Cesaro or Ziggler could easily go and make the title mean something especially since lower main eventers now aren't really main event eg: Sheamus, Alberto Del Rio, Christian etc., the feuds could be really good and compel a person to care about the title.

 

[whoopin' ass]

Bioshock brings up a good point about the title runs. Someone like Flair or Lawler have multiply runs because they worked different companies but in the wwe over the past decade or so Cena has held the title about 10 times, same with Edge, Orton and Batista all have multiple runs not to mention Jericho, Christian, Sheamus, etc. With 2 belts, people were able to get tons of title runs but most of them didn't mean much since they were short runs. Wouldn't you rather be the champ who held the title once but kept it for 6 months than the guy who won it 4 times for a combined total of 6 months? I think one belt will limit who gets it(for better or worse) but it will make the run seem more important instead of just tossing them the other title and increasing their number.

 

[hisfirewithin]

I'm all for one belt, and they should bring back the vintage winged eagle from 87-98 with the new logo. It even has the right verbage.

Seriously, tell me this isn't awesome:

 

[closet_fan]

To sum things up from my end, it just seems odd to me that they would continue to keep the BIG GOLD belt when all they had to do was toss that and use the new black belt and call THAT the WWE World Heavyweight title.

Even if there are plans to change it since the etch is going, there's no reason to keep 2 belts.

They could likely go the route of the tag belts, although I hope the new belt isn't as shitty as one huge penny stuck on a leather strap. Those belts are terrible.

But something is up by that other belt sticking around for so long.

 

[Angels]

To be honest I prefer the 2 belt establishment, there's way too many talented wrestlers in the business right now and not enough advancement, primarily because the creative writing behind the IC championship and US championship is absolutely horrible, and the whc championship is now taken away, now you have many wrestlers placed in lala land because there's no room for advancement. Give credibility to the two mid card championships, allow the whc championship to be separated, and you'll have piece of the pie for almost everybody.

 

[kadroan]

I'd say keep both titles. It looks more prestigious. It's not everyday in wrestling you see a champion walk around with two belts. For a guy of Bryan size, it makes him look even more impressive.

 

[HORRORHOLIC]

I'm all for one belt, and they should bring back the vintage winged eagle from 87-98 with the new logo. It even has the right verbage.

Seriously, tell me this isn't awesome:

It's the best belt they've had. I think there should be only one belt too. One champion one belt, makes sense to me!!

 

[oldschool123]

I'd say separate the belt, the WHC needs to be a belt that is not only considered important, but also a tool that can help increase the presence of other wrestlers, When you unite the belt, you have many wrestlers who were once top card now going to mid card like sheamus and alberto del rio and it just looks weird like they were demoted. Keeping the WHC and WWE championship separate would prevent that from happening I think.

Neither of them were ever "the guy" or even close to it. Back in the day when it was just the WWF Championship, Intercontinental Championship and the Tag belts the titles actually meant something and they would have both been Intercontinental Championship guys at best. They're both solid guys but neither of them is good enough/over enough to be main event status.

 

[Dagger Dias]

I don't think they will seperate the belts again. There was no point in having two world titles anymore with the brand split being done away with. If the roster gets large enough for Smackdown to have its own set of title tiers for main eventers, midcarders, divas, and tag teams seperate from those on Raw.... then by all means let's seperate all the belts again. They should remain unified so that there is one World Champion in the WWE to signify who THE top guy within kayfabe is. So, no, definitely no storylines on going back to two different titles.

On the subject of whether there will be two physical belts or just one being used as the WWE World Heavyweight Championship.... I can see them keeping it as two during Daniel Bryan's current reign so that he can continue to raise them up one in each hand while leading YES chants from the crowd. Whoever dethrones him, I can see that wrestler retiring the big gold belt and only using the WWE Championship's recent design. I personally would want to see a gold plate instead of a black one be used behind the WWE logo on the WWE Championship to symbolize the unification and the representation of the World Heavyweight Championship in the belt's history. I doubt that happens though.