Possible Title System

[gmanversion1]

A few months ago I thought of a title tier system that I thought could work. Just wondering what people thought about it.

For sake if ease I'll use WWE for example.

Tier 1: Super elite
This title would only be defended at the big 4 (Rumble, Mania, Summerslam, Survivor Series). The champ can show up on, fight at any show as deemed nessisary.
Ex WWE World Title

Tier 2: Elite
This title would be defended at every PPV, but never on TV. The champ can show up/fight when ever.
Ex Intercontinental Title

Tier 3: Semi-Elite
This title CAN be defended at any TV/PPV but not required. This champ can show up/Fight at any show
Ex. United States Title

Tier 4: Talent showcase
This title MUST be defended at EVERY TV/PPV. The champ must fight at EVERY show
Ex. A TV or Internet Title

This would only be for the men's singles

Women's Title would fall under Tier 3

Tag Titles would fall under tier 2

 

[Dagger Dias]

You have a good idea here, but I strongly disagree with your 1st tier. Why would you not have the World Championship defended monthly? The whole point of being a wrestler is to (kayfabe) become a World Champion. What WWE has done with Lesnar's reign is a disgrace. Without a World Championship match each month, why are they even there on the weeks leading up to shows that aren't in the Big 4? Here is how my title tier structure would look....


Tier 1 - World Championship
Defended at EVERY monthly PPV event. No questions asked. If you cannot compete at the top level, you cannot be the top guy. It can be defended on television but only on rare special occasions. If the champion's only entire appearance during an entire PPV cycle is at the PPV, then that will suffice as he still shows up to defend the belt for the month.

Tier 2 - Upper Midcard Championship
WWE's Intercontinental Championship would fall under this for me. This can be defended on television or on PPV but it must be defended once per PPV cycle, so monthly but it can be more often than that. The point of this title tier is to see if they can prove themselves as a potential world title tier competitor.

Tier 3 - Lower Midcard Championship
WWE's US Championship could fall under this. I do like the idea the threadstarter had of a showcase title that gets defended everywhere. If it was on the line at every show it would be something I'd look forward to. Lengthy title reigns full of successful defenses with this belt would be a big deal. I would put an additional stipulation on it though, if you lose to the current champion you do not get another shot until there is a new champion.

Tag Team Tier
This would follow similar rules to the Tier 2 title. If the Tier 2 title is not on this month's coming PPV event, then there would be a Tag Team Championship match instead. The champions can defend either on television or on PPV, as long as it is monthly or more.

Womens' Tier
This would be the female division's equivalent of the Tier 1 title. It would follow the exact same rules as my Tier 1 title. To further increase the prestige, not only would the champion be forced to defend monthly on PPV's and on special ocassions on television but also she MUST be able to work a match and needs to either be able to do promos or find a manager who does it for her. No Bella Twins or models who cannot wrestle holding MY Womens Championship. Not gonna happen. Girls like AJ, Paige, Emma, Natalya, etc would dominate this division. You know, the ones who can WRESTLE.

 

[gmanversion1]

Thanx for that feed back. I understand what you were saying about my tier 1. Now first I'll say that I'm not arguing, just going to clarify where I was coming from. I was looking at it from the other side. As a competitor, I think it would motivate me to do my best to earn a shot if there were only 4 to get in a year.

Also, I liked the idea you had about for the showcase, if you lost to the champ, not getting another shot until there was a new champ. So, would the champ be forced to vacate the title if they got through the whole roster? Would you be awarded an automatic shot at the next tier, or could they immediately get to jump right to the top ? As I said I really liked your idea

 

[OldSchoolWrestlingFan]

I have read your post over & over - After really thinking this through I like the overall idea very much (like any idea it could use some small tweaks). This system is very close to the way the championship system worked when I first began watching wrestling in my childhood. I can remember Hogan being champ & only really defending his title at PPVs and it made it seem more of a prize to be obtained & something elite to hold. My only major critique would be that you've got to have some on the spur of the moment title defenses on Raw & Smackdown (thrown in from time to time) like they had during the attitude era just to make things less predictable but overall I like the concept.


P.S. I think WWE does need something like a TV Title or something along the lines of the Hardcore title that is defended every week or so just to keep titles fresh in people minds. I could also see them implementing a Divas tag title to help add further depth for the ladies.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I'm of the opinion that the World Championship should be defended at once a month or, at least, every 2 months. Defending the title only 4 times a year just doesn't work for me as it's supposed to be THE ultimate goal of every male wrestler. I'd have one or POSSIBLY two defenses on television each year, but only a certain times. Defending the title every few months via ppv could give more time to develop a storylines and generate a slower burn to allow things to develop more. This also has the potential to cause officials to be more careful in who the put in these spots, though that's still no guarantee of success. I mean, a wrestler might be doing well until he's given a main event push and he flops. It happens sometimes with promising talent, after all. There are potential drawbacks in altering the format or sticking with the traditional monthly defense. However, the champ still has to appear, wrestle, do promos on TV and work house shows.

As for the Intercontinental Championship, I like the notion of this title returning to the status of the "work horse" championship, so I think it should be defended more than the World Championship, maybe twice a month. I'm all for ending the hot potato runs, so this could genuinely return to the status of being a sort of proving ground championship, especially if the champ is given a strong run, a long enough run to where he has the opportunity to show what he's made of through consistent, competent booking. It could also mean WWE getting more choosy about who becomes champion instead of having hot potato runs in which 5 or 6 guys a year have a turn at carrying the title for a while.

As for a lower mid-card title, I'd personally retire the US title and reinstate the WCW World Television Championship, under WWE of course, and use it as a title to be defended entirely on television on a monthly basis. Sort of use the title as a means of showing who could be ready to move into the upper mid-card picture.

As far as the tag and Divas titles, I'd probably have it operate under the same format as the World Championship.

 

[RKO920]

I like the premise but what I've always thought would be to adopt the UFC model of title defenses. Where essentially each title can headline a PPV, minus the big 4 where all the titles would be defended. So for example...

January- Royal Rumble- All titles defended
February- Fastlane- IC Title
March/April- WrestleMania- All titles defended

It would rotate from there, this would give storylines time to develop. Also, and this is a big one for me personally, Number 1 Contender matches would mean something again. I watch UFC and when there's 2 guys fighting and you know the winner is next in line for a title shot you know it's something big. Wins and losses would actually mean something again, I get it it's scripted tv, but if you wanted to build up a guy then you have them go on a nice win streak, work their way for the IC title or US title and then keep working their way towards the World Title. It's a nice way to go a little old school with a slow burn instead of everything happening yesterday like it does now.

 

[chuckmdubya]

It seems they are doing something to edit title structure in the WWE.
With all the recent talk of Lesnar getting close to a deal with WWE (of course, there is no way to know until it actually happens), it seems as if the lesser titles may be getting revamped.
Let's assume the rumors are true and Lesnar resigns and retains title. We would assume he would resume his regular schedule. During this schedule he doesn't appear or defend often. With him being their biggest box office draw, he should be champ. This brings into question what to do with the time that the Champ isn't there or defending.
It would seem that with the star power involved in the other title match ups at WM that a bigger star than usual will walk out with both titles. Assuming this all goes through, we are likely to have US champ Cena, and IC champ Bryan or Ambrose. This is a huge boost for the prestige of these titles, having 2 of your top 3 faces holding 2nd tier titles. This of course would add to entertainment value of WWE programing.

Now that WWE has used Lesnar's contract talks as part of a kayfabe storyline, it seems the likelihood of this is increasing. These top tier stars defending the US and IC titles makes the matches for these titles more important and it makes the titles a bigger draw.

We will see how it all plays out, but I'd like to see something along those lines happen.

 

[Naniwa91]

Or what about this:

WWE World Heavyweight Championship
-----------------------------------------------------
This title would be defended semi-monthly. Meaning that if you're the champion, you cannot go more than two months without a defense but defending the title at every PPV is optional. A minimum of 8 defenses per year. And even special defenses count. Minimum of 2 per year/per defense.


Intercontinental Championship and United States Championship
------------------------------------------
This title would be defended at every PPV, and every two weeks in a format like this

1. PPV Title Defense, no defense on the RAW or SD of the following week
2. number one contender determined
3. title defence on RAW or SD
4. no defense this week
5. number one contender determined for the match at the PPV
6. PPV title defense

or something like that.


WWE Light Heavyweight Championship (my suggestion)
---------------------------------------------------
Defended at every PPV.

This title can only be contested for wrestlers under 235 lbs, but wrestlers of this division can compete in other divisions whilst LHC Champion, but cannot hold the LHC and the WHC simultaneously.



Tag Belts would be contested similar to the IC/US titles when there's enough depth to the tag division; at every PPV only, when there isn't.

Divas championship business as usual.

Divas Tag championship would be similar to the Mens Tag championship.


Hardcore Championship can be defended at any time during a taping, even after the show goes off air, in any part of the arena property.





So, what do you think?

 

[Dagger Dias]

Thanx for that feed back. I understand what you were saying about my tier 1. Now first I'll say that I'm not arguing, just going to clarify where I was coming from. I was looking at it from the other side. As a competitor, I think it would motivate me to do my best to earn a shot if there were only 4 to get in a year.

Fair enough, but say Lesnar retains at Wrestlemania and holds the title hostage until Summerslam. Seth Rollins is not going to be able to use his briefcase despite having until July to cash in. For everyone else, why would they even show up to the summer Raw's or the summer PPV's if there is no title shot until August? They'd crown a contender and then they are wasting time until the match. There's motivating the competition and then there's idiotic booking. Not having monthly World Championship matches is the latter.

Also, I liked the idea you had about for the showcase, if you lost to the champ, not getting another shot until there was a new champ. So, would the champ be forced to vacate the title if they got through the whole roster? Would you be awarded an automatic shot at the next tier, or could they immediately get to jump right to the top ? As I said I really liked your idea

I'd probably have them get stripped of the title upon having defeated the whole roster but they then get to exchange the Tier 3 title for a World Championship shot at the next PPV. If WWE timed it perfectly this could make for a very memorable Night Of Champions angle. We're talking in the realm of 50 title defenses if he goes through the whole roster from jobbers to midcard to Tier 1 wrestlers, so that's 20 somewhat week's worth of Raw/Smackdown defenses and some PPV's along the way.

 

[FarFromFine]

I'd probably have them get stripped of the title upon having defeated the whole roster but they then get to exchange the Tier 3 title for a World Championship shot at the next PPV. If WWE timed it perfectly this could make for a very memorable Night Of Champions angle. We're talking in the realm of 50 title defenses if he goes through the whole roster from jobbers to midcard to Tier 1 wrestlers, so that's 20 somewhat week's worth of Raw/Smackdown defenses and some PPV's along the way.

I love this idea. TV title would mean something and it would be exciting whenever "your guy" eventually won it as you would always be hoping HE was the guy that would run the table and get a title shot. I would probably just make it "hold the title for a year- get a title shot" and have them have to defend it once a week, not during every wrestling program.

 

[Kyphael]

I had this idea before, but I would focus more on meaning behind titles than tiers, after all, someone not over today could be over next week. The idea I had is this...

WWE World Heavyweight Championship (Main event)

WWE United States Championship (Mid-card title 1, defended ONLY in the continental United States, and nowhere else outside of it.)

WWE European Championship (Defended ONLY during the European tour after Wrestlemania, and whatever other European tours, the title would mean so much more and title reigns as well, and the title matches in Europe would mean much more too.)

Tag/Women's title self explanatory.

 

[Naniwa91]

It makes sense for the US championship to be defended only within the US, but since (as far as I know) the WWE only tours Europe once or twice a year, wouldn't that mean that whoever has the European Championship at the end of the tour would be champion until the next tour of Europe? I think for that particular belt that there should be a mini tournament to decide the winner of the belt.

As far as the United States Championship goes, what if there is a PPV outside of the continental US? What then? I like the idea, don't get me wrong, but for situations like that, is there a special rule or does it just not happen until the next taping in the US?

 

[King Patrick Star]

I like this idea. The only change I would do to the original proposed plan is making it a 3 tier system instead of 4.

Tier 1: WWE World Heavyweight Championship Title Division (Elite)
This title would only be defended at the Big 4 (Royal Rumble, WrestleMania, SummerSlam, and Survivor Series).

Tier 2: Intercontinental Championship Title Division (Main Eventers)
This title would be defended at every PPV, but never on TV.

Tier 3: United States Championship Title Division (Mid-Carders)
This title must be defended at every Raw, but never on PPV.

I do not think a 4th tier is necessary, but if need be, I would just use the NXT Championship Title Division as tier 4. Bringing in a 4th singles Championship in the WWE wouldn’t be great for marketing, but not so much for storyline purposes. It would just take up time.