Should WWE cut back on non-title matches for their champions?

[LSN80]

There are several reasons I'm an advocate of all champions working less non-title matches. First, for as long as I can remember, the booking has been ass-backwards.The established champions such as John Cena and Randy Orton rarely lose, and when they do, it via a distraction, or outside interference. Who benefits from that? R-Truth certainly didn't, as he beat Cena by countout to earn his title shot, and never looked like a serious challenger in a main event role as the result. He hadn't piled up enough victories against other wrestlers to be perceived as a threat, he was just put into the title mix after beating Cena by countout. Not only does that not benefit the wrestler, but its bad for business if the outcome of the main event is never in doubt.

A much more effective way to build a credible challenger is how CM Punk was been booked. He won his 2 of 3 series with Mysterio, and then the triple threat match on Raw, all clean. But even that wasn't without flaws, as he only defeated Cena by distraction. The non-title victory means less in that context then if he had just beaten Mysterio and won the triple threat match. The non-title win over Cena meant little in the context of him needing a distraction to defeat Cena, which is contradictory to the shift in character of him being "The best wrestler in the world", and not needing Nexus help to win. Fortunately, Punk's mic skills are so strong he can gain whatever credibility or momentum is needed, but how many wrestler's can that be said about?

Conversely, having the champion successfully defend the title in more one on one matches also builds the champion's credibility with each win. Both companies, WWE and TNA, do the opposite, and it's lazy booking.
Two prime examples of this were the matches between US Champ Dolph Ziggler and Kofi Kingston on Raw 6/27, and Cody Rhodes vs IC Champion Ezekiel Jackson on the 7/1 Smackdown. Ziggler and Jackson are the new US and IC Champions, respectively.Both men, especially in the case of Jackson, need to be established as new champions. That's a difficult thing to do when both lose their first non-Title match since winning the belt, right off the bat looking like weak champions, especially with Jackson losing just a 4 minute affair. This isn't a rare thing, as WWE does this all too often, such as Ziggler vs Kingston. Dolph's first non-Title match came against Kofi on Raw, with Ziggler being pinned clean. Again, who does that benefit? I know Ziggler was a champion on Smackdown, but he needs to become established on a completely different show in Raw. Rhodes and Kofi are both well established at this point. A few wins over other mid-card talent and a promo about wanting the respective title should be more then sufficient in granting them #1 Contendership. Instead, WWE did what they always do and just had the challengers beat the Champion cleanly in non-Title matches. It's lazy booking, makes the Champion look bad in the process, doesn't help the challenger, and is one of the biggest reasons the mid-card titles aren't over.

Perhaps Im going to the extreme here, but my point is clear. Champions, especially the newer ones, should not be losing non-title matches cleanly. it destroys their credibility and doesn't help build them up whatsoever. The tic for tack booking keeps all parties involved stuck in neutral, without elevating anyone. Countout victories, interference wins, and DQ victories against the more established champions doesn't help either. R-Truth developed a very intriguing and unique character, but he was only elevated slightly, and could only beat Cena by countout. This lazy booking makes the newer, mid-card champions look weak, and doesn't establish true contenders. At the very least, im advocating that WWE significantly cuts down on the # of non-Title matches a champion has. I think this would lead to more careful booking of both champion and challenger, with credibility for all. Thoughts on this?

 

[The Suplexer Perfecter]

How many top faces that were champion in the history of wrestling ever lost CLEAN to a heel? Did Austin ever lose clean to a heel as WWF champion? I don't recall that ever happening. And of course Hogan never lost clean to a heel.

Plus when you are champion you're the top guy so you have to work the tough schedule since you're supposedly the top draw.

Count out or DQ on a champion was done constantly back in the day too.

What would you have the champions do then? Constant title defenses where they then win all the time? But that's what you're complaining about on what Cena and Orton do.

 

[JSpaz]

There are a couple of ways to go with this......

Let's talk about only Cena and Orton for a second. (WWE/World Championship)
1) Not a chance Vince is going to have these guys defend the title every week.

Why?? Because the build for a PPV main event will suffer. You can only have so many matches with so many superstars each week. What would be left for a PPV main event? And,you can't keep them out of the ring every week.
Hogan was able to do this in the 80's because he only worked PPV's and other big events. But, there was no live Raw every week or Smackdown.

Now.....

Every other title holder I say YES. (IC/US title/Divas/Tag team) These titles are very rarely used on PPV's and there are some weeks the champions are not on TV. This will bring prestige back to these titles and give some of the mid-carders more exposure.

Save the WWE/World title matches for PPV's. Other titles defend more on TV.

 

[RATED R CHAMPION]

FACE champions cannot always lose clean to a heel challenger boy, villains are supposed to win by cheating and with interference, that's not something about today's wrestling, that has always been that way kid.

You will not see cena lossing clean a lot of times, hell! not even lossing that much, look at wrestlemania he has lost 2 times, one in a triple threat, and ONLY ONE TIME IN A ONE ON ONE MATCH and with the help from the rock. that's the correct way of doing it, you have to protect your top babyface pal.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Generally speaking, I have little problem with seeing champs wrestle in non-title matches. Over the course of this year, we've actually seen a good number of World Heavyweight Championship & Intercontinental Championship matches in and of themselves. Champs in and of themselves should be pretty visible and that visibility needs to happen during matches sometimes instead of promo segments.

What I tend to dislike about the mid-card title situation is that WWE seems to be rather chaotic with their booking of the IC champs. Lately, they've been looking like a buncha chumps. Since Kofi Kingston started his 3rd run with the title, the IC champ hasn't been booked to look strong. Kofi lost more often than not during that run as did Wade Barrett and Ezekiel Jackson's first match ever as champ resulted in him losing to Cody Rhodes last Friday. There hasn't been as strong champ since Ziggler held the title and actually used it to elevate his position in the company. Sure, he's not in the main event spot right now but that's due to creative losing him in the schuffle rather than his own fault. He's gotten back on track with a United States Championship run. I'm hoping he'll bring some stability to that title because the IC strap definitely needs some.

 

[LSN80]

How many top faces that were champion in the history of wrestling ever lost CLEAN to a heel? Did Austin ever lose clean to a heel as WWF champion? I don't recall that ever happening. And of course Hogan never lost clean to a heel.

Youre referring to a different era that's irrelevant now. What was good booking in 1991 or 2001 doesn't automatically make for good booking in 2011. Which is why Im advocating for less non-title matches for champions. Why? Because they're used as a lazy way to establish a number one contender. If you read my entire post instead of just focusing on the top guys, you'ld see that my biggest problem is with the way the mid-card is handled. Both heel and faces are losing their FIRST non-title matches since winning the title and getting the obligatory rematch clause in. Again, what Im saying is to not use cheap outs to establish top contenders. A non-title win over the champion is one of those cheap outs.

Plus when you are champion you're the top guy so you have to work the tough schedule since you're supposedly the top draw.

That would be relevant if WWE didnt run house shows with each brand 3-4 nights a week. That's the "tough schedule" that the champion works. champion If you think a champion cant be an integral part of the show if they don't wrestle, you must have missed Raw on Monday.....

Count out or DQ on a champion was done constantly back in the day too.What would you have the champions do then? Constant title defenses where they then win all the time?

And it sucked "back in the day" when they did it too. And again, perhaps I should have reserved this for discussion of the mid-card titles, because that's where I truly feel the lazy booking is. I think the mid-card would be much more marketable if the champion wasn't booked time and again to lose his first non-title match after winning the title in order to establish some kind of challenger immediately. Kofi beating Ziggler is a little more excusable because 1. Dolph has already been a champion several times now, and 2. The apparent storyline they're going with is that Dolph can't beat Kofi without Vickie's help. But is there any rationale to have the new IC champion lose in 4 minutes in his FIRST match?

If you want to do Cody vs Zeke, its simple. Keep them away from each other for a few weeks, with Cody piling up wins. Throw Zeke a title defense in the weeks leading up to a feud with Cody. Whats the problem with having your NEW champion win? Then have Rhodes cut a promo as to how he deserves the title shot. How much more effective would that be at establishing both champion and challenger then having the new champion lose a 4 minute affair. That's lazy booking.

What would you have the champions do then? Constant title defenses where they then win all the time?

But that's what you're complaining about on what Cena and Orton do.

No complaining here whatsoever. My only goal here is to drive discussion. Im one of the biggest Cena marks on this board, and if I went by what I "wanted", Cena would win every match. But that's not good for the product. Sometimes theres nothing wrong with establishing that Superstar A was better then Superstar B on a given night, especially in the main event echelon. My major issue is with the mid-card, where stars are generally made before becoming main eventers. And that's where much of the lazy booking occurs, and its difficult to establish stars when everyone wins the same number of matches.

Lastly, with regards to Cena and Orton, my solution there is simple: I think from a business standpoint it's not wise for your major champion to be wrestling every week, that's what house shows and PPV's are for. Do you know what Miz' first match as champion was? A title defense the next Raw. Do you how many times Miz wrestled between EC this year and Wrestlemania? Once. And it was a brilliant move. Miz won the title match he was in as well as the lone non-title match he was in between EC and Wrestlemania. There are ways of keeping your champion visible and relevant without having them wrestle.

 

[LegendKiller716]

I don't think that champions should have non-title one on one matches at all. If a superstar beats the champion, he should be the champion. Punk beat Cena one on one a few weeks ago, so why should he have to beat Cena again to prove he's the champ? He shouldn't.

 

[The Suplexer Perfecter]

Youre referring to a different era that's irrelevant now. What was good booking in 1991 or 2001 doesn't automatically make for good booking in 2011. Which is why Im advocating for less non-title matches for champions. Why? Because they're used as a lazy way to establish a number one contender. If you read my entire post instead of just focusing on the top guys, you'ld see that my biggest problem is with the way the mid-card is handled. Both heel and faces are losing their FIRST non-title matches since winning the title and getting the obligatory rematch clause in. Again, what Im saying is to not use cheap outs to establish top contenders. A non-title win over the champion is one of those cheap outs.

Logical wrestling booking works in any era. Like how heels are liars and bad people that cheat.

They usually lose their "first" non title match to set up another title match, especially today.

That would be relevant if WWE didnt run house shows with each brand 3-4 nights a week. That's the "tough schedule" that the champion works. champion If you think a champion cant be an integral part of the show if they don't wrestle, you must have missed Raw on Monday.....

That's what wrestlers do, they travel and draw houses and make money. They stop the house shows, they lose money. It's a business after all. I doubt they'll turn down the house shows ever.

If you want to do Cody vs Zeke, its simple. Keep them away from each other for a few weeks, with Cody piling up wins. Throw Zeke a title defense in the weeks leading up to a feud with Cody. Whats the problem with having your NEW champion win? Then have Rhodes cut a promo as to how he deserves the title shot. How much more effective would that be at establishing both champion and challenger then having the new champion lose a 4 minute affair. That's lazy booking.

Title defense against who? You'd need to build up that contender as well.
Maybe they want an IC title match for the Money in the Bank PPV? They set up mid card title matches like that all the time for PPVs.

Lastly, with regards to Cena and Orton, my solution there is simple: I think from a business standpoint it's not wise for your major champion to be wrestling every week, that's what house shows and PPV's are for. Do you know what Miz' first match as champion was? A title defense the next Raw. Do you how many times Miz wrestled between EC this year and Wrestlemania? Once. And it was a brilliant move. Miz won the title match he was in as well as the lone non-title match he was in between EC and Wrestlemania. There are ways of keeping your champion visible and relevant without having them wrestle.

People pay to see the guy wrestle. Just making an appearance isn't the same thing. Miz isn't on the same level as Cena either. You also set up angles in the wrestling ring.

 

[The Holy One]

I just thought I should point out that Big Zeke's first match as IC champ was a title defense against Barrett. Now for the topic at hand, I agree that title contenders and champions shouldn't have one on one matches at least until the title match whenever it takes place. However, I do believe a champion should be in a match once a week or every other week maybe it's a tag or against a jobber, because at some point just having the champion in talking segments gets tedious and boring. Especially if your champion is a face, they're supposed to be fighting champions taking on any challenge.

 

[Mac Attack]

Good Thread LSN80,

I truly believe that they should keep the nontitle matches the same. I truly believe (and it may only be me) that they do not have all that many non title matches and when they do it is usually to set up a feud. So from that sense the non title matches do serve a purpose and help promote storylines. Personally I prefer the champions to participate in tag team matches because this benefits both storylines, however in a singles non title match I don't mind seeing the champ win or lose. I think these non title matches make title matches even better so I'm all for it.

 

[H33LTurn]

I agree, i think more title defenses are just what we need to boost the credibility of certain champions. Lately Smackdown has been having more title matches than RAW, and for the WHC at that. WWE cant deny that the championship match between Orton and Christian on SD was better than any WHC match on ppv ever since. Its all about building credible champions and contenders. R-Truth had to beat Cena by count out because he wasnt built up enough as a credible contender. He didnt have the others wins under his belt, like you mentioned, so it would be downright ridiculous if he pinned Cena. I agree with some posters here, heels dont often pick up victories cleanly but it wouldnt kill WWE to develop its heels strong enough so that they dont need a big distraction or a team of guys attacking them to pick up the victory.

 

[xoxo French Kiss xoxo]

Much like at House Shows every Champion in the WWE should defend their title on Raw and Smackdown.

I for one would rather see the Champ vs a challenger weekly than the Champ with a face/heel tag partner vs their upcoming PPV opponents.

Tag Team Main event matches BLOW!, 6 man tags are worse, and 8 man tags are complete garbage. Yes we know tag matches are used to keep the main event players healthy and rested as their tag partner takes most of the beating throughout the match while they work the crowd in the corner, but they still blow.

Non-Title matches are usually used to determining new #1 contenders but isn't it time that methodology was changed? Having the Champ wrestling a different guy every week for the title helps to establish other wrestlers and show that they can go with the best in on their brand in the ring. It also helps to add credibility to the Champion and their title run by having them defend it multiple times a month, it adds to the spontaneousness and excitement of the show if you think that the title may change hands at any given time. Rather than the system we currently have where the title is only changes hands at the big 3 or after MITB.

 

[LSN80]

Logical wrestling booking works in any era. Like how heels are liars and bad people that cheat.

Except there's no logic in having your mid-card champions lose more often then they win. When you look back at the prestige of the US title and the IC title, were guys like Pat Patterson,The Rock, Dusty Rhodes, Ric Flair, Ricky Steamboat, and so on losing four minute matches in their first non-title match? No. Is it any wonder those titles don't mean as much anymore?

They usually lose their "first" non title match to set up another title match, especially today.

Which is what Ive been saying. And that's the epitome of lazy booking. That doesn't benefit the new champion whatsoever for them to lose their first non-title match. If you can give me a reason for the champion to lose his first match after winning the title and the subsequent rematch rather then booking him strong in 4 minute victories to set up a match against a heel whose winning every week as well, Id love to hear it.

That's what wrestlers do, they travel and draw houses and make money. They stop the house shows, they lose money. It's a business after all. I doubt they'll turn down the house shows ever.

You were the one who said "the champion needs to work through a tough schedule." I was simply telling you how they do. House shows, media promotions, movies, etc. Not sure how this pertains whatsoever.

Title defense against who? You'd need to build up that contender as well.

Im talking about a legitimate contender. We've seen John Cena defend the WWE title against Eric Bischoff, Carlito, and Chris Masters at one point or another for goodness sakes. The point was another successful title defense for the champion whose stock was still on the rise, against clearly inferior talent. What would be the issue with Jackson defending the IC title against a Ted DiBiase, Cody's "protege", while Cody racks up non-title wins in the mid-card? Again, how is a title victory against a DiBiase not superior to his first non-Title match being a 4 minute loss to Rhodes?

Maybe they want an IC title match for the Money in the Bank PPV? They set up mid card title matches like that all the time for PPVs.

They want an IC title match at the PPV between the IC Champ and one of the 8 men already in the MITB match?

People pay to see the guy wrestle. Just making an appearance isn't the same thing. Miz isn't on the same level as Cena either. You also set up angles in the wrestling ring.

My point exactly. PPV stands for PAY Per View. Whether Miz is on the same level as Cena is is completely irrelevant here. He was the champion going into Wrestlemania, correct? And they set the angle up around Miz beating Cena down 4 weeks in a row, despite not wrestling once, because Cena had divided focus on the Rock. How was that not a selling angle? How many matches did HHH and Undertaker have combined before their WM 27 match? Zero. Angles, by and large, are what set up wrestling matches, not vice versa.

And a champion is only as strong as his challenger, and vice versa. If one or the other isn't built effectively, especially within the mid-card realm, it hurts both the title and the wrestlers. And you get young champions over with winning, and even moreso with successful title defenses. Not 4 minute non-title losses.

I just thought I should point out that Big Zeke's first match as IC champ was a title defense against Barrett.

From my first post.....

That's a difficult thing to do when both lose their first non-Title match since winning the belt.

 

[Wade's Public Transit Bomb]

Actually, I am going to spin this in a different route..

I think the champs, matches or not, have too many matches; non-title or not. I think it would add more importance/intrigue to the champion fight. After all, s/he is the champion. Why should they give a fuck about the match if they got more important things to worry about? Maybe this mentality doesn't work for the faces, but I can most definitely see a heel champion going "Pfft. Call me when I need to defend MY title."


I also think it would protect the talent/feuds. How many of us were just happy we didn't have to sit through ANOTHER fucking Ziggles vs Kofi match on Raw? (Well, I didn't watch the show but I digress ) And who really cared for the last 30 weeks in a row they fought? It just shows that creative is probably the wrong name for the people putting these two together.

Kelly also comes to mind. She's been facing off with the Bellas for a couple of months now. We have seen everything we are going to get out of the toothy blonde, so why have the same match over and over and over? While I don't want to take her to the gallows for being champion, but I don't think she should be having matches weekly because it really exposes her limitations as a worker.