Shouldn't All Of The Belts Be Defended At Wrestlemania?

[Tenta]

It is my humble opinion that all of the belts should be put on the line at Wrestlemania.

I mean, my logic's quite simple. People nowadays complain that belts like the IC title, the US title, etc, all have no meaning to them anymore. I agree wholheartedly, but what would you expect, when the belts aren't even treated as significant objects at the biggest show of the year? Most of the time, the IC and US titleholder are thrown either into MITB, or they're chosen as the representative of Raw or Smackdown in the interpromotional battle. It's almost blatantly saying that this title has no significance to it, as the holder would rather have a 16% chance of gaining a shot at a world title (makes a bit of sense) or fight someone from the other brand (makes no sense). My question is simple... Why are these belts not defended on the biggest stage of them all? If the WWE were serious about making these titles legitimate, wouldn't they book an actual feud between them and a worthy opponent, and give them some time at Mania? Hell, look at Savage and Steamboat. Razor and Shawn. Roddy and Bret. These were meaningful feuds. And what resulted was a classic match between two of the best workers for a belt that actually had meaning.

Can the WWE actually reach the point where they can build up a feud like this again?

And what about the tag titles? Again, most of the time, one of the title holders is put into MITB, or they just leave the title off Mania for good. Wouldn't it make sense to defend at least one of these titles at Wrestlemania?

 

[Showtime]

That's why we got Night of Champions now sonny. In a way, perhaps they should. Wrestlemania is the biggest event on the calender, so you'd imagine that every champion would want to defend their belt on the biggest stage of them all, but then again, there's issues. One being mainevent build ups, second MITB. Since Wrestlemania is the biggest PPV of the year, every big name and main event who's healthy will want to be on the card, so that will inevitably take up most of the card. Most are too big for the middle card or tag team division titles, so rather than sacking them with a title to be on the card, they build up long rivalries which are to climax at Wrestlmania, like Jericho/HBK, or HBK/Angle, main eventer feuds that started at or around the Rumble. So, aside from the world title matches, you will most likely see 2-4 matches between main eventers that are not in any title picture. Second, MITB, which we see uses a lot of middle and uppermiddle carders, so the people who would be fighting for the middle card titles are instead in MITB. Since now 8 are used in MITB, this leaves very few to contend for the middle titles, which is why the IC champion has regularly competed in the MITB, except for in 07 where instead the IC champion battled the ECW champion in a non title Trumps hair vs Vince's hair match with Stone Cold Steve Austin as the special referee. (Long breath) Third, and I didn't have a third before, but I thought of one now and am not going back to add it in, the WWE just doesn't care about its tag team division that much any more. They could put together four team single pinfall matches for tag titles like they did in the mid 00's, but the rosters are just too thin now and even with two tag titles, there are fewer tag teams then there ever were before, partly due to roster cuts. So, in short, no the shouldn't have to defend all the belts at Wrestlemania, we have Night of Champions, for that, yes I understand your point, but Wrestlemania has always been more about putting on the exciting match you won't see at any other PPV than about titles.

 

[Greenlight13]

I used to hold the opinion that every belt should be defended at every PPV, but they added more belts and now it just isn't possible outside of Night of Champions. Every world title should be defended at every PPV unless it's like a dream tag team match or something like that.

As for wrestlemania, well, I think almost all of them should. Depending on who carries them really. I'd rather see Shelton Benjamin in Money in the Bank than defending the strap against R-Truth, MVP, Hurricane Helms, Kennedy or Umaga. I'd also enjoy seeing Morrison in the match, same goes for Punk really. Punk and Regal could have a great match at Wrestlemania, but if there's any chance they want Punk to win it again, then I'd want him in it. I don't want to see Carlito in any kind of match so he and Primo can defend the belts as far as I'm concerned.

Melina and Beth Phoenix are likely going to fight.

Swagger and Dreamer.

Maryse will have rehabbed my Mania but quite frankly Smackdown's women's division is a joke. They took the only half decent face and turned her heel, now their top 3 womens wrestlers are heels, that makes no sense. Unless Gail Kim re-debuts quickly, I have no idea what they want to do about that one. If Kelly Kelly gets naked I suppose they'll feed her to Maryse and McCool in a triple threat or something.

Cena will defend against Orton.

Edge against Triple H.

If Morrison isn't in Money in the Bank I don't know if they will even give them a match on the main show, which sucks, because they are the top team in the WWE. Cryme Tyme and the Legacy in a three-way tag match?

Same goes for Carlito and Primo. They probably have even less chance of getting a main-show match if Carlito is left out of MITB... unless it were AGAINST Miz and Morrison but that would be just champions vs champions, no belts on the line.

Shelton is like 90% guaranteed to be in MITB and if not will defend against one of the people I said above.

Punk is probably about 80% likely to be in MITB again, if not it's like Regal or no-one... PLEASE not Mike Knox! Maybe Kane?

Think that's everything... In answer to the actual topic, yes in theory every belt should be defended. But Money In The Bank has always always been a great match, and a few of the current champions would be great additions to it, so depends if you'd rather see every single belt defended and an average match for MITB, or take the sacrifice of a few non-defences in order to get a great match for MITB.

Don't forget they are going to need to leave room for the non championship matches like Undertaker vs Jericho/HBK or HBK vs JBL or something along those lines.

 

[IrishCanadian25]

World Heavyweight
WWE
ECW
Intercontinental
United States
World Tag
WWE Tag
Women's
Diva's

Yep, there are still 9 championships in the WWE - and roughly 9 matches can realistically occur at a Wrestlemania. So for ALL of the titles to be defended a few things have to happen:

1. No more Night of Champions, because that'd be redundant.

2. Under this premise of yours, you cost us the chance to see the next Bret vs Owen, Warrior vs Savage, Angle vs Michaels, Jericho vs Michaels, Hogan vs McMahon, etc. A lot of times, the matches involving no championships are truly the best.

3. No main stream exposure matches, a la Rourke / Jericho, Big Show / Mayweather, Lashley with Trump / Umaga with Vince. That'll hurt buyrates that are expected to hover around a million.

 

[HBK-aholic]

WWE
World Heavyweight
Intercontinental
One of the Tag belts

At a PPV like Wrestlemania, I really think these are the only belts that should be defended. Not saying that others can't be, but I think these are the main ones that should be fit into any PPV really.

The divas division shouldn't be on Wrestlemania, they're awful, simply put. And if a male wrestled like one of them, he wouldn't even get into the business.

I think having all the belts defended would leave no time for matches without a title. Many of the best matches are matches which the title hasn't been involved with, and we'd have missed a lot of Mania classics.

 

[klunderbunker]

I'd say no as well. THere's simply too many belts to have them all defended. What's the point in just stacking on more and more titles matches to a card aside from saying that the matches are there to have title matches? Do we really want the Colons vs. Hawkins and Ryder on Wrestlemania, even as a warm up match? Same with something like the Divas Title. It's overrated and has been defended what, three times on tv/ppv? Wrestlemania has the tradition of having a big match that would be a main event at most other shows. Do we need to drop that so Michellle McCool embarass herself in a match with Maria?

 

["Cool Guy" Jensen]

Wrestlemania is the biggest pay-per-view of the year, so having all the titles defended in the event would be a good idea. The only reason that would not be a good idea is because would have to spend too much time thinking of building up legit rivalries for each title. In order for a Wrestlemania match to have a lot of hype, is if they have enough build-up. You are guaranteed that the WWE and World Heavyweight Championship will have the most build-up, but the mid-card and tag team wrestlers are most likely to appear in the Money in the Bank match or they are left completely off the card.

Night of Champions, however is able to have all the titles defended because it isn't as big of an event as Wrestlemania. Even if there isn't too much build-up for all the title matches, it will still get sold due to the simple fact that all the titles will be defended at the event.

 

[Tenta]

Man......... Kinda forgot just how many belts the E has....

Well, even if that is the case, I'll agree that all of the women's titles don't need to be defended, nor both tag team titles. Though if I had it my way, I'd have both tag teams facing each other in a match. I think if you give Carlito, Morrison, and to a lesser extent Primo and Miz, a chance to fly around the ring, it could make a great match. I'd say have the tag team champions of each brand face each other in a non-title match.

So it seems we're left with one in the air: The US title. Shouldn't that at least be defended?

 

[OIL]

The divas division shouldn't be on Wrestlemania, they're awful, simply put. And if a male wrestled like one of them, he wouldn't even get into the business.

So then what would be the point in the Divas being a part of the WWE at all? I mean, if they're not going to be on the biggest WRESTLING show of the year, then they shouldn't bother WRESTLING year in, year out. Sure, the Divas of today aren't much compared to Trish, Lita or Victoria, but deal with it. We have Melina, Beth Phoenix & Natalya who could easily put on a quality match. Sure, the other Divas aren't as good as you'd expect for the top company, but some of them are improving. Don't forget, women are physically different to men, so you can't expect them to put on amazing matches compared to the males, because physically they're different. It's a fact that men are stronger than women, we have bigger frames ect. It's why men & women can't compete together, and why women's cross country is shorter than the men's at school. So don't compare them directly.

Anyway, to keep this on topic. Should all the belts be defended? Well, in an ideal world, yes, because it's the biggest show of the year, so you'd want all the belts defended. But in reality, it's an impossible task. Firstly, Night of Champions would lose it's gimmick, so you would have to scrap that firstly. Secondly, there just isn't enough time. 9 championships, that's 9 matches. Pretty much a WM card right there, so you would scrap the MITB match, celebrity involvement and the random fueds that have captivated WrestleMania audiences. HBK vs Angle I remind you. So in reality, the main championships SHOULD be defended. WWE Title, WHC, Intercontinental, Tag Team Women's Championship. The rest can be mentioned, and sure, hype up the fact that there is also a US Champion ect.

 

[The Todd]

Think everyone has pretty much covered it, and I'd say no as well.

No one wants to see the Diva's title on the line at Mania, or the lesser of the tag team belts. The intercontinental and U.S. champions are usually ones who are on the verge of the main event scene, and therefore should be in the money in the bank match. I fully expect C.M Punk and Shelton Benjamin/MVP to be in the money in the bank so can't really defend their title.

Also, the Night of Champions is the special night where it is all title's on the line. That is the ppv where the Divas championship and the lesser tag team champion and contenders can showcast their talent in a pressured situation. If they mess up, it is a lesser PPV, but they cna't take that risk at Mania.

Mania is for the two titles, a tag team match, a special Diva match, the MITB and three of four major feuds either just getting started, coming to an end or just a one off match (Taker vs HBK for example)

 

[ad21k]

Why?

The only titles with any worth are the WWE title, and World Heavyweight title.

The IC title only has a shread of credability because it has been around so long but hasnt really meant anything for at least 10 years.

The ECW likewise only has a shread of credability because it is at least consistantly defended.

But at WWE's biggest event of the year where they are trying to attract viewers to the product, and spike buyrates the tag titles, and Us titles have zero pull. In fact they have zero pull on any of the B PPV's so why would WWE have them on their biggest event of the year.

I'm sure WWE is much more concerned about building up major feuds between its top stars, than it is with making matches with medicore wrestlers who are paper champions.

I think smarks should stop romantising about the nostalgia of the IC, and tag titles in particular. The WWE knows it makes more business sense to have only the major titles defended on PPV which is why wrestlemania wont be featuring 9 championship matches.

If anything wrestlemania is more about the WWE title (and nowadays the the World title too). As long as the prestige of these 2 titles is maintained, by been defended in the main events thats all that matters, as these are the only 2 titles with any significance.

 

[Legendary_Undertaker]

I agree completely. Mania is no place to have titles in which nobody cares about defended.

When was the last time anybody gave a damn about the ECW/Divas/WWE Tag Team Titles? If it were up to me the two top titles would be defended and one of the tag titles unless you put M&M against the Colon's in a winner take all match then that would justify adding more titles to the card

Most of the classic wrestlemania moments are ones in which the title isn't in the pucture. Wrestlemania is bigger than a championship and to fill the biggest card of the year with a bunch of laskluster mathes would just suck

 

[PsychoWard]

You guys have covered everything! But you know what would be cool...
MITB Tag Team Title Match... or Just a Tag Team TLC Match Both World and WWE hanging from the rafters!

Priceless, Cryme Tyme, The Colons, Edgeheads, Miz Morrison

Then MITB match right after... The winner of previous Tag Match also get in so... Miz and Morrison! Kofi, Rey, MVP, Christian, R-Truth, Shelton.
Morrison WINS after two huge match... how much rise would he get then!
Or christian wins

Then you have Hardy's match.. More ladders! Just and Onslaught of Ladders to start the first 3 match at MANIA

Undertaker vs Shawn

Beth vs Melina

CM Punk vs Kozlov thats our cross brand match for the IC title

Jericho vs Austin? with Rouke & Flair?

Orton vs Cena

HHH vs Edge
Edge wins... and while he is weak in the ring Christian come out and hug edge and uses his brief case and edge once again is MITB victim... Two years in a row he gets his own medicine?

Thats 9 match with almost all titles being used!

 

[Pbenglish]

I have to say no. Title belts have been so diminished in the meaning that having them all defending at Wrestlemania would be a waste. I'd much rather watch a MITB match than a woman's title match for example. Or a well thought out grudge match (like the WWE seems to be building with the Hardy brothers) than a meaningless ECW title match (post for another time, but I HATE ECW and feel they should not be on a main PPV to begin with).
WWE should keep the "Grandest Stage of 'em all" for the main titles (WWE, World Heavyweight, Intercontinental and tag) and then have the other titles defended throughout the year. The "Night of Champions" PPV is a good idea as well.

 

[Hacksaw Highway]

Yeah, I'm thinking that they should have WWE, World, and ECW titles for sure defended (say what you will about ECW being less prestigious than IC or US, it's still the brands top title), and then IC and/or US. I'd be all for a Tag Titles unification match with Miz and Morrison vs the Colons, but other than that I don't care about the tag belts too much right now.

 

[Undisputed Y2M]

basically when it comes to mania i agree # 1 title is WWE Championship and # 2 title World Heavyweight Title. If anything to change mania, they should definitely increase the # of particepents in the MITB from 8 to maybe 12, this way there is less of a chance in predicting the winner and it makes it seem like total chaos. Personally this year id like to see Undetaker retain the WWE title against HHH given Taker wins the elimination chamber at No Way Out, however I would not be surprised if Edge retains and Jeff Hardy beats him at mania, that would be the best guess because while WWE has been saying they want to switch around the World title more to catch up in history, the WWE title lately has been handed around like candy ever since Orton's possession, before you know it everyone is going to catch up to Flair!!

 

[IrishCanadian25]

Trying to think of a particular criteria for titles to be defended at Wrestlemania is foolish. It really depends on the products leading in, and if certain wrestlers are coming in to the match with heat or not.

If there are 5 hot title feuds, then roll with 5 matches. Better yet, roll with 4 and save one for the RAW after Wrestlemania, which tends to be very highly rated. A good, gripping match based on a title feud can help keep those casual fans who tune in JUST for WrestleMania with the product year-round.

You also have to deal with the fact that many of the talent who hold mid-card and tag-team belts need to be in the Money in the Bank match. Guys like Morrison, Miz, Shelton, Punk, etc. They are a huge part of MITB right now, and you can't exactly refuse to give them titles in the months before Wrestlemania.

 

[Y2Jathon]

Real simple, take the grandest stage of them all to take some of the titles away. combine the tag titles, miz and morrison fight on all 3 brands anyway so it will bring more credible teams to defend against. have punk and shelton put their titles on the line, maybe in mitb? mitb winner becomes undisputed IC champ plus shot at title. people will be on their feet the whole match. then you have time for cena vs orton, matt vs jeff, edge vs hhh, hbk vs taker, jericho vs (ausitn, Flair or Rourke) sounds like a wrestlemania worthy of being number 25.

 

[Shocky]

That's a big no from me too. The pay per views of Wrestlemania, particularly 16 and 20, were bad because they tried to defend every title on the pay per view, and it just didn't flow right. As has been stated, the WWE already has a pay per view with this in mind, Night of Champions. Why would the WWE waste two pay per views a year to have all of the titles defended on one show? It essentially devalues Night of Champions as a potential A style pay per view.

 

[CDR]

Yes, I believe all titles should be defended at WrestleMania, but if they did that, it would take away the meaningness from the Night of Champions pay-per-view. Why would you want to have every single title belt defended at two different pay-per-views? If that were to happen, the Night of Champions name would have to be changed because then there would be two Nights of Champions. So, if you think the belts should all be defended at WrestleMania, and you're wondering why they aren't, blame Night of Champions.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

Again, this is my opinion, as well ... but I think as far as titles go, virtually every title should be defended at Mania.

I think the bare minimum should be:

WWE
World
ECW
Intercontinental
US Championship

I also think the Tag Team Champions and the Women's Champions should appear, as well ... preferably one of each defended ... but in the very least there should be a Tag Match and a Women's Match on the card.

So that would be 5 titles (preferably 7) that would be defended.

Keeping in mind that the event is about 3 hrs 50 minutes ... and previously, in the old days, there used to be anywhere between 10-12 matches for a 3 hour show, I think the problem is pretty evident. The problem is that we've got in the habit of expecting ALL of the matches be longer matches.

I think the way to do this is trim all the matches by a few minutes. I'm not suggesting to cut a 20 minute match, down to a 10 minute match ... but rather, trim each of the matches by a few minutes here and a few minutes there to get us back in the habit of seeing 10-12 matches back on the shows, once again. By doing so, this gives greater opportunity for more matches and for more talent to be utilized on these shows.

Additionally, take steps to cut out the excessive pre-match promo videos, that they have gotten in the habit of doing for every match now. That's another 2 minutes or so each time. Multiply that by 10 matches and that is 20 minutes wasted right there.

And there is enough name talent on the Roster, that I think they merit to be on the show. Why fans have this obsession now with expecting EVERY MATCH on every PPV to go 20 minutes minimum, and have every match go in the range of 20-30 minutes, is ridiculous, if you ask me.

If someone is entertained by having a wrestler in a rest hold, and is entertained by a wrestler being in that rest hold for 3-4 minutes ... than that is essentially as exciting as watching paint dry. You could cut that 3-4 minutes from that match, and do the same for another match ... and BAM ... you just created enough time for another new match and for 2 more guys to be on the show.

Here would be a hypothetical Mania card, you could work within a 3 hr 50 min time frame.


1. Triple H vs Randy Orton (World) [22 min]
2. John Cena vs Edge (WWE) [22 min]
3. Jack Swagger vs Tommy Dreamer (ECW) [8 min]
4. Shawn Michaels vs The Undertaker [18 min]
5. Chris Jericho vs Steve Austin [18 min]
6. CM Punk vs Rey Mysterio (Intercontinental) [12 min]
7. MVP vs Shelton Benjamin (US Title) [10 min]
8. Money in the Bank: Christian, Kofi Kingston, Evan Bourne, Mr. Kennedy, R-Truth, JBL, Big Show, Umaga [18 min]
9. Beth Phoenix vs Mickie James vs Melina vs Jillian (Women's) [10 min]
10. Jeff Hardy vs Matt Hardy [14 min]
11. Miz/Morrison vs The Colons (Non Title) [10 min]
12. Tag Team Battle Royal- (Winner gets a shot at the Losers of the Tag Team Match between Miz/Morrison and The Colons)- Cryme Tyme, Priceless, Jesse/Festus, Hawkins/Ryder, Kane/Mike Knox, Kendrick/Ezekiel Jackson, Hurricane Helms/Jimmy Wang Yang [8 min]

That is 170 minutes worth of matches. The PPV lasts about 230 minutes. So that is 60 minutes worth of miscellaneous time for the show's opening, closing, promos, entrances, and banter which should be adequate ... if they run a tight ship.

 

[Sparky]

No they shouldn't. Wrestlemania should be for the BIG matches. the tagteam's and the IC, USC titles never have interesting storylines. Imagine just having sloppy matches to defend the titles? it would kill wrestlemania. Leave it with only three title defenses max. anymore then that and people will be expecting the titles to change hands.

Plus the magic aint there for the other titles. its alot better to say I won the WHC at wrestlemania, rather then I won the IC title at wrestlemania. Big whoop no matter where it is it's still really nothing. the champions at the present time Just ain't good enough to be in the Wrestlemania championship defenses.

leave it for the experts

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

No they shouldn't. Wrestlemania should be for the BIG matches. the tagteam's and the IC, USC titles never have interesting storylines. Imagine just having sloppy matches to defend the titles? it would kill wrestlemania. Leave it with only three title defenses max. anymore then that and people will be expecting the titles to change hands.

Plus the magic aint there for the other titles. its alot better to say I won the WHC at wrestlemania, rather then I won the IC title at wrestlemania. Big whoop no matter where it is it's still really nothing. the champions at the present time Just ain't good enough to be in the Wrestlemania championship defenses.

leave it for the experts

One of the number one complaints I hear is that WWE doesn't treat the IC/US Titles or the Tag Team Division with any respect.

Well, when you treat titles like crap, and don't defend them on the shows, then what do you expect?

Same concept with treating a Brand like crap. When you treat ECW like crap, people aren't going to watch. When you treat Smackdown like the "B" Brand, then people are going to do the same.

Make titles mean something again, by actually defending them on the PPV's, and make the titles mean something again.

All goes back to Cause and Effect. Who causes the "Cause" and what is the "Effect"? WWE is responsible for devaluing their own titles and divisions. The fans had no input into that, whatsoever, nor is that their fault.