The Interim WWE Championship

[Rayne]

The booking on RAW, although making sense in an end-run, don't push Ambrose/Rollins past where they're ready kind of way.... doesn't seem to make much sense. You're taking two people, Cena and Orton, one of whom just lost to Ambrose and the other insisting on fighting "the other guy", and giving them a guaranteed title shot against Brock Lesnar. Meanwhile, Ambrose and Rollins... just fight.

In terms of setting up a Royal Rumble main event, yes, you do want to finish the Cena/Lesnar business. Isn't there a better way of doing that? Specifically, by ripping a page from the MMA book?

In MMA, when a champion will be out for an extended absence (usually due to injury, sometimes due to temporary 'retirement' a la Randy Couture but not Georges St. Pierre), the organization creates an Interim Championship, and reunifies the belts when the 'true' champion returns. Championship matches put asses in seats; I'm a big believer in titles being props, but they're props that work. In bygone days, there used to be a 30-day title defense stipulation, which was adhered to when it suited the stories.

Stripping the belt from Brock Lesnar doesn't make much sense; you don't put a build behind a guy like his B/U/V dismantling of John Cena only to drop the whole issue for when he's ready to return. However, we're looking at three pay-per-views now where the WWE goes without a champion. Creating an Interim Champion would be simple; have a 4-man tournament, have The Authority declare that a match will be for an Interim Championship, or hell- just create heel heat by handing it to Randy Orton, and John Cena can beat him in December.

In this way, you can later sell a "Champion vs. Champion" match, while having the MitB briefcase retain its meaning (how does someone cash it in if the champion is never around?) Props need to have meaning, and people do love the idea that someone could cash in that briefcase at any time.

What do you think? Would an Interim Championship be a good idea or a bad one?

 

[DCLXVI]

Bad idea... The midcard titles are already underused. You touched on Ambrose and Rollins being pushed to the moon and not being ready. I was a big Ambrose fan and I know a lot of people are high on him on this forum but I think his role as a headliner has started to show his limitations as of late... You can only act so crazy for so long in a PG format (a hot dog cart instead of a beer truck?) and I am not sure about the jumping on people and throwing ridiculous looking punches.

No interim title... Work on the relevancy of the midcard titles and building guys instead of The Shield guys.

 

[Good Golly It's Ollie]

Alright Rayne, I see what you're trying to do, and I understand the point behind it. It's not bad, but I think the execution could be better. I'm not totally writing off the idea; it's true that an absentee Champ leaves a gap. However, he does also provide a strong objective for the people still around. The main event becomes more about the chase and the struggle between a number of different parties rather than just challenger vs. champ.

There are two titles bouncing around the midcard without actually getting anyone to look stronger or more over at the moment. I think you could use the IC belt for something like this. The IC belt changed more than three times in the same number of weeks recently, and I think that could be better utilised in the manner you have described.

I suppose in some ways this was the advantage of the brand split. The question then is how you get the IC belt (or otherwise) off the "interim champ". I guess the point of "interim" is exactly that; you can temporarily retire it as need be, which is an advantage of your suggestion Rayne. I need to come back to this once some more people have made some input.

 

[TheICChampion]

Just have them bring back the World Heavyweight Championship, and from now on defend the WWE and World title on alternate PPVs with the exception of WrestleMania. We already know the WWE title won't be defended at Hell in a Cell, we can do without it at Survivor Series, and by December have the Authority come out and cut a promo pretending that Brock Lesnar not being around wasn't part of the plan, and have them bring back the World title in a mini tournament, with the finalists going to TLC for the title. Then the Authority can say, well, if Lesnar doesn't come back and defend his title by the Rumble, he will be officially stripped of the belt. Something along those lines. From then on, the titles can be defended at alternate PPV's.

 

[Mustang Sally]

Stripping the belt from Brock Lesnar doesn't make much sense; you don't put a build behind a guy like his B/U/V dismantling of John Cena only to drop the whole issue for when he's ready to return.

I like Rayne's idea, especially where it concerns Brock Lesnar's rather unusual arrangement with WWE.

For one thing, this is....and will be....a constant problem with Brock; he's a mercenary in the strictest sense. Despite how it's made to appear to fans, he's scheduled to work only a few days a year and probably doesn't give a rat's ass about the overall success of WWE, save that they continue to exist so they can pay him all monies due.

For another, whether one likes Brock's arrangement or not, it's WWE's chosen way of handling matters for however many years they can keep him. Therefore, what's the sense of stripping him of the title for not defending it enough? That would interfere with the sacred storyline, for gosh sakes. But how are his frequent absences to be explained if he holds the title despite seldom being here?

The interim champion concept handles it. Brock is the guy we'll think of as the true champion even as the interim guy is more visible as he keeps defending the belt in the ring.....the guy we get to see all the time.

Meanwhile, there's another problem: Having fought Cena, Punk and Triple H, there's hardly anyone left for Brock to face who would appear credible. (Do you want to see Brock square off against Big Show for the title? I don't). With this Interim/Brock title match, you've got a logical match-up for Brock that should prove a good draw. Whomever is holding the title in Brock's absence, we'll be seeing a Champion vs. Champion match once Lesnar gets back.

Win-win.

 

[L@RISANO]

I absolutely loved last night's segment between Orton, Cena and Heyman.
Especially the ending with the RKO to both Cena and Heyman, which could be a prelude to Orton-Lesnar at Survivor Series perhaps.

However, the ending of RAW threw a spanner in the works with regards to a possible Orton-Lesnar match with Rollins now basically being Orton's new 'rival' so to speak. However, if that new 'rivalry' is slow-burned and stretched out to the max in terms of the entire Authority's inevitable dissension and destruction, then Orton-Lesnar can still very well happen, and I think most people would rather such a match rather than just having Lesnar's opponent list in the lead-up to Mania 31 read: Cena, Cena, Cena....


That said;
It is a pity that Batista is probably not going to be back soon. As the Heyman,Cena,Orton segment clearly emphasized; the OVW Class of 2002 has become veterans in their own rights(tho Batista wasn't mentioned,obviously).


It would've been brilliant if this Brock Lesnar Championship reign post-Streak breaking, would consist of his fellow OVW Class of 2002 standouts being his Challengers in the lead-up to Mania 31 where someone of the New Gen would take him out.
Something like:
SummerSlam & NoC - John Cena
Survivor Series - Randy Orton
Royal Rumble - Batista


Such booking coupled with an eventual 'beating the One in 21 and One' storyline conclusion would Truly signal the "END of an ERA" for the WWE, lMO.

 

[King Patrick Star]

It does sound interesting. It would be similar to when CM Punk walked out and came right back in a very short period of time. We agree that a Championship match should end a Pay Per View, but that’s where the similarities of our opinions end. Don’t get me wrong, it could work, but I rather not see 2 WWE World Champions again. Instead of an Interim WWE Champion, why not just push the Intercontinental Champion and the United States Champion in the Main Event spots on the Pay Per Views that Brock Lesnar doesn’t show up to?? For example, the United States Championship match could Main Event Hell In A Cell, and then a Traditional Survivor Series Elimination Tag Team match could Main Event Survivor Series, and finally, the Intercontinental Championship match could Main Event TLC.

 

[Rayne]

It does sound interesting. It would be similar to when CM Punk walked out and came right back in a very short period of time. We agree that a Championship match should end a Pay Per View, but that’s where the similarities of our opinions end. Don’t get me wrong, it could work, but I rather not see 2 WWE World Champions again. Instead of an Interim WWE Champion, why not just push the Intercontinental Champion and the United States Champion in the Main Event spots on the Pay Per Views that Brock Lesnar doesn’t show up to?? For example, the United States Championship match could Main Event Hell In A Cell, and then a Traditional Survivor Series Elimination Tag Team match could Main Event Survivor Series, and finally, the Intercontinental Championship match could Main Event TLC.

There aren't "two" champions, except for a brief period of time where you reconcile the belts. This is different than the World Heavyweight Championship/WWE Championship era, where you had two champions on separate programs, and as the brand split ended, two champions on the same show. You have one champion who is out-of-sight-but-still-in-mind, and another who highlights your show. There's room for plenty of 'real champion' talk and 'ran away from a fight' talk to set up your Royal Rumble unification match.

As far as the US/Intercontinental championships headlining a show goes.... this isn't 1995. It's a program driven around a few top-tier personalities, and unless you're prepared to make John Cena or Randy Orton an Intercontinental champion, people are going to pass on a pay-per-view when Kofi Kingston vs. Sheamus is the headliner.

 

[Mudlup50]

I feel like this idea was already suggested like a month back, I only say that because it seemed like most of the community was against it at the time. I think it's fine like it is, right now every other title should be elevated! And if you look at it, they sort of are. Ziggler is a 2 time world champ, Sheamus is a former world champ. Sheamus is feuding with a former world champ. They just need actual storylines behind these belts!

Anyway, while I like the idea it just seems to be a way to get people off their case. Think about this. If you get the Network(which every country has now right?) you would have re-subbed in September. You already got 1 Lesnar match(an actual match not an ass kicking), you'll get another at Survivor Series or Royal Rumble and you'll get the set up for Wrestlemania. What do you do then? Well you just saw 2 title matches and you wanna see Lesnar lose the belt so you re-sub which coasts you into September of next year when we will probably see another new champ.

I don't think it should matter if Lesnar isn't there at all. If Punk's reign proved anything, it's that Cena main events pretty much regardless. Lesnar is a draw no doubt, but other guys are getting the spot light without the belt. That's what matters.

How many people unsubscribed because they knew Lesnar was going to be gone? Seriously? I doubt much of anyone. And the people complaining that Lesnar isn't there, don't quite get that he's 1 guy in the machine. Brock's gone, so cheer for someone else. Plus the champ being off TV adds heat to his character, helping keep him as a superheel.

Now maybe they could have both cell matches be number 1 contedership matches for Survivor Series, we would have Cena v Ambrose...but then Cena wins the belt back to face Lesnar at Royal Rumble. Does it give him the 16th reign? Or do we just act like it never happened? All this just so that way we can say the champ is here for 2 months? For 9 Raws?

To the guy saying split the belts again...no, just no. When Lesnar won the undisputed championship he was the reason the belts split. Okay that happens, but if it were to happen again! I would hope Brock would go straight to Vince and F5 him over and over again. Plus they just unified the belts 10 months ago, just to break them apart...which to be fair, is what happened with the Undisputed championship.

The MitB briefcase comment, I agree with but I don't see the problem. If Brock shows up for Survivor Series, Royal Rumble, Wrestlemania, and someone takes it...that gives Rollins what about 20 different Raws/PPV's to cash in?

The worst part is the fact I think Seth will lose when he cashes in. And I've said this since Brock won the belt, it just seems like Reigns/Bryan will win the belt and Seth will cash in only to lose. Thus establishing a new superface(like Cena). But this would make Rollins look weak. If Seth were to win it, the belt would lose a lot of prestige after 2 long reigns and 2 short ones that should have been only one. Which is why I think the WWE should get rid of the MitB briefcase, or at least tweak it...but that's just me

Back to point, I don't think interim champions should happen.

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

I'm against this.

The idea in general is fine but the fact of the matter is, an interim champion in a scripted show just seems more likely to unravel as farcical in a fan's eye. Maybe that is why they got Punk back in so early in 2011. I think we were ready for a tournament finally this year for the WWE Championship, but those are powder-kegs too. And god knows, that was what MiTB this year was. Like a 30 minute crash-tourney.

An interim champ, somehow, can't be taken seriously. And when someone wins the title off him (unifies), it isn't the same thing really.

 

[CrucifiedRaven]

Depends how "MMA" they want to go with their style of booking around Lesnar as champion. If they really wanted to try and copy the UFC format to "legitimize" their own title and champions, then sure. It wouldn't be a bad idea. Everyone would know it would be a straight ploy from UFC, but when it comes to comparing a pro wrestler to an MMA fighter might not be a bad thing.

If they don't book Lesnar for Survivor Series then his run is a bit of a waste. Especially if his only defences prior to 'Mania are vs John Cena. Keeping him off of TV/PPV until Dec/Jan is a bad idea. Having him defend at every other PPV is fine though. Orton should get his shot at Survivor Series... then if they really wanted to have Cena/Lesnar IV (please no) do it at the Rumble. Or maybe a Lesnar/Orton/Cena triple threat at the Royal Rumble.

If they keep the champion defending it on every other PPV (similar to Goldberg in WCW), there is no need for an "interim" champion. If Lesnar misses three straight PPV's without being seen... then the WWE has some explaining to do.

 

[Dagger Dias]

Creating an Interim WWE Champion would be a bad idea. The simple solution is this.... If Lesnar cannot show up a single time during an entire PPV cycle, then he should NOT be the World Heavyweight Champion. Period. I don't care if the PPV itself is the only time he shows up, if he defends the belt even once in the PPV cycle, then that's all that matters. Why set up a championship that in the end wouldn't even matter? The actual WWE Championship is the one that truly matters. Then there's the matter of how WWE can't even make their midcard belts matter, so what makes anyone think that they would make this belt matter? As of right now, there's not a single belt that the federation treats the way it should. Including the World Heavyweight Championship. Until the WWE fixes that and books its belts to the point to where people care, no new titles of any kind should ever be added.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

Isn't the current champion technically an interim champion since Daniel Bryan was stripped due to injury?

That's the only thing that makes this not as appealing to me. Your story is that Brock wins a title that Cena had (which he never beat Bryan). Brock beats everyone but Bryan. Bryan wins it back at WM31.