Those other world championships in the WWE

[CM Steel]

The old WCW title made it's return to the WWE in the summer of '01 during the invasion angle with Booker T as champion. While the ECW championship made it's debut in the WWE two nights after the One Night Stand 2 pay per-view on the first episode of "ECW" in the WWE, where it was rewarded to the then-WWE champion Rob Van Dam. Never have all three major world titles have been in one wrestling promotion. The old WCW title was re-dubbed the WWE world heavyweight championship on RAW in the summer of '02 when it was rewarded to Triple H from then RAW general manager Eric Bischoff.

As time went on both world titles were getting tainted while active in the WWE. By the time Jack Swagger won the World Heavyweight Championship from Chris Jericho via the Money in the Bank contract, the WHC was looked upon as a secondary world title by then instead of being equal to the WWE championship. While with the ECW championship by the time when Johnny Nitro/John Morrison won the vacant ECW title against CM Punk the title started to look like the IC/U.S. championship of ECW in where any mid-card wrestler could win it.

But in your opinion. Where do you think the world titles of WCW & ECW took a wrong turn at while active in the WWE? And why?

 

[Bobbywoodhogan]

To be honest when they gave the WWE World a Heavyweight Title to a Triple H it was from the get go the secondary main title. Giving it to Triple H was one of the dumbest moments I'd seen in WWE. I do feel the title got back some pride when Benoit won it at Mania XX but then it went to Randy Orton and back to Triple H in no time.

I wasn't watching WWE at the time they brought back ECW but I can only imagine having yet another world title, along with two others and other mid-card belts only further dilutes the importance.

On the subject of the titles, admittedly I don't watch WWE anymore but I do tend to check the website now and then. I saw the new WWE title the other day and it's ugly as hell. This logo belt idea makes the damn thing look like a toy, same as that spinner belt. They should have stuck with the big gold belt, it just looks like the world title should in my opinion. It's different style sets it apart from any of the other belts and I always found that important.

 

[No Count Pup]

I think the world titles took bad turns in 2006. Let's start with the WHC. For the first three to four years, Raw and Smackdown were seen as roughly equal. But when WWE decided to elevate Raw and kick Smackdown into the ditch, the WHC got dragged through the dirt with it. Time for a stroll down memory lane:

Batista got injured in early 2006, and everything got wacky on the blue show. Kurt Angle won a battle royal for the title, and Rey Mysterio won the strap at WrestleMania. His reign was just rank awful. Did things get better? No! Booker T then got the gold and the reign of boredom was in full swing. In my view, the WHC on Smackdown never recovered. Sure, Batista and Undertaker had a great WrestleMania match. And yes, Edge did his best to resuscitate the belt. Unfortunately, the damage was done. The WHC equaled the WWE Championship only one more time, and that was during the 2008-2009 draft year when it was exclusive to Raw. After that time frame the belt was relegated to permanent number 2 status.

*That's not to say the belt became irrelevant. I wish the WHC was still a sovereign world title. But since 2006, WWE has shown where its priorities are.

The ECW Championship was dead in 2006 at December to Dismember. Bobbly Lashley won the title and walked it into oblivion. Rob Van Dam and Big Show were believable champions. They had a resume, they had an extreme style. Look at the hurtin Big Show put on Sabu at SummerSlam 2006. That all ended when Lashley won the title, the day the music died. He capped off the worst pay-per-view of the decade, and would find his first reign halted by Vince McMahon himself.

All in all, I keep this in mind: If WWE wanted to, they could re-institute the belts tomorrow and make them headline titles. It's all about how WWE prioritizes things. Title descents are corporate decisions. There may come a day when the WHC returns as the equivalent to the WWE Title. There may also come a day when the WWE Network brings back ECW. On both fronts, I won't hold my breath.

 

[Aquaman6686]

The old WCW title made it's return to the WWE in the summer of '01 during the invasion angle with Booker T as champion. While the ECW championship made it's debut in the WWE two nights after the One Night Stand 2 pay per-view on the first episode of "ECW" in the WWE, where it was rewarded to the then-WWE champion Rob Van Dam. Never have all three major world titles have been in one wrestling promotion. The old WCW title was re-dubbed the WWE world heavyweight championship on RAW in the summer of '02 when it was rewarded to Triple H from then RAW general manager Eric Bischoff.

As time went on both world titles were getting tainted while active in the WWE. By the time Jack Swagger won the World Heavyweight Championship from Chris Jericho via the Money in the Bank contract, the WHC was looked upon as a secondary world title by then instead of being equal to the WWE championship. While with the ECW championship by the time when Johnny Nitro/John Morrison won the vacant ECW title against CM Punk the title started to look like the IC/U.S. championship of ECW in where any mid-card wrestler could win it.

But in your opinion. Where do you think the world titles of WCW & ECW took a wrong turn at while active in the WWE? And why?

The World Heavyweight Championship was NOT the WCW Championship. It was a brand new title using the Big Gold Belt as its physical form. Triple H was the first World Heavyweight Champion and Randy Orton was the final World Heavyweight Champion. The only reason WWE had the WCW title history on the World Heavyweight Championship page for a few years was that they wanted the belt to instantly be seen as equal to the WWE Championship. After a few years they took the WCW stuff off the page because they felt the title had acquired a history of its own.

As for the ECW Championship, as far as I'm concerned it had far MORE prestige in WWE than in the original ECW. The original ECW was a regional promotion that didn't have a true World Championship. They had a few good years and got on national TV for a while, but their top title was still a regional championship because it was never defended overseas. From 2006 to 2010, the ECW Championship was a legitimate World Championship no matter how much ECW fans whine and complain about it. It's not a matter of opinion, it's a simple fact. From August 27, 1994 until April 10th, 2001, it was a regional title. From June 13th, 2006 to February 16th, 2010, it was a WORLD Championship.

I've been watching wrestling for well over 20 years and I had zero problem with the multiple World Championships situation. I don't know why so many people have such a passionate hatred for that, as well as the Brand Extension in general, which in my book was the single best thing WWE ever did. What WWE did wrong was stop treating the brands and titles as equals. WWE promoted SmackDown and the World Heavyweight Championship as the B show and the B championship, and that's why the fans stopped caring about the title, not the other way around.

 

[Bobbywoodhogan]

Aquaman, I agree that multiple World Championships can be fine, especially if there is a roster split. It really is down to how the belt is used, booked etc and that they are seen as equal.

 

[Charismatic Enigma]

I think it took a turn the day there was no company to represent its legacy. I remember thinking how stupid it was when they announced "The Hardys are the new WCW tag team champions!" and there was no WCW. It would be like working at Netflix and having them appoint you the CEO of Blockbuster.

The only way having multiple championships work is when there is a legitimate brand split, with virtually no cross-over. Even though I already miss the big gold belt, I am definitely in favor of having one belt for one company.

 

[The Boss]

The World Heavyweight Championship was NOT the WCW Championship. It was a brand new title using the Big Gold Belt as its physical form.

Not according to the official WWE DVD "The history of the World Heavyweight title". On that DVD they indeed recognize the WCW years as part of the title's history. In fact the chapter in which it was awarded to Triple H is called, ""World Championship Returns". Now how can it return if it's a new title?. Then to hear Eric Bischoff say, " you may recognize this championship. It's been worn by some of the greats." and then in the DVD exclusive to hear Triple H "It was good to have that title back UN play." proves that the WHC had history before Triple H.

Furthermore one the DVD "The history of the WWE Championship" Jim Ross mentioned that the the undisputed belt was created "to represent BOTH titles". In other words the the formerly named WCW World title (it had been renamed simply "World" title before Jericho won them both) was still an active championship and the titles were not unified but merely held simultaneously.

On top of that WWE magazine also recognized the titles as one and the same. The ONLY WWE source (wikipedia is NOT an official source) that says otherwise is the old WCW title history on wwe.com which is just an old forgotten page. Without a doubt the WCW and WHC World titles are one and the same.

 

[Aquaman6686]

Not according to the official WWE DVD "The history of the World Heavyweight title". On that DVD they indeed recognize the WCW years as part of the title's history. In fact the chapter in which it was awarded to Triple H is called, ""World Championship Returns". Now how can it return if it's a new title?. Then to hear Eric Bischoff say, " you may recognize this championship. It's been worn by some of the greats." and then in the DVD exclusive to hear Triple H "It was good to have that title back UN play." proves that the WHC had history before Triple H.

Furthermore one the DVD "The history of the WWE Championship" Jim Ross mentioned that the the undisputed belt was created "to represent BOTH titles". In other words the the formerly named WCW World title (it had been renamed simply "World" title before Jericho won them both) was still an active championship and the titles were not unified but merely held simultaneously.

On top of that WWE magazine also recognized the titles as one and the same. The ONLY WWE source (wikipedia is NOT an official source) that says otherwise is the old WCW title history on wwe.com which is just an old forgotten page. Without a doubt the WCW and WHC World titles are one and the same.

WWE.com's official title history trumps DVD documentaries. The only reason they said those quotes in the DVDs was to try to add more prestige the title while it was on RAW, because Vince didn't want fans viewing "RAW's title" as an inferior belt. The World Heavyweight Championship was created on September 2nd, 2002 and Triple H was the first champion, while Randy Orton was the last. In fact WWE's brand new feature from late last week once again states that "The Big Gold Belt has represented five distinct championships - the NWA World Heavyweight Championship, the WCW World Heavyweight Championship, the WCW International Heavyweight Championship, the Undisputed WWE Championship, and the WWE's own version of the World Heavyweight Championship".

 

[WBL]

Something I want to clarify here for any newcomers. Holding a title and holding a belt are two separate things. Usually they go together, but in exceptions like this, while the physical belt itself might be the same, the name and distinction of the actual title is something different altogether. Hence why the lineage of the "Big Gold Plate" splits from when Jericho melded it into the WWE Undisputed title, to when HHH was handed it by Bischoff. Same belt. Different titles.

 

[whoopin' ass]

Aquaman, the World title is and isn't the WCW title - they want to claim its history but not admit it was used in WCW. It is classic WWE picking and choosing what they use even if it makes no sense. But in the end, that is still the WCW title no matter what they name it. Look at the tag titles and how many names they have had since the Attitude era yet today's titles are the same ones that The Hart Foundation had. They have to be or else they have no meaning.

I think when Hunter was given the World title was the start of the problems but things really got messed up when the titles started switching brands. Suddenly whatever was the RAW title was the important one. Plus once they allowed guys to go after either title it got worse as the World title became their "test" title - want to see if a champ will get over or want to make someone champ for some dumb reason? Make them World Champ. I think it was the draft when Cena as wwe champ came to RAW that started it all as until then, both titles seemed to be about equal but once that happened, it all went downhill. As for ECW, Benoit. I think it was supposed to be a real deal and Benoit was going to be the face but after his death, WWE just have up on it. Angle leaving didn't help either.

 

[Aquaman6686]

Look at the tag titles and how many names they have had since the Attitude era yet today's titles are the same ones that The Hart Foundation had. They have to be or else they have no meaning.

Again, wrong. The original World Tag Team Championships were retired n 2010. The WWE Tag Team Championships defended today are the belts created at No Mercy 2002. How is this so confusing for people? It was explicitly stated on numerous occasions.

 

[King Patrick Star]

In my opinion, I always looked at WWE as number 1, WCW as number 2, and ECW as number 3. With that being said, I also looked at their respective Championships that way. When they were all under the WWE banner, I still looked at those 3 that way. That is probably why I viewed the WCW / World Heavyweight Title as the new / current Intercontinental Title and the ECW / WWECW Title as the new / current European Title at the time. It doesn’t matter what you name a Title Belt, number 2 is number 2 and number 3 is number 3. The WWE Championship Title, regardless of the design of the Belt itself, will always be the richest prize in this industry, to me.

 

[Dagger Dias]

The old WCW title was re-dubbed the WWE world heavyweight championship on RAW in the summer of '02 when it was rewarded to Triple H from then RAW general manager Eric Bischoff.

No, that's a different belt that had a very similar design. The World Heavyweight Championship used in WWE from 2002 up until 2013 and the WCW Championship are two completely different belts other than their design which is nearly identical. WWE.com even lists them as two seperate belts. The final WCW Champion was Chris Jericho in December 2001. The first World Heavyweight Champion was Triple H in September 2002. Why do people not understand this!?

Anyway, on to the actual question.

Where do you think the world titles of WCW & ECW took a wrong turn at while active in the WWE? And why?

The ECW Championship during the time it was used in WWE took a wrong turn when Vince McMahon won it. It no longer felt like a big deal. RVD, Big Show, and Bobby Lashley all seemed like legitimate World Champions when they held the belt. John Morrison, CM Punk, Chavo, Kane, Mark Henry, Matt Hardy, Jack Swagger, Ezekiel Jackson, and Tommy Dreamer all looked like midcarders holding the belt. Even Christian could be argued as not looking like a top tier champion when he held the belt.

As for the WCW Championship, I don't see a time where it went downhill in WWE considering it was only in use in WWE for less than a year. If we are speaking about the World Heavyweight Championship, it was in 2011. A lot of people seem to think it was when Swagger won it. I'd argue it remained rather relevant for a little bit longer. When Alberto Del Rio won the Royal Rumble in 2011 getting the opportunity to OPEN Wrestlemania 27 in a World Heavyweight Championship match, that for me was when that belt stopped being booked like a legitimate world title and seemed barely a step above the midcard belts for nearly the rest of the time it was around.