Title Changes On TV

[ARLO]

It has come to my attention that every current championship in the WWE (except for the Divas) was won on TV. We have:

The Miz - WWE Championship Nov 22 2010 RAW
Sheamus - US Championship Mar 14 RAW
Edge - WHC Feb 18 Smackdown!
Kofi Kingston - Jan 7 Smackdown!
The Corre - Tag Team Championships Feb 21 RAW

Did you notice this rare occurrence?
Do you like having titles change hand on television rather than PPV?

 

[Decarow]

Well, technically Edge's last win was on Smackdown. But let's be real. He won it at TLC and they did the bullshit vacancy to give Ziggler a bullshit reign when he deserved more.

Tag Team, US, and IC titles are kind of expected to change hands more frequently on tv though.

Miz cashed in MITB, which has been on TV just as many times as on PPV.

It is a rare occurance, but doesn't mean anything. I think you're looking too far into something man.

Good observation though.

 

[ARLO]

Well, technically Edge's last win was on Smackdown. But let's be real. He won it at TLC and they did the bullshit vacancy to give Ziggler a bullshit reign when he deserved more.

Tag Team, US, and IC titles are kind of expected to change hands more frequently on tv though.

Miz cashed in MITB, which has been on TV just as many times as on PPV.

It is a rare occurance, but doesn't mean anything. I think you're looking too far into something man.

Good observation though.

I know about Edge. And I believe the tag titles was a similar deal. plus, Sheamus was never gonna quit.

I for one am glad that titles are changing on tv. I think it opens the window for younger talent.

 

[Decarow]

Well personally, I think the world titles should rarely even be defended on TV. Only for special occasions. That helps with PPV buys.

But it's great for the poorer college student fans like myself that can't afford PPVs, to actually see a title change.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

World Championships are rarely defended on television most of the time. When Edge won the WHC for the first time, he did defend the title several times on television, much more than I can recall seeing in a very long time. When The Miz won the WWE Championship on Raw late last year, it was only the second time in about 4.5 years that the title had changed hands on television.

I like title changes when they happen on television as long as they don't happen too often. Title changes almost always happen at ppvs rather than on tv or at house shows and it can potentially give a certain show a shot in the arm if viewers know that there's a legit chance a title will change on tv for free.

 

[The Suplexer Perfecter]

Hey back in 1999 the WWE title changed hands on TV a lot. But right now it's a rare occurrence. Plus those title reigns before were pretty long, like Bryan's, and Ziggler's before Kofi won it.

If they do it as a rare event, maybe once a year for a world title, that would be OK. Of course if someone get's injured they should do it on TV.

 

[TonyLo]

Actually, the Divas Championship has changed on TV.Two or three years ago, Maryse defeated Michelle McCool on Smackdown, becoming the new Divas champion.This was Maryse's first reign as Divas champion.

But they try not to make a big case of the championships changing hands on TV, because they also rarely have championship matches on free TV.How would it look if every time a championship was defended on a show, which is about once or twice a month, if it changed hands that many times? Its bad enough that championships tend to mostly change hands every PPV or even every other PPV, why every time on free TV?

Those would be way too many championship changes.

 

[dizzle1119]

The World Heavyweight or WWE Championships changing hands on television once in a while is expected. It creates some buzz and makes fans think they don't have to pay money to see a title change hands. It also makes them tune in again next week, because the company has created an "anything can happen" atmosphere. The buzz & atmosphere usually don't last long, but it's cool while it's happening.

Now, to answer your questions.

1. No, I didn't notice. I rarely get a chance to watch Smackdown. I usually spend fridays with my woman and the kids.

2. Yes, I think it's cool for the main titles to change hands on regular tv once in a while. I wouldn't want it to happen constantly, though...

 

[The Calgary Kid]

I think it's great when titles change hands on TV. It makes casual and hardcore fans alike more likely to tune in. The WWE title alone has had four defenses on Raw between Orton (Barrett, Miz cash-in) and Miz (Lawler, Morrison), in addition to Cena's rematch after Fatal 4 Way (spoiled by Nexus) and Sheamus's squash of Zack Ryder just a few months ago. It's a welcome change, after a very lengthy hiatus for that title to be defended on Raw (granted the Ryder match was a joke).

I am in favor of it as long as it's not just a constant cock-tease and it never, ever changes hands. The point is to make the competition look valid and also treat fans who don't/can't order the PPVs. If, in theory, the title was defended at twenty TV tapings and ten PPVs, but only changed hands on PPV, that would look like BS and could arguably alienate fans. Obviously that's a hypothetical scenario, and the WWE title is rarely defended on free TV.

As an interesting side note, Miz has never won a title at a PPV. All were on TV, except winning the World Tag Titles with Morrison at a house show.

 

[risephoenixrise]

A title change is as important as a company makes it. If they are going to have title changes on TV for free, then it makes the PPVs seem less important. And with the cost of PPV events, it gives the fans the impression that they don't need to order the PPVs.

I'm all for a good match, and if I get to see it for free, awesome. The fans don't lose anything other than the money they wasted on a PPV.