Two Wrestlers holding one singles-title at the same time?

[Deoxyribonucleic A.C.I.D.]

I thought of this a couple of daysago and decided to share it here with you guys. I know that there are a lot of crazy bookers in here.

Now, on topic this is obviously something that has never been done before and could be very very very controversial on many levels. I'll get to that in a minute.

Let's say that in the current storyline between "The Corporation" and Daniel Bryan, Bryan manages to overcome the odds and beats Orton for the title. Triple H gets furious and angry and decides to place Bryan against a Tag Team in a Handicap match for the WWE Championship. Of course, that team wins and becomes the "WWE Champion". Now that is only an example.

Also, the team that achieve that must definately be heels, as this seems like a heelish way to win the belt.

Now, on to the pros and cons:
Pros:
1) This something that has never been done before and could provide interesting TV if done correctly.
2) It gives the "champion" instant heat and make the title hunt for the challenger much more easier.

Cons:
1) The tag team members must be main event players if we're talking about a bigger belt like the WWE or World Heavyweight Championship/
2) For some, it may devaluate the Championship, since that is a Singles Championship and it is supposed to be held by THE Champion, one person.
That being said, it is controversial since we're talking about titles with history, not some storyline like Mae Young's son/daughter, whatever that hand was.

A lot of groundbreaking things have happened during the course of years like women competing in the Rumble, Chyna winning a men's title, Money In The Bank, Kurt Angle holding every title in Tna etc.

Please discuss.

 

[Slash-LN]

It hasn't been done on a main event level but Chyna and Jericho held the Intercontinental title at the same time and LayCool held the Women's title at the same time.

Would this be handled differently?
I don't think it would devalue the title in any way. I think ultimately it would lead to the co holders feuding for the title with one of them likely turning face.

 

[Eyebrows]

I don't like it for the main titles but I guess it could still work for the undercard. The Chyna/Jericho program was sort of interesting. If they did it for the main event at the moment it'd only get in the way of the story they're trying to tell with Orton/Bryan.

I suppose when Punk left with the belt and Mysterio then Cena won the WWE Championship in his absence that they've technically already done this.

TNA have done it before with the X-Division title with Kaz and Michael Shane and WCW did it once with the cruiserweight title too, so it isn't really a new concept and it only ever works short-term.

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

It's a rare sight to see 2 wrestlers holding a singles title, but it has been done before in the examples listed above. Personally, I don't think it devalues the title but its just a short-term gimmick and is only ever a short-term storyline. At least it would offer something different to most feuds, and would likely end up with the tag-team partners feuding and a face turn for one of them.

 

[King Patrick Star]

I don’t think two Wrestlers holding one singles Title at the same time is a good idea. I didn’t like it when Jericho and Chyna did it with the Intercontinental Championship, and I don’t think I’ll like it if it were to happen again with any 2 SuperStars with any Title. Now, one SuperStar holding 2 singles Championships is the way to go, but that’s for the other thread.

 

[WWEWrestleFest]

It wouldn't work because there's the obvious question - why don't they just wrestle for the championship?