What exactly brings Prestige to a Title?

[rko57]

I dont know if this is in the right section since it applies to both RAW and SD!, but also applys to TNA. Move if necessary

Anyways, now to the topic. I read and see people bitch and moan about a title not being prestigious anymore, or how it needs to get prestige. I mean for the IC Title you have HoFers who have held onto it and that made it prestigious, but then people said for the past few years it's lost prestige, until recently while Ziggler has been champion, people are saying prestige is back to the title. That is just one example.

Now you tell me, what exactly makes a title prestigious?

 

[Mr. Steve]

I don't know if this is in the right section since it applies to both RAW and SD!, but also applys to TNA. Move if necessary

Anyways, now to the topic. I read and see people bitch and moan about a title not being prestigious anymore, or how it needs to get prestige. I mean for the IC Title you have HoFers who have held onto it and that made it prestigious, but then people said for the past few years it's lost prestige, until recently while Ziggler has been champion, people are saying prestige is back to the title. That is just one example.

Now you tell me, what exactly makes a title prestigious?

well, it's mainly for people that can fit the description of what the fans have been held to believed in terms of what that particular champion is. Take the mid card titles in WWE. the IC has been described as the "stepping stone" to the Main event or the cornerstones of the midcard scene. The "lifers", if one has to term it like that. Which, Ziggler fits into the equation rather nicely (the main event, not the mid card cornerstone), once one thinks about it. Thing is, the title loses its luster, so to speak, when it's given to people that DON'T actually fit the mold that WWE has beset. Guys that aren't quite ready to be given a championship run and guys who have held a main event title then go back to the Mid-Card and get it. This just destabilizes the very meaning of the Mid-Card division in the WWE: guys that have the potential to break the Glass ceiling. Why? You have guys that already broke it then go down on a whim. This move just eclipses the other dudes already working the Mid-Card, since the one that had a WHC title run, or a TNA championship title will just not look the same compared to a fresh face that never had a title run. Take, for example, Chris Jericho vs. Dolph Ziggler. Which of the two will be a more believable IC champ?

For tag teams, it's supposed to be for these teams who are pretty much DESTINED to be a team. Guys who are capable of carrying the division on their backs, like any other champion on their respective place in the pecking order.

Main Event: Well, this one's simple. It's the guys that are ACTUALLY perceived as holding on to the title for a lengthy amount of time, heel or face. Take The Miz. Right now, he's making people BELIEVE he'll have the longest title run ever, and he will not lose the title, and all that jazz. Besides, for all we know, he might lose it next Monday. What back up this claim he is making? He won't win clean (interferences abound, yo!). I mean, cowardly heels DON'T win clean, of course. So yes, for the case of the Nickle-Colored Brass Ring (I made that up!), it needs to be believable, and at least more than a TV dinner run (doesn't need to be lengthy. Just satisfying for the fans.)

 

[Kaeden]

In short, what makes a title prestigious is the quality of the combatants for it, and the reverence given to it. The Legends/Global/TV title in TNA frequently has its prestige called into question. Why? Because they changed the name, rarely featured it on television, created a silly stipulation for its defense, and put it on guys no one cared about. In recent weeks AJ Styles and Douglas Williams have begun to make legitimate competition for it. It can be saved. Conversely, the X-Division title has fallen off the planet, and been dragged through the mud, featuring last-second matchups and Robbie E.

In the WWE, the tag team titles are considered to be at an all-time low. Why? Because the division is weak. When was the last time you saw a good tag team matchup? And how long are these teams together before they win those belts? They feel like an afterthought, so they are perceived as such.

The intercontinental title 'lost' prestige when it was thrown around in matches with guys who didn't seem to care about it. Also, Santino. I love him to death, but a comedy angle does not build prestige. But now, Ziggles defends the belt like its his own world title. The matches are meaningful, and he carries the title, not like a stepping stone, but as if it were already the top prize. That creates prestige.

 

[Suxen Redael]

I have always had the thought that the only way to give a title its prestige back is to give the title to a big name. If you give the IC title to Randy Orton, people will look at the IC title as something big because it will bring the IC title back to main event status and people will look forward to who can take the IC title from Orton. The quickest way to bring prestige back to a title is to put it around a bigger name.

 

[Mr. Steve]

I have always had the thought that the only way to give a title its prestige back is to give the title to a big name. If you give the IC title to Randy Orton, people will look at the IC title as something big because it will bring the IC title back to main event status and people will look forward to who can take the IC title from Orton. The quickest way to bring prestige back to a title is to put it around a bigger name.

But that brings attention to the holder, not the title. Which is the problem. Stuff like that DOES and HAS taken away from the title. I mean, why would you want Orton, a guy that's way too cemented in the main event, to just go back down to the mid-card? Within the context of kayfabe and the like, Orton will just stomp all over everyone there, and just dominate the division too much. Now ask yourself this now: What happens to the title when it's taken from Orton? Will both the holder and the title possess the same presence that Orton when he had it, taking your scenario in mind? Or, was the title run worth it to Orton? It's detrimental to the worker and the strap.

I don't agree in the sense that there's a quick way to bring prestige to a title altogether. There's got to be a careful, composed way of making sure that the title keeps its definition: putting that mid card guy that you want in the main event over with that very title. Putting the strap on the main event guy will prove an inverted scenario: in the eyes of the fans, the title won't be the center of attention.

 

[marklouis]

I think the best way to bring prestige to a title is to make it meaningful. Have it defended on a regular basis, & have the person who carries it actually care about it. The US title right now isn't as prestigous as it should be, not because Daniel Bryan is a poor champion, but because WWE doesn't care about the title. It wasn't defended on the last PPV, & it just seems to be forgotten in general.

The WWE tag titles are irrelevant b/c the WWE doesn't seem to care about the tag division. If they created a few tag teams & kept them together for a few years, the titles would mean something. The Hart Dynasty was broken up far too soon. Why didn't they have a lengthy feud with the Usos or Nexus? You can't continue to pair up 2 random singles stars & give them the belts.

For TNA, the TV title is getting some prestige with the Styles/Williams rivalry. But Styles should've been defending the title more often when he held it. This was another reason why I think the EV2 storyline did more harm than good. It would be better, though, if Styles were feuding with a star closer to his level, someone like The Pope or Samoa Joe. Williams doesn't really move the needle.

The X divison is just very poor at the moment. A long feud between Lethal & Kazarian for the title would be a good way to restore some prestige to the title.

 

[safeco1999]

Prestige is value/worth.

It's gained when you put the belt on someone to recognize them as being one of the best in the world, and they actually go out and defend that honor.

Look at Bret Hart - he faught many challengers and held the belt for a decent amount of time. That makes the belt hard to obtain, and if you can knock off someone who's beaten so many others, it makes it valuable.

Titles have lost their value the past 10 years because no one can really defend it properly. The titles switch too quick, and a lot of times, the belt has gone on guys who have no other storyline to work with, so they just 'fight for the belt'. There are exceptions to the 'quick switches', such as when Foley/Rock battled for a while. But nowadays, who really remembers how many belts Orton or whoever has won.

Back in the day, you could remember the title history dating back for a few years (i.e. Flair > Bret > Yoko > Hogan > Yoko > Bret.. etc) You remembered those matches. But later on, every week the belt was changing hands. Nowadays, the belt is defended once a month, while every other week, the champion is in a weird tag team match or something stupid.

Hopefully this gives you a good idea about how belts gain value. Scarcity and the difficulty to obtain the belt is where the value is.

 

[johnbragg]

I don't know if my idea would add prestige to a midcard title, but I throw it into every discussion of midcard titles after a while.

I'd strengthen the midcard title by separating the main eventers from the midcard.

Create a rule that only certain, select wrestlers are even eligible to challenge for the world title. Have a rule that separates the world-title-eligible from everyone else. It could be a set number of contenders (I'd go with four, so that in case of a vacancy you have a tournament ready), or set rules--former world champions from the past 2-3 years plus wrestlers who have earned a title shot--MITB, Royal Rumble, etc.

Then declare that anyone who holds the US/IC title for X days or Y defenses or defeats Z challengers earns a world title shot.

Say this rule is implemented the night after the Royal Rumble. Miz and Edge are still champions, with Seamus, Cena, Orton, (Batista) and HHH plus Kane, Punk, Mysterio, Swagger and Undertaker(and Jeff Hardy) as recent champions. Whoever wins the Rumble is eligible, plus 5 recent champions on Raw and 3 on Smackdown.

Everyone else needs to go through the IC/US champion to get a world title shot (unless they win MITB--someone said in the last IC title prestige thread, "They still have the IC title for the next main eventer, they just call it the MITB briefcase.")

People have said, just give the IC title to a main eventer (Orton) and the title is elevated, but I still remember when HHH came back from his first big quad injury and won the IC title, allied to world champ Steve Austin. I was still pretty new to wrestling, but just didn't buy the story of why HHH would settle for the lesser title instead of challenging Austin.

 

[deadtaker]

The title needs to be important o the wrestler and it must be something they want and desire. For the mid-card title like The I-C and U.S title you ave to have guys that actually compete for it and look at it as a status builder and road to the Main Event.

Chris Jericho and Chris Benoit had several great matches for the I-C belt before they became heavyweight Champions. Stone Cold and Owen Hart battled for the title same with The Rock and Triple H. These guys all went through battles for the title where it meant a lot to them as a way of proving themselfs for a title.

The length of the reign matters a lot as well. The heavyweight title has lost its "prestige" because it seems so easy to attain now. The easier it is to achieve the belt loses its lustre. The truly top stars use to carry the belt now you have guys come in and win it withing a year or two. That effects the mid card title as well as wrestlers are by-passing that belt to the Championship.

It needs to be a slow build and longer road because if the guy needs to work for it and it is harder to get then it is more important. If you come in and win within months then how does it make the champion look if he is losing to some rookie or newbie?

 

[Jack-Hammer]

As with everything else in wrestling, title prestige can often been seen as a matter of personal perception. One thing that a lot of people are hung up on is the length of a title run. A long title reign can be a good thing or a bad thing. If you put a title on someone for a long period of time and everything that the champ is involved in is lackluster, then the reign can often be seen as a failure. And the alternate is true sometimes for a shorter run. I've seen some wrestlers do more in 30 days with feuds, matches and general interest than some have in 6 months. Length can, of course, add meaning to the title as it's hard to take a title serious when it changes hands once a month or so.

For me, it's a combination of a lot of things. Length is a factor but, for me, the single most important factor is interest. Is the guy holding a title generating interest in fans to see what he's involved in? Does he have people talking about him, his feuds, his matches, what he's doing in general, etc.? If people don't care, then it doesn't matter how good he looks or how athletic he is or how great of a high flyer or mat technician he is. All of those can, of course, contribute to a wrestler's success by generating interest but sometimes not.

People sometimes hate on The Miz, for instance, because he doesn't fit what their personal idea of a World Champion should be. However, he's generated a lot of renewed interest in the WWE Championship picture, maybe more than there's been in years. Whether you like him or not, most want to see what happens with him next and what he's involved in.

A good champion having good feuds and good matches for the championship makes it prestigious in my view.

 

[OutsiderDX]

The biggest factor is how a wrestler shows his desire to be champion.

One of the best examples of this was Unforgiven 2008- When Chris Jericho won the title in the scramble match, he clutched the world title to his chest, hugging it and protecting it with a fierceness in his eyes. He put the gold belt to his face and head, in an attempt to get as close as possible to it. With those tiny actions alone, i felt like that title was now the most important thing in the WWE. If a man can desire to be champion so much, it has to be important.

A subsequently how a wrestler acts after losing the title is just as important.

I specifically remember Mickie James losing her women's title on a ppv, then the next night she came skipping out to her music. I lost total respect for her at that very moment. It was obvious the title was meaningless to her if she can be cheerful and happy less than 24 hours after losing the title.

 

[OutsiderDX]

The biggest factor is how a wrestler shows his desire to be champion.

One of the best examples of this was Unforgiven 2008- When Chris Jericho won the title in the scramble match, he clutched the world title to his chest, hugging it and protecting it with a fierceness in his eyes. He put the gold belt to his face and head, in an attempt to get as close as possible to it. With those tiny actions alone, i felt like that title was now the most important thing in the WWE. If a man can desire to be champion so much, it has to be important.

A subsequently how a wrestler acts after losing the title is just as important.

I specifically remember Mickie James losing her women's title on a ppv, then the next night she came skipping out to her music. I lost total respect for her at that very moment. It was obvious the title was meaningless to her if she can be cheerful and happy less than 24 hours after losing the title.

 

[safeco1999]

A subsequently how a wrestler acts after losing the title is just as important.

I specifically remember Mickie James losing her women's title on a ppv, then the next night she came skipping out to her music. I lost total respect for her at that very moment. It was obvious the title was meaningless to her if she can be cheerful and happy less than 24 hours after losing the title.

I remember after a year long run, Diesel lost the belt to Bret, and totally went nuts back in 95. That reaction was awesome. Everytime Bret defended the belt, he would kiss it before every match. Of course Shawn winning the belt in 96, too. So, good point made, about the reactions of wrestlers. It actually does make a difference to the fans on how these guys react.