Which Path To A World Title Do You Prefer?

[Mantis]

I feel like there are two general paths to winning a World Championship.

The first is what I like to call the traditional path. This is where a wrestler pays his dues for a while and works through various feuds before getting involved in the mid-card singles and/or tag-team title picture. Once this talent really gets over with the crowd (via character change, face/heel turn, etc), then they are sent into the main event picture before eventually winning the big one. This is the more prevalent path as we've seen it with everyone from Bret Hart, to HBK, to Stone Cold, to John Cena, etc....

The other path is what I call the hotshot path, where a guy skips most of the traditional path and wins a World Title as his first championship. Examples would be Undertaker, Brock Lesnar, Sheamus, and Alberto Del Rio.

I generally prefer the traditional route, because it usually takes time to get the fans to really love or hate someone. And I just like seeing someone work his way up the ranks through the roster and different titles with a World Championship as the culmination of all that work.

The hotshot path has its place too, but it only works well when a wrestler is truly over and believable as a top guy. Brock Lesnar was probably the best case because he was freakishly strong and almost as skilled and it was easily convincing to see him run through the roster and win the WWE Title very quickly. Sheamus has the look. but I don't feel he generated enough of a reaction, and he had nowhere to go but down. I'm even less pleased with ADR going straight to the title (especially on Raw). I just feel like his character should have evolved a bit before being a main eventer on the A-show. He's still too "gimmicky" to be a believable World Champion.

 

[TheJbody]

I prefer the traditional path.

The traditional path allows a person like Dolph Ziggler or The Miz to get over before they give them the world title. If they don't get over as a US or IC Champ they don't become world champ.

The hotshot path is risky. Look at Del Rio. He's the WWE Champ and he barely gets a reaction.

 

[dcarson108]

The Del Rio "non reaction"claim has to the biggest myth in pro wrestling today. Everyone believes it because that's what a few people said on the internet. Watch the shows, he gets heat. Maybe not the most heat in the company, but to say he gets no reaction is as dumb as saying John Cena is a bad in-ring performer. Watch the show and form your own opinions people, don't just take what the forums are saying!

As for the question, both are good. The traditional way works great and should happen more often, but the hotshot path works extremely well in the right situation. Lesnar was (almost) a perfect example of this. He got over and stayed over.

 

[Da Big Champ]

I do prefer the traditional path. For me this path makes a guy look more like a world champion when he finally wins. For me I'm only now believing that Sheamus is world champion material.

For certain guys I do like the Hot Shot path like ADR but only because he wrestles like a main eventer and he has a main event gimmick.

 

[TheHitMark-SirJoseOle]

I always prefer a wrestler gets pushed the traditional route to become a World Champion, there are exceptions though to this rule i.e. guys like Hulk Hogan, Undertaker and to an extent Brock Lesnar. In Hogan's case, he paid his dues already in the territory system and held the NWA Southeastern Championship (had Hogan arrived on the scene years later he'd probably have been given an IC Title push) and The Undertaker (He had such a hot debut and was so unstoppable that pushing him straight to the World Title was something that worked and despite his first reign was only six days and he had to wait six years before getting the strap back, Taker was further legitimized even with that brief first reign as champion) and Brock Lesnar (obviously a different style than the Undertaker but a similar aura when first arriving in the promotion, totally unstoppable deadly and a brute the King Of The Ring at that time was just as good as winning the IC Title - which was slowly being phased out into a brief retirement - which thankfully didn't last).

However, I have to be honest I prefer seeing most wrestlers take the path of going after a secondary title first. There's a reason those secondary titles existed back in previous eras. There are instances where some wrestlers are frankly not World Title material to begin with (unfortunate but true and I speak mostly of the WWF/E's point of view and not necessarily my own on this one) and there are those who are World Title material but have to grow into that potential first. There's also those instances where some former IC Champions should have been pushed to the WWF World Title period but alas never got that organization's top strap.

But in all seriousness, guys like Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels and Randy Savage all benefited from great IC Title runs that solidified their potential to reach even further heights. Which all three had done and done exceptionally well if I may so myself (pardon the markdom but yeah I mark out for all three but hey their legacies make it hard not to). I think those IC title reigns were essential to test the waters to see what these guys could do with a grander platform.

Then of course there were staples of the IC Title division like Scott Hall, Don Muraco, Honky Tonk Man and Owen Hart that for one reason or another often competed for the World Title but never got the top prize.

Then there were guys that were World Champions elsewhere like Curt Hennig and Rick Rude (Sorry WCW haters but the WCW International World Title counts, period. The Big Gold Belt repped the strap after the NWA/WCW partnership dissolved, therefore I'm calling it a World Title...period.) that you could absolutely make a case for and say, "Why weren't these guys WWF World Champions?". Again like the names I mentioned above, they had competed for the top strap but never won it.

Bottom line in most cases, the path to the World Title in any organization should be built around the competitor rising through the ranks and capturing a secondary title first. Just because it's a better testing ground for who the stars of the future could be. No offense to Jack Swagger (the ECW Title I can't even put in the same criteria as a stepping stone like the IC and US titles) but he's a prime example of how a direct push to the World Title can be a bad thing. Maybe one day he'll recover from that much like CM Punk was able to after his two MiTB wins which lead to his first couple of World Title reigns but to me it's not my favorite style of booking a wrestler.

Because in the end if you push a guy to the secondary straps first but he doesn't go beyond that level you can at least say he had some success but if you push a competitor straight to a World Title and he bottoms out like Swagger has, then you are left wondering, "Where do we go from here?". Had Swagger won the IC and US straps before hand, who knows, maybe he'd be in the main event picture still.

And Alberto Del Rio could well be on his way to that same fate for all we know...only time is going to tell. I also know I might be missing some other examples here, but that's the best I can offer. I look forward to more insight on this topic from others.

 

[Daniel]

Both paths have their places in professional wrestling.

The traditional path obviously allows wrestlers to build up a rapport with the fans before they win a championship. That's good. That's fine. That's the way it should generally be done.

However, I love "hotshotting" titles. Hotshotting has a negative connotation. It shouldn't though. I watch wrestling for surprises. For those moments that make you go "wow, I did not see that coming". Jack Swagger becoming a main eventer in five days was widely criticised. I can understand those complaints, but on the other hand, you had two truly shocking moments. That fact that Swagger turned out to be pretty decent was also a plus. The "surprise path" (as I'm going to call it) should be used sparingly. If it wasn't, surprises would be no longer be surprises.

 

[.]

In wrestling, you can have the long, drawn out push to the top. And you can have the sudden, shocking, title change. I don't see why wrestling promotions have to use the first one 100% of the time and the second one has to always be considered "piss poor".

Bret Hart and Diesel are two guys whose main event WWF runs happened very suddenly. I guess if the internet was around then, it would have crapped on both title changes, but it was exciting stuff(Before i was aware of the internet, I had a huge amount of wrestling ppv's from 1992 royal rumble up until Survivor Series 97 & some RAW's from 1992-1995). Midcarder Bret Hart walking out one week with the world title, having dethroned Ric Flair at a house show...unbelievable! Same deal with Diesel. Mankind was a little higher up maybe when he won his first title - but there was no build to the match itself, and nobody really believed it was going to happen until it did. There's drawbacks to drawing things out. I personally thought the gave the title to Austin way too late...it would have been way more exciting to do it early on his run....Same with Cena. But really, I don't inherently hate either way of doing it - I like seeing being on the receiving end of the story, and not being sure what's going to happen. (and it blows my mind that so many fans here seem to DEMAND specific finishes ahead of time and then RAGE when that isn't delivered.)

If you go into wrestling with a concrete list of a handful of conventions and you're going to throw a hissy fit any time any of them are vioalted, wrestling is just going to make you miserable again, and again, and again.

 

[FutureShocked]

i prefer the traditional approach but sometimes, they over do it (see christian, mark henry, jeff hardy etc) all these guys were talented enough to be world champion years ago but never got the chance. sorry, im goin off topic. the hotshot approach is good too but it has to be done right like lesnar. when sheamus won, it just seemed like an accident. same with alberto del rio with the mitb.

 

[dansaun77]

the days of the traditionl push are over because the business has changed so much. Guys could work for 5-10 years or more, going from promotion to promotion fine tuning their skills and character and being fresh in a new promotion coming in with a new story. Now we get the same dried up boring faces who trade the titles as they have no hot commodities to bring in from elsewhere because WWE has no competition. TNA is full of mid carders and washed ex WWE talent. Ring of Honor will never be a heavyweight in North America without a major tv deal. Trying hard to find somebody since Jericho in 2001 who took the "traditional" path. Angle was a champ within 12 months, Lesnar within 4 months.Ok, Edge and Christian I stand corrected. While WWE is written and booked ineptly, older fans who understand the business will continue to not bother except for the big ppvs like Wrestlemania

 

[EastCoastFan]

I prefer the traditional path and someone should pay their dues before getting the big title. That way, the champion is someone who's earned it and has proven himself worthy.

The hotshot path can work with the right guy (Undertaker, Brock Lesnar) but there's a big risk it will backfire and you wind up a champ that leaves the fans scratching their heads (ADR, Jack Swagger).

 

[Krossbreed]

I like the stick around and push for the top spot until the top guys leave the company path. IC title then world title.

 

[Mantis]

I do prefer the traditional path. For me this path makes a guy look more like a world champion when he finally wins. For me I'm only now believing that Sheamus is world champion material.

For certain guys I do like the Hot Shot path like ADR but only because he wrestles like a main eventer and he has a main event gimmick.

I totally agree with you on Sheamus. His current push and seemingly inevitable title win is a lot more convincing now and his previous titles will be pretty much forgotten.

But I really don't see how ADR's gimmick is main event material. I might be more accepting of it if it was something he grew into, but I think the guys with heavy gimmicks are better suited for midcard status. It also doesn't help that JBL had already done something similar not too long ago, and it's made overly obvious that his car are being advertised by the auto dealers because Cole has to announce the name and price of the car every single time.

Most competitors have to streamline, if not drop altogether, their original gimmicks before they become serious main eventers. It seems like the best "top guys" are beyond the heavy gimmicks and just play exaggerated versions of themselves.

 

[Dagger Dias]

I always prefer the traditional path for two reasons. The first is because the payoff is greater when fans anticipate seeing a guy work his way up to the top of the card. The second reason is because it's fair to make them have to earn their spot. I generally dislike it when guys get to jump past the midcard and/or tag teaming stages. They should stick to the traditional path with each wrestler. If they did then everyone would be in the process of climbing up the card to earn their spot(s) which would ensure that there is always a tag team division and a midcard. WWE kinda screwed up on that one by pushing too many people too fast. I know fans are impatient but making them wait would be more worth it in the long run.

 

[Notorious718]

Personally, I prefer to see wrestlers take the traditional path to the world title instead of being hotshotted into the world title picture. It's nice to see a wrestler evolve over time, improve themselves in the ring, gain credibility, and establish a genuine connection and with the fans before grabbing the brass ring. It can provide fans with a feel good moment. However, the world of professional wrestling has changed greatly over the past years and concepts such as "paying your dues" have frankly become somewhat outdated. Nowadays, if the company sees money in a guy even if he is a newcomer, there's no point in wasting time having that particular talent toil in the midcard when they could potentially bring more money to the company by being featured more prominently in the main event scene. If the young guy has what it takes to be in the main event, then he's gonna get pushed over the old guy who's been in the company for years but has never proven to be a draw. Despite my preference for the traditional route, the truth is that professional wrestling is a business. It's not always about what's "fair" or "right" but rather about doing what you think will make the company more money.

Does this necessarily mean that WWE has always made investments in the talent they should have? Absolutely not. They've had many instances in which they pushed talent that they shouldn't have. You win some, you lose some. Professional wrestling has a lot of trial and error.

 

[Youngsleez]

i think the traditional is the best way, but in some cases I feel when some of the pushes arent made fast enough for some wrestlers and they get lost in the shuffle. For example MVP. He came in with the buzz and everything, could wrestle, had a reaction, could work the mic, and the crowd got into him (when he was a heel). I honestly think he should have at least been a constant contender for the world title when he was on smackdown like ADR's run on smackdown. I do think some of the quick pushes work when the right gimmick is involved. Right now the only gimmick i can see that could use that kind of a push would be Daniel Bryan if he does a heel turn... If he does a heel turn I can see his character just being a relentless tap or snap character who could be built to be unstoppable cause he just stop caring about what ever. Either him of MR. Perfect Jr... one or the other I can see get that push at this moment.

 

[Skinsley]

Traditional is always the best, and its great to watch someone that deserves it come up the ranks and become a top guy.

But at the same time, every once in a while there has to be an unorthodox title run like that of Sheamus or Lesnar...because you just gotta shake things up a bit.

But ofcourse the way Cody Rhodes is currently being groomed is absolutely perfect in my eyes....it looks like he got most of what he has from his own merit and not from Dusty or Goldie's coat-tails. He has slowly drifted up the ranks and should be in the WWE/Hweight Title spot sometime in the next 6 months or so.

 

[IHaveRegistered]

Not to say I dislike the Hot shot path but Traditional is the best way. One of the most important things (if not the most) in Pro Wrestling storytelling is the build-up. a great example would be Dreamer vs Raven (all though no title involved but Dreamer beating Raven is similar).

 

[bjdc1204]

Simply put. Traditional is pretty much the best way to go UNLESS you are automatically world title ready or they wanna push you as the next big thing.......and by doing that, you need to make an immediate impact - just like the four guys you named above!!!

 

[Straight-Edge]

I'm a big fan of the traditional path. It helps test the watters a bit tro see if they can connect to the crowd and tell a story. If they don't, well then your not going to have a bunch of fans asking why he won the title. IMO, you need to hold the IC title before you win the WWE/World Heavyweight title, because it jus makes the guy a lot more believable as to why he won it.

The Hotshot path works for a small number of guys who the fans can understand why he would win the title 6-8 months into his career, whether it be dominance or other factors, before he won the secondary title. ADR isn't in this group, purely for the fact that he gets next to nothing from the crowd and clearly isn't ready. Sheamus, like some above posters said, is looking more like WWE/WHC material compared to his first run as WWE Champion, and, IMO, it's because he won a secondary title.

 

[GrandSword]

If the wrestler is booked well, then I don't care either way. For example Wade Barrett. He won NXT, and with the help of his NXT "Brothers" took over Raw, destroyed everyone from Vince McMahon to Rick Steamboat to the Undertaker to John Cena. He made Cena look like a fool for weeks and was portrayed as a devious, cunning and the most intelligent superstar the WWE has seen since the Cerebral Assassin in the late 90's.

After such a great story, I couldn't believe they didn't capitalise on all the time and money put into him. He was the company's #1 promotion and even though he hadn't been with the company even a year, if he won the WWE title I would have applauded the move.

Also they can put a belt on someone way too late. When RVD first walked into WWE he was so over the company could have made so much money on putting the belt on him, but because he wasn't a WWE guy, they waited until everyone had forgotten about ECW to pull the trigger and by that time his popularity had dropped and no one really cared when he lost it a week or so later...

It's all about how the man is booked...