Who had the worst title reign?

[Little Jerry Lawler]

So you're telling me that Jeff Hardys 2 minute reign of the World Heavyweight Championship from earlier this year isn't the worst reign ever? I love the guy but he got screwed here and this unfortunatly his has to be the worst reign ever due to the time. At least David Arquette had time to suck as champion. I really cannot think of anything that comes this close to being the worst ever. Maybe Yokozuna after he lost it to Hogan after about 5 mins.

It is not the worst reign because it had PURPOSE. The purpose was to turn Punk heel and they did a damn good job and set in motion arguably the feud of the year. Hardy had already one the title once and won it later so it didn't hurt him as many believe it did.

 

[wazaveli]

Jeff Jarrets WCW title reigns made no sense to me or any in 2000 considering the title changed hands 4.8 billion times per month.

Kane winning it for a night was crap as is any one day or one week reign. Its like whats the point of it all.

If this thread is all titles, then Id say Hornswoggle and Oklahoma as Cruiserweight champion made no sense either and were horrible to watch.

 

[Big Time]

Well, due to my obsessive interest in old school wrestling, I figure it would be fitting to write my first post here. Lets see..

First of all, like so many before me has said, Kanes pathetic one day championship reign. Its insulting to him that he has yet to have a single worldt title riegn after that.

Oh right, he had the ECW title. Alright, a world title that COUNTS

Actually, I'm going to skip any reigns that lasted less than a week and go right for the real stinkers, the ones where they tried to make a good run with inadequate wrestlers. First on the chopping block, Diesel! Nash is an alright Big Man wrestler, dont get me wrong, but Big Man fighters still have to have... you know, working storylines and challengers and stuff? And guys, Mabel is not a belivable challenger!

Next, Psycho Sids second reign. The first was alright, just for the flavor Sids tend to bring. You know, unstoppable monster, and all, but his second was just... pointless.

For something outside the WWE, we have the...atrocities calling themselves title reigns in the final days of the WCW, with Russi and Arquette of course, but for people who were actually WRESTLERS we have Ron Simmons, who is a good wrestler, but its a little hard to respect a title run that was added for the sole purpose of making your title lineage look less white. I prefer to consider the first black champion to have been Bobo Brazil back in 52.

And thats my two cents

 

[StevenQBosell]

1. Andre the Giant-what Vince did was probably one of the biggest disrespects I have ever seen in wrestling. How do you take your biggest star (and I'm saying this as a Hogan fan) up to that point and ONLY make him champ for 2 1/2 minutes? Again I say this as a Hogan fan. With how Andre pleased that company the LEAST they could have done was make him champion for a decent reign. This is how the situation should have worked out. Bare with me here in my alternate wrestling history timeline as I screw things up in the WWF year of 1988.

1988 at Royal Rumble, Andre along with DiBiase conspire to keep Hogan from winning the first Rumble eventually culminating in a HUGE rematch at WMIV. This time Andre betters Hogan in the main event (maybe a TKO with Andre's bearhug) with the help of DiBiase, Virgil, Hennan and whomever. Andre succcessfully defends title on several SNME events and house shows until he eventually gets tired of DiBiase's harrassment over the belt and turns face and fights DiBiase in the main event at SummerSlam. Since DiBiase would have Virgil and Hennan in his corner Andre would have none other than his former friend Hulk Hogan in his. However, DiBiase pulls a major screwjob and defeats Andre for the belt (I always felt DiBiase should have been given the strap) and then goes on to drop the belt to Savage at the next SNME. At Survivor Series the main event is Andre, Hogan, Savage, and Roberts vs. Dibiase, The Twin Towers, and Rick Rude. After this regular timeline resumes with the John Stud winning the Rumble and WMV Mega Powers explode.

2. Not really that the title reign was a mistake but the fact that we were cheated out of a Hogan/Flair main event at WMVIII. Originally that was the main event then it got changed to that Hogan/Sid crap and a great match between Savage/Flair.

3. Anyone who was given the strap for less than a week, those storyline are just down right ******ed.

Great point... They totally wsted the Giant at that poi9nt; although it was my understanding that his helth was pretty bad at point... hence him teaming with Haku in the early 90's.

They may have even approched Andre with the idea, but he may have passed on it, due to his condition...

But in a perfect world, that would have been a fantastic WM5 event... although I still Loveed Macho as champ

 

[Davi323]

I am gonna have to go with the Great Khali. To this day, I don't know the purpose of giving him the strap even for a minute. He can't wrestle at all, hell, he can barely move, can't speak credible english, meaning he can't give a "champions" promo, so, they give him the title? WHY? How exactly was Khali supposed to draw?

 

[Dagger Dias]

I am gonna have to go with the Great Khali. To this day, I don't know the purpose of giving him the strap even for a minute. He can't wrestle at all, hell, he can barely move, can't speak credible english, meaning he can't give a "champions" promo, so, they give him the title? WHY? How exactly was Khali supposed to draw?

I hated that title reign too, but from what I recall, Khali was their only option. Taker and Edge were injured, Kane didn't want the belt for some reason, so they did the only thing they could do.... Khali was their best alternative at the time because he had been built up as a monster on Raw where even Cena (kayfabe) had a tough time against him in matches. Sure, Khali's reign was terrible, no arguing that, they just didn't have anyone else they could put the belt on though. The only name that comes to mind is Batista, and he was the one who ended up defeating Khali in the end anyhow.

Khali's reign, while it sucked, was still better than Batista's short 2008 reign that lasted 8 days, only for Jericho to get the title back. THAT reign was the worst because it was pointless.

 

[LascoX]

I think the stain that is the Arquette stint with the belt ranks as the worst. At least you can belive Kahli could actually pin someone. His and Russos time with the belt are a permanent stain on the belt that is the World Heavyweight Champion.

 

[The Mark of Zur-En-Arrh]

I'd have to say Foley's were some of the worst. As someone said before, he had three title reigns and dropped the belt in his first defence every single time. He never once succesfully defended the WWE title.

In regards Kane, they gave him the title so that we'd accept him as a ME talent. He was placed in a LOT of angles surrounding the belt, and only seemed to not be challenging for the title when he was in the Corporation or fueding with Taker. Plus, him losing so quickly made sense, because the only way he could beat Austin in that first blood was to cover himself in clothing from head to toe, whereas before he'd leave his left arm exposed.

What's my point you ask? Well the point is, doing that showed that even Kane didn't think he could beat Austin, and when they faced one on one in a normal match, Austin proved it. Would you really expect a guy who had to cheat THAT much to win the belt, would hold it for very long?

 

[Tougie]

I'd have to say Hogan's 93 title run. I mean come on Yoko gets robbed out of the belt, only to see Hogan lose to Yoko at KOTR 2-3 months later, im pretty sure he never even defended it before the rematch. Show's 02 run from Survivor Series to Armegeddon was just terrible. David Arquette shouldnt even be mentioned by I have to. Kane's 1 day is just pathetic booking by WWE, we all knew Kane was gonna win because of the stip that if he lost he would set himself on fire, but to have Austin win it right back Rocks 02 title run from Vengeance to Summerslam where he lost to Brock was completely unnoteworthy, then again Rock never held the belt more than 3 months i believe.. HBK's 02 run from Survivor Series to Armegeddon was also pathetic.. Just a few of the top of my mind

 

[Tastycles]

There are plenty of short reigns, but the farce that was No Way Out 2007 has to be the winner. Orton got given the title, lost it immediately to Triple H, and then Triple H beat Umaga before losing it again to Orton. Bearing in mind that Orton had been waiting for three years for his second title reign, only for it to immediately end was unbelievable. That he then had to wait less than three hours for his third reign was even more ridiculous.

 

[kcordloh]

The ones that annoy me the most are the short reigns where the title changes hands, and then goes back to the original guy shortly after. Batista in late 2008 is an okay example, although it did really put over Jericho as an opportunistic and smart sob. Kane is another. The guy was so dominant and over (but who at the ME level wasn't back then), that one day seems a shame. But it did put over that McMahon could NOT keep Austin down..

I'm gonna go with Santino's first IC reign. That was POINTLESS