World Championship Hot Potatoes

[SJM12492]

Well, as you can guess, this thread discusses championship reigns and wether or not they're long and prestige-y... Now, I'd say the world championships are quite groovy at the moment. But with WrestleMania coming up, the odds are there will be changes.
With Jericho winning the EC for SD! and winning the World Heavyweight Championship, will this reign be great or is it just to set up Edge's F***ING 10th world championship reign?
Batista winning the WWE Championship for no apparent reason after JC won RAW's EC match... Will his reign be long and groovy, or will JC (most likely) win at WrestleMania?
In my opinion, the championships have been thrown back and forth to often that we can predict who's gonna win it next even if a change wouldn't happen in months!
The WWE, in my opinion, made Sheamus win it just to shut up all us internet smarks who complained about it the next day, LOL. But his reign could have justified itself IF he actually defended his championship cleanly with REAL contenders.
Of course, he lost it in the EC because the WWE will never have someone as less popular as Sheamus headline WrestleMania (yet). But having JC's reign last all of standing up, the championship is losing it's own prestige with these crappy reigns.
Same goes for the World Heavyweight Championship. Taker had a the best reign of his career in my opinion, with that world championship. But to hold onto it for so long, then lose it, and not even target Jericho a little... Just seems un-Takerish... Granted he's dealing with HBK first, but he could at least make a promo to vow a world championship win again...
Justifying this argument, I've looked at the first 5 reigns of the WWE Championship, and they've totalled 10 years! If we look at the last 5 reigns lately, it doesn't even go for half a year.

Anyway, enough about me rambling on... Question be this:

Are reigns not long enough, is it fine to have short reigns to strengthen fueds, and does the WWE universe have the patience for a real long reign (3-5 years)?

I say the patience question because I think the biggest down-fall of Cena's fans was his massive reign when people got bored of him (matter of opinion).

 

[Ferbian]

Are reigns not long enough, is it fine to have short reigns to strengthen fueds, and does the WWE universe have the patience for a real long reign (3-5 years)?

I don't know if we can really complain about the length of title reigns currently, I mean sure in 2009 we could complain about the fact that the WWE championship changed hands a little too often for anyones liking, but in the end it came off to make John Cena and Randy Orton seem equally strong to a certain point if you ask me, putting them forth as the heel and face of the company respectivly.

But in the 2010 period we had Sheamus holding the title for about 70 day's time I believe it was, and for a first time reign I actually didn't mind that length, considering the only time we actually got to see a proper "defense" was at the Royal Rumble, considering Sheamus did nothing to get himself disqualified (thankfully)

Besides, 2009 wasn't the first time we had numerous title changes in the WWE championship picture, just look back to the Attitude Era, the title changed hands basicly as much as it currently does, yet I never read a thread complaining about "oh Mankind just regained the WWE championship after 2 days!".
The only time I actually heard somebody rant about title reigns during the Attitude Era was when people ranted about Kane.

And the World Heavyweight Championship, I actually don't think we can really complain about that neither, Undertaker had a reign of over 120 days, and before that we didn't see the title change hand at every PPV, and I didn't mind the state it was in when CM Punk and Hardy was fighting over it.

So I don't see the world titles as a hot potato, even thou I gotta admit I wouldn't mind seeing both Jericho and Batista retain at Wrestlemania, but that is simply because 1: I don't really like Edge's new face like character, and I prefer seeing the belt on Jericho, just for a little longer, turn Edge heel again and sure I'll say give him the belt. and 2: I think Batista is doing nice as a heel champion right now, I like him in his current element to be honest, and I would love to see him keep that line for a while, as champion.

Edit: and you mentioned a long reign of 3-5 years, I don't think that would ever work now, because I simply don't see the potential amount of feuds able to last long enough for a titleholder to have the belt for longer than 1 year maximum, and that's taking into consideration that he have a potential cross-brand feud like Cena vs Batista. (depending on the ability for the titleholder to keep us interested, a guy like Triple H could keep me interested for 1 year as champion for certain),

 

[Lazerball]

it hasnt really been hot potato, its been business as usual with title changes, better than when Cena held it forever. its nice to see it change hands to people who are truly worthy and deserving of it like Jericho again finally. Taker had it for a while, was long enough, Orton and Cenas battles over the title with it changing hands is wat made those matches and the feud so powerful, other than the lame breaking point finish, the match was awesome, but the finish was lame. I wanna see Chris keep it at mania this year, give him a mania title win plz, him and Edge can go on to the all the stupid theme PPvs and rock the house down no matter wat kind of match it is.

 

[DL23]

Well, as you can guess, this thread discusses championship reigns and wether or not they're long and prestige-y... Now, I'd say the world championships are quite groovy at the moment. But with WrestleMania coming up, the odds are there will be changes.
With Jericho winning the EC for SD! and winning the World Heavyweight Championship, will this reign be great or is it just to set up Edge's F***ING 10th world championship reign?
Batista winning the WWE Championship for no apparent reason after JC won RAW's EC match... Will his reign be long and groovy, or will JC (most likely) win at WrestleMania?
In my opinion, the championships have been thrown back and forth to often that we can predict who's gonna win it next even if a change wouldn't happen in months!
The WWE, in my opinion, made Sheamus win it just to shut up all us internet smarks who complained about it the next day, LOL. But his reign could have justified itself IF he actually defended his championship cleanly with REAL contenders.
Of course, he lost it in the EC because the WWE will never have someone as less popular as Sheamus headline WrestleMania (yet). But having JC's reign last all of standing up, the championship is losing it's own prestige with these crappy reigns.
Same goes for the World Heavyweight Championship. Taker had a the best reign of his career in my opinion, with that world championship. But to hold onto it for so long, then lose it, and not even target Jericho a little... Just seems un-Takerish... Granted he's dealing with HBK first, but he could at least make a promo to vow a world championship win again...
Justifying this argument, I've looked at the first 5 reigns of the WWE Championship, and they've totalled 10 years! If we look at the last 5 reigns lately, it doesn't even go for half a year.

Anyway, enough about me rambling on... Question be this:

Are reigns not long enough, is it fine to have short reigns to strengthen fueds, and does the WWE universe have the patience for a real long reign (3-5 years)?

I say the patience question because I think the biggest down-fall of Cena's fans was his massive reign when people got bored of him (matter of opinion).

This is something thats happened since late 98, before Survivor Series 1998, the titles always had a long-ish reign, minus Bret/Kane 24 hour runs in 1997-1998 respectivly.

The problem is with long title runs, how long would the fans class as long?
HHH from Sept 2002-Sept 2003 held the World HW Championship for a year mins HBK's 3 week run in late 2002, John Cena held the WWE Title from, September 2006-October 2007, and the fans HATED them long title runs simply because they've been conditioned into enjoying frequent title changes.

When I got into wrestling Bret was the champion, soon enough he dropped the belt to Bob Backlund, then I had endure a 12 month reign with Diesel, who in my honest opinion failed, tho I do feel Shawn Michaels tried and did out shine Diesel at Mania 11, among Diesels failed main events (KOTR 95 & Summerslam 95).

The problem with long title runs is simple, the amount of TV time WWE has nowadays, it seems like the champions are shoved down our throats, and the fans get sick of them, like Cena for example, back in 2005 was pushed to no ends, and in the middle of a feud with Kurt Angle the mega heel, the fans turned on Cena.

Personally I'd be happy with 4-6 month title reigns like Undertakers last run, but cut out the hot potato title changes like Cena/Orton late 2009, it makes them look even in terms of abilities but IMO it kind of hurts the title, being swapped some many times in a short period, kind of like Rock/Mankind in 98/99,

No chance of a 1 year + title reign, the feuds get boring after a while, and predictable, UNLESS WWE scaled back to to say 6 PPVs per year and kept the Cena/Orton or Orton/HHH or HBK/Jericho's or Undertaker/Jericho's off of TV shows that way we'd be more invested into the matches rather then big matches be given away.

I'll be flamed for this no doubt however I don't care but WWE is like WCW back in 1998-2001, their giving away PPV matches on free tv, fair enough their not PPV quality or anything but it takes away from the match IMO

 

[FromTheSouth]

Long title reigns need heels. It's that simple. Faces are always better chasing the title. Even Hogan's title reigns as a face got stale.

The heel just has more ways to keep a title and generate heat. No one wants to see a dominant face, and overcoming the odds gets stale, which is why Cena is still undeservedly booed today. Plus, ending a long heel run makes the crowd love the face more.

 

[Mr.Superstar]

The world championships do get passed around alot. Like they could a least limit the amount of world champions in 1 year to like 4. I mean if you look at the united states championship from october 10 2006 to now it's only been 7 champions. Like FromTheSouth said long title reigns need heels. Because they can cheat to keep the title and have long succesful title reigns. For instance Randy Orton when we were in the age of orton that was a 203 days and that's good for his first reign as WWE champion (really was his 2nd when he was awarded the title by vinnie mac and then Trips won it the same night in a match then orton won it back that same night.) So yea the world titles are passed aronud to mutch.

 

[Tastycles]

The reason we don't have long reigns anymore is simple - we have more PPVs now. If you look throughout history since Hogan, the title has changed hands roughly every two major shows. The reason for that is obvious. If you want people to buy the PPV, then you want suspense, and you get that by having a 50-50 outcome to your main event, which is what you get from having the title change hands every two shows. If one guy held the title forever now, then nobody would buy the shows, because what's the point?

 

[RicSpade]

Honestly the wrestling world is real different now then it was 20 10 hell even 5 years ago, sometimes you could have a guy like Triple H on top for an entire year with a heavyweight title, and the main reason people bought into it is because each month someone you loved came in and tried their damndest to dethrone him, and thats why people buy the ppv. Seriously the WWE knows two things: Kids want the ppv's when John Cena or DX are fighting for the title because their the childrens highest draw, and 2. Adults like watching a heel champion because they are curious to see who can beat them.

Edge is obviously getting big pops and so is Cena, and while people may boo or cheer Cena they want to see if he'll win or get beat down, and people want to see Edge beat Jericho will it happen I don't know honestly considering how the last few Wrestlemania's panned out I don't see both titles changing hands this time.

But in this day in age a long title run only works if you have someone way over,Flair, Hogan, HBK, Bret, Triple H, Rock, Austin, Taker are all prime examples of this. Honestly I don't see a long reign unless Jericho retains and someone like Christian who is way over and has shown oN ECW can carry everyone holds the title like he did, but it has to be a good scenario, and I definitely don't see anyone going longer than a year as champion.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Back in the hayday of Hogan and Flair, pro wrestling relied a lot more on house shows and live events than they do now. Back in the 80s, you didn't have live 2+ hour broadcasts go out every single week, you didn't have a pay-per-view each month. Quite frankly, pro wrestling is much more visible for the most part now than it was then.

Take Prime Time Wrestling for instance. Prime Time Wrestling consisted of Bobby Heenan and Gorilla Monsoon interacting with each other and clips featuring matches taped during WWF house shows and that was pretty much it. Every now and then, they'd show a clip of a wrestler doing a promo.

With the way wrestling is organized on television today in the United States, a wrestler can't really get away with carrying a title for 2 or 3 years at a time. Wrestlers are too visible and seen too often. John Cena's 3rd reign as WWE Champion lasted 380 days and one thing I heard the most about was how stale it was, how a lot of fans were tired in seeing him in the main event and so on and so forth. And that's John Cena, the most over babyface in pro wrestling today. If the top babyface in wrestling can't keep a year long reign fresh in the minds of the multitudes, I doubt that anyone can.

As far as hot potato reigns in general, they do tend to lessen the prestige of the title more often than not, but not necessarily always. I think what matters more is how a champion is booked and how he's portrayed over the course of his reign. If a wrestler's stock is higher by the time he loses a championship than it was when he first won it, then the title reign served its purpose.