Worst world champ ever?

[relentless1]

O yeah...forgot about jeff jarrett, lol i forget who said it on rise and fall of WCW "the guy broke 1000 guitars and never drew a dime" lol, DDP was a pretty shitty champion too which is sad because if they had given it to him a year before he got it i think he wouldve been a decent drawing champion

 

[t619]

Jeff Hardy 1st World Heavyweight Championship

It last about 3 minutes literally.

 

[ThUnDeRpHoEnIx]

Vince Russo.That was a huge slap to the face of all us fans.He shouldnt even be able to touch the title.

I will go as far as saying when HBK won the World Heavyweight Championship and was set to defend it at Armageddon in December it was the worse WWE PPV ever not because the action but because it was lowest attended WWE PPV in history and the least selling PPV of all time. If you think I am completely wrong about this then why after this PPV we never saw HBK win another world title????? Its not because they wanted to put other guys over because they knew he is only capable of being in the main event not being the champion or winning the championship. It has been proven when he is champion he can't draw any money. And if you can't draw any money it doesn't matter how good you can wrestle you can't be the champion if we can't make any money. So in my opinion HBK is the worse world champion of all time

HBK couldve easily had the title if he asked.HBK didnt want it because he was getting older and he didnt want the travel schedule that came with being world champ.And where's the proof that Armeggedon 2002 was the lowest attended WWE PPV and least seeling PPV?And obviously you've never even heard of David Arquette or Vince Russo.

 

[notjustanotherfan1981]

Khali is not the worst champion ever. I REALLY don't like him, but he did exactly what he was supposed to do. If you recall, he was a battle royal to get the belt, meaning he never won (by pinfall or submission) the belt from anyone. He is a huge monster. That's all he has to be or needs to be. When Batista went over him, it just made Batista look more like an ANIMAL.

If we are going to talk about THE WORST champions ever it should be a requirement that if someone who has NEVER watched wrestling sees this person, they are SHOCKED that they are the champion. You see Khali and it is immediately believable that he could physically pin just about anyone for 3 seconds. Same goes for Swagger and Sheamus. The obvious ones have been mentioned in Arquette and Russo. I think it is legitimate to question the believability of someone like Rey Mysterio if we are going to look at former WWE World or Heavyweight Champions though.

I might take some heat for this, and I really do love to watch Mysterio matches. I just don't see how is is even slightly realistic that he could beat anyone for a HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPIONSHIP. Plus, when he has held the belt, it has been treated like LUCK when he retains on his defenses. That's a garbage title reign. The champion should at least have a realist chance.

Anyone have any thoughts on that at all?

 

[LFC till i die]

David Arqutte. What a joke. What eles can i say apart from that . . .

The Great Khali. How this guy won a world title i do not know. How this guy still has a job i do not know. He finds it hard to walk let alone to wrestle. Him winning a world title is a HUGE slap in the face to legends who have never won a world title, to veterans who have never won a title and to people who can actually wrestler. People like Dolph Ziggler (i don't consider him to be a former world champion, he didn't ACTUALLY win the WHC did he?), Kofi Kingston, Cody Rhodes, Wade Barett, John Morrison, R Truth who have never won a world title and who are actually more talented than Khali.

Jeff Hardy. He shouldn't have won because. . . he sucks and i hate him.

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

The Great Khali. How this guy won a world title i do not know. How this guy still has a job i do not know. He finds it hard to walk let alone to wrestle. Him winning a world title is a HUGE slap in the face to legends who have never won a world title, to veterans who have never won a title and to people who can actually wrestler.

I hated the fact Khali won the belt, he did not deserve it one bit. He can barely walk due to his size, his knees are completely shot. He only got the belt due to his immense size (which is the only reason he ever got a job in WWE too). I would rather never see the guy on TV again, but luckily Vince seems to realise how poor Khali is in the ring and has kept him out of the title picture ever since.

However, I understand why he has a job. Khali is a MASSIVE draw in India, he is a hero over there and will bring in so much income to the WWE from the Indian fanbase. Having someone from that country on the roster is a huge financial benefit to WWE. Same with Yoshi Tatsu. Why does he still have a job when he has done nothing since joining the company? Why was Funaki employed for so long? Because they bring in income from fans in their home countries.

Jeff Hardy. He shouldn't have won because. . . he sucks and i hate him.

Well...nice mature response there....

Jeff Hardy more than deserved to be champion in WWE. He had worked his ass off for years, and looked like he had left his personal problems behind him. He was performing better in the ring than he had in years, was showing vastly improved mic skills and was one of (if not THE) most over member of the roster at that time. It was what the fans wanted, they were desperate to see Hardy finally break through and take the title. It was a great decision for WWE to make and gave the fans a really nice feel-good moment. I think Jeff was a fine World Champion.

It is not always the biggest and best who should have the title. Sometimes just being incredibly popular with the fans is enough. If the fans believe in you, then that will only be good for the company as they will PAY to see you succeed and PAY to watch you.

Look at Mankind. He was never the best in the ring, didnt look like a traditional champion, but he was LOVED by the fans. They wanted to see Mick Foley win the title and the roof came off the building when he did. The same was true of Jeff Hardy. The love for the guy was the reason he was pushed to the title. I think it was a good thing, its just a shame he as messed up so much since then as he looked set to be one of the WWE's biggest stars

 

[god-soldier]

You dumbass humanoids don't understand that Vince Russo n David Arquette as champions were both publicity stunts it wasn't because they earned a spot it was to gain publicity for upcoming PPVS you morons don't seem to understand it. It is so obvious but you mental midgets can't seem to grasp on this. I am sticking with who is the worse champion of all time and its HBK couldn't sell tickets, couldn't get PPV buyrates, couldn't draw ratings, or sell merchandise. When you can't do any of these things regardless if you give 5 star matches it don't matter. And for you humanoids
who dont believe HBK defended the World title in front of the lowest attended WWE PPV of all time look up Armageddon 2002.HBK is the worse world champion of all time!!!!!!!!

 

[King Sheamus]

Going to go With old SGT. Slaughter. Why did he win the WWE Title from warrior in the first place? It was at the royal rumble and sarge was out of his prime and was pretty chubby. Hell did he even defend the title? Most fans wanted to see Hogan warrior 2. Instead the Got Hogan vs Slaughter which still goes down as one of Hogans worst WM match.

 

[celeb]

The time when Khali became the champ he was a hot affair and WWE wanted to make most out of him,which they did.Khali cannot be the worst.

Acc. 2 me Christian's reign was the worst.Its evident tht WWE itself doesnt believe on Christian thts why he never became a champ in his whole carrier.Where as his partner Edge was superb so was jeff hardy.Christian was matt hardy of edge and christian tag team.

 

[¡Roján!]

There isn't really much of a debate here, it's clearly the Great Khali, in my opinion. But to not be cliché, I'll go with Dolph Ziggler.
Whenever you win a world championship, it normally means you are on your way up to a main-event status but the burial of D-zigg after his reign was terrible. Thank god they did away with his new aggressive gimmick cause that just plain sucked. And how long was ziggler's reign? like 15 minutes. Way to bury a guy.

 

[RATED R CHAMPION]

THE WORST EVER GREAT KHALI!!!!!!

other horrible title holders, RONNIE GARVIN IN '87, how the hell did garvin win the nwa title from Flair? I still ask myself every day

 

[NathanFantastic]

As much as i like him, and although he isn't the worst and he is far from it but i will have to bring up Rey Mysterio. When he was champion he lost a lot of pointless matches but won some title defences. His reign was pretty useless. Yes it was in memory for Eddie (Viva la rasa!) but does that mean if Jeff Hardy somehow died then Matt would have been a World Champ of some sort. Sorry Rey Rey but it is called Heavyweight for a reason.

 

[D-BOMB]

I know alot of people wont agree but christian never deserved to have won if edge hadnt retired christian wouldnt have never got it like how mysterio won it when eddie died christian ownly won it cause edges wrestling career died

 

[The Death Rattle]

From a kayfabe perspective, the obvious names have been already mentioned: McMahon, Russo, Arquette. The worst champions in my opinion are those who were put in the spot with no chance of doing anything with the title, namely lame duck title holders. Be Sergent Slaughter getting the title from Warrior just to give it to Hogan at Wrestlemania VII or Dolph Ziggler getting a 8 minute reign on Smackdown, I think it cheapens the title and the importance/significance of when we see the belt change hands.

 

[CommonSense]

David Arquette easy that was a disgrace. But if your talking about actual wrestlers i agree with an above poster about The great khali. He is a good title chaser to put the champion over, but no way in hell should he have won the title. He is not strong enough in the ring or the mic so that wasn't common sense.

 

[therockiswwf]

You dumbass humanoids don't understand that Vince Russo n David Arquette as champions were both publicity stunts it wasn't because they earned a spot it was to gain publicity for upcoming PPVS you morons don't seem to understand it. It is so obvious but you mental midgets can't seem to grasp on this. I am sticking with who is the worse champion of all time and its HBK couldn't sell tickets, couldn't get PPV buyrates, couldn't draw ratings, or sell merchandise. When you can't do any of these things regardless if you give 5 star matches it don't matter. And for you humanoids
who dont believe HBK defended the World title in front of the lowest attended WWE PPV of all time look up Armageddon 2002.HBK is the worse world champion of all time!!!!!!!!

Well to be fair to HBK, he really had no big back-up during his time at the top (Undertaker and Hart were really his only back-up). Russo isn't famous, so him winning the title did nothing but make it worthless. Arquette is not a really famous guy, he is just a kind of famous guy. They gained minimal publicity from it and all it did was hurt them even more. December to Dismember had a lower attendence than Armageddon.


But Jack Swagger has to be, by far, the worst. He wasn't over anywhere and he never had the chance to build himself up before cashing the MITB in. He was boring and his feud with Show, was also, boring. He was no where near ready for it and it really showed.

Now if we go by reigns, The Big Show's first reign was just awful. He won it when Test should have (Test would have made perfect sense to beat HHH at the time, Big Show made no sense to beat HHH). It was in the middle of Show/Bossman/Show's daddy angle. From what I remember he defened the title against the likes of Viscera and Bossman. Show's reign was worst than Hardy's first reign and Swagger's reign. At least Hardy's win made sense and Swagger's reign was somehow more entertaining than Show's.

PS - Didn't say McMahon, Russo or Arquette because they are obvious.

 

[Dude_Love87]

David Arquette-embarassment to wresters and wrestling fans, WCW deserved to get shut down after that. Off the top of my head, I would say Bob Backlund!! After he beat Bret Hart at Survivor Series 92', I believe it was, Helen Hart threw in the towel, I thought that was kind of dumb, in my opinion. I stopped watching wrestling from 2003-may 2011, so there might have been worse title reigns than this, but David Arquete doubt it.

 

[THEpapachamp]

Dolph Ziggler easy..

especially since he never won it and lost it the next week

 

[emcsq29]

Aside from the obvious (Arquette, McMahon, etc.) I think there have been several . . . and since this is under the "Old School" heading, I'm going back a little bit.

1. Tommy Rich -- given the NWA title in '81 for about a week. Not even a transitional champ to take the title from one face/heel and place it on another face/heel, he beat and then lost to Harley Race. What was the purpose? He was awuful to begin with, but then began billing himself as a "former world champ" because that was basically his only accomplishment.

2. Ronnie Garvin -- Enough said. Horrible, horrible wrestler, couldn't perform on the mic, etc. NWA seems to be good at this, huh? ('87 for about 2 months, beat, then lost to Ric Flair)

3. Larry Zbyszko -- It says enough when you're the champ when a major promotion (AWA) folds.

4. "Psycho" Sid Vicious/Eudy -- WWF & WCW. Horrible. Only slightly more mobile than Kahli.

5. Pretty much everyone who held the WCW title when it was changed almost nightly.

6. Anyone else who held a title for less than a week / anyone who gave the title up after the dreaded "finger poke."

But I have to agree with the majority, that the worst world champ ever was Kahli, for all of the reasons stated before. Simply put, he's horrible.

 

[therockiswwf]

I don't get why everyone thinks Khali was an awful World Champ. Just because he is one of the worst wrestlers in the history of ever (Andre wasn't much better), doesn't make him an awful champ. He was still a monster back when he won it, huge in India and he was in the upper card. Its not like he was losing to Santino one day, winning the world title the next. I still think Swagger is worse, he wasn't huge anywhere, super boring and had awful charisma. At least Khali was over somewhere.

PS - I still don't get why they counted Ziggler's reign but I don't really count his as he never really beat anyone for it so whatever.

 

[SickJames]

This isnt a thread, just a fact answer- Khali and Swagger actually tie. Khali only got it for size and sucked while Swagger only got it for being an amatuer wrestler etc and them trying to make him Kurt Angle which background or not he's far from and his attempted good heel promos were boring, not heel heat boring, but boring as in totally bad work all around.

They both equally deserve to share that spot


Rey's lucky he got a 2nd run because the first is one of the worst just for him only getting it because Eddie died

 

[HollywoodLuthias]

To anyone who thinks Sheamus, Jack Swagger or The Miz are the worst world champions in WWE history...think again.

On the 600th episode of SmackDown, two records were set. The first recored was for the blue brand becoming the third longest-running television show in history, and the second record was for a new all-time low in the long history of the World Heavyweight Championship. After failing to beat Edge for the World Heavyweight Championship three times in a row, Dolph Ziggler was awarded the world title by the acting SmackDown General Manager, Vickie Guerrero. Less than a minute after his official crowning, Theodore Long returned from injury and forced Ziggler to defend his title against Edge. Within a matter of minutes, Edge was declared the new World Heavyweight Champion and Dolph Ziggler was kicked off of SmackDown.Now I don't know about you, but the transitional reign of Dolph Ziggler will go down as the absolute worst World Heavyweight Championship reign of all time in my book.Although Dolph Ziggler isn't the first WWE Superstar to hold a world title for less than a day, everyone else became world champion by actually WINNING the strap first, and then immediately losing it.

 

[Chris1-16]

Vince McMahon

Storyline advancement or not, when you look at this and and then look at how many times the belt changed hands in '99 alone, you realize how wacky the booking was at the time.

 

[Dr. Mantis Toboggan, M.D.]

John Cena is the worst champ ever ( ok yeah i said it sue me). He is boring as a face, most fans depise the way he always wins and worst he only knows 5 moves ( hence the 5 moves of doom).

Any excuse to bash John Cena.... pitiful, really. I bet he could out wrestle the shit out of you with less than 5 moves.

I am going to have to go with Vince McMahon. To give someone who isn't a wrestler the most sought-after prize in all of wrestling is a disgrace. You can argue that the guy from Scream was the worst, but really, did the WCW title mean anything at that point? While the WWE title has always meant something, in a big or small way.

 

[RAUl Mf. L0wk0]

The worse champion has to most definitely be David Arquette. He had no business being champion in the first place. But WCW was such garbage at that time it didnt matter being World Heavyweight Champion anymore.

And I honestly think Jeff Jarrett is the most undeserving champion back in WCW. Even with the state of WCW at the time, Jeff had no business being champion. He's been in the business forever, but i think he should of stayed in the mid card instead of being World Heavyweight Champ.