WWE title importance and PPVs

[Radical]

One thing that I must say I'm kind of surprised about is the lack of title matches at WWE PPVs.

And this isn't just something that has happened in the last couple years it has happened for years and years.

I feel like I'm not alone here in wishing that MOST of the WWE titles were up for grabs at most PPVs. I feel like that's kind of supposed to be one of the main drawing points of the PPV - that something other than bragging rights is on the line.

Now, yes, of course, the WWE title and World Title are usually defended at every PPV but what about the IC title, the US title and the TAG TEAM titles? When was the last time the Tag Team title was defended at a PPV? When was the last time the US title was defended at a PPV? How many times has the IC title been defended at a PPV in the last year?

And because of this lack of defending at PPVs how is anybody supposed to care about who has any title except for the WWE and World title? The way the WWE seems to treat the other titles is nothing more than a prop.... no more importance than the replica titles that fans bring to the arena.

This is why I feel that the World Title should be merged with the WWE tile and then the IC title should become the second biggest title and be defended at basically every PPV.

But anyway my point of this thread is to ask a few questions of the IWC:

1.) Do you think more titles should be defended at WWE PPVs more often?

2.) If yes, given the situation in the WWE right now where there are almost no feuds or storylines related to the IC, US or Tag Team titles, how would you start booking matches and generating feuds that would contribute to making those other titles more important and more worth caring about?


I've already basically made my first point that YES I would like to see more titles defended more often at WWE PPVs. My plan for making the other titles seem more important is basically the way I build my WWE Universe in WWE '12:

After each PPV I look at the champions and figure out who should be challenging them next and I start building my show around feuds related to the titles. That is my #1 objective. Yes, of course, natrually the WWE title and World title feuds will be built but I also actually take the time to build a feud for ALL of the titles. The only title I sometimes let go by the wayside a bit is the Divas title but even then I try to only let it go for no more than 2 PPVs.

I get that personal feuds can be a drawing point of a match with no title on the line. Lesnar vs Triple H, matches vs The Undertaker or years back when Flair was fighting for his Career. Those matches make sense to be for something other than a title but when you look at the PPVs of the last few years and you have to look through 5 or 6 PPVs to find one where the US title AND IC title AND Tag Titles are defended it is truly dissapointing.

 

[Raiden46]

This point has been discussed ad nauseum here, but alas...

The WWE and WHC need to be merged ASAP. The idea of have two world champions and two people who are "#1" is just oxymoronic to say the least. I understand the need for having two belts with the brand split, but that was over 10 years ago and there isn't enough high caliber talent in WWE right now to justify two world title belts.

I actually don't mind having two mid-card belts in the IC and US titles. Ideally both would be merged as well to make one more prestigious, but if we want to help bolster the midcard then I think this is an appropriate time to have more titles in that area of the roster to increase morale. To answer your question though, yes these belts need to be defended just as often as the A-level titles. I agree that fewer people care about who holds the belt when it is not always televised.

The tag team division has been complete garbage for years, but it seems that things are turning around now in that area. Until the teams start gaining more steam and name recognition, I think it's a wise move to keep it off PPV.

 

[ProWrestlingFan]

1.) Titles are already defended at every PPV except a very few.

2.) When WWE makes everybody from Dolph Ziggler to Cody Rhodes say that they want to be World Champions that makes every other title irrelevant and less prestigious.

In my opinion, for making the titles relevant, WWE should bring back Brand Extension with separate PPVs for both RAW and Smackdown.

 

[FlairFan2003]

Elevating the importance of 2ndary titles is important, especially if WWE wants these titles to elevate the wrestlers who wear them. Giving more air time and attention to storylines involving the titles has almost no downside.

Triple H seems to have a very "old school" mentality and you can subtle changes with the programming, particularly having dominant World Champs, wether they dominate as fan favs (aka "Hogan style") or as dastardly heels (aka "Flair style"). Having stability at the top of the card makes it easier to build really big matches and makes it easier to draw in casual fans, people who dont watch every week but might be inclined to buy a PPV (this is why this past WrestleMania was built around two matches involving 5 guys, only one of which was a regular full time wrestler and not retired, semi retired, or close to 50yrs old).

As far as good business, there is nothing bad about giving better feuds and more quality storylines to the IC & US Titles. A well promoted tag division is also a good thing because if nothing else it enables you to utilize guys on the roster who otherwise would not be contributing much to your show.

 

[King Patrick Star]

One thing that I must say I'm kind of surprised about is the lack of title matches at WWE PPVs.

And this isn't just something that has happened in the last couple years it has happened for years and years.

I feel like I'm not alone here in wishing that MOST of the WWE titles were up for grabs at most PPVs. I feel like that's kind of supposed to be one of the main drawing points of the PPV - that something other than bragging rights is on the line.

Now, yes, of course, the WWE title and World Title are usually defended at every PPV but what about the IC title, the US title and the TAG TEAM titles? When was the last time the Tag Team title was defended at a PPV? When was the last time the US title was defended at a PPV? How many times has the IC title been defended at a PPV in the last year?

And because of this lack of defending at PPVs how is anybody supposed to care about who has any title except for the WWE and World title? The way the WWE seems to treat the other titles is nothing more than a prop.... no more importance than the replica titles that fans bring to the arena.

This is why I feel that the World Title should be merged with the WWE tile and then the IC title should become the second biggest title and be defended at basically every PPV.

But anyway my point of this thread is to ask a few questions of the IWC:

1.) Do you think more titles should be defended at WWE PPVs more often?

2.) If yes, given the situation in the WWE right now where there are almost no feuds or storylines related to the IC, US or Tag Team titles, how would you start booking matches and generating feuds that would contribute to making those other titles more important and more worth caring about?


I've already basically made my first point that YES I would like to see more titles defended more often at WWE PPVs. My plan for making the other titles seem more important is basically the way I build my WWE Universe in WWE '12:

After each PPV I look at the champions and figure out who should be challenging them next and I start building my show around feuds related to the titles. That is my #1 objective. Yes, of course, natrually the WWE title and World title feuds will be built but I also actually take the time to build a feud for ALL of the titles. The only title I sometimes let go by the wayside a bit is the Divas title but even then I try to only let it go for no more than 2 PPVs.

I get that personal feuds can be a drawing point of a match with no title on the line. Lesnar vs Triple H, matches vs The Undertaker or years back when Flair was fighting for his Career. Those matches make sense to be for something other than a title but when you look at the PPVs of the last few years and you have to look through 5 or 6 PPVs to find one where the US title AND IC title AND Tag Titles are defended it is truly dissapointing.

1.) Do you think more titles should be defended at WWE PPVs more often?

Yes. Not only do I think more Titles should be defended at WWE, and even TNA PPVs more often, but I think ALL of the Championships should be defended at EVERY PPV. For the WWE and TNA, that would automatically give us 6 Title matches per PPV.

2.) If yes, given the situation in the WWE right now where there are almost no feuds or storylines related to the IC, US or Tag Team titles, how would you start booking matches and generating feuds that would contribute to making those other titles more important and more worth caring about?

This question is a little tougher to answer, but the way I would do it would be to have #1 Contenders Tournaments on Raw / Smackdown and Impact / Xplosion. From the Tournaments, storylines and personal feuds could be forged from there. It writes itself.

This is actually the way I’d like the “Federations” to be set up.

The WWE Elite 8

After looking at the “TNA’s Top 10 rankings”, I started wondering how I would use this as a “booker”. Now it looks as if TNA’s is indeed fixed to fit storylines, rather than actual fan voting. You can’t be too sure about fan voting, but that’s another topic altogether. My idea would be for the WWE to sort of use this system, with a few changes, of course. Here’s what I would do.

The very first thing Vince would have to do is push every PPV date to the last Sunday of every month, and cut the yearly PPV count down to exactly 12. For the month of May, “Extreme Rules” is more than enough and “Over The Limit” should be nixed, especially if the WWE is focusing on themed PPVs. What exactly is the theme / gimmick match of “Over The Limit”?? For the month of October, “Bragging Rights” should be nixed and the Raw vs. Smackdown matches (Woman’s Champ vs. Divas Champ, IC Champ vs. US Champ, Team Raw vs. Team Smackdown) should instead be held at the Survivor Series. Now we know that Vince is having two PPVs in October to “disrupt” TNA’s version of March / April with the Flagship Supercard “Bound For Glory” in the same month, but is it really necessary??

Now for the actual idea. Create 2 polls on WWE.com, one for Raw and one for Smackdown. Make every single WWE Star a selection in their respective polls. Voting will be open from the start of a PPV to the following Monday at 9. On the first week after the Pay Per View, the rankings are revealed. The top 8 for each respective brand are seeded as such and placed in a 4 week tournament to determine the number one contender.

Week 1 tournament quarter-finals
# 2 vs. # 7
# 3 vs. # 6

Week 2 tournament quarter-finals
# 4 vs. # 5
# 1 vs. # 8

Week 3 tournament semi-finals
Week 1 winners’ match
Week 2 winners’ match

Week 4 tournament final
Week 3 winners’ match

Then comes the PPV. Champion vs. the # 1 contender in the match type pre-determined by the PPV. The WWE could benefit from this in so many ways. They can still determine the outcomes of the matches, but the fans will have somewhat of a say in who they see week in and week out. This makes every single Raw and Smackdown just as “important” as the PPVs. The build up from the weeks / tournament is enough for the Superstar to walk into the PPV as a convincing challenge (the # 1 contender would have just won 3 matches to get there).

I know what you’re thinking, “what about the rematch clause”?? Just like the “10 / 20 second count out rule” and the “time limit draw” they can just drop the idea. We live in a world where we don’t want to see the same matches over and over again in a span of 3 PPVs in a row. At least this way, we as the fans, can somewhat prevent that. Exceptions to this rule would be the Fatal Four Way PPV. In this case, the tournament can stop at Week 3 and just insert the former Champ to fill in the 4th spot. There’s your precious rematch clause.

As for the rest of the roster, I think the Stars who ranked 9 through 16 should follow the same format but for the respective mid-card Titles (Intercontinental and United States Championships) and placing them in their own tournament. This gives the secondary Titles as much importance as the World Titles, as far as TV time goes.

Those who placed at # 17 through the end on both polls can be combined and placed in some kind of Tag Team Tournament for the Tag Straps.

Each week, those eliminated from their respective tournaments are then placed in the random matches they would have been placed in anyway. These can be used to catch the eye of the fan for the next month’s set of voting.

As for the Champ, well, I think the Champion should have somewhat of an “advantage” and take the “Hulk Hogan” route of only having matches at PPVs. They can come on the weekly shows and cut promos, sit ringside during matches, do a vignette of them training, or even have a warm up match against someone not in contention, maybe even have them on NXT once in a while.

So what do you think??
Any other tweeks needed??
Would it work in the WWE all year round??
Is this the focus we, as fans, want on the WWE, World, Intercontinental, United States and Unified Tag Team Titles??
Should we use this formula / process for the Women’s and Divas Titles as well??

I posted that on 08-09-10 and still think it could work today.

 

[Anthony Caimano]

One thing that I must say I'm kind of surprised about is the lack of title matches at WWE PPVs.

And this isn't just something that has happened in the last couple years it has happened for years and years.

I feel like I'm not alone here in wishing that MOST of the WWE titles were up for grabs at most PPVs. I feel like that's kind of supposed to be one of the main drawing points of the PPV - that something other than bragging rights is on the line.

Now, yes, of course, the WWE title and World Title are usually defended at every PPV but what about the IC title, the US title and the TAG TEAM titles? When was the last time the Tag Team title was defended at a PPV? When was the last time the US title was defended at a PPV? How many times has the IC title been defended at a PPV in the last year?

And because of this lack of defending at PPVs how is anybody supposed to care about who has any title except for the WWE and World title? The way the WWE seems to treat the other titles is nothing more than a prop.... no more importance than the replica titles that fans bring to the arena.

This is why I feel that the World Title should be merged with the WWE tile and then the IC title should become the second biggest title and be defended at basically every PPV.

But anyway my point of this thread is to ask a few questions of the IWC:

1.) Do you think more titles should be defended at WWE PPVs more often?

2.) If yes, given the situation in the WWE right now where there are almost no feuds or storylines related to the IC, US or Tag Team titles, how would you start booking matches and generating feuds that would contribute to making those other titles more important and more worth caring about?


I've already basically made my first point that YES I would like to see more titles defended more often at WWE PPVs. My plan for making the other titles seem more important is basically the way I build my WWE Universe in WWE '12:

After each PPV I look at the champions and figure out who should be challenging them next and I start building my show around feuds related to the titles. That is my #1 objective. Yes, of course, natrually the WWE title and World title feuds will be built but I also actually take the time to build a feud for ALL of the titles. The only title I sometimes let go by the wayside a bit is the Divas title but even then I try to only let it go for no more than 2 PPVs.

I get that personal feuds can be a drawing point of a match with no title on the line. Lesnar vs Triple H, matches vs The Undertaker or years back when Flair was fighting for his Career. Those matches make sense to be for something other than a title but when you look at the PPVs of the last few years and you have to look through 5 or 6 PPVs to find one where the US title AND IC title AND Tag Titles are defended it is truly dissapointing.

The titles should have more meaning than they currently have. They change hands too often. I don't understand why we see title matches on RAW. To add to that, I dont understand why we even see the champions in matches unless its on ppv. If the title holders didn't fight every Monday and Friday then more people would pay to see them perform at PPV's and special events like the Raw 1000th episode. Raw should be all for exciting matches with new talent gaining contendership and champions cutting promos for their matches at upcoming events.

 

[boywithbluehanger]

I'm kind of torn on this subject because of the fact that I think there are two issues here worth mentioning. One, the fact that most of the titles as you've mentioned, are overlooked for PPV matches. And two, there are too many PPVs occurring annually. There's a need to see the importance of the IC, Tag Team, and US title when watching Smackdown and Raw but featuring title matches at every PPV would not be the way to resolve this. It's difficult to justify the push for longer title reigns if they have to be defended as frequent as the PPVs occur. It would be far easier for the storylines if getting a title shot remains a rare opportunity.

The last thing we want is a revolving door of talent getting owned by the champion just because he has the title. So I think one way around this would be to alternate which championships get defended at each PPV. This way you could have matches that still have significance that aren't title-based but are instead foreshadowing to an upcoming event. Or stipulation matches that determine the "invisible ranking" of a wrestler in line to get a title shot. Even grudge matches could be built upon more often with the possibility of the winner being next in line for an opportunity at a title match.

So while I do believe that there should be more title matches for the TT, IC, and US titles at PPVs, I do not think they should all be defended together. That's sort of the problem that the WHC and the WWE title fall into. We want long reigns with semi-frequent title matches but instead we're getting decent-lengthed reigns with an overload of title matches featuring the champion winning. It almost needs to happen less to appreciate more. Already we're accustom to the way things are with the main event titles. However the mid card titles can allow for the necessary change and flexibility.

 

[MattRhys20]

I think that there should be more title defences at PPV's, but if EVERY title was defended at EVERY PPV. Then Night Of Champions would be meaningless. What's the point in having a PPV designed for having every title defended, if it happens at all the others.

I would actually change NOC into a regional PPV in September (like Capital Punishment in 2011). Each year would have it's own PPV at differing locations around the country (or indeed the world):

Rumble On The River (somewhere in Mississippi)
Destruction In The Dessert (somewhere in Arizona)

You can pick anywhere you want and insert a tough name, I'm struggling to come up with ones (which is bad I know for a wanna-be-journalist)

 

[TheChosenOne10]

I have a few ideas ill just categorize them by belt/belts...

World & WWE Championships
-There should only be 1 top championship and that is the WWE Championship (on a whole other issue get rid of the spinner belt)...Not every guy needs to be a world champion and with the World Title that Sheamus holds right now it allows guys to win it who normally wouldnt hold a world title which is nice but it brings down the credibility of being a former WWE Champ or being the current Champ. So i say combine the titles by next Summerslam (2013). Have it set up like the Undisputed Championship tournament, give the current champs first round byes then semi finals to finals with champion vs. champion. Then bring in the new title belt that hopefully isnt sparkly or colorful, gold or silver simple like the old Undisputed Title Belt. Then have the top guys, Orton, Cena, Sheamus, Punk, Barrett, Ziggler, Bryan, Jericho all in the main event. All those guys should be fighting for the big one. You can also have those filler feud guys around like Big Show, Kane, Mark Henry who have all had their run and are just stepping in when not much is going on. I left guys like Del Rio, Miz, Christian & Mysterio out for a reason and thats because I believe they should be mid card guys which is not a knock at their talent but some guys dont need to World Champion. These guys could bring prestige back to the mid card titles which is bringing me to my next part...

Intercontinental Championship
-This title has picked up a bit since Rhodes brought back the belt. But lets be honest not a ton has been done as far as bringing prestige back to the belt. I think having guys really want to fight over this like guys do for the wwe title will do just that bring prestige back to it. Stop defending it on Raw and Smackdown every week, stop throwing together random title matches on PPV's the night of, and stop giving it to guys who do not deserve it. Miz, Rhodes, Mysterio, Christian, Del Rio, Sandow, McIntyre, Ryder, DiBiase, Ryback, Kingston etc These guys could all have great feuds for the belt. Give them time on the mike to develop a proper feud, give them a reason to not like each other and make sure the main focus is becoming the IC Champion. If the title is to be defended on Raw or SD make it the main event, give it a stipulation, make it the center piece of that 1 Raw or SD. But mainly defend it on PPV and give them time to create a good feud.

United States Championship
-This title I would more like to see as the starter belt for guys and for the guys who you know will never win a IC Belt or higher but have paid their dues and deserve something. The guys who are newer to the roster or just havent quite gotten anywhere yet but trying to make an impact. Guys like McGillicutty, Mahal(hate him), Bourne, Truth, Santino, Slater, Riley, Gabriel, Swagger, Otunga and whoever else is coming up. Can be defended on Raw/SD or Pre Show to PPV or occasional PPV. As with the other belts it should have feuds over it, actual feuds but it doesnt need to be a huge focus of it. Basically this can be the belt that helps decide whether a guy can make it to the next level.

WWE Tag Team Championships
-Starting this off with get rid of those horrid belts. And bring back some tag teams. For teams you have Epico/Primo, Hawkins/Reks, The Uso's and the Prime Time Players. I hate the PTP i think AW is garbage especially with his live mike. I think Young is talented and would be better off as a singles guy. But back on track with the tag belts. Bring back some guys like London/Kendrick, DH Smith for the Hart Dynasty. Bring up Ohno and pair him with Cesaro to have teh Kings Of Wrestling, try to get Haas & Benjamin back, Im pretty sure Sabin & Shelley left TNA so bring them in for sure. But with the 8/9 teams here you could have a great tag division. They can have actual feuds over the belts doesnt need a lot of mike time since most guys arent great on the mike here but the tag wrestling would speak for itself. They can be defended on all PPV's and some Raw/SD's.

 

[Radical]

After reading some replies I want to clarify some of my view points:

- While I would like to see the IC and US and Tag Team titles defending MORE often on PPVs that is not to say I think they HAVE to be defended at every PPV... but MOST. Night of Champions can still be important because Surivor Series is around that time and usually is more about building teams and not defending championships so there is a break from defending titles.

Plus, I'd rather see them have to change/get rid of Night of Champions because they realize they are defending all the titles at most PPVs than the opposite... which is now, where all titles are rarely defending at the same PPV.

I mean, c'mon, Cody Rhodes title reign? You or I could have been Champion for 90% of his reign because we didn't have to even defend it most of the time.

- I agree that a few less PPVs on the year would be good

- I also really agree that Raw and SD having the champs in matches all the time just becomes boring and that time would be better served having contendership matches and featuring other talent so that *GASP* we might actually care about who is going up against the champion because we've seen them more than a couple times before the PPV.

No wonder nobody cares about Sheamus and Del Rio. They are featured every week sometimes twice a week and Sheamus never loses and Del Rio either has a squash match or a match involving Sheamus which he will lose (even if he cheats or beats on Sheamus after).

 

[Syborgg]

I'm kind of torn on this subject because of the fact that I think there are two issues here worth mentioning. One, the fact that most of the titles as you've mentioned, are overlooked for PPV matches. And two, there are too many PPVs occurring annually. There's a need to see the importance of the IC, Tag Team, and US title when watching Smackdown and Raw but featuring title matches at every PPV would not be the way to resolve this. It's difficult to justify the push for longer title reigns if they have to be defended as frequent as the PPVs occur. It would be far easier for the storylines if getting a title shot remains a rare opportunity.

The last thing we want is a revolving door of talent getting owned by the champion just because he has the title. So I think one way around this would be to alternate which championships get defended at each PPV. This way you could have matches that still have significance that aren't title-based but are instead foreshadowing to an upcoming event. Or stipulation matches that determine the "invisible ranking" of a wrestler in line to get a title shot. Even grudge matches could be built upon more often with the possibility of the winner being next in line for an opportunity at a title match.

So while I do believe that there should be more title matches for the TT, IC, and US titles at PPVs, I do not think they should all be defended together. That's sort of the problem that the WHC and the WWE title fall into. We want long reigns with semi-frequent title matches but instead we're getting decent-lengthed reigns with an overload of title matches featuring the champion winning. It almost needs to happen less to appreciate more. Already we're accustom to the way things are with the main event titles. However the mid card titles can allow for the necessary change and flexibility.

I don't really agree with this viewpoint. I think every title should be defended at every PPV. Then, if for some reason the card is too busy to fit one of the title matches, put that title match on either the Raw after or the SD before.

It all comes down to booking and the build towards the title match. Every WWE or WHC match has atleast some sort of build toward it, sometimes the build sucks, but there is atleast a bit of a story there. With the I.C./U.S. titles, the last real build-up I can think of was Zack Ryder's petition to get a U.S. title match. Then they squashed it all by having him lose it quickly and all but disappear from the picture all together.

Just because the title would be defended, it doesn't mean it has to be a different opponent for the champion. Why not have rematches? Why not have an I.C. title fued last longer than a month? I think that alone would bring up the importance of the championship. The point is, they seem to book the 2 ME titles fairly well, but forget about the mid-card titles. All they have to do is start booking some fueds around the mid-card titles and put a little effort into the undercard.

I would start by first getting rid of the U.S. Championship altogether. That would give you alot more potential I.C. title contenders. Also, you could use the unification match as a way to elevate a Superstar's status. Said superstar would preferably be a heel(like Sandow). Then you pit him against some really good workers. Make the I.C. title the "wrestler's" title again. Guys like Tyson Kidd, Sandow, Swagger, McGillicutty, etc. and once in awhile insert a solid veteran to help bring the division up a bit. Guys like Mysterio, Miz, Kofi or Truth could be used in that way.

That's just an example of what I would do to elevate the I.C. Championship. The tag titles are in a similar situation. However, in that case, they just need more teams. I might be dating myself, but I remember a Survivor Series where they had enough tag teams to have 5 face teams against 5 heel teams in an elimination match. That's 10 teams! Now if they can get 4 or 5 solid teams, they are doing well. The problem I have with the tag teams is this, as soon as Kofi and Truth(and Little Jimmy) lose the titles, they may get 1 rematch and then they'll break them up. I do however like the fact that the Uso's are a real team, the Colons are a real team and the PTP seem to be a real team. That gives me faith that they actually are slowly building towards a good tag division. More teams are needed though. Also, maybe start elevating Recks and Hawkins instead of jobbing them out to Ryback.

After a long post that was meant to be a short post, my point is they CAN have EVERY title defended at EVERY PPV. And with an extra hour of Raw each week, there really is no excuse to NOT try and build meaningful fueds around those mid-card titles.

 

[HBKistheHOF]

Punk's AMAZINGLY true & real promo said it all!

EVERY WWE SHOW & PPV SHOULD END WITH THE FOCUS ON THE WWE CHAMPIONSHIP & CHAMPION!!!

And I think EVERY title should be on the line at EVERY PPV, not saving it to have an awful PPV where the stipulation is every title being on the line. House Shows & even TV I can understand. But, almost all the time a title is left off of the bill or put on the pre-show(which has anyone else wondered why they don't add the pre-shows to the dvd's?!?!)

Note: With two belts and WWE more or less saying it, I'm okay with the World Title being almost the "Iterim" world title or that "first step" world title and OCCASIONALLY opening shows or simply not being billed the highest.