WWE Title matches at House Shows

[No Count Pup]

In regards to house shows and dark matches, it appears WWE is headlining those shows with quasi-main eventers rather than with world title matches. This harkens back to the old tradition of the Golden Age and the New Generation years. House show world title matches were relatively infrequent.

The Attitude Era saw a marked increase in house show and dark match world title matches. Apparently, WWE's theory was world title battles would draw more fans in.

As stated above, the shift nowadays is from the world title holder being the main event to main eventers (or those on the rise) being the main event. It worked well when Yokozuna was the champion on his crew and Lex Luger traveled as the main eventer for his crew. The crowd was fired up to see Luger close the show even without gold.

Here's the question. Since WWE is relatively light on star power, should WWE stick with the 21st century formula of using the world title as a house show draw, or should they leave their attendance figures in the hands of Sheamus, Dolph Ziggler, The Miz, Randy Orton, Bray Wyatt, and Roman Reigns? Are they big enough names to headline house shows, or does anemic star power necessitate frequent world title matches to elicit local inerest? Should the Intercontinental and United States championships be the featured house show titles?

(Lesnar won't be champion forever. Should the next world champion defend on the house show circuit?)

 

[NegativeFeedback]

In regards to house shows and dark matches, it appears WWE is headlining those shows with quasi-main eventers rather than with world title matches. This harkens back to the old tradition of the Golden Age and the New Generation years. House show world title matches were relatively infrequent.

The Attitude Era saw a marked increase in house show and dark match world title matches. Apparently, WWE's theory was world title battles would draw more fans in.

As stated above, the shift nowadays is from the world title holder being the main event to main eventers (or those on the rise) being the main event. It worked well when Yokozuna was the champion on his crew and Lex Luger traveled as the main eventer for his crew. The crowd was fired up to see Luger close the show even without gold.

Here's the question. Since WWE is relatively light on star power, should WWE stick with the 21st century formula of using the world title as a house show draw, or should they leave their attendance figures in the hands of Sheamus, Dolph Ziggler, The Miz, Randy Orton, Bray Wyatt, and Roman Reigns? Are they big enough names to headline house shows, or does anemic star power necessitate frequent world title matches to elicit local inerest? Should the Intercontinental and United States championships be the featured house show titles?

(Lesnar won't be champion forever. Should the next world champion defend on the house show circuit?)

I'm of the opinion that no titles should be defended on house shows. They're stupid as we all know the title isn't switching hands. The babyface champ is always winning, and the heel champ is always losing via DQ.

I've already said a bunch of times that WWE should have a house show championship that is only defended at live events (WWE Underground Championship). It should never be acknowledged on TV, but yes on WWE.com and on the house shows themselves. It should change frequently enough that you can expect a title change, but it should be retained enough to keep it meaningful. Give it to the guys who aren't in real storylines on TV as to not confuse the audience. But the audience will still be on the edge of their seats because there's always magic in hearing the ring announcer say "Here is your winner and NEW...".

If they had it today, I'd have someone like Cesaro be WWE Underground Champion. He hasn't had a feud since Sheamus, so while he has nothing to do on TV, he'd be defending his Underground title around the nation. By the time he gets something on TV, he can drop it at a random house show against Jack Swagger, The Big Show, or any other guy without a program.

But back to the main point, I don't think the World Championship should ever be defended at house shows.

I've seen CM Punk lose via DQ to the Undertaker.
I've seen Sheamus lose via DQ to Randy Orton.
I've seen Del Rio lose via DQ to John Cena.
I've seen Edge lose via DQ to John Cena.
And so on.

Enough is enough. I hope I never see a house show title match again.

 

[timothy26]

They did Reigns vs Kane at the Australian live event for the main event this year and I think that kind of match is the best for a live event

Although WWE comes to Australia only once a year so it is kind of dissapointing that the Champion wasn't on the show in some capacity

 

[Mudlup50]

Now I thought they used to do something similar to defending the titles back in the 80's. Isn't that why there's confusion on Flair total title count? Because he'd drop it to some local guy then win it back before he left the area? Again not certain, but I had heard that when everyone was talking about Cena being a 15 time champ.

Point of the discussion, I see no reason for title matches in house shows. This is my mindset and I know a lot of people are gonna disagree but titles should only change hands on Raw and PPV's now. Maybe a mid card title on Smackdown, so long as it's a feud built up on Raw and not some throw together match.

But really the World champ doesn't need to be built up, the other guys do. I'm of the thought that everybody that's not world champion or Cena need built up. So please, if you wanna have house shows that help Reigns get popular, by all means go for it! I don't think seeing Lesnar wrestle on a house show is good for anybody

 

[timothy26]

I think the US title needs to be dropped ASAP as it is pointless having two mid card titles. They have a good thing going with the IC championship at the moment but it should be pushed a bit further up the card. I think the only time the World title should change is at a major PPV unless they need to change it because of an injury or something.