Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2010 8:54:24 GMT -4
The Figure Four Wrestling newsletter is reporting that as of now there are plans to unify all the WWE titles between now and Wrestlemania. We found out on Raw last night that the Divas and Women’s titles will unified at Night of Champions. There are also plans to unify the IC and U.S. titles as well as the WWE and World Titles. As always plans can change but this was the direction as of last night.
This is overdue, I thought they should have done this years ago and if it is true it's a good move and they need to get back to having the shows as shows and not brands or rosters, the WWE is doing something smart with this unification direction...
|
|
|
Post by wildfire on Sept 1, 2010 9:01:11 GMT -4
I agree 100%. I wouldn't even mind if they had the same number of titles, but there needs to be 1 World Champ, not two.
|
|
|
Post by graymar on Sept 1, 2010 9:34:14 GMT -4
I think they should leave the IC and US titles seperate. Let those be 'brand' titles defended on TV.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2010 10:42:04 GMT -4
I think they should leave the IC and US titles seperate. Let those be 'brand' titles defended on TV. They can still do that with whatever the title they go with and have it defended on RAW and Smackdown, moving the champions around from RAW to Smackdown is something they can do and it opens the door for more match options...
|
|
|
Post by graymar on Sept 1, 2010 11:13:40 GMT -4
I think they should leave the IC and US titles seperate. Let those be 'brand' titles defended on TV. They can still do that with whatever the title they go with and have it defended on RAW and Smackdown, moving the champions around from RAW to Smackdown is something they can do and it opens the door for more match options... I am all for unifying most of the belts (World, WWE, Diva/Women's, Tag)...I just like the idea of having a "Brand"/TV belt that is just defended on the brand or PPV with the other champions "floating" between brands.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2010 11:33:45 GMT -4
They can still do that with whatever the title they go with and have it defended on RAW and Smackdown, moving the champions around from RAW to Smackdown is something they can do and it opens the door for more match options... I am all for unifying most of the belts (World, WWE, Diva/Women's, Tag)...I just like the idea of having a "Brand"/TV belt that is just defended on the brand or PPV wit the other champions "floating" between brands. Yeah that could work, there were rumors that the WWE were going to make RAW and Smackdown belts, but who knows...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2010 12:39:02 GMT -4
It's a good idea if the WM Unification match is Cena vs. Undertaker. I don't get why they're tried building up each brand's belts (if you want to call it that), just to bring it all back to square one. Then again, 4 titles is what they had in the 90s (when the Women's Title was active), so I guess it could be a good thing. Fewer titles, in theory, means fewer changes.
It's funny, I read this yesterday on another board where people were practically begging for this to bring the Brand Split to an end.
The Brand Split is essential to the WWE now. There's what, a good 10-12 solid main event guys now? (Orton, HHH, Cena, Swagger, Punk, Taker, Mysterio, Sheamus, Edge, Jericho, Barrett, Big Show)
So if you have those twelve guys fighting amongst themselves for one world title, that means that they're going to take up the bulk of the show, which means that the undercard guys who thrive on the fact that there IS an undercard with a place for them are going to get pushed down, maybe even off TV in some cases, which would lead to a lot of careers being killed.
I don't care if they unify every pair of belts, but if they end the brand split, a lot of careers would die...in theory.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2010 14:10:38 GMT -4
I have to say I don't see them ending the brands but having one World Title will still give you only so many main event guys and that will be 12 or so wrestlers...
Then you'll have say another 8-12 wrestlers fighting for the secondary belt and then the ladies and tag team belts are fought over by the rest...
I have to say the WWE needs to give us more shock and awe then just go with the flow they've been doing, but the only way that could happen is another fed stepping up but that's not going to happen for a long time if at all...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2010 14:20:12 GMT -4
I like the idea of one world heavyweight champ, one pair of world tag team champs and one woman's champ. I would like to see them keep the U.S. and Intercontinental titles separate. I think Switch is right in saying that the brand split should be continued with as many guys as the WWE has under contract and this seemingly youth movement. If you designate the secondary titles to be show specific it will give the mid-card guys something to shoot for while the main eventers are challenging for the World Heavyweight and Tag Team Titles.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2010 14:33:20 GMT -4
In the end we'll see what happens, if they do go with four belts total that will give them the challenge in who'll be contenders for what belts and we all know not everyone is worthy of a title run or a title shot you do need wrestlers who are there to fill out the show...
|
|
|
Post by graymar on Sept 1, 2010 14:54:07 GMT -4
I like the idea of one world heavyweight champ, one pair of world tag team champs and one woman's champ. I would like to see them keep the U.S. and Intercontinental titles separate. I think Switch is right in saying that the brand split should be continued with as many guys as the WWE has under contract and this seemingly youth movement. If you designate the secondary titles to be show specific it will give the mid-card guys something to shoot for while the main eventers are challenging for the World Heavyweight and Tag Team Titles. Agreed. This is a good point by both you guys. Okay...who wants to write the letter/email/memo to WWE and VKM?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2010 20:17:49 GMT -4
I like the idea of one world heavyweight champ, one pair of world tag team champs and one woman's champ. I would like to see them keep the U.S. and Intercontinental titles separate. I think Switch is right in saying that the brand split should be continued with as many guys as the WWE has under contract and this seemingly youth movement. If you designate the secondary titles to be show specific it will give the mid-card guys something to shoot for while the main eventers are challenging for the World Heavyweight and Tag Team Titles. Agreed. This is a good point by both you guys. Okay...who wants to write the letter/email/memo to WWE and VKM? I'd do it, if they'd actually pay attention to it.
|
|
|
Post by wildfire on Sept 1, 2010 20:30:56 GMT -4
What I'd like to see is for the brand to be real... with no interaction at all between them... then it would mean something. I think it's either that or get rid of it.
I agree there would be great temptation to have the top of the card guys appear on both shows all the time if they did that, which would not only kill the mid-card, as SF said, but be pretty boring... I don't think I need to see 4 hours a week of the same 10 guys. They would have to be very careful to avoid that if they got rid of the split, which I doubt they could handle.
The half-assed way they do it now is annoying, IMO.
I could definitely could see them using the IC and US titles as a Raw and Smackdown title..that would make some sense.
That could really make the World Title mean something... they could pretty much only have it defended on PPVS, since they'd have the other belts to fight for on TV.
|
|
|
Post by Marduuk on Sept 1, 2010 22:01:29 GMT -4
It's not like titles mean anything anymore.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2010 0:12:15 GMT -4
It's not like titles mean anything anymore. They still mean something...it's just something completely different than what they once did.
|
|