blynd
Televised Wrestler
Posts: 30
|
Post by blynd on Aug 31, 2010 11:46:17 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by alex0816 on Aug 31, 2010 15:30:18 GMT
i am mixed on this, id love to c all the titles unified, you dont have too many titles, and there will be a different contender every month(hopefully), but i also dont want to c john fuckin cena on both shows, squashing everybody, and it could hurt workers like christian, morrison,kofi, who havent won a title yet, so how will they get one now?  |
|
|
|
Post by Valdora on Sept 2, 2010 0:42:38 GMT
I for one am totally for brand unification.
My reasons being that ratings are dropping the floor on Smackdown and Raw has seen much better days, the PPVs arn't selling and the on screen product is boring.
Now does this mean that half the roster may not get TV time? Perhaps, because in my mind you can still utilze different talent on different shows so long as its bookmarked by the big stuff that draws ratings. Hell thats what they did before the brand split for 3 very profitable years.
Also I have to say that perhaps streamlining the talent wouldn't be a terrible thing. We would then get the cream of the crop and stuff we wan't to see. Lukewarm talent and deadweights would be gone and only the stars and wrestlers that people want to see/get a reaction would be featured. Just look at the crowds now and compare it to even 5 years ago, they are just dead and lukewarm. Why? Because the rapid fans have either switched channels or suffered in bordom and the new crop they market too are trained to WWE being all hollywood and entertainment so they know its not real. They come to see Cena but other than that they don't care. I know I went off on kinda a tangent but my point is that Raw needs energy, it needd exitement, it needs a pace and right now everything just feel very stale due to us being fed "stars" we just don't care about and being told "you will like this!"
|
|
blynd
Televised Wrestler
Posts: 30
|
Post by blynd on Sept 2, 2010 10:03:35 GMT
I think I remember someone, DM I think, saying something that I think might be very interesting in the past.
What if the champions are "Travelling Champions"? That way the brands can stay split, thus giving the lower card talent tv time but still having the title situation less saturated.
I guess the problem with this is that the draft won't really mean all that much when it rolls around because the titles can be defended against anyone on any brand.
One problem I have with the title Unification is the World Championship unification at Wrestlemania. Where does that leave the Rumble winner? I can understand the reason why management would want the Wrestlemania match but unless they make it a Triple Threat with the Rumble winner it can't really work well.
I do like the idea though as long as they use the right titles. Women's Title, not the Diva's. Intercontinental and not the US. And the WWE title (hopefully with a new look, perhaps one that doesn't look likea giant penny).
|
|
|
|
Post by BlackMage5072 on Sept 2, 2010 17:57:21 GMT
The ONLY titles that should not be unified are the Intercontinental and US Championships. For a couple of reasons:
1.) Both those titles, especially the US Title, have so much history and lineage behind them, that it'd be a real shame to just destroy all that history. Plus, the US Title is the nicest looking belt of the last 10 years. That is just an awesome belt.
2.) It'd give Raw and Smackdown each their own definitive champions. The top contender on Smackdown or Raw could then, potentially, go after the WWE Championship, since they, being champions, are the best wrestlers on their respective shows. (If titles meant anything anymore)
3.) It'd give each show more of an opportunity to utilize some of their excellent mid-card talent and give them a chance to show the world what they've got. Guys like Danielson, Kaval, Bourne, Kofi, Ziggler, Gabriel, and hell, even Ryder can get more of a spotlight, while the main event still goes on unhinged.
I think this could be a really good thing if they keep the mid-card titles separated.
I'm ALL FOR unifying the women's titles... it would make the Divas title the shortest lived title in WWE history, if I'm not mistaken, and I'm all for a brand new WWE Championship, because, thankfully, when they rechristened the World Heavyweight Championship, they DIDN'T attach the NWA history to it, so the lineage of that particular belt in this case doesn't get erased. Although personally... I'd prefer if they used the World Heavyweight Championship as their belt... but that'd NEVER happen.
Final note: Maybe they'll bring back another version of the Winged Eagle belt? That was my fucking favorite belt of all time. It looks so good.
|
|
|
|
Post by alex0816 on Sept 2, 2010 19:01:51 GMT
im wit bm, i dont want the ic and u.s. titles to be unified, they would probly just cancel out the u.s. title which would be a shame because of the history it has goin back to the wcw days
|
|
|
|
Post by Valdora on Sept 2, 2010 19:09:00 GMT
On the winged eagle belt: Bm that would be so awesome but they won't do it because its too "old school" for the "kids today." That is also the reason I use that belt in my fantasy, it just looks prestigous and truly a physical representation that said "champion!" In the same way the World title does.
Oh a side note BM, if you check out the World title DVD (which I swear is narrated by Darth Vader himself James Earl Jones) they ellude that that is indeed the same belt Flair and Steamboat wore. Then again that would also make David Arket an offical World Champion so mabye its best to go with your idea.
As for you idea of having the IC belts and US belts be the main belts for Raw and Smackdown and then have a Champion who is kinda the elite that the best of best go for. That is geninus. However it would also make WWE have to give sports like pretigue to their belts again and they don't like that. The Champion has to defending his title because he raped the guys wife dam it! So yeah WWE won't so it no matter how much sense that makes to us.
|
|
|
|
Post by BlackMage5072 on Sept 3, 2010 20:50:14 GMT
True Karl, despite the fact that it IS the same exact belt, read up on the title history on WWE.com. They didn't attach the prestige of the original title onto the rechristened version, despite the fact that it's the same exact belt. So that makes it okay if they "erase" that title, since the prestige of the NWA isn't attached to it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Valdora on Sept 3, 2010 20:59:45 GMT
Lets go with dot com!
|
|
|
|
Post by BlackMage5072 on Sept 5, 2010 8:07:09 GMT
Right! They didn't attach NWA's history, so there's no damage done!
|
|
blynd
Televised Wrestler
Posts: 30
|
Post by blynd on Sept 5, 2010 13:11:16 GMT
I have to disagree. I have a WWE magazine with all the titles and their history. In that magazine the US Title is said to carry the NWA and WCW lineage.
|
|
|
|
Post by BlackMage5072 on Sept 5, 2010 17:29:04 GMT
Yes, the US Title has the lineage attached. If you noticed, I said that the IC and US Titles shouldn't be unified, because both their histories would be erased, essentially. And that's not good.
I mentioned that in terms of the World Title, they didn't attach NWA's history.
|
|
blynd
Televised Wrestler
Posts: 30
|
Post by blynd on Sept 5, 2010 23:15:49 GMT
Sorry, I was extremely tired as I posted that. My bad.
|
|
|
|
Post by DM on Sept 13, 2010 19:07:44 GMT
In retrospect I don't think they really could use the lineage of NWA since WWE doesn't own the rights to it, now if they said "WcW" then they can. Personally I think you need one World Champion, One Women's Champion and one Tag Team Champion, have the IC defended on Raw/Smackdown and the US Title Defended on Raw/Smackdown depending on how the drafting goes. A this would give MORE exposure to the under card trying to fight for the mid card (and sometimes best wrestling) title and B this gives a LOT more credit to the World Champions since they would have to face Both Brands and the exposure they would have would be huge.
In the Hogan Era when he was champion, Unless it was Saturday Night, you NEVER saw him unless he cut a backstage/taped promo, people bought the PPV's of course to see Hogan but finally when the champ came out, it had a bigger fight feel. Bret Hart destroyed that rule by defending it almost on a weekly basis, not such a bad thing since it makes him a fighting champion, however, he fought everyone where as now, you can't see Cena wrestling against Zack Ryder and make it credible.
This is a step in the right direction, but there should be some more steps taken as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Valdora on Sept 15, 2010 14:00:28 GMT
Hmm make things more special again. I think thats the problem with wrestling these days; A special effect is no longer special if you over use it.
|
|
