|
|
Post by Controversial Maverick PUNK on Nov 3, 2013 20:01:13 GMT -5
I'd like to see this happen: Royal Rumble: Daniel Bryan wins. Raw:He's told by Triple H that he has to pick who he wants to face at WrestleMania and he has until next week's Raw to decide. That night, Orton has a match and Bryan comes flying out and knees him in the head knocking him out. Then he stands there with the WWE title belt nodding at the camera. SmackDown!:Cena comes out at the top of the show and says: "Well, it looks like Daniel Bryan made himself clear on Raw this week and he intends to kick Randy Orton's head in at WrestleMania. Well, I can't say I'm sad about that because I've lost the top prize to him before and he's a very difficult competitor to put away. That being said, I still would have welcomed his challenge at WrestleMania because I know he deserves it. I hope he brings it home at WrestleMania and finally puts this 'face of the company' stuff behind us all because, when it comes down to it, we all know that when it comes to the face of the WWE... The champ is here." Then he has a match and Bryan comes out and knees Cena in the face and holds the WHC above his head nodding at the camera. Raw:Triple H calls down Bryan to ask him what he's going to do, he's pissed off both champions and he can only challenge for one championship at WrestleMania 30. Bryan comes down and says: "You know something? I laid out both of our champions last week and didn't break a sweat. With the same move that won me the WWE championship last year at SummerSlam before it was stolen from me by you and Randy Orton. As if I still needed to, for the sake of it I proved last week that I am better than both Randy Orton and John Cena, and if I wanted to, I could take their title of them in a heartbeat. Eight days ago, I defeated 29 other WWE superstars to earn the right to face the champion at WrestleMania, but it occurred to me: WWE doesn't have "THE champion", it has two. And that, even if I win the WWE championship, John Cena will be considered the face of the WWE, and if I win the World Heavyweight Championship, Randy Orton will be considered the face of the WWE. Well I don't want to be A champion, I want to be THE champion. Because, you and your wife have been right this whole time, I'm no "A" player, I'm THE player. So, at WrestleMania, I challenge both of your conveyor belt supermen to a three way for THE championship. And if you don't like it, I won't challenge anyone and you don't have a main event this year at the biggest WrestleMania ever and I will know, just like all these people, that you don't believe in your champions. After WrestleMania there will be ONE champion, and he's going to be a five foot eight, two hundred and ten pound, goat-faced vegan from Aberdeen Washington!" If it's Cena vs Orton, I'm not interested. The reason Jericho winning the Undisputed Championshpi was so important was because he was something fresh and a great change of pace from The Rock and Austin. I'd like to see this happen, also - but with Punk in place of Bryan. |
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Nov 5, 2013 10:53:12 GMT -5
Everyone can talk all they want about Punk or Bryan unifying the two world titles but the bottom line is that they are not the WWE's "Golden Boys." Reality...  |
|
DestroyerOfNations
Main Eventer
WF 10+ Year Member
Joined on: Nov 29, 2011 18:39:50 GMT -5
Posts: 2,855
|
Post by DestroyerOfNations on Nov 5, 2013 11:33:47 GMT -5
I'd like it to happen, but I want the WHC to stay, not the new WWE one, and I don't think they'd go that route. The Big Gold Belt holds so much history and importance, I don't wanna see it disappear, but I'd love to see it become THE belt again.
|
|
|
|
Post by K5 on Nov 5, 2013 14:15:57 GMT -5
that would explain why the hell they bothered putting that title on cena, other than giving him just another reign.
|
|
|
|
Post by K5 on Nov 5, 2013 14:18:50 GMT -5
No...that's John Cena vs. CM Punk. Give me Cena vs. Punk or Punk vs Bryan and I'll be happy. I don't want to see Orton vs. Cena, that's for sure. Punk vs Cena is a great rivalry, but to me WWE has showcased Cena VS Orton in a much bigger way than Cena VS Punk. Im not saying its a terrible match, Im just stating my opinion. These 2 guys are WWEs go to guys, their faces for the company. a few years ago i'd agree, but punk is carrying his own main event storylines now outside the wwe title picture. i wouldn't be surprised at all if he's a much larger draw than orton, not to say orton isn't one of their top names. but the 2011 summer of punk and his subsequent heel run the next year solidified him as this generation's anti-authoritarian in wwe. |
|
|
|
Post by K5 on Nov 5, 2013 14:19:00 GMT -5
No...that's John Cena vs. CM Punk. Give me Cena vs. Punk or Punk vs Bryan and I'll be happy. I don't want to see Orton vs. Cena, that's for sure. Punk vs Cena is a great rivalry, but to me WWE has showcased Cena VS Orton in a much bigger way than Cena VS Punk. Im not saying its a terrible match, Im just stating my opinion. These 2 guys are WWEs go to guys, their faces for the company. a few years ago i'd agree, but punk is carrying his own main event storylines now outside the wwe title picture. i wouldn't be surprised at all if he's a much larger draw than orton, not to say orton isn't one of their top names. but the 2011 summer of punk and his subsequent heel run the next year solidified him as this generation's anti-authoritarian in wwe. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 13:17:55 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2013 15:34:08 GMT -5
I'd prefer two main titles….hard enough to push people up to the top as it is. it'll be way worse
|
|
|
|
Post by Zeke on Nov 6, 2013 22:04:39 GMT -5
Someone needs to beat John Cena and Randy Orton in the same night, it'll do wonders, like when Jericho beat Austin & the Rock.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 13:17:55 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2013 23:35:37 GMT -5
I'd prefer two main titles….hard enough to push people up to the top as it is. it'll be way worse The problem is that WWE is trying to push too many people to the "top level" instead of just making a strong roster from top to bottom. They try to make every over and moderately talented person into "The Next Big Thing". Having two World Titles is worse because it makes everyone look bad. When a guy like Dolph Ziggler or Miz gets a World Title run, or someone like Ryback or Wade Barrett gets pushed to the top of the card immediately, once they have to step away from the title picture and do other things, it's looked at as a step down and they're marked as a "failure". And guys like Kofi Kingston just look like total losers because they can't win a world title when everyone and their mother is getting a world title reign. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 13:17:55 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2013 23:51:41 GMT -5
I'd prefer two main titles….hard enough to push people up to the top as it is. it'll be way worse The problem is that WWE is trying to push too many people to the "top level" instead of just making a strong roster from top to bottom. They try to make every over and moderately talented person into "The Next Big Thing". Having two World Titles is worse because it makes everyone look bad. When a guy like Dolph Ziggler or Miz gets a World Title run, or someone like Ryback or Wade Barrett gets pushed to the top of the card immediately, once they have to step away from the title picture and do other things, it's looked at as a step down and they're marked as a "failure". And guys like Kofi Kingston just look like total losers because they can't win a world title when everyone and their mother is getting a world title reign. why would two titles be bad if you're looking to avoid wrestlers falling down into mediocrity? they could shift to a different 'top' prize & stay at a high level I'm of the mindset that if they handle the wrestlers incorrectly after a main event 'try out,' that's not because there are too many being pushed up, but because they have bad management/planning Having a solid product top to bottom is key, but the crowd doesn't really want to root for ziggler/bryan/anyone if there's no hope of him going up to the top & he has a better chance with 2 belts With one title, you would have CENA, PUNK, BRYAN, ORTON, DEL RIO, possibly BIG SHOW all at the top & risk things going staler than with 2 belts IMO….just my opinion, but one belt makes it impossible to root for the Bryan's & Rhodes of the world getting a shot someday **Why bother anyway when it's just for a little while until they bring back 2 belts….it'd happen eventually |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 13:17:55 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2013 0:16:51 GMT -5
The problem is that WWE is trying to push too many people to the "top level" instead of just making a strong roster from top to bottom. They try to make every over and moderately talented person into "The Next Big Thing". Having two World Titles is worse because it makes everyone look bad. When a guy like Dolph Ziggler or Miz gets a World Title run, or someone like Ryback or Wade Barrett gets pushed to the top of the card immediately, once they have to step away from the title picture and do other things, it's looked at as a step down and they're marked as a "failure". And guys like Kofi Kingston just look like total losers because they can't win a world title when everyone and their mother is getting a world title reign. why would two titles be bad if you're looking to avoid wrestlers falling down into mediocrity? they could shift to a different 'top' prize & stay at a high level I'm of the mindset that if they handle the wrestlers incorrectly after a main event 'try out,' that's not because there are too many being pushed up, but because they have bad management/planning Having a solid product top to bottom is key, but the crowd doesn't really want to root for ziggler/bryan/anyone if there's no hope of him going up to the top & he has a better chance with 2 belts With one title, you would have CENA, PUNK, BRYAN, ORTON, DEL RIO, possibly BIG SHOW all at the top & risk things going staler than with 2 belts IMO….just my opinion, but one belt makes it impossible to root for the Bryan's & Rhodes of the world getting a shot someday **Why bother anyway when it's just for a little while until they bring back 2 belts….it'd happen eventually But even WITH two titles, everyone can't be in the title picture at once. The fact that you're even mentioning Punk and Bryan in the same breath as Orton, Cena, Del Rio, and Big Show to begin with shows that it IS possible to break through into the upper echelon. But that should only be reserved for the guys who work the hardest and get the most over. Bryan and Punk made it because they're exceptionally talented and got mega over, not because there are two titles. Hell, CM Punk was a three time World Heavyweight Champion, yet the Pipebomb promo made it seem like he was getting sidelined as a C-show jobber before that point. Daniel Bryan is a former World Heavyweight Champion, yet throughout the feud with Cena, they made it seem like he "never won the big one". That shows how much the WHC means nowadays. The World Title will always be a consolation prize for the guys who aren't ready/aren't good enough/not their turn to be WWE Champion. Even with Cena holding it, we know that it's just a distraction to keep him away from the Authority storyline. With two titles, you'd just have one top guy hoarding one belt forever while the other belt is passed around as a consolation prize to placate the other guys and keep them satisfied. And that really isn't fair to the younger guys either. The real reason why everyone wants young talents to be in the main event is because WWE has ruined the concept of a midcard. They've neglected it so badly that they've created the mindset that "midcarder = jobber", so now they think the only way they can get a guy over and have him be taken seriously is to shove him into "the main event" and present him as a "star". But all that does is lead to a really bloated uppercard scene. The roster is too top heavy at the moment and there are too many guys on the roster who we're supposed to think are "main eventers" |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 13:17:55 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2013 1:04:29 GMT -5
why would two titles be bad if you're looking to avoid wrestlers falling down into mediocrity? they could shift to a different 'top' prize & stay at a high level I'm of the mindset that if they handle the wrestlers incorrectly after a main event 'try out,' that's not because there are too many being pushed up, but because they have bad management/planning Having a solid product top to bottom is key, but the crowd doesn't really want to root for ziggler/bryan/anyone if there's no hope of him going up to the top & he has a better chance with 2 belts With one title, you would have CENA, PUNK, BRYAN, ORTON, DEL RIO, possibly BIG SHOW all at the top & risk things going staler than with 2 belts IMO….just my opinion, but one belt makes it impossible to root for the Bryan's & Rhodes of the world getting a shot someday **Why bother anyway when it's just for a little while until they bring back 2 belts….it'd happen eventually But even WITH two titles, everyone can't be in the title picture at once. The fact that you're even mentioning Punk and Bryan in the same breath as Orton, Cena, Del Rio, and Big Show to begin with shows that it IS possible to break through into the upper echelon. But that should only be reserved for the guys who work the hardest and get the most over. Bryan and Punk made it because they're exceptionally talented and got mega over, not because there are two titles. Hell, CM Punk was a three time World Heavyweight Champion, yet the Pipebomb promo made it seem like he was getting sidelined as a C-show jobber before that point. Daniel Bryan is a former World Heavyweight Champion, yet throughout the feud with Cena, they made it seem like he "never won the big one". That shows how much the WHC means nowadays. The World Title will always be a consolation prize for the guys who aren't ready/aren't good enough/not their turn to be WWE Champion. Even with Cena holding it, we know that it's just a distraction to keep him away from the Authority storyline. With two titles, you'd just have one top guy hoarding one belt forever while the other belt is passed around as a consolation prize to placate the other guys and keep them satisfied. And that really isn't fair to the younger guys either. The real reason why everyone wants young talents to be in the main event is because WWE has ruined the concept of a midcard. They've neglected it so badly that they've created the mindset that "midcarder = jobber", so now they think the only way they can get a guy over and have him be taken seriously is to shove him into "the main event" and present him as a "star". But all that does is lead to a really bloated uppercard scene. The roster is too top heavy at the moment and there are too many guys on the roster who we're supposed to think are "main eventers" just my opinion, but it doesn't matter if the world title is a consolation prize…..without it, you'd just have one top guy hoarding one belt forever period - no growth for upcoming stars, no chance to shake things up a bit & test out how well things go with them as a star on the second rate show. based on what you said, why not just get rid of smackdown? we can all agree it's the number 2 show, but it's needed to help give some wrestlers a chance to have some spotlight, spotlight they can't get on raw (even world champ). again, just my opinion, but there is no room with one title - we will have orton vs cena for 6 ppvs a year. cena having it is to keep him away from that storyline, but that's a good thing…keeps him as a top guy in a solid feud with challenger after challenger, while letting other guys fight for the top title |
|
Alpha Q Up
Main Eventer
Not gravitas
Joined on: Jun 20, 2010 21:48:13 GMT -5
Posts: 2,691
|
Post by Alpha Q Up on Mar 19, 2014 20:49:05 GMT -5
Wizard.
|
|
