USIC TITLE? help me understand

Except he wouldn't be the first US/IC champion.. Edge was, when he beat Test at Survivor Series 2001.

Unifying the belts is an awful idea. Especially with Sheamus,

Yep.

The US Title was still around after 9/11.  It didn't get unified until November of 2001.  Then was brought back in July of 2003.


And technically, this US Title is different.  Edge unified the WCW US Title with the WWE IC Title, this would be Sheamus unifying the WWE US Title with the WWE IC Title.

First of all, if they do unify it they better not start calling the resultant product the "United States Intercontinental Title" or some BS like they do with the WWE Title. It's too wordy, confusing and downright stupid as the name of a company's championship.

They shouldn't unify the belts in the first place anyway. Wrestling as a whole is different than it was in the 1980s were there wasn't a demand for more championships. Four titles was fine for 1987 but it seems odd and out of place in 2014, not unique. Unifying the World Titles guarantees the title picture to revolve around the same handful of stars because with only one major championship the WWE would be less likely to give an up-and-comer a World Title, instead of giving them the lesser (WHC) and testing the waters before solidifying them with the WWE Title. The likes of Cesaro, Seth Rollins, Dolph Ziggler, and Kofi Kingston have NO SHOT of a World Title run for the forseeable future because, let's be honest, none of them would be able to carry the company's top title, even in a fluke run. Instead, the only main-event title feud, the only match that would go on last on PPV save for a grudge match with a seasoned veteran (HHH, Brock, etc.), revolves around the likes of Cena, Orton, Batista, Kane, Sheamus, and Roman Reigns. It makes the product bland and predictable because say the WWEWHC match on PPV is Cena/Barrett. They could do the best job in the world of building Barrett but everyone and their mothers know he won't be holding the biggest title in the company (the example leads into the "oh because he's fighting Cena" argument but you could replace him with anyone else I've mentioned). The same blandness that occurs at the top will occur at the bottom of the card if the IC and US titles are unified.

What have the midcard "feuds" been this year without the championships? We've had 3MB fighting Los Matadores because midgets, we've had Cesaro/Van Dam/Swagger in a poorly-construed rivalry, Rusev versus America and random Vladimir Putin references, and now we're treated to a love rectangle between Dolph/Fandango/Summer/Layla. The feuds we've gotten, and in turn the matches we've seen on PPV, have been lacking and, again, bland. The titles have added two quality matches to the card on the PPVs they've been defended. Big E/Barrett at Extreme Rules, Sheamus/Cesaro and Barrett/Van Dam at Payback. The title gives the feud some reality, something special that's lacking with non-title feuds. Goldust and Stardust vs. Rybaxel at MiTB got almost no crowd reaction. Big E/Barrett had the whole crowd on their feet. Yeah the championships are "devalued" and are just "props," but you could convince me easily that Guy A wants the belt from Guy B and will do what it takes to win it, and when he doesn't he moves on and Guy B takes on his next challenge. If these belts are unified--especially if the US Title is dropped, basically making Sheamus's reign irrelevant because he did nothing to re-legitimize it from Ambrose's stranglehold on the belt--we lose one more exciting PPV match, one more relevant and explainable feud, and one less "prop" that keeps the current product fresh.

They better not unify them.

Meh, it's only a title, hell the brand split is old news. They might as well just bring in the "Jobber Title", it would still mean more than a US/IC title run in this day and age.

I don't want them to unify the mid card belts.

I'd just bring back the European Title or make a new Television Title.