|
Post by BROKEN on Mar 12, 2015 14:55:03 GMT -5
In my opinion, the wwe championship and the WHC made wwe better for me. It gave more superstars a chance to win a belt
If there was two belts
lesnar, reigns, Seth could be chasing wwe belt
bryan, Ziggler, Ambrose could be chasing WHC
Your thoughts?
|
|
Miztery
Superstar
Joined on: Dec 30, 2014 0:16:59 GMT -5
Posts: 892
|
Post by Miztery on Mar 12, 2015 15:00:06 GMT -5
As long as there is only one main show then I think they should keep it the same. If the day comes that they have enough talent loaded up and they try the brand split again then yes, of course you switch it back to two. I wouldn't hate it if they made two championships again but for now I think it is best at one. Although I must say, having two main belts would help eliminate a lot of the filler that is most of RAW.
|
|
|
Post by Roman Bellic on Mar 12, 2015 15:03:09 GMT -5
for example: 2 women > 1 woman
same here
|
|
|
Post by Yambag Jones on Mar 12, 2015 15:05:08 GMT -5
I'd keep it the way it is unless SmackDown becomes a legit show with exclusive talent. Which I don't see happening anytime soon.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 27, 2024 12:07:10 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2015 15:10:09 GMT -5
No. It's better with one belt. All the World Heavyweight Championship did was allow WWE to pretend that upper mid carders were main eventers and further perpetuated the idea that the midcard doesn't matter.
|
|
|
Post by Planktung on Mar 12, 2015 15:12:46 GMT -5
Without a brand split, the World Heavyweight Championship was essentially the Intercontinental Championship. One major title is the better of the two options. Much better.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 27, 2024 12:07:10 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2015 15:25:45 GMT -5
Without a brand split, the World Heavyweight Championship was essentially the Intercontinental Championship. One major title is the better of the two options. Much better. This. And all it did was suck up contenders who could have been fighting for either the WWE Championship or the Intercontinental Championship. A wrestler's first world title win should be the biggest moment of their career, not a stepping stone.
|
|
|
Post by SodaGuy on Mar 12, 2015 15:25:43 GMT -5
People begged for a single championship and now people are wanting two back. Don't quite understand that. *shrug*
|
|
|
Post by Planktung on Mar 12, 2015 15:30:05 GMT -5
People begged for a single championship and now people are wanting two back. Don't quite understand that. *shrug* A lot of pro wrestling fans live under the motto, "When we get what we want, we don't want it anymore."
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 27, 2024 12:07:10 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2015 15:33:58 GMT -5
Definitely not. I prefer one.
These boards were craving for there to be one championship again. Now there is...
|
|
|
Post by The Yes Man on Mar 12, 2015 15:43:31 GMT -5
I see it this way.
1 roster, 1 belt. 2 rosters, 2 belts.
|
|
|
Two belts
Mar 12, 2015 15:54:37 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Himmy! on Mar 12, 2015 15:54:37 GMT -5
Much happier with one title.
|
|
ππ΅πβοΈ
Main Eventer
WF 10 Year Member
King Of The Ring 2007 - Team Undisputed
Joined on: Feb 4, 2013 13:46:47 GMT -5
Posts: 4,708
|
Post by ππ΅πβοΈ on Mar 12, 2015 16:08:13 GMT -5
I prefer 2 Championship Title Belts, but 1 Championship Title. I always thought it looked cool when Chris Jericho, and for about a week, Triple H, held the Big Eagle and the Big Gold simultaneously. I also thought it looked cool when Randy Orton, Daniel Bryan, John Cena, and for about a day, Brock Lesnar, held the Big W and Big Gold simultaneously. Being that the Intercontinental, United States, Tag Team and Divas Champions all have a Belt each, I think the WWE World Heavyweight Champion should have two Belts. Then again, I'm a Belt SMark. I love Gold and leather. It's kinda my thing.
|
|
|
Post by King Silva on Mar 12, 2015 16:11:09 GMT -5
I prefer two belts as well so I hope the titles are separated in the next couple of years.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 27, 2024 12:07:10 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Two belts
Mar 12, 2015 16:14:03 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2015 16:14:03 GMT -5
No way. The WHC was nothing more than the IC belt for years.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 27, 2024 12:07:10 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Two belts
Mar 12, 2015 16:23:21 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2015 16:23:21 GMT -5
What I would like to see is for Vince to give HHH a second show on the Network. That show would be a new version of WCW that HHH would control in the same way he controls NXT. The talent would be comprised of main roster guys who don't have a spot on Raw or Smackdown. Their championship would be the WHC.
I mean, what I really want is for Smackdown to be re-branded as WCW and for HHH to book it, but that's not happening anytime soon. A Network show seems more feasible to me.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 27, 2024 12:07:10 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2015 16:41:20 GMT -5
I see it this way. 1 roster, 1 belt. 2 rosters, 2 belts. Even WITH the brand split, there should only be one major title. The WWE Champion should be the champion of WWE, not just half of it.
|
|
|
Post by Rob on Mar 12, 2015 16:49:16 GMT -5
I've never liked the 2 world titles situation and hated it even more with 3 world titles with ECW. They should have left it like they had it during the undisputed era with the champion appearing on both shows.
It should have always been WWE title, IC title, US Title for the low mid carders(Like the European title).
|
|
|
Two belts
Mar 12, 2015 16:55:40 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by RybackV1 on Mar 12, 2015 16:55:40 GMT -5
No
|
|
|
Two belts
Mar 12, 2015 17:30:58 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by jayrod2009 on Mar 12, 2015 17:30:58 GMT -5
1 belt. Thats should be the only way to go. You can't hae 2 World Champions in one company.
|
|