|
|
Post by taker1 on Aug 26, 2007 22:23:12 GMT -5
To me at least, it's becoming pretty obvious that WWE is going back to the way things used to be- with title changes happening pretty unfrequently. I mean..I can't remember the last time somebody held a belt for only a month or less. RVD?
I like it. People keep saying that the titles " are losing more and more value", but WWE's making them more prestigious by having less title changes. It's bringing stability to all the belts in WWE. It makes titles changes seem more special..
Opinions?
|
|
|
|
Post by BigDaddyChacon on Aug 26, 2007 22:26:20 GMT -5
To me at least, it's becoming pretty obvious that WWE is going back to the way things used to be- with title changes happening pretty unfrequently. I mean..I can't remember the last time somebody held a belt for only a month or less. RVD? I like it. People keep saying that the titles " are losing more and more value", but WWE's making them more prestigious by having less title changes. It's bringing stability to all the belts in WWE. It makes titles changes seem more special.. Opinions? Yeah, I've noticed that too. I remember back when I would watch in the 80's, a title change was a pretty special thing. It hardly ever happened except at Wrestlemania or another big event. Maybe that's what the WWE is trying to do again. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 27, 2024 7:18:53 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2007 22:27:18 GMT -5
I actually prefer more frequent title changes to keep things more interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by chumped on Aug 26, 2007 22:28:01 GMT -5
I like it, but not for this long.
|
|
|
|
Post by wwemark1 on Aug 26, 2007 22:28:13 GMT -5
Yes, because if someone gets a title you know they aren't just going to hold it for a month. It adds to the win as well because of how long the regin was. I love it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Iron Man on Aug 26, 2007 22:28:55 GMT -5
The only reason some titles don't change (like Tag, CW, Womens etc..) is because they don't have enough contenders...
|
|
|
|
Post by christian1cage on Aug 26, 2007 22:29:48 GMT -5
No. Because now you know that the champ will lose his belt right away. When the title changed a lot, it made the title matches unpredictable.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 27, 2024 7:18:53 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2007 22:50:20 GMT -5
Sure. But my only complaint is Cena holding to belt for so long. If Orton or Kennedy or Carlito won the belt and held it for a long while. That would be awesome.
|
|
|
|
Post by taker1 on Aug 26, 2007 22:52:40 GMT -5
No. Because now you know that the champ will lose his belt right away. When the title changed a lot, it made the title matches unpredictable. But that, in turn, made the title and titles changes worth less. so it's a double-edged sword.  |
|
|
|
Post by Iron Man on Aug 26, 2007 22:55:15 GMT -5
a good 5-6 month reign. Every once in a while have a long title reign and a short one...
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Old School™ on Aug 26, 2007 22:55:52 GMT -5
The WWE title might have more meaning if it didn't look so stupid. Come on, that spinner belt is a disgrace. Can't wait until Triple H destroys that thing with the sledgehammer. You know it's going to happen and I for one, can't friggin' wait.
|
|
|
|
Post by BigShab421 on Aug 26, 2007 23:05:09 GMT -5
No, its  ing annoying if u ask me. It the SOS every month. |
|
|
|
Post by kamardo on Aug 26, 2007 23:13:29 GMT -5
I think its
"Whoever the 8 year olds like, get the titles. the mama's boys can get the ECW title though"
|
|
|
|
Post by Iron Man on Aug 26, 2007 23:19:10 GMT -5
I think its "Whoever the 8 year olds like, get the titles. the mama's boys can get the ECW title though" Exactly.. Guys...Uhmmm I mean Women like, Cameron : A WF God |
|
The Doctor
Main Eventer
Joined on: Feb 3, 2002 19:03:52 GMT -5
Posts: 3,446
|
Post by The Doctor on Aug 27, 2007 0:15:13 GMT -5
I like the longer title reigns. Even if you don't like the current champ, you can pretty much bank on the fact when the loss does come, it will really mean something. While it does build up the guy carrying the belt, it also builds up the title itself. If they were playing hot potato with a belt and your favorite guy were to win it, you're not going to enjoy it for long and it will just piss you off because they held for a month (or less) to start with.
|
|
|
|
Post by opportunist on Aug 27, 2007 0:21:00 GMT -5
No. Because now you know that the champ will lose his belt right away. When the title changed a lot, it made the title matches unpredictable. That's a good point, and what I feel was the beauty of the Attitude Era. It really worked for them back then . . . . I can totally appreciate the other side of it, too . . . . longer reigns do make the next title change seem like a huge deal. I know you can't have it both ways, but somewhere between would be good . . . periods of stability, followed by instability. |
|
|
|
Post by cutthroat on Aug 27, 2007 0:29:10 GMT -5
i like the idea but it depends on who is holding the belt like Khali they should get it off of his A_S_A_P cuz some people who have titles desevere them others dont and im not gonna name anymore names
|
|
|
|
Post by Thick Justice on Aug 27, 2007 0:31:00 GMT -5
No, not year long reigns like Cena's. However If it went 2-6 months rotating like 2 month then 4 month then 5 month then 3 month then I would like that because it would make the title matches seem unpredictable. I was fine when Cena hit the 6 month line but 11 months isn't even border line crazy it is crazy. Now no one deserves to hold a 7 month reign not even HBK, HHH, Kennedy or even Angle or Joe.
|
|
|
|
Post by 50ff on Aug 27, 2007 1:31:23 GMT -5
No, not year long reigns like Cena's. However If it went 2-6 months rotating like 2 month then 4 month then 5 month then 3 month then I would like that because it would make the title matches seem unpredictable. I was fine when Cena hit the 6 month line but 11 months isn't even border line crazy it is crazy. Now no one deserves to hold a 7 month reign not even HBK, HHH, Kennedy or even Angle or Joe. Amen |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 27, 2024 7:18:53 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2007 2:15:12 GMT -5
I like it, but not for this long. Agreed, Cena needs to drop, but it looks like WWE is making him out to be the next Bruno Sammartino |
|
