Does SmackDown need a WHC again?

[Dolph'sZiggler]

lol wow. So all the opinions you used to have I am magically remembering it all wrong. good to know. Next Jono comment I'm booking a one way to Cornwall and broadcasting my murder/suicide on justin.tv. you fucking smurf

 

[Rysenberg]

Ryan got it spot on.

Yeah I really did.

<3 u more Dolph's

 

[Lockard 23]

The WHC itself still had miles more credibility than any title outside of the WWE title (not saying much). Just look at Ziggler's title winning moment, for a guy like him who'll most likely never win the WWE title, what other championship could have provided him a moment like that? People absolutely did care when he won it, and just because ADR's final reign was god awful doesn't mean the title had lost all credibility.

Hell, it could have been great in The Shield's storyline. If you'd had Dean win the strap a few months ago, with Seth and Reigns cheating/interfering in his matches so he kept it until 'Mania, they could have had Reigns's big moment where he wins the WHC. Sure, he'll most likely still get big pops and a lot of momentum from his win at 'Mania (under the assumption that he does win), but it could have been a much more significant moment in his career if he'd won the belt and then carried it for a few months.

I don't think the unification has given the WWE title anymore credibility, all it's done is remove their second most important title. I also disagree on the brand split, there's easily enough depth - probably more than in some years where the split was in place - they'd just need to improve their booking of certain guys.

So one big moment warrants keeping a second world championship around? Meh. People popped for Ziggler winning it because both the casuals and the smarks love Ziggler, and it happening in front of a smark crowd certainly didn't hurt. His actual reign wouldn't have seemed anymore special to me than a reign with the Intercontinental Title, and I find the same is true of Sheamus' reign back in 2012. Without brand exclusive PPVs and without a brand split period, two separate world championships shouldn't exist imo. I also didn't find the WHC all that more prestigious than the IC and US Titles during it's final days. A world championship should be able to headline an event if need be. Do you honestly think feuds like Sheamus/Show, Ziggler/ADR, Sheamus/ADR, Ziggler/Sheamus, Cena/ADR, Christian/Orton, etc. would be worthy of headlining PPVs? Most of those seem like they'd make for good IC or US Title feuds, but not something I want to see main eventing.

 

[Crayo]

lol wow. So all the opinions you used to have I am magically remembering it all wrong. good to know. Next Jono comment I'm booking a one way to Cornwall and broadcasting my murder/suicide on justin.tv. you fucking smurf

jonathreat

 

[Jonathan]

Dolph literally becoming me :

 

[Dolph'sZiggler]

Dolph literally becoming me :

Jonathan literally botching the use of the word literally.

 

[Dolph'sZiggler]

jonathreat

Crayothon post.

 

[Jonathan]

Jonathan literally botching the use of the word literally.

Isn't that ironic

 

[Dolph'sZiggler]

Isn't that ironic

:isee:

 

[Rysenberg]

So one big moment warrants keeping a second world championship around? Meh. People popped for Ziggler winning it because both the casuals and the smarks love Ziggler, and it happening in front of a smark crowd certainly didn't hurt. His actual reign wouldn't have seemed anymore special to me than a reign with the Intercontinental Title, and I find the same is true of Sheamus' reign back in 2012. Without brand exclusive PPVs and without a brand split period, two separate world championships shouldn't exist imo. I also didn't find the WHC all that more prestigious than the IC and US Titles during it's final days. A world championship should be able to headline an event if need be. Do you honestly think feuds like Sheamus/Show, Ziggler/ADR, Sheamus/ADR, Ziggler/Sheamus, Cena/ADR, Christian/Orton, etc. would be worthy of headlining PPVs? Most of those seem like they'd make for good IC or US Title feuds, but not something I want to see main eventing.

I get that this situation could be rectified over time: They could unify the US and IC belts in order to give extra meaning, or they could shove them higher up the card. But why bother? They had two titles which people consistently cared about, if the right people were involved, and now they only have one IMO (generally speaking). The feuds weren't main event feuds anyway with WHC so I don't really understand that point. I'm not saying it should be at the very top end of the card (although I wouldn't have had a problem with it), it's just a belt that has the ability to give upper-card guys and their PPV matches some extra credibility which neither the US or IC would bring at this point in time.

If the unification had made the WWE title feel much more important then I might have been on board, but to me all they have done is remove a prestigious title that could have helped guys out, and for no discernible reason.

 

[Farooq]

Smackdown should showcase the Intercontinental championship, and the United States championship. The champions can still show up on Raw, but have the build up and feuds for midcard wrestlers in Smackdown. That way, the main stars can be shown on Raw and Smackdown can have something of it's own. No divas on Smackdown either, it's usually just filler so it wouldn't do it any good. Tag team can be every here and there, but not every show. Also, get rid of Raw recaps. One or two wouldn't hurt for something involving the world title, but Smackdown over does it.

Smackdown should just be the midcard show, that way the ones who don't get time on Raw, can still be showcased on Smackdown.

 

[Snowman1]

Why? Its not going to main event ppvs and will just be a secondary title. There should only be one heavyweight champ with everybody else gunning for him, thats the point of wrestling. Smackdown should just be Midcard guys getting some time.

If the brand split comes back, I respectively disagree. Having the 2 belts made sense since the two rosters on both brands all were gunning towards that prize of the WWE or WHC. Even though the Heavyweight Title was opening shows and not main eventing many PPV's it didn't really matter, it got its credibility from that alone.

If the brand split stays gone (no reason for it to for all the reasons already stated) the WHC should too. Crayo, you know better. Not sure what to do to salvage Smackdown in it's current state, though, maybe it's fine being the weekly glorified house show?

 

[F.R.I.E]

Yes. It's going to help split the talent and focus on more than one title. Unifying the belts was a terrible idea. It just leaves too many options for future contenders, especially at 'Mania.

 

[Lockard 23]

I get that this situation could be rectified over time: They could unify the US and IC belts in order to give extra meaning, or they could shove them higher up the card. But why bother? They had two titles which people consistently cared about, if the right people were involved, and now they only have one IMO (generally speaking). The feuds weren't main event feuds anyway with WHC so I don't really understand that point. I'm not saying it should be at the very top end of the card (although I wouldn't have had a problem with it), it's just a belt that has the ability to give upper-card guys and their PPV matches some extra credibility which neither the US or IC would bring at this point in time.

If the unification had made the WWE title feel much more important then I might have been on board, but to me all they have done is remove a prestigious title that could have helped guys out, and for no discernible reason.

My point was that a WORLD championship imo should contain feuds that are at least main event worthy. One thing I never liked about there being two world titles with no brand split was that one would always have to be defended in the undercard since only one title can headline. Hell, one thing I never liked about the brand split itself (probably the only thing I disliked about it) was that on co-brand PPVs - Royal Rumble, Wrestlemania, Summerslam, Survivor Series - one of the belts would still end up defended in the undercard then as well, but I was fine with it then since in that case, it only happened a few times a year. Without brand exclusive PPVs or a brand split, it happens all the time.

I know it's a small difference since it really just comes down to whether it bothers you seeing a world championship become basically the new Intercontinental Title (i.e. not on the same level of the WWE Championship but still clearly the second most important championship in the company) or whether you'd just rather see upper-midcard/midcard feuds revolve over championships that have traditionally always been seen as the upper-midcard/midcard titles (i.e. the Intercontinental and United States Championships.) I take the viewpoint of the latter, which is why I was all for ditching the WHC so that we could put more focus and emphasis on the WWE Championship as the premiere title as well as attempt to build the IC and US Titles back up to what they were before.

 

[Nexus1]

i have better solution
1) brand split and make WHC #2 title. and push samus and adr or cody to win it
2) merge us title in ic title. and give chance to ziggler, real Americans, kofi to win ic title.
it's just suggestion but i know that no one cared about my suggestion specially that fuckin wwe. :-$