Which is more entertaining: a babyface or heel world champion?

[We Are Legion]

​

Which type of champion keeps you more entertained? Do you prefer the type of scenario when one of your favorite babyfaces is steadily climbing the ranks to overthrow a tyrant champion? Or do you like seeing your favorite babyfaces defending their honor against the evil-doers?


For me, it's the former. There's just something about having a heel champion that keeps me coming back a little bit more than the latter. It's much easier to hate a heel when he's the champion and he constantly cheats challengers out of their moments of glory.


When a babyface champion finally wins the belt, it makes everything a little too calm and I'm more inclined to tune in mainly for title defenses because I don't really care what dastardly deeds the heel commits because the babyface is still the champion regardless. This applies the same even if I like the heel more than the babyface. You might be aware of "transitional champions", but for me, all babyfaces are transitional champions. Only a heel can really bring the most needed sense of urgency to capturing a world championship. I think mid-card belts like the US and IC championships are better-suited for babyfaces because they do a good job establishing those wrestlers as formidable challengers to the world titles. I don't think any great heel really needs to make a pit-stop for a mid-card belt if he's really doing everything right.

So what do you think? Babyfaces or heels?​

​

 

[Defiant]

I tend to get more fun out of watching heel champions. On the one hand you've got the hard-working, admirable challenger trying to climb the mountain. On the other, the usually more charismatic and interesting heel is the focus.

 

[PHX]

If there was a way to put wash I would. I picked heel champion but the reason I would say wash is because I think the heel challenger and face challenger beats both. It's always more entertaining watching the chaser either way. Orton 2009 without the belt beats any other time where he had the belt easily for example. Stone Cold Steve Austin was the perfect title chaser. Still was a great champion but I loved his pre champion stuff better. Heel champ in the end though I say beats the face champ.

 

[ATKOOL]

A heel because they make everyone in the crowd angry. It feels like the crowd is stronger when a heel is in there than a face. Instead of clapping or saying yea when a face talks you have real strong boos and you suck chants. Face champ always feels the same where they claim to be a fighting champion and will wrestle any challenger any day and so on. With a heel, you have so many different people to dislike. Whether it be calling the hypocrites, angry at the guy with all the money, hurting their hero, and I could go on.

 

[Heisenberg]

I voted for heel champion, I just prefer them over faces and they are much more interesting. Play their roles so well.

 

[AF.]

I generally prefer interesting babyfaces in wrestling (which don't come much in the WWE - they seem to water down their faces to extreme levels) so yeah. A good babyface champion will do it for me.

Not a fan of the heel love the IWC seems to have. Guys like Barrett, Rhodes are uninteresting and are total bores.

 

[PY.]

To me, it doesn't really matter as long the person holding the title is entertaining. As long as the storylines are interesting, and the character isn't boring.. Really doesn't bother me.

 

[John McHenry]

I tend to be split right down the middle to me its more about the character. Their can be easily to faces take ADR and JBL for example I like one more than the other and I like one less than a face. So the whole good evil thing isn't really what it's about its whose being more entertaining and telling a better story with their character.

I will however say this I would think its easier to be a heel than a face. Heels just go out they can cheat they can insult people get cheap heat. Faces can't do as much if any of that.

 

[Darth Shizzel]

Well I prefer a badass as a champion so I prefer the Austins, Punks and Lesnars to the Cenas and Hogans or the Edges (heel), Del Rio's.

 

[The Cork]

Goes on a case to case basis, I cant really make a sweeping statement like "heels > faces".

I enjoyed Rey Mysterio's as much as Miz' reign.

Heels are obviously booked better in the WWE though.

 

[Johnny Ace]

I prefer a heel champion because typically heels are the ones that dictate the pace of the match, and lead the match with the person that they are working with. They also have more freedom to say stuff on the mic, unlike babyfaces. CM Punk is the only exception.

 

[Cornerstone]

I'd say a heel champion both because generally they're allowed to show more personality and when done right it's great to see the face finally beat him to get the title off him. Often times I love the faces more when they chase for the title then once they actually get them.