If You Had To Kill Either the World, IC, or US Title...

[KAMALA]

Which one would you kill? Kind of an f, marry, kill, but with championships.

I'd probably kill the US belt, f the World title by naming it the Heritagfe Title (or WCW Heritage title, but that would NEVER happen) and marry the IC belt by keeping it the same.

 

[Defiant]

Probably the World Title. At first I was going to agree with the U.S. Title since, it seems, whenever WWE get the itch to revitalise the mid-card title scene its usually concentrated on the IC Title anyway, so what's the point? Then again, the World Title scene is probably just as redundant as the US division, just on a larger scale.

Unify the major titles, then WWE starts focusing on strengthening and diversifying the mid-card a lot more to build their contenders. The U.S. and IC Championships should be their go-to props.

So yeah, getting rid of the WHC will benefit the other divisions and heighten the prestige of the WWE Title at the same time.

 

[John McHenry]

My answer would involve too many variables. Brand extension being the major one. In it's current form I'd get rid of US or IC make one the cruiserweight (since Hardcore is hardly an option) and leave one alone.

 

[The Cork]

Has to be the US Title, last time it seemed semi-important was when Booker and Benoit had the best of 5 on Smackdown like 7 years ago, and even that was a poor imitation of their best of 7 in WCW.

Never known that title to have helped anyone get over in anyway since it was introduced. If it wasn't for so many titles already around I'd suggest Cesaro bring back the European belt, fits his gimmick perfectly.

 

[KAMALA]

Has to be the US Title, last time it seemed semi-important was when Booker and Benoit had the best of 5 on Smackdown like 7 years ago, and even that was a poor imitation of their best of 7 in WCW.

Never known that title to have helped anyone get over in anyway since it was introduced. If it wasn't for so many titles already around I'd suggest Cesaro bring back the European belt, fits his gimmick perfectly.

I think the US title has helped some people like John Cena and MVP for example. However, right now it is the weakest state of the three belts and doesn't have the rich WWE-related history that the IC belt does. I know, I know they keep saying it is the same belt held by Harley Race, Ric Falir, etc., but that belt hardly seems connected those reigns what with those reigns being in different companies.

 

[Chris]

I'd kill the World title just because I think two world titles are too much at the moment when they don't have the talent to compete for them. The WHC right now is basically where the IC title should be as a secondary title.

 

[We Are Legion]

World Heavyweight Championship without a second thought. It has the shortest history of all the belts and two world titles hasn't been necessary since the brands were at war with each other nearly 10 years ago. And since the wrestlers aren't even exclusive to the show they're "signed to", it's even more unnecessary.

 

[WhatAboutBigBob]

I'd kill the World Heavyweight Championship.

I'm one of those people who believe the Brand Split is hurting the product because there isn't enough Main Event Talent to have two separate Major Championships. So, in turn of killing the World Heavyweight Championship, or bringing back the Undisputed Championship (which wouldn't make sense since the new Championship is being created), that would mean ending the Brand Split.

The United States and Intercontinental Championships help build up wrestlers, and they aren't really focused as being anything important like they were 8-10 years ago.

 

[The New F'n Show]

I think the US title has helped some people like John Cena and MVP for example. However, right now it is the weakest state of the three belts and doesn't have the rich WWE-related history that the IC belt does. I know, I know they keep saying it is the same belt held by Harley Race, Ric Falir, etc., but that belt hardly seems connected those reigns what with those reigns being in different companies.

This is pretty much how I feel exactly. US Belt seems to have the least prestige, which is sad because Greats have held it.

 

[Cena's Jeans Shorts]

Kill the World Heavyweight Championship. As much as I get the marketing and economics behind the idea, I think it kills the kayfabe prestige of the idea of a world title by having two since you'll never have enough top level talent to create two separate world title programs.

I'd probably F-- the U.S. title. Mostly because I think the poor IC title has been fucked enough times that it's getting sore.

 

[Rated R Superstar]

I'd kill the WHC honestly. It hasn't been around as long to accumulate the kind of history the IC or US have. I kind of like Cesaro as US champion anyway. Always great to see a foreigner holding the US belt, as it has so much potential for a great heel run.

 

[Dale]

It's a bit of a roundabout situation I think really as ideally both need to happen at some point. Kill the US Title and have a bigger, stronger midcard so that guys can spend time in more of a stacked division against better calibre opponents that way they will appear more credible and ready to step up to the main event.

 

[Ozymandias]

Kill the WHC and the US. Keep the intercontinental, it has too much of a history to be retired.

I'd put the WWE title on Raw and devote Smackdown to the IC and give the mid-carders and huge platform

 

[Dod Draper]

Kill the WHC and you kill Smackdown. That is, unless, the WWE Champion begins appearing on there.

So, for that reason I say kill the US title.

 

[We Are Legion]

Kill the WHC and the US. Keep the intercontinental, it has too much of a history to be retired.

I'd put the WWE title on Raw and devote Smackdown to the IC and give the mid-carders and huge platform

The US Championship has more history than the IC.