• Welcome to "The New" Wrestling Smarks Forum!

    I see that you are not currently registered on our forum. It only takes a second, and you can even login with your Facebook! If you would like to register now, pease click here: Register

    Once registered please introduce yourself in our introduction thread which can be found here: Introduction Board


Raw Thread June 11

Becky Two-Belts

Evil Owner
Administrator
Jun 28, 2010
52,135
2,851
113
33
Bo$$town
I know when Orton won the WHC they acknowledged that he passed Brock as youngest world champion despite Brock gaining the record by winning the WWE title
I stand corrected, prior to 2004 then. I remember that and once again caused by there being two world titles and WWE wanted to erase Brock's record for leaving them. WWE creates all these "records" out of spite, lmao.
 

Becky Two-Belts

Evil Owner
Administrator
Jun 28, 2010
52,135
2,851
113
33
Bo$$town
Guess we should eliminate the entire "triple crown" accomplishment since there's no European title.
WWE changed their triple crown and grand slam qualifiers.

So anyone under the old one is no longer technically a triple crown or grand slam.
 

Becky Two-Belts

Evil Owner
Administrator
Jun 28, 2010
52,135
2,851
113
33
Bo$$town
I've said multiple times I don't care, I'm just saying they aren't wrong and I mean we care bc it's still impressive? We cared when Punk was having that long reign not because he was gonna break the record but bc it was impressive so they added a qualifier to it to show that while it wasn't breaking an actual record it was notable
Punk's was more notable because while he didn't break the top record, he still advanced over other people in the record books. Beating out Diesel, Macho Man, and Hogan for the 7th longest reigning WWE Champion. Brock is definitely already the longest reigning Universal Champion. Either way, he's technically held his belt longer than Punk did his. So I'll leave it there as I think we've exhausted this topic.
 

Chris

Super Moderator
Dec 23, 2011
18,161
2,352
113
23
Just West of Parts Unkown
I stand corrected, prior to 2004 then. I remember that and once again caused by there being two world titles and WWE wanted to erase Brock's record for leaving them. WWE creates all these "records" out of spite, lmao.
Prior to 2004 the only chance they would have had to "mix records" (you keep saying this like it implies a record actually disappears, brock was still the youngest wwe champion despite orton winning the whc younger, they just acknowledged orton was the youngest to win either) was from late 02 when the WHC and second tag titles were created so it took them less than two years to start lmao
 

Becky Two-Belts

Evil Owner
Administrator
Jun 28, 2010
52,135
2,851
113
33
Bo$$town
Prior to 2004 the only chance they would have had to "mix records" (you keep saying this like it implies a record actually disappears, brock was still the youngest wwe champion despite orton winning the whc younger, they just acknowledged orton was the youngest to win either) was from late 02 when the WHC and second tag titles were created so it took them less than two years to start lmao
But even after they started, how often did they do it? Not as often as they do now. It's a promotional tool to take people they don't like out of the equation. Which is dumb because they could just do it with the same belts, but whatever. We're talking in circles now.
 

Deezy

Well-Known Member
Nov 13, 2010
43,872
9,888
113
Canada
Wait....they changed the definition for triple crown and grand slam and that's accepted.

Like they just did for Universal championship. :nowords

What are we even arguing about now....the changed the narrative.
 

Becky Two-Belts

Evil Owner
Administrator
Jun 28, 2010
52,135
2,851
113
33
Bo$$town
Wait....they changed the definition for triple crown and grand slam and that's accepted.

Like they just did for Universal championship. :nowords

What are we even arguing about now....the changed the narrative.
Not even the same thing. They didn't change the name of the WWE Title. It still exists as does its records.
 

Becky Two-Belts

Evil Owner
Administrator
Jun 28, 2010
52,135
2,851
113
33
Bo$$town
Wait....they changed the definition for triple crown and grand slam and that's accepted.

Like they just did for Universal championship. :nowords

What are we even arguing about now....the changed the narrative.
But even if we accepted that narrative, why do we want swallow any horse shit WWE makes up on the spot?
 

Becky Two-Belts

Evil Owner
Administrator
Jun 28, 2010
52,135
2,851
113
33
Bo$$town
My saying "I guess" was my succeeding the point to you @Chris and then you came back with another long post.

Brock is the longest reigning champion of the world title status since the 80s. For whatever reason that matters.

So we can close this topic if y'all want to. SmackDown about to start.
 

Cwalker

Well-Known Member
Feb 25, 2012
12,816
3,100
113
Wait....they changed the definition for triple crown and grand slam and that's accepted.

Like they just did for Universal championship. :nowords

What are we even arguing about now....the changed the narrative.
I’ve been lost for about 2 pages now.

This is just the New Day debate we had a couple years ago.
 

Chris

Super Moderator
Dec 23, 2011
18,161
2,352
113
23
Just West of Parts Unkown
New Day are the longest tag team champions in wwe history no? Does it matter which of the three tag belts they've held when they've held one longer than anyone else has held the other two?
 

Becky Two-Belts

Evil Owner
Administrator
Jun 28, 2010
52,135
2,851
113
33
Bo$$town
They changed its standing on the pecking order.....Boxing did it too. WBO > WBA
And it'll change back.

WWE always comes back on top, but that wasn't even remotely what the conversation was about. Anyways.

I'll see you in the SDL thread Deezy.