Whats with the hotshotting of the World Title?

[chessarmy]

The World Heavyweight Championship in particular is getting thrown around like a dancing jumping bean lately. It seems that everyone that holds that belt only has it for a month, then BOOM a switcharoo. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not asking for a year long title reign from someone but at least let someone hold the fuckin belt for 3-4 months! With Backlash approaching in just a few hours, I am almost sure the World Title is going to change hands AGAIN and while it would make sense for it to do so, I'm definitely getting tired of these 1 month title reigns.

So, when will this end? The question is, who is finally going to get a World Title reign that lasts more than a month?

 

[aceofspades7778]

yeah man I absolutely agree with you, it kinda devalues the title when it gets passed around so much......... but the same exact thing happened with the undisputed title in 2002 that title changed hands at 7 ppvs that year and it consecutively changed hands at wrestlemania, backlash and judgment Day..... This also happened in 2000.... Idk why WWE does this lol

 

[MikeRaw]

Did you watch the Attitude Era by any chance?
If you think this is frequent changes, look at the title changes from 97-2001. It was crazy. For example: In 1999, the WWE championship changed hand 12 times, 5 by May. The World Heavyweight Championship has changed 2 times this year so far. Title reigns are slightly longer now than they were during the Attitude Era.
Anyways, I don't have a problem with it. Shit just goes in cycles. I don't care too much about how long the title reigns are, as long as it can advance the storylines, and keep me entertained. In a year or whatever, we'll probably be in a cycle of long 6 month reigns and stuff. I just take it as it comes. But really, this is mild compared to 5 and 10 years ago.

 

[JurassicBonez]

Did you watch the Attitude Era by any chance?
If you think this is frequent changes, look at the title changes from 97-2001. It was crazy. For example: In 1999, the WWE championship changed hand 12 times, 5 by May. The World Heavyweight Championship has changed 2 times this year so far. Title reigns are slightly longer now than they were during the Attitude Era.

Thus one of the reasons the attitude era wasn't as great and "the best" as people claim it to be.

World titles shouldn't be tossed around like a drunk Trish Stratus at a college party. Yes, World titles shouldn't be kept for years and years (unless you refresh the person during their reign) but there shouldn't be 3 or 4 week reigns either. It lowers the value of the title in my eyes. But having every reign last 3 - 4 months wouldn't be good either cause of the fact that you know when a title change is coming.

For examplem I honestly would have had no problem with Cena's long reign if they alternated him during his reign. He could have went from face to heel to freshen him and his reign up. He could have became bad ass. If they are going to do a long World title reign, that's what they need to do. Having a reign that's only a few weeks from time to time ain't bad, but it's ridiculous when it's every reign that someone gets back to back.

 

[chessarmy]

Did you watch the Attitude Era by any chance?
If you think this is frequent changes, look at the title changes from 97-2001. It was crazy. For example: In 1999, the WWE championship changed hand 12 times, 5 by May. The World Heavyweight Championship has changed 2 times this year so far. Title reigns are slightly longer now than they were during the Attitude Era.
Anyways, I don't have a problem with it. Shit just goes in cycles. I don't care too much about how long the title reigns are, as long as it can advance the storylines, and keep me entertained. In a year or whatever, we'll probably be in a cycle of long 6 month reigns and stuff. I just take it as it comes. But really, this is mild compared to 5 and 10 years ago.

The attitude era is long gone, I'm not even attempting to compare the current era with that of the 90's. What I was trying to say is WWE is uncharacteristically juggling the World Heavyweight Championship when in the modern era most of us have grown used to decently long title reigns

 

[MikeRaw]

I never said you were comparing. But what I'm saying is, the only time we've had consistently long reigns (year longs and over) was pre-attitude era. Starting in the Attitude Era, and ever since, title reigns, with only a few exceptions (07 Cena, Evolution HHH), have been short. To change now and go back to ones that are consistently 6 months or so, would be pointless. Title changes are needed now a days to help get people over, and advance storylines. That's why storylines have been frequent ever since about 10-13 years ago.

 

[Quintastic One]

This is another contributing factor of the downfall of WCW. Vince Russo considered the title belts to be trinkets and faucets for storylines, rather than realizing that they have a certain amount of "prestige" that needs to be upheld. Playing hot potatoe with the belt only cheapens it, and makes people care less and less about title matches.

Now we did granted just come off some really long title reigns of Randy Orton, John Cena, JBL, Triple H and Edge over the past couple of years. But this is ridiculous. It went from Edge beating Jeff at the Rumble, to Edge losing the title at No Way Out, just to win it back on the same night against Cena. Cena beating Edge at Mania, and now Edge has beaten Cena at Backlash. And I'll be damned if they don't hotshot it to CM Punk at Judgement Day in his hometown of Chicago next month.

This is not a product of "business as usual" for WWE. This is a true testament to the fact that WWE Creative has gotten so bad with being unable to plan out any long term fueds, that they HAVE to hotshot the belt every month. Because if a fued is planned to last longer than one month, Vince McMahon will shake everything up. It's going to get to the point where you see a title change every 2 weeks, because Vince McMahon is so paranoid about Spoilers leaking, he's going to do absolutely everything in his power to make his product as unpredictable as possible. Even at the expense of ruining his own world titles.

 

[The Rated R CMStar]

I fail to see how a belt changing hands rapidly devalues a championship.

 

[Kizza]

Having two main titles devaluates it more then it changing hands a bit.

 

[Quintastic One]

Admittedly, I'm not the best man to answer that question. But the proof is right there under research of WCW where Booker T's 5 reigns of world champion all happened within a year. Which was the around the same time period within the last years of WCW they had Jarrett with most of his main reigns, Nash and Hogan with reigns, David Arquette and Vince Russo with reigns, DDP, Ric Flair of all people at that time, I mean seriously. It was a mess.

So like I said, I'm not the best man to take up that debate any further than that question. But alot of people said before Edge Vs. Cena even took place that they didn't care of this match because of the hot shotting of the belt and that we've seen Cena Vs. Edge too many times. But now suddenly because Edge won it they are defending the hotshotting because it is currently in favor of Edge. If he does lose it next month to CM punk then you can bet people will be right back onto complaining about the one month title reigns.

 

[MikeRaw]

I fail to see how a belt changing hands rapidly devalues a championship.

Exactly. In fact, it's almost impossible to de-value a championship at all. If you think about it, in kayfabe, the title will always be looked at as the most important, no matter how many times it changes hands. In kayfabe, whoever holds the title is the best. That will continue for years and years. The frequency of title changes won't change that. And out of character, you can't really devalue it, because out of character, we all know it's just a prop, and don't look at someone better just cause they hold the title. Out of character, we don't really put much stock into the title to begin with, so I don't see how it can be de-vauled.

 

[Quintastic One]

But we do look at someone better when they have the title. Finally breaking the glass ceiling like Jeff Hardy did and winning the title proved that we was good enough to be the main guy on the brand, for however short amount of time. It's supposed to be harder than hell to win the belt and remain main eventer. When we have a new champion every month, it makes it feel like the champion is weak, and that anybody can be the champion if they are given the match.

 

[MikeRaw]

^That's where I disagree though. Do we actually look at someone better when they have the title? Triple H had the title for months, and many people held Orton in higher regard than him. If Swagger had retained the belt last night, people wouldn't have thought of Christian any different than they did before. If Show was Mr.MITB last night, and cashed in on Cena, no one in an out of charatcer sense would think he's actually better than Edge or Cena. My point is, in a non-ayfabe sense, the title is just there. Not many people actually put a certain value on it, or put too much stock into it in a non-kayfabe way. So you don't have to worry about de-valueing the title in that way. The only other way the title can be de-valued is in the kayfabe sense, and I really don't believe that'd ever happen. It'd have to take some serious shit to devalue the title in kayfabe. In kayfabe, no matter how much it is passed around, it's still "the main prize".
But it doesn't bother me at all. After watching wrestling for 10+ years, as I'm sure most people here have, I've seen the title have plenty of spurts where it is passed around more than it currently is. In 2007, there were alot of long reigns, so I guess right now their storylines all revolve around frquent title changes. No big deal IMO, soon enough it'll go in different trends.

 

[Quintastic One]

Well alot of people complained about the fact that CM Punk was champion over say, Jericho or Orton. Alot of people also say things like "if so and so doesn't win the title I will be pissed" so obviously there are those who care about whether or not you're champion. If there was no championships due to them being pointless, what would there be to fight for? In a kayfabe sense you fight for the belt because you want to be known as the best. Not the guy who won a belt that was held by 6-7 different people within a six month period. That doesn't mean your the best, that just means your another guy in a long line of guys who's won a meaningless award.

 

[MikeRaw]

Well alot of people complained about the fact that CM Punk was champion over say, Jericho or Orton. Alot of people also say things like "if so and so doesn't win the title I will be pissed" so obviously there are those who care about whether or not you're champion. If there was no championships due to them being pointless, what would there be to fight for? In a kayfabe sense you fight for the belt because you want to be known as the best. Not the guy who won a belt that was held by 6-7 different people within a six month period. That doesn't mean your the best, that just means your another guy in a long line of guys who's won a meaningless award.

So if people DO care, like you say they do, about who holds the title, and if people actually think that someone is better because they hold the title, then the fact that the title gets shuffled around more should be convienient to you and those people, shouldn't it? Having someone hold the title for like a year will result in very few new guys actually holding the title. That goes back to my point of this being needed just for storyline purposes. The belt will never be de-valued in a kayfabe sense, because WWE basically controls how you view things in the kayfabe. If the belt is changed quickly and frequently, like it is currently with Edge and Cena, that doesn't devalue it in kayfabe. All it does is make it look like the champion won it in an underhanded way, like Edge did, but that's fine, because that's what they want himt o look like. The reason it's been changing so much frequently is because Edge is at the centre of it. It's not supposed to look like he went through hell, and a war to get it, and then finally won it and made his boyhood dream come true, or any of that shit. It's just supposed to be that he won it in a sneaky way. That doesnt' devalue the title though. It just devalues Edge's reign, which is what they want anyways.