Championship belts no longer = prestige?

[WarroBODFan]

I understand that threads similar to this have been done in the past, and I've seen some recently as well. But now we pretty much know the card for Wrestlemania 30, does it surprise you that there are hardly any titles on the line?

We have the tag-team title match on the pre-show. Big E has no match to defend his IC title in as he's in the jobbers battle royal. Ambrose has no match to defend his US title in as he's busy fighting the geriatrics. No mention of any IC and US title unification has been made for months, and speaking about Big E in particular, he's had absolutely zero noteworthy feuds, unless you can count a 2 week feud with the Real Americans as something. The only titles up for grabs on the main card are the Divas championship, and of course the WWE WHC.

Is it just bad timing for these guys to be holding the straps leading to a show as prestigious as WM30? When the spotlight evidently goes to big name feuds, and returning superstars. Is it right that these titles aren't on the line and that they take a backseat until some of the part-timers sail off into the sunset? Or is WM30 the perfect place to potentially put some importance back on the middle-tier titles, or to sell a title unification?

I can kinda get why the IC and US titles aren't up for grabs at Wrestlemania 30, and I'm sure they can be used as leverage to start up some good feuds once the 'new' wrestling year begins, which is kinda what happens post-any Wrestlemania. But to not have the tag team titles on the main card I think is bogus.

 

[tommo1898]

Tag titles on pre show too. I remember when the tag title match was one of the highlights of a PPV with the likes of edge and Christian, hardy boys, dudleys etc

 

[AegonTargaryen]

WWE tag team title match on the pre-show? Oh, it wouldn't matter, considering that the Los Matadores and Rybaxel are in it.

I have lost all hope when it comes to Wrestlemania being a show that it once was, with every body holding a mid-card championship having their own role to play on the show. For instance, at WM 21 they gave us Eddie Guerrero and Rey Mysterio in the opening match. IMO, had Rob Van Dam never been injured, we'd have gotten a show-stealer match between Van Dam and Mysterio vs Eddie Guerrero and Booker T. Poor Booker T!

It's pathetic how New Age Outlaws are on the card, but Real Americans aren't. It's disgusting how in the name of Andre the giant, there's this idiotic and futile battle royal and guys like Cody Rhodes and Sheamus and Christian will be in it. Damien Sandow and Wade Barrett don't even matter year long anymore, leave aside Wrestlemania.

I sympathize and understand your point of view, but as long as the WWE can bring back guys like Undertaker, Brock Lesnar, The Rock and Batista, forget Cesaro, Damien Sandow, Jack Swagger, Big E or Cody Rhodes to have a meaningful spot every year at Wrestlemania.

 

[GoatfaceKiller]

Lazy booking is lazy. And, wth, I thought that Dolph Ziggler won a #1 contender match to wrestle Big E at Mania for the Intercontinental Title. Was I seeing/hearing things? As for the tag titles, yah...I honestly cannot condone that match being on the pre-show...that's just bull. Once again, lax booking. At the very least, after Mania is over, Ambrose needs to lose the US Title to someone like Sheamus or Cesaro...someone who will actually DEFEND it once in a while. Ideally, they'd just combine the US and IC titles and just have one mid-card belt that people can continue to not care about.

 

[rokuma]

Isn't this symbolic of the greater problem with WWE today? When I was a kid, I became a fan of WRESTLING, not this garbage that is so-called "Sports Entertainment." I enjoyed watching 2 sides of good vs bad square off and cheer for the good guy. It was that simple. Even though wrestling was "scripted" or "fake" as some say, I enjoyed watching it and suspending my belief that it was a legitimate athletic contest. That's what the commentary of the era with Gorilla Monsoon, Jesse Ventura, Bobby Heenan, Jim Ross, The King, and WCW's Tony Schiavone usually portrayed. They would talk match strategy, past history, and using their experience as a guide for commentary. Now, we have Michael Cole, JBL, and King talking about God knows what (usually the WWE app or social media in some way so they can shove it down our throat) and there is little focus on the action in the ring. If WWE isn't interested in the product in the ring, why should I be?

Further more, since it's not viewed as an athletic competition, but more of a Broadway play, the fans have little incentive to cheer or boo except for those they perceive as talented in the ring. Instead of awesome gimmicks (like Sting or The Undertaker or even Macho Man or Hulk Hogan), we get generic cookie-cutter athletes that look the same from one guy to the next. Fans could care less so they cheer for guys like CM Punk, Daniel Bryan, and other IWC darlings because they actually wrestle very well. It's hardly different from Ring of Honor in that sense.

Back to titles: Since WWE doesn't view the product as a legitimate athletic competition, why would they care about the Intercontinental or US title or the Tag Team title? They don't. They think the show they put on is more important than the perception of it being an athletic competition. Basically, it has become a male soap opera. This is something WWE should think about: Eventually, every TV show "jumps the shark" and becomes a caricature of itself, but sports leagues like the NFL or even the NCAA with March Madness continue to thrive year after year. Why? Because people love the drama of meaningful competition and seeing athletes go for the ultimate prize. The WWE has stripped that away from their product and basically, ripped the heart and soul of wrestling out of their company. Until they address that vision, the WWE will be the same boring and sad product that we're seeing today.

 

[AegonTargaryen]

Isn't this symbolic of the greater problem with WWE today? When I was a kid, I became a fan of WRESTLING, not this garbage that is so-called "Sports Entertainment." I enjoyed watching 2 sides of good vs bad square off and cheer for the good guy. It was that simple. Even though wrestling was "scripted" or "fake" as some say, I enjoyed watching it and suspending my belief that it was a legitimate athletic contest. That's what the commentary of the era with Gorilla Monsoon, Jesse Ventura, Bobby Heenan, Jim Ross, The King, and WCW's Tony Schiavone usually portrayed. They would talk match strategy, past history, and using their experience as a guide for commentary. Now, we have Michael Cole, JBL, and King talking about God knows what (usually the WWE app or social media in some way so they can shove it down our throat) and there is little focus on the action in the ring. If WWE isn't interested in the product in the ring, why should I be?

You won't believe but that's what I thought earlier- the exact same thing! I was watching the opening match of Starrcade 1996- Dean Malenko vs Ultimo Dragon for the cruiserweight title. There were not 3 but 4 commentators surprisingly, though Mike Tenay joined Bobby Heenan, Tony Schiavone and Dusty Rhodes after the 5-minute introduction to the event. I must say I loved Dusty Rhodes' peculiar and usual accent and intonation(It just makes me feel awesome the way he talks), always loved Bobby Heenan , Mike Tenay is literally a wrestling professor, and there is something inexplicably enchanting about Tony Schiavone's commentary. Contrasting that with the WWE commentary since 2006? It makes me want to puke. Nonetheless, the match was great, and I realized I was reliving "wrestling", and how tormented I have been due to the crappy product of the WWE.

Further more, since it's not viewed as an athletic competition, but more of a Broadway play, the fans have little incentive to cheer or boo except for those they perceive as talented in the ring. Instead of awesome gimmicks (like Sting or The Undertaker or even Macho Man or Hulk Hogan), we get generic cookie-cutter athletes that look the same from one guy to the next. Fans could care less so they cheer for guys like CM Punk, Daniel Bryan, and other IWC darlings because they actually wrestle very well. It's hardly different from Ring of Honor in that sense.

Exactly. Crappy gimmicks like The Miz(I'm Awesome...Really?), Zack Ryder(oh please don't say Woo Woo Woo), among others have been dominating the WWE TV until 2013 and now it seems they've taken a better direction FINALLY after the advent of The Shield, The Wyatt Family, among others. I miss the days when I knew which wrestler had passion as I saw Chris Jericho, Chris Benoit, Kurt Angle, Edge, Eddie Guerrero in the early 2000s. Now usually a guy can be given a MITB contract, even an undeserving guy, and Lo! magically he main events wrestlemania. Or a guy that chants YES! endlessly for chrissakes. To make matters worse, guys with an actually better gimmick like Damien Sandow are losing to Sin Cara. Wade Barrett doesn't even do any thing beyond giving "Bad News" .

Back to titles: Since WWE doesn't view the product as a legitimate athletic competition, why would they care about the Intercontinental or US title or the Tag Team title? They don't. They think the show they put on is more important than the perception of it being an athletic competition. Basically, it has become a male soap opera. This is something WWE should think about: Eventually, every TV show "jumps the shark" and becomes a caricature of itself, but sports leagues like the NFL or even the NCAA with March Madness continue to thrive year after year. Why? Because people love the drama of meaningful competition and seeing athletes go for the ultimate prize. The WWE has stripped that away from their product and basically, ripped the heart and soul of wrestling out of their company. Until they address that vision, the WWE will be the same boring and sad product that we're seeing today.

I don't even know how much antagonism, fury, or passion to express to all your aforementioned true statements. Just when you think IC/US titles matter, there's a 30-man battle royal, and the US title holder alongwith his teammates will face 3 45+ yr old has-beens from the attitude era- and for what!?

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Sometimes it's due to lazy booking, sometimes it's due to lousy timing, sometimes it's a little of both. Vince's ultimate strategy for WrestleMania has been to put most of the primary focus on matches featuring the top money players. More often than not, that doesn't include the tag team or mid-card champions. There's also issues regarding timing and "fairness" concerning WrestleMania. For instance, everybody wants to be part of the WrestleMania payday but if they're not on the show, they'll gripe about it backstage, fans will take to Twitter, Facebook, forums, etc. complaining about how it isn't fair for so & so to not have a place on the card despite working hard all year round whereas Brock Lesnar shows up ever 4 months or so and gets a prime spot handed to him, dirtsheet writers will write similar criticisms, etc. The battle royal and the Diva match is lazy booking, but they're also the only logical means of having everyone on the roster take part in the show with some degree of meaning.

I'm sure they could also go the route of booking more singles & tag matches as a means of having everyone on the roster, but that'd probably result in more than a dozen matches for the card. As a result, most of the matches on the card would have to be pretty short. This would lead to criticism of the matches not being long enough to generate any real relevance resulting in them being labeled as pure filler. They've only got 4 hours for the primary card, so you couldn't feature every member of the roster in singles or tag matches and expect each match to go 15 or 20 minutes.

 

[gothicsyn]

Isn't this symbolic of the greater problem with WWE today? When I was a kid, I became a fan of WRESTLING, not this garbage that is so-called "Sports Entertainment." I enjoyed watching 2 sides of good vs bad square off and cheer for the good guy. It was that simple. Even though wrestling was "scripted" or "fake" as some say, I enjoyed watching it and suspending my belief that it was a legitimate athletic contest. That's what the commentary of the era with Gorilla Monsoon, Jesse Ventura, Bobby Heenan, Jim Ross, The King, and WCW's Tony Schiavone usually portrayed. They would talk match strategy, past history, and using their experience as a guide for commentary. Now, we have Michael Cole, JBL, and King talking about God knows what (usually the WWE app or social media in some way so they can shove it down our throat) and there is little focus on the action in the ring. If WWE isn't interested in the product in the ring, why should I be?

I have this same frame of mind and have this very argument with a friend who tries to drill into me I cant expect the WWE to have it be the attitude era all the time because then I'd be bored with summin else, that I should just focus on the action in the ring which is near impossible to do considering the rants from the commentators, its not the attitude era I want back but the attitude the company once held when the product genuinely was must see weekly tv. I truly believe the PG13 crap they churn out week in week out is so watered down it doesn't even resemble the show I once watched so keenly. And as for Smackdown I'm lucky if I'm still awake by the end of the damn show!

Further more, since it's not viewed as an athletic competition, but more of a Broadway play, the fans have little incentive to cheer or boo except for those they perceive as talented in the ring. Instead of awesome gimmicks (like Sting or The Undertaker or even Macho Man or Hulk Hogan), we get generic cookie-cutter athletes that look the same from one guy to the next. Fans could care less so they cheer for guys like CM Punk, Daniel Bryan, and other IWC darlings because they actually wrestle very well. It's hardly different from Ring of Honor in that sense.

They turn out that one guy who has something then by hook or by crook they bury him mid card or drill him so far down your throat you just wish he'd go away never to be seen again.

Back to titles: Since WWE doesn't view the product as a legitimate athletic competition, why would they care about the Intercontinental or US title or the Tag Team title? They don't. They think the show they put on is more important than the perception of it being an athletic competition. Basically, it has become a male soap opera. This is something WWE should think about: Eventually, every TV show "jumps the shark" and becomes a caricature of itself, but sports leagues like the NFL or even the NCAA with March Madness continue to thrive year after year. Why? Because people love the drama of meaningful competition and seeing athletes go for the ultimate prize. The WWE has stripped that away from their product and basically, ripped the heart and soul of wrestling out of their company. Until they address that vision, the WWE will be the same boring and sad product that we're seeing today.

Its a sad truth don't get me wrong it has its moment its rare but they happen, and they are almost never created by those part timers, I hated the Rock been champ, he did NOTHING to earn been champion, he ruined not 1 but 2 Wrestlemanias, it's ridiculous same with Lesnar, who clearly could be responsible for Taker never been heard from again, he wont win the Streak is too big for that but he is in my opinion reckless and arrogant in his own little world.

I've always maintained that no "Superstar" should walk in and be handed a title EVER no matter their resume they need to work for it like those that came before them. The company is no longer about the fans and that sucks, all these polls and votes are a gimmick that counts for nothing, just like the Slammys too many external gimmick and not enough focus on the very product that makes WWE what it is a damn wrestling company!!

 

[Radical]

This is something that constantly bugs me about WWE programming!

I want ALL the titles to mean something. And in order for that to happen, the titles have to be, GASP, DEFENDED! Not only that, but DESIRED by others! WWE are making their own bad jokes public by having the commentators mention how Dean Ambrose is the longest reigning champion in WWE but he rarely defends it. They even go as far to say that "Well, can you blame him? The management aren't giving him any challengers!" And it's true.

It's disappointing.

The WM 30 card is actually pretty good. I wouldn't really change much EXCEPT I WOULD have Dean Ambrose defend his US title. Against who? Oh, I don't know? How about Seth Rollins! AND/OR Roman Reigns? Could be a singles match with Seth or Roman choosing a corner to be in or could be a Triple Threat. But you can't say that it wouldn't be a compelling match because there has been all sorts of tension built between The Shield and we know these guys can put on a show! So why not make them face each other? THAT to me is a money match. The New Age Outlaws and Kane? Big fans ... but when they were YOUNGER. Not now when there are more interesting feuds and matches for a WrestleMania!

Now how about Big E? Well, again, they basically DID create some interest in a IC title match with that Fatal-4-Way a couple Raws ago. Christian got injured so they did it again on Main Event and I THOUGHT it put Ziggler in a match against Big E at Mania. Apparently not. But WHY NOT? Ziggler and Big E have history and they could put on a good match! Hell of a lot more interesting than them just being a couple more jobbers in a Battle Royal!

Speaking of the Battle Royal... ASIDE from the fact that I think all titles should be defended at WM, I don't mind the idea of this 30-man Battle Royal. I mean, for the wrestlers themselves, it is nice because a lot more of them are going to get a WM paycheck than they would have in previous years. Since they won't bring back MITB matches for WM since they are big enough to be a PPV of their own then I like the 30-man Battle Royal idea.

I just wish the titles were treated with some respect.

WE KNOW the damn show is made up and the titles are not won but GIVEN. But why have any damn titles in the WWE if you are hardly going to recognize any of them?

You go to WWE.com and look at the Superstars line up and the first thing you see is all the Champions. It's not like the Champions are just sorted into the pack they actually show you ALL the Champions first before you can scroll through. So, sometimes it seems like they are trying to suggest the titles are important but then you watch the shows and they don't get defended often, they hardly have anyone feud for them, etc. And they rather put old guys vs some new guys in a 'personal' feud instead of making a different personal feud WITH the titles involved.

Doesn't make sense to me. I don't get it and I will NEVER like it when they go long periods without having all the titles defended and made to seem important.

For the sake of WWE's creative team I hope they DO unify the US and IC titles because they seem to damn lazy or careless to give the US and IC titles any sort of meaningful investment so they better make them one so they can hopefully concentrate better on title feuds. Then, maybe some years down the road after they figure out how to make every title mean something they can add another title.

But for now... it's #unifyUSandIC time!

 

[Dirk]

But now we pretty much know the card for Wrestlemania 30, does it surprise you that there are hardly any titles on the line?

We have the tag-team title match on the pre-show. Big E has no match to defend his IC title in as he's in the jobbers battle royal. Ambrose has no match to defend his US title...

I'll be honest here... When I saw the thread title, I thought blood was going to spurt from my eyes and my palm-prints were going to be imprinted on my forehead permanently. It's a valid point you're making, though.

However, finding a place for all the titles could be difficult, since it's WM 30 and all the possible stops are being pulled out for this one.

Dean Ambrose has had the US-belt for the tenth-longest combined title run and it's only his first time. I suspect (as do many others) that it's going to be a focal point in the Ambrose/Reigns(/Rollins?) feud after WM, so at least THEN it will get a time to shine. Being one of the longer-reigning US-champs, it IS a shame that for much of the Shield's existence, it's been an absolute afterthought.

If they're unifying the two lower-level belts, I think they'll keep the Intercontinental Championship belt - it has both the WWF-lineage and I think bigger names have had it, even though Axel is a blemish.

Does this mean Langston will drop the title and languish in midcard limbo where he'll meet great purgatory-buddies like Kofi and Dolph? Let's hope he'll get a good feud.

 

[Dagger Dias]

Things are different now than they were a few years ago before they unified the belts. They don't have to have every single title defended at Wrestlemania. That gimmick belongs to Night Of Champions. Now that there are only 5 title match that could be possible, as opposed to a few years ago when there could be as many as 8, it's fine for only the Divas and World Heavyweight Championship get defended on the main card. The fact that Big E and Ambrose are still in action on the show while holding midcard titles is fine. If they were left off the show while holding a belt, that would be an issue.

 

[WarroBODFan]

Things are different now than they were a few years ago before they unified the belts. They don't have to have every single title defended at Wrestlemania. That gimmick belongs to Night Of Champions. Now that there are only 5 title match that could be possible, as opposed to a few years ago when there could be as many as 8, it's fine for only the Divas and World Heavyweight Championship get defended on the main card. The fact that Big E and Ambrose are still in action on the show while holding midcard titles is fine. If they were left off the show while holding a belt, that would be an issue.

For us without the WWE Network, the tag-team title match has been as good as left off the show, though. That was kinda one of my points. At least I like to think that the titles are still worth something, but it seems this is no longer the case. Are we really at the point where titles are just 'gimmicks' that should be pulled out every so often just to add a tiny bit more incentive to a storyline? Call me out of touch, but I wish the titles still had more prestige than they currently do. I'm not saying they should be the focal point of every single storyline. Sure, they can be good just as enhancers to story. But at the end of the day, isn't it really all about getting the gold and being the best? I totally get what you're saying, don't get me wrong. But WHY has this direction of not caring about the titles happened in the first place? Whether it's fine or not.

 

[Dagger Dias]

For us without the WWE Network, the tag-team title match has been as good as left off the show, though. That was kinda one of my points. At least I like to think that the titles are still worth something, but it seems this is no longer the case. Are we really at the point where titles are just 'gimmicks' that should be pulled out every so often just to add a tiny bit more incentive to a storyline? Call me out of touch, but I wish the titles still had more prestige than they currently do. I'm not saying they should be the focal point of every single storyline. Sure, they can be good just as enhancers to story. But at the end of the day, isn't it really all about getting the gold and being the best? I totally get what you're saying, don't get me wrong. But WHY has this direction of not caring about the titles happened in the first place? Whether it's fine or not.

A small part of the blame can be placed on Night Of Champions. If every belt was defended at every show, then WWE would lose one of its better PPV brands. Alongside Money In The Bank, I consider it one of the two biggest PPV brands after the Big 4. If they ever do trash that show and just make all the belts be on the line at every PPV, perhaps that could restore some importance. They don't HAVE to put every belt on the line at every show though is the thing. As long as they feature the champion on the card somehow. There should be a world title match closing every PPV (or at least being in the upper card if there's a dream match closing) and MAYBE a divas title match each show. The tag team and both midcard belts can shuffle between shows for which one is featured. It still means something to be a champion. I'm usually far more interested in a title feud than in a non-title feud and I view it as a major accomplishment when anybody wins a title belt. If the wrestler does nothing worthy of note in a title reign it really is more on the booking team than on him since he wouldn't even be considered if they didn't have their reasons.

 

[thebarber]

The secondary titles have been treated like shit for years now, no surprise WWE are doing nothing with them on the biggest show of the year.
Why they could not have had Ambrose drop the US Title leading up to Mania, could have furthered the Shield discension storyline, and put a singles belt on a guy who could use the rub of a title and subsequent 1-1 match at Wrestlemania.

 

[whoopin' ass]

Doesn't really surprise me. That's the problem with "sports entertainment" - the drama is more important than the titles. Your titles are supposed to be your built in storyline - you want to be a champ so you can show that you are the best. But now it is about whatever story they want to tell and the titles don't matter. Think of how many guys just seem to float around with no purpose - shouldn't they be challenging for a title?

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

To an extent, yes. Hey also have limited time and you need your most over guys in the matches. Go back and watch old manias with 14 matches for the sake of getting everyone and every title on. It's unbearable. I agree that they need to add more meaning to the Midgard titles, I just don't think it's a huge deal. The guy who said something about guys without passion...then ragged on Daniel Bryan...that's a fast way to lose credibility. I was watching during the wcw cruiser era. Believe it or not, they didn't (as a company) put the cruiserweights over on a weekly basis. They gave them time, but they were never booked as a threat to anyone. They were given the opener and kept in their little small guy box. Nostalgia can be cruel. I promise you, you see better in ring action today than any other time except maybe the smackdown 6 era.