The WWE needs a Television Singles Title

[Azamuth]

I would really love a TV title in the mix but for that to happen you would have to examine the current title situation.

WWE Womens Division: Just as everyone says, we DONT need 2 belts for 19 wrestlers. Cut it down to 1 belt that allows the champ to go to any show and were good.

WWE Tag Team Division: We have one!? Please save us Baretta and Croft lol. If you have an unified Championship and it never seperates then it should be renamed the "WWE Tag Team Championship". Oh... make it just one belt and if you want, maybe a new design.

Oh, ECW Championship... ive been hearing that this show might be ending so if it does another title will have to take its place to give the spill over wrestlers something to fight for. If they dont create another title then I can see them doing another series of roster cuts.

After all of that ive just been able to see 2 belts get removed from active status and 2 titles being simplified. Does this warrant a TV title... in the end it just might not.

Finally, you need to look at what rules the title needs to follow.

The title must be defended on television a certain number of times per week.

The wrestler must be able to go from show to show

What is the title's value?

If you can work that out, go for it!

 

[IrishCanadian25]

OH DEAR GOD NO THEY DON'T.

WWE doesn't have / make the time to devote to the titles they have, the LAST thing they need is another one. It's why I hate Carrottop - too many props to be effective. It's why I loved Gallagher - just the right number of props and substance to be effective.

"Television" is, much like "United States" and "Intercontinental" just a fancy term for "Mid-Card." There is nothing remotely special about any of them, except some history. There's a reason the European Title is defunct.

I'll argue the WWE needs to merge the women's divisions into one - with ONE champion - and if they add any title, it has to be special and have some attractive value. I've stated many times that the Lightheavyweight Title should be brought to ECW.

But a TV Title? It's just a token way for the IWC to feel that their "under-rated" young stars are being pushed. News flash - if they need to create a new title to get those guys over, then they'll never be legitimately over.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

The Television Title is one of the dumbest ideas in wrestling I have ever seen. It is an absolutely pointless title. A title that you only defend on television? So what is the point in not defending it on House Shows? It is an absolutely meaningless title.

WWE has the perfect number of titles on their shows right now, with the exception being that I would rather Smackdown have its own Tag Team Championship. However, that isn't going to happen because they refuse to invest in Tag Teams .... and that doesn't appear to be changing anytime soon.

But the more titles you have, the more meaningless they all become. It's just too many for people to keep track of and waters down the prestige of all the other titles.

Bottom line is that there are just enough titles in WWE right now, and one could argue they actually have too many as it is. So no. A big veto from me on this one ... especially since the Television Title is amongst the most useless titles in wrestling.

 

[Mr. TM]

PRetty pointless to bring it back, there are already too many titles in the WWE, there are too many pay per view matches on the cards, and their are not enough credible people to hold a title without devaluing the NINE current titles even more so. The only way I could ever see this happening is if ECW added an hour, which would just flood the world of Professional wrestling with 9 hours a week.

 

[Rated R Stustar]

The WWE has too many titles as it is, even the ECW Title is pretty much a mid card Title these days, although I would rather WWE bring back the Cruiserweight Title for ECW, if Kaval ends up on ECW the title would be perfect to start him off and have him and Rey feud for it, but there seems to be ni point in having a fourth mid card Title.

 

[THEratedRsuperStar]

first why dose alot of ppl think there are too many belts I dont think theres enough it seems like there used to be alot and that gave plenty for superstars to do bring back the the european title and the hardcore (even tho its pg thats got nothing to do with it) and the cruiserweight and bring in a tv title make the guys wwe dont think is ready for upper mid or main event fight for those and tag titles to see is they can be upper mid or main event and have the upper mid and main eventers fight over the ic/us and the wwe/world and i know i left out the ecw title but it worthless now the ic title used to be so prestiges and as for the womens division I dont care anymore whos champ or not I rlly agree with ppl who said its not like the days b4 trish and lita retired now it just something to look at

 

[ChristianRivers]

I've got to agree. The ECW title is just a knock off WWE tribute belt. And it should be done away with along with ECW. You really only need the United States, and IC Titles, so they have a good system there.

It's too bad they don't invest in tag teams. I never understood the idea of a Television Championship. Obviously you either defend it at live events, or whatever TV Taping there is. However with the WWE known to give it's champions any where from 8 months to almost a year for a title reign a Television Title wouldn't really make sense. It might have made sense to be a title that is later upgraded to a another belt. But WWE is fine. They should worry more about what belts they have.

 

[The_Hooded_One]

Simply,no! Theres more then enough titles, we dont need it like it was back in 2001 where there was I believe 8 separate titles, that's just a overkill man. Although I would vote in favor of getting rid of the Divas Title and bringing back The Cruiserweight Title. And wtf was the WWE Tribute Title and how is it linked to the ECW Title? Im confused there.

 

[Suneeboy]

Oh please. Another title so it can go undefended for weeks and months? So the champion gets thrown in random matches never defending the title? So there are no feuds built around it to the point of us probably forgetting the title exists? So the champion can lose every non-title match to put other people over, but still “keep the belt”? Please, spare me the pain.

The WWE has two mid card titles that rarely get defended, yet Matt Hardy, R-Truth, Evan Bourne, and Kofi Kingston are fighting the mid card champ every fucking week. If the champ was a face it would be Carlito, Chavo, Mike Knox, and Dolph Ziggler fighting every week with no title shots. Give me a goddam break already with this bullshit.

Did you realize there isn’t even enough people on the brands to support another title? Who would fight for it week in and week out to keep it fresh? What brand would it be on? Please, that’s TNA thinking right there…which isn’t a bad thing, but those types of ideas don’t work in the WWE. They have a whole different set of problems to deal with before they can even fathom the thought of creating another type of title of ANY KIND!

 

[Dagger Dias]

I don't really support this idea. There are too many belts as it is, and adding a new one would make the title scene even more of a cluster-mess. The idea of a title being defended on all 4 shows (aside from the tag team belts) is also a bad idea. Not many people would care about some random midcarder gaining access to all shows so it wouldn't generate that much interest.... and if a main eventer won it, then WWE would be risking this belt becoming more "important" than the world titles, and we know they wouldn't want that to happen. The only reasons that someone should gain access to all shows are if they win the tag team titles, the world titles get unified giving an undisputed champ, or if it's Wrestlemania time and the brand separation somewhat vanishes for a month. They should keep things the way they are because the IC and US titles are usually defended on tv rather than PPV anyway, plus very few wrestlers would benefit from a new title being created to be defended on all shows, I honestly think the current format of the titles and what show they are defended on is fine.

 

[Mitch Henessey]

WWE has enough titles as it is,and they don't need another one. Besides, with all the backstage segments,skits,and in ring promos, do you really think they would have time to showcase this title? Just imagine if it were on Raw. There's now way in hell they would have enough time to focus on this because of the WWE championship,the divas,guest hosts,and DX segements.

Again,WWE just doesn't need another title there are enough as it is. The only way this MIGHT work is if it were done on ECW, seeing as they only have one champion.Still, it would be hard to pull off because it's only a 1 hour show.

 

[scottyvia]

I dont think we need another title. We have enough titles that dont get enough attention or have lost their value. The tag titles are just accessories now. The WWE title looks like a 6 year old designed it. The only title that seems to have any value in its storyline right now is the IC title. Thats the only storyline that shows both guys actually want that title more than anything. Thats how it should be.

 

[Guilty]

Not a TV title. With the U.S and I.C you already got two prestigious midcarder/upper mainevent titles. Why a 3rd? HOW EVER! What id love is for the rebirth of the CRUSIERWEIGHT TITLE.

WWE should show TNA they can compete with the X-Division...but highly unlikely.

Hurricane
Jimmy Wang Yang
Evan Bourne
Chavo G.
Tyson Kidd
Ray Gordy(Slam Master J)
Funaki
Rey Mysterio
M. Hardy
Yoshi Tatsu

They also got Kaval and Danielson in FCW as well as recent luchadore signings Incognito and Super Nova.

Thats more than enough talent to warrant a CW title. Sadly.....wont happen

 

[Dysturbed]

On the surface I do like the idea of the champ being able to be on each show or even add a bit more legitimacy to Superstars (though we no longer seem to get it here even though WGN is a Chicago based station)

However I am still thinking that there are already too many titles. In this day and age just about every wrestler who ends up being around for long enough has a resume filled with multiple title reigns of different sorts. It has always been that way to some extent but it's a lot bigger now and basically adding another title kind of dillutes things imo though it does have it's positives.

Also, while it's true that it would give wrestler "something to do" when they are not competing for the top prize or when a midcarder has no specific focus, I can't help but think that they don't need a belt in order to have something to do. WWE maybe needs to find them things to do but it shouldn't have to (not that you said that it had to) involve a title. WWE often supposedly releases people because of a "lack of creative direction" and maybe a tv title could provide them with a direction but realistically so can a lot of other things if WWE really wants them to.

Where main eventers are concerned I know that it's not in the personalities of a lot of the characters to not want to have or compete for the title as often as possible but their is always some sort of thing that they can fight with someone over so I'm not sure if it needs to be a title.

 

[FromTheSouth]

I imagine I am not the first person in this thread to say that the WWE needs less belts not more. The brandsplit has dilluted the product to such a point that over half the roster has been some kind of champion at some point. That is absolutely ridiculous. There is a longer wait at the merchandise stand than there is in the locker room to get a belt.

Honestly, if you end the brandsplit, you can lose the big gold belt, make the IC belt number two, and make the US title your TV belt, if you feel it is absolutely necessary.

 

[Pepe Silvia]

I'd love to see this belt replace one of the women's belts. They don't have enough female talent to do two shows anymore. Also, this would allow a Third Tier belt to exist again, like the Euro belt. Which, would then, allow a new definition for a GSC. (Grand Slam Champion)

 

[Dysturbed]

^^^A third tier singles belt imo would be more favorable if there weren't already 2 top tier and two middle tier male singles ones. I say 2 cause each person places the ECW one in a different "tier" and we don't know the future of that title so I'm not sure where to consider that as the third. For now though that's another singles title. I do agree with only having one title for the women however.

 

[ramblinroy68]

The WWE needs one world champ not two. I say

WWE World Heavyweight Title: Get rid of the stupid old spinner belt and keep the NWA/WCW Ric Flair belt as the Title.

National Championship Title: (Change the US title to this Title) Defended on Smackdown and be The highest ranking belt that is only defended on SD and PPV.

Intercontinental Title: Highest Belt that is only on Raw and PPV's.

Women's Championship: 1 belt for the Ladies. Let it switch brands at PPV's and Superstars

World Tag Team Champions: Pick a brand either Smackdown or Raw and have the best tag teams on that show. My feeling is Smackdown would be the place for it.

World Television Title: Put this title on whichever brand doesn't have the Tag Titles. This would be the place for mid-card pushes. Actually have it defended and change hands on TV.

One show could focus on pushing mid-card talent like McIntyre, Miz, Morrison, and Dibiase. While the other would focus on having Tag Team feuds. This would seperate the two shows and make the brands feel different. I would put women on both shows, but focus the title on Superstars.

 

[slushpuppy53]

Liking the effort put into this by Ramblin, but I would take it one step further. lose the brand split entirely. Expand ECW/NXT to a full 2 hours and move some of the lesser names down.

Make ONE world champion only (remember when the champ was on every show?). ONE set of tag titles. ONE tier2 belt (partial to the IC over the US but whichever is fine). ONE women's belt. ONE additional "specialty" belt (either cruiserweight or hardcore). With 3 two-hour shows a week, it's more than enough time to spread the champions out without assigning them to a brand. And finally, not every champ has to be on every show, so can alllow more time to develop fueds and stories without having to develop a fued in 3 weeks like they do now.

 

[Why Always Me]

Whilst the Brand Extension is still in place, the title situation is ok.

Each show has a heavyweight champion, mid card, womens/diva's and the tag champs can go everywhere.

If the WWE insisted on keeping the crappy split, I would at the very least liek to see all the champs work both shows, that way the titles could be unified.

Then the situation could be as follows:

WWE Champion
Intercontinental Champion
Tag Team Champions
Television Champion
Cruiserweight Champion
Women's Champion

But I dont see that happening, so bringing in a Television Title whilst the situation is like it is atm is pointless, while there are still separate rosters the title balance is ok.

 

[theBIGdealAndyP]

i have been and will be a big proprieter of a revamped TV title, a guy who has to show up and defend that title EVERY week, the best guys have always held the title, william regal, finlay, lance storm, bottom line is its gotta be someone who can go 100% every week and convincingly beat mid-carders every week (or at least cheat really good). id love for it to be a Jack Swagger or Shelton Benjamin, but both have been made to look like fools recently, christian (when they strip him of the ECW belt) or even big Zeke or Zack Ryder could, (though, i like tough heels in this category), then theres CM Punk (but would that be beneath him at this point?), then my personal pick... Cody Rhodes w/ big brother Dustin helping him get the win every week, have Brett Dibiase make his debut lose a buncha matches, till big brother Ted comes in and makes the save and gives lil brother a push...

 

[GenMe]

Honestly i like your idea.Making a TV Title for all the 4 shows will be great,And now that NXT is going to debut why not put it in that show? A TV title instead of a heavyweight title in NXT will be great.Because really NXT will not need a heavyweight Champion.And maybe the TV title could be your ticket to a better show in the future.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

I disagree big time.

As of right now here are all the titles the WWE has:
WWE Title, World Heavyweight title, ECW title (although maybe gone soon or already)
Womens Title, Divas Title
Unified Tag Champs
IC Title, US Title

Frankly 7-8 titles for one company is just too many to hold. For myself, it should be 1 world title, 1 midcard title (and if that is the TV title so be it although I think they should just make it the IC title), 1 womens title and 1 tag title(the only one they got right so far IMO). If you over-saturate a company with titles they become meaningless and people who are undeserving of titles (Sheamus anyone) get them.

There can't be 2 #1 guys in a company, you're either on top or your not. Not only that, if they do cut back on the title belts it can help re-establish a lot of the prestige the titles have lost over the years, not to mention the WWE could actually make every division credible instead of what they have now.

Also, if you bulk up each division (because now you have 20 guys i a division instead of just 5 or 10), it can be used to build other non-title feuds because so many guys are going for 1 belt (which in turn makes these guys seem deserving for a title shot because they had to prove themselves that much more to get there). Now its like 5 guys going for the WWE title, 2 guys going for the US title, and 3 teams going for the tag titles, not to mention that only 4 divas in the entire WWE can work a decent match.

So really you have it like this: (Sheamus beat Orton and Cena, so now the only person really left to fight is HHH or HBK). This in turn makes the title seem less prestigious because you blow through all guys in line for a title shot in 4 months whereas if you had lets say 12 guys going for the title you have fresh feuds for at least 2 years with the same guy as champ, which in turn can make for longer and more meaningful title reigns, which in turn will elevate said character to another level (because he is now a real champ, not a paper champ).

The reason titles change hands so frequently is because they use up all guys in such a short period of time, so to keep it fresh you have to give titles to guys or people who are just there (like McIntyre. Morrison could of had a much longer and better title reign if he actually had fresh faces to fight on a regular basis). Seriously, if a title changes hands every 2 months than every title holder is looked at as unworthy because they can't be build as a credible champion (who takes a champ who one 2 title defenses seriously, I know I don't).

To cut this rambling short though (too late), I don't think another title is a good idea at all because with all the titles in the WWE currently, it will be almost impossible to build it to the point where the title can be seen as something more than flashy bling carried around by whoever holds it. I never took the WCW TV title seriously for this very reason, winning a belt in WCW was commonplace, every loser and asshole held a belt there (like the Renegade) so no one really cared about any of them except the world title (until they gave it to David Arquette).