Lately I've been hearing an argument from fans that really doesn't make any sense to me. So and so's match doesn't need the belt to be over. I think this is a really stupid concept. The only way for the belts to mean anything is if they are fought over by the top guys in the company. Look at some of the biggest matches in wwe history. Hulk and Andre fought for the belt. Hulk and Warrior fought for the belt. Rock fought Austin twice for the belt. Even Cena and HHH fought over the strap. If you look at this card it appears that the belts will be contested in matches that will be seen as less important than Brock Goldberg, whoever Undertaker is fighting, HHH and Rollins, and whoever Cena ends up fighting. The belts will be meaningless props unless they are included in bouts that mean something.
Just wait until next year, when the World title matches get bumped all the way down to the pre-show! They'll be wheeling Undertaker out for his match against new HOF inductee King Kong Bundy or whatever.