Skip to main content

Belts

Scott,
One of the many reasons I haven't followed wrestling on a consistent basis and haven't considered myself a fan for some time is my belief that in WWE, the titles don't really mean much and haven't since the whole brand extension mess. While there have been glimmers of hope sprinkled throughout the last 10 years or so, ever since they began flooding the company with titles and establishing two heavyweight WWE championships (not to mention a US and Intercontinental title), the company still hasn't quite figured out how to make these stupid things seem even remotely important. Having two top titles is like having a Best Picture and Best Movie award at the Oscars.
To the best of your knowledge, which of these is true: A) Vince and company know full well these belts don't mean what they used to and simply don't care, or B) They aren't aware a lot of people feel the same way I do and truly feel fans care about these ill-defined and diluted championships. And now that I think of it, if the former is true, why do they not care? Why do they still feel such a need to keep around two world/WWE titles when they isn't even a brand split anymore -- not that they did a bang up job with them when they did have a split in the first place?

Operation Clean Out My Inbox Continues!

They know full well and they don't care.  They consider them to be nothing more than TV props there to "tell stories" and sell toy belts with.  They literally only keep all of them around because they have to clear any changes to the belts with Mattel first, and they make way too much money from replica belt sales to just give that up.  That's why I'd be shocked if they actually had Cesaro bring back the European title as has been rumored.  

Comments

  1. "That's why I'd be shocked if they actually had Cesaro bring back the European title as has been rumored."

    But wouldnt that be a new belt to sell to the European market?

    ReplyDelete
  2. man the US title used to be my fav. back in the 90's. it pisses me off how big of a shit they took on it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I fall into the category that wrestling titles are nothing more than a show prop. So for me to get upset when a title is not defended on a consistent basis, I just shrug it off.

    I really believe more fans care more about who the money in the bank winner is than who is the divas champion or intercontinental champion.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Maybe Cesaro bringing back the European Title would just be a reaction to slow US Title replica sales.

    Remember last year when Cody brought back the "classic" IC Title design?  I figured that was the same thing.  The modern IC Title design must have stopped selling very well, so it was time for a change.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Speaking of belts, apparently Orange County Choppers is making the new WWE championship. I want to be optimistic, I really do, but I fear that this will make the spinner belt look like the winged eagle in comparison.

    ReplyDelete
  6. If they're bringing back the Euro title in favor of the U.S. belt I'm all for it. The U.S. title looks horrible, like something you'd buy at K-Mart.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "like something you'd buy at K-Mart."
    Which is pretty much what they're going for.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It's HUGE.  It's like a side plate enlarged to a giant face plate, and then a bunch of other smaller versions of the giant face plate as side plates.  I'll give it a chance because we haven't technically seen it yet, but anything that makes me think they should keep the spinner belt can't be good.  

    ReplyDelete
  9. Someone on LoP was talking about how the side plates would have the Twitter, Tout, Facebook, and Youtube logos on them. I know he was joking, but I could totally see them doing that.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Strange how much they value the titles for the merchandising opportunities: you'd think they'd design a crop of belts that didn't look so terrible for better sales opportunities. But in terms of the number of championships, I don't so much mind the amount so long as they are properly developed and are built up as something to go after. You've got enough talent to run the titles you have now, if you would (GASP) actually develop new stars.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Or pictures of Triple H as the side plates.

    I just got into Colt's podcast and I find it interesting that Punk started out saying he hates Twitter and all social media, then joined yet mocked WWE for pushing Twitter so hard, yet now he tweets consistently. Thankfully his tweets are 75% him and 25% storyline advancement.

    ReplyDelete
  12. They originally DID have two "Best Picture" Oscars. One was for artsy "you made a really great movie" films, one was "This was a big blockbuster production" films.

    And really, if they're going to have two world champs, that wouldn't be a bad way to go about it. Have the world title be the "you put on really great matches" belt, have the WWE title be "you're way popular, sell tons of merchandise, et cetra" title.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Well, Punk is a hypocritical asshole, so that's not surprising. After all, we're talking about someone who thinks it's wrong to make a Kobe joke, but OK to tell someone to drink bleach and kill themselves. Be a STAR, indeed...

    ReplyDelete
  14. "Having two top titles is like having a Best Picture and Best Movie award at the Oscars."

    I disagree with this.  Not the part about having two top titles being bad, but that the WWE and the WH titles are both "top titles".

    The WWE championship is treated today like the old WWF championship -- the most prestigious prize in the company, fought over by main-eventers.

    The World Heavyweight Championship is treated like the old IC belt -- younger up-and-comers hold and fight over it on their way to the main event.  It's defended on the B Show and held by guys like Sheamus.

    The current IC and US titles are treated like the Euro title was -- a throwaway prop to give to lower-midcarders.

    Really, the brand split has accomplished something the WWE couldn't do for years in the Attitude Era, at least not consistently.  The secondary title is much more prestigious now than it has been since the Rock and Stone Cold were feuding over it before they were main-eventers.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Daniel Bryan is a star.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Speaking of Oscars, I've never understood how someone could win Best Director but then not win Best Picture.

    ReplyDelete
  17. So WWE has to clear changes with Mattel, but then half their wrestlers can go through a major gimmick change ten days before the new videogame released by THQ. Yeah, that makes sense.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Whoops, this was answered a few weeks ago. We still love you, Scott.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I wish they would just create a clear hierarchy among the male singles titles instead of pretending the two sets of parallel titles are equal. The hierarchy should go as follows:

    WWE - The top title in the WWE which goes to the top guy. The main eventers contend for it. Ex: CM Punk, John Cena, Randy Orton, Big Show
    World Heavyweight Title - The number two title and the leader of the Smackdown brand. The contenders are those just below the main event level or main eventers who are taking a break from the main event programs. Ex: Daniel Bryan, Sheamus, Alberto Del Rio, Rey Mysterio, Miz
    Intercontinental Title - Number three title, the prize that the midcarders aspire toward. These individuals are not quite at main event level but are not Superstars fodder. Occasionally Heavyweight contenders fight at this level to elevate the midcarders. Ex: Kofi Kingston, Santino Marella, R-Truth, Dolph Ziggler, Damien Sandow
    U.S. Title - This should be the title that lower card aspire toward. It should be occasionally be defended on Superstars, the upcoming Main Event show and the other C-level shows. The titleholder should often be an up and comer that they want to elevate but they want to see if they are ready for the elevation. Ex: Heath Slater, Tyson Kidd, Justin Gabriel

    This hierarchy would provide some stakes for everyone in the card. They should all be treated as something everyone wants and should be taken seriously. Titleholders should not be treated as jobbers. If the writers feel a titleholder isn't at the same level as someone else then don't have them interact in the ring with each other. In other words no more things like Santino Marella losing to Alberto Del Rio in two minutes. It would provide more structure up and down the card and maybe would lead to better storylines (we could only hope).

    ReplyDelete
  20.  Didn't he tell someone who made a homophobic remark on his twitter page to drink bleach? I don't see how saying that and criticizing a rape joke is hypocritical.

    ReplyDelete
  21.  Cause there's more to a movie than directing?

    ReplyDelete
  22. I guess a story could be so well-written and well-acted that the direction may be lacking without truly harming the overall quality?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Wouldn't Mattel make more money selling replica European title belts as well?

    ReplyDelete
  24. I was about to say, didn't Zack Ryder do that with his Internet Championship belt?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Best director is awarded for, well, directing, and Best Picture is an award for the producers.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment