- 54,228
- 31,745
6 Rings G.O.A.T.
Supporter
- 136,270
- 117,249
6 Rings G.O.A.T.
Supporter
- 136,270
- 117,249
- 2,341
- 1,897
I disagree I think each show should have a championship belt on it. Also IMO the storyline they’re telling is the fall of the bloodline I think he needs to complete the fall by losing both belts before moving on to the next iteration of Roman Reigns.
I hear you tho.
- 11,529
- 7,439
Why do you think it's necessary for both shows to have a championship belt? The Big Dawg and the Uso's have been defending both belts at once and have been showing up on both shows without a problem so far. Heck even non champs have been showing up on both shows.
- 22,552
- 29,161
Then what’s the point of having two separate shows/rosters if even no title holders show up?
- 2,341
- 1,897
It can definitely be done but it’s not ideal IMO but aside from the that it just doesn’t make much sense narratively to me. I’m not sure how you illustrate the fall of the bloodline when the leader still has the championship.
- 160,549
- 142,215
I somewhat follow this as I have always wanted ONE "Main Title"
My personal breakdown
World: Both Shows
US: One Show
IC: The Other Show
Womens: Both Shows
Tags: Both Shows
Cruiserweight: Title matches on either show; Give importance to the division and elevate the title to mean something
That Unviersal Belt is still a joke IMO. (Name Wise)
My personal breakdown
World: Both Shows
US: One Show
IC: The Other Show
Womens: Both Shows
Tags: Both Shows
Cruiserweight: Title matches on either show; Give importance to the division and elevate the title to mean something
That Unviersal Belt is still a joke IMO. (Name Wise)
- 72,809
- 116,900
Raw has the US title and Smackdown has IC. Having a higher title on both shows just waters those down for no reason.
One main championship and one set of tag team titles where those performers can go to each show is perfect.
One main championship and one set of tag team titles where those performers can go to each show is perfect.
- 72,809
- 116,900
Would also probably have one main women’s championship and then add a secondary belt too where both can go to either show.
- 2,341
- 1,897
I think RUSH vs Danielson has potential to be the best of the series. They’re gonna eat the **** out of each other.
- 11,529
- 7,439
What do you mean by both shows? Do you mean that there should be a belt for both shows or that the one champ should appear on both shows?
- 11,529
- 7,439
Agreed. The Women's division def. needs a worker championship. Some version of the IC or even a women's lightweight belt would do.
- 88,744
- 47,951
if you arent gonna have two seperate world heavyweight titles then stop the seperate brands thing. just go back to one main wwe brand with two shows with different names like how it use to be.
- 160,549
- 142,215
I'd rather the women be broken into weight classes than having a secondary title that isn't a lower weight title.
I can't take Alexa being in the ring with bigger women.
I can't take Alexa being in the ring with bigger women.
T0INE
formerly toine2983
- 67,154
- 73,555
Get rid of the women's tag team titles; they are still an afterthought and create a secondary singles title so the like of Alexa, Liv, Zelina, Emma can have something to do.
- 30,074
- 25,520
They need to have 1 World title for both men and women..Each show should have it's own champion..You'd have a RAW champion and SmackDown champion for both men and women (no more IC/US titles)..1 World Tag champion for both men and women..Each show should have a TV title that's defended every week in 10 minute matches..This way you have a clear path to start your accent and a clear goal (WHC)..It makes every belt important and makes stories/angles so much easier to write/watch/book..Somebody tell either of the Khan brothers to hire me so I can book these damn shows..
- 53,481
- 21,060
wwe made those women’s tag belts then released and broke up a bunch of tag teams. wwe is dumb AF.
- 53,481
- 21,060
Also a universal champion is the dumbest belt they’ve ever had. Just make it the wwe belt again.
- 11,529
- 7,439
Curios as to why some of y'all prefer to have two different champions. I never understood the point of this. The best gotta be the best not one of the best.
- 53,481
- 21,060
Probably because wwe will combine the belts then just make 2 separate champions again a short time later. Plus they devalued the I.C. belt so much when it should be the second most important title in the company.
- 88,744
- 47,951
- 88,744
- 47,951
i think it was the wcw world title before
- 2,341
- 1,897
I don’t personally prefer but it just seems like what WWE is going for. I always assumed Roman was the exception in the current WWE, not something they would continue doing.
I think the one world champion is a good idea. Universal championship doesn’t hold much prestige for me.
- 2,341
- 1,897
Similar threads
