Guest Jamster26 Posted May 15, 2014 Share Posted May 15, 2014 Since the titles were unified, I feel that it has left some of the wrestlers twiddling their thumbs and not doing much. Think I preferred when both Raw and Smackdown had their own titles and feuds going on, rather than having the one title feud over two shows. We had a good Sheamus and Big Show rivalry on Smackdown for the World Title, but neither have done much since then. I dunno, I was originally in favour of the unification, but now I am not so sure. Do you think the titles were right to be unified or should they be separate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgehead Posted May 15, 2014 Share Posted May 15, 2014 I think they're better unified. When they were separate the World Title wasn't much more than a midcard belt. They only really needed to be separate when Raw & SD were separate brands. I do think since they unified them it has been a bit under whelming but I still prefer them as one title. I'd like to see them get rid of the 2 belts & just have one so it really seems like one title like they did in 2002 with the undisputed title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ciaran The King Posted May 15, 2014 Share Posted May 15, 2014 Having a unified title is good for WWE , finally there can be one WWE World Title instead of a tarnished WWE title and a watered down Triple H inspired World title. This way the belt will finally be rebuilt and can get some prestige back, I'm all for the unification and to be honest main event scene ain't that packed at the moment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King 277 Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 What's the point of still having 2 belts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxximus 353 Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 It looks cool? I think it looks cool anyway. Takes the attention from that shitty wwe title. If they had to get rid of one I would hope that's the one they would get rid of and keep the big gold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omega 354 Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 As I said before with Bryan out they should put one title on Batista and one on Orton until he comes back and have the two of them start of as TWO handpicked champions and eventually turning on each other as each one wants to be the only champ and then simply have another 3 way (or some other match it doesn't matter really) where Bryan effectively unifies them again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest darkblack Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 i miss the old 2 titles. I'm a huge wow fan and love the world heavyweight belt the way it looks very old school Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ciaran The King Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 (edited) If I were to pick a title to keep based on looks it would be the World Title all day long, the WWE title over recent years has descended into nothing mor than a childs toy Edited May 17, 2014 by Ciaran The King Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Foil1212 Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 I think I liked them separate. WWE's problem wasn't having too many belts, it was in not writing storylines for those belts. If they had interesting feuds for any of the belts and not just "We like this guy, I guess, let's put a belt on him" I think I'd personally care more about them. It's not like the IC belt or the US belt got suddenly more important when they got unified, and it doesn't look like it's getting better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pheadley Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 1 title. would like to see wwe do what tna did with the x division title. whoever is holding the i.c. belt leading up to a certain ppv has the chance to trade it in for a wwe world title match. this could help guys who normally wouldnt be in the title picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead Crow 370 Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 (edited) GDPR Edited February 20, 2019 by DraVen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Beltster Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 I think I liked them separate. WWE's problem wasn't having too many belts, it was in not writing storylines for those belts. If they had interesting feuds for any of the belts and not just "We like this guy, I guess, let's put a belt on him" I think I'd personally care more about them. It's not like the IC belt or the US belt got suddenly more important when they got unified, and it doesn't look like it's getting better.While I agree it has alot to do with the booking, it 100% also had alot to do with WWE having too many belts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ciaran The King Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 As 2002 came to a close there was never enough headliners to justify a second work title, Triple H just felt left out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jack Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 There should only ever be one world champion. Hopefully they make a new belt soon too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BeorimJ Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 i am torn. A unified title should also be just one belt, and that would be ok. But then again, they have so many wrestlers with potential, who have neither chances for any belt, nor real story lines to follow. And that sucks. At least when there is a title on the line, you can make them fight a bunch for a reason, to give it all a bit of meaning, which is missing too often atm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts