Anonymous asked in SportsWrestling · 1 decade ago

Am I the only person who thinks WWE having three "World Champions" Is ludicrous?

I can understand maybe having three respective champions on the shows, but I think there should be only ONE "World Champion". It makes no sense to me for WWE to have three.

I think they should have this setup with the titles:



Women's Title

Cruiserweight Title

Three "Mid-Card" champions (AKA the "Champions" of the three shows)

Does anyone agree?

19 Answers

  • Best Answer

    I think having three world champions is fine. I mean the WWE is packed with superstars who should get their first or more World Title reigns. If there were one World Champion there wouldn't be much accomplishments amongst superstars in the WWE. The average feud is 2-3 months maybe 4 if the feud is good enough. That would mean with 1 World Title that we would get probably 3 or 4 World Champions per year if it changes with each feud.

    It would be crazy to see 1 person have the only World Title in the WWE after ever feud (ie: Cena if WHC & ECW Champ didnt exist). I think it will also be crazy to have the titles change hands every 2 months. I like change but that would be a bit too much. So in conclusion having three World Titles keeps the excitement flowing even if one title stays with a champion for 11 months (Cena) and it gives many other superstars their chance to shine.

    Source(s): Didnt mean to type so much.. just trying to get my point across = )
  • Steve
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    That makes too much sense. Having 3 world champions waters down the value. Besides having 3 world champions in one company is stupid. I thought it was dumb when WCW had 2 world champions, The WCW World Champion and the WCW International World Champion, back in the early 1990's. The top title for Raw should be the intercontinental championship. The top title for smackdown should be the US championship. The top title for ECW should be the ECW championship, not ECW World, just ECW. There should be one WWE World Heavyweight Wrestling Champion, who would defend the title against anyone from any of the 3 show.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    The Rock agrees.

    The Tag team belts have lost so much honor.

    TOP stars and teams used to be Tag Title holders.

    Now it's The Blues Brothers and the goofs that search barns for dates.

    Here's The Rock's list:

    WWE Champ - Top spot

    WHC - #2

    ECW Champ - Not #3... make it like the Hardcore Title.

    Intercontinental Champ - #3 Spot

    USA Champ - #3 Tied (Mid-card) Championship

    Only ONE set of Tag Titles, interpromotionally defended.

  • They should also have the Women's Tag titles again too. For some reason it's banned. That's bull. Actually, they shouldn't have them because none of the divas can actually wrestle now! Exept Victoria...maybe Torrie. She's been wrestling for a while. Or even Queen Sharmell! She was a Nitro girl and she should wrestle! Didn't you see her muscles when Booker T came to Raw? Jeez.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 4 years ago

    jericho is the closest but the only reason why he gets cheers is he still has fans carried over from his face days his promos are actually better than jbl"s the only reason why jbl didnt get any cheers is not many of the people who dont care about face/heel alignement didnt like him for his wrestling skills but jericho is a true heel its just the people who dont cheer or boo based on heel/face alignment likes jericho more so it wasnt 100% percent real heel heat jbl was getting some of that was just real dislike for the guy and btw im a jbl fan. so no jbl wasnt the only true heel wwe has had wq: mickie james she is the better wrestler of the two and deserves it more than michelle mcoverpushed

  • 1 decade ago

    Yes i agree but you also have to realise the WWE acquired 2 of their biggest competitors being WCW and ECW and when they did their rosters grew a lot.

    Having one of each title would make them worth a lot more but it would be near impossible to fit so many wrestlers, their storylines and title challenges into one 2 hour show.

    But I agree with you, having multiple titles that are supposed to be the same is stupid and pointless.

  • 1 decade ago

    Yes, you are right...but with the ridiculous brand names and having brand names tour, there needs to be belys marketed for the shows. It's Vinnie again thinking way too much.

  • 1 decade ago

    i agree i think it should be like the wwf days three diffrent sows with all the superstars on each of them and bring back the hardcore belt and european title give me a thumbs up if you agree wwf was better

    Source(s): facts
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    I agree with you 100 percent.

    I absolutely hate that they have 3 champs.

    It just devalue the prestige of The Champ.

    Source(s): ECW Championship should be destroyed.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Yeah but I guess it is better for wrestlers!!! Instead of one guy having all of the glory, three guys can have it at once!!! But I get what you are saying!!!!

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.