WWE and World Heavyweight Titles: Why a Unification Match Should Happen
The WWE Title and the World Heavyweight Title are two of professional wrestling’s most prestigious and recognizable titles. But they are both currently active within the same promotion, which defies the traditional ideals of having only one world champion. These two iconic titles should be unified in a match.
Bear in mind that this is 2012, which would be the main reason a lot of wrestling fans would argue on why the WWE should keep both titles. Yes, the WWE has changed dramatically in their overall product over the last 20 years, but having two major world titles in the same promotion basically dilutes the prestige of both titles overall.
When the WWE first created the idea of having two separate brands, RAW and Smackdown in March 2002, having two major world titles made sense. One superstar can claim to be the world champion of RAW, and one superstar can claim to be the world champion of Smackdown.
But the only reason the WWE brought in a second world title was because Brock Lesnar, who was the WWE Undisputed Champion at the time, only wanted to defend the title on Smackdown, not on RAW.
So in turn then, general manager of RAW Eric Bischoff commissioned the World Heavyweight Title and inaugurated Triple H as its very first champion. Obviously, the creation of a second world title was planned from the start, and no WWE wrestler in history would have been able to make such a ridiculous demand three months into his career.
But on August 29th, 2011, the WWE officially ended the brand extension, and announced that superstars from Smackdown would compete on RAW, which brought back the traditional method of how the WWE and professional wrestling promotions operate. So there really is no need for a second major world title.
Throughout the history of the WWE, and other wrestling promotions, there were several unification matches, and in every situation, it was the right decision to decommission certain titles: WWE Tag Team/World Tag Team Unification (2010), WCW World Heavyweight/International Championship Unification (1994), WWF World Heavyweight/WCW World Heavyweight Championship Unification (2001), etc.
From a business standpoint, having a unification match would be good for the WWE long term—if it were booked well, that is. The WWE could have their top two guys as the respective champions clash in a match: Randy Orton vs. CM Punk, Daniel Bryan vs. CM Punk, etc. It could be built over a period of months, which would draw substantial money when the match finally takes place at a major pay-per-view like WrestleMania, or the Royal Rumble.
Also, consider that if this unification match were to take place, it would be the perfect opportunity to bring in a brand new WWE title belt to replace the less-than-stellar design that is being used today. Many past examples of unification matches have ended with the debut of a completely different title.
There is a good indication that Vince McMahon and the upper echelon of the WWE would go with the idea of keeping the WWE Title and decommissioning the World Heavyweight Title, if a future unification match were to take place.
Again, it is 2012, but only having one major world title in the WWE would be the best, and the right thing to do to keep the storied and prestigious history of the WWE Championship intact, and thus make it significant once again.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?