Examining the Pros and Cons of Having a Long-Reigning WWE Champion

When a wrestler holds onto the WWE World Heavyweight Championship long enough for that reign to be called a dynasty, the arc of the narrative changes, new opportunities arise and the significance of a change in empire is far greater.

WWE's holy grail is a key tool in the stories told in the squared circle. Acquiring it can elevate a new star; battling for it can be the heart of a storied feud.

The story surrounding current champion Seth Rollins has become a lengthier one than many expected, a novella at the moment on the verge of becoming a full-fledged novel.

Rollins is on his way to keeping that title in hand for half a year. He is fast approaching the 150-day mark as the top titleholder.

A look on WWE.com at recent WWE title history reminds us that kind of reign is rare. In the last five years, Brock Lesnar held the gold for 224 days, Randy Orton did so for 161 days and CM Punk famously remained champion for 434 days. The majority of the other reigns, though, were blips compared to those.

They told much different, much shorter stories.

What kind of narratives unfold with champions who keep their crowns for months on end? What impact do these longer reigns have?

The negative side of that answer is all about what those championship runs lack.

Cons

Monotony at the Top

A long-reigning WWE champion forces fans to hear the same voice and see the same face again and again. The champ is on the marquee; he's the headliner and the centerpiece. To see the same person on top for an extended stretch tests the audience's patience.

There is a distinct lack of variety with this route.

If you were a WWE devotee and not a fan of Bob Backlund from 1979 to 1983, you were simply out of luck. He was the company's top champion during that span, the man who headlined major shows and wrestled the longer, higher-profile matches.

During the Attitude Era, The Rock, Steve Austin, Mick Foley and Undertaker were all champions. That period offered a collection of personalities at the top. Backlund's time and either one of Bruno Sammartino's historic reigns saw just one No. 1 star for years on end.

That formula worked in WWE's earlier years, but today's audience is harder to keep happy with sustained sameness.

No Title-Change Drama

So many of the biggest moments in WWE history came courtesy of WWE's crowning a new world champion.

Hulk Hogan defeated The Iron Sheik in 1984, launching a new era. Mick Foley's pinning The Rock in 1998 shifted momentum in the Monday Night Wars. CM Punk's knocking off John Cena in 2011 sparked renewed interest in the product.

Those moments wouldn't have happened without champions losing, without WWE's decisions to cut into someone's reign.

A champion's retaining is usually just not as exciting as a title's changing hands. And that excitement is around far less the longer one's reign is. It's a thrill fans have seen just twice since last SummerSlam and just twice for the entirety of the '60s.

Only Propelling One Star

Ultimately, the WWE title is a narrative tool. One of its key uses is serving as the crowning achievement of a wrestler's career.

WWE World Heavyweight Championship wins have been the climax of boyhood dreams. They have been the means to usher in new eras.

Longer reigns keep those options at bay.

In the '80s, Hulk Hogan clutched tight to the world title. His first reign lasted nearly 1,500 days; his second ended shortly before he reached a full year as champ.

That dominance certainly propelled him and the WWE as a whole. One has to wonder, though, what a WWE title run could have done for the likes of Ted DiBiase, Roddy Piper or Jake Roberts.

That's something we will simply never know.

If Rollins holds his crown for as long as Punk did, or if Cena reclaims it and goes on his own historic run, men like Dolph Ziggler, Cesaro, Kevin Owens and Dean Ambrose won't be offered the chance to step into the role of the hunted champion.

Pros

More Significant Title Changes

Only fans with great memories remember much of anything about Big Show's WWE title reign in 1999. His win over Triple H at that year's Survivor Series isn't exactly legendary, either. 

Blame Big Show for ending a 49-day reign with a 50-day one.

Compare that to Ivan Koloff's finally stopping the Italian Superman Bruno Sammartino in 1971. Despite that happening so long ago, its impact is still remembered. Koloff wasn't just beating a champion; he was felling an immortal.

That's what it felt like when The Russian Bear finally ended Sammartino's time as champion. 

You don't have that kind of seismic shift of a title change unless the titleholder's time with the strap is a long one. Just as Lesnar's defeating Undertaker after 21 straight wins at WrestleMania meant more than had Diesel ended the streak at 4-0, the longer a reign is allowed to develop, the more stunning it is to see it end.

More Chance for Momentum

Lengthier reigns give champions more room to establish themselves. There are more victories to be had, more major events to headline.

Their stories expand and start to feel more like epics than footnotes.

One can debate how good of a champion John "Bradshaw" Layfield was, but his sustained reign certainly aided him. From mid-2004 to WrestleMania 21, JBL became the face of SmackDown. His dominance became something he bragged about on air, a way to generate heat and ultimately a way to make Cena's victory over him mean far more.

If WWE can stop having Rollins lose in non-title action, he can begin to make this feel like the Rollins era. He can create more memories and thus more momentum. 

Transitional champions are largely forgotten; enduring titleholders feel as if they are making history.

Added Prestige

The longer it takes to defeat the WWE champ, the more valuable that prize becomes.

It leads to WWE's timeline being lined with fewer champions. That makes getting on that list a bigger deal.

This has been one of the major issues with the Intercontinental Championship. The reigns have been so short with it since the late '90s that it doesn't feel like a particularly special accomplishment to win it.

As seen on WWE.com's list of IC champions, the title has changed hands eight times since last year's SummerSlam. The WWE title has had just two titleholders in that span. 

Don Feria/Associated Press

To win the IC title, it feels as if someone just needs a whiff of momentum. Becoming WWE champ, especially after someone has held it as long as Cena did in 2006 or Randy Savage did from WrestleMania IV to WrestleMania V, feels like a tremendous feat.

That's one of the many factors WWE has to consider when mulling over how long to have Rollins keep that strap around his waist. The power of dethroning him increases with each day he adds to his reign.

And he tells a longer, more significant story.