Should WWE Unify The WWE And World Heavyweight Championship?

One of the latest idea’s being thrown around on the internet is the intent of WWE to unify the WWE Championship and the World Heavyweight Championship and bring back the Undisputed Championship. This title has not been seen in WWE since 2005. The match is slated to potentially take place at Wrestlemania 30, with many speculating that John Cena will hold the World Heavyweight Championship up till this time. As with most things we read on the internet you can’t believe it all. But what I want to do is examine the idea and what potential benefits, and negatives, this would this bring to the product.

WWE Championship

The first thing that really jumps out at me as a good reason to have the titles unified is simple – One champion, one belt. One of the biggest problems right now in WWE is that they have too many championships, and some get neglected. One of the belts suffering for a long time now is the World Heavyweight Championship. Sadly I feel this great championship has not been receiving the respect it deserves. It almost feels like it is playing second fiddle to the WWE Championship. Lets face it, when did the World Heavyweight Championship last really seem to mean anything on WWE television? It’s been treated almost like it’s a secondary title, and for me does not feel like WWE feel like it is worthwhile. Eliminating the two championships and making it into one brings some significance to being champion as you really will be ‘the guy’ in the company.

Another reason I feel unification would be a great idea is it is going to push the superstars on the roster to work harder so that they get noticed, it will create stiffer competition, and it will mean that those who really want the championship are going to have to work to get it. Whilst there is always the danger that Vince is going to push someone on us in the main event, like Ryback, who does not deserve to perhaps be there, having only one championship eliminates this chance as the main event match for the championship will then contain two wrestlers who want to give it their all, and will give everything they have to show why they deserve to be champion, and why they deserve their main event spot. It creates better competition for WWE superstars, present and future, and may even push other outside the company wanting to get noticed to step up their game and do something different to get noticed.

World Heavyweight Championship

However, whilst there are good points for title unification, there are also some negative. One of the biggest problem I see is the size of the rosters. There will have to be a lot of cross promoting over Raw and Smackdown, but there can only ever be normally 2 or 3 wrestlers fighting for the title at any one time. It means that potentially less people may get a run with the belt. Superstars like Dolph Ziggler, Antonio Cesaro, or Kofi Kingston, who deserve a shot at running with a title may well have to miss out to bigger more established names. The only way around that is a return to the Attitude Era mentality, where you could pretty much guarantee the title changing on average once every 3 months or less. While that is an option you then take away value from the championship and make it mean less than before.

It also poses another potential problem for WWE in that when they are on the road, much like they are in Europe this week, they are running 2 different shows in 2 arena’s on the same day. Instantly you then need to look at which show does the champion go on? One thing I was critical of TNA for when they came to the UK on their first ever tour was not bringing their championship with them, because they put it on Sting a few weeks before. When I go to a show, the championship match is one of the ones I look forward to as it is the 2 top guys normally facing off for the title, and at the end of the day that is what I have paid for and expected. If WWE runs 2 shows on the same night then how do you determine which shows has the champion on? The logical answer is the Raw show if the champion is from Raw, and Smackdown if they are normally on that show. However, we all know WWE regards Raw as the A show, therefore the likelihood is the belt is going to end up on that tour run more often than not. If you unify the title, does this almost call for an end to the brand separation?

Undisputed Championship

Is it a good thing or a bad thing then to unify the titles and just have one champion? Before I started writing this article I was very much on the fence. I felt there were valid arguments for both sides. However, upon reflection I feel that unification of the championships into one would be a bad thing for WWE in the long run. Yes, the World Heavyweight Championship has been neglected, but having one champion and one championship will significantly hurt WWE for me in the long run. It would mean an end to the brand separation of Raw and Smackdown, meaning less talent gets TV time, meaning some talent never get the spot they deserve. Touring events would mean going back to one show a night as how many people are going to pay not to see a big championship match? Having two championships in WWE is a good thing in principle, I think WWE just needs to learn to manage their use of the championships better. For me, they need to both be used as the main staple of the show. They have it right with the WWE Championship, it is the main focus right now on Raw, I just hope now John Cena holds the World Heavyweight Championship they can bring the same notoriety, and importance, back to the World Heavyweight Championship on Smackdown, and that in less than 5 months from now I am not having to think about who will be winning the Undisputed Championship.

web counter

  • Charlie

    I don't think they should because there are too many names that could hold each title. There would be no room for different guys to get a title shot, which is why the WHC was brought in in the first place.

    • Jamie Welton

      That's what I think too Charlie, too many superstars would be fighting over one title and people who deserve a run would potentially be over looked. While WWE are treating the WHC poorly and with little respect, it's better to have 2 titles to allow more names to get their chance in the spotlight than have one and lose out on a top prospect.

  • Adams

    Well , it will be great to bring back the indisputed WWE Belt to the business , but as you montioned , superstars must work harder then ever , names like Zack Ryder , Kofi Kingston , Ryback , and the list is going… , therefor , only the best in the business will have the chance to go for it , as for the world heavyweight championship , it´s not as valuable as the WWE Belt today un the Company , i mean remember names like EDGE , he was holding the title and giving it the respect it should have.

    • Jamie Welton

      Definitely agree Adams, while it has it's positive points there are more negative factors to having just 1 title than any. Take for example, someone like Antonio Cesaro, who was heavily put over by John Cena over the weekend. He is a future champion if he carries on this way in my book, but if WWE drop the WHC then potentially he misses out. I would imagine he would get a WHC run before a WWE Championship run. Your totally right in the fact the WHC is not as valuable. It could well be if WWE booked it better, but it has suffered a lot of neglect over the years

  • Darren

    I agree one champion to many wrestlers would get lost in the shuffle. That’s happening now having one would be even worse. Another thing that no one talks about. Its time to change the design of the WHC. I never liked it. Just a big gold belt. Give it a new edge no pun intented lol. Something with swag. Then maybe the wrestlers would work harder for it. How long has the WHC has had that same design?

    • Jamie Welton

      Totally agree Darren, it’s as big a problem now as it would be then. Too many guys get lost in the shuffle sometimes and just don’t have big enough characters to come out of it. The WHC has always been one of those belts I think WWE are afraid to change the design of. I agree though, it’s old fashioned and out dated and in need a major make over. I can’t even begin to think when they last changed it, thats how long ago it clearly was

    • WrasslinFan21Century

      Frankly , PW has bitten off more than it can chew , in a whole !!! WWE is WAY to into being this Super-Pretentious "All about the Money" Product , and Far LESS about "Wrestling" !!! While it utilizes the W word , it is more about the glamour and glitze , and being "image conscious" !!! Yeah , I know…Money Talks…that's all well and good , but Wrestling is the business that put the McMahon's on the map first and foremost , and NOW , that they are Multi-Millionaires , former Billionaires…that logic has gone out the window !!! TNA too…has bitten of alot in order to propell itself into the stratosphere on the industry , namely bring aboard big , yet yesteryear names such as Hulk Hogan , Eric Bischoff , Ric Flair , and many others , taking Impact on the road…which I do believe we all wanted them to do in the first place…other moves like "defending the TV title EVERY Impact Show" , Open Fight Night , and Gut Check…all ideas that seemed to be thrown in for good and bad measure as an afterthought or just basically went nowhere !!! This is not a great time for PW in general !!! People wish it would return to the days of the Monday Night Wars/Attitude Era and Heyman ECW , but lets face it , those days are a memory and that's all she wrote !!! It's time for something fresh and unusual…but if that will ever be accomplished again by either company mentioned , or ever indy companies such as ROH , or maybe some unseen promotion , remains a mystery !!!

      • Jamie Welton

        WrasslinFan21Century – While I agree with you the product is now less about wrestling than the entertainment value, I think what fans don’t realise is it’s been like this for a while. Look back at the Attitude Era – There was more talking than wrestling! Wrestling under WWE has always been more about the entertainment, or I would say it has been since the early 90′s onwards. It’s about glitz and glamour, with some wrestling thrown in. People may disagree but I enjoy the current WWE product more today because it isn’t all about putting people through tables and bleeding just for the sake of it. I don’t feel a return to the Attitude Era style benefits everyone, simply because I don’t truely think it’s what the product needs. Like any form of sport or entertainment, wrestling may just be going through one of those periods where it’s not popular. The last boom we saw was with CM Punk. It will turn around but at the end of the day I think we all need to stop ebing so critical and just enjoy the product for what it is – If we can’t just enjoy it, why are we watching it?

  • Darren

    I agree Jamie you can’t stay in the same storyline for ever. The attitude era is arguably the best era in wrestling. I don’t believe in going back in time. What made that era so great the wwe focused on all divisions and all the belts had meaning and value. Heavywieghts, The Rock,HHH,Taker,Kane,Stone Cold. Mid card gold dust, xpac, big boss man, etc etc, Tag team, The Hardy, Dudley’s, new age outlaws, APA, Heck even the women’s title had value not the crappy ugly divas title. I remember the IC title reign was a prelude to a heavyweight title shot. Today WWE focuses on one division and a couple of superstars. While the rest are lost in the shuffle. Like I said one champ would be worst when they can’t establish the rest of the roster.

    • Jamie Welton

      Thats the thing Darren, you can’t recreate or re-live an era that was mostly lived in the moment. Things meant a lot then because the competition was fierce and everyone was fighting for their job. It was a fantastic time but I don’t personally the audience overall would appreciate a return to those times. If WWE could sort out making titles relevent again I think an Undisputed title has a chance of being successful, but until then it would be the worst thing WWE could think of doing

  • Leighton Hanson

    I always thought that all titleholders should be able to defend on both shows, allowing for more chances of storylines.

    When a wrestler loses his/her title they should stay on that show, which would mix up the rosta more often & also allow for more storylines/rivalries.

    I think they should keep the seperate titles but still do champion vs champion with all titles & the winner become the undisputed champion. Also with the mid cards being known as Undisputed Intercontinental or United States Intercontinental champion) until they lose one of the belts. Same with the tag team division & put more focus on them.

    Your thoughts?

    • Jamie Welton

      I remember Leighton there was a brief time they started doing that, and then the titles would switch from show to show, which gave the audience some variety and a nice cross over. Nowadays the WHC is solely thought of as a Smackdown belt. I agree that allowing the rosters to mix by keeping that superstar who lost on the show they lost the belt to is a good idea, the problem is WWE will then start being too selective about champions.

      The danger of unifying any title still remains that not all deserving superstars will get the run they may deserve. There will be too much choping and changing potentially, which will devalue the title. WWE need to get a better handle on the divisions and their titles first before they start making any bold moves or thoughts about unification

  • Ty

    I see one of your main points against a title unification is that too many superstars would be overlooked. I would say that since they’re being overlooked now then go for the unification. Maybe I’m just weird but I really like the concept of an undisputed champion. At least I wouldn’t have to see a John cena vs R Truth title match like we did a year or two ago.

    • Jamie Welton

      Thats a great point Ty, the likelihood is if they are overlooked now then what makes me think they won’t be in the future? I’m more thinking down the line without unification at least they still may have a shot.

  • Kiseki

    I would like to see one world champion…the top dog, just like in the old days. I understand the benefits of having two world champions, but only one can be the best…the undisputed champion.
    This could also increase the importance and prestige of the I-C and U.S. titles.
    WWE, make it happen! :)

  • Chris

    The brand seperation for all intensive purposes has been over for a couple years now. Pretty much you see the main storyline for Raw continue on Smackdown and there really are no SD or Raw Superstars….why do you think they don't have a draft anymore? I don't see it as a problem. Going along with your Attitude theory, do you think the Rock and Austin's rivalry would have been as prominent if there were 2 world titles? No. Austin would be WWF Champ and Rock would be like since he is WWF Champ, I'll fight for the World Title. A unified title is a good thing. WWE can just end the brand tours and tour as WWE where Everyone goes to the same cities.

  • I don't like this

    Well it's official now. I knew there was something bad going on when Cena won the title, World title would've meant Cena had to compete on smackdown regularly and since he is top star on raw, that was obviously not going to happen. It's true that they stopped doing drafts couple of years ago, but taking the WHC title away from smackdown will cause some serious issues with the show itself.

    What is left there to make it interesting? I do admit wwe has been doing terrible job finding good enough main eventers on smackdown to put on WHC picture, their downfall started when Edge had to retire, afterall he was supposed to be the top guy on smackdown.

    WWE could make it work if they let the title to be defended on both brands equally, but as usual, raw will have the title 95 percent of the time and smackdown barely 5%. In other words, smackdown loses whc title and gets nothing in return. Way to go wwe.

  • kurt_angle_fan

    it has become very important to unify the titles because IC title has lost its relevenace because of the 2 major championships..

  • Pingback: The Championship Conundrum | WWE News()