Ask WNZ: For Or Against Brand Specific Belts? - Wrestle Newz twitter google

Ask WNZ: For Or Against Brand Specific Belts?

WWE Championship
With the news on RAW that they are creating a Universal title to fill their lack of a top champion, what do our writers think about creating titles because of the brand split?

Dorathy Gass:

I’m all for adding new titles. RAW needs a top tier champion. Now, I do think the name is lame, and something that an eight-year-old would come up with (my brother and I would have incredible wrestling matches, vying for the ‘Universal’ Championship when I was younger). Still, adding one more title on RAW is needed.

Also, I do think a tag title is needed on SmackDown, as well as a title for the women on that brand too. Give the divisions, something to work for, and achievement to reach for.

But really, other then those, I wouldn’t bring any other titles back. Not at the moment. They need to feel out the shows, and the roster, before bringing back anything else.

John Deegan:

A proliferation of titles is exactly what I was dreading about the brand split. Because, it’s inevitable. Unless the title holders are allowed to move between shows, as they were in the past, then inevitably, shows end up without titles.

So look at it this way. RAW has the Women’s title, the tag team titles, the US title and is about to have the Universal title. And, I presume, a cruiserweight title when the division makes it’s return (because, why have a division if there’s no title?).

On the flip side? SmackDown has the WWE Championship and the Intercontinental Championship.

So, actually, from where I sit, it should be SmackDown, not RAW, pushing for a new title or two, to balance things out. I mean, if I am a woman or a tag team, and there’s no title on SmackDown…why would I want to be on the brand?

So while I don’t like it, I think having duplicate titles is inevitable and a necessary evil. I just don’t know if some divisions had the depth to support two champions, because in cases like the women’s division and the tag team ranks, it wasn’t that long ago that things weren’t so rosy. So it will be interesting to see how things play out.

Joseph Lisnow:

I have mixed feelings. I think there should only be one WWE Champion because of the prestige that goes with the belt. The Universal Championship sounds like a joke and almost seems like an interim belt. As for the Women’s Championship and Tag Team Championships, they should also be defended on both brands. The reason being, WWE doesn’t have the largest female roster and being stuck on a brand with no belt might lead to a lack of trying. The same theory applies to the Tag team Championships.

For the United States and IC titles, I like those being on separate brands. I never saw the point of having both belts unless the roster was divided. Those two titles can be seen as equals, so splitting them makes sense. We’ll have to see how the criuserweight title plays out on RAW.

Share This on Facebook

Follow Wrestle Newz