20 Jul 2016 13:10:27
I can see lower down there has been some debate over having 2 world championships back.

What would be everyone's opinion on having brand championships. You could have a Raw championship and a Smackdown championship. On top of that you could have an undisputed World championship across both brands which would only be defended at the shared PPVS such as Summerslam, Survivor Series, Royal Rumble and Wrestlemania.

I would prefer having a separate top title on each show just to try and keep both brands separate.

1.) 20 Jul 2016
20 Jul 2016 14:23:09
I think you could do that with the US/ Intercontinental titles, rebrand those slightly either by the colour or the belt itself.

But each brand could put up there top contender on some ppv's to determine who would go forward to be No1 contender and let the `main title` roam free, that way they can have time of air or have a match with anyone from either roster.

2.) 20 Jul 2016
20 Jul 2016 14:23:12
I'm with you they need to have the own top title if they really are in competition just like nxt.

3.) 20 Jul 2016
20 Jul 2016 14:54:53
I'm strongly against two world titles.

History shows it devalues both, and adversely affects the standings of the US and IC belt.

As Once said up a bit, the IC and US belts could mean the world and the World Title would be kept special, above the rest of them.

I grew up in an era when there was only 3 titles, and if the tag, IC, or WHT was being defended it was the main event. It mattered.

Throw in a women's division, a cruiserweight division, and an NXT showcase match and these shows could be bulging with action you're interested in.

4.) 20 Jul 2016
20 Jul 2016 16:05:07
If WWE push them as separate entities then I think having 2 championships is fine. If you think about it there are loads of World titles but they are all in separate promotions.

5.) 20 Jul 2016
20 Jul 2016 16:20:20
Meh - I personally think they should only have one world champ, but then no doubt this time next year they will re-merge the two belts for the millionth time anyway so doubt we will have to put up with it for too long.

6.) 20 Jul 2016
20 Jul 2016 17:07:30
But there is only one World Champ in each one. One top guy. One main event.

If they broke Raw and Smackdown up properly and called the WWE and WWF, and they were actually out to get the other I'd consider it.

I'm not say the draft is a total work, but we all know the WWE is hoping there is huge success for both. They are essentially still the same entity.

Being the WWE Champion should be the pinnacle of a guys career. He shouldn't have to share that.

7.) 20 Jul 2016
20 Jul 2016 17:41:14
I agree that when Jack Swagger was world champion on one show and John Cena was WWE champion the WWE championship was a much bigger deal, but during the brand split when Kurt Angle and Brick Lesnar were both feuding on Smackdown for the Wwe title and HHH and Shawn Michaels were feuding for the WHC on Raw both titles seemed equally important.

Book the two shows like seperate competing entities and you can have two equally important world titles.

8.) 20 Jul 2016
20 Jul 2016 19:49:57
I'd rather look back on this era and have the conversation/ debate be more about who shouldn't of been a World champ, than who should of been. I'd rather see guys like Khali win a WHC, than see guys like Hennig, Piper, etc., never win one.

I also have no desire to go through more periods of time where the only World title gets defended 3 times in 8 months or keeps getting put on a guy less popular than a potted plant.

9.) 21 Jul 2016
21 Jul 2016 10:09:29
Khali is another great example, another thing that grinds my gears is that because they had this underling world title guys like HHH and Cena can say they are 15 times world champions.

I'm telling you if they split the titles by next years Wrestlemania one of the belts will be nothing more than a prop, and nobody will care, except for when the two champions meet once in a blue moon.