It’s funny how some of my columns generate a good deal of activity in the comments section and some don’t. A couple of weeks ago the column about my preference for longer, drawn out feuds that last more than a pay-per-view cycle seemed to spark a lot of feedback on both sides of the issue, probably because a good deal of the subject matter had to do with how the WWE is handling its current deal with the returned Brock Lesnar. I don’t know what their plan is right now for Brock, and with Cena set to face Big Johnny at the next pay-per-view (for whatever reason), he will presumably be starting a program with someone else soon, so I guess we’ll see.
This week, I’d like to talk about the role of championships in today’s wrestling scene. I realize that times have changed, the industry has evolved, and title belts don’t necessarily mean (or even need to mean) the same thing they did back in the day.
But, let’s face it…most of us want to treat wrestling like any other sport. And in every other sport there are championships and the champion (or in team sports, champions) represents the best that sport has to offer at that level at that time. I mean, the NBA is currently in the midst of its playoffs, and the winning team will be considered the best professional basketball team in the nation (and I guess the world, ostensibly), at least until the next season when a new champ is crowned. The same can be said for the NFL, MLB and such. Golf and tennis have a number of different championships, so that’s a bit different, but the idea is still the same in that there’s a certain level of prestige and notoriety with winning a championship.
Boxing, MMA and other combat sports are more in line with what wrestling championships should mean. Even if there are competing brands and organizations, and in many cases weight classes, holding a sanctioned championship title comes with a certain sense of accomplishment and recognition, so being champion is important on many levels.
I’ve seen several times that Vince Russo back in his heyday only heralded the championship belts as storytelling tools, basically as props. Now, I can definitely see how the titles can be part of a storyline, mostly as a catalyst for a feud or such, but even now, I think there could be and should be more weight given to championship reigns.
When I was a kid, and even later admittedly, I thought holding a championship belt, even if it was just the CWA Mid-America title (A belt I actually got to physically hold once), was about the best thing in the world. Even after I got older and “smarter,” I always enjoyed getting to watch a wrestler I liked being entrusted with a title belt. To me it was a feeling that someone I admired had accomplished something, even if all it really was was a decision where some promoter told some wrestler, “you’re getting the belt tonight, kid,” or whatever.
For example, I had been big fans of Paul Diamond and Pat Tanaka going way back to the early 80s when they first began teaming in the Memphis area. And, when they won the AWA World Tag Team titles from the Midnight Rockers (through admittedly nefarious means) I completely marked out. Granted, when it comes to prestigious wrestling titles, the AWA tag belts are not exactly the J-Crown, but as a 15-year-old fan, I thought it was awesome. That they went on to hold the belts for like a year and a half was even more awesome.
When I read or hear about “titles don’t really matter anymore” it makes me sad. Sad that the industry that I love feels this way about what should be considered it finest honors and sad that the legacy of some of these beloved titles has been so easily downgraded by proxy. Ric Flair is a 16 (or so) time world champion. During many of those reigns, Flair’s designation as champion meant at that time and for the duration of that reign, he was to be considered the best in the business (and was quick to tell you such). When someone beat him, say Dusty Rhodes or Sting, that victory meant something. Hell, Tommy Rich beat Harley Race for the NWA title and held it for 4 days, and he was able to parlay that 4-day reign into a selling point that gave him a pretty nice career (okay, not so much with Ron Garvin, but eh…).
Even the second- and third-tier titles used to have their share of prestige. Everyone knows about the classic between Randy Savage and Ricky Steamboat at Wrestlemania III, but the awesome blood feud between Magnum TA and Tully Blanchard over the U.S. Title was just as classic. The U.S. title was also the centerpiece of a great series between Magnum and Nikita Koloff.
Back in the late 80s, there was a VHS (what?) tape entitled “History of the WWF Championship” that covered the birth of the WWF title in 1963 to Randy Savage winning the belt at Wrestlemania IV. That’s 25 years. During that time, the WWF title changed hands a grand total of 10 times (you can stretch it to 12 if you want to include a switcheroo between Bob Backlund and Antonio Inoki in Japan and Ted DiBiasse’s purchase of the belt from Andre the Giant). When the title changed hands it was a big deal. And, yes there was a storyline reason to go along with it usually, but the point is that there was a reason that guy was chosen to carry the torch (and the burden) of being WWF champion. The NWA title, for all the ridiculousness that would befall it later, was perhaps even more highly regarded.
These days, title reigns are almost footnotes in a company’s overall status. I can’t think of a more glaring example than this year’s Wrestlemania. The World Heavyweight Title match was the OPENER! And the WWE title match was for all intents and purposes in the mid-card. You can argue about the overall importance of HHH-Taker and Cena-Rock all you want, but even Hulk Hogan-Sgt. Slaughter headlined Wrestlemania VII.
Now, I’m not advocating three-year title reigns or anything. Admittedly, those days are gone, and probably should be, but there needs to be some prestige restored to the title belts. It needs to be important when a new champion is crowned and there needs to be some direction in place. There’s no doubt that the WWE Diva’s title is probably the least coveted title in the world. It means nothing to be WWE Diva’s champion, no matter how many tears Kelly Kelly can conjure when she wins the title. But there was a time when the WWF Women’s championship was a draw, and at least not a cue to go to the bathroom.
The once highly-touted Intercontinental championship was once considered so irrelevant it was actually retired. It hasn’t really recovered yet. In the past ten years or so, the title has been held by a woman (Chyna), simply given away (Austin to Rock), won by a wrestler making their debut (Santino) and simply ignored.
So, how exactly can the prestige and importance of the title belt be restored? In some cases, I’m not sure if it’s possible. The U.S. title has become a joke. Once considered a sure stepping stone to the NWA World Title, it’s now become a consolation prize for over wrestlers who are not seen worthy of elevation (Zack Ryder, Santino) or something to try and draw heat on a not-over guy (Jack Swagger, for example). Or worse yet, the title has been relegated to virtual non-existence for months at a time.
I wrote an entire column about the disappearance of tag teams, especially in the WWE. The recent non-reign of Primo and Epico only served to highlight the disregard for this division in the WWE. In fact, it virtually became the storyline until Truth and Kofi Kingston won the belts last week. Is this the beginning of an attempt to re-establish the tag belts as worth of recognition?
Can the stature of the World Heavyweight title ever be returned to its former glory? The belt once held by Flair (theoretically) will probably always play second fiddle to the WWE title, but recently the belt has garnered full red-headed step-child status. Jack “Not Ready for Prime-Time” Swagger was given a run with the belt. Dolph Ziggler got a nice eight-minute “reign” as champion. The WHC has been the go-to belt for cashing in the Money in the Bank case (6 times, I believe), leading to some ridiculously short title reigns, such as Big Show’s 2 minute run with the belt after beating Mark Henry and before Daniel Bryan cashed in his case. That’s a perfect example of (in my opinion, granted) of wasted opportunity in which the title belt was nothing more than a prop. You had a monster heel champion who was more over than at any point in his career who lost the title to a perennial transition champion who did just that, to put over the concept of Money in the Bank and put the belt on a guy that was being elevated. Sure, it worked to a certain degree, but why couldn’t Bryan and Henry simply have the best David vs. Goliath match they were capable of and put the belt on DB that way. They could still easily transitioned to the heelish persona Bryan converted to later on with no problem.
There was actually a similar deal with Rey Mysterio getting an hour-long reign as WWE Champ before dropping the belt to John Cena in a convoluted deal on Raw last year.
So again, how to fix this?
First, make people earn title shots. I thought the Beat the Clock series last Monday was a step in the right direction. The reason the Royal Rumble winner is so highly regarded is that they are seen as having “earned” their title match. I’m not saying have a Rumble every other month is the way to go, but have a guy earn the title shot somehow, be it a tournament, battle royal, or some gimmick match (I’d make the Elimination Chamber for a title shot, not the title. The idea that five guys wouldn’t take out the champ at the first opportunity and then fend for themselves is just ridiculous). Even bring back some kind of ranking system so that regular wins and losses mean something again.
Put the title on top guys (at least every so often). I know a big part of the industry is making new stars, but let’s have them (when the time is right) beat someone who matters for a title. If, say, Randy Orton were to win the Intercontinental title from Cody Rhodes, then the title would instantly become more important. Then if down the road, say Lord Tensai or Ryback wins the belt, then they get elevated. No one who beats Santino Marella for the U.S. Title is getting any kind of rub.
Highlight the lesser titles. I mentioned a couple of weeks ago that the WWE or WHC title match didn’t have to be the draw for every pay-per-view. The WWE likes to be spoken of in the same circles as the UFC. UFC shows routinely feature non-title matches or lower weight-class title matches as the featured bout. I know it’s a bit of apples and oranges, but the WWE could go that route as well. If the lesser titles get elevated, an IC title match and a big gimmick match like Money in the Bank or a TLC spot-fest for the tag titles or whatever could make for a compelling pay-per-view.
If you’ve never seen it before, here’s a recap of the match in which the Ultimate Warrior made a surprise appearance to vanquish the evil Honkytonk Man once and for all and end his likely-to-never-be-broken 18 month reign as Intercontinental Champion.
Not only did this serve to end a great storyline, it put over an up-and-coming guy, and it highlighted the importance of the WWF’s then-second most coveted title. Warrior would go on to drop the belt to Rick Rude, regain it, and then headline Wrestlemania VI against Hulk Hogan in a title vs. title match.
Could this work today, even in a truncated manner that wouldn’t require a year and a half for a payoff? I don’t know, but I do know that the upcoming Punk-Bryan match at Over the Limit could and should be a classic technical wrestling showcase.
I just wish it meant more.
