Rumours about the US and IC Title

Discussion in 'General WWE' started by Cloud, Jan 12, 2014.

  1. Not sure where they got the info. But over on Bleacher Report they are reporting a possible unification match between Ambrose and Big E at EC merging the US Title and IC Title.

    http://m.bleacherreport.com/article...o-unify-yet-more-championships-in-near-future

    Not sure of my thoughts on this, yes the US Title is never defended on Ambrose but this doesn't give much for newcomers to aim for with only two singles belts. It could I suppose with the Network and NXT becoming more prominent mean that stars are kept on NXT longer to challenge for the NXT title before being 100% ready to move up.
     
  2. The dude who wrote that probably read the article on WWe.com with Big E and Ambrose talking about their belts. Bleacher isn't a reliable dirtsheet at all since anyone can write for it.
     
  3. I know just thought it'd be a fun discussion topic.
     
  4. I don't think they are going to unify those two belts. They're needed if they are going to go with one belt for the top guys in the long term.
     
  5. They should unify them as both titles mean very little and are supposed to represent the same thing. IC is ahead of the US now but is still far away from what it was and should be.
     
  6. They should unify the titles. Have 3 titles in the company ( tag,IC and the world title.) Up and comers don't need titles to aim for just build feuds. The IC strap should only be held by the guys who they really want to end up in the main event. Makes 2 credible titles and you have a strong undercard as feuds are built. Cheap as chips and easy as shit.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. They could always use a modified version of TNA's option C.. Make US Belt so you can cash it in for an opportunity at IC and then Cash in IC belt if you want a shot at the world title.
    This would make both belts relevant, idk just my two cents I kinda like how TNA does it over the past two years where you can cash in the X-Division Belt to get an Opportunity at the World Title.
     
  8. That devalues the belts. Not a good idea. The belts would just become a way to obtain something else, thus there would be no worth or honor in holding the belts themselves.
     
  9. Nope it gives you a reason to chase the belt and want it more than ever. What current reason does anyone have for wanting a midcard title? No one wants to be anything but a world champ IRL why try to complicate wrestling by making them pretend to want to be the IC champ? Use it as a stepping stone so guys have a reason to get it .
     
  10. Show Spoiler

    - A title unification match between WWE United States Champion Dean Ambrose and WWE Intercontinental Champion Big E Langston is likely for the Elimination Chamber pay-per-view next month.

    Read more: http://www.pwmania.com/wwe-to-unify...on-the-live-nxt-network-special#ixzz2qClQc5Px


    WWE should have created a special PPV called like 'Unification Night', and done Orton/Cena & Big E/Ambrose there, although I doubt they had it as a long-term plan. They're shitting on all 4 titles by just throwing together these random matches at nothing PPVs IMO.
     
  11. In the perfect world every belt should hold its own value, there should be pride in holding "Belt X" or "Belt Y". It's what made the old IC belt work so well. The guys competing for it didn't do so because it would lead to getting a shot at the world title, they did it because being IC champ was important in its own right.

    Your objective should be to get a belt, then to defend said belt. Not to get a belt just so you can get a shot at another belt.
     
  12. How does that make sense from a kayfab stand point? It doesn't in this day and age in the 80s it worked to an extent as it gave guys a higher standing in the company and often lead to a world title reign so it made sense as the next step up now it doesn't the heritage is too screwed up. This offers a title meaning but apparently it devalues it?

    Your objective is to be the best at whatever you do from a kayfab point not be only good enough for part best. How many boyhood dreams have dreamt of the US title?
     
  13. It devalues it because the title becomes throwaway. You only hold it to get a shot at something else, something which you in kayfabe can get much easier.

    Why would I spend all the time and effort to win a belt, defend it and then cash it in for a shot at a better belt, when all it takes to gain a shot at said better belt is attacking the champion?
     
  14. Why would you bother going for the royal rumble when you can just attack the champ? Fighting tooth and nail to keep a world title shot sounds a lot better than well its a belt I suppose. The fact you defend it makes it more than a throwaway it gives people a motive to build feuds.
     
  15. True, that argument might not be the best. But I am of the mind that championship belts need to have a value in and of itself. Not for what it can lead to, that's in a sense what MITB is for. I'd rather see wrestlers compete because they want to be the best wrestler in the united states or on the American continent than see them get it just so they can get a shot at Cena/Orton/Triple H.

    Like in New Japan, all belts have their own value except the NEVER belt. That's how I'd prefer it if the American belts were. All important without some sort of cash in gimmick attached to it.
     
  16. TNA has briefcases too (Gunner & Storm are about to rematch for it).. certainly if they do it the way I described than there would be a period of time that the US Title holder or IC Holder would have to hold their belts before they are given the option to cash in (eg: 2 PPV events time). But the belt cash-ins don't work like briefcases, they are just an opportunity for a match at the next PPV or what have you, it's not like you can just beat the person down and then cash in for an instant match..

    In Retrospect, I probably wouldn't do IC -> World Champ, probably just US -> IC.
    I feel it would make the IC valuable as well as give people a reason to want the US belt for a time and then on Smackdown you can just have a US Championship Tourny after someone cashes in..
     
  17. Cashing in for a midcard belt is dumb IMO.
     
  18. Jericho has said before (non-kayfabe) that growing up, his dream was to become the WWF Intercontinental Champion. Not because he didn't think he was ever worthy of being the world champion, but because the IC Title was always the belt held by his favorite wrestlers and so many of his favorite matches were contested over it. Marketing the midcard belts like this, as championships that have been held by so many greats and have individual merit and prestige of their own, will make people better understand why a wrestler would find a lot of importance in just holding the IC or US Title without feeling like they're just a mere stepping stone to the world title.

    As for whether they'll unify them or not, I hope not but if they do, then it must show how serious they are about improving the IC Title.
     
  19. I'd be really happy about that. Get rid of the US Title, keep the Intercontinental. No need for 2 mid-card titles with the combined brands.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Unification city.