News WWE unifying two more titles?

Discussion in 'General WWE' started by Crayo, Jan 13, 2014.


  1.  
  2. "Both titles on the line"

    Then at Wrestlemania, it's Orton v Langston with all 4 titles on the line OMG
     
  3. Could just as well be they are having a champion vs champion match and we could have a double champion, doesn't mean they are unifying.

    For the record however, I would unify the mid card belts if I were booking. Only fuck Ambrose and Langston, fucking jobbers. Reigns would be the man to unify the titles
     
  4. lol wwe is now joke for haters
     
  5. God no..

    Another idea to waste mid-carders who have a chance to get a title imo.
     
  6. Less titles=more prestige to each title.
     
  7. Good, I hope they do it. The US title has become nothing lately.

    Side note thats sort of related - I had a good laugh the other night thinking about how Cena has his rematch. But technically his rematch is for the belt he lost (WH), right? I mean, superstar A has no belt, gets championship match against superstar B but loses. Superstar A generally doesn't get a rematch right? Only if you have a belt you lose (or some interference I guess). So along that line of logic, wouldn't Cena's rematch with Orton ONLY be for the WH title and not the whole schabnag??? Thats just my thought process though. That all took a good ten minutes to go over in my head the first time, lol. I know it won't go down that way, but it was interesting to contemplate.
     
  8. A Horrible idea, I`m feeling bad for the midcarders that actually have some talent
     
  9. There is no WHC/WWE championship, they are unified bro, that was the point of their match. There are no separate matches for separate titles because the two titles together just represent the WWE World heavyweight Champion.
     
  10. Not really, think about this. A talented midcarder gets pushed and wins the title. As there's only one title it's the most prestigious one of the midcard and one of the most prestigious in the world because it must be defended periodically instead of doing whatever they want. The US title hasn't been defended for months and it looks shitty right now, and with two titles, that'd be something happening really often so one title will always look shitty and won't be defended in 3-5 months looking boring and irrelevant. Having a champion defending the title month after month makes it look really better tbh.
     
  11. Yes I get that D'Z. Missed my point I see. They should have ONE new belt already. I hate seeing them carry around both belts if there's only 1 championship. Its dumb.

    The logic of a rematch for a title that is now unified with another all made my head spin for a little while is what I am saying. Cena never technically won the WWEWHC, as the ONE title is now known, so why does he get a rematch for it like he lost it? Thats what I am getting at. Its all due to the circumstances surrounding the unification I suppose. Sorry, just had the thought and wanted to mention it.
     
  12. I don't think he is getting this rematch as apart of any rematch clause. he is just getting another match because he's john cena

    but I'm sure you already know that :adr:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Yeah def
     
  14. They just made that shiny new WWE Champioinship Belt last year, are they really going to get rid of it that quickly? Assume eventually they'll just do away with the WHC.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. two belts is pro, its only Orton who makes it seem lame. Jericho, HHH always looked badass with both belts.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Damn you Orton!!!!!!
     
  17. Hopefully they'll be unifying the IC and US belts and not just have a champion vs champion like they usually have. If they do you unify them then it would be great if they have an elimination chamber match for them instead of WWE World Heavyweight championship. This way they can have Brock Lesnar fight against whoever wins out of Randy Orton and John Cena at the Royal Rumble.
     
  18. This is like the third time this month that Crayo has posted news that's already been posted by someone else. :pity2:

    On topic, I prefer two midcard belts as it gives people in the midcard more to do while still not over-saturating the roster with one too many belts. Two singles titles in the undercard is the perfect balance to me but whatever.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. To be honest, I don't really understand why they half-unified the belts at TLC. They would have been much better off leaving it until 'Mania where, presumably, they'll combine the titles to make one. They should have just had the initial WHC vs WWE match there though.

    Great news about the midcard belts, the combined belt will hopefully act as a WHC replacement - at least from a credibility standpoint.
     
    • Like Like x 1