VOW Flagship: Elimination Chamber, Deserving Titles, New Beginning & more!

[mlev76]

Since Satoshi Kojima lost the title on 1/4/2011, only four different guys have held the IWGP Heavyweight title (Tanahashi, Okada, Styles and Naito).

16 different guys held the WWE title in that same time period. (Miz, Cena, Punk, Mysterio, Del Rio, The Rock, Bryan, Orton, Lesnar, Rollins, Reigns, Sheamus, Triple H, Ambrose, Styles and Wyatt). Plus you have guys like Ziggler and Swagger who only held the big gold belt but get the "former WWE World Champion" label slapped on them.

A world championship is an extremely important plot device in a fictional sports league and the accomplishment means very little when so many guys have won it, including guys who are still relatively young and healthy but clearly aren't top guys (let alone money draws). WWE probably couldn't get away with just 4 guys winning the title in 6 years because of the differences in their schedule compared to NJPW but 16 different guys is a joke.

I don't have an issue with WWE devaluing other titles because WWE doesn't rely on them to draw but how they treat and World and Universal titles is so disappointing. As far as importance goes, is Kevin Owens even booked as top 5 on Raw or top 10 in WWE overall? He may as well still be Intercontinental Champion.

This is an incredibly unfair post on numerous levels, namely:

1) In the period mentioned, the WWE title was actually two titles for 3 1/2 of the 6 years mentioned.

2) In that time, the IWGP title was defended 32 times TOTAL. New Japan does not have its Heavyweight champion defend on house shows; WWE does.

3) I look at the list given and will kindly ask which of the people mentioned were not 'top guys' when they won their titles? In the WWE world, all were/are top guys when they were champions. And, if you want to compare apples to oranges, please note that all of those people drew houses much bigger than New Japan houses. Miz, Cena, Rock, Bryan, Orton, Lesnar, Rollins, Reigns and Triple H all main evented shows that drew many times over the biggest New Japan shows.

4) Your comment about WWE titles not being used to draw is silly. They are the basis of house shows, pay per views, etc. And Owens? Not top 5 on Raw? Clearly, you do not watch.

[Empiresk]

I agree on the "deserving Champions" debate. People don't deserve shit. But, I do see a time and a place when it can be used effectively.

Transitional Champions can be used very effectively. Examples of this are The Iron Sheik beating Bob Backlund only to drop the title to Hulk Hogan a month later. You could even see Cena and Wyatt being transitional champions. Cena ties Flair's record and drops it immediately so they now have that 17th title reign in their pocket for a big show like Summerslam or Mania while Bray getting turned on like Orton could get him over more than usual as face of the brand and negate Cena's absence at house shows. Hell, Zack Ryder's one day IC reign ended up being pretty great as it helped Owens vs Zayn move on and established The Miz firmly in the upper card after years of irrelevance. Ryder gets to have his moment after years of shit and it helps three or four other people down the line.

Would love to see someone argue Nakanishi's IWGP Title reign though!

Smackdown has been off since November and the Women's and Tag Titles are a big part of it.

[noggy]

1) In the period mentioned, the WWE title was actually two titles for 3 1/2 of the 6 years mentioned.

The 16 guys I listed held the title that Bray currently holds. The list would be much longer if I included the other title.

In that time, the IWGP title was defended 32 times TOTAL. New Japan does not have its Heavyweight champion defend on house shows; WWE does.

I acknowledged WWE couldn't get away with just different 4 guys holding but 16 is a lot. WWE titles almost never change hands on house shows these days so I'm not sure why you brought that up.

I look at the list given and will kindly ask which of the people mentioned were not 'top guys' when they won their titles? In the WWE world, all were/are top guys when they were champions. And, if you want to compare apples to oranges, please note that all of those people drew houses much bigger than New Japan houses. Miz, Cena, Rock, Bryan, Orton, Lesnar, Rollins, Reigns and Triple H all main evented shows that drew many times over the biggest New Japan shows.

There's a world of difference between being placed in the main event and being a draw. Wrestlemania 27 didn't fill a stadium because The Miz was in the main event. Replace him in that match with any vaguely over heel and the show does that same level of business because the real attraction was the interaction between Cena and The Rock.

Your comment about WWE titles not being used to draw is silly. They are the basis of house shows, pay per views, etc. And Owens? Not top 5 on Raw? Clearly, you do not watch.

House show attendance is declining and WWE Network subs only go up during Wrestlemania season when the real stars consistently show up. As for Owens, I'd say he is currently presented as a less important character than Lesnar, Goldberg, Triple H, Reigns and Undertaker at the very least.

[BlizzardAcolyte]

You know what's funny about you wanting to see Taichi disappear from the BOSJ lineups? He and TAKA are the only guys whose BOSJ matches I would bother to watch.

Just to be clear - you prefer Taichi and TAKA to KUSHIDA, Ricochet, Will Ospreay, and Hiromu Takahashi?

- TAKA's part of my List of Workers Whose Singles Matches I Actually Watch
- Much like with Joe and Iizuka, I never tire of Taichi's shtick--I actually hate that Abe Miho has become an established part of that shtick
- To the point that I am generally bored with singles wrestling: I haven't watched a Ricochet match since him vs. O'Reilly at Black Cole Sun; I've only watched one Ospreay match (because Sabre Jr. was in it); I've never watched a Hiromu singles match; I haven't watched a KUSHIDA singles match since he was still in HUSTLE

[Lawsoncomedy]

I kind of think The Usos and America Alpha need each other. I can't believe we've gone this long without having a PPV match between those two teams. Give them a best of 5 series or something. They'll get over in the ring. It's so obvious that its frustrating.

The problem is that the Usos kept getting injured at the worst time, though Alpha getting the titles was rushed in general because of Zack Ryder getting injured

That's true. Also part of me feels like we're jumping the gun on how over Alpha has to be right now. I remember a time early in 2013 when the hot take was how The Shield "wasn't over" but WWE kept protecting them and it turned out pretty great. As long as Alpha stays protected I think maybe the same rule will apply. The fans will have to look at them as top guys. And then a breakout match or two later, you've got legit stars.

[Lawsoncomedy]

I get the the critique of the story for Lynch/James, but I wonder if part of it is our perception of Lynch is different than the company's. I understand why we all see Lynch as the "Ace" of Smackdown. She's the best. But outside of that inauagural title win, and being the last member of her team at Survivor Series, when has she ever been booked to be that, really? I think the company still books Lynch as more of an underdog character. Not quite like Bayley. But she certainly hasn't been pushed as hard as either Charlotte or Sasha. Becky couldn't even get past her first program with Bliss.

You could be right, but with the bold you are taking away the things that make her come off as the ace, no? Those are big reasons why I perceive her that way.

Well, I see her that way too. I'm playing devil's advocate here though because remember how Lynch used to be booked when she had to deal with the other two horsewomen. She didn't fair greatly. She was the underdog before Bayley was around. And had she held the inaugural title for...even 4 months, maybe that would establish her as The Ace more to the less hardcore fans. But in the company's eyes, has she been pushed any harder than Bliss or even Naomi, really? She only won the one big match. Even her one successful defense against Bliss was marred in controversy.

I guess I'm saying, she got the first turn with the belt, and due to her status at the time of Survivor Series, was pushed then (even her submitting Nia has never been played up since), but in the company's eyes never seemed to get a real "Ace" push. Compared to Charlotte, or the last 4 women's champions in NXT...I'd have to say she's the least protected Ace I've ever seen.

[Speedy Bellerin]

I think the way WWE uses it's titles is a huge problem. All too often they change hands for political reasons and not for the good of the storylines.

Snickers commercials, wrestlemania is in your home town, it's football season and John Cena has a flight to catch are not good reasons to be made a champion.

Well booked titles make wrestling better but I have little faith that WWE will get a grip on the situation.

I am however loving the glut of quality matches. Even though I wasn't as high on some of them as other people were it's great that there's so much enjoyable graps about. Good matches get wrestlers a lot of buzz. Theres a real incentive to go out there and kill it.

[mlev76]

1) In the period mentioned, the WWE title was actually two titles for 3 1/2 of the 6 years mentioned.

The 16 guys I listed held the title that Bray currently holds. The list would be much longer if I included the other title.

In that time, the IWGP title was defended 32 times TOTAL. New Japan does not have its Heavyweight champion defend on house shows; WWE does.

I acknowledged WWE couldn't get away with just different 4 guys holding but 16 is a lot. WWE titles almost never change hands on house shows these days so I'm not sure why you brought that up.

I look at the list given and will kindly ask which of the people mentioned were not 'top guys' when they won their titles? In the WWE world, all were/are top guys when they were champions. And, if you want to compare apples to oranges, please note that all of those people drew houses much bigger than New Japan houses. Miz, Cena, Rock, Bryan, Orton, Lesnar, Rollins, Reigns and Triple H all main evented shows that drew many times over the biggest New Japan shows.

There's a world of difference between being placed in the main event and being a draw. Wrestlemania 27 didn't fill a stadium because The Miz was in the main event. Replace him in that match with any vaguely over heel and the show does that same level of business because the real attraction was the interaction between Cena and The Rock.

Your comment about WWE titles not being used to draw is silly. They are the basis of house shows, pay per views, etc. And Owens? Not top 5 on Raw? Clearly, you do not watch.

House show attendance is declining and WWE Network subs only go up during Wrestlemania season when the real stars consistently show up. As for Owens, I'd say he is currently presented as a less important character than Lesnar, Goldberg, Triple H, Reigns and Undertaker at the very least.

1) Thanks for clarifying the title issue.

2) I again ask you to tell me which guys on the list were unworthy. The amount of people and title changes matter, but if someone is worthy of being champion and its the right spot, what is the issue?

3) How do you define draw? This is a clever way of denying any value to WWE stars while accentuating New Japan stars even though when you look at the numbers, it's not even close. The Mania you mentioned which didn't fill the stadium had 71,000 fans in attendance-in context, that's several Tokyo Dome shows combined.

4) If you want to make the case on Lesnar and Goldberg, I'm ok with that, but the other 3? Triple H and Undertaker have not appeared on any Raw PPV since Owens won the title and Triple H hasn't wrestled since Mania. As for Reigns, sorry, Owens is currently higher on the food chain than him

[mlev76]

Smackdown has been, with a few off weeks, still very solid over the last few weeks and it had a great main event this week. I think the change is more that Raw is getting a lot better and when Raw is solid, the more limited and smaller Smackdown roster becomes more noticeable. This is not to say that everything is perfect-they could have done a better job with the Alpha title win, the Ziggler/Kalisto/Crews thing is a mess and I am fully on board with banishing Ellsworth for life. With that said, as much as I enjoy the Raw women's title scene, I like that Smackdown has stories for the women beyond the title. It feels like a real division rather than a title and nothing more

[noggy]

How do you define draw? This is a clever way of denying any value to WWE stars while accentuating New Japan stars even though when you look at the numbers, it's not even close. The Mania you mentioned which didn't fill the stadium had 71,000 fans in attendance-in context, that's several Tokyo Dome shows combined.

The thing is WWE has made the brand the draw. They sell like 50,000 Wrestlemania tickets before a single match is announced. If you're plugging a bunch of guys into the main event and business remains flat, it doesn't mean all of them are draws. It means none of are and it's the brand doing the heavy lifting. Fans aren't stupid, when WWE puts the world title on somebody and tries to them them this guy is now a big deal, they will look at guys like Miz, Sheamus, Mysterio, Ambrose and Del Rio who were never consistently treated as tippy top guys and conclude it's no big deal that someone new won the title.

Wrestling has always been built around treating a small group of guys (or sometimes just one guy) as being clearly above everybody else. When a company tries to simultaneously present like 10 guys as being top level, it doesn't really work. Wrestling's always been a star driven industry and while the brand being the big draw is "safe", it also has a lower ceiling than fulling committing to a few time full time guys.

[mlev76]

How do you define draw? This is a clever way of denying any value to WWE stars while accentuating New Japan stars even though when you look at the numbers, it's not even close. The Mania you mentioned which didn't fill the stadium had 71,000 fans in attendance-in context, that's several Tokyo Dome shows combined.

The thing is WWE has made the brand the draw. They sell like 50,000 Wrestlemania tickets before a single match is announced. If you're plugging a bunch of guys into the main event and business remains flat, it doesn't mean all of them are draws. It means none of are and it's the brand doing the heavy lifting. Fans aren't stupid, when WWE puts the world title on somebody and tries to them them this guy is now a big deal, they will look at guys like Miz, Sheamus, Mysterio, Ambrose and Del Rio who were never consistently treated as tippy top guys and conclude it's no big deal that someone new won the title.

Wrestling has always been built around treating a small group of guys (or sometimes just one guy) as being clearly above everybody else. When a company tries to simultaneously present like 10 guys as being top level, it doesn't really work. Wrestling's always been a star driven industry and while the brand being the big draw is "safe", it also has a lower ceiling than fulling committing to a few time full time guys.

You're contradicting yourself throughout your response. On the one hand, you're saying the brand is the draw. But you then immediately talk about how business rises, falls or stays the same based on the choice of champion? So, clearly, who is champion DOES matter. Yes, Mania has a built in audience, but the other 11 months do not. And shouldn't the person the company chooses to put in that role and/or keep in that role mean something?

It is odd to me that the assumption is that it's one of the four men you mentioned who were IWGP champion who mattered as draws but not those who consistently drew bigger crowds both numbers wise and gate wise in the WWE. And why do we assume the New Japan brand doesn't draw? This is a bit of a narrative that his been built to improve the value of New Japan stars while diminishing the value of WWE stars.