KOTR Round 1 5th Matchup.

Ok here we go this is the 5th matchup on the card.

Below will be the answers from PM's i got off each person and i wan't you to use the poll's to vote for your favourite, i have set the poll to last 1 day.

The question i asked was:

How would you go about bringing prestige back to the midcard titles in the WWE? (US and IC)

Person A.

Personally, I feel that the main reason for the drop in prestige of all titles, not just the midcard ones, is the over abundance of belts in the WWE at the moment.

Raw and Smackdown both have a world title and midcard title to try and accommodate as well as the multi brand Tag and Diva titles.

The first thing I would look to do is go back to having one world title, defended on both shows, with the Intercontinental and US titles becoming the Raw and Smackdown main belts. This Undisputed title scene would initially involve Orton, Cena, Christian and The Miz.

On Raw, Alberto Del Rio would challenge and beat Kofi Kingston for the US Title at Over the Limit. I would book him to have a long and dominant heel run with the belt, defeating Kingston in his rematch (Raw), Rey Mysterio (Capitol Punishment), John Morrison (Raw) and The Big Show (MitB), before Triple H returns the night after MitB.

He would say the US Title should be in the hands on an American and challenge ADR at Summerslam. At Summerslam ADR manages to beat HHH after interference from Ricardo Rodriguez. In the rematch at Night of Champions Triple H would win the title and have a short reign, defending at HIAC and then dropping it at Bragging Rights to The Miz.

On Smackdown the disintegration of The Corre would continue with Ezekiel Jackson turning face and challenging Wade Barrett for the Intercontinental Title at Over the Limit. Barrett would retain with the help of Slater and Gabriel, who would later disassociate from Barrett leaving him alone.

At Over the Limit Jackson would beat Barrett for the title, before losing it to Cody Rhodes at Capitol Punishment. Christian, who would beat Daniel Bryan to become number 1 contender, would then challenge for the title unsuccessfully at MitB. At Summerslam in a triple threat match Christian would win the title, turning heel on Daniel Bryan. These two would then feud through Hell in a Cell and Bragging Rights, with Christian managing to retain the belt.

CM Punk and Chris Jericho have not been included in this as their futures are not clear at the moment, but these are two people that would be involved in their respective title scenes going forward.

As wrestlers drop out of the world title scene, I would make sure they don't go straight to the 'midcard' scene as a rule, so it doesn't make it look like a consolation prize. Instead they would move into a non-title feud before either going back up to the world title, or challenge for the Intercontinental/US title.

The titles would be defended at just about every ppv, along with the world title, as well as regular defences on TV. There would be occasional title changes on TV to keep the interest in the matches, but this would not be overused so as not to cheapen the image of the titles.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Person B.

In the past, the Intercontinental/US title holder was seen as the top contender for one of the world titles. It meant there was added importance to the title, as superstars needed it on their way to becoming the world champion. Nowadays, the mid-card title holder doesn't even matter, because other top-tier guys are being named No. 1 contenders, which all but nullifies the mid-card belt. Superstars are no longer billed to go out with the aim of becoming a mid-card champion, as the world champions are made to look leagues apart from the people lower down the card.

In my opinion, there are a few very simple ways the WWE could bring back the prestige to the mid card titles. Firstly, the contenders for the titles are no longer being built up as genuinely deserving of the championship opportunity. You only have to look back to Extreme rules last Sunday to see this. One night Sheamus attacks Kofi Kingston from behind, and two days later Kingston ends up winning the title straight off the Irishman. Is that really a genuine build up to someone who deserves to even get a title shot? What the WWE needs to do is build up the characters more before throwing them into the title scene. These six man matches, where number one contenders are made in an instant really do nothing of use to the championships. I say “make the mid-card belts mean something again.” Remember when Macho Man Randy Savage and Ricky Steamboat fought over the InterContinental title? That was a great feud and a great program, because they pushed the IC belt as the No. 1 contender for the world title. Although, we don’t necessarily want to look into the past, this is exactly what the titles need at the moment – a big feud, not some meaningless card filler. If you treat the mid card as a completely different roster of guys rather then use them as fodder for the main eventers, you make those titles more effective. Only when a mid carder is absolutely ready and has run his course at that level should he be placed into the main event scene. The current feud that is sparking between John Morrison and R-Truth is a prime example of what we need to aim for. Feuds like this need to occur before they are allowed anywhere near a title. Now the feud means something, why not get them involved with the US title? Right now all the titles need are a few meaningful feuds focussed purely on the belts.

Developing mid card characters including featuring them in backstage segments and giving them mic time can also be a good way to build up their characters before placing them in the title scene. If they can get a reaction before even making a debut, it is a good start, as a strong fan reaction one way or the other is vital. The time given to develop characters is crucial for superstars at the mid to lower-card level who are looking to make more of an impact. Scrapping the raw rebounds and not giving the announcers so much time would be one step towards allowing such a function. Lately, the mid-card titles have been used as little more than a stepping stone to see if superstars have the ability to cope as a main eventer. They're not as coveted as the WHC and WWE Title simply because they're not being pushed as important titles. Daniel Bryan seems to be the latest person to be placed into the position by the WWE. With one of WWE's biggest stars recently leaving (Edge) and others on part-time contracts (Undertaker and Triple H), it seems as though the time has come for a new sheet of main eventers to make the step up. Obviously The Miz and Alberto Del Rio have already been subjects of such a push.

Occasionally, we see either the IC or US title being contested on a Raw show, but it is always lower down the card. If the WWE are even going to do this at all off PPV, it needs to be done at main event level. If not, the superstars competing at the top of the card will completely overshadow it, even though it is a title match up. Obviously if you were looking for a quick fix, the best way would be to have two superstars with strong characters building up each of their characters over a long feud and eventually ending it with a ‘midcard’ championship match at a Pay Per View with the only difference being the position on the card. A PPV main event for either of the two titles would really make it seem much a more important and prestigious award from the viewpoint of a fan.

The US and IC titles are clearly below both world titles so a former world champion going for those titles - such as what they have done with Sheamus – seems to make the titles seem more prestigious. Having a former world champion hold a mid card title adds more prestige to that title and boosts those who compete for it closer to the main event. A former champion may have come up short in rematches for the world title and has to earn his way back into contention. Holding a mid card title may be a good way to do that. I suppose holding the US or IC title is better than not holding a title at all; even if you already had a taste of the big one. If a former world champion goes on to win one of the mid card titles, albeit only a month or so, it adds prestige to it when superstars like Kofi Kingston go on to win the titles off them.

So, to conclude, there are many methods right under the WWEs nose of bringing back the prestige to the midcard titles. The only problem is that they just don’t see that there is any problem is this sector of the roster. It could be easily done with a bit of guidance.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok so just to remind you, you can vote on the following guidelines:

1). You enjoyed reading the reply.
2). You thought the argument was explained thoroughly
3). You just liked the reply!
4). You thought it was informative and well written.

Oh and please try not to vote for yourselves!

Let the voting commence!

Not really too keen on either post if im honest, but i voted for poster A.

Poster A's original idea was really good but I voted for Poster B as I felt Poster A was telling a story line rather than describing how he would change.

Mr H wrote:Not really too keen on either post if im honest, but i voted for poster A.

Got to agree there, i was expecting more ideas rather than a storyboard. Poster A edges it for me.

wasn't impressed by either but went for poster a

I went for B as for me they answered the question, where as A just came up with a story line, all be it a good one

Poster A has a very NWA feel to it, the old territories would have a champ build him up and then have a World Champ like Flair come to town to feud with him, i'm not sure I like that idea but kudos for great imagination

voted for B simply because poster A straight away started talking about every other title in WWE even unifying the world titles. question was about mid card titles sorry

I feel that Poster B answered the question more...explaining how to build people up etc...whereas Poster A came up with a storyline. For that reason it has to be Poster B for me.

David Tails wrote:I feel that Poster B answered the question more...explaining how to build people up etc...whereas Poster A came up with a storyline. For that reason it has to be Poster B for me.

This is the reason why I voted for Poster B.

Anyone else got any ideas how to build up these titles?

Have a very credible main eventer who wishes to, hold the belts for a while.

By a while i don't mean 2 days and defend it reguarly against decent believable opponents and then drop it to someone the fans care about.

The main thing for me would be to actually have them defended against credible challengers. Don't just throw a match together 3 days before a PPV and expect it to be a draw.

Don't give titles to people as a piece of their costume. How long did the Miz hold the US title? How many times did he actually defend it?

I liked the old best of 5 series!

B wins it for me. A was too much like fantasy booking. I think the answers are both too long considering how little depth they both went into.

What I would title wise is make it that to the people going for them it actually means the world, that the belt is the pinnacle for them rather than it be simply a belt for main event cast offs and those that haven’t got anything else to do.

Back in the day (rose tinted glasses now on) you knew that an Intercontinental title match would get a huge build up, it’d be between two guys that the company would be pushing in a couple of years time, that they’d both be desperate to put on a show to prove themselves in hope that at some point they’d make it.
Now it’s for those that never make it v those that tried but failed.
Wrestlers need to wear those belts with pride, namecall the belt at all times, ensure that the fans know that they are the champs, that they are the ones to beat, make the fans be involved in the title and then they will be more interested in seeing it defended.
Have it defended at least at every other PPV and vs someone that the champ has been involved in a rivalry with for some time. Have a building storyline PPV battle as part of a tag team, battle royale etc and then the first one on one, if the match draws then have another at the following PPV with a stip if needed to put an end to the feud while the match remains hot but most importantly focus the reason for their feud to be about the TITLE.

Sheamus seemed to be the first champion in awhile to hold that US title with a bit of pride. Shame he was dam jobbed to king of the botches.

This is where I'd make RAW and SD! different, on SD! I'd like to see a Champions League styled group where I'd have 2 groups of 4 guys fight one another twice over six weeks and have the guys who top the groups have a PPV match to become the #1 contender for the IC Title but while thats going on I'd still have the Champ involved in angles, I wouldn't use this format all year round but would consider it using it twice a year, on RAW I'd be more inclined to make it storyline based and I'd never let the champ fight a #1 contender on free TV before they have a PPV Match

I'll go for B as for the general idea listed above

In terms of making the titles relevent, I'd actually go the opposite way from Gaffer and make the belts the pinnicle of Raw or Smackdown, while I would try and put a complete ban on the World Title's being defended on free TV and where possible prevent the champs from wrestling in order to build aticipation, I'd then focus the US and IC titles as the belts to have with the holders main eventing on Monday and Friday nights, I feel its a win win situation, it gives the Secondary champions some much needed exposure while also building up the World Title as you need to buy the PPV to see the champ get in the ring and defend his belt

Dr Gregory House MD wrote:I'll go for B as for the general idea listed above

In terms of making the titles relevent, I'd actually go the opposite way from Gaffer and make the belts the pinnicle of Raw or Smackdown, while I would try and put a complete ban on the World Title's being defended on free TV and where possible prevent the champs from wrestling in order to build aticipation, I'd then focus the US and IC titles as the belts to have with the holders main eventing on Monday and Friday nights, I feel its a win win situation, it gives the Secondary champions some much needed exposure while also building up the World Title as you need to buy the PPV to see the champ get in the ring and defend his belt

I'd love to see them do this more, ie having IC/US/tag and even Divas title matches headline TV shows. A title match of any kind should be a main event any time it takes place on TV. Having said that I also agree with gaffer that they give away too many matches on TV.

I think once every 3 or 4 weeks Raw or Smackdown should headline with a US/IC/tag/Divas title match. This would add prestige straight away. And it would also force the booking teams to be more disciplined and make the titles mean something. I wouldn't even mind non-clean finishes in some of these matches as long as it was with the intention of setting up a rematch on PPV.

World titles should definitely be something we only see defended on PPV, with maybe a maximum of 3 world title TV matches per year on each brand.

The problem is, this philosophy totally goes against Vince McMahon's. Making the titles feel important is too sports-like for his liking, and he doesn't like to take any risks in his main events which is why the same people are always featured.

However, you would have to be careful not to completely overdo it and end up with the world titles losing all credibility.

I've got no problen with Title matches on TV, I just meant I wouldn't put a title match on free TV until they had done that particular match on PPV

the-gaffer wrote:I've got no problen with Title matches on TV, I just meant I wouldn't put a title match on free TV until they had done that particular match on PPV

Absolutely agree, it makes no sense. I've never got why they do this (they never used to). It is totally self-destructive.

Well played Enforcer.

I don't get how Barrett retained at Over The Limit and Jackson won at OTL.

What?

Well done Legend! Bit of a trouncing really but there we go, if I was a bitter man I'd ban you.

*sneaks off to ban Legend whilst sobbing uncontrollably*

Nothing new, Enforcer! I've been banned (kicked) many a time