Uncle Albert Posted 7 October 2013 Author Posted 7 October 2013 Does that ending set up for a Bryan, Orton and Show triple threat at HIAC? Think WWE have also been discussing a HHH v Show Survior Series match.
LCFC_FAN_1995 Posted 9 October 2013 Posted 9 October 2013 Decent Raw to be honest, expected the usual alright ppv from Battleground! Right, so next ppv will be Big Show vs HHH, Big Show gets his job back if he wins.. John Cena coming back though, brilliant! To come back in the short period of time is really good, with that being said, I can see Orton winning the title, so it'll be both Cena and Orton as the "faces".
Uncle Albert Posted 9 October 2013 Author Posted 9 October 2013 I know it makes no difference to us this time as Battleground was free but if I had paid for that on Sunday and then on Raw they just repeat some of the matches from the night before. It's daft! So many Americans would of been annoyed paying $50 dollars for that. Looking forward to Hell in a Cell now, bit strange seeing Cena go for the World Heavyweight Championship, at least it gives the title some meaning! Saying that maybe it's away of Sandow cashing in and pushing him up the ranks and have a feud with Cena..
The Horse's Mouth Posted 9 October 2013 Posted 9 October 2013 That title will never have meaning, I think the people annoyed about it aren't seeing the bigger picture. With him pursuing the WHC he isn't in the corporation feud which is to elevate Bryan
Uncle Albert Posted 9 October 2013 Author Posted 9 October 2013 Of course it's had a meaning! It's the most prestigious title in Wrestling, now a days the WWE title is the main in one. You'd be very daft to think John Cena won't give the title a bit more of a meaning. Obviously Cena can't just jump into the main feud but if WWE wanted to they could of kept him off screen, Cena would of been happy with that but no, WWE have put him straight back into action. It will make the WHC more attractive and will give it more credit. What a way for someone like Sandow to kick off his main stage career than cashing in v John Cena, gives the title the recognition it deserves.
The Horse's Mouth Posted 9 October 2013 Posted 9 October 2013 It's not, it was magically created in thin air and handed to Triple H.
Uncle Albert Posted 9 October 2013 Author Posted 9 October 2013 You clearly know nothing about wrestling, because if you did you would know the WHC goes back to the 80s where NWA first introduced the Championship. WCW took the Championship over and was brought over when WWF brought WCW out, surely if it had no worth WWE would have just dismissed it? Ric Flairs title reigns meant nothing? Absolute idiot.
The Horse's Mouth Posted 9 October 2013 Posted 9 October 2013 The title wasn't taken over, it wasn't until the brand extension that the WHC came about. They claim it's the same NWA belt, but it isn't. It was literally made because Triple H didn't want to hold the intercontinental title. It is the same design, but it isn't the same belt.
Heart-Shaped Fox Posted 9 October 2013 Posted 9 October 2013 The WHC i would argue meant more from when it was introduced for about four five years. Especially around 2003-05ish when Raw had HHH, Hbk, Jericho, Benoit, Orton, Edge and Batista coming through. It just had the edge especially when Raw was considered superior. The quality of wrestlers on both brands was much better than now though.
Mike the Metal Ed Posted 9 October 2013 Posted 9 October 2013 The WHC i would argue meant more from when it was introduced for about four five years. Especially around 2003-05ish when Raw had HHH, Hbk, Jericho, Benoit, Orton, Edge and Batista coming through. It just had the edge especially when Raw was considered superior. The quality of wrestlers on both brands was much better than now though. Raw was the drizzling shits in 2003, but yes the World Heavyweight Title had much more prestige. Mostly because Triple H wouldn't want it to be weak while holding it.
Uncle Albert Posted 9 October 2013 Author Posted 9 October 2013 The title wasn't taken over, it wasn't until the brand extension that the WHC came about. They claim it's the same NWA belt, but it isn't. It was literally made because Triple H didn't want to hold the intercontinental title. It is the same design, but it isn't the same belt. How was it not taken over?! You absolute moron, The Rock won the title off Booker T at SummerSlam 2001 in the WWF v Alliance feud, did Chris Jericho not beat The Rock and Stone Cold to become the Undisputed Champion? Which was both titles.. Seriously, shut up. You know nothing.
Mike the Metal Ed Posted 9 October 2013 Posted 9 October 2013 How was it not taken over?! You absolute moron, The Rock won the title off Booker T at SummerSlam 2001 in the WWF v Alliance feud, did Chris Jericho not beat The Rock and Stone Cold to become the Undisputed Champion? Which was both titles.. Seriously, shut up. You know nothing. Technically speaking the World Heavyweight Title and the WCW World Heavyweight Championship have different lineages as the WCW title was unified into the WWF Championship at Vengeance 2001. The official WWE World Heavyweight Championship history only goes back to 2002 when it was given to Triple H by Eric Bischoff. On the other hand, it's professional wrestling, who the **** cares?
The Horse's Mouth Posted 9 October 2013 Posted 9 October 2013 How was it not taken over?! You absolute moron, The Rock won the title off Booker T at SummerSlam 2001 in the WWF v Alliance feud, did Chris Jericho not beat The Rock and Stone Cold to become the Undisputed Champion? Which was both titles.. Seriously, shut up. You know nothing. The undisputed title then became the WWE title. Then the WHC came along a couple of years later and was handed to Triple H because the brand extension would make the Intercontinental title the main even title on RAW and Triple H thought he was above it. . It doesn't have the same heritage as the WCW championship. If you think that, then you're clueless.
Uncle Albert Posted 9 October 2013 Author Posted 9 October 2013 It's the same title, it is held in the same regard as the WCW and previous World Heavyweight Championship, hence why all former greats are mentioned when discussing the current WHC. Simple as that really.
The Horse's Mouth Posted 9 October 2013 Posted 9 October 2013 I'll agree to disagree, even though I know I'm right.
Uncle Albert Posted 9 October 2013 Author Posted 9 October 2013 God knows how this works, but from what we have both been saying, I don't think either of us are wrong?
Heart-Shaped Fox Posted 9 October 2013 Posted 9 October 2013 Must be the same as Booker T said on Raw that he's a 'six time six time six time six time six time six time World Champion'. He used to say five time WCW champion ha. Can you dig that? Suckas.
The Horse's Mouth Posted 9 October 2013 Posted 9 October 2013 God knows how this works, but from what we have both been saying, I don't think either of us are wrong? It's pretty dodgy I'll agree.
Mike the Metal Ed Posted 9 October 2013 Posted 9 October 2013 Fun fact: Professional wrestling companies like to manipulate the truth to put over the product whenever they need to. The title history is whatever they want it to be. Pat Patterson never won a tournament in Rio de Janiero.
The Horse's Mouth Posted 9 October 2013 Posted 9 October 2013 Yeah, they do the same with the US title and stuff.
Ross-Kemp Posted 10 October 2013 Posted 10 October 2013 Normally I disagree with a lot of what Albert says, but here he is bang on the money. The WHC is the WCW/NWA championship and that's a fact. Anyway, Cena feuding for the WHC for me can only mean a title unification at 'Mania, well, I hope that's the case anyway.
Jace Posted 10 October 2013 Posted 10 October 2013 The big gold belt was reduced in size recently too
Uncle Albert Posted 10 October 2013 Author Posted 10 October 2013 Anyway, Cena feuding for the WHC for me can only mean a title unification at 'Mania, well, I hope that's the case anyway. I think it needs unifying but again I can't see WWE having away with the belt, shame as like most have said the WHC is becoming more like the Intercontinental Belt and the current IC title is irrelevant. John Cena challenging Del Rio can only be a good thing for the WHC, I would like to Sandow cash in v Cena at Hell in a Cell and lose, yes lose. This way it will keep Cena in the WHC frame and give Sandow and real feud, otherwise if Sandow wins, Cena is going to get caught up in this Corporation Orton v Bryan feud and we're just going to go back to Del Rio challenging for the WHC.
Jace Posted 10 October 2013 Posted 10 October 2013 The way PPVs are opened with the World Heavyweight title is just 1 of the many things wrong with WWE now, the concept really doesn't work anymore. I used to be a huge fan but 1 or 2 hours of a decent Raw is sustainable but 3 hours of Raw, 2 hours of Smackdown, 1 hour of NXT, 1 hour of superstars and another hour of some stupid Saturday morning slam is just too much and the quality is poor throughout.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.