This is a discussion on Isn't The World Title Supposed To Be Important? within the TNA Discussion forums, part of the Wrestling Forums category; I might be wrong, but from what I read Joe could have become champion but instead he gave the belt ...
Welcome to Wrestling Clique Wrestling Forums
We are the premier wrestling forum and your source for wrestling news and rumors, wrestling divas, wrestling gifs, sports discussion, e-feds, writing and more. Wrestling fans participate in active discussion on all the major wrestling leagues and events including WWE, ECW & TNA pay per view events, live wrestling streams, wrestling video games, collectibles, and other wrestling related products and services.
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the Forum Rules by clicking the link above.
You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Re: Isn't The World Title Supposed To Be Important?
Yes and no. If the motivation is sufficiently explained, then it could make some sense. In a way, its kind of like Andre winning the belt and then handing it to DiBiase for cash.
As a whole, TNA does a far better job of making their title seem important than the WWE does. To me, having a belt change hands every month does more to devalue it than a screwy title change like last night on the PPV.
Re: Isn't The World Title Supposed To Be Important?
Well apart from the Joe thing,I really feel that TNA is putting more emphasis on storylines and less on the world title.But Hey,I'm still enjoying TNA.
Re: Isn't The World Title Supposed To Be Important?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigpapa42
Yes and no. If the motivation is sufficiently explained, then it could make some sense. In a way, its kind of like Andre winning the belt and then handing it to DiBiase for cash.
As a whole, TNA does a far better job of making their title seem important than the WWE does. To me, having a belt change hands every month does more to devalue it than a screwy title change like last night on the PPV.
I agree that they definitely do a better job of making it seem big than WWE, and this is helped by the fact that there is only one World Title so only one person can be the man, but I think last night's finish is pretty retarded no matter what the explanation is.
As far as I'm concerned the World Title should be the ultimate dream of any wrestler, and Joe giving the belt to Angle to me says that the belt isn't that important to him, which obviously harms its credibility to a certain degree.
Re: Isn't The World Title Supposed To Be Important?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigpapa42
Yes and no. If the motivation is sufficiently explained, then it could make some sense. In a way, its kind of like Andre winning the belt and then handing it to DiBiase for cash.
As a whole, TNA does a far better job of making their title seem important than the WWE does. To me, having a belt change hands every month does more to devalue it than a screwy title change like last night on the PPV.
Bingo. The actions of Joe might upset a great deal of fans (myself included) because it demonstrates incredibly asinine booking for one of the company's top stars, but I don't think it makes the title look weak at all. On the contrary, I think it will make Joe a very hated heel in TNA, whereas in WWE, if the same thing happened I doubt many people would care at all because of how often their world championships gets whored around.
It still irritates me that TNA would book Joe like this, given all the stock they've put into him to build him as one of the most dominant baby faces in professional wrestling today. This heel turn was far too soon and could seriously come back to bite TNA in the ass. Not to mention it seemingly makes zero sense, after all Joe has done to destroy the MEM the past couple months. Sure, the angle will probably make a little more sense once there is some explaining on Impact, but it doesn't change the fact that Joe is indeed heel now, which is stupid.
But as much as it might hurt Joe, I seriously don't think it hurts the title at all. TNA's World Championship still means you're the top guy. Neither of WWE's do at all.
Re: Isn't The World Title Supposed To Be Important?
Requium. Woah. 6 reps for only 8 posts. That must be some kind of record. How did you manage that?
I dont see how being TNA world champ makes you the top guy. Foley was TNA champ for 2-3 months. I would hardly call him there top draw, wrestler, guy on anything in between.
__________________ Originally posted by Tommy Platinum "Silver Saviour is great. He is one of my favourate posters, he's a ledge and a cool guy 2"
Re: Isn't The World Title Supposed To Be Important?
lol, I dunno.
Mick Foley wasn't the "top guy", but keeping the belt on him for that brief period served it's purpose. It was a huge deal to TNA to sign him and he's arguably the most popular guy in the company, from a mainstream perspective anyways. Him being the World Champion put him over as the top heel in the company, which is no doubt where TNA will keep him for a while even if he isn't wrestling regularly. I doubt he'll win the title again anytime soon, but his title reign will give the fans more reason to be against him should he compete for that title again. Foley is a very hard guy to boo, but somehow, TNA managed to pull it off. And I think most fans knew his title reign wouldn't be long, but just having a brief one was enough to establish him as the type of character they want him to be.
But as for the 3 champions before him, Sting, Joe, and Angle, a strong case could be made for any of those guys being the top star in the company during the times they were champion.
Re: Isn't The World Title Supposed To Be Important?
Yeah, thats a good point. I just think sometimes people take titles too seriously. They are just props. I dont mean anyone specificaly, just the "Oh my God, they have devalued the title, and now I dont believe that he is credible, etc." guy, who doesnt really get what the titles about, or wrestling for that matter.
Dont get me wrong, they serve a massive purpose and are very important, but I just think people at times lose that line between reality and make believe when it comes to champions. Sometimes people have to unsuspend their disbelief and look from a buisness analytical perspective in the long term. The same goes for people complaining about the WWE title changes. No one ever says that title changes make a show more credible because in real competition anyone can win at any time.
__________________ Originally posted by Tommy Platinum "Silver Saviour is great. He is one of my favourate posters, he's a ledge and a cool guy 2"
Re: Isn't The World Title Supposed To Be Important?
Fair enough. I don't even believe a promotion's top star even needs to be champion, as long as they can draw and make money for the company, that's really all that matters. I just think the title needs to be something the fans should at least want their favorite superstar to win. When it becomes just a prop, it makes following the program a lot less entertaining. But when the promotion tries to feed all the fans at once over the course of a couple months with half a dozen title changes, that's when the title starts becoming just a prop. That's also why I think heels make the best champions, because once the fan favorite wins, it's really downhill from there.
Linear Mode
