Why do people always complain about whether a person deserves a title(more inside)?
Posted by admin on Apr 13, 2010
This is only towards WWE and TNA(not counting the TNA world title though for the most part that is still somewhat a true title)since most people on here don’t watch the promotions that actually treat their titles like real titles.
What does it matter about deserving a title when really WWE and TNA dont treat the majority of their titles like they mean something. They pass out title reigns like they are free samples in a grocery store. Its not like any of the titles truly have prestige anymore, especially not when world titles have already changed hands 3 times this year and its only april my god that is just pitiful. So does it really matter anymore in today’s wrestling if a person truly deserves to have a title. Shouldn’t it just be if the person entertains you as champion thats enough. No need to go and say oh I like this wrestler but its just not his time WTF, really someone doesn’t deserve a title that is being passed around like a thai prostitute at a bachelor party come on guys. As long as you like the person who has the title that should be good enough today.
This is a response to people I have seen actually go I like jack swagger or sheamus but then go to say I just don’t think they deserve it or are ready. And you can go ahead and insert any newer wrestler who wins a title and has that said about them
I agree with you for the most part.
Most of the champions in both organizations aren’t the most deserving in essence, but rather just the most over, and who the company feels is the most over in their respective division/title scene. Not everyone that holds a title is going to be considered "deserving" of it, but most of the time, being "deserving" doesn’t matter at all.
And really, how do most fans know who is the most "deserving"? Simple: they don’t.
I agree. Really the only mainstream title that is treated as a real championship right now is the TNA Tag team title, and to a certain point their world title.
References :
Are you old enough to remeber WCW, the real WCW? David Arquette (spelling?) won the WCW title, and that is sad. Don’t pay much attention to wrestling anymore, but if the person has great charisma, physical build, and a great "gimmick" then I see no reason as to why a person shouldn’t "hold gold" in his first couple months in WWE. It’s not like this is the first job for the majority of wrestlers, they come from independent wrestling organizations, road shows, overseas, etc.
References :
the only people to blame for that is the peole who are in charge of wrestling
References :
I agree with you for the most part.
Most of the champions in both organizations aren’t the most deserving in essence, but rather just the most over, and who the company feels is the most over in their respective division/title scene. Not everyone that holds a title is going to be considered "deserving" of it, but most of the time, being "deserving" doesn’t matter at all.
And really, how do most fans know who is the most "deserving"? Simple: they don’t.
References :
you do have a point but what pisses me off is when people say they are tired of the same people being wwe/world champion like john cena,the undertaker,triple h,edge and randy orton definitely but when a young talent wins the title like sheamus and jack swagger right now they wanna complain. even when cm punk became worlds heavyweight champion you had people complaining. people just arent satisfied.
you got me with the title changing hands so fast and no prestige being put into the gold. since january of 2010 the wwe championship changed 3 times from sheamus to john cena to batista and now to john cena like what the hell is that? no good title defenses,no feuds no nothings. look at the world heavyweight championship since it was vacant in April 29, 2008 nobody held the damn championship for more than 3 months. what kind of prestige is that? and its the same people getting the championship over and over again.
References :
Your spot on, but when someone like Sheamus and Swagger has title reigns under their belt (no pun intended) and those like Benjamin, Christian, and Matt Hardy don’t then you have to understand why people get upset.
References :
KENTA
What you have to understand about the IWC (for the most part) is that regardless of who is getting pushed, who is or isn’t champion or who wins or loses a match, the wrong guy (or girl) is ALWAYS getting the push/championship/win. Always.
I usually check into this site once or twice per day, and every time, literally without fail, I see complaint after complaint about how the WWE never pushes new talent. I see constant whining about how we’re all sick of John Cena/Triple H/Batista/Randy Orton/ ect, ect, and how if Cena/Triple H/Batista/Orton, ect, ect, wins one more title then we’re "done" with WWE. Then, when Vince actually does go out and push new stars like Sheamus, Drew McIntrye or Jack Swagger, the IWC proceeds to launch into another endless stream of complaints about how the young guy getting pushed "doesn’t deserve it" or "isn’t ready". Seriously, it might be the most hypocritical system I’ve ever seen. The IWC hates that Vince always pushes the same old faces, and yet they also hate when Vince DOES push new faces, they hate those guys as well. I honestly don’t understand why they even watch the WWE (or to a lesser degree, TNA) in the first place. It boggles the mind.
Whenever a new star is pushed into the main event, we always see the some old moaning about how "they should have pushed Matt Hardy" (never mind that Matt Hardy is completely out of shape, is, at best, a decent wrestler and very few people would legitimately buy him being able to compete physically with guys like Sheamus, Randy Orton or Triple H). It drives me crazy when people just have their collective heads in the sand and refuse to listen to reason or even consider something other then their own point of view.
As for the presitge of the titles, you may have a point there, but I think that if you want to enjoy wrestling, you just have to take it as it is. The wrestling business as a whole has a long history of being circular, so I certainly wouldn’t bet against long champions again. Remember, The Undertaker just came off a lengthy title run and it wasn’t that long ago when John Cena had the WWE Championship for over two years (or somewhere around that number). Yes, we have seen a trend towards shorter title reigns in recent years, and while I’d prefer long ones, I will say that the current formula keeps things fresh and unpredictable (again, for the most part).
References :
People have their own opinions.
References :