Becoming the WWE Champion should be the biggest goal for any young wrestler with genuine ambition; it is the industry's equivalent of a tennis player being triumphant at Wimbledon or a cyclist winning the Tour de France. Each of these accolades indicate that those victorious were the best in their division at one point or another; unless of course youre The Miz, that one cant be explained. Unlike the other sports mentioned the WWE is a pre-written entertainment show; therefore its biggest prize has seen both good episodes and bad episodes. We've seen dramatic highs, such as when Shawn Michaels finally beat Bret Hart after a sixty two minute Iron Man match, to pick up his first ever WWE Championship; he clutched onto that title as though it was a newborn baby. That was a man emotional that he had finally accomplished his greatest goal as a wrestler. Then on the flipside, you have the time Vince McMahon made himself the champion for six days. A recent recurring issue that has proven irritating to many of the wrestling community regarding the WWE Championship, is when it is not shown as the main feature on a show. Often when John Cena is without the belt or a popular wrestler of the past returns for a one-off match, they will close the PPV rather than the champion. A main consensus amongst many fans is that nobody should be seen as a bigger draw than the man holding the WWE title belt, but recent history would suggest that some wrestlers are, perhaps devaluing the belt somewhat. As you read on, you will notice instances where wrestlers rank at the same number of title reigns, when this is the case the order becomes arranged based on which wrestler was with the title for the longest period of time. You may be very surprised by some of the great wrestlers that don't quite make it on to the list...