In September 1999, Vince McMahon captured the WWE Championship. That's right, the man who is responsible for overseeing the booking of his shows knowingly put himself in a position to capture his company's top prize. Sure, he only won the title after interference from "Stone Cold" Steve Austin helped him to defeat Triple H and never was he actually portrayed as an equal of any of the top stars but the fact that the history books state that McMahon won the title and, worse yet, that it was only a plot device, is problematic. At the time, the titles still meant a great deal, no matter how much Vince Russo's writing tried to convince us that they were but props in the grand scheme of things. Fans respected them and wrestlers treated them as if they were the most important things in the industry. McMahon winning the title to further his feud with Triple H set a dangerous precedent that played out over the years that followed. Titles were passed back and forth, the subject of stories and the sole reason for two men to fight four or five months in a row. They no longer were as important as gaining a measure of revenge or maintaining personal pride and they never quite recovered. Don't believe that? Take a look at the upcoming SummerSlam bout between Brock Lesnar and John Cena in which the former is far more concerned with beating and maiming Cena that taking the WWE Championship.
Erik Beaston is a freelance pro wrestling writer who likes long walks in the park, dandelions and has not quite figured out that this introduction is not for Match.com. He resides in Parts Unknown, where he hosts weekly cookouts with Kane, The Ultimate Warrior, Papa Shango and The Boogeyman. Be jealous.
