Short title reigns are bad. They really don't help anybody. The previous champion looks like a loser and the guy that only holds it for a short period of time looks even worse. What's the point of having a champion for six days like Masato Tanaka was in December of 1999? It's not like Tanaka was a bad wrestler. He had a lot of great matches in ECW with Mike Awesome, who proved to be his best opponent in the company. Their matches were hugely popular. Looking back on it, they really didn't need to involve the ECW Title in the feud. It's just that they wanted to have title changes on television to make it more of a must see event. When Tanaka beat Awesome for the ECW Title in December of 1999 he only held it for six days before dropping it back to Awesome. What's the point of doing it in the first place? To have one more match. That's really it. It was no surprise that WWE did Tanaka vs. Awesome at ECW One Night Stand 2005 six years later. They knew there was chemistry there.
John wrote at WhatCulture from December 2013 to December 2015. It was fun, but it's over for now. Follow him on Twitter @johnreport. You can also send an email to mrjohncanton@gmail.com with any questions or comments as well.
