2. Unify The World & Intercontinental Championships
It has become abundantly clear over the past year or so that the World belt is much less prestigious than the WWE belt, never reaching main event status and being held by the top talent of the mid card. It's the belt in which the up and comers and genuine workers tend to feud over, and that is just fine in my book, but that's mainly because I have come to terms with the fact that the World Championship is the modern day Intercontinental Championship. Once this is realised, you get to understand the belt and its use that bit more. The obvious problem with this is that WWE still has an Intercontinental Championship, which genuinely serves little to no purpose nowadays. What the IC belt is doing at present is causing fan confusion to the belts around it. It is supposed to be the more prestigious belt when compared to the US title, but isn't getting the same exposure at present with Dean Ambrose as Champion. Even before Dean was the champ, the US belt had a niche with the under-card and was easily understood and therefore would get more attention. The World title is batted around by the upper mid-card performers, a place the IC belt used to occupy, leaving the Intercontinental belt to be fought over by...the mid-mid carders!? It's in a state of limbo at present and because of this strange situation, seems to make the tiers between belts blur. It's all very confusing! The obvious and most glaring dilemma with such a suggestion, though, is the absolutely genuine heritage this belt holds, which should not be discarded. I would even argue this belt holds more past heritage than that of the WWE title, especially when it comes to wrestling talent that have held the belt! The World title again holds more wrestling heritage than that of WWE's own belt even if the biggest names to hold it were in WCW and its territories. The image of the belt is also etched into every fan's mind, new or old, and holds a special place in their hearts. Both belts would cause an uproar if removed from WWE, but I think I see a simple solution for all involved. The booking of the angle to unify is stupidly straight forward, so this isn't a problem. For example, the obvious angle would require two big names to hold each respective belt, come to blows at some point and battle it out for both titles. Personally I would wait until Chris Jericho makes his guaranteed return, give him his 10th reign as IC champion and be involved in the unification against, I dunno, CM Punk. The booking could be achieved in this or any number of ways as long as two great guys were involved. What really matters is how the new, unified Championship is labelled from that point on, as marketing the belt is the most important thing. As is usually the case, the easiest way is the best way, and the name and look of the belt will count for a hell of a lot. You want the heritage from both to carry over naturally, and if you break down each belt's most marketable strengths, it comes down to the Intercontinental name and the Big Gold Belt. Keeping the design of the new belt very similar to that of the Big Gold Mamma Jammer with a few IC tweaks is easy enough. The imagery and silhouette remain the same, but what do you do to keep the Intercontinental name and stigma? Call it the Intercontinental Championship of The World. It can be called the IC belt or the World belt, whichever you see fit, and will keep the long heritage going by being feuded over by the best pure wrestlers! The match to name the first Unified Champ is itself a landmark and would sell, especially if used on a major PPV, but going forward, the unification would help talent, fans and storylines no end. If stables became a big selling point once again, as discussed earlier in the article, I don't think two world belts would work. I mean, two stables would have a World champ, so which was the top dog? You'd never really know. If there is one top belt, the confusion is no more and in fact, adds more weight to this very argument. The biggest problem and the biggest reason why Vince and co. wouldn't make this change comes down to the gimmick pay per views. You couldn't really have a Money in the Bank Ladder Match for the IC belt as it stands currently; it just wouldn't sit well. Also, why would the Royal Rumble winner, if given the option of facing the IC or WWE champion, select to go for the lesser strap when they could be in the main event of WrestleMania? You could argue, though, that the main event contender for the WWE Championship at WrestleMania was selected by the Royal Rumble for many a year before the brand split, so that's not really a problem. In fact, it would stop the awkward booking that goes into the "other" angle not created by the rumble winner that we currently see each year, so it's a plus on both sides. Money in the Bank is another matter altogether. You've got to have a couple of briefcases floating about, right?...