7. Would It Be Bad To Lose The Additional World Title?
One thing is for sure, the WWE title and its lineage will continue. It will be the 2002 created World Title which is absorbed and vanishes in a unification angle. Is this really a good move for WWE business? You could argue that the two world titles makes for more dramatic storylines, after all, WWE is then able to book two title chases on one show. The problem is that meaningfulness of the world title has been increasingly diluted. John Cena even said this himself when he won the title back in October. The 2002 belt goes across both shows and now seems inferior to the WWE title. When the belts were exclusive to one specific show, they had a lot more relevancy and meaning. Now that they both feature on Raw, the WWE championship comes across as the main belt. Still, there are benefits to consider in having two belts remaining on the show. Just have a look at all the stars that WWE has been able to make by utilizing two significant belts - for example in 2005 the company was able to get over both Cena and Batista as champions. If you discount Batista's world tile reigns, he was only a 2 time champion in WWE as opposed to his status as a 6 time champ. It will certainly be a risk if WWE are going to make this big change and have all the gold on one individual.