WWE.com relaunches title history section

[res37618 0]

An interesting find here . . . .

 

Check out the US Title History page, it's not entirely complete, but they've started on it. There's not a link from WWE's page anywhere - I just found it by trial and error messing with the web addresses for the rest of the Title Histories.

 

Starts with Flair's title victory vs. Jimmy Snuka in Greensboro 4/19/80.

[Taker666 0]

Its been a while, but the History of the United States Championship is now up going back to 1980 when Flair first won it.

 

just an update if anyone cares at this point.

[ChrisMWaters 0]

Well, with the US Title history up now, that just leaves one more title...the World Tag Team Titles.

 

And THAT'S going to be a while, I can tell.

[SuperJerk 0]

Well, with the US Title history up now, that just leaves one more title...the World Tag Team Titles.

 

And THAT'S going to be a while, I can tell.

No doubt.

 

Who HASN'T been a Tag Team Champion at some point?

 

They're the wrestling world equivalent of Pamela Anderson.

 

Speaking of the US title, THIS IS FUNNY:

 

BOOKER T

March 18, 2001 - July 24, 2001

 

Booker T was the first Superstar to hold the United States Championship in WWE. He won the belt from Rick Steiner at Greed, and then once he was in WWE, he handed the United States Championship over to Chris Kanyon on an edition of SmackDown!

 

Way to no-sell the Invasion era WCW as being a separate company in the storylines.

[iliketurtles 0]

God. I've tried reading this thread but I've got a headache.

 

I think it's safe to say all titles have no more lineage in the company and it's going to take years to fix it.

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

Wonder if we'll get LHW, Euro, HC, or WCW belts. The official company line for the Hardcore title lineage would be interesting compared to, say, WIA's list that uses every house show title change.

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

I find it a bit interesting that after they went out of their way to refer to Austin as "Stone Cold" and only Stone Cold in the other title histories, he's back to Steve Austin in this one. Sure, it would look silly to say that Stone Cold lost to Jim Duggan in 27 seconds, but it's also silly to say Warrior beat Hollywood Hogan for the WWE title.

[Slickster 0]

In a shocking display of continuity, WWE recognizes Terry Funk's one-day reign as WCW US Champion (9/22/00-9/23/00) where he beat Storm at a house show in Amarillo, TX and lost it the next day.

[ChrisMWaters 0]

In a shocking display of continuity, WWE recognizes Terry Funk's one-day reign as WCW US Champion (9/22/00-9/23/00) where he beat Storm at a house show in Amarillo, TX and lost it the next day.

So did the old WCW website when it had title histories up.

 

It's not THAT odd, if you ask me.

[Promoter 0]

I find it a bit interesting that after they went out of their way to refer to Austin as "Stone Cold" and only Stone Cold in the other title histories, he's back to Steve Austin in this one. Sure, it would look silly to say that Stone Cold lost to Jim Duggan in 27 seconds, but it's also silly to say Warrior beat Hollywood Hogan for the WWE title.

Ah, classic Vince! Still protects his property of "Stone Cold" jobbing in 27 seconds although he owns everything! Then again, he has "Hollywood" Hogan winning the title in 1984. Why not just use Hogan? Maybe he's trying to get the image of the heel Hogan into the history books to erase his popularity. Silly logic, but we are talking about wwe here

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

In a shocking display of continuity, WWE recognizes Terry Funk's one-day reign as WCW US Champion (9/22/00-9/23/00) where he beat Storm at a house show in Amarillo, TX and lost it the next day.

So did the old WCW website when it had title histories up.

 

It's not THAT odd, if you ask me.

WWE is claiming WCW never acknowleged it, and only now after the sale is it being recognized.

[Slickster 0]

Indeed, it was NEVER acknowledged, much like the TV Title switches in May of 1998 and at The Battle in Seattle webcast in '97 (I think).

[res37618 0]

Click on this link: World Tag Title History - it's the "work in progress" of the World Tag title history on WWE.com. There's no link anywhere on WWE's site for it, and it's by far not complete, but it looks like it should be an interesting one.

 

And oddly enough, guess what team is featured on the graphic at the top of the page? Money, Inc. I found that to be an odd choice, but cool nonetheless.

[TheFranchise 0]

Click on this link: World Tag Title History - it's the "work in progress" of the World Tag title history on WWE.com.  There's no link anywhere on WWE's site for it, and it's by far not complete, but it looks like it should be an interesting one.

 

And oddly enough, guess what team is featured on the graphic at the top of the page?  Money, Inc.  I found that to be an odd choice, but cool nonetheless.

Yeah, nice choice, but I was kind of hoping for a Mark Lewin & Don Curtis picture.

[BHK 0]

The World Tag Title History is now up.

[Lil' Bitch 0]

Because Austin took it back from the World Heavyweight Title. Bischoff couldn't because he had no authority over a belt on Smackdown.

Really long delayed response:

 

Yet Stephanie could take the US title back from the IC Title even though she had no authority over a belt on RAW?

 

By the way, I love the fact the WWE recognizes the lineage of the US title even after a new belt design, but chooses not to do that with the WCW Title lineage even though it kept the same belt design.

[Guest ShootingStylesPress]

I guess the way WWE works is that people can just bring titles back with no reason at all.

[SuperJerk 0]

I love the fact the WWE recognizes the lineage of the US title even after a new belt design, but chooses not to do that with the WCW Title lineage even though it kept the same belt design.

Couldn't. Agree. More.

[UseTheSledgehammerUh 0]

In hindsight, how lame is it that HBK & Diesel forfeitted the tag titles because they "couldn't get along" back in 94?

[Slickster 0]

In hindsight, how lame is it that HBK & Diesel forfeitted the tag titles because they "couldn't get along" back in 94?

Hell, Russo made that one of his booking trademarks.

[Taker666 0]

I know this is an old topic but I thought this was interesting.

 

Looks like the WWE is doing a histories for ALL of their title, The history of the European Championship and Light Heavyweight Championship are now up. and the next and final one will be the Hardcore Championship.

[BHK 0]

Thanks for bumping the thread, I wouldn't have noticed that had you not mentioned it.

 

Also, What was the non-kayfabe reason for HBK/Nash forfeiting the belts in 94?

[Guest The Shadow Behind You]

It was to get the tag title off Nash and firmly turn him face before giving him the title run a few days later.

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

Benoit's LHW title reign in Japan get's no sold!

 

The disregard of the pre-1997 lineage from Japan is not in any way surprising, though. One thing I don't get is for Dean Malenko's 2nd reign, it says he lost a few weeks later to Crash Holly.

 

Since when is 11 months "a few weeks"?

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

"The championship didn't make an appearance in the United States, however, until after Shawn Michaels defeated the British Bulldog in Birmingham, England at One Night Only. After Michaels won the title, the European Championship began being defended on U.S. soil, as well"

 

Oh snap, this whole time I thought Bret reunited with Owen in one of the greatest moments in Raw history when he interupted a European title match, on Raw, in the USA, between Bulldog and Owen in March 1997, but WWE.com says the title was never defended until Michaels won it!

 

It sucks to find out one of your favourite moments in televised wrestling never happened. Ken Shamrock and his quest for the title must have been a figment of my imagination too.

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

"After winning the European Championship in a joke of a match against Shawn Michaels, Triple H lost the championship in an equally joking fashion. Dressed as Goldust, Triple H took on Owen Hart. Hart was able to secure the victory. Afterwards, Commissioner Slaughter ruled that the European Championship would change hands as a result of the match's decision."

 

Does WWE have this backwards? I seem to recall Goldust dressing as HHH and Slaughter saying it counted as a title match... the way WWE.com has it makes no sense.

[TheFranchise 0]

"After winning the European Championship in a joke of a match against Shawn Michaels, Triple H lost the championship in an equally joking fashion. Dressed as Goldust, Triple H took on Owen Hart. Hart was able to secure the victory. Afterwards, Commissioner Slaughter ruled that the European Championship would change hands as a result of the match's decision."

 

Does WWE have this backwards? I seem to recall Goldust dressing as HHH and Slaughter saying it counted as a title match... the way WWE.com has it makes no sense.

You'd be correct.

[pochorenella 0]

"The championship didn't make regular appearances in the United States, however, until after Shawn Michaels defeated the British Bulldog in Birmingham, England at One Night Only. After Michaels won the title, the European Championship began being defended on U.S. soil more often."

 

Dr.Venkman, either they changed the wording or you read it incorrectly. This is how it appears on the page.

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

My post was a C&P job, so they must have pulled the ol switcheroo.

[SuperJerk 0]

I know this is an old topic but I thought this was interesting.

 

Looks like the WWE is doing a histories for ALL of their title, The history of the European Championship and Light Heavyweight Championship are now up. and the next and final one will be the Hardcore Championship.

I feel sorry for the bastard that has to research all of THOSE title changes.