The ECW Title

[RedJed 0]

RedJed, how can you argue against the ECW title when you're a fan of a promotion that had JEFF JARRETT as their "world" champion on multiple occasions? ECW outrates TNA by a good margin, so clearly more people would treat the ECW title with more prestige than the TNA title, right? But that doesn't stop you from treating the TNA title with a semblance of importance. Like Scroby said, it doesn't matter what some people might perceive the title. It is what the WWE wants it to be. If ROH can claim their title to be a world title, the WWE can claim the ECW title to be a world title.

 

WTF, talk about going off topic here, what does me as a TNA fan (and mind you, not an "exclusive TNA fan" - I enjoy TNA just as much as WWE, ECW, ROH, etc - they all have their positive points) have to do with ANYTHING? What was I even arguing on the ECW title other than the obvious that it just doesn't stand out as special?

 

So you don't like Jeff Jarrett, neither do I. And you're talking about a clearly valid and obvious mistake anyone could claim with Jarrett as the TNA/NWA champion, it has nothing to do with shit here. This is not comparing the current usage of the TNA title to the ECW title whatsover since Jarrett hasnt even been champion for a year and ahalf. Lets not get off topic here, dude.

 

I'm not saying that WWE shouldn't treat the ECW title as a "world" title (which, as it has been said in this thread, it isn't even being treated as. As the major title in ECW, sure, but it's not even being labeled as a "world" title anymore - probably to not confuse it with Smackdown's belt) - all I was saying is that they should try to make it standout as unique (ala the title where it has to be defended under extreme rules, cmon it just makes sense, its fucking ECW after all) versus just another belt sitting around really not standing out whatsoever. Alot of the problem with it is this....

 

1) The title isn't given to guys that are really even that over in most cases, and could legitimately carry the brand.

2) The title is showcased in opening to middle parts of each ppv the title has been defended on, barring December to Dismember. And realistically, it never will go beyond that regardless of the uniqueness they try to create the title as.

[bob_barron 0]

RedJed, how can you argue against the ECW title when you're a fan of a promotion that had JEFF JARRETT as their "world" champion on multiple occasions? ECW outrates TNA by a good margin, so clearly more people would treat the ECW title with more prestige than the TNA title, right? But that doesn't stop you from treating the TNA title with a semblance of importance. Like Scroby said, it doesn't matter what some people might perceive the title. It is what the WWE wants it to be. If ROH can claim their title to be a world title, the WWE can claim the ECW title to be a world title.

 

One really has nothing to do with the other, and ECW doesn't even outrate TNA by a good margin. ECW does about 1.4, TNA a 1.1.

 

ECW's champion is Chavo Guerrero. Chavo Guerrero! I don't think I'd take him seriously as US Champion, let alone ECW Champion. The ECW title is a joke, as evidenced by the fact that it curtain jerks most PPVs.

[King Cucaracha 0]

Ratings and prestige and who's holding the title really aren't important. The TNA World Title is a world title because TNA call it a world title. The ROH World Title is a world title because ROH call it a world title.

 

If WWE wanted to call the ECW Title the ECW World Title, no problem. But they don't. Sure it's the top championship on one TV show (it's arguable if ECW is even it's own 'brand' anymore, what with the talent exchange angle), but that doesn't make it a world title.

[Silence 0]

If WWE wanted to call the ECW Title the ECW World Title, no problem. But they don't. Sure it's the top championship on one TV show (it's arguable if ECW is even it's own 'brand' anymore, what with the talent exchange angle), but that doesn't make it a world title.

 

Even Carlito and Santino have been on ECW and they're on Raw, which isn't part of the Smackdown/ECW talent exchange, so it really is arguable now.

[Matt Young 0]

Both were on the show as part of the WrestleMania build. There's always a shit ton of brand crossovers around this time.

[Broward83 0]

I thought the main contention to it being a world title was that it had to be defended on international ground a couple of times.

 

I remember ECW's title getting "world" title status near the end of its run and RoH getting that honor like, a couple of years ago.. I think, thanks in part to it being defended over in England.

 

Sure, anyone can call their title a "world" title, but I still feel there's enough of us that go along with I think its PWI's rankings for titles and the like.

[boobshaw 0]

ECW World Title @ WWE Shopzone

 

 

According to WWE Shopzone, in what I am assuming is a current replica of the ECW belt, it says World Championship on it. Because of its history and what it stands for, I still consider it a World Title. If you use the debate of "what they call it" in regards to whether or not a title is a World Title, then the WWE Title on the Raw side is NOT a World Championship. (Actually, if you use my thought process of what the belt says, then it isn't a World Championship either.)

 

So, yes, I would say beauty is in the eye of the beholder. It's all about booking, and we're all marks anyways. so if someone puts the IC/US over the ECW, then fine. If someone puts the ECW on the same plane as the TNA title, then fine.

 

But if you ask the ECW belt, he'll say he's a World Championship... and that Chavo sucks.

[Boxer 0]

Give it to someone who they are developing as the next big star. I say make the ECW title the NEW IC title of the 80's and 90's.

[RedJed 0]

Give it to someone who they are developing as the next big star. I say make the ECW title the NEW IC title of the 80's and 90's.

 

But shouldn't that purpose be saved for the U.S. and IC titles, basically?

[Boxer 0]

Give it to someone who they are developing as the next big star. I say make the ECW title the NEW IC title of the 80's and 90's.

 

But shouldn't that purpose be saved for the U.S. and IC titles, basically?

 

It was, but these days those titles are either not defended or mean nothing. The IC title especially, guys who have won it are already over, in the case of Hardy or Jericho, or who will never be pushed as a star, like Albert back in 2001. There is no direction for that title.

 

The US title could have elevated a few guys, but they went back to guys above the title like Benoit and Booker.

 

Basically, those titles need long reigns and are defended enough and are not forgotten. At least the ECW title gets TV time, hence why I think that should be the new IC title.