By the time I joined the creative team in July 2002, they already kinda knew that having one world title that went back and forth between the two shows wasn't working. There had been some hesitation to splitting the titles, more out of tradition than anything else I think. But as we developed the Stephanie/Bischoff general manager thing and really started giving each show its own identity and feel, we debated it and finally resolved that for the longterm success of the brand extension, it was probably the best thing.
So we sought to come up with a plan as to how to create a whole new title that had the instant feel and legitimacy of a world championship.
We threw a bunch of ideas out there for how to crown this new champion, and eventually came up with a plan playing off the fact that the Intercontinental Championship has been seen as the No. 2 title in the promotion, so perhaps we could crown someone a No. 1 contender for the current world title, and then have them face the IC Champion for this new title. Seemed that like that would give it some weight.
We knew we had 16-time World Champion Ric Flair in our back pocket as an early win for whoever this new champion would be to give the title even more pop. I also suggested we use the big gold belt for the new title (it hadn't been seen since around the time that Triple H won the unified title at WrestleMania in Toronto that year), since that belt has so much history and instant recognition.
Brock Lesnar was slated to win the Undisputed Title from The Rock at SummerSlam (at Nassau Coliseum!) soon after, with Raw emanating from Madison Square Garden the following night. We figured the MSG hook could only add to the prestige and get the ball rolling, and I think it was either Vince or Paul Heyman's idea for Brock to leave MSG with the title, defecting to SmackDown at the World's Most Famous Arena, really making an impact.
Chris Benoit was Intercontinental Champion when we came up with the plan, and he had just left Raw for SmackDown, which was a problem, since the IC title needed to be on Raw for this plan to work. So we came up with some back story about Raw having a contract for an IC Title match, so the title could be moved over to Rob Van Dam at SummerSlam.
The MSG Raw also called for a No. 1 contenders match, which would see Triple H beat the Undertaker to claim a future title shot, just moments before Brock was to jump to SmackDown only.
Then, with Brock gone and defected, our plan called for Bischoff to announce the creation of the World Heavyweight Championship, with the No. 1 contender (Triple H) facing the IC Champion (Rob Van Dam) to crown the first champion at Unforgiven.
Van Dam would then win the World Title, and our plan called for both he and Brock to hold onto their championships until the following WrestleMania -- there had been so much turmoil and craziness with the Invasion storyline and the brand extension that we resolved it would be a good thing to get one guy driving each show for the better part of the year. Having Brock and Van Dam be the guys felt new and fresh, especially after a year when you had Austin, Hogan, Rock, Triple H and Undertaker on top -- all huge stars obviously, but the fans (and most of us on creative) were screaming for something new.
We figure it was a no-lose situation -- either we would have branded a new World Championship, or, if things didn't work out, we could just get a payday out of re-uniting the titles if need be. And the early talk was to do Brock vs. RVD at WrestleMania XIX.
Of course, things didn't quite work out this way ... more details to come later this week!
Comments (23)
Seth,
I love the blog, and I love your insight! Keep the stories coming! This stuff is intriguing and awesome! I love the creative side, and have always wanted to get involved in that somehow. Not necessarily at the WWE level, because my path throughout college brought me in a different direction, but maybe in a lower-level indy level.
To be honest, I'd like to open a small indy promotion one day, maybe as I get more established in my current business and have the funds to support it. It would be more of a fun thing for me to do, and hopefully help younger guys get noticed.
But, I digress from my ramblings --- keep up the posts! I love it!
Seth, I just found your blog today. I love it. I plugged your RSS feed into my site on our wrestling forum, so hopefully alot more people find it.
Triple H and RVD wrestling for the title instead of handing it to HHH would have been a much better move in alot of fans eyes. I'm curious to see the reason why this match never happened and why the belt was just awarded to Triple H. As if I couldn't guess.
The creative team wanting to put it on RVD for a long run would have been a huge swerve. No one would have expected that. Too bad.
Why was the floating (dare I say "touring") undisputed champion considered a failure? The title came off as more important than it had in years during those 4-5 months as the champion was a bigger deal than everyone else. Was there hostility over the champion working more shows than everyone else for some reason?
It would have been more interesting if RVD had won the title. If memory serves, Triple H was given the title on a Raw and then beat Ric Flair right away in the first defense on Raw - like that would give him getting it handed to him some credibility.
I always thought that was pretty dumb and didn't make sense. If it had to go to H, maybe it would have been better to have Ric state a claim to it, being it's a belt he'd carried for many years. Then have a match between him and H where one would have actually won the title.
Then again, I think having two world champs is pretty silly. They were doing alright with a unified champion going back and forth between the shows.
Hi Bix,
It's not that the floating champion was considered a failure; more that it didn't allow us to optimize the champion's role. Think about it: The ultimate goal of everything in the wrestling business is to draw money. Let's say your champion is going into the next Pay-Per-View to face a guy from Raw. So then what do you do on SmackDown? You can build a TV-only feud, which might pop a rating, but how is it going to draw money? Why should I care about a made-for-TV feud when one of the guys involved has a big money match against a guy who's not even on this show? The only example any of us could think of as a successful crossover during that stretch was when Undertaker was champion, going into a Vengeance match with two SmackDown guys (Rock and Angle), and yet had a nice mini-feud with Jeff Hardy on Raw that culminated in that ladder match. But that was the exception, not the rule. Why limit yourself like that?
Plus, with split house shows, why leave money on the table by ensuring that only one will have a world title match?
And it's not about hostility about the champion working more shows -- one show or two, if you're the champion, you're going to be working more than everybody else.
Thanks for reading, guys. Newsday keeps me busy, but I'll try to post more entries and chat with you all as much as I can.
I have a question, what changed that made it Triple H vs Kane, why did'nt RVD get a world title til '06 if he was this close in '02?
Thanks,
Biran
Could have had something to do with RVD landing on HHH's larynx buring the Elimination Chamber match...a few too many bhang hits perhaps?
Biran, have you been hitting the bhang too? I thought your name was Brian... :)
Sounds more like arm chair booking and mark pleasing with these blogs
IC should have been more important on RAW. U.S. on Smackdown then floating World champ would have worked
IC should have been more important on RAW. U.S. on Smackdown then floating World champ would have worked
The splitting of the undisputed world heavyweight title WASN'T WORKING??? How do you figure? It was stupid thing to do! Nobody took the reactivated WCW world title seriously for several years! Really all the belts were to be defended on either show. And the whole seperate identity thing ended up in a bunch of people watching one show or the other but not both and the brainaic McMahons didn't see that was a problem, even though it resulted in viewership ratings for both shows taking a big drop from what they were.
Seth,
Who buys a ticket to a house show because there's a world title match on the card anymore? That's a dated mentality. Unless you're an idiot, you know full well there won't be a world title change at a house show. So if anything, getting a main event that ISN'T a world title match is preferable because you have the chance of a more unpredictable finish.
Besides, can you honestly tell me the company is better off now with separate champions on Raw, Smackdown and ECW?
That was brief but interesting... I would love to hear all the legitimate reasons why WWE programming is as horrible as it is!
I always felt the seperation of the title were half assed. I really wish Vince had just bitten the bullet, and restarted WCW. You would have had your tournament and had an established title. You may have even gotten back those disenchanted WCW fans back.
Giving RVD the strap would have been much better than handing it to HHH. I hated that they just did that with Orton!
Unfortunately you dont need to work for the WWE to see how much politics plays a part in the show.
Huthaifa, Vince wanted to run WCW as a separate show at first. But he couldn't get the air time WCW had (which is what caused them to die) and couldn't get the OK to launch a WCW branded show in the smackdown timeslot...after the XFL debacle they wouldn't touch anything Vince had not labeled WWF/E.
That's the theory behind it anyway.
well i had the perfect soulution to the whole thing turn the ic and and us titles into brand titles and have them move through the locker room and everypay perview you have a undisputed match or a brand title match and a brand champ battle to face the champ like the days when it was abilled as a fight for the right to face the MAN AKA RIC WOOO FLAIR. there's your story lines for years and unify the world and wwe tag belts. back to the solution, you could do it now ecw vs raw vs smackdown the winner the wwe undisputed champ then the us and ic champs vs the two runner ups for brand champ then it's fun and you paint a bullseye on three guys and create a shark tank buzz ,and throw in the jump the champ gimmicks for all three .thats my theroy
I never understand when WWE hires they want a soap opera writers and obvously it doean't work. You need someone that knows the characters and can make them real. The 2 brands was a bad idea its time to bring them together and work only 200 days to make sure they aren't masking their injuries. You need to take care of the talent a lot more then your doing. If you have the talent working 200 days you have a healthier roster which makes for a better product. You need to bring new charactors like the old days Bruiser Brody Abby Valient Bros etc. I hope this gets to creative we need to see a better product which means less working gets healthier roster happier locker room which shows in the ring.
Armchair booking obviously, but what could have been done was:
You keep one Undisputed World Wrestling Federation Champion. Then instead of creating a seperate equal world title, you would bring back the United States Championship (was not around at the time).
The Intercontinental is the main drawing title on RAW, and the United States Championship is the main drawing title on Smackdown -- all major fueds for the specific brands are built around these titles. If "US" and "IC" seemed too second rate, they could have always been branded "Raw Heavyweight Championship" and "Smackdown Heavyweight Championship" -- although i feel keeping it IC and US would have added more prestigue to those lacking titles.
You then book RAW and Smackdown around those titles, including the PPV branded headline matches, and you are then left to the Undisputed Championship.
The current way it was booked was 'naming branded number one contenders' -- this doesnt work because it does not allow for storyline fueds over the championship to last longer than 4 weeks.
Also, remember at the time, the WWE had a roster of guys like, Austin, Rock, Hogan, Lesnar, Angle, HHH, HBK, Big Show, Flair, Nash, Jericho, etc etc etc... PLENTY of big names to be placed in non title fueds with each other, in addition to being placed into main event programs for The Undisputed Championship.
So hypothetically, Lesnar fueds with Rock on Smackdown for 2 months, the fued concludes at the PPV, and then the following night on RAW, he attacks HBK and starts a 2 month program with him, all the while, going on Smackdown and cutting promos, and allowing HBK to be exempt from the brand seperation. Something along the lines of 'if you are fueding with the champ, you're on both shows'
Also at the time, the PPV's were not seperated, so the Undisputed Champ was the top draw on every card. The IC and US fueds satisfied the undercard, and main events of the house shows. Not to mention, main event guys could hold those titles, didnt have to be only midcarders.
With all of that said, 2002-2003 were the years to split the titles if they had to. Rock, Austin, Lesnar, Angle, Hogan, Nash, Goldberg, Flair, HBK, Benoit, RVD, Jericho, Show, etc... were all on a stacked roster.
Today, the star power is not there anymore, and they should go with the aforementioned idea.
The only reason why the World title didn't have much meaning during it's first few years as Raw's heavyweight title it simply because the title was handed over. Then there was a ton of backlash over Kane being defeated for the I-C title, dropping it to Triple H, thus retiring the once prestigious I-C title (for a tad bit of time, atleast). This was also during the time where Triple H was the most hated man in the WWE; and probably all of the Wrestling world, and not because of his in-ring character. This was the time where fans sounded as if they had loath Triple H because of his supposed backstage polotics, and being handed the World title didn't do him any favors.
The Undisputed champion defending the title on both brands wasn't as fun or entertaining or great as some of you like to remember. Seth made a good point when mentioning that a big Pay-per-view showdown was to take place for either a Raw or Smackdown PPV; all in the while the Undisputed Champ was having also juggling a television-only feud with whatever brand he wasn't headlinning the PPV for.
People then and now still want to see a World champion when they go to house shows. Of course, no one really expects the title to change hands, but it's still really great and awesome to see the World champ and to be able to tell your friends you were there to watch the World or WWE champ wrestle in the main event. One time, I went to a house show in the year 2000, and it was The Rock (C) Vs. Triple H in a steel cage match at the former MCI (now Verizon) Center. Chris Benoit interfered using a steel chair. Triple H won the match and went to the corner to show off his newly won WWF title. For a few moments, thousands of fans thought that they just witnessed history and saw the crowning of a new champion at a house show, a true rarity. Of course, I stayed in my seat and told the rest of my friends to calm down and don't leave to go "beat the traffic", because the same situation occured at a house show the night before (damn me for reading results for a house show! it spoiled what could've been a suprise for me the next night!). Of course, a ref came out, re-started the match and The Rock won and left with his title.
During the time of the Undisputed Champion wrestling for both brands, I also went to a house show in Washington D.C. and the main event was Hulk Hogan Vs. The Undertaker (c). Usually, most people don't know what the card is for the house show until they get to the arena. I guess they posted the card up on wwe.com? I don't know.... I never bothered to check. But not knowing what the card would be, my main concern was whether I'd be able to see the Undisputed Champion, The Undertaker, defend his title. Sure, I could've gone without seeing 'Taker wrestle a night, but the show feels more special and important when you have a World champion defending his title.
With that being said; I doubt the Intercontinental title being the main focal point would make the house show feel anywhere near as important. The I-C title was once passed around like a cheap whore at one time; the likes of "Rodd Dogg" Jesse James, Test and Albert (actually, I thought he was much better then people give him credit for. Godbless him for finding success overseas). You think the main event of Christian defending his I-C title against Booker T. would've sold tickets? How about promoting Kane defending his I-C title against Chris Jericho? Sure, four very talented wrestlers, but the I-C title has been seen as a stepping stone to the WWE championship; unlike in the 80s or most of the 90s when some wrestlers actually made winning the I-C title their main goal in their career and being content with their career if they had never won the WWF title.
Since late 2001, the I-C title hasn't much. Why would anyone pay to see the I-C title headline a house show or a Raw main event? Only more reason why to have brand World champions. These days, the title is hardly ever defended. Thank God the likes of Jeff Hardy and Chris Jericho have held the title in the last 10 months because they actually give the I-C title more meaning and give it the rub and put the title over, instead of the other way around like when a nobody cared about like Santino (at the time) or a Johnny Nitro who could hardly get any heat - the brass expecting the title to make the wrestlers look important and make a splash when it had no effect at all.
Sorry, I'm just a rambling man. Anyway, it would've been awesome for RVD to have won the title. He had a pretty quick feud with Triple H - easily jobbed to HHH at Unforgiven - and then we were left with three very boring World title runs for Triple H. Not all his fault, though. His feud with Goldberg could've been interesting if he hadn't had that groin injury. But contenders like Booker T., RVD and Kane were taken care of very easily, and Scott Steiner was just pathetic to watch. Triple H's run didn't get interesting until HBK was back in full-swing and they tore down the house at Royal Rumble '04 and the awesome feud, and matches, with HBK and Chris Benoit.
But the freshness of a Brock Lesnar/Smackdown run and an RVD/Raw run can only make you wonder what could've been. Hey. an RVD World title run at the time probably could've been worse than Triple H just being handed the title. Afterall, fans finally got to see RVD run with a more important title, the WWE title, only to screw that up in 3 weeks. But what do I know? I just whine and cry. Oh, and I'm far from knowing what I'm even talking about.
Wake up! I know that was long!
Honestly whenever the WWE comes to my area, (IZOD center formerly Continental Airlines Arena) The tickets sell very well way befor ethe card is ever announced. These days the World Champ really has nothing to do with selling tickets in my book.
I loved the 2001 2002 years of WWE, RVD was becoming the favorite and brock was defiantely the biggest heal. I wished that RVD would have defeated brock at King of the Ring but Brock was more believable. RVD should have defeated HHH at unforgiven but a rematch should have been followed up with the Flair interfearence. That should have carried the company but I don't understand why the company makes so much drastic changes. Brock's matches and storyline was great but the world title was messed up with the intro of all those WCW has beens. They should have never had some of those maches with HHH.