You seem mad that HHH was "just handed the title" because he did not participate in a match that decided who got the belt. What you're missing here is that even if he was going to be in a tounament or a match to determine the rightful champion, he still would've won. Bishcoff mentioned that he wasn't going to have a tourney because that's what Smackdown did. I think that statement and the fact that HHH was going to be the champ anyway makes up for him being handed the title. Plus we didn't have to see him go through RVD, Jericho, or Booker T to do it. Would you have been satisfied if the HHH/Flair match decided who was champ? Everyone and their 8 year old brother would have seen through to the outcome of that match.
Originally posted by Santa SangreYou seem mad that HHH was "just handed the title" because he did not participate in a match that decided who got the belt. What you're missing here is that even if he was going to be in a tounament or a match to determine the rightful champion, he still would've won. Bishcoff mentioned that he wasn't going to have a tourney because that's what Smackdown did. I think that statement and the fact that HHH was going to be the champ anyway makes up for him being handed the title. Plus we didn't have to see him go through RVD, Jericho, or Booker T to do it. Would you have been satisfied if the HHH/Flair match decided who was champ? Everyone and their 8 year old brother would have seen through to the outcome of that match.
I agree with the Pool Man 100% on this. The popular sentiment seems to be against GIVING people belts that they don't earn in the ring. Back when Ted DiBiase bought the title from Andre the Giant, this was disallowed because the commisioner wouldn't let the belt be transferred via a sale. By that same token, should Triple H beat Brock for the Real Title Belt, he wouldn't be able to GIVE his Raw belt to his buddy X-Pac. And I don't see how the WCW title belt was in the rightful possession of Bischoff to give in the first place. The current situation is more like Ted Dibiase buying his own title belt and calling himself the champion.
BTW, Can I get some feedback on my Ultimate Fan column?
>What if they just gave Triple H the belt because they >wanted people to feel like he didn't actually deserve it?
It would have worked if JR expressed any doubt whatsoever with the idea of just handing him the belt. JR saw nothing wrong with it - actually, he seemed to think it was a wondeful idea - so it didn't come off as a heel move.
It would have been nice if they did it that way and it was BEGGING for JR to question what was going on between two heels, but they were more intersted in putting over the concept of "seperate BRANDS = seperate CHAMPIONS" as strong as possible that even questioning how it was done would harm the idea. In their eyes, anyway.
It would have been nice if they did anything to make the belt mean something. I'm pretty sure this wrestling thing is totally fake and Triple H would have gotten the belt anyway, but it gives the belt the (fake) crediblity if there's actually people trying to get it. It doesn't get much when someone's handed the belt because he's the only guy left on that show at his level.
If a belt has no crediblity - if a belt doesn't mean the person holding is neccsarly any better than anyone else, than waht's the point of the belt? To give Bubba dillusions?
I think that giving HHH the belt to make him more hated would have been a good idea, but they did not build it like that. The only person who raised any objection to HHH being handed the belt was Flair. JR could have gone OFF on a speel about "You can't be handed a title, a true champion EARNS his laurels, dammit!" And that would have satisfied me. Yes, if they had a battle royal/tournament for the belt, I know that they would have just given it to HHH anyway. But you still go through the motions. You still have the matches. Just because you know how the story is going to end, it does not mean you do not tell it. Everyone (but me) seemed to know that Brock was going to walk away with the belt at Summerslam, but they still had the match. It is the same thing.
Craig Reade "Pool Boy" Chris Jericho stole my beard. That is right, I had it first.
Yeah, I guess the fact is that I didn't actually see that part of the show, so I didn't know what JR was doing on commentary. Oh well, goes to show you. I'm smarter than a multi-million (billion?) dollar business as a whole.
Let me just pat myself on my back.
"You gotta hate somebody before this is over. Them, me, it doesn't matter."
"Hate, who do I hate? You tell me."
"Who do you love?"
-Wintermute to Case in William Gibson's Neuromancer
Not only did JR not express any doubt about the dubious nature of the new title and HHH having the title given to him, he actually went out of his way to note that HHH didn't have "time to prepare" for the match when Flair took control of their match later in the show, as though Flair was the one who knew, coming into the night, that HHH and Bischoff were instituting a new title.
Since they went with the actual belt they did, they maybe could have also sent out Booker T to complain about the situation. He is the guy who brought that specific belt into the federation and has been obsessed with noting that he's a five-time WCW champion. Even if it's not the WCW title anymore (at least not yet), they could have used it as an opportunity to come right out and say it's not the WCW title and has no connection to it, if that's the intent.
Here's something I just thought of. How will having this new belt effect guys like RVD, Booker T, and Benoit winning their first championship. They wouldn't be winning "the" championship, just the raw or smackdown championship. It won't be the same if you don't have one champion. And everyone is saying this belt is meaningless anyway so does that mean RVD...ect will be winning a meaningless belt when they finally get to the top? Since Flair is a 16 time champion does that make Booker a 5 time champ? And will his next reign be his 6?