Seantherebel
World Title Status and/or the "complementing the Raw and SD titles" clause
editAny chance we'll be getting a follow up reply from you? :) --UnquestionableTruth-- 00:43, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
ECW Championship
editI saw your argument over at the ECW Championship talk page. Consider this a response to your asinine statements.
1) Basing information on opinion, such as your opinion on how WWE "treats" the ECW Championship constitutes original research, and seeing as you brought up WWE's stance on the status of belt... The ECW Championship is a world championship acknowledged by every current professional wrestling promotion (as even noted by TNA... Yes TNA). Yes, WWE still considers it a world championship.
take at look at Matt Hardy's bio page on WWE.com and scroll down to the very bottom.
The page reads - "Apart from his sibling, Matt has achieved success in solo ranks as well, including United States, Hardcore, European and Cruiserweight Championship reigns. The greatest achievement, however, came in 2008 when Matt triumphed in a Championship Scramble Match to capture the ECW Title; his first taste of World Championship gold." - thus, affirming WWE's recognition of the ECW Championship as a world title.
Also note this results page from WWE Backlash 09 after Christian won the ECW Championship.
The page reads - "Christian’s first World Title comes after a journey that expands well beyond his two months in the Land of the Extreme." - Christian Cage's accomplishments in TNA aside, this AGAIN confirms that the WWE considers the championship to be a world title.
So your argument about how WWE doesn't consider the championship to be a World Title isn't valid. As far as the "Not recognized by WWE" argument is concerned, WWE does indeed recognize the ECW Championship to be a world title
2) As for the "name" of the championship or the "words" etched on the physical belt having any effect on the status of the title... A championship's name doesn't necessarily reflect the "status" of the title. The WWE Championship hasn't been referred to with the word "World" in its name since the early 1990s and the physical belt hasn't had the word "World" etched on its design since the winged-eagle belt, last used by Steve Austin the night he won the title at WrestleMania XIV. If you look at the article of the WWE Championship, you can see that the title has gone through multiple name changes throughout its history, with its name getting shorter each time.
The ECW Championship when it was recommissioned for the ECW brand in 2006 was referred to as the ECW World Heavyweight Championship, and as time passed, the name continued to change, getting shorter each time. It began to be called the ECW World Championship and finally simply just the ECW Championship for short.
If you remember when the WCW World Heavyweight Championship was used in the WWF, it was only referred to simply as the WCW Championship. See a pattern? Did these change of names mean anything? No, plain and simple.
So even the naming of a championship doesn't necessarily reflect the status of a title.
3) Now about Chavo's participation in the 2008 Royal Rumble match while ECW Champion... It was noted by the commentators that Chavo won the ECW title 5 days prior to the Rumble, which by then Chavo had already drawn his number for the match. It was also noted that Chavo's entry allowed for him to potentially become a dual World champion or prevent anyone from challenging him for his title at 'Mania provided that he win the Rumble match.
So the ECW Champion's participation at the Rumble did nothing to the title's status as it was a prior engagement that forced Chavo's entry.
...and for the record... You claimed that the ECW Champion has even participated in a Money in the Bank ladder match at WrestleMania. I don't know where you got that information because it is incorrect. ECW Champion has only had 2 appearances at a WrestleMania - WrestleMania 23 and WrestleMania XXIV - and in those events the ECW Champion did not participate in a Money in the Bank match.
4) Now on Pro Wrestling Illustrated... PWI is a magazine with its own set of views. It is not however a nor the definitive authority in world title recognition. There is no entity with any authority to grant or discharge world status to titles other than the owning promotions of said titles. Even so, If you were to follow PWI then you would only recognize SmackDown's World Heavyweight Championship and the TNA World Heavyweight Championship as world titles. Since the latest issue, only those two are referred to as world titles, leaving the WWE Championship behind. Yes, PWI NO LONGER recognizes the WWE Championship to be a world title. Look at the scans from this month's magazine below.
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y64/3bulletproof16/PWI2a.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y64/3bulletproof16/PWI1a.jpg
How ridiculous and asinine is that?
In fact, you are ridiculous to think that a magazine has any authority over a subject. "FIGHT! MAGAZINE" is an MMA magazine similar to PWI with its own views and opinions, and yet even that doesn't have any authority to regulate the sport or any organization like UFC.
5) World status is ultimately granted to a championship by the company or organization that owns it. Read over some of the boxing articles and the various organizations such as the World Boxing Association, World Boxing Council, International Boxing Federation and World Boxing Organization. Those in control of the WBC, IBF and WBO were simply of the mind that if the WBA had "world" champions, then so could they and that's exactly how it went. It's the exact same in professional wrestling. Just as various wrestling companies have done, those boxing organizations simply bestowed world status to titles under their control. The status can't be stripped away by any magazine or publication. No other governing body can come along and tell them "no, you can't call your title a world championship". There is no universal decision which grants world status to any championship, no matter which sport it is. How often have the winners of the World Series been called world champions? But are they really world champions? They didn't beat every other team from every other country that plays baseball, so how are they world champions? It's all ultimately about the stance of the organization, plain and simple. WWE has theirs, TNA, the NWA, the WBA, MLB and so on and so forth.
So in conclusion, the ECW Championship has been and still is a World title.--UnquestionableTruth-- 02:32, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Dear Whoever you are:
I appreciate your comments and feedback and your own giving of opinions, and had you just stuck with the Hardy bio argument (point 1), I might have taken your comment as a valid point and moved on, but since you went all douchebag on me and felt the desire to add in other remarks, you have given me something to argue on behalf of PWI and against the ECW international title (yes, I used int'l instead of world intentionally.)
1 (refutes point 2). I am aware of the title names not needing "world" in them to be considered World titles. The WWE title has not been called the WWE world title at any time in recent memory, and this had nothing to do with my argument.
2 (refutes 3). In reference to Chavo's participation in the Rumble, I rewatched the Rumble match, and at no time was that explanation ever mentioned. As for the MITB match, I had Morrison's title reign off by two months.
3 (refutes 4). This PWI remark is just as ignorant. If you look at the first image again in tag teams, the mag. calls one tag title the WWE tag title, but it does not = a non-world title, rather, they now use the title names. The titles used to be identified as Raw and SD world titles, but because the belts kept alternating, the magazine changed the policy to recognizing the belts as to stop constantly changing champions mid-reign and tacking on more title reigns for wrestlers simply because they now defended on a different show.
Now, as to your magazines dont sanction titles theory, are you kidding me? Boxing fans worldwide recognize the Ring Magazine title as the only legitimate sanctioning body, because it does not judge based on promoter or WBA, IBF, etc. rankings. PWI tries to do the same for wrestling, except they sanction world titles as "True" world titles instead of trying to determine a champion from kayfabe. PWI-haters are always trying to kill their credibility, but as it stands they are the only sanctioning body for belts, and they do deserve some respect.
4 (refutes 5). Yes, companies for sports all over call their titles World championships, and that is fine. But in wrestling, the number of world titles is so outrageous that some titles need to be given a level below. Look at it this way, if the Celtics won an NBA title and Olympiacos won the Euroleague title, both are talked of as world titles, but the NBA is the only one taken seriously, because of the level of exposure and competition. I feel that although a title can be recognized as a world title, wrestlers like Blue Demon Jr., while good, cannot just flaunt the NWA belt and claim himself to be on par with the Ric Flair's who held the belt when competition was fiercer.
The bottom line is ECW can flaunt its belt all it wants, but PWI doesn't put it on par with the other 2 WWE belts, and the wrestlers of WWE as well as management on some level dont either. I can go into more detail later when I have time, but until then please look at the June 15 Raw and Wrestlemania 25. Notice that Superstars got formal intros before the WWE and WH title bouts but not the ECW on raw, and at WM, ECW didnt even have a title match, which if it was a world title, would be a first in the history of a WM PPV.
If you still feel a formula is needed to determine a true world wrestling title, I've begun work on one, and if you're curious, I'll post it. Until then, please examine the shows and the mannerisms toward ECW and its belt, and try to see how the show is essentially a AAA to raw and smackdown's AL and NL (baseball reference). (Seantherebel (talk) 06:34, 3 July 2009 (UTC)seantherebelSeantherebel (talk) 06:34, 3 July 2009 (UTC))