Wrestleview - Wrestling news and results from WWE, TNA, ROH, Raw

Poll results: Should WWE unify the two world titles? - Wrestleview.com

Poll results: Should WWE unify the two world titles?

Matt O'Brien maintains the Wrestleview.com poll

There was a time when wrestling fans fantasized about a champion vs. champion showdown. It would be the top guy from one organization against the top guy from a rival promotion. Such dream matches included Ric Flair vs. Hulk Hogan and Bill Goldberg vs. Steve Austin. In 2001, when WCW was purchased by WWF, that dream was closer to reality than ever before. The showdown everyone waited for happened in December of that year when Chris Jericho defeated Steve Austin to unify the WWF and WCW world titles. Less than a year later, the label of Undisputed Champion was no more, and in its place were two separate championship belts - one for the blue brand, one for the red. Since then fans have even seen the inclusion of a third title when ECW re-launched in 2006, but that run was short-lived.

Today, the two titles still remain. A recent poll on Wrestleview.com asked readers if WWE should unify these titles. After over 7,000 votes, the results are as follows:

Should WWE unify the two world titles?

Not yet 48.01% (3,441 votes)

As soon as possible 33.68% (2,414 votes)
Never 18.31% (1,312 votes)

Nearly half the voters believe that the titles should be unified, just not yet. There is a time and a place for everything, and right now is not the time. Unifying the titles should be a big deal, perhaps big enough to headline a future Wrestlemania. There is also a matter of getting the right two guys to face off. While Sheamus and CM Punk are big names, and both have held their respective titles for several months, maybe they aren't the guys for that unification match. You can have a match between two big names like John Cena and The Rock, or you can do what the company did in 2001 when Steve Austin helped elevate Chris Jericho. There is also a segment of the audience that sees some gas left in having two titles. Without two championships, guys like Jack Swagger, Dolph Ziggler, Christian and a few others probably would have never have worn the gold. With a need to prepare for a future without the CM Punks and John Cenas, two championships can serve a purpose to build new stars until the WWE is ready to unify them.

Over thirty percent of the votes went to unifying the championships right away. It is time to do it. For ten years there have been two champions. Is there really a need to have the pile of championships the company has? Having two titles can water down what they are supposed to stand for. While the belts are props on a TV show, they represent that which every wrestler seeks. There weren't two holy grails in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. With all the other titles WWE has, there can is always room to elevate the U.S or Intercontinental championship if needed for selling tickets on the house show circuit.

Lastly, about eighteen percent of Wrestleview readers think things are fine the way they are. WWE should not unify these titles because there is no need to fix something that isn't broken. Having two titles for house show purposes is practical. It also elevates new stars to a main event level when there is not room to headline a pay per view. As stated above, it opens the doors for so many other people to become a champion. Gone are the days when only a very small percentage of wrestlers could ever say they wore the gold. For some fans, that is a bad thing, but for this particular group, the more the merrier.

Thank you to all those who continue to vote in the Wrestleview polls. Your input is much appreciated.

Be sure to check out Wrestleview.com homepage and cast your vote!

Matt O'Brien
Wrestleview.com
mattman5436@yahoo.com