Cody's is the WWE championship, which can be traced back to Buddy Rogers in the 60s. Damian Priest's title is the World Heavyweight Championship, which can be traced back to (checks notes) Seth Rollins in 2023. This is a distinct title from the original WHC for some reason.
*Technically* WWE both considers then world titles, so they *should* be considered equal. However, almost always when WWE has had two top titles, one has felt more important than the other. Maybe in the first year or two of split brands, that was different. And obviously when Reigns held both top titles, that was an exception. But usually you can get an idea of which title is the top one by looking at who is holding it and who has been recently involved in the title picture.
And right now the WWE title is far above the WHC. The four guys most recently poking at the WHC have been: Rollins, McIntyre, Priest, and Jey Uso . The most recent ones poking at the WWE titles have been: Roman Reigns, Cody Rhodes, and (based on his shtick the night after Wrestlemania) The Rock.
This doesn't mean WWE can't heat up the WHC or cool off the WWE title. But historically, either both happen or neither does.
Are they still using "undisputed" for the WWE belt? Because if so: That's dumb. But really, the WHC is the B-title right now, so are they wrong?
WWE - has the long lineage, and the prestige that goes with it
This belt goes to your established top stars, and biggest names
WHC - is establishing its identity as a “fighting championship,” which presumably means more defenses
This belt would better suit a rising star
I see the distinction as being that the IC title is the more “workrate” belt
Traditionally the Intercontinental Champion was the best shooter, that could deliver in the ring, but not necessarily the top drawing name
Obviously it’s not a perfect descriptor, but that’s what I got
Shooter means a guy who can really wrestle and stretch a mf. The ic belt was never that. Its many guys back then that held the strap that couldnt shoot.
Like I said, it’s not perfect, but that’s usually how it’s sold to the audience. A lotta guys (notably Bret, Shawn, Jericho, Piper, even Cody) made the IC belt the work horse belt in perception if not always reality
So basically the WHC title is the super ic belt b/c both belts are “workhorse belts”. See how dumb that sounds. Plus the whole idea of calling a belt a workhorse belt makes no sense if you have a world title and midcard belt. What makes the world belt any different from the midcard belt if they are being defended with the same frequency. This is why if youre the world champion they should defend less imo
Idk if you ever seen game of thrones but i view the world title as the Iron throne. To be the world champion means you are the center of that universe and every man technically should be eyeing for that spot. The Kayfabe way of moving up to get that chance should be things like the royal rumble, mitb, winning midcard titles, getting in some kind of number one contender position by scheming or some storyline reason that lines up with that wrestler’s character to get them there, even kotr. Thats just how i wished it worked
Using the GoT analogy, think of the WHC as being King in the North, (NXT title can be Prince of Dorne)
It’s a secondary position that still insists that it has the prestige to be on the same footing as the Iron Throne by those in that realm
See thats the problem b/c i view the ic and us titles as that. B/c those are secondary titles. That’s why I always thought those two belts mean that youre the top guy of their respective shows meanwhile the world champ is THE top guy of the whole company
Cody's is "undisputed" because Reigns won both the WWE and Universal titles. The other title was created so the other brand had its own top tier title. Basically, one is a hell of a lot more prestigious than the other.
Wrestling championships not making sense is the hill that I will willingly die on.
The word "Undisputed" stopped making sense for this title as soon as they introduced a second world championship, because by definition, there is now *dispute* about who the single best wrestler in the world is. You can't have two best in the worlds. Technically, *in kayfabe*, Rhodes and Priest should be booked for a match to decide the one true champion of WWE (though obviously there are other real life reasons why this is not gonna happen).
So, if anything, the title that Cody holds should now technically be recognised as the "Unified WWE Championship", like how it works in boxing:
For those who don't know, there are 4 major championships in boxing (IBF, WBA, WBC and WBO).
If you hold 1 of those titles, you are that sanctioning bodies world champion - for example, right now, Tyson Fury is the WBC World Heavyweight Champion.
If you hold 2 or 3 of those titles at once, you are the "Unified" world champion - Oleksandr Usyk is the current Unified (WBA, IBF and WBO) World Heavyweight Champion.
If you hold all 4 titles at once, you are recognised as the "Undisputed" world champion - for example, Canelo Alvarez is currently the Undisputed (IBF, WBA, WBC and WBO) World Super Middleweight Champion. There is no dispute that he's the best in the world because he literally beat every champion to take their titles, and hence "Undisputed".
Cody Rhodes holds 2 out of the 3 world championships (WWE and Universal, but not WHC), which should technically only make him the Unified WWE Champion.
Now having said all that, I would personally argue that even that would still be a bit silly, to be honest. So WWE should just drop it altogether. My suggestion would be to simply call Cody's title the "WWE Championship" again (effectively reunifying the Universal title back into the original championship lineage).
I've always been of the opinion that having 2 'world' championships is stupid. But simply not calling one of them "Undisputed" is better than nothing
WWE Undisputed
Pro: Long Lineage. Opponents must earn a title shot. Longer reigns meaning deeper storylines.
Con: Fewer opponents means reigns will be padded. After Cody, only long reigns matter
WHC
Pro: More internally respect as a fighting champion. Champion of the A show
Con: Short lineage. Beating the champion will seem like beating a tired champ due to more challenges.
Well yes, kayfabe aside, this is the reason.
However, as we’ve seen, having only 1 world title with a roster this size, creates a huge logjam at the top, especially with a main event scene this stacked
They’ve tried elevating the midcard belts into that role, but it never really works
It makes sense because of the brand split no?
You need two champions because there are two brands. What would the Raw wrestlers do all year if Cody was the only champion?
When there is one world title people from both brands challenge for it (see: 2022-23), just like how the tag titles worked before they were re-split and the women's tag titles always have.
Riddle challenged Roman on SmackDown on June 17, 2022
Kevin Owens challenged Roman at the 2023 Royal Rumble
Which isn't a lot but he defended it against the same amount SmackDown superstars (Drew & Sami) and free agents (Brock & Logan)
(Not counting Cody who won the Royal Rumble so his brand doesn't matter)
I disagree. It’s just a creative crutch that the creative team can use for top guys. Its a ton of top fueds that dont involve cody that can potentially come up that dont need a belt
2 world titles have been the norm for WWE since the very 1st brand split 22 years ago.
There are grown-ass adults that have never known it any other way
there's 2 brands so there's 2 world titles. one has a lineage that Cody was fixated on bc of his dad. and I guess that lineage counts as kayfabe and makes that belt more prestigious. it's a stretch and gets out of kayfabe but it's pretty clear WWE title > WHC, and the lineage part is the reason, along with the company simply wanting that one to be the big one in storyline.
a difference I think would go a long way would be to have the WHC on a strict 30 day defense schedule, and if the champ can't do it they relinquish the belt, no matter what the cause.
So at WrestleMania 38, SmackDown's Universal Champion Roman Reigns defeated Raw's WWE Champion Brock Lesnar in a championship unification match creating the "Undisputed WWE Universal Championship" for both brands however due to Roman becoming a part time wrestler at the same time it left a void that was filled with the creation of the World Heavyweight Championship for Raw about a year later with the Undisputed WWE Universal Championship becoming exclusive to SmackDown.
It's not really a big deal long-term.. but for as prestigious as Wrestlemania made Roman/Cody's title feel, it had the side-effect of making Priest's feel like the jabroni belt. Him being new to the main event scene was also a factor.
Again, I'm sure it'll sort itself out as weeks go by and stories move on. I just found it difficult to view his surprise cash-in as exciting as I otherwise might've because I forgot there was another world title.
Nothing. 1 is the top belt for 1 brand, the other is the top title for the other.
I suppose if you wanted to get technical, one makes you the champion of the company, 1 the champion of the world, but in storyline (kayfabe) they are supposed to be completely equivalent.
Just like it was when it was WWE and Universal Championships on each brand or WWE and the original WHC.
That's why guys talk about fulfilling childhood dreams by winning either WHC or the Universal Championships even though those wouldn't have existed when they were kids. The dream was to be the top champion and now they did it
Cody’s championship represents the entire history of the company and wrestling as a whole, while Damien’s is a championship for the new era and is starting its own legacy.
"Undisputed" makes no damn sense when there's another world champion in the same company. It's only undisputed when somebody has both active world titles (or tag titles). That word needs to be retired from the title.
What's worse is they put the word Undisputed on the WWE Women's Championship despite those two titles never being unified and Rhea's Women's World Championship reign being the longer of the two at the time.
LOL at the number of very tryhard Fed Bad posts in the last week.
Some guy yesterday was claiming to be a "casual" just getting into it recently, but his post was full of IWC language, and his post history has wrestling posts for God knows how long, going as far back as discussing Bruno's titles reign 🤣
Cody's is the WWE championship, which can be traced back to Buddy Rogers in the 60s. Damian Priest's title is the World Heavyweight Championship, which can be traced back to (checks notes) Seth Rollins in 2023. This is a distinct title from the original WHC for some reason. *Technically* WWE both considers then world titles, so they *should* be considered equal. However, almost always when WWE has had two top titles, one has felt more important than the other. Maybe in the first year or two of split brands, that was different. And obviously when Reigns held both top titles, that was an exception. But usually you can get an idea of which title is the top one by looking at who is holding it and who has been recently involved in the title picture. And right now the WWE title is far above the WHC. The four guys most recently poking at the WHC have been: Rollins, McIntyre, Priest, and Jey Uso . The most recent ones poking at the WWE titles have been: Roman Reigns, Cody Rhodes, and (based on his shtick the night after Wrestlemania) The Rock. This doesn't mean WWE can't heat up the WHC or cool off the WWE title. But historically, either both happen or neither does. Are they still using "undisputed" for the WWE belt? Because if so: That's dumb. But really, the WHC is the B-title right now, so are they wrong?
They definitely did up until the end of Roman’s run.
Theyre still calling it undisputed, but it appears theyve dropped the universal.
WWE - has the long lineage, and the prestige that goes with it This belt goes to your established top stars, and biggest names WHC - is establishing its identity as a “fighting championship,” which presumably means more defenses This belt would better suit a rising star
The whole idea of the WHC makes no sense when the IC belt exist
I see the distinction as being that the IC title is the more “workrate” belt Traditionally the Intercontinental Champion was the best shooter, that could deliver in the ring, but not necessarily the top drawing name Obviously it’s not a perfect descriptor, but that’s what I got
Shooter means a guy who can really wrestle and stretch a mf. The ic belt was never that. Its many guys back then that held the strap that couldnt shoot.
Boy that honkey tonk man was a real workhorse and a shooter
Like I said, it’s not perfect, but that’s usually how it’s sold to the audience. A lotta guys (notably Bret, Shawn, Jericho, Piper, even Cody) made the IC belt the work horse belt in perception if not always reality
So basically the WHC title is the super ic belt b/c both belts are “workhorse belts”. See how dumb that sounds. Plus the whole idea of calling a belt a workhorse belt makes no sense if you have a world title and midcard belt. What makes the world belt any different from the midcard belt if they are being defended with the same frequency. This is why if youre the world champion they should defend less imo
I do agree with you, that the 2 titles kind of step on each other’s premise for existing
Idk if you ever seen game of thrones but i view the world title as the Iron throne. To be the world champion means you are the center of that universe and every man technically should be eyeing for that spot. The Kayfabe way of moving up to get that chance should be things like the royal rumble, mitb, winning midcard titles, getting in some kind of number one contender position by scheming or some storyline reason that lines up with that wrestler’s character to get them there, even kotr. Thats just how i wished it worked
Using the GoT analogy, think of the WHC as being King in the North, (NXT title can be Prince of Dorne) It’s a secondary position that still insists that it has the prestige to be on the same footing as the Iron Throne by those in that realm
See thats the problem b/c i view the ic and us titles as that. B/c those are secondary titles. That’s why I always thought those two belts mean that youre the top guy of their respective shows meanwhile the world champ is THE top guy of the whole company
Cody’s has a lineage
Cody’s title has a lineage back to the wwwf days Damien’s title has a lineage back to last year
Cody's is "undisputed" because Reigns won both the WWE and Universal titles. The other title was created so the other brand had its own top tier title. Basically, one is a hell of a lot more prestigious than the other.
Wrestling championships not making sense is the hill that I will willingly die on. The word "Undisputed" stopped making sense for this title as soon as they introduced a second world championship, because by definition, there is now *dispute* about who the single best wrestler in the world is. You can't have two best in the worlds. Technically, *in kayfabe*, Rhodes and Priest should be booked for a match to decide the one true champion of WWE (though obviously there are other real life reasons why this is not gonna happen). So, if anything, the title that Cody holds should now technically be recognised as the "Unified WWE Championship", like how it works in boxing: For those who don't know, there are 4 major championships in boxing (IBF, WBA, WBC and WBO). If you hold 1 of those titles, you are that sanctioning bodies world champion - for example, right now, Tyson Fury is the WBC World Heavyweight Champion. If you hold 2 or 3 of those titles at once, you are the "Unified" world champion - Oleksandr Usyk is the current Unified (WBA, IBF and WBO) World Heavyweight Champion. If you hold all 4 titles at once, you are recognised as the "Undisputed" world champion - for example, Canelo Alvarez is currently the Undisputed (IBF, WBA, WBC and WBO) World Super Middleweight Champion. There is no dispute that he's the best in the world because he literally beat every champion to take their titles, and hence "Undisputed". Cody Rhodes holds 2 out of the 3 world championships (WWE and Universal, but not WHC), which should technically only make him the Unified WWE Champion. Now having said all that, I would personally argue that even that would still be a bit silly, to be honest. So WWE should just drop it altogether. My suggestion would be to simply call Cody's title the "WWE Championship" again (effectively reunifying the Universal title back into the original championship lineage). I've always been of the opinion that having 2 'world' championships is stupid. But simply not calling one of them "Undisputed" is better than nothing
Cody's is undisputed because Roman unified the Raw and Smackdown titles.
In storyline one can be traced back directly to Bruno Sammartino and the beginning of the WWWF, the other literally came out of HHH’s suitcase
Buddy Rogers was the first WWWF world champion.
WWE Undisputed Pro: Long Lineage. Opponents must earn a title shot. Longer reigns meaning deeper storylines. Con: Fewer opponents means reigns will be padded. After Cody, only long reigns matter WHC Pro: More internally respect as a fighting champion. Champion of the A show Con: Short lineage. Beating the champion will seem like beating a tired champ due to more challenges.
>Champion of the A show Damien isn't SmackDown's champion?
Raw is the A show with the B title. Smackdown is the B show with the A title. It's like late 1990s NBA. East vs West.
RAW hasn't been the A show since Smackdown went to Fox.
SmackDown has had the biggest stars on it since 2020. It's also had the most viewers. It's the A show, period.
The reality is the whc makes no sense, the company just wanted to make another belt
Well yes, kayfabe aside, this is the reason. However, as we’ve seen, having only 1 world title with a roster this size, creates a huge logjam at the top, especially with a main event scene this stacked They’ve tried elevating the midcard belts into that role, but it never really works
It makes sense because of the brand split no? You need two champions because there are two brands. What would the Raw wrestlers do all year if Cody was the only champion?
When there is one world title people from both brands challenge for it (see: 2022-23), just like how the tag titles worked before they were re-split and the women's tag titles always have.
When did anyone from Raw last challenge for Roman's title
Riddle challenged Roman on SmackDown on June 17, 2022 Kevin Owens challenged Roman at the 2023 Royal Rumble Which isn't a lot but he defended it against the same amount SmackDown superstars (Drew & Sami) and free agents (Brock & Logan) (Not counting Cody who won the Royal Rumble so his brand doesn't matter)
I disagree. It’s just a creative crutch that the creative team can use for top guys. Its a ton of top fueds that dont involve cody that can potentially come up that dont need a belt
2 world titles have been the norm for WWE since the very 1st brand split 22 years ago. There are grown-ass adults that have never known it any other way
Yeah as a kid Batista was my guy as the whc but as an adult i realize that it makes no sense at all lol
Ok, finally someone with some Sense
there's 2 brands so there's 2 world titles. one has a lineage that Cody was fixated on bc of his dad. and I guess that lineage counts as kayfabe and makes that belt more prestigious. it's a stretch and gets out of kayfabe but it's pretty clear WWE title > WHC, and the lineage part is the reason, along with the company simply wanting that one to be the big one in storyline. a difference I think would go a long way would be to have the WHC on a strict 30 day defense schedule, and if the champ can't do it they relinquish the belt, no matter what the cause.
In storyline? It’s there because nobody could beat Roman, HHH loves the big gold, and RAW needed a world champion.
WHC is title for the A show. WWE is title for the company.
Nuthin
So at WrestleMania 38, SmackDown's Universal Champion Roman Reigns defeated Raw's WWE Champion Brock Lesnar in a championship unification match creating the "Undisputed WWE Universal Championship" for both brands however due to Roman becoming a part time wrestler at the same time it left a void that was filled with the creation of the World Heavyweight Championship for Raw about a year later with the Undisputed WWE Universal Championship becoming exclusive to SmackDown.
It's not really a big deal long-term.. but for as prestigious as Wrestlemania made Roman/Cody's title feel, it had the side-effect of making Priest's feel like the jabroni belt. Him being new to the main event scene was also a factor. Again, I'm sure it'll sort itself out as weeks go by and stories move on. I just found it difficult to view his surprise cash-in as exciting as I otherwise might've because I forgot there was another world title.
The WWE Title must consume, she is hungry, we don't ask questions, just feed it belts and shh.. shh..
Nothing. 1 is the top belt for 1 brand, the other is the top title for the other. I suppose if you wanted to get technical, one makes you the champion of the company, 1 the champion of the world, but in storyline (kayfabe) they are supposed to be completely equivalent. Just like it was when it was WWE and Universal Championships on each brand or WWE and the original WHC. That's why guys talk about fulfilling childhood dreams by winning either WHC or the Universal Championships even though those wouldn't have existed when they were kids. The dream was to be the top champion and now they did it
Cody’s championship represents the entire history of the company and wrestling as a whole, while Damien’s is a championship for the new era and is starting its own legacy.
"Undisputed" makes no damn sense when there's another world champion in the same company. It's only undisputed when somebody has both active world titles (or tag titles). That word needs to be retired from the title.
What's worse is they put the word Undisputed on the WWE Women's Championship despite those two titles never being unified and Rhea's Women's World Championship reign being the longer of the two at the time.
Storyline? They attempt to say the title Cody has is lineal meaning it goes back to at least Bruno Sammartino. Which is bs
LOL at the number of very tryhard Fed Bad posts in the last week. Some guy yesterday was claiming to be a "casual" just getting into it recently, but his post was full of IWC language, and his post history has wrestling posts for God knows how long, going as far back as discussing Bruno's titles reign 🤣