A draft has already been confirmed. I think you're splitting hairs.

Noooo!!! Really hope this is not true. I hated the two world champions thing so much. You can only have 1 main champion. It took them years to finally merge the belts as one so why after only a few years go back to two different belts again.

Hopefully it is only a rumour and not true as it would be a stupid way to start the brand split.

Agreed with this. That's a bad sign if true.

It works so much better with the one World Title and just makes the belt seem more important.

The 'Big Gold Belt' came across as by far the inferior belt towards the end and had some shocking champions - the likes of Kane, Mark Henry, Big Show, Sheamus and Del RIo were among the last few champions.
No wonder WWE put the belt out its misery.

Hey BFG.

The one thing I think it does do is make Smackdown relevant. I mean let's face it, how many people actually watch Smackdown nowadays? I'm sure many on here if not most don't.

With it going live and having its own roster. Smackdown immediately gains importance.

And while it may not be beneficial to factions and such, it will be beneficial to wrestlers who struggle to get on the shows, as each show has half a roster to work with now.


I assume the PPV's remain joint, I agree with Hollie that they could have brand specific network specials whih could run alongside the PPV's.


As I mentioned before this move immediately makes Smackdown more relevant. It will be a live show and have its own roster. Hopefully WWE makes the effort now.


Agree with the title situation you mentioned Hollie. Only the US and IC Titles need to be brand specific. The other champions should be allowed to appear on both shows as was the case originally.


Agreed again BFG. No need to bring back the second world title.

However if WWE do this they did show it could work between 2002-2005, where both titles were treated as important. WWE should not do this though.

A look into the future (concept) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVuHkWjTuSE

On the show, Meltzer said he had spoken to several people within WWE and they all said two world champions was the current plan.

I would have preferred Smackdown to remain on Thursdays purely due to asking people to commit 5 hours over two consecutive nights (and a commitment of 8 hours over 3 on PPV weeks). I mean can you imagine WM weekend in 2017. 3hr NXT, 47hr Hall Of Fame, 7hrs WM, 3hr Raw and 2hr SD in the space of five days. I know you don't have to watch everything but 17/18hrs is a hell of a lot of content. But I can see the logistical reason for not having the set out.

If this goes as it appears, it looks like an extra night off for the majority of talent. I can't see them adding a Raw live event on Tuesday and a SD on Monday so that should be welcomed by all. That's if a brand split is truly adhered too.

It hopefully leads, at least in the short term, to better talent progression and a focus on making SD worth watching but given they aren't putting much into making Raw better I won't hold out much hope.

I'm surprised at this happening. I'm a wrestling fan for 30 years now and I can't stand matches going longer than 10 minutes. It bores me to tears. In other words this is just more of the same and I hope their fanbase enjoys it, more wrestling with more amateurs that are nowhere near being household names, no star power at all and in the case of Kevin Owens and Sami Zayn and Finn Balor will NEVER be household names.


I think the NFL in 3 months is the real game changer and with Raw doing 2.2s and the third hour regularly falling below 3 million I hope the NFL puts Raw out of it's misery and the entire show falls below a 2.0 and maybe then the USA Network will step in and maybe request some changes, some major major changes. More and more people need to tune out before things really change.


Even on a few other forums I visit and post on, people are the same as me, just sick and tired of wrestling matches, pure boredom. Even then I just don't like most of the wrestlers anyway, i'm just being honest, young boys, not wrestlers. But as always I'll sit back and see how it all plays out because i don't pay money for any TV channels now that fibre broadband is available so i'll see how it all unfolds with those that do pay for satelite and cable and see if they tune in for 5 hours across 2 consecutive nights and see how they fare and if the audience builds from the start to the end of the show and if they can keep the audience interested.

One World Champion would be the best thing all round. The World Champion would be considered the best among both brands. Two world champions would be devaluing the main champions.

Also the IC and US title would be treated with much more interest and importance.

How does the brand split make the WWE suddenly worth watching again?

It'll still be the same old writers coming out with the same old shite just this time it'll be live twice.

The only good thing about it is that AJ can at least be a champion even if it's just a RAW/SD WHC (as if the WWE would let him beat Reigns).

There should be only one set of belts. Not this 2 brand ****ery but then the belts do mean **** all these days so I doubt it'll make any difference.

Also JBL needs to piss off.

They should have one world champion and make the IC and US championships so important that they are almost number 1 contender positions, So no stupid Kalisto reigns for nothing

This is the kind of thing i'm reading elsewhere too. People talking about belts and champions and this belt and that belt............right down the wrong path IMO.


This is why it's just window dressing and typical IWC going on about belts and belts and this and that and champions. Proves my point exactly that nothing will change. It's 2016. Wrestling needs to get away from matches and prop belts and champions and get back to being entertainment with characters and storylines.

Yep you are right. Been looking around at various sites and forums and it all points to having two separate world champions again.

One report stating that the 1st live Smackdown will have a world title knockout format with the two finalist fighting at a PPV with the new belt.

Really not a fan of it at all but seems certain to happen

It means Smackdown at least has a purpose again at least.

Unsure why WWE are so keen to go back to 2 World Titles. Also logistically how does that work for MITB? Presumably the MITB holder could cash in on either champion.

Having the one World Title makes a win feel a lot more prestigious.

But if JBL went we'd miss such gems as
"BALLGAME MAGGLE" and "They boo who they normally cheer and they cheer who they normally boo".

It fits with their half arsed way of making new stars. This is an era in which stars don't develop organically, but are pushed as such regardless of fan support. To them they can stick a world title on Ambrose, Owens, Rusev, Wyatt - instant headliner!

Hang on, where is everyone getting two world titles from?

Meltzer is saying he has sources. But then he had multiple sources within the company telling him Sasha Banks was off television for storyline reasons but then a couple of weeks later also had a number of sources telling him that Sasha is off screen injured.

I'm not saying there won't be two titles but I'm not buying into it simply because Meltzer says itm

Yep their writing and booking is on the whole horrendous - which makes me worry when there's anything that involves storytelling or reliance on Creative.

Just found this video of VInce from just before the Attitude Era - which I thought was really interesting. How times have changed.

2 lines that stick out:
"We in the WWF think you're tired of having your intelligence insulted"
"The era of the superhero telling you to take your vitamins and say your prayers is passe"

In fact that video I think highlights the biggest issue WWE has.
You watch Vince in that video and he seems to get culture (or at least is hiding it well) and knows where the then WWF should stand.
Whereas now I think most of us would agree he seems to be behind the times. He doesn't get culture in 2016 and fans in 2016.

They are people now saying only one World title but the woman's belt will be exclusive to one brand

Meltzer has said last summer WWE had people phone up, I believe it was pwinsider.com, and told them the main event of this years Wrestlemania was Cena v Taker, then immediately had people phone him to tell him they definitely weren't building to Cena v Taker.

I'm sure WWE are well capable of muddying the narrative here.

WHY DON'T YOU GO ASK HIM MAGGLE and of course who could ever forget MEXICOS GREATEST EXPORT when referencing ADR.

That video even now looking back is just laughable saying we are bored of good guy vs bad guy. Um no.

Considering this was Nov/Dec 1997 did we ever get a Face vs face or Heel vs Heel main event in 1998, 1999 or 2000?

I know we had Taker/Austin at Summerslam but Taker was slowly starting to become heel after this match.

We didnt really have change because the same formula works.

I know the other line was a dig at Hogan but christ kids have to have role models to look up to and believe in.

They screwed up the World Titles last time, they should have had a unification match at Wrestlemania not a December PPV.

We dont need 2 World titles again, at least not keep bringing back the WCW world title then pretending its the WHC because the design is too similar.

Does that mean we are getting 2 tag belts and bringing back the Divas belt.

The nxt show on 8th June is now called NXT Takeover: The End, so it's reasonable to assume several there will be moving to the main roster(s) afterwards.

They love to play games with the smarks, so it could just refer to the end of the months long Balor/Joe feud.

Concurrently, the likes of Joe, Balor, Alpha, Aries, Bayley, Asuka, Nakamura are more than ready for the main roster.