WWE Is Serving Up Hot Titles
April 28, 2009 by AlexV
In the last year the two main titles of the WWE, the World Heavyweight Championship and WWE Championship have been changing hands quite frequently turning everyone into transitional champions. It’s almost maddening.
Last year on Smackdown the WWE title went back and forth between Edge, Triple H, and even Jeff Hardy had a brief stint as champion. And you know that would be ok if the other show (Monday Night RAW) had a little bit more of a consistent champion. But ever since Chris Jericho yanked the World Heavyweight Championship off Batista, who only held the title for a week, even that title has been bounced around like a hot potato; First, Cena came back from injury and got the belt off of Jericho. He held it for a good two or three months, then lost it again to Edge in the Elimination Chamber. Then, about a month or so later, Cena wins it back off Edge at Wrestlemania 25 only to lose it again last Sunday at Backlash.
Although a lot of these title changes have made for some interesting Pay-Per Views, one key question (at least to me) is raised. What is the point of Wrestlemania? Wrestlemania is supposed to be “the grandest stage” as the WWE likes to put it. But if you have two competitors, Cena and Triple H, winning and defending their titles respectively on the “grandest stage, only to lose the titles a month later to the same guys they faced at Wrestlemania… then what is the point? I would think of the Mecca of all WWE Pay-Per Views to be the end-all-be-all. However, when Cena wins the title and the WWE makes a big deal of how he took out the Big Show and Edge at the same time then loses 30 days later, and the Triple H and Orton feud is not resolved at the final showdown of the WWE season, then it’s almost like winning at Wrestlemania has no finality to it.
And perhaps that’s not what it is meant to be. But if this keeps up, at least in my mind, it makes Wrestlemania look like just another WWE Pay-Per View.