The Grand Slam and Triple Crown: Forgotten Achievements in Wrestling?
by, 03-28-2011 at 03:10 PM (2668 Views)
First, I'm a fan of stats in wrestling, so this may not apply to those that don't like meaningless trivia such as I do but I do miss the facts when commentators used to mention the past accomplishments of wrestlers. These stats gave great insight on not just the wrestler but the prestige of the titles and accomplishments. Ever since JR and Matt Striker have been taken off commentary for the main shows, we get to hear less and less of this. I believe that mentioning The Grand Slam or the Triple Crown in wrestling actually puts the titles over when it comes to how prestigious it truly is, instead of "props" as Vince Russo coined them as (and sadly at this point, he's right).
Second, Everyone knows or at least should know by now that Shawn Michaels is the 1st Grand Slam Champion and Triple H is the 2nd. JR has pointed that out and if one does research, it is shown but for everyone else, it's never said at all. For example, whenever Kane comes out in a big match like Money in the Bank, he is mentioned as just a former World Champion or Tag Champion, when he has actually accomplished the feat himself. albeit 10 years ago at this point nor do they mention that he is a Triple Crown Champion (winning the World, Intercontinental and Tag titles). By mentioning this, it shows that the wrestler has done it all in this business and is a success, no matter how many crappy storylines he is put in, or whatever the case may be.
There are 22 Triple Crown Champions, the latest being Dolph Ziggler, and not once have they mentioned that feat for any of the 22 that have ever attained it. You would think the 3 Core titles for WWE would have a lot more meaning wouldn't it? Furthermore, another gripe I have about the Triple Crown and Grand Slam is that the United States title isn't involved in either criteria in order to win it. Both Tag titles are and so are both World titles. Why not both secondary titles? The United States Championship means just as much as the Intercontinental belt, why not add it in there or does WWE not care about prestige anymore but who can draw a crowd? It's like WWE only cares about the 2 World titles and the rest seemingly doesn't matter anymore. Look at WrestleMania for example, we barely get IC much less US title defenses on the show. We get our money matches and the World titles. and our occasional Divas debacle. Championships mean more than just a shiny gold, silver or whatever piece. It means that you accomplished something in whatever field that you are in and if WWE remembered that, we wouldn't need Night of Champions to remind us who the hell the champions are.