TNA vs. WWE - who's championships mean more?

[BadAndy]

That doesn't make a lot of sense. You have to consider the prestige of the belt on all occasions. The way you talk, makes it seem like these are just normal belts, well they are not. You always have to consider prestige becasue you don't want someone holding your World Title if there going to do it wrong, especially after people like Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, Ric Flair and countless other wrestling legends have worn them in the past and made them as big as they are today.

Well, those that say the World Championship isn't as prestigious could be deemed wrong then because I came from the world of WCW and always knew that belt and don't have the same way I look at the WWE Championship. I could care less how prestigious the belts are. I look more at all the belts having prestige. I just hope that in having that, they have a champion I like wearing it. It's just nonsensical to me that someone has to feel there is a rank to them and what not. Do I feel the US title has lost prestige since Santino has held it? No, but I would like someone else to hold it. I just don't see how they lose prestige.

[Angryhero]

I just don't see how they lose prestige.

You don't see how something can be undervalued? When people that hold it, and the company that owns it doesn't care how their "champions" look? losing matches all the time....

When I was a little kid I always wanted to be the IC champion- it was the coolest looking belt, and to me, it was #2 belt in the world. Those who wore it were one step closer to getting a world title shot, or at least becoming a main eventer... Hell the WWE/WH title are hardly in main events anymore...

[Darkside Ron Garvin]

No-matter how much of a WWE mark I am... The TNA Championships mean more currently. Now if we were talking about past prestige then WWE would easily trump TNA. However, that's not the case right now. /MadLoveForTNA.

I'm going with this. I disqualify the reigns of Austin, Sammartino, Hogan, Backlund, Warrior, Hart, and everyone else pre-2002 when discussing this. Why? Because the WWF closed down in 2002. The WWE replaced it. If we look at it in this light, we have a relatively better comparison (10 years for both companies).

From 2002 to around 2004, WWE won, hands down.
2005 thru 2008ish, TNA took the reigns.
2008ish-2010 Give it to WWE.
2011 thru current, I say TNA.

Overall, in the current state we are viewing, TNA wins hands down without comparison. When incorporating the past 10 years, it's a split between the two in which some titles would swap their "prestige level" but both companies have had their fair share of problems in making their titles be the focal point of the product... TNA has seemed to remedy that problem at the moment, so they win for me.

[Bralon23]

When I think about the prestige of titles and which one I would personally value more, it would have to be WWE's just because of the history behind them. Think of all the people who have held the WWE and World Heavyweight Championships. It's not TNA's fault that they haven't really been around long enough for their belts to have a legitimate history behind them, but it's an easy decision from my own personal point of view.

[BadAndy]

You don't see how something can be undervalued? When people that hold it, and the company that owns it doesn't care how their "champions" look? losing matches all the time....

When I was a little kid I always wanted to be the IC champion- it was the coolest looking belt, and to me, it was #2 belt in the world. Those who wore it were one step closer to getting a world title shot, or at least becoming a main eventer... Hell the WWE/WH title are hardly in main events anymore...

What you are talking about is more so the ranking of the value of the belt, not the prestige that the belt holds. I find it had to look at the value of the belts since they are originally from two different companies. As a US citizen and known fan of WCW I have always kind of put the US title over the IC but I know most don't. I really just look at both as the step before the WH/WWE titles. As for the titles being in the main event, I think they are dealing with that right now with Punk's feelings towards it. It has been about ratings, money, etc. and not necessarily the title. If that's what you're referring to with prestige, then maybe the prestige has been hurt. But I don't think it's lost its value any in a ranking system.

[Y2Jryder]

It all depends how one spends it!!!

Well played

[PSOjedi]

I think the TNA World Heavyweight championship looks great and that TNA & Bobby Roode did a fantastic job.

Same for CM Punk and the WWE Championship, the title looks great and Punk is a great champ.

As for the WWE's WHC, actually and for months now, and especially since Sheamus is the champ, this title and what is build around don't make me really interested. I mean both Sheamus & Del Rio, can't cut a good promo and the stoyline around their fued is always the same, Del Rio destroying Sheamus week after week. This is really boring. As for now I really want Sheamus to drop the title at Summerslam or ASAP. I know my interest for the WHC won't change if Del Rio is the next champ, but Sheamus vs Del Rio is really boring. WWE should tell these 2 to improve their mic skills and work on their charisma.

[HCollins-TNA1]

In my opinion the World Heavyweight title is like a Glorified Mid-card title these days..... Pretty much used to build someone they might want as WWE champion or to give a former WWE champion...