Originally Posted by TempestH
So by your first three paragraphs, I have taken away the fact that you’d rather settle for both the WHC being something that as meaningless and SmackDown as being a show without direction. These things are okay with you by never improving nor being of relevance. If that is the case, why make the argument at all to even change them? SmackDown is pointless, correct? If so, then why go through this extensive revamping of it? You are talking about freshening up something that you are stating is of such low value, it makes more sense to cut costs and sell off the property before dumping so much time, effort, and revenue into a money pit. As to the point of the IC title vs. WHC – I’d rather have a Silver Medal than a Bronze one. Even if the difference between 3rd
place is 1.2 seconds, I still finished 7 seconds ahead of 3rd
As for your Trips point – He held the title for 7 days in April 2001, followed by a whopping 34 day run after winning it back from Hardy. The whole reason he held the belt in the first place was to further the domination of the HHH/SCSA tag team as holding all the gold in the WWE. Don't alter history to try to make your point of view valid; it wasn’t done because Trips DESIRED to hold the IC belt. As to the Sheamus fact, clearly we see differently. Sheamus chose the WHC at the Rumble for 2 reasons. First being because he had never held Big Gold, and second as a way to signal himself as the Face of SmackDown. Both reasons helped to build up SmackDown as a place (and belt) the young up and comers were choosing to make their names known under (even if the “almighty” Punk calls it a Second Value Title, it doesn’t mean that it will always be so. If something is treated right, it can have whatever value is placed upon it – Like when Trips went after it). This is why Ziggler has yet to cash in his MITB and is the focal point in programs with such top stars as Cena; not to put Cena in the WHC picture. The failure to have substantial storyline depth to go along with it (not to mention the fact that all of the SmackDown boys were also pushed upon the RAW audience) is not something to which Sheamus, Bryan, Ziggles, or Miz are to be held accountable for.
Originally Posted by TempestH
I can understand where you are coming from with the view of the belt being mistreated. This is why my original point was to refocus the belt, not to throw your hands up and just change it. With the depth of those who held it, it can be something of great value (Excluding WCW for a second, think of when Benoit held it for 200+ days, or when MVP held it for damn near a year... Hell, it’s what MADE Cena a damn main event star) when it is treated right. You don’t give up on a good thing and just cast it aside when you start to see faults due to wear on it. If a vehicle is broke, you get the mechanic to fix it; not trade it in for a car of lesser value.