When WWE successfully builds up guys, that they have buried for years, to be main eventers like Kane last year and now possibly Mark Henry, it shows that the writers are still very capable.

Any one know anything about Andy, the tough enough winner.
Am rather curious as to when and which show they are going to put him on.

I'm pretty sure he's still not ready to come up even close to full time right now. I imagine they'll probably have him working more in FCW and maybe some of the house show circuit. If he's ready, it might not be horrible to put him in one of the MITB matches as a surprise entrant. He obviously won't win, and he'll get a chance to work a match with a few different guys on the roster and they can spin off of that.

Still don't understand why WWE doesn't resurrect the tag division to give a ton of these guys time but have them still be semi-protected. Heck even Cena had a tag team with Bill Buchanan. (Cena also cut some semi-racist "freestyles" against the Guererros that have been forgotten back when he was hardcore rapper and not happy salute the soldiers thug.)

chavo stole the show at the royal rumble btw.

A Guerrero stealing something? What a shocker!

Its possible but unlikely. Id say Henry is more likely going to feud with Orton to keep something ticking over while MITB winner Cody is built up to main event level (such as Miz did last year).

I dont think there is any legit reason why Henry cant be a WHC tho, Kane had a run last year off the back of crowd reaction with his work vs Taker and Henry is getting a good reaction as a monster heel with Show.

Fair point, but there's a difference between the two, in that Kane's backstory and character are way more interesting, and he had the history with 'Taker to work with. You're right that Henry's been getting good reactions recently, but I'd have serious doubts about whether he'd be able to carry a main event feud with a guy as bland as Orton, even with Orton being as over as he is.

Having said that, I don't have much of a problem with them doing Orton vs Henry at MITB, as long as they come up with something better for SummerSlam. Orton vs Christian in a gimmick match of some sort, with Christian having won MITB, would be great.

Finally caught Friday's Smackdown on the Universal HD replay last night.

I'm actually pretty psyched for Mark Henry/monster heel angle...significantly better than the aforementioned weird story lines/jobber to the stars roles he's had for the last decade.

How does this sound for a thesis: The WHC is the new IC belt (the IC of the late 80s through mid 90s that actually mattered)

Pretty good thesis. Now if only the WWE title of today was actually comparable to the WWE title back when the IC title mattered.

I know we played this game with the IC title, but when would you say the WWE title lost prestige? Did it jump the shark when Vince McMahon won it back in '99?

I don't recall the exact storyline but I don't believe I thought it jumped the shark then. Didn't he like put it vacant shortly after winning?


I think it's gotta be sometime around Khali. Maybe it wasn't as important as it used to be before it, but it wasn't like "lol who cares".

Either then, or whenever it started getting passed around like it meant nothing between orton/cena

It started in '97 when there were seven different reigns. They hadn't come close to that before. That's really the biggest problem with the belt is the fact that they think that it's acceptable to just change who has it once every couple of months on a consistent basis. Aside from Vince, there hasn't been a truly embarrassing champion during the time I watched. I certainly didn't like every champion, but they were always viable. The sheer frequency of title changes, though, is unacceptable.

Until and unless they can ever redefine normal to being no more than three championship reigns in a year, and almost never have it change hands on free TV, I will never again get real goosebumps from a title change.

Khali didn't win the WWE belt. He won the world title that is being compared to being the IC title of today.

I still wouldn't say it has, really. If any dilution has happened, I would say it happened with the Brand Extension leading to two ostensibly equal, yet obviously unequal, titles. With Raw being the "A-Show" then the title on Raw would almost have to be the top belt. With the movement of champions back and forth between shows, this just leads to confusion about who the more important champion is.

Like I said, though, it's still up there. The only people to even do any "damage" to that title's reputation would be Vince - for obvious reasons - and Sheamus. That last one is just my opinion because he was just too damn new for it yet.

This is exactly what I would have said had I put it better.

Secret Shame: I find myself marking out over these:

WWE Adult Replica Title Belts

See especially the WWE Winged Eagle Championship (from the days of the Hogan/Andre feud) and also the WWE Classic Intercontinental from the Macho Man/Steamboat/Honkytonk reigns.

ignore me

http://www.davemillicanbelts.com/CastBigGold-081310.htm

imo. would def love to fire up an attitude belt as well.

Wow. Now I know what to do if I find a couple of grand lying around.

Also, I love the classic WWF tag belts. The new ones look like garbage imo.

http://www.davemillicanbelts.com/chadtag.htm

I have this belt, it's really sweet. I think I'll probably get the Winged-Eagle belt next.

http://www.highspots.com/product.asp...03&category=50

I think the WWE title lost some credibility when they made the W spin around. That **** does not look prestigious it looks weak

Funny, I've been watching a lot of WWE on Demand lately and trying to piece together the title from '96-'98. I don't remember that many title changes in '97. I remember HBK beating Bret Hart at WM in '96, losing to Sid at SS '96. Sid lost to Taker at WM '97. Somewhere along the line Taker lost to Bret, then the infamous screwjob at SS '97. Then Austin beat HBK in '98.

I only count Sid, Taker, Bret, HBK in '97. What changes am I missing? I kinda thought it became less important a little after that when they built up Austin to be the man and then win it at WM '98 and then took it off him fairly quickly and within the next calandar year there were multiple reigns for him and at least one for Rock, Foley, Kane, maybe even Taker, I don't remember.

Sid had the belt at the start of the year, dropped it to HBK at Royal Rumble. Bret Hart won it at the next IYH, then lost it to Sid on Raw the next night. Undertaker won it at Mania, Bret won it from him at SummerSlam, HBK got it in the screwjob at Survivor Series.

Only four different champions, but six title changes (so seven reigns, since obviously part of Sid's reign coming out of '96 entered into 1997).

Jesus, I blanked the whole first quarter of '97 up to WM out of my mind. I don't remember any of that. That's 5 title changes in just over 4 months.....maybe 6 depending on how long Taker held it after WM.