 |
| Does this title mean nothing? Photo Credit: WWE.com |
I often wonder whether that makes me a "bad fan," especially since I've now been eroded by the mindset that Vince Russo so outrageously fostered in the late '90s, that title belts don't matter. Well, that's not the case. Title belts do matter, but they don't matter as much as stories do. Obviously, titles and stories go hand in hand, given that the easiest and most recyclable story in all of pro wrestling is the chase for a title. But does that title story deserve to have a spot on the card just because it has that trinket attached to it? That's a murky question to wade into in today's WWE, less so in other companies though.
In WWE, there are no fewer than five singles titles right now that are defended on main shows. One is gender-specific, the Divas Championship. The other four are technically without constraint (remember, Chyna has held the Intercontinental Championship before), but what do they mean? What are their appellations? The fact that basically the World Heavyweight Championship and the Intercontinental Championship basically mean the same thing, that you're Champion of all the lands on the Earth (although if you get technical, the WHC also gives you dominion over the seas too, which now makes me astronomically intrigued to have a WWE Nautical Championship) means WWE has too many title belts. That brings into question the idea of unification or streamlining (or at the very least a reclassification), and honestly, that SHOULD be the endgame right now, especially since WWE Creative has no fucking idea how to wield a roster of that size efficiently.
However, it is what it is right now. There are five singles Championships and one for the tag teams right now. If you're going to have them, you might as well use them. Cesaro and Barrett being snubbed, though, is not some new thing. It's part of a disturbing trend where all they do is lose until it comes time to defend the titles. If you couple that with the fact that most of their WHC or WWE Championship matches have more than just the simple idea of chasing the title as part of their stories, it means WWE doesn't know how to harness the low-hanging fruit. I'm not saying that it's a bad thing that there are personal stakes in title matches, by the way. However, if the title matches need to have a different story attached, what makes them different from any other feud on the roster?
It might be a matter of semantics, but I wouldn't be too angry that the eight-person mixed tag is on the show over a United States Championship match. Instead, I'd be angry that they thought enough to make a story for the former situation and gave Antonio Cesaro nothing to chew on going into Mania except "making everyone else look good." Truth be told, I wouldn't mind that at all with all else equal, but with the United States Championship, he's got potential to tell stories being pissed away. Just because wrestling's not a sport doesn't really mean that the sporting tropes need to be thrown in the garbage. WWE has a fundamental flaw in how they treat their titleholders, especially ones below the level of the Big Gold Belt. Complaining about the fact that Barrett's on the pre-show or Cesaro or Kaitlyn aren't on the card at all is only treating the symptom.