Message-ID: 

Michael (jandm16{at}charter.net) writes:
> 
>> * Goldberg beat Hogan for the WCW title five years ago in the Georgia
>>   Dome.  How close was it to being the exact same date?  And you notice
>>   Goldberg is challenging for the same (physical) belt, while the "WWE
>>   championship" is considered (by WWE) the #2 belt in the company?
> 
> See the above comment.  That the Smackdown belt has better matches over 
> it is coincidental.

I don't see the company treating the WWE title as #2 to the World Title's
#1. Yes, we've had Triple H refer to Kurt as a "paper champion," but a)
that was in character, and b) even if it was a "pseudo-shoot", it would
just be his opinion.

I don't have the match lists handy for all of the shared PPVs, but IIRC
Kurt vs. Brock was the final match at WMXIX, which goes a long way to
discrediting the "SD! title is #2" claim. The one thing the brand
extension has done well ("paper champion" comment aside) is keep the
titles out of any situations where a direct comparison or ranking between
brands can be made. This is one reason I *really* don't want to see any
sort of unification/title vs. title type matches, or cross-brand matches
in general.

--

Jamie Rosen's e-book _Vessel of Heaven_ is now available from Jintsu Etexts
Check it out at http://www.eggplant-productions.com/jintsu


--- Internet Rex 2.29