Loki Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 I've always believed it was meant to be the same championship, hence the identical(ish) belt. I think at one point there was an article on WWE.com explaining its lineage back to the NWA title. Â And the WWE own all this, so they get to write the fiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members neil's bitch Posted December 5, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted December 5, 2012 I can only presume that whilst WCW used the same belt design, it was also the NWA belt design for some time, (prior to WCW became a fully fledged promotion), so have some sort of ground to say, "Hey, if it looks the same.....then it is".The NWA has some links to the original world title, so I'm guessing that's what they are trying to say in this instance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 In that clip, Flair say he wore "that title" 16 times. Couldn't be clearer that it's meant to be the WCW title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members neil's bitch Posted December 5, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted December 5, 2012 (edited) In that clip, Flair say he wore "that title" 16 times. Couldn't be clearer that it's meant to be the WCW title.See, i would have thought that means he wore "The Big Gold" design 16 times, as in WCW he held the WCW world title 7 times. As his other reigns are two as WWE champion, and the rest of numerous as NWA champion (some of which, bore the same design prior to WCW began).So I would think he generically means he has been "World Heavyweight Champion" 16 times, but not to imply that belt is either the WCW/WWE/NWA title in any shape or form.Edit: Speaking of the number reigns Flair has, I have that he was WCW champion 7 times, WWE champion twice, and NWA champion 11 times (some of which i presume is when the NWA champion was also considered the WCW champion and vice versa). This would rack him up to be a 20 time champion, yet WWE officially recognize him at 16. This is also not to forget the "phantom changes" during the early NWA title days, which would probably start putting him in the 30+ reigns, if they were officially recognized. Edited December 5, 2012 by neil's bitch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members air_raid Posted December 5, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted December 5, 2012 I've always believed it was meant to be the same championship, hence the identical(ish) belt. I think at one point there was an article on WWE.com explaining its lineage back to the NWA title. And the WWE own all this, so they get to write the fiction.  Yes and no. They can say what they want about in terms of reviving the WCW title, which has been in existence since 1991. They own that. The NWA title is seperate, and while JCP/WCW was a member of the NWA and promoted NWA title matches, the WWE has no right to say either of their titles has anything to do with the NWA title. The WWE title has been in existence since the breakaway in 1963, the World title has been in existence since 1991 if you agree that it's the same title as the WCW title, or 2002 if you don't.  Re : Flair, the only man that would know how many times he's been a World Champion would be him, if he had his marbles. Which he doesn't.  For the record, I class him as an 18-time World Champion from the recorded and documented title victories. He won the NWA title 10 times and was recognized as the WCW Champion 7 times, although one of those was a concurrent reign ; he was recognized as first WCW Champion simple because he was the NWA Champion at the time, so 16 reigns, on top of his 2 WWF titles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Why would they call him a sixteen time world champ? They just picked a number in error/at random and then decided to stick with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members air_raid Posted December 6, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted December 6, 2012 (edited) Why would they call him a sixteen time world champ? They just picked a number in error/at random and then decided to stick with it? Â Why WWE call him a sixteen time World Champion (I'm guessing it's WWE to whom you refer, with "they") because at the time he left WCW, they referred to him as a sixteen time World Champion, which they mistaken believe acknowledges Flair's two WWF title reigns. It doesn't. Â When Flair left WCW and was stripped of its' title, then showed up on WWF TV with the Big Gold Belt and was summarily stripped of the NWA title, he was at the time officially recognized (and referred to on TV) as a seven-time World Heavyweight Champion, as he had "officially" won the NWA title seven times (the final reign of which WCW started referring to him as "WCW World Heavyweight Champion" as well, got the new belt made when Luger won it blah blah). His sixth World title won from Steamboat, his seventh when he got it back from Sting, which was the last he "officially" won before departing. Â When Flair returned from the WWF, the NWA retrospectively started recognizing the title win where he won the title back from Harley Race in Kallang, Singapore on 23rd March 1984, having lost it to him two days earlier in Wellington, New Zealand, neither of which had been widely reported or acknowledged as "official." Similarly the NWA retconned that Tatsumi Fujinami had in fact taken the title from Flair in Tokyo on 21st March 1991 and regained it at SuperBrawl on 19th May in St Petersburg, even though Fujinami winning at the time was ignored by the Alliance and the rematch at SuperBrawl was presented as a title defence - Flair even walked to the ring with the belt around his waist and was announced as champion prior to the match. Â They did this only to make Flair officially a 9 time NWA World Heavyweight Champion so when he beat Baz Windham they could declare he was now 10 times World Heavyweight Champion without acknowledging his WWF title reigns, ridiculous as that sounds. Post that reign, he then went on to win the WCW title 6 times, making him a 16 time World Heavyweight Champion - 10 times NWA Champion (one concurrently the first WCW Champion) and a further 6 reigns as WCW Champion - in the eyes of WCW, who announced him as such up to the last Nitro. Â WWE either, as I've suggested, believes that the "16-time" tagline includes their title runs in error and is by and large unaware of the retconning, or is aware of the retconning and considers it twaddle (a lot of WCW was twaddle) and ignores it. I'm more inclined to go with the former. Â In terms of "official title histories" Flair is either an 18-time or 19-time World Heavyweight Champion as recognized by the NWA, WCW and WWE - he has held the NWA title 10 times, the WCW title 7 times and the WWF title twice. As I mentioned however, the 9th NWA title reign and 1st WCW title reign were the same, and indeed with only one belt, so I only consider 16 reigns in total outside the WWF (as WCW did, as I stated). But I wouldn't be pedantic enough to argue with anyone who referred to him as a 19-time World Champion. Unless I thought they were a bell end. Edited December 6, 2012 by air_raid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEWM Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Similar question to that Greater Power one the other day - when, in storyline terms, do you think Austin and McMahon got together before Mania 17? A couple of weeks? After the Rumble? Before Austin even came back? Similarly, when was HHH clued in? I always thought his swerve turn against The Rock on the post-Mania Raw was meant to be him making a decision, so Vince and Austin weren't sure which way he would go. You can't imagine he'd be best impressed knowing ahead of time that Vince and Austin were in cahoots after he'd spent the best part of two years putting him out of action then fighting him upon his return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members LaGoosh Posted December 7, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted December 7, 2012 (edited) I always imagined it being very close to Wrestlemania 17. Perhaps after they did that sit down interview where Austin said that he had to beat The Rock and would do anything to win Vince McMahon would have seen the interview and realised he could turn Austin to the darkside. Edited December 7, 2012 by LaGoosh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted December 7, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted December 7, 2012 Similar question to that Greater Power one the other day - when, in storyline terms, do you think Austin and McMahon got together before Mania 17? A couple of weeks? After the Rumble? Before Austin even came back? Similarly, when was HHH clued in? I always thought his swerve turn against The Rock on the post-Mania Raw was meant to be him making a decision, so Vince and Austin weren't sure which way he would go. You can't imagine he'd be best impressed knowing ahead of time that Vince and Austin were in cahoots after he'd spent the best part of two years putting him out of action then fighting him upon his return. I gathered when Austin lost to Triple H at No Way Out, Austin thought "I need a backup plan against the Rock" so he did a deal with Vince. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ShortOrderCook Posted December 7, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted December 7, 2012 I always read the whole Debra thing as Vince fucking with Austins head and using it as a tool to manipulate him, bringing those emotions into play and trying to cause Austin to doubt himself and become paranoid, which could be done after such a devastating injury and Rock becoming so huge. Â Vince wanted to do a deal with Austin, he'd just bought out his enemy in WCW, now he secures a deal with his other biggest enemy. All to feed Vinces ego as much as anything else. And Austin became desperate. The deal was secured either just before, or shortly after that sit-down interview. That sit-down interview tells the whole story tremendously and Austin is magnificent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm29195 Posted December 8, 2012 Share Posted December 8, 2012 Re: the World Heavyweight Championship - in this opening video from Unforgiven 2002 - the first PPV that WWE's WHC was defended on, they specifically show that it is the WCW Title and even date it back to the NWA Title.. Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members neil's bitch Posted December 8, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted December 8, 2012 Re: the World Heavyweight Championship - in this opening video from Unforgiven 2002 - the first PPV that WWE's WHC was defended on, they specifically show that it is the WCW Title and even date it back to the NWA Title.. I suppose we can only say in WWE land, that's the case. I mean, in reality, that's partially not true. When the NWA/WCW split, the NWA title was still very active, and still is today. They can say it's linked to the WCW title, which of course they own all that stuff. Although I'm sure they're just going off the physical look of the belt, over what belt it actually is.  At one time, the WCW champion was also recognized as the NWA champion, (and/or vice versa, so 'technically' one person held two title's), so that's the only link they can, or should, really talk of. It's nearly the same as when TNA used the NWA belts, yet after the split, still recognise the former champions as "TNA" champion's.  I've sure it makes sense to somebody, Of who is most likely based in WWE headquarters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members air_raid Posted December 8, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted December 8, 2012 (edited) At one time, the WCW champion was also recognized as the NWA champion, Â Only one time. Ric Flair in 1991. When he fucked off to the WWF, WcW had Luger/Windham for the WcW title, the NWA crowned their next champion after over a year of fannying around via Masa Chono winning the G1 Climax in 1992. After Flair, the lineages were seperate forever. Â I have no issue whatsoever with TNA referring to the TNA-era NWA Champions as former "TNA Champions" because they're only retconning their own history, and realistically speaking the champions from Shamrock through to Christian were the champion of TNA. You'd feel a right moron saying that AJ Styles has only been TNA Champion once (since he's only held the title once since the NWA split). It's the same to me as the aforementioned Ric Flair reign, whereby he is a 9-time NWA Champion and the first WcW Champion. TNA as best as I can tell however, have at point no suggested that they can trace their title back to 1948/08 the way WcW used to. That would be ludicrous. Edited December 8, 2012 by air_raid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted December 8, 2012 Share Posted December 8, 2012 Re: the World Heavyweight Championship - in this opening video from Unforgiven 2002 - the first PPV that WWE's WHC was defended on, they specifically show that it is the WCW Title and even date it back to the NWA Title.. I suppose we can only say in WWE land, that's the case. I mean, in reality, that's partially not true.  The reality of a fake sport where promoters decide who wins the belt? WWE land is the only land that counts now. Personally I see more of the old NWA heritage in the WCW and then WWE WHC title than the one passed around promotions like a whore since 1993 and currently held by the world renowned, err... Kahagas?  WWE owns the legacy and video history of WCW and therefore the NWA of the 80s essentially, and if they say that their WHC title has that legacy, then it does. The sad thing is that it's nowhere near as important a belt as the old WCW or WWF belt was, due to the company having 2 "champions" with no clear distinction between them.       Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts