"I think there's too many belts, lads" - Tidying up the AEW Men's title scene

[Statto]

Been toying with doing this thread for a few weeks (since the titular quote from @BomberPat and some follow-up discussion around WrestleDream) and have decided to go for it based on @RedTwoster's comments about ditching the National Championship in the Full Gear thread.

I'd be inclined to agree we're probably a bit heavy in terms of the number of championships in AEW (I'm not touching RoH with a bargepole) but as much of a problem for me is that there's a real mush of "secondary" men's titles that don't have a clear hierarchy, or anything particular to distinguish one from the other. So that said, here's what I'd do...

Men's Singles Division

I think this division can probably reasonably sustain 3 regularly-defended championships - a top one, an upper-midcard one and a lower-midcard one. I'd therefore go:

Main Event - AEW Men's World Championship: Pretty obvious here, except I'd officially/permanently add the "Men's" distinction used in Hangman's reigns.

Upper Midcard - TNT Championship: The OG 'secondary' title in the company, keeps its place based on that and the fact I don't like there being a "World" and an "International" championship at the same time.

Lower Midcard - AEW National Championship: The newest championship, but the naming convention works in the hierarchy so it sticks around on that basis (more on this in a bit...) This gets a slot on PPVs if the match warrants it, but I wouldn't shoehorn it on for the sake of having every belt on every PPV.

So what happens to the International and the Continental...?

Well, the Continental Championship can continue to exist, but only a visual representation that this bloke won the premier tournament in professional wrestling, the Continental Classic. Win that tournament, you get the belt and get to carry it around for the year - and a slot to try to retain it in the next tourney.

The International... I toyed with the idea of folding it into the TNT (and renaming as "TNT International Championship" but what I'd probably do is keep it on Okada long enough (and strong enough( that he/Callis can start somewhat justifiably claiming it's as/more prestigious than the World Championship, then do an Okada vs Ospreay unification match in the main event of a major PPV. Ospreay wins and the Men's World Championship stays as THE gold standard.

Men's Tag Team Division

Primary - AEW Men's World Tag Team Championship: Much like the singles, this is pretty obvious but again I'd officially add the "Men's" distinction

Secondary - [NAME TBD] Tag Team Championship: One thing I thought during the "look at all our great tag teams" parade at All In was I think AEW could sustain a secondary tag team title. I just don't know what I'd call it. I thought about some sort of angle where the National Championship became the National Tag Team Championships, but I want to keep National as the 3rd singles title. "United States" and "North American" are taken by WWE. Maybe follow the TNT/TBS model and go with HBO Max Tag Team Champions...? I dunno about a name, but I'd like to see another set of tag belts. This would be another one you could put on PPV if the match warranted it, but I wouldn't shoehorn it onto a 15-match card just to get it on there.

Men's Trios Division

AEW Men's Trios Championship: I really like Trios wrestling, and these belts have really proven their worth over the last few months. Once again - a title I'd put on PPV sometimes, but not necessarily every time. And I'd get them onto the Rascalz and let let them have a sold 6-month reign.

FWIW - I think the current Women's model (World, TBS, Tag Team) is just perfect, save for something of a lack of proper tag teams right now!

[tiger_rick]

I have no problem whatsoever with the amount of AEW titles. It's absolutely fine for the amount of TV and the amount of people on the roster. I do agree somewhat with Bomber's points about the deliniation of some of the people and which titles they go for but the amount of belts, the emphasis put on them and the fact that the champions are treated as potential World Champions has been really good for the last couple of years.

My problem with belts is purely the external ones being shown on their TV. ROH belts can stay in their lane. CMLL can get to fuck. Anything from Japan that isn't the IWGP World Title can equally piss off. It's unnecessary and clunky. An exception is when they make a story of it. Like Mercedes or Kenny Omega collecting titles from other promotions. I'd also be OK with someone coming in with a title that's made a big deal of as an introductory tool. Like the NJPW Tag Champs but, I want to see them consider the value of the mention. At the moment, they just acknowledge the wider wrestling world, which is OK to a point but crosses a line often. I feel similar about them mentioning that everyone has had 17 matches before. I don't want them to pretend every match is a first ever, like WCW would do often but, equally, I'm not excited by them all have met in PWG or ROH or All-Star wrestling 17 years ago. 

I just want AEW to be the be all and end all of the wrestling world on AEW's shows and I think they have the balance off a bit.

[RedTwoster]

As long as I care about a title, I don't mind that it exists. The Continental title does feel valuable, but I don't think it should be defended in random matches - put it up for grabs in the Continental Cup and Continental Classic each year, and that's it. Hype it up as being a unique title that you only have two opportunities to hold each year, and each one involves a shitload of work. 

As I mentioned in the Full Gear thread, I think the National Title is beyond salvage. It elevated Mark Davis when he held it, but outside of that, it's been held by people who feel beneath it. I'd get rid of it. That would leave me with the World Title, the International Title and the TNT title as far as men's belts go. 

I'd add an Intergender Tag Title - I think you could do something really good with that, having men and women who wouldn't typically interact do just that. Imagine seeing Toni Storm and Jon Moxley or MJF face off? Talking of MJF - imagine the shithousery you'd get from having him team up with someone like Thekla or Mercedes Mone? Would Ospreay and Windsor be better than The Brawling Birds? Dunno, but you'd probably see them team up. 

I'd also be tempted to add a Super Heavyweight Title, or maybe a Brawlers title instead to reduce the limitations of the former. AEW does a big man match well, and a title like that would allow for more of that kind of thing. What leaves me slightly hesitant is that AEW has less in the way of that kind of wrestler on their roster than they once did, with Big Bill/Cass, Miro and Hobbs all moving to WWE. Not that they couldn't be replaced, but I don't know if it's worth it. 

If I did introduce another men's title, I'd probably unify the International and TNT titles. 

[BomberPat]

It's absolutely about delineation. I don't know what distinguishes the National, TNT, and International Title, or why, in kayfabe, any wrestler would choose to challenge for one of those belts over the others. That's a bigger problem than there just being too many belts in general.

I also, as I make clear most weeks (as AEW tends to give me reason to), hate a champion challenging for a different title. I think it devalues a title belt if, the moment you win it, you start going after another title rather than defending the one you have. That issue would come up less if there were more distinctions between the titles. It also devalues someone like Kenny Omega or Mercedes Moné doing a belt collector gimmick if they're not the only champion on the show who's carrying multiple titles.

I think titles from other promotions can be additive, but too often are just too much window dressing. Around Forbidden Door, absolutely we should see the other promotions' title belts. But if it's a random midcard match where someone with minimal standing in AEW happens to have a title from CMLL, I don't think it does either company any favours to draw attention to that.

 

I'd just like to see title belts given more identity. The TNT Title is often, unofficially, an "open challenge" belt - challengers aren't having to win eliminators or number one contenders matches to get a shot, and the champion tends to defend against all-comers on TV most weeks, and treating it like a de facto TV Title in that respect helps create some separation, particularly with it being named after a TV network in the first place. The Continental Title has its own set of rules, so at least that's something.

Rather than introducing belts like a National Title that's indistinguishable from the International Title, I think titles that guarantee a certain type of match would perhaps be more beneficial. ROH still has the Pure Title, and given the choice I would swap one of the AEW singles titles for the Pure belt or something like it; a specific set of rules that favours technical wrestling, I would maybe even go stricter than the Pure belt and introduce rounds as well. It means you know you're getting a different pace of wrestling to the rest of the card, and it's a place to showcase wrestlers and styles that might otherwise go under-appreciated.

Similarly, a "High Speed" belt (but with a better name) that's for a matches with a 10 minute time limit (or even less). Introduce it with a series of matches that are really fast and frantic, between high flyers and luchadores, almost early X-Division style of "video game wrestling" - just constant move after move after move, escalating until someone eventually wins - but then once it's established, start to change it up; have a big bruiser like Mark Davis challenge for it, and start winning just by flattening people in record time. Have a cowardly heel win it and just keep stalling and trying to run down the clock.

[Carbomb]

9 minutes ago, BomberPat said:

Similarly, a "High Speed" belt (but with a better name) that's for a matches with a 10 minute time limit (or even less). Introduce it with a series of matches that are really fast and frantic, between high flyers and luchadores, almost early X-Division style of "video game wrestling" - just constant move after move after move, escalating until someone eventually wins - but then once it's established, start to change it up; have a big bruiser like Mark Davis challenge for it, and start winning just by flattening people in record time. Have a cowardly heel win it and just keep stalling and trying to run down the clock.

See, I'm glad you've introduced the time limit, because the bold bit is the issue I've always had with the X-Division. There's no actual kayfabe rule as to what the delineation is. Saying it's "no limits" to imply loads of big moves is, to my mind, stupid - because what's to stop a wrestler doing those kinds of moves in the "regular" divisions, and what's to ensure that wrestlers do high-flying or spectacular moves? And conversely, Samoa Joe just battered the shit out of everyone else, regular style, so then the criteria for X-Division isn't high-flying or llave or lucha or any other kind of fast, technical stuff.

It would've been difficult to pull off, but I always thought they should differentiate the X-Division with the six-sided ring, and keep the four-sider for the regular divisions. Maybe add some extra rules about time limits, as you say, and perhaps about how many times you can strike a downed opponent in the same "down" period, or something like that.

[Devon Malcolm]

Last time I tried to watch AEW (back in the spring, I think) they had 7 titles on the male side alone. And I think there were some ROH titles being defended in there somewhere. So you'll need a massive fucking broom.

[ReturnOfTheMack]

I liked the Continental title having specific rules, including a time limit. I got fucked off with the Continental title as at least twice Mox decided his fueds needed to have a match with no time limit. 

 

[Infinity Land]

1) World - 2) International - 3) National

Follows a basic understanding used in other sports. I'm fine with that.

TNT 

Exists because it's a business and wanting something for big names to do that have fallen out of World Title contention but seen above the developmental track of the lower titles.

Continental can just be reduced to the Owen Hart Cup belt. The tournament win is the triumph it doesn't need to be something that's defended.

We've seen AEW's booking for years now that titles are a crutch. The Women's Tag Titles in the past year may not have led to a tag team boom but helped to round out the division as a whole. Most of the titles end up having some moments in any given year. The National title has done alright for Ricochet who was becoming a bit of a joke, Mark Davis and Andrade. Could have done without Jack Perry. 

 

[Jazzy G]

Do it like in Smackdown 2 where each title was a little league. That felt like what they were trying to do originally with their win/loss records and rankings, even when there were people who'd won more matches lower down the rankings because it was also based on who you'd beaten. If they could establish consistent rules and stick to them it'd be a big help. 

[Lion_of_the_Midlands]

2 hours ago, BomberPat said:

Similarly, a "High Speed" belt (but with a better name) that's for a matches with a 10 minute time limit (or even less). Introduce it with a series of matches that are really fast and frantic, between high flyers and luchadores, almost early X-Division style of "video game wrestling" - just constant move after move after move, escalating until someone eventually wins - but then once it's established, start to change it up; have a big bruiser like Mark Davis challenge for it, and start winning just by flattening people in record time. Have a cowardly heel win it and just keep stalling and trying to run down the clock.

I know that AEW gets an unfair rap online about all the ex WWE people they bring in but if they bring in a version of a belt WWE have just dropped then the criticism might be justified. The Speed title was shite in WWE and would be in AEW as well. 

[Arch Stanton]

I genuinely can't work out whether @BomberPat was taking the mickey, or earnestly and obliviously pitching the exact title premise that WWE had!

[LaGoosh]

Bin off the National title immediately. Make the TNT title a TV title (maybe only defended on Collision as that's actually on TNT). Make sure the International title is the clear number 2 belt. Keep the Continental title but stick to the 20 minute rule very strictly. Don't show other company titles on TV. I think if they did the above all will be fine.

[tiger_rick]

15 hours ago, Infinity Land said:

We've seen AEW's booking for years now that titles are a crutch. 

I've said this for years going back to prior to AEW's existence but Titles and Title matches have been a massive part of WWE's booking forever and AEW's for most of it's existence. Because for the most part, title matches and title shots are the only things fans buy into. There have been exceptions, particularly in AEW, with some well booked blood feuds that didn't need any bells and whistles but, any match that isn't for anything is almost always a throwaway and has been for at least the last decade. There's a reason WWE had a hundred titles too at one point and even now, has AAA title matches on their TV - which I don't see any complaint about by the bad faith actors for some reason.

One of the best parts of early AEW were the rankings, which while they did have some title conotations, did create a system which allowed matches to be for something without overtly having to be for a title match or title shot. I really miss that. The current best of 5 series between FTR and MCMG is sort of on those lines but could definitely benefit from FTR being the #2 team in a tag team rankings and the MCMG being able to outright knock them off their perch.

[BomberPat]

16 hours ago, Lion_of_the_Midlands said:

I know that AEW gets an unfair rap online about all the ex WWE people they bring in but if they bring in a version of a belt WWE have just dropped then the criticism might be justified. The Speed title was shite in WWE and would be in AEW as well. 

16 hours ago, Arch Stanton said:

I genuinely can't work out whether @BomberPat was taking the mickey, or earnestly and obliviously pitching the exact title premise that WWE had!

I wasn't really thinking of the Speed Title! I was thinking of the High Speed Title in NEO and STARDOM, which is a belt with a 10-minute time limit, two out of three falls, and a 10 count on the outside rather than the usual Japanese 20 count. It's something I've thought that, if I were to ever book a full-time wrestling promotion, I would probably introduce a version of, because I think once you get beyond one or two singles belts, anything that follows should have a distinct identity beyond it being just another title.

I don't think I ever watched any matches for WWE's version, but I suspect that they were just short matches wrestled exactly the same as any other WWE TV match, when the point of any stipulation should be to show how it changes the psychology of the match, and forces people to wrestle differently. I think AEW would do a much better job with something like that than WWE could - I'm not suggesting AEW necessarily should introduce this title (and certainly not in addition to the belts they already have), just that it's worth thinking of ways championships could serve distinct purposes in ways that AEW's titles currently don't.

Similarly, something like CHIKARA's Young Lion's Cup, for wrestlers under 25. Titles with restrictions or qualifiers to make them something unique.

Incidentally, I completely agree with everything @Carbomb said about the X-Division - it's very kayfabe-breaking to say "it's about no limits", but then have a clear idea of what constitutes an "X-Division wrestler"; it's coming within a breadth of saying "It's for the flippy boys" without actually saying it.
 

1 hour ago, tiger_rick said:

There's a reason WWE had a hundred titles too at one point and even now, has AAA title matches on their TV - which I don't see any complaint about by the bad faith actors for some reason.

I always think about this every time I see bad faith arguments about AEW having too many titles.

AEW has five men's singles titles, the tag and trios, and then two women's singles titles and the tag. Yes, you sometimes see ROH, NJPW or CMLL titles showing up as well, but I think that's increasingly rare - Bandido hasn't been carrying the ROH belt around him with him during his current Trios programme at all.

In WWE, you've got four main roster men's singles titles, two sets of men's tag titles, four women's singles titles and the women's tag titles. So the only category in which AEW have more belts than WWE is men's singles belts, and I'd say WWE having two separate World Championships makes that one pretty equal. 

There's then an additional two men's and women's singles titles and a tag title in NXT (for comparison's sake, let's contrast that to three men's belts, three women's belts, a tag and a trios for ROH), a men's and women's title in EVOLVE, and a men's and women's WWE ID Championship, and then the AAA Mega Title has been featured on RAW, La Catalina wrestled on RAW as AAA Reina de Reinas champion, Rey Fenix is regular defending the AAA Cruiserweight Title on WWE TV, The War Raiders were defending the AAA Tag Titles on Smackdown. Weird that WWE don't seem to get the same criticisms as AEW over that.

[gmoney]

I wish we could stop with the whataboutary any time someone criticises another promotion. I think only Supremo still watches WWE these days? This was a thread about AEW specifically in the title. Do we have really have "bad faith arguments" on here?