4 Championship titles that need to be added (and 4 that need to go)

LAS VEGAS, NEVADA - OCTOBER 03: A replica of Ronda Rousey's WWE Raw women's championship belt is displayed in the Wrestling Revolution booth during Unicon 2021 at the World Market Center on October 03, 2021 in Las Vegas, Nevada. (Photo by Gabe Ginsberg/Getty Images)
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA - OCTOBER 03: A replica of Ronda Rousey's WWE Raw women's championship belt is displayed in the Wrestling Revolution booth during Unicon 2021 at the World Market Center on October 03, 2021 in Las Vegas, Nevada. (Photo by Gabe Ginsberg/Getty Images) /

There is nothing greater in pro wrestling than winning the coveted championship titles of a federation. While the honor is glorious, there are some wrestling titles that are sorely missing and others that make no sense.

Add an X Division Tag Title

TNA delivers most of its 5-star matches within the X Division. Wrestlers like Samoa Joe, AJ Styles, Mike Bailey, and Chris Sabin are proof enough that the X Division is one of the strongest reasons to watch Impact.

The X Division has never evolved and I think that is a crime. A tag team focus would add some excitement and more opportunities to put more wrestlers into the spotlight. It could also be a shoe-in for a trios stipulation, as many high flyers like to get into groups of three. The Rascalz versus the Time Machine? Yes, please. Ace Austin and Chris Bey versus Mike Bailey and Gringo Loco? Sign me up!

Get rid of TV/Digital/Internet titles

Championship titles that are restricted to a visual medium make no sense and rarely follow their own rule. Did WCW and ECW only challenge their TV titles on their weekly shows? No. What was the point of calling it a TV title? Did WWE and TNA only put up their internet championships online? No, that would be stupid. Giving championship titles a rule or focus can be fun, but wrestling federations NEVER follow their own rule. Besides, why confine a title to a medium that could make it less accessible? I am glad McMahon didn’t try a Streaming or Blu-Ray title.

Add a Women’s Mid-Card Title

When it comes to women’s wrestling most companies only have two options: world or tag for championship titles. This implies that there is only room for one female and one team to advance in their developmental career. Wrestling rosters have locker rooms full of women, but there is very little room to shine on them unless they have a world championship run or a rivalry.

WWE needs a mid-card title for women. You might think that with NXT, Smackdown, and Raw titles for women that would be too much and I get the logic of not overcrowding the trophy rack. But I think that women in the mid-card should not be overlooked. There are a lot of titles that you could remove to make room for it including…

Get rid of International/Intercontinental/US championships

There are few championship titles that make less sense than the ones named after countries, regions, and continents. WWE and AEW absolutely does not follow the rule behind these titles. International titles are not fought on foreign soil with foreign wrestlers. The Intercontinental title is rarely challenged in different continents. The US championship in New Japan can be won in Japan.

Once again, why have a rule that you can’t follow? This is a limit that makes no sense. I would understand if AEW had a hungry locker room full of international wrestlers waiting to bring the title home or if WWE had shows on other continents where the title could switch hands. That is clearly not the case.

Don’t get me wrong, an international title where a wrestler from a different country was facing another wrestler from a different country would be amazing. Korea facing off against Germany or Japan versus Mexico sounds exciting, but no federation has that kind of locker room flexibility.

Wrestling has been borrowing these title ideas from MMA and boxing since the 70s, but they need to understand that the names are archaic and meaningless.

 Add an Extreme/Hardcore/Anything Goes title

Most championship titles are a clever way to highlight mid-card wrestlers. This is a company’s way of saying to their talent, “We don’t want you to leave for another company, but we don’t think you are main event worthy., here’s a runner-up title.” This is a smart way to put life into the mid-card, but these titles can feel very vanilla. None of them distinguish a wrestler’s diversity or character traits. Mid-card titles feel like smaller versions of world championship titles.

Wrestlers should be fighting for titles that have personalities and challenges attached to them. An Anything Goes title would make a stipulation that the match can be anything but pinfall/submission. An Extreme Title would have no active referees. Those are fun. You can take it further and have a title that is solely for comedic matches or zany hijinks.

Hardcore titles and 24/7 titles were introduced in the late 90s (with bad results), but that doesn’t mean you can’t spice up the ring with a belt that has creativity behind it. Pro wrestling is creativity and it needs to be executed.

Get rid of TBS/TNT titles

I have no problem with the fact that AEW’s TBS and TNT titles are placeholders for upcoming mid-carders, but I do think naming your beloved prize after your media mogul is lame. Furthermore, the TBS title can be challenged on TNT programming and vice versa, meaning that it is another title that is pointlessly named.

No one would give an ounce of respect to a Skittles Heavyweight Title or a Cricket Wireless Championship belt. That would be corporate pandering. AEW has the right idea with making fresh mid-card belts, I get that, but naming it after the company giving you air time seems corny at best and butt-kissing at worst. It would also need to be changed if AEW ever switched companies.

Add a Stable Championship

There are currently no wrestling championships that reward stables. The closest we have is Trios and Tag. A Stables Championship would take the idea one step further and put a spotlight on a team or a group.

The Stable Championship could be its own division. Different teams could face off. The team captain could dictate what kind of match it would be to defend the title. Captain versus captain, 5 versus 5, battle royale. This also could set up storylines and feuds between gangs. The Trios title only promises that an extra wrestler can interfere with the match, but a Stable Championship has way more creative opportunities.

Get rid of  Universe/World Championships

Why in the holy heck would a company have two different major championship titles? I understand that WWE had to add an extra world championship because Roman Reigns was keeping his for a long time, but the idea of having two major grand prizes is confusing. If the WWE had a distinction where Raw titles could only be won by Raw wrestlers and Smackdown titles could only be won by Smackdown wrestlers that would alleviate the confusion. But you have two major titles that are not clear on what they mean and who is allowed to receive them. Is the World Championship silver and the Universe Championship gold? Is a Universe Champion better than a World Champion? Can the Universe Champion be challenged on Mars, but the World Champion can only be challenged on Earth?

Nothing was more irritating when Roman Reigns held two world championship belts. It felt like WWE was cramming his importance down our throats. In AEW, when I see a wrestler holding two different belts I think, you have over 300 wrestlers and you give this schlub half of your titles? A world championship should be the top prize; it tells the audience where to focus their ultimate praise (or heat). Having an alternate grand prize just muddies the waters.

Next. Five big matches for Randy Orton's WWE return. dark