Friday, September 29, 2023

Latest Posts

Your Two Cents: Would Two Titles Be Better Than One?

“Your Two Cents” is our interactive feature where we gauge the opinions of our Twitter and Facebook followers on different discussions in women’s wrestling.

This week, we’re asking this: Two years ago yesterday, the Women’s Title & Divas Title were unified. We want to know: do you think the division would be better off today if the WWE kept both titles? We’ve read your responses on our social media pages and picked some of the best submissions to highlight here on the website. As always, you can join the debate by leaving your comments!

Ahl Anthony Aggari | They should have kept both titles. One for Smackdown and one for Raw. In that way, more Divas will have more chance to showcase their talents. I just miss those times where Superstars and Divas fights for their brands. Those epic Smackdown vs. Raw are now gone. Until now, I can’t believe that they retired the Women’s Championship. It was a really prestigious title.
Ant John | Personally, I never saw much need for two titles. There were only a handful of Divas on each brand that could put on solid matches, and I feel having the two made the depth of the division shallower. Outside of Victoria, Michelle McCool, Natalya and Maryse there was no one on the blue brand to contend for the Divas title (when it original came in). They should’ve done what they do now, have all Divas on both brands competing for one title. More Divas = more thirsty competition. Now if only WWE did something with them for longer than a cup of coffee the belt might mean something.
Bobby James | I have always supported having 2. One, the Women’s Championship for established talents like Beth Phoenix, Layla, Natalya and Eve Torres. And one used to develop women like Tamina, Aksana, Kaitlyn, etc. I think eliminating the Women’s Championship was a mistake. It took the division down as a whole. Plus who in their right mind doesn’t think names like Kharma, Beth Phoenix, Natalya, Eve and Layla don’t need to be on the Moolah/Trish Stratus/Lita list?
Eric Holt | I feel that the WWE should have kept both titles active. Since the Women’s Championship belt was retired, there has been one divas feud that happens for about a month or so, and as a result, more Divas have had to take a backseat and wait for their opportunity to be a part of a feud/get a title shot. If WWE had kept both titles, we’d be treated to not one, but two Diva feuds, and more Divas would be used. Plus, it would of have been nice to have seen other DESERVING Divas who have never held the Women’s Championship or the Divas Championship to have held one or the other.
Francisco Mata | It’s kinda difficult to predict what will happen in the future, but I’m going to risk and say that it would’ve been a horrible decision if WWE kept both titles. Why? Simply because as we have seen most of the Divas reigns nowadays are forgettable to say the very least, and if the Women’s Title was kept it would destroy the prestige that was built over the years by many great women’s wrestlers. Taking the Women’s Title away had its pros and cons but taking it away definately made a good transition to a new generation.
Josue Guzman | I find myself constantly asking myself this. We have to keep in mind that what made the Women’s Title so prestigious was that it was around for 50+ years, was held by some of the greatest women in WWE history, was very strongly pushed (back when ALL the titles meant something) and put in very strong and entertaining story lines/fueds.

The Divas Title has yet to hit the five mark, held by women who some find as “unworthy” of being champion and has never really been pushed the way the Women’s Title was. I do think that division would’ve been better had the WWE kept both titles. After all the whole reason the Divas Title was even introduced was to give the Smackdown an opportunity to some gold (well, in this case, silver).

More titles means more opportunities, I mean look at what happened to the tag division when the WWE unified their title; the division was hurt too. All I’m saying is that with some time, the right creative team, a new roster and perhaps a more serious design, the Divas Title can be worth something to look forward to.

Kiemon Beard | It makes the one title a hot potato to whatever flavor of the week is gaining popularity. Two titles could allow Divas to grow on each brand.
Megan Travis | On paper the answer should be yes. One belt could still be used for Raw and the other Smackdown and that would mean at least four ladies are getting showcased in the two title feuds. But WWE’s had trouble bothering to book anything for a single title feud up until lately so it makes me think there would have been that issue with both belts.
Zak Burke | It’s best they left the Women’s Title behind because think of all the women who’ve held the Divas title since Michelle’s second reign. Can you imagine them as Women’s Champ?

And now we turn it over to you…

What are your two cents on the debate? Should the WWE have kept both championships? Tell us in the comments…

Latest Posts

Don't Miss