WWE, calling Dibiase and Rhodes are TWO times champions? What??

Question

Ok, now W.W.E puts a lot of emphasis on how many world title reigns a superstar has had, e.g Ric Flair is known as a 16 time world champion.

However, after seeing the recent events concerning Rhodes and DiBiase and the world tag titles, I reckon that it would be much better and fairer measureing a champion on days held the title not the individual reigns themselves.

I mean, Rhodes is now a 3 time champion and Dibiase a two time champion but would have been a better tag team if they hadn't lost to Cena and Batista in the first place, yet they'd still be on Cody's Second and Ted's first reign.

I think it would be better if they said 'held the world title for over 3 years (or 1000 days), rather than saying '10x'

Your thoughts please?

Answer 1

Rhodes had it with Holly and Ted then they lost it and got it back again which makes 3 tag team title wins

Answer 2

They shouldn't even be tag team champs, FALSE WIN!

Answer 3

Yes 2times

Cody won 3times with hardcore Holly as well  

Answer 4

I 100% know what your talking, because to me it's more important how long you have held a championship rather than holding it a huge amount of times. The No. of days just seems way more important. Then again there are some guys like JBL and MVP who talk about being the longest reining champ on SD! or holding the US title. When you think about it some of the Legends of wrestling may have short reins with a title (if the No. of reins and days aren't added). It's wired though, most people of today seem more interested in the No. of reins rather than the days held.

I'm pretty sure though that if there where reeeeaaaaaalllllly long reins today, most would complain. But I do think that you make an interesting point :).

Answer 5

yes, ure rite

Answer 6

Title reigns are a joke these days. Some last one day (i.e Backlund before Diesel beat him or Kane's first reign) or even seconds (Yokozuna drops the strap to Hogan at WM9). Others UNDESERVEDLY last for months. How in the world was Cena allowed to have such a long reign and break the records of great legends like Bret Hart. Also, the numbers mean nothing. Triple H is now a 12 time champion, but does he deserve to be? Consider this: Bret hart was a 7 time World champion--5 times in WWE twice in WCW. Triple H now has 12 reigns. Who is the true legend here? Also, does Hunter really deserve to be the one to break Flair's 17 reigns (also an inflated number) which is what WWE is setting him up to do? Reigns mean nothing. Look at the true match quality and substance of reigns--superstars should be rated on the quality of their legacies not quantity.

Answer 7

I remember RVD and Booker T. doing a segment. Booker bragghed about be the 5 time WCW champion and RVD said like, I can't believe you lost the WCW title 5 times.

I agree the length of the reign should be more important than the number of reigns.