twitter google-plus feed2 chevron

WWE Women’s Tag Titles revealed, 6-team Elimination Chamber match set; Heavy Machinery debuts

  • Sparti Love

    Adding two shows just to have tag team titles is silly. We don’t need more shows, we have too much already and no one is going to watch a show dedicated to tag teams. Tag matches can be really boring and slow.

    I agree that we need floating champs, at least until the women tag teams are more established. While the champs are facfac one team on Raw, the teams on SD can feud for #1 contender. If anything there’s more for the women to fight for because there’s always been women tag teams/alliances that didn’t involve the Woman’s Championship belt. Now everyone can be utilized in some capacity.

  • MT McGee

    Yes, but in fairness anyone not Alexa, or whoever she may be talking to at the time, is the highlight of a prolonged Alexa speaking segment.

  • Whistling Joe

    That’s not what I’m saying. What I’m saying is let’s say that the Iiconics, a Smackdown team, are champs and are feuding with the Riott Squad, a Raw team, what do Sonya Deville and Mandy Rose have to do in the meantime over on Smackdown? Nothing. There’s no reason for them to compete, nothing for them or any of the other SD teams to fight for. What are they going to do? Go over to Raw and try to take out the Riott Squad so they can be number one contender? The whole thing is broken. And a feud can not live outside of TV. I refuse, as do MANY others, to follow feuds on social media. I have more important things to do in my life than follow everyone in WWE on Instagram, FB, and Twitter so that I can know who’s beefing with who. If it’s not on my TV, it doesn’t count.

  • Kyle Abraham

    Anyone else think Otis in that segment was the highlight? Lol

  • CC

    But as I already said, back then you did not have the network. There has been numerous rumours of a womens division show similar to 205 live for a while now, so a weekly show like that would help immensely.
    And as has been seen recently with Lynch/Rousey, a feud can live outside of TV.
    And while someone holds the belt, they are no longer exclusive to a brand. That means whoever holds the belt can actually appear on both shows in a single week.
    Just because a tag team on SD has the belts, does not mean that they will not appear on Raw. Simple really.

    Why would you think that the only time they can fight a tag team from another show is on PPV? The title belongs to both shows and whoever holds the title essentially become free agents during that period.

  • Whistling Joe

    No, it didn’t work because let’s say you had three women on Raw and four on Smackdown and someone on Smackdown had the title and was feuding with someone else on Smackdown. What the hell are the women on Raw supposed to be doing until that feud ends and it’s their turn at the belt? What the they need to do, as much as I dislike the idea of more main roster programming, is bring back Heat and Velocity and stick the Raw women’s title and Raw men’s tag belts on Heat and their Smackdown counterparts on Velocity. That way if you want to watch men’s tag matches or the women’s matches you will ONLY see them on Heat and Velocity. Doing anything else would turn those shows back into Superstars or Main Event.

  • CC

    Not really that stupid. There is not enough depth in the individual womens rosters to justify two tag belts, and in this day of Network specials etc, it makes floating titles more feasible.
    In fact I would say now is a perfect time to get rid of two mens tag titles and two heavy weight titles, and go back to floating championships.

    Plus, it did not work before because of poor booking, not because the idea is bad. And can you honestly tell me that titles like the IC, USA & Universal are being booked well now? Being brand specific is not exactly working for them now is it.

  • Whistling Joe

    Stupid stupid stupid. We’re back to floating champs. Because that worked so well during the first brand split.