Sure, I apologize for the confusion earlier. I strongly believe that the WWE should have only one undisputed world championship, just like how Major League Baseball (MLB) recognizes only one true champion despite having two leagues. MLB has the American League and the National League, each with their own champions, but they ultimately compete for one ultimate title, the World Series.

This approach ensures that the championship remains exclusive and that only the best of the best can earn the title of world champion. It also adds prestige to the title, as it is seen as the ultimate goal for all wrestlers to achieve. In contrast, having multiple world champions dilutes the value of the title and creates confusion among fans, as it is difficult to determine which title is truly the top prize in the company.

Moreover, the idea of “everybody gets a trophy” is antithetical to the nature of professional wrestling. A world championship should be earned through hard work, talent, and perseverance, and not handed out simply to appease multiple wrestlers or fans.

To provide a detailed example, during the early 2000s, the WWE had two world champions, the WWE Championship and the World Heavyweight Championship. This resulted in numerous instances of unification matches to determine which title was the “real” world championship, including at WrestleMania XX and Survivor Series 2001. In the end, the WWE ultimately unified the two titles in December 2013, underscoring the realization that having two world champions was a flawed approach.

In conclusion, the WWE should have only one undisputed world championship. The concept of having one true champion is prevalent in many sports, including boxing, mixed martial arts, and even esports, and it ensures that the championship remains exclusive and only the best of the best can earn the title of world champion. The WWE could have different titles for different brands or shows, but only one should be recognized as the ultimate world championship.