I would let them Co exist for at least a few months as to not stick all of our eggs in one basket.

Co-existing might be rough with the lack of activity around here. Im sure RULE's got a plan but what I thought generated the most interest in the initial belts were the tournaments that decided the champs...cuz you had the tourney then everyone who didn't win was trying to get the belt for a while after. If there's a tourney, the current champs could be slated to face the winners of the tourney and give them a fair shot. Idk...just thinking with my fingers here

I always thought u weren't half bad.

But what kinda title?

---------- Post added at 10:14 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:12 AM ----------

You get heated faster than a microwave

If you and @ILLoKWENT get your ships together. Hell, even give us a date for Illmania we could probably form some decent teams in the run up.

sounds like a good idea, especially if it works

There's too many spots on the GC's. I think u should make the brackets smaller.

I'll wait on some more comments.

Could be exciting to have a new belt around. Kinda like having UFC & Bellator.

Both heavyweight belts, just different ranking and execution methods.

I don't think it would go over well just seeing the activity levels now and it would saturate titles even more like Illo said. I don't see a point in having another interchangeable title PPV when the one in place now isn't flourishing. Might as well just rebrand LBA/T and spice it up if you're looking to make things more interesting.

Exactly.. why would we need another interchangeable title thrown in?the existing one is not as active as it once was, and even you yourself can't promise to be able to commit consistently if your we're to go back and run the LBT.. I don't see any point tbh.. I say you run LBT again and let it flourish like it once did..

EtH Vs RULE - Audio = Main Event


Yeah, RULE definitely knows what the people want.