5 reasons why WWE shouldn't unify the men's titles 

#4 Leaves one show without a title

Will Monday Night Raw or SmackDown Live be left without a title picture when all is said and done?

Seriously though!

What about the superstar and the brand that doesn't win the winner take all match hinted at by WWE? Not only has the company failed to explain exactly what effect this will have on the brand split, but also what effect it could have on the show that ends up losing their show's main title.

Think about it! Does either Raw or SmackDown Live exist without a title? Does WWE just end the brand split? If so, then what is the point of the Superstar Shake-up next week and what will it mean for the show that comes home a loser? It's not like WWE is just going to create another title for them to fight for, so there's got to be something else in mind.

Maybe WWE will allow superstars to switch brand and chase the title, which will effectively render the brand split meaningless. Then again, WWE could also just have either Kingston or Rollins be the undisputed champion for a while and have one of the men lose the title later, but what would be the point of the winner takes all then?

If nothing else, WWE has obviously not thought this one through and need to reconsider what they are doing here going forward. In all honesty, neither Rollins nor Kingston deserve to lose their respective titles and doing so would just be a ridiculous decision that only furthers taints WWE in the mind of fans.