2 reasons why WWE should split the Undisputed WWE Universal Championship and 2 reasons why they shouldn't

WWE committed to a one-world-title philosophy when they had Roman Reigns unify the two world titles at WrestleMania 38. Since then, there has been one top title on the roster for everyone to gun for.

Reigns' reign as the Undisputed Universal Champion has been solid, but it has arguably stalled a bit compared to his dominance with just the Universal title. This, coupled with some other factors, has brought up the debate of the company being right to unify the championships or not.

As such, we look at two reasons why WWE should split their undisputed championship and two reasons why they should persist with the current one.

#4 Why WWE should split the world title: Roman Reigns is on a part-time schedule and doesn't look like he will drop it for a while

Reigns is on part-time God Mode

Roman Reigns' victory over Drew McIntyre at Clash at the Castle means there are no more viable challengers left for him on the main roster. The European premium live event was a big chance to crown a new champion, but the writers didn't take their chance.

Reigns' part-time schedule means it will be a while before he defends his title again. This cannot persist with the top championship of a wrestling promotion. We get that the backstage personnel want to capitalize on The Tribal Chief's star power, but that can be done by making him lose one of his titles while allowing him to keep the other.

#3 Why WWE shouldn't split the world title: It seems like a bigger deal when unified

Quick question - does 'Universal Champion' sound better than 'Undisputed WWE Universal Champion'? Not at all in our books, which is why it shouldn't be split back into the two parent titles.

Holding a championship that was born from the unification of two already-prestigeous world titles is the pinnacle of anyone's wrestling career. The champion seems like the absolute top dog and THE one to beat. Having two world champions shoots down some of that credibility.

#2 Why WWE should split the world title: RAW seems obsolete without one

Reigns rarely appears on RAW

The problem with Roman Reigns being the undisputed top champion is that he is a SmackDown superstar. This means the world title is almost always on the blue show and is being defended against their wrestlers. RAW has suffered because of this, with most of their roster barely getting a sniff at the championship.

This is unfair to superstars like Bobby Lashley, AJ Styles and many others. If RAW has a world title, we could see way more high-profile matches taking place. While it's nice to see the secondary championships being spotlighted on the red show, it's not quite the same.

#1 Why WWE shouldn't split the world title: It ends any hope of a potential axing of the brand split

WWE reintroduced the brand split in 2016 and has persisted with it ever since. This meant having two world titles instead of just one, but post-WrestleMania 38, there have been two shows and one world championship.

The brand split being binned is a rumored possibility, but it's one the company hasn't committed to yet. It's nice to have options, but if they split the world title, they will no longer have that particular route at their disposal. For all the pros of splitting the world championship, Triple H and company would do well to mull over the cons.

Do you think the Undisputed WWE Universal Championship should be split? Give your thoughts in the comments section below.