5 reasons why WWE should not end the brand split after the title unification match

Following the announcement from WWE that the Brock Lesnar vs. Roman Reigns Match at WrestleMania 38 will be a title unification bout, it has made things more interesting. There's no doubt it'll be the biggest WrestleMania Main Event in years.

However, should the world championships be unified, WWE will have one undisputed world champion across the two brands. WWE will find itself in the same situation they were in before 2016.

Back in 2016, WWE decided to split brands and had two world champions on respective brands. Now that Lesnar and Reigns are set to battle for one unified title, the brand split is at risk of being undone.

Here are five reasons why WWE shouldn't end the brand split after the title unification match and revert to the pre-2016 situation.

---

#5. There will be one less champion to aim at

The problem with the pre-brand split era was that there was one top champion. While one can argue that this gives the champ more potential challengers to face, it also means there are fewer feuds for fans to enjoy.

If there are two world champions, there can be two simultaneous top feuds. It also allows for more big matches and more eyeballs on the product. That won’t be the case if the brand split comes to an end.

#4. Many superstars will be on the fringes

The biggest issue fans had before the brand split was that there were only so many stars WWE could give the spotlight to. Many talented wrestlers were left without any direction or prominent storylines.

The brand split allowed multiple wrestlers to shine because there were more feuds in the limelight. That has been the case until the present day, but it's at risk of ending if WWE decides the title unification warrants the end of the brand split.

It will be a shame if talented superstars find themselves directionless and without real storylines. For that to not happen, the brand split must stay.

---

#3. One show might become irrelevant

If one recalls WWE’s product before the brand split, they'll remember it was all about RAW, pay-per-views, and nothing else. SmackDown was little more than a glorified house show, with next to nothing of note happening on the blue brand.

The brand split made SmackDown as relevant as RAW and kept it that way for years. Fast-forward to the present, and SmackDown is under the FOX umbrella and a bigger show than its red counterpart. Nevertheless, one must still watch both shows because both are significant in the narrative scheme of things.

However, if the brand split ends, WWE will make SmackDown the sole show worth watching due to their lucrative deal with FOX. The world champion will also reside in the blue camp, making RAW the pre-2016 SmackDown and an afterthought.

#2. Survivor Series will become less interesting

One of the brand split’s biggest positives was that it brought about Interbrand warfare. RAW and SmackDown clashed at Survivor Series every year to determine which brand was superior that year, with multiple dream matches taking place.

Before the two-brand setup, however, Survivor Series was just another generic pay-per-view. It became a must-see because WWE embraced a dual-brand venture, and it's in danger of becoming mediocre again if they end the split.

While WWE can still make Survivor Series a decent event, it won't carry the hype of two brands duking it out for bragging rights.

---

#1. Interest in the product will dip

If we're to talk numbers, WWE made more money during the brand split era as more fans tuned in to watch both their shows and the pay-per-views, whereas the pre-split time saw most viewers on RAW and SmackDown’s viewership sub-par.

Numbers don’t lie, and if WWE wants the money to keep rolling, they'd be wise to persist with the brand split. There's an appeal in having one champion reigning over two brands, but it wouldn’t be the smartest thing to do.