RSS Feed

The 2013 TWB 100

Posted on

David: Every year, Tom Holzerman, proprietor of The Wrestling Blog, invites fellow wrestling bloggers, tweeters and anyone else with an opinion on wrestling to vote for the TWB 100, a ranking of the top 100 wrestlers for the previous year. Last year, Scott was a contributor, and this year I decided to join in. 

The countdown started yesterday (April 22) with the numbers 100-75. 

You can read that at this link: TWB 100 – Numbers 100-75

You can also take a look at who didn’t make the top 100, and meet the rest of the voters here.

Next Stop: New Orleans

Posted on

wwe-wrestlemania30-logo

David: As I write this, we are less than three weeks away from WrestleMania XXX. As we found out on the March 17 edition of Monday Night Raw, Triple H will face Daniel Bryan, with the winner entering the main event, which now will be a triple threat match. We’ll talk about that concept in depth, I’m sure, but I actually want to rewind a bit. On the March 10 episode of Raw, Daniel Bryan filled the ring with members of the #YesMovement, “hijacked” the show and set up his storyline with Triple H and his potential entry into the WrestleMania main event.

When it happened, I was standing in my living room “Yes”-ing my little heart out, but when I went on Twitter a little later, and the next day, it seemed like some people didn’t like it as much as I had. I saw reactions that ranged from jubilation to “that was so corny.” I’m not sure if I ever saw a full reaction from you… and even if I did, maybe our readers didn’t. What was your reaction to that scene, and if it wasn’t entirely positive, what do you think could have been done differently from a storytelling perspective?

• • •

Scott: The scene itself left something to be desired, though I can’t quite pin it down. For one thing, the crowd (the real Memphis crowd, not the staged occupiers) lacked the unison intensity of the “Yes!” chants that accompanied Bryan’s forceful exit from the Wyatt Family in a steel cage on a mid-January Raw. That was a goosebump moment as it unfolded live. The Memphis bit, though, as it played out seemed more like something that would look great in still images and the inevitable promo video than a “Raw moment” worth replaying for many years to come. (I have similar feelings about the Lawler-Shield-Kane bit from March 17. It was great, but I wanted more; it lacked the buzz of the Shield-Wyatts showdowns from February.)

Maybe what was off-kilter was Triple H’s aggression. He was selling it verbally and facially, but given the ruthless beating he delivered March 17, in retrospect his restraint in Memphis seems uncharacteristic. Could he have dominated an entire ring full of “fans”? Maybe not. But it sure seems like he would have tried.

Or maybe it was timing. The segment might have fit in better with the aesthetic of the March 3 Raw in Chicago. But there is something to be said for drawing out the story progression, especially important on the long road to WrestleMania. Ultimately the ends trump the means. We get Bryan wrestling HHH at WrestleMania for a chance to be in the title match at the end of the night. There have been some real woofers in the long history of triple threat WrestleMania title matches, but I have confidence enough in Bryan’s ability to prefer this than a Bryan-Batista bout, especially since that would have put Bryan’s title win at the Chamber.

The upside to the Bryan-HHH story dragging out is the added layers to the Batista-Orton relationship as well as the interplay between HHH and his former evolution cohorts. I wouldn’t be shocked to see Ric Flair somehow involved in the story between now and New Orleans. Unlike John Cena, the overest underdog ever, they’ve built a compelling story for Bryan with all sorts of odds to overcome and demons to put in his past. And they’ve jerked him around for so long, it’s not inconceivable they’d do it again, which makes the matches themselves worth watching.

One other small upside: Before Triple H made himself eligible to qualify for the title match, I was worried the Bryan-HHH bout would end in somewhat screwy fashion, requiring something like the intervention of Hulk Hogan to right a wrong and send Bryan to the main event. That would have bothered me, and now I’m less worried about that possibility. I do have two other WrestleMania worries — one is Hogan somehow upstaging the battle royal winner (though if Cesaro wins and giant swings Hogan back to Tampa I’ll be delirious); the other is Cena triumphing over Bray Wyatt and taking the steam out of his momentum. Do you share that concern?

• • •

David: Let me ask a rhetorical question first: does it feel odd to you the first match in this feud is going to be at WrestleMania? It does to me. WrestleMania feels to me like a show where feuds should begin or end, not move forward. I know that isn’t always the case, because the 2012 CM Punk/Chris Jericho feud didn’t really start to get going until after their match at WrestleMania XXVIII. But I guess that’s neither here nor there.

The-Wyatt-Family-newer

Follow the buzzards.

To answer your question, I do worry about Cena taking the steam out of Wyatt’s momentum. But I’m not necessarily sure Cena triumphing does that. Cena winning is not the worst thing that could happen to this feud, because killing Bray Wyatt’s momentum would be more about how he wins. Based on Wyatt’s March 17 promo, I think they are setting up for a Cena win, because Wyatt said “At WrestleMania, I don’t care if I never leave. I don’t care if I die, as long as the world sees you the way that I do.”

Off the top of my head, I can think of two scenarios where Cena winning would be acceptable to me. The first is if he gets beaten to a pulp by Wyatt (and possibly Harper and Rowan) and getting the disqualification victory. That would lead nicely to a possible steel cage match or something similar at Extreme Rules. The other situation makes for a more interesting story.

My biggest hope is Cena and Wyatt brawl, with Wyatt taking most of the punishment. However, every time Cena hits him with a big move, he gets up… almost like early 90s Undertaker. I would like the story of the match to be that Cena doesn’t know how to beat Wyatt, because everything he normally does isn’t working. I’d like to see Wyatt take three or four Attitude Adjustments, and still get up. Maybe he could even get trapped in the STF and power his way out of it after a time, all while laughing like a maniac and getting under Cena’s skin, until Cena snaps and (in a PG manner) brutalizes Wyatt. The match could end with Cena getting a pinfall victory, but a closeup on Wyatt’s face reveals that he’s still smiling. Cena gets to celebrate at WrestleMania, but on Raw the next night, Wyatt gets to explain he wanted to bring out that violent, brutish side of Cena, so really he won.

I’m not quite sure where they could go from there, but I think it would be a good way to give Wyatt and Cena their WrestleMania moments, and allowing Bray to still be the dangerous cult leader… with his momentum intact.

Going back to the Daniel Bryan storyline, our friend the Black Cat from the Old School Wrestling Podcast asked an interesting question on Twitter recently.

Tweet from Black Cat: Booking Daniel Bryan

As much as I hate to say it, if Bryan wins, I could see a feud with Batista starting immediately. If Bryan were to get the victory over Orton in New Orleans, Batista could come out on Raw and claim he wasn’t beaten and still deserves his title shot. That would conceivably give us a story that could go through Extreme Rules, but unless The Authority is still involved I’d have a hard time seeing that be a two- or three-pay-per-view feud.

What do they do with Bryan after he slays the giant Batista?

• • •

Scott: Not only is it weird for Wyatt and Cena to start off with a WrestleMania match, it’s weird for Wyatt to basically shoot to the top of the card (though not the title picture). To me this program has to continue for a few months or it’s a total waste.

I feel sort of the same way about Daniel Bryan, or more specifically, the authority. Bryan winning the title definitively at WrestleMania feels like the only satisfactory ending to the story they started heading into SummerSlam. But (mixed metaphor alert) anyone who thinks a Bryan win takes all the wind from the Authority’s sails is missing the boat.

If Bryan wins the title at WrestleMania, it’s not as if Triple H and Stephanie McMahon are going to show up on Raw the next night with a conciliatory address. Much like Vince when Austin won the gold (note to self, watch the post WMXIV Raw for proof of this memory), they’re going to be enraged Bryan is the champ and do whatever they can to get the belts back.

Depending on how the main event plays out, that could start with them dumping Orton and sending Batista after Bryan. Or maybe they let Randy and Big Dave sort out their spat and get Lesnar to challenge Bryan at Extreme Rules. (He did say he wants to be champ, after all.) The beauty of having Bryan as champion is when he is put up against insurmountable odds, he can actually make that believable, unlike Cena, who ends all of his feuds by shaking off months of abuse and getting a clean victory.

Bryan’s versatility as an in-ring performer makes me think he can tell great stories with whomever Triple H decides is the best to unseat him in a given month. It could be a cage match with a monster, his technical equal (a heeled up Punk or one-off Jericho?), an old familiar foe (Sheamus), another triple threat, or a cage match or a gauntlet or whatever. The fact Bryan is a physical underdog (when that’s rarely true for Cena) is going to make the stories seem fresh. So long as Bryan is able to maintain his popular heroism (which Punk could not), there’s lots of options on the table.

It would seem the ultimate destination is for Triple H to decide none of the underlings can do it on their own, so it falls on him to take the titles away from Bryan in the ring. How long that can or should be strung out is up for debate. Obviously Bryan will lose the title at some point, but I’m assuming I’ll enjoy the ride.

Does that make sense to you?

• • •

David: It does make sense. It fits with Triple H’s character in general, and it fits in with the way they’ve built him up for the past nine months. The idea of Triple H putting every conceivable obstacle in Bryan’s way, and Bryan overcoming them all, while vanquishing Triple H would be a great story to tell.

Speaking of great stories, the Shield seem to have gone from the verge of breaking up a few weeks ago, to becoming true purveyors of justice… and good guys?. When they came down on the March 17 Raw and defied Kane’s order to attack Jerry Lawler, it seemed to signal a shift in their mission.

NewAgeOutlawsSlammy

Dumber and Dumbest?

They were no longer going to do the Director of Operations’ bidding, which led to Kane attempting to use Rybaxel and the Real Americans to take out the Hounds of Justice. When the New

Age Outlaws, who now are all grown up and wearing real suits (as opposed to the “Dumb and Dumber”-inspired apparel from a couple of months ago), joined the attack, it told us what we needed about what the Shield would be doing at WrestleMania.

Are you with me that the Shield’s story has been pretty good leading into this match, or are there things you would have done differently?

• • •

Scott: As noted earlier, I thought the actual in-ring segment March 17 lacked some oomph. I enjoyed the most literal face turn in wrestling history as they slowly rotated away from Lawler to stare down Kane, but as far as wordless bits go it wasn’t quite as memorable as those Shield-Wyatts staredowns.

I love how the winter of Shield discontent served to better illustrate their individual personalities while keeping the group together, and how they’ve managed to — like Jake Roberts once upon a time — essentially maintain their character while simply shifting which types of opponents they target. That’s been a key WWE narrative problem in recent years. They develop compelling heel characters who happen to be fantastic wrestlers, then give in to public pressure once the performer starts drawing massive crowd response, except they have no idea what to do with the guy once they’re on “the good side.”

The WrestleMania battle royal is full of such guys — Alberto Del Rio, Dolph Ziggler, Big E, Mark Henry. You can say they don’t know what to do with good guy Miz, either, and it seems a lot of momentum has been lost as it relates to the Rhodes brothers. As we saw in the recent Intercontinental Title qualifying matches, it’s not like guys such as Ziggler and Del Rio have lost the ability to connect with a crowd. In fact, their skill in that regard probably keeps them very valuable on the house show circuit. And sure, not every segment can feature a white-hot star. But hopefully we’re going to see some more ebb and flow in the traditionally flexible spring and early summer.

Speaking of the Shield specifically, the other beef I have with their current situation is their WrestleMania opponents. Unlike with Bryan, whom I trust to deliver a great performance in nearly any match style, I’m less sure the Shield’s showdown with Kane and the Outlaws will allow the Shield to live up to its show-stealing potential. It’s sort of the same reason I’m not wild about the tag title four-way — it’s not the spotlight I’d have chosen for Cesaro.

That said, each match thus far has at least one wrestler whose ring work I almost always enjoy. I seem to be more excited for this WrestleMania than usual, but I suppose it’s hard to fully recapture emotions of anticipation once the event has come and gone. Looking back on the card for WrestleMania XXIX, however, I seem to recall only being really interested in the Team Hell No title defense and the Punk-Undertaker clash, though I was prepared to enjoy Brock and Triple H. I say this year’s show has the most potential of any recent Mania. Do you agree?

• • •

David: When you say “recent” I have to take that as the last four, because I was on a self-imposed wrestling hiatus until 2010, and given those parameters, I do agree with you. WrestleMania XXVI had me excited for the second of the two great Undertaker/Shawn Michaels matches and CM Punk vs. Rey Mysterio during the Straight Edge Society’s run, but little else. The three Manias following had good matches but also had glaring flaws in their build and match selection, not the least of which was three straight WrestleManias where the Rock, of whom I am not a fan, played a major role.

This year, the glaring flaw would have been, in my opinion, Orton vs. Batista in a one-on-one match for the WWE World Heavyweight Championship as the main event. Luckily, we appear to have escaped that fate. Even the worst-case scenario, with Triple H beating Daniel Bryan for a chance at the title, is an improvement. However, I feel pretty confident that by hook or by crook, Daniel Bryan will beat Triple H and be in the main event at WrestleMania. As it stands, of the eight announced matches, I’m excited for three of them and think four of the remaining five will be flawed but entertaining. The fifth match is the 14-Diva, single-fall match that has the potential to be a complete disaster, and seems like a lazy way to shoehorn all the Divas into WrestleMania. However, I read something this morning that gave me pause.

Stephen T. Stone, who writes the Complete Shot Blog posted his WrestleMania predictions on March 27. His predictions consist of what he would like to see happen and what he thinks is likely to happen. For the Divas match he posted the following.

Image

After I read this, it sparked something in my imagination. A few weeks ago, there was an article on WWE.com about Sara Amato (a.k.a. Sara Del Rey), the first female coach at the WWE Performance Center. The reaction to that article, at least in the corner of the internet where you and I reside, seemed to be overwhelmingly positive. In fact, I went on YouTube and watched four or five of her matches that day.

In the article, Amato says about a run in the WWE, “If the opportunity comes up, I definitely wouldn’t say no.” Well, what if she’s given a run starting at WrestleMania XXX?

I would love to see AJ Lee retain the title in the 14-Diva match only to have Vickie Guerrero come out and declare that AJ hasn’t defeated all the Divas that she invited. She introduces Sara Del Rey, Del Rey hits the ring, lands a few suplexes hits AJ with her signature move, the Royal Butterfly, and gets the win.

20140310_EP_LIGHT_sara_C-homepage2

Your next WWE Divas Champion? Probably not…but we can dream, right?Photo courtesy of WWE.com

I know the chances of this happening are slim to none, and I’m probably crazy for publishing the idea, but I have to say it would breathe some life, in my opinion, into the Divas division. Furthermore, I think if Sara Del Rey were to get a surprise run, the WWE could do worse than starting it at WrestleMania, which does draw a pretty wrestling-savvy crowd that might know who she is without a lot of build up or explanation.

Given how unlikely my scenario is, are there any other ways to avoid a 14-person (because I don’t think this is a case of it having anything to do with the competitors) match turning into a complete train wreck?

• • •

Scott: I have to say I disagree with your suggestion the Mania crowd would be savvy enough to recognize Del Rey on sight. I have no doubt she could put on a great show, but I think even Sami Zayn would fail to inspire the Superdome crowd, despite all his success on NXT. WWE crowds are conditioned to react to sameness. That’s why most guys don’t mix up their gear too often. It’s why theme songs, catch phrases and signature and finishing moves are a necessity — the routine helps fans prepare mentally for each stage of a match. You can have surprises at WrestleMania, but only if they revolve around someone a vast majority of the fans already know in some context.

That’s why you’re more likely to see a few “familiar” faces in the Andre the Giant Memorial battle royal than a shocking challenger for AJ. I do appreciate your idea — imagine if Tamina wasn’t in the match, AJ wins, then Vickie offers Tamina the chance to face the champ right then and there. Your excitement for that moment probably hinges on your belief in Tamina as a Divas champion. But for your scenario to play out as intended, it’s going to have to be someone people recognize, such as Kaitlyn.

So to answer your direct question, no, it’s going to be a train wreck of sorts unless there’s a major surprise planned. I’m not out of sorts or anything — I’ve been conditioned to expect the women’s division to be mishandled, especially show at WrestleMania. We walk a fine critical line here — not being excited about the product but being sure to place blame on the presentation and not the performers. The potential exists for great women’s wrestling within the WWE structure, but we’re not going to see it in New Orleans.

What are we going to see? Any predictions for the big night?

• • •

David: So far, the name of Hulk Hogan has only been referenced once, so let’s deal with his presence as the “host” of WrestleMania XXX. The last time WrestleMania had a host was WrestleMania XXVII, when The Rock hosted and involved himself in the finish to the Miz/John Cena title match. That was, of course, a way to set up Cena vs. Rock at WrestleMania XXVIII. Luckily, I don’t think we have to worry about Hogan setting himself up for a match at WrestleMania XXXI. However, I do predict we will see Hogan involve himself with either John Cena (since Bray Wyatt riffed on the similarities between Hogan and Cena a few weeks ago) or Daniel Bryan (since getting involved with the most popular guy on the show seems like a very Hulk Hogan thing to do.) I’m not sure what form his involvement will take, but I’m sure we will see him doing more than just “hosting.”

I’m also going to predict an absence for this year’s WrestleMania. I don’t think we’re going to see an overblown, extravagant entrance for John Cena. I think it will be closer to his typical Raw entrance. The reason for this is twofold. First: he’s not going to be in the last match of the evening. Granted, he wasn’t in the last match at Wrestlemania XXV or XXVI, but still had the Cenation Army and the Air Force Honor Guard, respectively, lead him to the ring. The second reason, however, is I just don’t think an extravagant entrance would ring true with the tone of the match. Outside of some “jokey” moments Bray has handled well, Cena has done some good character work so far in this feud, and I think if he does an over-the-top entrance, it might detract from that.

There haven’t been many celebrities, other than Drew Brees, who is involved with a charity auction, announced for this year’s WrestleMania yet, and as I write this, we are just more than a week away. Outside of Saints players, are there any New Orleans based celebrities you’re thinking might make an appearance? Do you have any other predictions for what we might see April 6?

• • •

Scott: If I were more up on popular music these days, I might be able to predict who would sing “America the Beautiful.” I haven’t the foggiest idea. I’m stunned that for such a milestone event they haven’t dipped back into the old traditions of casting celebrities to handle ring announcing timekeeper duties, etc. One of the many drawbacks to the death of the backstage interview role as part of regular shows is it becomes unwieldy to shoehorn in someone like Mario Lopez to do the job.

Further, celebrities are involved on the weekly show now. Could WWE have waited on Betty White, Aaron Paul and Arnold Schwarzenegger for New Orleans? Probably, but I guess they’re more needed on Raw these days.

I also have a hard time accepting Hogan will be little more than stage decoration, although I’m shocked how little he’s been involved in the program since his return. (Not upset, just surprised he didn’t seek a bigger role for himself.) I’m also kind of stunned there’s been so little talk about the Ultimate Warrior. I didn’t expect him to have a return match or anything, but I feel people need a reminder part of Mania weekend involves giving that nutjob a live microphone at the induction ceremony. On that note, I do expect him on Sunday night to sprint to the ring and run the ropes a few times. Anything else would be a massive disappointment.

We’re going to get a “WrestleMania Moment” from Cesaro for sure (perhaps not a win, but he’ll swing someone, Ryback perhaps?) and at least Roman Reigns if not the entire Shield. There are only 26 participants named for the 30-man battle royal, and there’s a likelihood Christian will have to drop out. I don’t imagine Warrior or Scott Hall, er Razor Ramon, would get in the ring, but could Jake Roberts? A returning star, such as Rob Van Dam? I’d bet good money those last five spots don’t get filled with Camacho or Rowan and Harper.

There are only three title matches, a throwback to days of yore. I guarantee at least one title change on the night. I’d be stunned to see the streak snapped. I actually do think the Andre trophy will survive. I have no idea what surprises might be in store for the following Monday night, but tradition dictates something major.

Rather than ask for specific predictions, let me put it to you this way: What has to happen for WrestleMania XXX to be a success in your eyes?

• • •

David: That’s an interesting question that really boils down to storytelling. As a fan of Daniel Bryan, I really want him to win the WWE World Heavyweight Championship, and if the final moment of WrestleMania XXX involves Daniel Bryan and the 70,000 fans in attendance chanting “Yes!” I’ll consider the show a success, no matter what happened beforehand. I would also accept, grudgingly, Triple H winning the title but getting attacked by Bryan at the end of the show, with Bryan standing over him leading the “Yes!” chants.

Outside of that, I want to see story development. I want to see multiple feuds created via the Andre the Giant Memorial Battle Royal. I mean, with that many guys involved in one match, it should be a good vehicle for creating storytelling opportunities.

I’d also like to see progression with characters as well. Too often, wrestling seems static. Characters stay the same, even as their situations change, which isn’t natural. This is one of the big problems I have with John Cena. Even though I like him, nothing he goes through ever seems to affect him. I want that to change this year. I want to see psychological effects of this battle with the Wyatt Family. I want to see change going forward.

What are your measures of success for the show?

• • •

Scott: You hit on my biggest touchstones as well. I’m not one to think the Daniel Bryan chase has played out too long, but I do feel WrestleMania is the natural conclusion. There’s a way for him to emerge triumphant Sunday and get thrown into a different direction Monday and for it all to be coherent and compelling.

I also agree we need to see some development from Cena along the way. If here merely vanquishes Bray Wyatt in his first attempt, that will render the buildup useless, cripple Wyatt going forward and rob us of an intriguing Cena narrative. This story should continue for a few months — and not just to keep Cena away from the title picture (in the same way Cena’s Kane and initial Rock program allowed CM Punk to have different challengers).

Image

And yes, the battle royal must, like the Royal Rumble, must be a plot incubator. Rich Thomas asked on Twitter if any feuds would come forth and then directly asked me for a prediction. My first thought was whoever dumps Big E will be in line for an Intercontinental title program. I could see that match being announced for Raw during the day Monday. I suspect the battle royal will give an indicator of Sheamus’ next opponent as well, unless (as Tom Holzerman predicted over the weekend) he becomes hired muscle for The Authority. Brodus Clay is listed as a participant, and we’ve not seen him in the ring much lately, so I’d guess he’ll stand out from the crowd as well.

There’s not much more to say about WrestleMania except I’m anxious for the actual show. The days between the go home Raw and the opening bell make up one of the longest weeks of the wrestling year in my book.

But there’s time for one last question — a two-parter. What’s your best guess for the main event of WrestleMania XXXI, and what match would you book if left to your own devices?

• • •

David: Booking the big show a year in advance is, obviously, a difficult task. The prospect of returns, either from hiatus or injury, and the signing and development of younger stars means the roster probably won’t look exactly the same next year as it does this year. I mean, in the lead up to WrestleMania XXIX, would it have occurred to you Batista might be in the main event at WrestleMania XXX? I know I wouldn’t have thought of it.

That being said, when you look at the current roster, there are a handful of Superstars who would not cause anyone to blink if they were announced for a main event at WrestleMania: Cena, Orton, Batista, Bryan and the Undertaker.  Additionally, there are a group of guys who are currently below main event standing I think could be elevated in the next year: Cesaro, all three members of the Shield, Bray Wyatt, Big E, Cody Rhodes and maybe Dolph Ziggler. Out of that group, I think Cesaro, Roman Reigns and Bray Wyatt have the highest chances of being in a main event scenario at this time next year.

However, if I’m trying to be as realistic with this prediction as possible, then I have to take into account returns, and as we know the Royal Rumble season is ripe for big, surprising returns. I could certainly envision a scenario where the WWE entices CM Punk to come back with a promise of a main event at WrestleMania XXXI. He comes back at, and wins, the Royal Rumble, and goes against WWE World Heavyweight Champion Daniel Bryan in the main event in Santa Clara, Calif.

On the other hand, if left to my own devices, I’d have Sami Zayn debut on the April 7 edition of Monday Night Raw (he can still work in NXT, until this Corey Graves story is over), winning a hard-fought match against Cesaro. I would then have him hold a spot in the upper mid-card for the next 8-9 months, allowing the audience at large to get behind him, until he wins the Royal Rumble, the same night that Cesaro beats Daniel Bryan for the WWE World Heavyweight title. That would set up Zayn/Cesaro V for WrestleMania XXXI.

Are either of those scenarios you can see happening, or is my fantasy booking just that: fantasy?

• • •

Scott: After I asked this question I started thinking about WrestleMania history. King Kong Bundy was in the main event of WrestleMania 2 despite being in the company a little more than a year. Ted DiBiase was in the main event of WrestleMania IV shortly after his debut. Would anyone a week before WrestleMania VI have guessed Sgt. Slaughter would be defending the WWF championship at WrestleMania VII? As Hogan beat Sarge, was there any inkling the defending champ a year later would be Ric Flair, while Hogan battled Sid Justice and the Warrior was (supposedly) gone forever? And Yokozuna came from nowhere just before Survivor Series 1992 to headline WrestleMania IX.

I know the first decade of WrestleMania events took place in a far different landscape than the second and especially the third, but there’s enough of a track record to say nearly anything is possible as it relates to the WrestleMania XXXI card.

Certainly if Zayn and Cesaro aren’t featured somewhat prominently on that show there will have been some sort of unexpected calamity, such as the concussion issues that robbed Ziggler of any significance from his World Heavyweight Championship reign that started the night after WrestleMania XXIX. I’m intrigued by the Wyatt Family’s story potential, but I’m not expecting any involvement with title belts. Heck, Bray is making his WrestleMania debut against the biggest star in the company — the only way he can move up is by challenging the Undertaker.

The roster is brimming with potential and there’s just not enough spots, even on a four-hour show, to let each rising star have a chance to shine. The only way to improve upon this year’s card is to write current stars out of the plot by next April, and precious few of the upper echelon seem poised to move on from WWE, even as they’re being challenged from below by a bumper crop of up-and-comers.

The good news is that means the next 12 months could be a banner year for the company, especially as the Network grows into maturity. I’m anxious to see how it all plays out — but in the meantime, let’s have a great WrestleMania weekend.

Thanks for reading! Have something to say? Contact us via Twitter, or the comments section below. We really do appreciate any and all feedback we get.

 

 

Dream of the Elimination Chamber

Posted on
wwe-network-logo

The biggest thing to happen to wrestling since PPV?

Scott: Once again, it’s been far too long. But here we go.

The WWE Network launches soon — two weeks from the time we started this debate. While there’s plenty to say about what WWEN might mean for the dollars-and-cents side of the business, this seems a good opportunity to explore the possible on-screen implications.

I have a billion questions and I’ve tried to sort them out on my own. Can’t be done. I need your insight. But I’ll start with an assertion: Fans will look back on the launch of the Network as the biggest impetus for a shift in the business model since Raw’s debut. How long, though, do you think it will take for us to see shifts in WWE storytelling methods?

WCW famously prized Monday night ratings over PPV buys, which was clearly evident in the way important events were scheduled. WWE obviously wants people to consider their monthly mega shows as important enough to be a selling point for the Network, but also have positioned WWEN as something attractive even to folks who don’t diligently follow the current product.

It’s not to say Raw will move away from cable and into the ether, but there will be changes in how stories are told, or perhaps shifts in how supershow cards are built. The first six months are crucial, since that’s the minimum subscription length. Will it be OK to leave John Cena off a show like Payback because the PPV buyrates are no longer a driving force? Will there be essential plot points exclusive to the pre-and post-Raw shows?

This early in the game, what’s your read?

• • •

David: As someone who is planning on being an early adopter, I can only hope there is “value added” material on Monday nights. Not only would I like to see additional character and plot development on the pre-and post-Raw shows, but I’d actually like to see the live action that goes on in the ring after the show goes off the air.

It strikes me that the key to the long-term success of the network is to hook the casual fan. For the hardcore fan of today’s product, WWEN pays for itself. The library of PPVs on demand will bring in lapsed fans looking to take a trip down to the corner of Memory Lane and Nostalgia Avenue. The viewer who only spends money on WrestleMania, and only watches a few Raws a year, is a tougher sell, though.

To answer your first question, I think any changes in storytelling will depend on how much business the network does initially. That initial six-month commitment is interesting, because it takes us through the post-WrestleMania season up to SummerSlam. With a lesser focus on buyrates, that time could be fertile ground for creative exploration.

In the past, I’ve read some wrestling critics advocate for the idea of an off-season in professional wrestling. With CM Punk’s sudden departure  being blamed in some circles on burn-out, it got me thinking of the idea in a new light. Could the network allow the WWE to be flexible with wrestlers’ schedules, and give them more time off?

• • •

Scott: Before I answer your last question I’m going to take issue with you on a few points. First, I don’t think the Network is all that tough a sell on the “WrestleMania only” fans. They can pay $60 to their cable company for one show, or pay the same directly to WWE for that show plus nearly limitless content. Who cares if they don’t actually watch the Network all that often? The value is undeniable.

But, is that a “casual” fan? To me, anyone willing to spend $60 on WrestleMania, even if that’s the only show they buy all year, is a bit more invested than the truly casual viewer, the kind of whom became devotees in droves during the mid-90s. During the recent Art of Wrestling podcast with guest Mike Quackenbush, Colt Cabana lamented the idea of the Network closing the loop, in a sense, meaning WWE primarily will be catering to the audience it’s already cultivated to this point. Quack countered with a positive — that maybe wrestlers can be wrestlers again and not just TV stars. But I don’t see Raw going away any time soon, if ever. It’s value to advertisers as live entertainment in an increasingly on-demand culture is impossible to ignore.

As for your question about time off, I’m not sure if I can draw a straight line from the Network to a rotating offseason, if only because I think it’s been happening already. Undertaker’s one match a year thing is the extreme, but Chris Jericho has done a good job with on-again, off-again stuff, and I think Rob Van Dam’s recent run was actually pretty well timed (it ended when he ran out of stuff to do), not to mention the resurgence of Goldust.

The key for WWE is if it can find a way to spread these things out across the year in order to get away from the perception of ringers coming in and hogging the WrestleMania spotlight. I actually think this is a great time for Punk to step away, whether it’s part of the story or not. Does anyone now care (or remember) he didn’t work a full 2013?

• • •

David: First off, you’re right. $60 is probably a bit more than “casual.” The casual fan is probably the guy who flips channels when Monday Night Football isn’t particularly compelling and happens to land on Raw. I guess my thinking is there are people who watch WrestleMania because it’s an event, and spending $60 on an event resonates with them differently than buying a subscription service. I think that’s especially true of people who don’t trust Internet streams, and they may be even more leery if they are aware of the issues WWE had with the WrestleMania online stream last year.

Also, I think there’s a point to be made about the difference between dropping $60 in one go and signing up for an auto-renewing service, which I’m assuming WWEN will be. In my above scenario, I wasn’t just thinking of it as a $60 commitment. I was thinking of it as a $120 commitment, since anyone with a gym membership knows we don’t always cancel things we don’t use, especially if we’re not having to write a physical check to pay the bill.

punk

Does CM Punk’s “sabbatical” make room for other talent to shine?

When it comes to Punk’s absence, I think longer is better for both him and the product. If the backstage reports are true, then he needs the time off to get over being burnt out. I think it also gives other talent the chance to step in and make a difference. I love that Antonio Cesaro is going to be in the Elimination Chamber match and hope it means the start of a big push for him. Is that necessarily a result of CM Punk not being around? Obviously, I don’t have the answer to that, but I certainly think it’s possible.

On the February 10 Raw, John Cena made a point of saying that the next generation of superstars needed to come through him if they wanted to be the “face of the WWE.” It’s easy to write off a statement like that as being part of the character Cena plays on the WWE Raw television program, but I have to wonder if there’s a certain reality to it. Is that why he drives himself so hard and why he forces himself to come back from injuries more quickly than medical science says should be possible? As much as I like John Cena, there are times when I think he’s Norma Desmond. Most people have heard the quote from Sunset Boulevard: “Alright, Mr. DeMille, I’m ready for my close up.” Right before that, Norma, in a dazed state after just having killed Joe Gillis (sorry if I spoiled a movie from 1950 for you) says to the news cameras: “I promise you I’ll never desert you again because after ‘Salome’ we’ll make another picture and another picture. You see, this is my life! It always will be! Nothing else!”

Kindred spirits? Or the biggest reach in the history of this blog?

Kindred spirits? Or the biggest reach in the history of this blog?

Has John Cena gotten to the point where he can’t exist outside the WWE, and will the WWE Network help with this, make it worse or have no discernable effect?

• • •

Scott: No, Cena can’t exist outside WWE, at least not as a professional entertainer. He’s tried to cross over into movies, which didn’t work any better than it does for most wrestlers, and probably also means he’s not a candidate for anything more than guest spots on TV series. There’s no other wrestling promotion where he’d  get paid what he’s worth.

I don’t see the Network having any discernable effect on Cena’s role with the company any time soon. Why? He doesn’t want to change. He seems to like the grind of the schedule (have you ever heard a report of him claiming to be tired or burned out?) and, because this is a scripted art form, he can (and must) always be presented as the same he’s always been. Absent an Austin-like injury that forces him to change his in-ring style, Cena has to be either the top of the mountain or gone altogether.

Yes, there is compelling narrative potential in a Cena who doesn’t know how to deal with his advancing age and fading powers. But there seems to be zero interest in telling that story. For one thing, he has to maintain his Übermensch status in order for there to be any real value in his rare clean defeats. For another, his character lacks the supernatural elements of the Undertaker (which mean he can fade in and out with little narrative exposition) or the vagabond, multimedia dynamism of Chris Jericho or even Punk’s “above all this/smartest guy in the building” vibe or any other element that lets you think either the character or the performer has any interest in being anywhere else.

In this way, Cena and Daniel Bryan are more similar than either character might care to admit. Bryan was right earlier this summer when he essentially labeled himself a pro wrestler who happens to be in the WWE and Cena a WWE star who fits nowhere else. That Bryan can and would go back to the independent barnstorm circuit is secondary, even if only because he’d immediately be the most bankable name. These guys are wrestlers first and foremost. Except Cena has been so big for so long, he can’t be anything but the best.

We’re not going to see Cena as the aging slugger taking a one-year deal with the Phillies just to hang around and pad his stats. But we’re also not going to see him cast as Michael Jordan, hitting one great, final shot and walking away (we’re ignoring post-1998 MJ, by the way, as everyone should), because Cena will be written to be great probably past when he can perform as well as the story demands.

I’m on a roll here, but I don’t want to get too far away from another point you established: Cesaro’s ascension as a result of Punk’s departure. I agree there may not be an exclusive correlation (I think the seeds of Cesaro’s split from Jack Swagger were sown earlier), but it’s certainly seemed to accelerate the situation. I love everything Cesaro does, so I think it’s a fantastic development. That said, I’d sooner have Punk AND Cesaro around and elevated. Much as I love Punk, I can stand to see him walk away if it means more chances for the other guys I support. So the question is where else could the dominoes fall? Who is ready to ascend around WrestleMania season, and does anyone need to leave for this to happen?

• • •

David: The name that jumps to the forefront of my mind is Dolph Ziggler. For a couple of years now, it seemed like he was ready to make the leap. If there had been an absence at the top of the card during his rise, it seems likely he would have been the guy for WWE to elevate. Unfortunately, he’s had some setbacks and regressions, and I’m just not sure if he’s capable of being “The Guy” at this point.

There is another guy who I think is ready to make “the leap,” and I don’t think there needs to be an absence for it to happen. With his performance in the Royal Rumble, and the build to the Shield’s match with the Wyatts, I think it has become obvious Roman Reigns is going to be a breakout star, and it appears it’s going to happen sooner rather than later.

As great as his Royal Rumble performance was, for me, the “moment” that told me exactly who Roman Reigns is in the eyes of the WWE creative team was on the Jan. 31 Smackdown when he stepped into Triple H’s face and told him the Shield wasn’t “asking for his approval” for a match with the Wyatts. I also think this match with the Wyatts at Elimination Chamber could be the next big “moment” for Reigns. Not to tip my hand before we get to any kind of EC discussion, but I have a feeling the finish to that match could have a lot to do with Roman Reigns not being on the same page as his Shield teammates, Rollins and Ambrose.

What will this man be doing come Wrestlemania?

What will this man be doing come Wrestlemania?

Before Punk left the WWE, there was a rumor I read a few places saying he was going to be featured in a match with Triple H at WrestleMania. Since Punk has left, that leaves Triple H open as a dance partner. I may dislike Triple H as a character, but I have to admit a match with him in the SuperDome in New Orleans could have a huge effect on an emerging Superstar’s career. Provided they built a good enough story, how would you feel about a Roman Reigns/Triple H match at WrestleMania XXX?

• • •

Scott: Here’s the thing about WrestleMania, and also the way the Chamber shakes down Sunday: what about Daniel Bryan? I think Bryan defeating Triple H would be a pretty good WrestleMania story, but are fans going to e-riot if Bryan fails to win the title Sunday the way they did when he didn’t appear in the Rumble?

At this juncture, I’d have preferred Wyatts-Shield to wait for WrestleMania. Maybe that’s because I don’t want the Shield to break up. Maybe it’s because I would like the group to have a more memorable WrestleMania moment before it disbands. Maybe it’s because I want the Wyatts to shine on the big stage and I can’t yet see where they go from here. We could have expected a Cena-Wyatts story after the Rumble, but that was ignored probably in light of Punk’s departure. After the go-home Raw, it’s not too hard to see a Cena-Real Americans plot developing (perhaps with the inclusion of the real Real American, Hulk Hogan), but that could all change depending on what happens in the Chamber.

To directly answer you, Reigns-HHH could be fantastic. All the Shield members, as well as guys like Cesaro and Big E Langston, can quickly and easily be put into matches with established veteran stars with an “old guard/new blood” narrative, except without the clunky, late-stage WCW forcing of factions amongst each side.

Cena has been vocal of late, on camera and off, about the rising stars needing to go through him to prove they’re ready to ascend. And while he’s clearly at the top of the mountain, other guys like HHH, the Undertaker, Lesnar and so on can still provide the kind of moment needed to move an up-and-comer into prominence as a new company cornerstone.

After two years where the top of the Mania card was pretty clear from a distance, there’s much more confusion going into a show that, thankfully, kind of sells itself at this point. Are you OK with that?

• • •

David: I am absolutely okay with that. I prefer wrestling to be unpredictable to a point. The problem with WrestleMania XXVIII was they set up the main event between John Cena and The Rock a year early, and then had to try to build a story that led up to it featuring a guy who wasn’t around very often. It was an interesting experiment that, in my eyes, wasn’t a creative success. They didn’t telegraph the WrestleMania XXIX main event quite as far in advance, but it was pretty clear once the Rock announced his intention to challenge for the title at Royal Rumble we probably were going to end up with “Twice in a Lifetime.” The fact we still don’t know what’s going down at WrestleMania XXX, other than Batista headlining, creates a lot of interesting potentiality for the show.

The fact there is no announced match yet provides an interesting look at the WWE’s business. As John Cena pointed out during his appearance on the Steve Austin Show, the WWE has already sold more than 60,000 tickets to WrestleMania without announcing more than a single competitor. This tells me that, despite any negative feelings about booking or creative direction, there are going to be fans who will always want to go to WrestleMania, because of its status as the “Big Event.” I wonder, though, if this is a bit of a double-edged sword.

Could the success of WrestleMania as a brand be to the detriment of creative booking?

• • •

Scott: I certainly think there’s something of a disincentive to taking major creative risks leading into WrestleMania, which is why the spring and early summer have always been more interesting — if not more creatively successful. I’m not at all sure how important it is to use a WrestleMania itself to build fans for the ensuing 12 months, and whether the shift to the Network vs. pay-per-view buys will be signal any shifts in the pace at which stories are told or the choices made about which performers to feature at given points on the calendar. Of course, that’s how we got into all this discussion in the first place, right?

I think it’s simply too early to tell how the next WWE era will differ from what we’ve come to know over the last several years. What I do know is there are now a large handful of stars on the cusp of breaking through to the top of the promotion. And even if guys like Big E Langston and Antonio Cesaro stumble, there remain others such as Damien Sandow and Dolph Ziggler who have been forcibly detoured of late, or the greatness of Cody Rhodes or AJ Lee, who have been upstaged in recent weeks. That’s to say nothing of the potential breakout success stories currently headlining NXT. There are so many great WWE matches every single month it’s almost impossible to envision anything but sustained success even if Cena should slow down and Punk just stays home.

But that’s big picture. Let’s get a little more narrow, specifically this Sunday. Let’s try something new here as we wrap up. We’ll take a look at the card the way A&E critics approach award shows. What do you think will happen, and how does it align with what should happen?

• • •

David: Okay, let’s start with the undercard and work our way up. On Raw, it was announced Titus O’Neil will take on Darren Young in a singles match. The feud between them started after a tag team loss by the Prime Time Players that ended with Titus O’Neil attacking Darren Young, thus dissolving their team. I tend to like stories that evolve from tag team break ups, and while this one hasn’t gotten nearly enough television time on Raw, I’m interested in seeing how these two mesh as opponents. I think Titus O’Neil probably will win the match, as he’s gotten way more television time in the lead up to the match, including his interview with Renee Young on Monday night. I think that’s probably the right move, since they seem to want to build him as a strong bad guy. I think he needs to look strong and get a decisive win, even if it is by nefarious means. That would allow them to carry the feud through and maybe end it at Extreme Rules when Young gets his revenge.

Is there a different way you’d write the story?

• • •

Scott: Well, for starters I wouldn’t have run with this until after WrestleMania. It came out of nowhere and, as you noted, is getting seriously lost in the shuffle, which is a shame because I think both guys are talented. I just don’t see this match on the WrestleMania card at all, unless they’re planning to have it be a subplot of a multi-man match like a Money in the Bank or battle royal. That said, I think O’Neil should and will win because WWE needs more talented lower-card bad guys at the moment. Hopefully that doesn’t mean an end to Darren Young being worthwhile. I’d have preferred to see these guys stick together to help bolster the tag team scene.

Next match up is the Tag Team Title match between the champion New Age Outlaws and the Usos. I think the Usos deserve to be champs at this point, but again this seems like a story that’s lacked build over the last several weeks. The Outlaws and Rhodes brothers seemed to still be feuding until just this week, and while the Usos have proven worthy of a shot, I don’t see a win here having big buzz. It seems likely Road Dogg and Billy Gunn are headed toward a WrestleMania appearance (a natural carrot to get them back in the ring for a few months), and I expect a rematch in New Orleans, or perhaps a multi-team encounter. Your thoughts?

• • •

David: You’re right, the build hasn’t really been there for this contest. I did enjoy the Billy Gunn/Jey Uso match, and even more so, the interplay between Road Dogg and Jimmy Uso on commentary. It was, in my memory, the best recent use of wrestlers on commentary. Like you, I think the Outlaws will and should beat the Usos leading to a WrestleMania rematch, where, hopefully, the Usos will win the titles on the big stage, which would be a huge elevation for them. I almost would like to see a third party help the Outlaws win at Elimination Chamber, paving the way for Rikishi to be at ringside for the Usos at Mania.

The next match, and I’m working my way up from bottom to top on the Wikipedia page for the event, is Big E (nee Langston) vs Jack Swagger. This match, like the first two we’ve discussed is suffering from a short buildup. Swagger won the title shot in a Fatal Four Way match on Smackdown, which aired nine days before the pay-per-view, and doesn’t really have any history with Big E. Unlike the first two matches, I see very little in the way of a long program between these two. I don’t see Swagger winning the title, and with the tension they’ve teased between Zeb and Jack, I wonder if this is going to be the match where we see an ill-advised (in my opinion) Jack Swagger re-alignment, and a possible Real Americans split. The reason I see it as ill-advised is because I think Jack Swagger will always work best as a bad guy with a manager, and I’d rather see Cesaro as a good guy, anyway.

Maybe I’m wrong, though. Do you think we’ll see Jack Swagger as a good guy, and will the WWE Universe accept him as such?

• • •

Scott: We’re agreeing too much again. I don’t see Swagger succeeding in attempts to get cheers. If he breaks from Colter and Cesaro I see the same thing happening as we predicted for Darren Young — a demolition to serve the needs of building his former partner. Of course, with Cesaro’s classic against Cena Monday as well as his spot in the Chamber Sunday, a feud with Swagger probably is a step back at this point. I’m actually fond of Swagger, and his NXT match with Sami Zayn is a largely overlooked bright spot of 2013. Hopefully there are some interesting stories for him going forward.

At least that match will be more interesting than the next one on the docket — Batista vs. Alberto Del Rio. What precisely is the point of this contest? Batista is in line for a title shot at WrestleMania, after one of the least impressive Royal Rumble wins in history, and the only possible interesting story is for him to lose to Del Rio, which sets up Del Rio as a top challenger should Batista win the belt. But is there any indication that’s a direction they’ll pursue with the Mexican millionaire? Should win (for my own interests)? Del Rio. Will win? Batista. Do you agree?

• • •

David: Well, I agree Batista will win, but I don’t necessarily agree Del Rio should win. Primarily because I don’t have an interest in Del Rio winning. Even though I can see he is a skilled performer, he doesn’t move me or excite me in any way. I don’t feel anything during his matches, which is unfortunate. Of course, I pretty much feel the same way about Batista, except he’s not as skilled technically as Del Rio. But, in terms of the story, it seems pretty clear Batista will win. It wouldn’t make much sense for him to lose and then be in the main event of WrestleMania six weeks later.

As for the point of this contest, there isn’t a good one. I think the point is to give Big Dave something to do while he’s waiting around for his title shot. Like I said… not a good point. It would almost be better if he were a part-timer like Lesnar, because he could have sat at home for the last month instead of having a pointless feud before his real job begins.

That brings us to the first of the two big matches on the card (maybe the biggest): the Wyatt Family vs. the Shield. There are so many storytelling possibilities for this match I don’t quite know where to begin. As I said earlier, I think Roman Reigns is poised to be the breakout star of the Shield, and I think he takes another step toward the deep end of the WWE talent pool this weekend. I am predicting a Wyatt family win in this match, and I think it’s the right move, primarily because I think there are more storytelling possibilities with a Shield loss.

I can envision a scenario where Reigns has the match well in hand, and Dean Ambrose tags himself in and ends up costing the Shield the match. From there, you can either break them up immediately, continue the simmering tension in the group or have their group resolve strengthen by having Triple H explicitly turn his back on them.

I know you’re looking more toward a Daniel Bryan/Triple H match at WrestleMania, so what do you see happening between the top trios in WWE?

• • •

Scott: Well, I should clarify my stance on Bryan. I’m looking for him to have a WrestleMania moment. Retaining the tag titles last year in New York was great, but I am aching for the visual of a triumphant Bryan leading the entire Superdome in a “Yes!” chant, and I’m OK if that’s not for a title victory. After all, it would take some screwy machinations for him to go in as a challenger at this point, unless he gets horned into a Batista-Orton match — which is possible, I guess, if he gets screwed in the Chamber and offered a qualifying match into the Mania main event some time on Raw.

I’d also be OK with a Bryan-Undertaker match, which I suppose could be set up if Undertaker saves Kane from a Bryan assault. Fans aren’t going to cheer for the streak ending unless Undertaker is going against someone with amazing crowd support, and even Cena at this point doesn’t qualify. And yes, yes I have gone down a fantasy booking rabbit hole, thanks for asking.

Reigns-HHH would be a great WrestleMania match. Both the Wyatts and all three Shield members need to have a place on the WrestleMania card, and hopefully not in multi-man matches. The WWE.com staff recently dreamed up some Mania matches, including a 10-man Money in the Bank that included both the Wyatts and Rollins and Ambrose, and putting Bray Wyatt in a match like that seems ridiculous. Harper and Rowan were able tag champs in NXT, but Wyatt’s character would not be enhanced by a singles title pursuit.

wyatts

Follow the Buzzards.

I did love, however, that same article’s suggestion of pairing Reigns and Langston. That’s a match I’d enjoy as much as Sheamus and Cesaro. Yet I’m not ready to let go of the Shield. Would they work well against Authority figures like Kane and the Outlaws? Would people complain if this Chamber match ends inconclusively and we end up with a rematch in New Orleans?

Your prediction of Ambrose causing the Shield loss and further dissension seems like the story they’ve been telling of late. But certainly Reigns turning by attacking Triple H would be far more momentous than him going against Ambrose. I’d love to see Reigns and Brock Lesnar tear each other apart, for that matter.

The main question I have about the Chamber, and this gets into the main event, is where are we going with John Cena? Do we revisit the hint of a Cena-Wyatts program we saw at the Rumble? Does Cena-Cesaro on Raw become Cena and Hogan against the Real Americans? I know we’re talking in circles a bit, but let’s look at the main event Sunday. There’s six guys, and it would seem all of them (with the possible exception of Christian) ought to have a spot on the WrestleMania XXX card. Yet all of them have so many possible stories that could be told well between now and then. What happens Sunday — not just the end of the match, but the storytelling all around it — will be incredibly interesting.

At this juncture, the best I can say is it does not appear Cena winning is the obvious, inevitable outcome (as it was during Money in the Bank 2012 and the 2013 Royal Rumble). That alone is a significant improvement over what we’ve come to expect. I know I didn’t make an actual prediction, but we need to wrap up soon. What are some things you expect to see in Sunday night’s main event?

• • •

David: I agree with your point about Cena winning not being obvious. I agree with it so much my expectation is he will be eliminated prior to the end of the match. If we’re seriously talking about a possible Hogan/Cena vs. Real Americans match at WrestleMania, why not use the Elimination Chamber to further what was started on Raw? Cena pinned Cesaro clean last Monday after a hard-fought match, so it seems plausible Cesaro could be the one to eliminate Cena from the Chamber.

daniel_bryan_bio_20130430

I’m hopeful, though I wouldn’t say I expect it, that we’ll have an understanding of why Christian was put into this match. He has to be going somewhere, right? Well, I guess he actually doesn’t…but I hope there is an outcome for him other than the one I’m afraid we’ll see, which is he’ll be one of the first men to enter and the first one to leave.

Along those same lines, I expect to have a better idea of where Sheamus is headed after this weekend. There have been rumors around the internet WWE was kicking around the idea of re-visiting the Sheamus/Daniel Bryan feud from two years ago. Their match at Extreme Rules in 2012 was fantastic, and they have a certain chemistry in the ring together, but there doesn’t seem to be the makings of a WrestleMania moment in that match. Maybe he and Christian will continue their mini-feud that started when Sheamus hit Christian with the Brogue Kick during their tag team match on the Valentine’s Day Smackdown.

I do sort of expect the Elimination Chamber to come down to Orton and Bryan as the final two competitors. I expect shenanigans involving Kane, and I expect Randy Orton to retain his title of Champion because of said shenanigans. I’m almost expecting something similar to what happened at Elimination Chamber 2010, when Shawn Michaels, who wasn’t an entrant in the match, came up through the grates and delivered the Sweet Chin Music to the Undertaker to cost him the match and his title. Kane could come up through the grates and chokeslam Bryan to hand the victory to Orton.

Now I’m going to go down the fantasy booking rabbit hole. This could lead to Triple H coming out on Monday night, letting us all know he knows Bryan got screwed by the Director of Operations at Elimination Chamber. He tells Daniel Bryan that to make it up to him, he gets a match with Kane as the main event of Monday Night Raw. The match itself features Daniel Bryan beating Kane from pillar to post right from the opening bell. Kane doesn’t get in a lick of offense, with Bryan brutally taking out all of his frustrations of the last six months on Kane. All of the sudden, the lights go out. We hear one chime and the lights come back on with the Undertaker in the ring, delivering a chokeslam to Daniel Bryan to save Kane, and standing over Bryan as Raw fades out… to the activation of the WWE Network.

How great would it be if one of the first things on the WWEN was an interview with Bryan challenging the Undertaker to put his streak on the line at WrestleMania XXX?

• • •

Scott: You know, it leaves me dumbfounded that until this very moment I’d not considered the absolute imperative the Feb. 24 Raw end with something that forces people to care about the aftershow. The scenario you outlined, or something just like it, is almost a certainty. And of course following it backward leads to the almost certain screwiness of the Chamber itself.

I like your thought about Sheamus and Christian — I’m not sure how their match on this week’s Smackdown will leave things going forward, but I would be OK seeing them paired off for the next couple of months, if only to keep Sheamus out of the title picture for a while.

At some point there will need to be a formal consolidation of Orton’s two belts into one and the formal elevation of the Intercontinental Title to establish it as the No. 2 belt. That would enable something like a Sheamus-Cesaro feud over a belt that truly matters in the “new” WWE.

(Side note: As excited as I am for Cesaro’s match this week and prospects in the Chamber, I also know he will be a centerpiece of the live NXT event on Feb. 27 in what will be an amazing match with Sami Zayn. How that encounter relates to Cesaro’s role on the main roster remains to be seen. But if/when Zayn beats Cesaro, doesn’t that enable him to graduate from NXT?)

Hopefully we’ve had a productive discussion here. I am far more excited about this big February show than I have been in years, and I’m also pretty jazzed about the long-term outlook for the WWE roster. I’m anxious to see how the Network changes storytelling and character development (don’t get me started on the backstage NXT show) and, well, I just enjoy talking wrestling with my friends, which is why we do this in the first place.

As always, thanks for reading, and know you can contact us via Twitter, or the comments section below. Your feedback is appreciated.

The Royal Rumble by (Entry) Numbers

Posted on

Scott has joined Tom Holzerman’s The Wrestling Blog. Right now he’s writing a series of pieces on the Royal Rumble, and breaking down the statistics surrounding each of the numbers of entry for the Rumble match.

As of this post, three articles have been posted, and they are extremely informative and entertaining.

Check them out, and keep up with them as they come out.

Entry #1: http://wallsofjerichoholic.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-royal-rumble-by-entry-numbers-1.html

Entry #2: http://wallsofjerichoholic.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-royal-rumble-by-entry-numbers-2.html

Entry #3: http://wallsofjerichoholic.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-royal-rumble-by-entry-numbers-3.html

On the Road Again…

Posted on
TLC 2013 poster

TLC 2013 – copyright WWE

Scott: David, old friend, it’s been far too long since we’ve conversed in this forum. But now, heading toward the on ramp for the Road to WrestleMania XXX, we need to get back to what we do best. Or at least what we do best when life doesn’t get in the way. Perhaps a wiser man would start somewhere else, but I’m going right for the top: Cena. Orton. TLC match. Both the World Wrestling Entertainment and World Heavyweight Championship on the line. I know there’s been some murkiness about whether this is an actual unification match or something of a ruse, but let’s agree at some point there will only be one top title in the world’s most notable promotion. Is this best for business?

• • •

David: Is a title unification best for business? I’m not sure it is, but I’m probably in the minority. The reason I have doubts is because I’m not sure what problems title unification solves. A lot of people on Twitter complain the World Heavyweight Championship, the Intercontinental Title and US Title mean very little because of the way they’ve been treated. They point to the number as being the problem. While I agree that sometimes the number of titles causes them to get lost in the shuffle, I think there is a much deeper problem.

If you read certain wrestling blogs (or Wrestling Blogs), there are a couple of problems consistently featured in the way the WWE creative teams write their stories. First, it seems as if champions (especially the IC and US Champions) can only win matches during title defenses. They lose non-title matches with an alarming frequency, which causes some people to perceive those wrestlers as “weak.” Outside of the title pictures, there seems to be a 50/50 philosophy, where two wrestlers will wrestle a series of matches where they trade wins back and forth. In my mind, neither of these writing styles creates strong or memorable good guy or bad guy characters.

So, if they reduce the number of titles, does that mean that they’ll get away from these two booking philosophies? I doubt it. It seems like they are ingrained in the company at this point, and I think it would take more than a title unification to change it.

Of course, that whole scenario is about us agreeing there will be one top title in the near future. But that’s not what this blog is about, so let’s dig a little deeper. You specified at the top you think title unification will happen at some point, but not necessarily at TLC. Do you think Dec. 15, 2013, in Houston, Texas, will be a date remembered for the unification of the WWE and World Heavyweight Championships?

• • •

Scott: Based on what I saw on Raw Monday and read online in the days following, my answer would be no — I expect Cena and Orton to each grab the other’s belt simultaneously in order to drag the story out a little more. But then I caught what Triple H said during his regular sit-down with Michael Cole for the WWE website, and he made it clear there will at some point be only one “top” title. I am not entirely sure that means the TLC main event will be a unification match, or that unification will be the result. After all, Daniel Bryan won the WWE Title fairly convincingly in early September, and that lasted all of 21 hours. I certainly think we won’t get past WrestleMania XXX with two main titles. Some folks are insistent it needs to happen in December so the Royal Rumble, Elimination Chamber and WrestleMania stories are cleaner. Others contend unification is such a major event it should only happen on the biggest stage. What say you?

• • •

David: Title unification is a huge step, and I probably would be in the camp that says it should happen at WrestleMania… except it does cause a problem. If we still have two champions on Dec. 16, presumably we still would have two champions at the Royal Rumble. How, then, can we have a unification match at WrestleMania if the Royal Rumble winner is guaranteed a WrestleMania title shot? Fear not, for I have two scenarios, although I’m sure one of them will be distasteful to a lot of people.

A lot of criticism surrounds the Survivor Series, and, to a lesser extent, the Royal Rumble, about them feeling like “just another pay-per-view.” David Shoemaker, in a pre-Survivor Series article on Grantland, spelled out how he would fix the Survivor Series. I have a fairly simple idea of how to fix the Royal Rumble… eliminate the title match. The Rumble is its own thing, and, I’m sure you’ll agree, deserves to be the most important match on the card. Let the champions enter the Rumble, with the idea that they get to pick their own challenger for WrestleMania if they win. Unfortunately, this means Cena or Orton would have to win this year in order to set up a unification match at WrestleMania, which is where some people’s distaste comes in.

There is another alternative that may be a little more palatable to some: the Royal Rumble winner enters the Elimination Chamber, and wins one of the titles. Not only does this lead us to a unification match, but it potentially builds more excitement for the Elimination Chamber than has been there in previous years. I would love to see a scenario where Daniel Bryan wins the Royal Rumble, wins the World Heavyweight Championship at Elimination Chamber, and challenges John Cena for the unified title at Wrestlemania.

How does that strike you?

• • •

Scott: I wouldn’t put anything past them at this point, especially given how much confusion there’s been since SummerSlam. I do agree the Rumble itself needs to be the most prominent thing on the card, and I recall bristling when they added a WWF Title match to the card way back in 1991. But I’m also okay with there being a title match on the show, provided the Rumble goes on last. There was a lot of frustration in January when the CM Punk-Rock match ended the show instead of the Rumble, but I have to wonder if that wasn’t the Rock’s ego/contract getting in the way.

CM Punk and Daniel Bryan

Could these two men re-create the ending of the 1994 Royal Rumble?

I saw one person suggest Orton and Cena can’t settle things while Punk and Byran pull a Hart-Luger 94 and both “win” the Rumble, setting up a winner-take-all four-way match for WrestleMania XXX. While it might be great to have Bryan win his first belt under those monumental odds, it also would evoke far too clearly the WrestleMania 2000 debacle. Black Cat of the Old School Wrestling Podcast makes a compelling argument: the Mania main event needs to be two guys, period.

Here’s the reality of the situation: Cena will be in the title match at WrestleMania, whether there’s one belt by then or not. Orton will be there too, unless someone directly causes him to lose his belt, spinning them off into a viable grudge match (maybe Big Show or HHH or Kane or something). It’s not yet clear if Punk or Bryan will be out of the mix with all that’s going on with the Wyatts and the Shield, but aside from Orton or a returning star, it’s not clear anyone else is ready to share this stage with Cena. So in my book it has to be one of those three on the other side of the ring.

All this talk makes me realize there are real losers in this scenario. My first thought is Cody Rhodes. When Sandow won the Money in the Bank match, and especially during Cody’s termination and Goldust’s return, lots of people envisioned a scenario in which those three would be involved in a long-form story surrounding the World Heavyweight Championship. Now that seems somewhere between unlikely and impossible. It’s going to be difficult, if not impossible, to elevate either the Intercontinental or United States championships to their previous positions. In fact, I’ll say it can’t be done and dare you to prove me wrong.

• • •

David: I specifically waited to answer this question until after I watched the Dec. 2 edition of Monday Night Raw, hoping maybe either of those titles would see some movement. My disposition at the moment is about 50 percent optimistic.

At this point, the US Title seems like a lost cause. It’s not that Dean Ambrose is a bad champion. On the contrary, I’d say he’s a very good champion, or at least he would be. Unfortunately, United States Champion Dean Ambrose has seemed to take a back seat to Shield member Dean Ambrose lately.

However, Raw featured an excellent match between Dolph Ziggler and Damien Sandow for the right to battle with Big E Langston for the Intercontinental Championship at TLC. With Sandow getting the victory and punching his ticket for a date with the powerhouse from the University of Iowa, I’m cautiously excited for what’s happening with the IC title. Power vs brains usually makes for a pretty good story. Do you think these two up and comers might have what it takes to bring some focus back to that title?

• • •

Scott: When I watched that Ziggler-Sandow match, I had the same general thought — establishing top contenders via contested matches is a good way to drum up interest. I don’t know if we’ll ever see a day where there’s a Money in the Bank match for the right to cash in on the Intercontinental champion, for example, but I do think the narrative will be helped going forward with a clear delineation between the top title and the second-tier belt. The reason the IC and US titles have floundered — in addition to the meager stories they’ve told around them — is the clear descent of the World Heavyweight Championship to the spot previously held by the IC belt.

The fact is, some of the greatest matches in history — not just WWF — have been for lesser titles. It would be almost too easy to make a list here, including times where a secondary belt match has stolen the show of a major card. It’s not impossible to get there, but the WWE needs to do more than just erase the WHC to make the IC belt relevant.

As for Langston and Sandow specifically, I’m in sort of a quandary here. I love both performers, and a loss is bad for either one. For Langston, it’s an indication he’s not ready for prime time and the excitement over his title win over Axel would be neutered as much as Ziggler’s cash-in on Alberto Del Rio in April. For Sandow, a loss would be another slip down from the peak he hit when he turned on Cody Rhodes and grabbed the Money in the Bank briefcase. So in some ways this is good storytelling, where I’m really interested to see both the result and how the in-ring performance supports the narrative. In

Dean Ambrose

Has Dean Ambrose’s position in the Shield overshadowed his status as US Champion?

other ways, I want my favorite guys to just beat up dudes I don’t see having potential.

And then there’s Ambrose. If someone showed up on Smackdown this week and scrapped the Sandow match in favor of an Ambrose-Langston unification bout, it would instantly be my favorite match on the TLC card, although as with Sandow, I want Ambrose to continue to succeed.

But you’re right, his role in the Shield has supplanted his role as U.S. Champion. And maybe it’s OK to let that title stay in the shadows for one more show, but as soon as the top belts are unified they’ll need to make a move with the lower belts. I’m still not convinced there’s a good strategy to employ, especially so close to WrestleMania. Do you see a successful road map anywhere?

• • •

David: In my mind, it doesn’t make sense to do anything special with the IC and US titles at the Royal Rumble because they’ll be overshadowed by the Rumble match itself. However, if Triple H and Stephanie announced the night after the Royal Rumble there was going to be an Elimination Chamber match to unify the two middle titles, I think I’d be pretty excited. They could use the period between the Rumble and Elimination Chamber by having a tournament to get into the Elimination Chamber. If done properly, I think there’s a story there that could grab people’s attention and make the unification of those belts meaningful. They could even make that match the main event, and say they’re giving the unified champion that pay-per-view off to prepare for his WrestleMania match with the Royal Rumble winner. This would especially work if Randy Orton, or (God forbid) Triple H is the champion at that point. In just writing it, the idea of a well-rested champion seems like it would be a way of creating a talking point for the WrestleMania main event, and giving an underdog (like Daniel Bryan) a bigger hill to climb. If they were to do that, in one deft stroke, they may have upgraded the midcard title, created a good story for WrestleMania and, if they so choose, made the entire year-long saga of Daniel Bryan worth everything we’ve gone through.

How do you feel about the idea of using the Elimination Chamber as a way to unify the titles?

The Elimination Chamber

Could this structure be used to unify the second tier titles?

• • •

Scott: I think it’s a great idea, which means it probably won’t happen. I don’t mind the Elimination Chamber as a concept, but like the annual Hell in a Cell dilemma in October, having the Chamber forced into February always seems to complicate the Road to WrestleMania. This year is a prime example. Why go through the process of unifying your top titles with your biggest stars in December, then crown one contender to stand above the rest in January… and then in February try to force six guys into one match as supposed equals?

You can’t have a Chamber match without stakes. Less titles means fewer stakes to be had. Heck, even if they didn’t unify the belts having one or both of them contested in the Chamber would elevate the profile. But I can debunk that logic, too: Look back to this year’s Money in the Bank. Everyone agrees the World Heavyweight Championship MITB was the high spot of the show, but it was the opener and having a great match did nothing to change perceptions about which belt was more important.

Maybe ultimately the most important thing for a belt is who has it — not for what the title means to the wrestler, but what the wrestler means to the title. That’s why this unification couldn’t happen until they found a way to get the “lesser” belt back on the bigger star, while having another highly decorated veteran carry the big strap. If we set aside our fan interests, is there any way they’d promote this match with any other performers?

Among the many things I’m confused about at the moment is how we get from December to WrestleMania. Many years that feeling is intrigue, but this year I’m more perplexed than anything. Is the Rumble main event just a Cena-Orton rematch? Will the TLC ending not be as conclusive as promised?

The more important question: is there any chance the writers, free from some of the rules hampering them over the last several years, can tell stories from WrestleMania XXX to XXXI substantially different from what we have today? Or is it going to be another year of mostly great in-ring action with mildly amusing to outright maddening narratives everywhere else in the “universe”?

• • •

David: In the Attitude Era, there was a period of time where Vince Russo got a lot of credit for the things that turned the WWE’s fortunes around. Russo eventually left the WWE and went to WCW, where he had a hard time creating compelling television. It was then believed WWE was a success in part because of Russo, but also because Vince McMahon was there to oversee what Russo was doing and reign him in when he needed to.

I believe the latter probably is mostly true, but I also think there is a third ingredient to the WWE’s success in the late 90s, and that’s competition. I once heard someone say “competition is the mother of innovation”, and I think innovation is what the WWE is really missing. Because of the lack of a strong competitor in the sports entertainment genre, the WWE isn’t really being driven toward innovation in its storylines.

WWE also doesn’t have a way to define its progress. Buyrates and ratings are, I would assume, how the WWE judges the merits of its storylines and matches, but those seem like empty numbers when they’re not being compared to something, or when they’re the apples being compared to oranges. The WWE constantly reminds us when it has the top ratings, or the most social media traffic, but that is useless horn blowing if there’s no one occupying the same space and competing for that traffic.

The emptiness of those numbers causes their effect to be exaggerated in my opinion. As a result, we get stories like the ones that surfaced last month about Vince McMahon being unhappy with the SummerSlam buyrate, and the idea he feels Daniel Bryan is the reason for the disappointment. How can Mr. McMahon truly know who is responsible for the low buyrate, if he can’t possibly know what the buyrate would have been without Daniel Bryan in the main event? Isn’t it possible that a lot of people really like Daniel Bryan, but didn’t like the story WWE was telling with him? Isn’t it possible that a lot of people really like Daniel Bryan but didn’t like the involvement of Triple H? Maybe there’s an argument to be made that casual fans didn’t buy SummerSlam because of Daniel Bryan, but I think the Dec. 9 edition of Raw proved how popular Daniel Bryan can be.

Personally, I think the SummerSlam main event was an artistic success, even if it wasn’t a business success. Of course, being an artist myself, I see the value of artistic success, even if it comes at the detriment of business success. Granted, I don’t have stockholders to answer to, and neither do most of the theatre companies I’ve worked for.

That is a very long-winded way of saying the answer to your question is I think we’ll see more of the same until the WWE changes the way it views success, or a competitor arises to force the WWE to innovate.

Thanks for reading! If you have any insights on our discussion, you can contact us via Twitter, or the comments section below. Your feedback is appreciated.

Harry Potter and the WWE Championship

Posted on

Scott: David, my friend, it’s been too long. We both have been busy, but I have the itch to debate wrestling again. I attribute this to many factors, but a leading one of late is WWE.com’s new “SummerSlam in 60 Seconds” feature, in which they distill an entire show into one minute of highlights. On the day of this writing, the showcase event is SummerSlam 1994, my first live WWF show. I could write a few thousand words about just that day, but I’ll spare you the nostalgia.

I remember you once telling me about a WWF house show you attended, I think in St. Louis. Do you have any fond memories of that event?

• • •

kiel

The Kiel Auditorium. Mecca for wrestling in St. Louis, and where David saw his first live show.

David: I have very fond memories of the two St. Louis house shows my father took me to in the late 1980s. The first was in November 1988, and featured a main event of the Ultimate Warrior vs. the Honky Tonk Man for the Intercontinental title. I vaguely remember that match, but I vividly remember my dad buying me an Ultimate Warrior poster and hanging it on my wall when we got home from the show. I also remember seeing the Rockers vs the Conquistadors. I had a been a Rockers fan since they were the Midnight Rockers in the AWA, and finally getting to see them live was great. I also remember there being a couple of “audience participation” spots during that match. At one point, the Conquistadors switched without tagging (which they did often) thanks to their masks, but the ref did something I had never seen before… he asked the crowd whether the masked men had tagged, and when we said no he disallowed the tag and made them break whatever hold they were involved in. The same thing happened later when the Rockers switched without tagging. The ref asked us if they had tagged, and we all said yes. As I look back on it… I guess good guys have pretty much always been jerks in the WWF/E, haven’t they?

The second show was in December 1989, and was supposed to feature Mr. Perfect vs Hulk Hogan. Unfortunately, due to bad weather, the Hulkster didn’t make it to St. Louis. I vividly remember them replacing the main event with a battle royal, which was won by Dusty Rhodes. But even more than that, I remember the promo Mr. Perfect cut before the battle royal where he called Hogan a coward.

I know you’ve seen a few televised events, but have you ever been to an untelevised house show?

• • •

Scott: I wish! I’ve only seen three live shows — SummerSlam 1994, King of the Ring 1996 and the WCW Thunder you and I attended in Cedar Rapids in 1998. I made a new year’s resolution to see a decent live independent show in 2013, but I’m not certain I can make it a reality. There’s good stuff in the Chicago area, but fitting it into the schedule can be complicated.

I’ve long wanted to get more into the “before they were stars” vibe on a lot of levels. I could go to Chicago and watch Second City performers before they get cast on “Saturday Night Live,” just like I could see guys who might one day make it to “Monday Night Raw.” You’re busting your hump in the community theater world these days — does that give you more of an appreciation for something like Daniel Bryan’s main event ascension?

• • •

daniel_bryan_bio_20130430

Your next WWE Champion?

David: I think so. I’ve seen friends of mine elevate themselves from the community theatre level to regional theatre, and I’ve seen people who have worked at the same theatres I’ve worked at move up to Broadway and television, and every time I see them in their new roles, I get excited for them. Did I have any role in their success? Of course not, but it’s thrilling to see someone who was in a similar position elevate themselves to a higher plane in your business. In the same way, watching someone like Daniel Bryan who fought so hard and so long just because he loves wrestling is exciting. Especially since the storyline is born out of that struggle.

So far, I’ve really enjoyed the “Entertainment vs Wrestling” angle they’ve gone with so far, even if John Cena has been pulling his “Let me get serious, Jack!” routine. I especially enjoyed Bryan not allowing Cena to interrupt him on the most recent edition of Raw. They’ve got a good story going, but I’m unfortunately wary about the McMahon family’s role in this match. Do you think we’ll get a clean match, or is there going to be some kind of screwball finish that somewhat tarnishes Daniel Bryan’s first chance at the WWE Championship?

• • •

Scott: First off, I really identify with your feelings about performers climbing the ladder. It’s one of the reasons I still want to see The Miz succeed, because I’ve “known” him since he was just a huge WWF fan trying to break into the entertainment world. I think the continued evolution of the NXT program and the new development center will help fans follow prospects the way we do in professional sports. Of course, the hard-core devotees are always going to be aware of guys long before their first WWE developmental deal, and they’ll be even more invested in the long-term careers and successes. It’s a totally different fan experience from what we had in the 1980s and 1990s, but it’s a welcome evolution.

As for the SummerSlam main event, it’s hard not to see some sort of screwball finish. It’s easy to see a Night of Champions main event featuring Bryan, Cena and Randy Orton (even if the event poster features Kofi Kingston and the Intercontinental belt). I know matches where Triple H is the special referee have a track record of more or less straight finishes, but with Orton’s briefcase involved, plus the Brad Maddox-Vince McMahon dynamic of late, it certainly seems something is afoot.

Let’s put it this way: when has SummerSlam ended with the champion triumphant, ending his story conclusively with no eye toward a future opponent? It’s rare. That’s how WrestleMania ends. And if that’s what we’re building to here with Bryan — similar to the path Steve Austin trod culminating at WrestleMania XIV — I’m OK with that. They can tell a great story. Adding HHH to the mix Sunday kind of prepared me mentally to accept the show will end other than Bryan picking up a clean win over Cena. I had that feeling for a while, but after Monday it just seems more clear.

Is Bryan-Cena the match you’re anticipating most? What else on the card has you jazzed?

• • •

rs_560x415-130813152620-1024.Cena.Bryan.mh.081313

The main event of SummerSlam 2013.

David: You’re right about the way SummerSlam is structured. It’s rarely a culmination, and more of a mid-point in major stories. I’m hopeful that this is the beginning of a longer Daniel Bryan story that does, indeed, feature him in the main event of WrestleMania.

The Bryan-Cena match is the one I’m anticipating most, mainly because I think it’s had the best build, and it’s got one of the two competitors I enjoy watching the most right now, Daniel Bryan. The other competitor is CM Punk, and his match at SummerSlam is secondary in terms of prominence to me, simply because I’m not a fan of Brock Lesnar. I don’t particularly enjoy watching him in the ring or anywhere else for that matter. However, I find it interesting that Punk’s feud isn’t really with Brock Lesnar, it’s with Lesnar’s manager and Punk’s former best friend, Paul Heyman.

The Heyman/Punk dynamic is something you and I have been talking about and hoping for for almost a year. Has the story between these two been as good as you hoped it would be?

• • •

Scott: I wasn’t wowed with the way Heyman set a “trap” for Punk on Raw this week, if only because it wasn’t a very good trap and Heyman should be smarter than that. But I did like how Heyman laid out Punk’s choices between being smart or being a hero. This is a story that goes back nearly a year, as it was the Labor Day Raw in Chicago when Punk first revealed his association with Paul. And again, since it’s SummerSlam, I’m not entirely sure this is the final movement.

w7826_Paul_Heyman_WallPape

I would’ve thought Heyman would set better traps…

I wouldn’t say Lesnar is my favorite performer. But I think we may disagree in terms of his value as it relates to the overall show. He’s just a different performer than everyone else on the roster, which is partly why he’s able to be relevant without being on the show every week. His music and appearance, as well as his in-ring style, give him the overall aura of someone who is simply there to mutilate and destroy (this was explained in great detail on episode 101 of the Old School Wrestling Podcast). It’s like playing through a level of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles video game full of Foot Soldiers (Curtis Axel) and then all of a sudden Krang shows up and stuff gets real.

Earlier this summer Tom Holzerman floated the idea Lesnar may not be Heyman’s end game for Punk, that maybe there’s even a more significant Heyman Guy for punk to conquer. To hybridize our two streams of consciousness, TH floated Austin as the Shredder in this analogy. Could it be anyone else besides Stone Cold? Is that fantasy matchup even worth pursuing at this point? Is there anyone bigger than Brock for Punk to encounter? Does the Brock-Punk thing have to keep going to keep Punk away from the Cena-Bryan-Orton story?

• • •

brock_bio

Did the WWE bring Brock and Punk together too soon?

David: I don’t know if Brock/Punk has to keep going, but Punk does need something relevant to occupy him if he’s not going to be in the title picture. Ideally, in my mind, that would somehow involve Heyman. Part of me almost wonders if maybe they brought in Lesnar too soon. Let’s go back to your TMNT analogy.

If Lesnar is Krang and Austin is Shredder (I promise I’m not about to make any Kevin Nash/Super Shredder jokes here), and Curtis Axel is the Foot Clan, maybe there should’ve been some other Heyman guys in Punk’s way. Ones that would be more of a threat than Axel, but less than Brock: Bebop and Rocksteady, if you will. There are a litany of Paul Heyman guys that could’ve been brought in to this story if things could be worked out: Raven, RVD, Rhyno, Dreamer… etc. In this scenario, I think it would’ve been awesome to see them bring in Colt Cabana on a short-term contract to work as an adversary to Punk.

Then, once Punk had beaten the new Dangerous Alliance, he could’ve faced Brock Lesnar at the Royal Rumble, which would do a good job leading us into a match with Austin at WrestleMania. I’d be interested in seeing that match, if I’m given the right story. But with the way this story has played out so far, I don’t see how they’re going to keep Heyman/Punk going for the next seven or eight months if Austin is indeed Heyman’s next move. I guess the match wouldn’t have to be at WrestleMania, but will Austin come out of retirement for anything less than a WrestleMania Moment™?

• • •

Scott: Great questions. I think to some degree Brock’s contract details are a factor — and I have no idea what those details are. I was surprised to see Heyman aligned with Axel in the first place, but maybe that was just part of the ongoing Punk-Heyman story. Not to overuse the word surprising, but I’m surprised both Lesnar and Heyman are with the company. Brock because I figured he’d have about one year before he got bored (though maybe the money and terms are too good to walk away from) and Heyman because, well, he gets fired everywhere he goes.

I’m not certain there’s a ton of potential in a “Punk goes through the old ECW roster” story long term, so maybe we are better off if this is the end. Maybe Punk beats Brock and assaults Heyman and we don’t hear from either for some time, and I guess Axel is just left alone? That can’t work either. I guess I’m going to be surprised one way or another on Sunday?

I have thought a Punk-Cabana story would be great, maybe along the lines of a Bret-Owen “What about me?” angle. A few problems with that: One, Cabana is nowhere near as established with the larger audience as Owen was in 1993. Two, the people who are greatly familiar with Cabana would very much be inclined to cheer for him getting another chance at the top, which wouldn’t help in this story. Three, can Cabana play a convincing heel on this stage? It’s tough for anyone to live up to Owen’s standards, but what would a heel Colt Cabana look like in 2013 as it relates to the rest of the roster?

A few of those issues could be rectified by bringing in Cabana as a Punk ally before a turn, but I am certain that won’t happen Sunday and not entirely sure it’s something Cabana even wants or needs at this point in his career. Not saying it won’t ever happen (never say never), but I think this is a case where practicality must be considered.

• • •

David: You’re right. My scenario was definitely fantasy booking. However, what is not fantasy is the fact that on the most recent episode of Raw, Dean Ambrose referenced CM Punk. And with Reigns and Rollins not having a match at the pay-per-view, could we see the Shield get involved in bringing their own brand of justice to CM Punk? I don’t know, but we’ll see.

There are other matches on the card, as we all know, but do any of them make you want to lay down your hard earned money? I’m certainly looking forward to the Bray Wyatt-Kane match. Wyatt has been nothing short of a revelation since he and his family made their Raw debut, and may be the best marriage of performer and character in WWE in a long time. His mic work is creepy in the best way possible, but what really sends a shiver down my spine is the kiss before he delivers “Sister Abigail.”

Which of the other undercard matches are you looking forward to?

• • •

Scott: I guess the Shield are Heyman guys in canon, right? It would be logical for them to come back to the Punk story. Are we supposed to be believing Heyman hired the Shield (and also paid off Maddox at one point) to save Punk, only Heyman never told Punk what he was doing?

But I’ll use the Shield to get me back to the rest of the show, because I’m always interested in their matches. While I’m not yet sure how Ambrose will work with RVD or if Mark Henry and Big Show are a good in-ring fit as opponents for Rollins and Reigns, I have confidence in the young guys based on everything I’ve seen from them so far. This is their first SummerSlam, and I expect them to make an impression. In fact, along with Bryan, the Shield’s ascendance from here to WrestleMania is probably my most anticipated long-term development.

I know we’re supposed to disagree a lot here, but obviously I’m on your side as it relates to the Wyatt family. That said, I’m not so much excited for the Wyatt-Kane match for a few reasons. One, the Ring of Fire concept is sure to be overly gimmicky. Two, Kane tends to do more for me in tag team or battle-royal style matches. This match probably puts Kane back on the shelf for a while while moving the Wyatts in a new direction, and I don’t think they need a 15-minute singles match to reach that goal.

The Cody Rhodes-Damien Sandow stuff has mostly been pretty solid, and I’m always glad to have a singles match with nothing more at stake than “these guys don’t like each other and want to prove who is best.” I would not be surprised if this advances to September and a match where Sandow’s briefcase is on the line. Why? The story of Money in the Bank was more about Cody losing (and how) than Sandow winning. Transferring the case to Cody allows him to rise up the ranks without hurting Sandow’s character. Not that I want to deprive Sandow of a title run, but it feels like the best use of him would be as a challenger to Cody’s title than as the one Cody has to chase.

That said, what’s happening with the contenders is to me more interesting than the actual World Heavyweight Championship match. My interest in Del Rio’s future took a significant hit when he turned on Ricardo, though maybe they are heavily invested in a Ricardo redemption story. I’m just not sure if El Local is ready to take that step without some more NXT seasoning. And while I enjoy seeing Christian on my TV, I don’t see him winning the gold. Or should I say, I don’t see a win for him here being as big a moment as he could be based on the way the story has been told thus far.

And then there’s the mixed tag match. It’s full of people I love to see perform, but with all the other, higher profile matches on the card, it seems the writers are seeing this as a throwaway. I’m sure Ziggler will try to steal the show, and Big E. Langston usually makes an impact. But I guess I needed something more along the way to get me invested in what happens going forward. If they didn’t know what they’d do when they broke Dolph away from E and AJ, then what was the harm in keeping them together? We’ll never know to what Degree Ziggler’s concussion altered the trajectory of his story for the summer of 2013, but we have come a long, long way from the joy of his MITB cash-in on Del Rio the night after WrestleMania.

• • •

Dumbledore's Death

I wonder if Daniel Bryan’s beard will eventually be as long as Dumbledore’s?

David: And that’s the rub with wrestling, isn’t it? An injury, a suspension, personal issues, anything that takes a piece from the chess board alters everything. By virtue of its serial nature and the fact it’s told mostly in a live setting, wrestling will always have to worry about planned stories changing. There are even rumors Cena has to have surgery after SummerSlam and that could affect the outcome of his match on Sunday. However, that’s only a rumor at this point, and in the long run, I’m not sure it matters. All I care about is that a compelling story is told in a compelling manner. I don’t care why JK Rowling decided she needed to (eight-year-old spoiler alert) kill off Albus Dumbledore in Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince. I only care about the effect it had on the story. Whether Daniel Bryan wins the title at SummerSlam or if it takes him until New Orleans, all I know is I will take pleasure that I’ve gotten to see a compelling character scratch and claw his way to the top of his chosen profession.

• • •

Scott: Great points. Though sometimes I wish my favorite wrestling shows came from a single creator the way Rowling created the Harry Potter universe — if only to help with internal logic and continuity.

I don’t know about you, but our chat here definitely has me worked up for SummerSlam. It’s never a guaranteed smash, but with as much emphasis as they’re putting behind the entire event experience this year, I’m hoping to be fairly well entertained.

As always, thanks for reading, and know you can contact us via Twitter, or the comments section below. Your feedback is appreciated.

Wrestling Moves and Wrestling Movement

Posted on

Scott: This morning’s Twitter conversation has inspired me. In a discussion about various wrestling moves and how some don’t age well (i.e., what was seen as devastating in 1993 is merely average offense today), I wrote: “Is there a list for people who always thought the stunner was lame? Line forms behind me.”

So, where do you stand on Steve Austin’s signature move?

• • •

David: The Stone Cold Stunner is one of those moves that sort of changes based on who it’s being delivered to and how they sell it. The move itself is okay, although I’m in agreement with Jason Mann that I like the Diamond Cutter more. I think a more apropos question is related to a twitter discussion that also happened today (May 2). Jason asked who did the third best DDT behind Jake Roberts and Arn Anderson. Some of his followers turned the question, and started wondering who took the DDT the best. So I’d like to change your question: Who took the Stone Cold Stunner the best?

• • •

Scott: I guess I’d have to say The Rock? Shane McMahon? I just watched WWE.com’s list of the 15 biggest Stunners, though I think those were more for historical impact than actual move performance. But of that list, I’d have to say Scott Hall at WrestleMania X-8 did as good a job as anyone making the Stunner look great. But still, it’s no Diamond Cutter.

Are there any other moves you can think of that get too much praise? Any that are underrated?

• • •

David: That’s a hard question to answer, and I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about it. I’m not sure the words overrated or underrated really work for individual moves. However, the idea did start me on a path of thinking about moves differently, and I now wonder why it took me so long to think of wrestling as the true art form it is. When I started thinking about moves that get praised a lot, one of the first things that came to mind was Ricky Steamboat’s arm drags. All throughout my childhood, his arm drags were lauded. But why? Is an arm drag ever going to finish off an opponent? Probably not. An arm drag is a transitional move. Mostly it’s used to get an opponent off of his feet. Almost everyone who uses an arm drag is able to do that, right? So what made Steamboat’s any better than anyone else’s?

Image

Best arm drags in the business.

Of course, the answer is Steamboat’s arm drags looked amazing. The way that he hooked the bicep was different from the way most people performed the move at the time, and he gave this utilitarian move a flair (he also gave them to Flair in their great series of matches) it didn’t necessarily have before. The aesthetic and artistic beauty of his arm drags seemed to have more importance than the impact that the move created.

Of course, Steamboat’s arm drags aren’t alone. There are a lot of moves that are aesthetically pleasing. Do any spring to your mind?

• • •

Scott: I’m surely not alone in being a fan of precision on the ring — execution of all sorts of moves by the likes of Bret or Owen Hart, Curt Hennig and so on. But in thinking of specific moves that are just the building blocks of a great performer, I envision things like Randy Savage’s punches, Bam Bam Bigelow’s headbutts or Davey Boy Smith’s delayed suplexes. I think of the way Roddy Piper’s ring style always perfectly matched his manic microphone work, or how Rick Rude’s cockiness came across every second he was on screen.

It probably says something about me that I’m coming up with examples that instantly hit the rewind button to the tune of 15 or 20 years. Surely there are guys currently on the big stage who have a consistency of character — attire, backstage segments, entrance routine, in-ring performance and more — that evoke the all-time greats. Guys like Dolph Ziggler and Daniel Bryan come to mind immediately.

Some of the biggest problems experienced fans have with characters like Triple H or John Cena are the countless holes between what they say and how they act. The best recent example is Cena talking about how the year after he lost to the Rock at WrestleMania was the worst of his career, ignoring his wins at Money in the Bank and Royal Rumble, not to mention continued dominance of the roster week in and week out.

We come to wrestling expecting and intending to suspend disbelief, But we’d also like this fictional universe to have its own sort of rules or logical consistency that make the whole thing easier to follow and accept. I get a sense that smaller promotions, and I’m referencing Chikara primarily, but surely there are others, do a much better job of establishing the parameters in which they will tell stories and then sticking to the ground rules. You’re much more a follower of the non-WWE world than myself. Do you have any insight in that regard?

• • •

David: I do think that, to a certain extent, smaller promotions do have an easier time maintaining logical consistency and continuity in their product. A lot of independent promotions (especially Chikara) cater to a niche audience who are glad to come to that promotion because of what they bring to the table. Chikara deals quite a bit with a very surreal side of wrestling, what with ants, wrestling ice cream cones, horror figures like my oldest son’s favorites, Frightmare and Hallowicked, and so on. Ring of Honor has spent most of its life concentrating on the “sport” aspects of professional wrestling, and succeeding for the most part. CZW assumed the “hardcore” mantle that was left open when ECW folded in the early part of this century. What these groups all have in common (besides some level of shared talent) is they operate on a smaller national basis than the WWE. Because of their size, they’ve been able to gain fans of their specific product, as opposed to the general professional wrestling fan. In my mind that makes the connection deeper and more profound.

Since you are primarily a fan of WWE, do you think you have a deep connection with today’s product? I know you have a deep connection to the product we grew up with, but has that stuck with you through today?

• • •

Scott: That’s a great question. Clearly wrestling was far more popular during our college years, which more or less coincided with the peak of the Attitude Era/Monday Night Wars, than it is today. But it’s fans like you and me, who were there long before the late-90s explosion, that are by and large still around today. That’s because all of the eras speak in some way to what we crave in our entertainment diet. Sure, the language may have evolved over time, but we’re fed nonetheless. How’s that for a mixed metaphor?

When I fell away from being a regular fan in the mid 2000s, it had more to do with my life schedule at the time than the actual product. Essentially, I couldn’t find the time to watch Raw, let alone Smackdown, and there were so many pay-per-view shows I just couldn’t keep up. That this coincided with the brand split made it all the more confusing. When I lived on my own for a few months in early 2007, I all of a sudden had the chance to commit to Raw on a regular basis. I spent a few hours looking up information online to fill me in on what I’d missed. I still consider summer 2002 to spring 2007 to be a pretty substantial void in my fan memory.

In this way, wrestling is very much like a soap opera. I actually committed to watching a soap opera once. It debuted during one of the summers I was home from college, so I figured I could get in on the ground floor. It was pretty easy to fit into my schedule at college as well. When I tried to keep up when regular viewing became a challenge, the same thing happened that I’d experienced with wrestling. There was enough familiarity to help ease me back in, but I still felt like someone who’d suffered some sort of traumatic brain injury when certain scenes didn’t register because that part of my memory was void.

All of which to say is sometimes I realize I’m watching a wrestling show out of sheer obligation to the fact I’ve been a fan since the mid 1980s. The May 13 Raw is a great example. I knew it would be a soft show, I plowed through it in an hour on the DVR while folding laundry and in retrospect I should have gotten caught up on “Parks & Recreation.” But I wanted to be part of the conversation, to read my regular recaps Tuesday and to be involved in Twitter when we all “watched” Extreme Rules. But if the Bulls actually had a chance to beat the Heat, I almost certainly would have given that priority.

All that said, there are times each year when I know why I’m still in on wrestling. When WWE is firing on all cylinders in a given story, I want to hear what the characters say, I want to see them mix it up in the ring and I spend far too much time thinking about who could or should win based on a variety of factors. Some shows have six or seven stories on this level. Some, like Extreme Rules, might not have any.

But there is something about the mix of scripted entertainment (so you know there will be drama, as opposed to say a “straight” sporting event that can completely fail to deliver if it’s a blowout) and the unpredictability of the live performance blended with impressive feats of athleticism that remain captivating after all these years.

Do I sit through a lot of absolute crap in order for those payoffs? Absolutely. But I’m a Cubs fan, so I’m rather used to waiting around for something good to happen.

• • •

David: You’re right. Based on our history with wrestling it would appear there are fundamental aspects of the genre that appeal to us. And I think you’ve hit on it pretty closely. I’ve long said I prefer wrestling to MMA because I know I’m going to get a certain quantity of entertainment for the money I’m paying… even if I’m not always sure of the quality.

What I am sure of is every time I turn on any wrestling event, there is the possibility of seeing something that will excite me, and might make me say “I’ve never seen that before.” That happened this past weekend at the end of the Chikara “Aniversario: No Compromise” iPPV. I know you don’t watch Chikara, but I also know you run in similar online circles as I do, so I’m sure you’ve picked up the gist of what happened, and if you (or our readers) don’t know what happened, basically, the main event ended in a no contest when Condor Security stormed out and ended things, which included tearing apart the stage.

The closest thing I can compare it to in mainstream wrestling was when the Nexus formed, and destroyed the ring and ringside area at the end of Raw in the summer of 2010. Even with that, though, there was no denying it was part of the story. Because of rumors and other things, there is just enough possibility that Chikara is done for good that people aren’t really sure what to think. I’m still pretty sure it’s part of the story, but again, the line is blurry enough I can’t be 100 percent positive.

The fact the line is blurred at all is pretty fascinating to me.

• • •

Scott: In the days after the Chikara show I got into a Twitter discussion about the nature of what is and isn’t “real” in wrestling. It started with Wrestlespective’s Jason Mann tweeting: “Wondering if something is real or not is about 50,232nd on the list of reasons I’m interested in wrestling.”  and I have to say I totally agree. I want to assume everything is part of the show.

Of course, that is not the same as saying I want everything to be predictable. Nor is it the same as, which Jason noted later, using reality to make a story more believable. Bringing in those real-world aspects of doubt and confusion, as with what’s happening with Chikara right now or the “will he or won’t he” questions surrounding CM Punk’s contract status in the weeks surrounding Money in the Bank 2011, is sometimes needed in order to keep fans guessing.

I think where the distinction comes into play for me is, at least in the Punk story, the company put the facts on the table and made them part of the story. Punk announced the date his contract expired, proclaimed he would win the title anyway and would leave as champion. For all I care, that could have been totally false. I don’t need a dirt sheet or website giving me the details of a contract to enjoy the show. In fact, when you do know these things — such as reports Chris Jericho would be going off the road following SummerSlam 2012, it takes an awful lot of wind from the sails of a retirement or “loser leaves town” match.

Some of the ideas in this conversation are why I don’t have much interest in following wrestlers on Twitter. I’m just more interested in the characters they play than the people they are, unless we have some sort of connection that goes beyond what happens in the ring. But I am totally on board with your description of wrestling as offering the promise of something exciting.

You and I both enjoy conventional sports, and we also have a background in theater (though yours is far deeper). I’d argue it’s hard to beat the drama of a live, high-stakes sporting event, but am compelled to note the disappointment when that drama is not delivered. The Cubs getting swept out of the playoffs in 2007 and 2008 was akin to Daniel Bryan losing in 18 seconds at WrestleMania. Months of buildup for absolutely no satisfaction past the introductions. But Bryan’s loss was notable because of its rarity. Stuff like what the Cubs did happens in baseball all the time.

Now, the St. Louis Cardinals’ run to the World Series in 2011 had about as much drama as anyone could bear — but that itself was notable in comparison to the team’s rather bland victory over the Tigers in 2006. If Bud Selig could script the Fall Classic every year, you’d never see pitchers making that many errors.

With theater, we go expecting drama (and laughter, perhaps music, dance and so on). We know absolutely everything is part of the act. Great performers make audiences suspend disbelief. The absolute best can take well-worn source material and still make it seem fresh. But aside from sets, costumes or the whims of a director, if you’ve seen “Death of a Salesman” a few times, you’re more or less appreciating how well one cast delivers versus those from the past.

Again, I’m not telling you anything you (or, likely, anyone reading this) don’t already know. Wrestling is a perfect mix. The story should be a secret to the audience. The feats of athleticism are fantastic, almost superhuman. Scripted or not, a spectacle is guaranteed. To me the art form takes the best of many other forms of entertainment, blurs the lines between them, and delivers a unique experience, and that goes far beyond the WWE product.

Have I made any sense? Does your acting career give you any additional insight?

• • •

David: One of the great things about any form of performing art is the possibility of catharsis. To use your example: in Death of a Salesman Willy Loman’s funeral acts as a method for the characters on stage, and the audience, to release the emotions that have built up throughout the story. The same thing happens in wrestling… whether the good guy wins or loses. The end of the match allows us to cheer or boo, depending both on the story being told, and on our own personal preferences.

However, there is something to be said for a lack of catharsis in art… or at least delayed catharsis. It’s something very tricky to pull off in certain dramatic arts. Most plays are one-evening events that take about three hours. When that three hours are over, the story had better be complete. Long-form television series and films with multiple parts have a unique opportunity, however. When everything went down at Aniversario: Never Compromise on June 2, I likened it to ending of The Empire Strikes Back. Han Solo is trapped in carbonite and on his way to become a wall decoration for Jabba the Hutt. Princess Leia has realized her love for a man she might never see again. Luke Skywalker has lost his hand, and gained the knowledge that the most hated man in the galaxy is his father. That’s a bummer no matter who’s keeping score.

The catharsis comes in the ending of Return of the Jedi, when the Emperor is defeated, Anakin Skywalker is redeemed and Han and Leia declare their love for each other. Part of why Chikara fans were legitimately upset at the end of the show is because with there being no ending to the title match, they were denied that catharsis. Presumably, if and when they come back, the fans will finally have that moment to cry or cheer over.

As I look at the lineup for the upcoming WWE pay-per-view Payback, I wonder where that emotional release is going to come from. As I pointed out catharsis in wrestling typically comes from the ending of each match… but I think a lot of fans want something more. As Tom Holzerman wrote recently on The Wrestling Blog, Kane is probably the best good guy the company has right now. That gives a lot of emotional weight to anything that happens within his storyline with Daniel Bryan. Will this Sunday see them break up for good, or will they reconcile?

Another potential emotional moment is in the Divas Championship match between Kaitlyn and AJ. AJ has spent the last month and a half playing mind games with Kaitlyn, which all came to a head on the most recent episode of Raw. Will Kaitlyn get her revenge, or will AJ’s plan to get inside Kaitlyn’s head work? I don’t know how that one will end, but it’s nice to see the Divas title get an actual storyline.

Being a Chicagoland resident, what do you think the emotions are going to be like on Sunday night when CM Punk makes his return to the WWE in his hometown? Also, is there any catharsis to be had in the John Cena/Ryback match?

Image

Punk makes his return at WWE Payback this Sunday on PPV, live from Chicago, IL.

• • •

Scott: Your question brings to mind the old K. Sawyer Paul standby of not predicting match outcomes, but whether stories would continue past a given show. That’s another quirk with wrestling as compared to other art forms.

As you said, in the theater you expect the story to end when the curtain falls. With television each show sort of communicates its approach: sitcoms and procedurals tend to be dominated by stories that wrap up with each episode, though characters have continuity and slow growth year over year. More conventional dramas tend to bring you along for a lengthy ride, drawing some bits out over several episodes, some from season premiere to season finale, and a precious few the entire run of the show — but they also generally have subplots that begin and end within the hour. Of course, few shows actually get to establish their own timetable as it relates to how long the network wants it on the air.

But with wrestling, the characters have to be in constant motion, especially so in the era of weekly TV. Nothing ends without a new beginning — with the WWE, this means a competitor who stands triumphant in Sunday might be brutally beaten by a new foe Monday (or Friday) night. This is nothing new, of course. The Flair-Steamboat trilogy ended only moments before Terry Funk attacked Flair to set up a new story.

The issue with wrestling (and I suppose specifically WWE) is fans don’t really know which is the long-form story and which is the time killer. It’s also clear the writing team doesn’t always know. On many shows, we can guess (say, the Intercontinental title will change hands but we know the WWE Title feud is only beginning). Looking at Payback, however it’s not especially clear. And getting back to what we talked about earlier, reality (or “what we know”) is part of the issue.

For example, was Fandango originally supposed to win the Intercontinental belt Sunday? Does that mean whoever does win is just a placeholder until he returns? Was Curtis Axel put in that match solely to convince fans the Punk return isn’t a Heyman swerve? Surely Axel can’t win the belt because it wouldn’t help his ongoing involvement in the McMahon family saga. But neither can he lose and risk what’s been built (or at least what they tried to build)  over the last few weeks. But what good is a Miz-Wade Barrett story without the belt? It’s barely any good with the belt.

We should expect Cena to win, not just because he’s Cena, but because he excels in these dumb gimmick matches. Punk is returning (if we don’t see Punk before his ring entrance, the crowd will be electric, especially if he dons a Blackhawks jersey), but is he coming back to challenge Cena for the belt? That seems an odd choice as well. We already know Mark Henry is coming back the next night on Raw, perhaps he will resume his issues with Ryback, thus removing him from the top of the card. But maybe Henry and Sheamus have unfinished business. Which is more unlikely to continue: Sheamus in the preshow or Ryback in the main event?

WWE Superstar Daniel Bryan

What does the future hold for Daniel Bryan?
Photo copyright: WWE

I could book out a year’s worth of Daniel Bryan story (short version: challenges Kane, demands Kane give him his evil best, even when Bryan wins he still feels insignificant and must challenge the Undertaker at WrestleMania), and I also am hoping Kaitlyn retains Sunday so her story with AJ continues to progress. The Ziggler-Del Rio story has been stilted on account of Ziggler’s concussion, and now Swagger has disappeared. But that’s the thing, I don’t really know.

Will there be any catharsis Sunday? If there is, it won’t last. As soon as Raw opens Monday, we’ll be able to focus on Money in the Bank, which is quickly taking its place among the biggest shows of the year. Will there be two briefcases again this year? Is the Wyatt family coming sooner rather than later? Will Henry or Punk get into either top title picture? Is Jericho done (again) after Payback?

I admit, I am more interested in the fallout than the actual Sunday show. But I wasn’t much interested in Extreme Rules at all, so I consider this an upgrade. Sorry I rambled so long here, we should wrap up before Sunday actually arrives. Any closing thoughts?

• • •

Image

Did I really just compare wrestling and Sweeney Todd? Yes, I did.

David: I keep thinking about the idea of catharsis in a dramatic context, and the idea of delayed catharsis. It’s not only important for the audience to be able to achieve that emotional release, but it’s also important for the characters. However, that delayed emotional release can lend itself to character movement. In the musical Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street, there is a moment at the end of the first act where the main character is about to use his razor to take revenge on the man who wronged him 15 years before the start of the play. That moment is interrupted, and it drives Sweeney to the point of madness.

The way you talked about Daniel Bryan’s current story made me think of that as an analogy. Bryan is convinced of his insignificance, and he has gotten to the point where he will stop at nothing to prove he is not a weak link. There are rumors Money in the Bank will feature a John Cena vs. Daniel Bryan match. If that is the case, I think we’ll see Bryan complaining about Cena saving him from getting beaten up by the Shield and further descend into this madness. Whether that ends with him trying to end “The Streak” next April in New Orleans is yet to be seen… but I certainly wouldn’t mind it.

As always, thanks for reading, and know you can contact us via Twitter, or the comments section below. Your feedback is appreciated.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 51 other followers