Instant Feedback: Bearded Giraffes

I didn't expect anything major to happen tonight, being that holiday RAWs rarely ever do anything. I was somewhat wrong, at least towards the beginning of the show, although the end reinforced the notion that nothing ever happens except for standard "faces win out" on these kinds of shows. I guess that's why I could palate John Cena standing tall over both Jack SWAGGAH and Alberto del Rio here. There would be plenty of time next week when more people presumably are watching to give del Rio some shine. Plus, the context surrounding the Swagger counter and tap was pretty good. In the main event, they managed to further one of my favorite stories, Dolph Ziggler and SWAGGAH's rivalry for the affections of Vickie Guerrero. del Rio, who was the other star of the show through his Sean O'Haire-esque backstage segments trying to rally troops to do his bidding for him, played into that as well, planting seeds into Ziggler's head about what Swagger's true intentions for Vickie were. Lost in the trailers for shitty movies and the Triple H/Kevin Nash/CM Punk top storyline spinning wheels, there's a really good midcard angle going on here.

That being said, when one top storyline is glossed over and the other gets the standard SuperCena Über Alles ending, it might seem like a terrible RAW. Let's look at the former now. The show started off with a lacking start, even though Punk did his best to save it. I thought he was much better actually wrestling, which people seem to discount because of the whole PIPEBOMB shtick. We know he's great on the mic, but when he gets people to care about a match with R-Truth that doesn't have a whole lot of context around it other than "Hey, he wrestled his tag partner last week", then that's mastery. I do like Punk's paranoia here concerning Trips' intentions towards Nash, but I think a lot of the peripheral stuff has come off pretty badly. One, the narrative still has Punk coming off as, well, a punk to some of the audience. Two, Trips putting his COO position on the line so soon into the narrative? Maybe I can dig it, but it feels too soon for me, even if I feel like the match itself isn't too soon. Third, if Nash is really gone (and with him getting in Funkhauser's limo in the second segment means he's not, more than likely), then it's been spinning wheels since his reintroduction at SummerSlam. Four, there is no four, only Zuul. Finally, the payoff that Nash was the one who sent the text was lame. Like, beyond lame. It pretty much insisted that he's a main player when he's not, and really, no one watching the show for the last three months buys that Trips, if he's a fair arbiter (and to their credit, he has been portrayed as such), is going to choose a guy who showed up, waltzed in and gave an ultimatum over the guy who has sold out a shit-ton of t-shirts and gotten Trips a lot of positive press, if we can blur the lines between kayfabe and "real" for a moment.

Also, I couldn't help but smile at the video package for Zack Ryder, and letting him get the win to a deafening pop was proof enough for me that the guy has arrived and that the fans do have a voice. When Michael Cole is ripping on a guy, you know they've arrived. Ryder's exuberance with Cena afterwards was really cool too, almost like it was as real as it was supposed to be part of the narrative. I really like a good success story. That being said, the pretense behind the match, that Lawler doesn't like David Otunga and Michael McGillicutty because they have "no charisma", is starting to grate on me. I think I see what all these people who think that "personality" is a funny thing to kayfabe feud over.

Also, the sooner they get Eve out of an active wrestler role, the better. Beth Phoenix may have flubbed the Glama-Slam, but she at least looks like a pro wrestler in there. Eve does not. I do find it funny though that they're using that Katie Raymond article as a talking point on TV. Again, K. Sawyer Paul is a guru at this kind of thing. Speaking of people who shouldn't be on camera? Jinder Mahal and Great Khali suck out loud in the ring. Not even Evan Bourne's masterful bumping could make them look good. Also, when Heath Slater and Randy Orton is a RAW match? Well, let's backtrack on that. It was a decent match. And I get the reasoning for it. However, it's something that might have been better suited for Superstars. Then again, what match would replace it? A Mark Henry squash? No better. Eh, I guess I can't complain, especially since Orton, I feel, has started becoming more comfortable wrestling as a good guy. I really like that he's actually setting up spots, especially his stump DDT, rather than, oops, guy's on the apron, let's drag him in and DDT him. Forcing the setup just looks cool.

But if we're going back to the wrestling, the main event tag match was as good a wrestling match as you'll get on a RAW main event. Just excellent pacing and storytelling all around. I liked the interplay between Ziggler and Swagger, the fact that Swagger got to attain beast mode early on, Sheamus taking out centuries of Irish frustration on the proxy for English oppression, Wade Barrett, and especially the spot where Christian's slap enraged Sheamus so much that it got both of them counted out. Really solid action for a show that was actually better than the impression I gave off on Twitter tonight. It was very much a holiday RAW, but it was a somewhat well-executed holiday RAW. It had its flaws, but I enjoyed it for the most part.

Earl Hebner Don't Take No Crap from No One

Photo via Stephen Stone via /woo/

Triple H is having his way with Mankind in the corner, ignoring the count from Earl Hebner. Hebner takes matters into his own hands. The results are awesome.

Future Endeavors 9/1 Power Poll: The Game Is King

Green Ant and Tadasuke tangling from King of Trios '10. They tangled again last week and both got rankings.

Welcome to yet another edition of the Future Endeavors Power Poll, a poll ranking wrestlers on a weekly basis based on how awesomely they performed or were portrayed on a Tuesday-to-Monday cycle. It is voted by a who's-who of wrestling bloggers, including my blogging Sergei Bo-Bro-vsky PizzaBodySlam. I will list the top ten, and then post and comment on my ballot. Here goes:

1. Triple H (Last Week: NR)
2. CM Punk (4)
3. Randy Orton (3)
4. John Cena (5)
5. Mark Henry (2)
6. Shemus (NR)
7. The Ghan-Am Connection (Kofi Kingston/Evan Bourne) (6)
8. Kevin Nash (9)
9. Sin Cara (NR)
10. The Awesome Truth (The Miz/R-Truth) (10)

NOTE: I refuse to use the name Air Boom. Brandon Stroud (who got the name actually from Dave Shoemaker and someone named @sweatingmullets... don't ask) had it right the first time.

And now, my ballot:

1. Tadasuke - For winning the Young Lions Cup and continuing to piss off the small, lonely people who have nothing better to do than populate Internet message boards and complain about wrestling in all its forms.

2. Mark Henry - Mark Henry, splitter of wigs, destroyer of worlds. My dream WrestleMania match is now Mark Henry vs. Galactus, which I'm sure Henry would win via World's Strongest Slam and the Death from Above Splash. BECAUSE HE'S FUCKING AWESOME THAT'S WHY SHUT UP.

3. CM Punk - Okay, so he did his best work of the week AFTER the ballot deadline. BFD. He should get ranked in perpetuity.

4. The Miz - Why just Miz and not Miz and R-Truth? Well, to be fair, Truth only came out to get mollywopped by CM Punk post-match.

5. Green Ant - Four wins in five matches, plus he got himself an article written about him by me. What do you mean circular logic?

6. Icarus - How could I vote for Icarus over Randy Orton? Because I can.

7. Sheamus - Fella.

8. John Cena - Y'know what I'd like to see? Cena vs. Icarus. Why? Fuck you, that's why.

9. Daniel Bryan - Stock Daniel Bryan ranking.

10. Drew McIntyre - Yeah, he lost his Superstars match against Bryan, but it was good. Plus, I feel bad for poor Drew. His improvement is inversely proportional to his push.

Photo Credit: Scott Finkelstein - Please visit his site to view the plentiful amounts of pictures he's taken for DGUSA, ROH and other indie feds: Get Lost Photography

Punk Vs. Waltman - Is It Viable?

He's still got the chops, but is he worth the risk?

Kevin Nash's figuring so prominently in WWE television the last couple of weeks has caused a rift in the WWE fanbase. Some like it, others hate it for varying reasons, one of which being that Nash can't work a match. In fact, he's not medically cleared to wrestle, forcing the company's hand and putting Triple H in the ring with Punk. The logic behind the move makes sense - bring back someone with ties to the new COO to provide either a henchman for his use when he reveals himself as evil or a great misdirection by the person really behind the texts. From the standpoint of getting someone to spar with Punk on the mic, Nash was probably the best choice. What about from an in-ring standpoint though? Assuming that Shawn Michaels would stay retired for the time being, who'd be the best option to wrestle Punk in an actual match? There's only one answer to that question:

Sean Waltman

Waltman has cleaned his act up over the years, and at King of Trios earlier this year, he proved he could still go, gradually building up to an epic Rey de Voladores final where he lost to El Generico in what is many people's match of the year to date. You'd think it'd be a no-brainer to bring him in as a foil for Punk, especially since the match quality would ostensibly be on par with the affairs the Straight Edge Savior had with John Cena. However, there'd be two stumbling blocks. One is his hepatitis. There's no guarantee that with his condition he'd be cleared medically to wrestle in WWE. Two is that even if he was cleared? Punk might balk at wrestling him out of the odd chance that Waltman did get busted open hardway and put him at risk for contacting the disease.

The upside to this would be that WWE has scaled back its style over the years so that stuff like blading has forcibly become antiquated. Guys bleeding in matches has become somewhat of a rare occurrence anymore, and thus transmission of bloodborne pathogens is reduced to the point where maybe a guy like Waltman would be alright to compete in a one-off match.

However, for a company that is trying so hard to forge a public image of safety and accountability, how risky is too risky? Even something that's relatively "safe" might not be worth it if the end result could be taking out one of the building blocks of its future before he even had a chance to give all he could give. All it would take is one tooth knocked out of Waltman's mouth, one errant punch to bust him open (and even the most careful wrestlers make mistakes) or one botched elbow to the face causing a bloody nose that would create a severely hazardous working environment.

So while I myself was excited for the prospect of what would be, even today, a PHENOMENAL match between one of the best wrestlers in the company and a solid worker who can still go, I'm not sure this is ever going to happen. I'm also not sure I'd blame Punk or WWE for nixing it from the get go. While I think there'd be nothing to worry about, I also don't want to be wrong and have Punk end up with a disease that would put him on the shelf and endanger his life. So yeah, this is a match that'd be best left up to video games and fantasy booking, because I don't think it's happening for good reason.

Photo Credit: Scott Finkelstein - Please visit his site to view the plentiful amounts of pictures he's taken for DGUSA, ROH and other indie feds: Get Lost Photography

Instant Feedback: Okay but Still Not Super

Smackdown was promised to be super tonight. It was live, it was co-branded, it had a loaded lineup. Other than two parts of the show, it was anything but super. That being said, at least the two parts that were really good were the two most important parts of the show. First, there was the contract signing between Triple H and CM Punk. IT was really, really good. Punk had his A-game back after being off the last two editions of RAW. Last night, he came off as a smarmy asshole who begged to get his comeuppance. Tonight, he acquitted himself better as the folk hero he needs to be to be a fan favorite. He was pitch perfect and with his speech about loving WWE and wanting drastic change, he totally rehabbed the damage on his cred when he went out and imitated Chris Jericho, circa 2000. Triple H was really good here too, a perfect counterbalance to Punk. He was sympathetic in his own right, and he had his own narrative. The more I think about it, the more I think the logical move here is going to an alliance between Punk and Trips, but since that is obvious, it's probably not happening.

The other really good part to tonight's show was the main event. It started off slowly, and it was looking like it wouldn't be the best work between Christian and Randy Orton. However, in the last segment of the match, things really picked up. Christian's avoidance of Orton's signature moves was amazing. The best play came when he hopped on the second turnbuckle to go for his diving European uppercut. It looked like Orton would hit him with the RKO, but Christian stopped short and dodged it. That was fucking cool. This was clearly the least best of the matches between the two I've seen, and the narrative from the announcers about it being a scintillating rivalry was just annoying because it was anything but in retrospect. However, it was still good enough to put a positive spin on the show. Well the match plus Mark Henry splitting wigs afterwards. Dude is rough 'n tumble. I really hope they strap him, let him run to WrestleMania and have the story be the smallest but most skilled man on the roster, Daniel Bryan, be Smackdown's last hope. That won't happen, but hey, it's nice to dream.

Speaking of which, while the Bryan/Sin Cara match was one of Bryan's weakest of the year, it bears noting that with the kick to Bryan in the post match? I really think we're going to see a dueling Sin Cara feud. Could be good.

Other than that, there really was nothing to write home about. John Cena reared his ugly head tonight, not only trying to crack wise, but coming off as utterly unlikable. He suckerpunched Ricardo Rodriguez, and then when Wade Barrett called him on it, he claimed he still owed him payback. Really John? You don't call dropping a million chairs on the man payback enough? The writers and/or Cena really must not think all that highly of the fans for us to forget what happened at the end of the TLC PPV in December. Ugh. The match was a turd too. Too short and too one-sided. I'm not saying this as a pedantic smark who thinks that Wade Barrett should be booked to look STRONG ZOMG. I'm saying this from a standpoint that when I see a match billed as a "MAIN EVENT", I want to see more than just token resistance and squash-like results. Compare to the real main event. No one thought Christian was going over. No one except maybe the most deluded Christian fanboys. Okay, but I think they did a really good job of selling the fact that Christian might just win. Barrett and Cena? It was like the people who laid the match out knew that the crowd knew who was going to win and told them to phone it in because they had to get more plugs, recaps and trailers in.

Yep, when you have a co-branded show, you definitely need more trailers and plugs, right? I mean, it's not like there were guys like Cody Rhodes, the Awesome Truth, Justin Gabriel, Ezekiel Jackson and Vickie Guerrero's traveling dysfunctional circus who could have been there instead of the trailer for Trips' next shitty movie or a recap for the most one-sided main event feud in WWE history... oh wait, there was.

Smackdown was better than RAW was last night, but it still felt very warmed over, not befitting the Super Smackdown label. I felt like I was bored for half the show, but thankfully, the other half of it that was worth watching was at least good. All I have to say though is that the magic WWE had over the summer is disappearing rapidly. Hopefully, this is just a hiccup and when RAW rolls around Monday, we get back to the awesomeness that we've been treated to in July and most of August.

Punk/HHH Is a Lot of Things, but Not a Hotshot

Is Punk a folk hero or an unlikable dick?
Photo Credit: WWE.com

There were a lot of differing criticisms about the end of RAW last night and the announcement that it would be Triple H taking on CM Punk at Night of Champions instead of Kevin Nash challenging the Straight Edge Savior. The one that seems to come up the most is that it's a hotshot. The announcement was abrupt, yes. They were building towards Punk/Nash since SummerSlam, yes. However, despite all that, this is not a hotshot. If you think about it, they've actually been building to this match since 6/27. Yeah, remember? Doofus son-in-law? Two months, Punk has been taking shots at Triple H, and for the most part, Trips took the shots in humor. Last night was his breaking point. There's nothing to suggest that this was the hotshot.

Now, that doesn't mean it's a good idea. Again, if Triple H was the endgame for Night of Champions, why misdirect with Kevin Nash of all people? Maybe it was a way to get everyone's hopes depressed for the prospect of Punk having to carry his 51-year old carcass around the ring for an extended period of time to the point where Trips would seem like an improvement. While there's reason to believe that this was the story all along (although the reasoning on the surface seems flimsy at best), it comes off so much like swerve storytelling, stuff that gets a company like Impact lambasted (rightfully so, by the way).

Secondly, and most importantly, the narrative is screwed up. How's Punk getting underneath Trips' skin. He's insinuating that his wife keeps his balls in her purse. While that's good for occasional ball-busting among friends in a fratboy douchebag sort of way, the longer it's kept up, the more people are going to want to see Trips deck Punk, not for Punk to prevail over his "evil" boss (who's totally not being portrayed as evil).

Again, the story isn't flawed because it's being rushed. Hardly. Unless the endgame is Punk/Trips at WrestleMania, then a two-to-three PPV arc between the two should start right now if that's the case. Hell, it could end up that the two bury the hatchet and join forces because they're being set up by whoever it was who sent the text to Nash in the first place. The story is fatally flawed because it's a bad story in the context of the direction they've set forth.

Punk is supposed to be a folk hero, right? While this course he's on makes him a folk hero by the very definition of the word, those kinds of niche characters don't get over the way that wrestling characters are SUPPOSED to get over. Wrestling caters to a specific audience, and usually the kinds of people who gravitate to a caustic troll (which is what Punk's character is) don't gravitate to wrestling. Steve Austin was a folk hero, but he was an oxymoronic folk hero who had broad appeal. He raged against his corrupt boss. Triple H hasn't proven himself corrupt, so Punk comes off as a dick. Yeah, he's a dick who got screwed over, but until/unless Triple H is revealed as a liar, the more he goads the Game, the more he seems like he deserves to get screwed.

But as badly framed as the narrative is, it's not too soon for a match between the doofus son-in-law and the pipebomb-wielding future star of the company. To call this a hotshot is to do the same thing that people accuse WWE of doing all the time, ignoring longer-term history. That doesn't mean you have to like the story, but at least be honest in criticizing it instead of using smark buzzwords to frame an argument that doesn't fit the thing you're raging against.

Instant Feedback: Super Dud

It appears brand extension has ended with a whimper rather than a bang, or at least it's been put on hold. Funny, but it makes almost total sense for it to end this way, because it seems some old habits are hard to break. Tonight's show seemed like a placeholder in every sense of the word, but instead of those places being held being current, they felt like they were out of a RAW from last year rather than this year. I understand that it's not really feasible to expect them to launch it out of the park every week, but tonight more than any other show between Money in the Bank and now felt like regression.

For one the sense of dread that I had when CM Punk and Kevin Nash were officially announced to have a match at Night of Champions actually materialized. I thought I'd be alright with it, but really, Kevin Nash wrestling in 2011 is just a losing proposition anymore. So you'd think I'd be alright with them switching out to Punk/Triple H, right? Well, only slightly. From a match quality standpoint, it works, but I don't know. I'm starting to get flashbacks to late 2010 with them rushing the story again. Punk/Trips feels like something that could be stretched out a bit, but then again, I get the feeling that after Night of Champions, the two are going to be aligned. Call me crazy...

Also, no Alberto del Rio on the show? C'mon now. I want to know how you're going to have a supershow and not have the WWE Champion. I don't know. I really don't know about most of this show. IT was just so confusingly and befuddlingly boring and uneventful. Like, how am I going to comment on something that felt so warmed over? Then again, at least the wrestling was good. It's a big saving grace, and I'm glad that they are really focusing on providing a decent in-ring product. That being said, if you make me feel like I'm wasting my time out of the ring, then it's just so draining as a fan. Ugh.

Was Mistico a Mistake?

Was Mistico fated from start to fail?
Photo Credit: WWE.com

When Triple H signed Mistico to a contract, most people who knew who he was were excited. He was one of the biggest standout wrestlers South of the Border, worked an exciting style and seemed to be a perfect fit for a company that seemed to take to high flying wrestlers very well. The fans loved him as Sin Cara too. He sold merchandise and got wows from the live audiences for all his acrobatic moves. The botches didn't seem to matter too much either.

The untold story to most fans was that Mistico was a headcase. There was a steady stream of reports from dirtsheets and C&P sites that noted he had a huge ego and brought down the brunt of management and the locker room for everything from those aforementioned botches to claiming that his matches in Mexico were shoot fights. Granted, none of these reports came from primary sources, so it's unclear how much of them were true. Still, the steadiness of said stream was troubling at the very least. That being said, his problems reared a more public head when he was suspended for violating the Wellness Policy.

One would assume that he'd sit out his thirty days, come back and feud with Sheamus, the guy who put him out in storyline with a vicious powerbomb through a ladder at Money in the Bank. That wasn't the case, as again, nebulous reports without primary sources surfaced that Mistico would not be back. More gas was thrown on that fire when the Sin Cara character was brought back two weeks before Mistico's suspension was up, only with masked FCW wrestler Hunico in the rule. A fake/real Sin Cara angle was teased, but ultimately it was dropped when Mistico took over the role again on house shows.

Then, the biggest kicker, Mistico was apparently sent home last Tuesday, with Hunico being placed back in the Sin Cara mask (which, oddly enough, got off to an inauspicious restart when he had to redo a match with Heath Slater twice before it was fit to air). Honestly, I'm not sure what the deal is here. Again, the reports say that he was sent home because of a combination of ego, sloppiness and frustration with the man himself. I'm not going to rule out this being the beginning of that aforementioned dueling Sin Caras angle, but then again, who knows at this point. I'm not sure who's getting the right information, but as of right now, it does seem plausible that the Mistico experiment was poisoned from the start.

The premise behind bringing him up to America was simple. He'd be a guy who'd wow the Anglo audiences, while providing a hometown hero for Mexican fans, a base that is a major growth sector for WWE (growth sector... shit, I feel so dirty for typing that, my apologies). Honestly, the former didn't need to be filled by a Mexican at all. Evan Bourne, for example, is a guy who is massively over with crowds despite being limited to bumping his ass off for bigger guys and doing the Air Bourne for a huge crowd reaction. If they'd turned him loose earlier, maybe he's the guy who'd have made it possible for Rey Mysterio to get his surgery before it became necessary thanks to injuries exacerbated by holding out.

But then again, he didn't fill the other void. You could argue Alberto del Rio did, but at the same time, would Mexican crowds cheer for a rudo in a company of gringos if he was the only one? It's a very good possibility he could have. I mean, WWE may try to keep heels heel in their hometowns through dastardly actions, but money spent on merchandise and tickets is a neutral language. CM Punk proved that at Money in the Bank. Bret Hart proved it in Canada in 1996-97. My guess is the fact that del Rio was crowned Champion so close to their next big tour of Mexico leads me to believe that they didn't necessarily need to have Mistico to have a Mexican draw.

That being said, it'd be nice to be able to have one on the RAW tour and one on the Smackdown tour as well. Again, the WWE could really expand in Mexico, so I guess you can't blame them for wanting to have as many. But why Mistico? Why couldn't they have put Hunico in the Sin Cara mask all along? It would have cost them less from the get go, and he would have been well-adjusted from start having been "broken" by FCW so to speak. It's easy to say that in retrospect, but the truth is, the Sin Cara role was created for Mistico. It wouldn't have existed if the Mexican superstar wasn't signed up in the first place.

The truth is, I really can't blame WWE for trying to sign the guy in the first place. They hit a home run with Dos Caras, Jr. Maybe they thought they could do better by having an established name come in and do business for them. However, what worked for the middling-to-struggling Caras wasn't just his heritage. It was a year in FCW, vignettes heralding his arrival as Alberto del Rio and working a generally less risky style that made him a success.

It's easy to look at this whole ordeal in retrospect and say what a terrible idea it was, but the fact is that it wasn't so much a mistake as it was a gamble. Triple H, in his first move, swung for the fences and yeah, he may have apparently struck out (remember, no one knows Mistico's status now), he's thinking enough outside of the box that his father-in-law has built that he's going to bring in new and eclectic guys. You live, and you learn, but you won't know if Mistico will be the guy for you unless you sign him (and really, if you divorce his ego from his in-ring, he was looking to be really huge).

Going forward, Hunico being in the Sin Cara mask is probably the right call, as long as nights like last Tuesday are aberrations rather than the norm. That being said, even if it didn't turn out as planned for WWE, bringing in Mistico was the right call. Sometimes though, the right call can turn out bad.

From the A1 Message Boards: Me and Jerseyboy on the Money in the Bank Buyrate

Don't worry 'bout Punk
Photo Credit: WWE.com

Normally, I hate talking about things like buyrates and ratings. Like Jason Mann said, they're boring. However, sometimes, you get dragged into conversations with people who take those sorts of things seriously. In addition to my post on why I don't think they need to be taken seriously at Fair to Flair, I got into it a little bit at A1-Wrestling with the people reacting to ratings and getting a bit in a tizzy because ratings haven't shot up.

I posted the now-determined-to-be incorrect buyrate for Money in the Bank, which was actually really good, before I was corrected by poster and sometimes TWB commenter KoppoKick bringing up Meltzer's analysis of the sheets bringing the number down a bit. The correct number, 185K as compared to the erroneous number of 276K, was still pretty good, at least I thought. Here's the passage of three posts over there that I think dictates why, regardless of how "good" or "not good" the numbers are, why, again, we shouldn't really worry about the business side when it comes to what they're going to do on the side we SHOULD care about, i.e. the shows themselves. Two of my posts will sandwich one by poster and regular TWB commenter Jerseyboy, with whom I may disagree from time to time. Despite that, he really is smart when it comes to this kind of thing, and I'm glad he reads and comments.

Yes, this will be directly C&Ped from the A1 board, but I think it's worth sharing. At least I hope you think it's worth sharing.

Me:

[Referring to the discrepancy between the originally reported 276K and the real 185K] It just goes to show that wrestling journalism has a long way to go, and wrestling fans such as myself have a long way to go before trusting any of these sites. My bad.

That being said, 185K is still a good number.

Jerseyboy:

I agree. To me, it meant that Punk/Cena had some juice.

The big thing that people need to keep in mind is that if there's going to be business turnaround with Punk as the centerpiece, it isn't going to happen overnight. Again, the things to look at over the next 3-6 months aren't the TV ratings so much, but to see if there's a bump in PPV buyrates and house show attendance and merchandise sales. If Punk means something, that's where the initial bump's [sic] going to come from.

Of course, the WWE might look at ratings and a less than expected PPV number and decide Punk needs to be shunted back down the card. But I'm thinking at this point that they're pretty much out of options and will go all the way with him.

Because if you move Punk back to the mid-card, who do you move up in his place? Exactly.

Me again:

Yeah, I think you're right in that they won't move him back down for whatever reason. They're already seeing the initial bumps in merch. MitB was slightly up, from this time last year, which is still up. Ratings are ratings, but in the last two months, they've been mostly stable. Plus, as Triple H gets more influence, I think the decision making might turn more rational over the long term. I think Punk will be fine.

Normally, I don't care about this kind of thing, but I posted the number just to try and allay concerns (before I found out that I had bitten on a bad one, again, my fault there) that something that we found good was going to continue to pay dividends and that really, we should probably stop worrying about the business end of things. 10 million people watch the Jersey Shore. Is that a measurement of how enjoyable that program is going to be to you? Hardly. Therefore, why should it matter how many people consume wrestling if what the company is producing is good? And unlike Fatty, there really isn't a consensus on this angle being good or bad (although most people I interact with have loved the last two months with hiccups here and there).

If WWE was proving to be reactionary, then they wouldn't have put Punk over Cena at MitB, they wouldn't have put him over Cena again at SummerSlam, and they wouldn't have programmed him against someone who is so obviously hateable and polarizing the other way that everyone, not just the "Attitude Era holdovers", men and anti-Cena crowd, would cheer him. Say what you want about Nash and Punk being programmed against him, but again, the logic there isn't to bury Punk or put him out of mind. It's to get everyone to cheer the man, and it's a prelude into a potential feud with the boss. Whether you think Nash should have been the segue into that or whether you think that a boss/employee feud in 2011 is a good idea is one thing, but I think it's undeniable that Punk is a priority to WWE right now.

This is program #1 or at least #1a (with Cena/del Rio being #1). The moment that Punk gets thrown back to the Dolph Zigglers and Kanes of the world is when we start panicking, at least in my estimation. But again, I'll be utterly shocked if that happens. Call me myopic. Call me overly optimistic. Call me a "WWE fanboy" (like that means anything among adults in 2011, even if there wasn't a shitload of evidence to prove that I come down on what I feel is bad wrestling regardless of company) even. Just don't call me late for dinner. But I have a really good feeling about the direction of WWE right now, and when it's all said and done, I really feel like come WrestleMania time, CM Punk is going to be fully integrated into the main event firmament.

I think that's a passage worth relaying. Again, numbers are numbers, and even if they do affect what they put on the screen, you always have the option to vote with your own remote control and not watch. Life's not long enough to the point where worrying about the performance indicators of WWE is worth it.

Also, I encourage you, like I always have, to sign up for an account at A1-Wrestling and post there. It's a really good community with great discussion for wrestling and so much more.

I Want Seth Mates to Book the Punk/Trips Storyline

Under Mates' plan, we'd see a lot more Big Sexy
Photo Credit: WWE.com

Seth Mates is a former WWE Creative Team member. He took to Twitter to criticize the main angle with CM Punk, Triple H, Kevin Nash and such as "messy", saying simplicity is the key. He then went into how he'd book the whole thing. It's really quite brilliant. Here are the links to his Tweets, and here's the whole thing transcribed:

Here's a thought on where I'd go with the story, if these are the pieces in place. Reveal Nash as the Raw GM and bring in HBK for SmackDown. Keep Stephanie as HHH ally. Then [d]o a seg w/HHH, Nash, Michaels, Steph in ring. HHH cuts promo about Shane leaving WWE, Linda running for Senate (ha!), Vince pushed out, then HHH says "and now plan comes to fruition. After years, I have what I need - the company is mine. And Stephanie - you're fired! Story is, HHH/Michaels/Nash been collaborating for years to screw McMahons & steal [the] company, strategically getting rid of 1 McMahon at a time, [l]eading up to HHH firing his own wife and taking full control with each of his buddies running one of the shows. They mess with Punk b/c he represents everything they hate -- and he becomes the white knight and savior of company.

Yeah, that may be fantasy booking, but it's good fantasy booking from a guy who used to be in the business. This wouldn't be the only satisfying conclusion to the story, but I think it'd be the best way to set up a complex authority figure structure. Granted, it would very much depend on the authority figures wrestling, and HBK could balk at that. That being said, he could easily be replaced by Sean Waltman, who proved at King of Trios he could still go.

I could also see where this is problematic as well, but it has promise. I really like the way he thinks, at least regarding this angle.

Alberto del Rio Loves You, Why Don't You Love Him Back?

He's pretty awesome... BAAAAHT... chu already knew that.
Photo Credit: WWE.com

Last night, RAW opened with two momentous occasions. One, Triple H ceded the ring after a mere 9 minutes of air-time and probably 7 minutes of him talking, which is a record low for him. Two, the person he ceded the ring to, Alberto del Rio, cut one hell of a celebratory promo after his WWE Championship win the night before at SummerSlam. I was so enamored with his sly delivery, his sarcastically friendly tone of voice belying the utter cockiness and disdain he had in the content of his words. The facial expressions that go along with it, how insincere they are in the face of his true intention, are among the best that I've seen.

A lot of people trashed the promo last night, and that's alright. Nobody's perfect Everyone has their own opinion of how promos resonate with them, and I can respect that as a guy who has his own quirky opinions. That being said, some of those criticisms baffled me. The first criticism is that he's too comedic. There is an air of glibness to his delivery that I think can be confused with that of a caricature. I mean, he does reside in the trappings of being a Mexican JBL or Million Dollar Man. It's easy to see how he can come off as a parody, but at the same time, think about it for a second. Mexican Million Dollar Man. Doesn't that sound funny to you? Traditional Mexican gimmicks include masked luchadors, guys who say "HEY I'M FROM MEXICO AND... uh... viva la raza?" and the rarely visited, highly insensitive stereotype of the Mexican migrant worker who hangs out in the Home Depot parking lot. I'd say the fact that he's treading new ground gives him a lot of leeway here.

So what does that have to do with his over-comedic stylings? Well, I think rather than looking at him like a traditional wrestling caricature, I look at him as I'd imagine someone who's rich would act, at least a rich maniacal supervillain. Okay, that doesn't help the caricature argument, but then again, who said being a caricature was a bad thing? The promos are good, the delivery works with the character and he's getting a great response from the live crowds. I don't see it as comedy (even if he's exaggerating his character), but more as a guy really getting into his character. He's swarthy, he's cocky, he's sly and he takes joy in crushing those who get in his way. If that's not the recipe for a great villain, I don't know what is.

Of course, none of that matters if the execution is bad. Yeah, I know. That's a matter of taste. AND MY TASTE IS BETTER THAN YOURS Still, how can I not like a guy who walks around like he owns the place, has his own cars and opulent ring entrances and his own ring announcer, and does it all so smooth and slyly amusing at the same time? Plus, the dude can wrestle. Seriously, that match with Mysterio last night was as good as anything on SummerSlam, and SummerSlam was one of the best pure wrestling cards of the year.

So yeah, you guys can all go to hell continue enjoying guys who aren't Alberto del Rio. However, I get the feeling that he's going to be around for a long time. And I for one can't be any happier.

Triple H As the Sword of Damocles: WWE SummerSlam 2011 Preview

Who will stand tallest? If there's a God, it won't be the one with the microphone.
Photo Credit: WWE.com

It's weird.

The last time WWE has graced pay-per-view with its presence, it hit every note correctly. Every match was pitch perfect with the exception of the Divas Championship match. The right people won. The right decisions were made. Things looked like they'd be intriguing for awhile with everything that went down.

For the most part, SummerSlam still is intriguing, or at least it should be. Whether or not you felt CM Punk coming back after eight days was a good call or not, they've at least set the table for his match with Cena nicely in response to that. In a vacuum, SummerSlam, while not as highly anticipated as Money in the Bank was, still would look like a decent card on paper.

But then there's the Sword of Damocles hanging over that match, a huge insertion to the main event that has set several fans panicking. Despite the fact that I still remain hopeful despite there being no reason for me to remain hopeful, I can totally understand if people get scared with Triple H now being the special guest referee. There's a part of me that fears terribly that the man who stands tall when SummerSlam goes off the air won't be John Cena, won't be CM Punk, but will be the doofus son-in-law.

It's not just the history that I've been writing about this week in some regard. It's the recent shows where Trips' ego running wild has been a theme, whether overt or a bit muted. The opening segment to RAW this past week was a self-produced tribute to Trips, orchestrated by the man himself. The end segment, as beautiful and effective as it was, had Triple H butting his nose into the conversation and putting himself above Cena at one point. It's a scary time for folks like us who lived through is reign of terror as a wrestler, those who weren't in his fan camp and who didn't enjoy him going over our favorites, for whatever reason.

The thing is, Triple H in this match represents a zipper that could come undone and turn the entire new direction of WWE on its head to some people. If we get worried about Triple H exerting his will, then the play of Randy Orton decimating Christian in 5 minutes with no recourse whatsoever. That domino falls to knock over the Divas Championship match, where Kelly Kelly beats Beth Phoenix clean as a whistle with an ass-shaking stink face into an ass-shaking moonsault that's botched terribly with no discipline. That domino falls to have Wade Barrett defeat Daniel Bryan in three minutes, claiming his Money in the Bank briefcase in the process and having Michael Cole come in the ring and do a dance around the fallen "nerd". Then there's the domino of Sheamus and Mark Henry standing isolated in the middle, because hey, that's really the only sure thing on this PPV whether good or bad. Either you're a big fan of hosses pummeling each other or you're not. But if all of the other four scenarios play out the way they do, SummerSlam will serve as a scorched earth reminder that WWE really hasn't changed at all.

That being said, do I believe all of that will happen? Hell, I don't believe that any of that is going to happen very strongly. Why would WWE reverse direction so quickly, especially when a new regime is slowly taking over, letting the last two months play out the way they have with wrestling becoming more and more of the focus, letting Punk speak his mind, giving Christian a platform to work from that isn't "trusty sidekick" or "never-will-be". Hell, Triple H is the guy who spoke up loudest after Jamie Noble had the crazy idea that Bryan should win Smackdown's Money in the Bank match.

That being said, while I think this will be a step forward for WWE, even if it's a small one that seems like they've just ran in place, I still can't shake the feeling that Triple H is going to do something very terrible. The Sword of Damocles, naturally, is rooted a bit in paranoia. I've learned to recoil at the thought of trusting someone who's bitten me so many times before. So yeah, you'll have to forgive me if I speak out of both sides of my mouth on this one.

I don't know. I get the feeling that this year's Slam is going to be good. I really do. But this feeling of dread abounding, when in a vacuum, it shouldn't be there at all, is just disconcerting. Either way, it marks as a potential watershed moment for WWE. It'll be the point where we get a better idea if change really is afoot and we are in for very exciting times as wrestling fans, or whether the new boss is the same as the old boss.

And hey, if that gives the main event an extra added layer of unintentional tension, we might be talking about this for years to come like we will be Money in the Bank, especially if they shock us and actually do something that doesn't involve the thread on the Sword of Triplcles snapping, sending his long-nosed blade hurtling down at our heads in a terminal velocity of malaise and dissatisfaction.

Triple H: The Bravest, Smartest, Strongest, Toughest... and Boringest

Too cool for school? Booooring.
Photo Credit: WWE.com

Yesterday, I wrote about the beginning of where the Triple H backlash began and whether he really deserved it. The study in Triple H continues today.

If you ask most people who don't give a shit about the backstage stuff what annoys them most about Triple H, my guess is if they have an answer, and believe me, he has enough fans out there that you're going to have a bunch of people say nothing annoys them, is that nothing seems to faze him. He's totally unaffected in that nothing you can do or say to him will make him show any kind of vulnerability. To use wrestling terms, he doesn't sell, even if in the ring, he sells, if that makes any sense. He always seems to need to be the center of attention in any segment he's in, regardless of whether it's warranted or not.

A lot of times, this doesn't come off as anything but annoying. He tries to be funny, and the only one laughing is him and sometimes the people who are fans of his most. If he levies an insult at you, you're supposed to take it to heart, but nothing you can say to him will make him think of you as anything but a mere annoyance, someone that he'll defeat in the ring. He always has to be portrayed as the smartest, the funniest, the toughest, the bravest, the strongest, the coolest... hell, any positive adjective you can describe, and that's what Trips seems to have to be portrayed as. As I said in Instant Feedback Monday, it's like he has this pathological desire to have all his attributes maxed out at 99 at all times. Is it ego? Is it bad writing? I don't know, but what I do know is it plays off terribly most of the time.

Look at the final segment to RAW Monday. Everyone did their part to make it pop except for one guy. CM Punk held the crowd in his hand. John Cena served as a great counterweight. John Laurinitis' big ol' melon head was the perfect thing for Punk to kick. Then there was Trips, whom every time he interjected into the fray seemed to be out of place, changing the tone to one that didn't fit. I'm not alone in this either, as chatter from message boards, Twitter and from B-Stroud at With Leather all noticed the same thing. And it's nothing new.

Sad thing is, he didn't always come off like this. There were times when he actually showed vulnerability, and it enhanced his story. This well of goodwill dried up mostly in 2001, but at the same time, when he sold for guys outside the ring as well as inside of it, it made for a much more interesting ride towards the match. I mean, did anyone think that if Trips went "Pffft, nbd" at everything Batista did and said leading up to their WrestleMania 21 match that it would have been as much of a moment? No.

That's the thing, being a no-selling creep doesn't make for interesting storytelling for most. It makes things boring. When you have guys showing vulnerability, it usually reveals character, and character makes a story work, especially if the endgame of that chapter is having the guy who would be otherwise invulnerable winning.

So yeah, even if you discount the backstage stuff, and as people who aren't backstage or in the company and who don't know exactly what went down (don't kid yourselves, my guess is a bunch of dirtsheet writers don't exactly know either), there are a lot of reasons why Triple H is perhaps the most annoying and boring wrestler in the last 10 years. This is definitely a hurdle that folks like me have to enjoying him now, regardless of how many people he puts over or helps enhance.

Unfairly Unforgiven: Historical Perspective and Triple H in the Fall of 2000

Did we play The Game wrong too early?
Photo Credit: WWE.com

I remember vividly the build-up to SummerSlam 2000. Kurt Angle had won King of the Ring a few months prior and was staking his claim to the WWF Championship. Despite only being in the company for 8 months, he had gotten himself so over that he implicitly demanded to be counted among the big boys of the company, then The Rock, Triple H, Undertaker and Kane. He was given a big story being the third man in the Trips/Stephanie McMahon relationship. The Internet hordes, myself included among them, screamed for Angle to come out of the feud as the new top dog in the WWF, with Triple H cuckolded and the boss' daughter having a new, Olympic beau.

When that didn't happen at SummerSlam nor at Unforgiven, boy, was the reaction screaming bloody murder. It didn't matter that Angle would win the WWF Championship at No Mercy, the damage was done in that The Rock had to do what Triple H didn't do... put Angle over. At the time, many among us accused Triple H of being a political machinist, someone who was paranoid about his spot and thus screwed Angle out of elevation. In retrospect though, was that fair?

To begin to examine that is to look at the context. The most important part of this background information has nothing to do with the players or the storyline in question, but with the people criticizing it. Internet fans by and large seem to be a fickle bunch. Stereotypically, they're always looking for the next big thing, and if/when that person breaks through, the backlash almost immediately begins. As someone who used to get caught up in that frenzy a lot more than I do now (and I'm not going to sit here and say that I don't lose perspective every once in awhile), it seems a little shortsighted. Yes, pro wrestling companies need to be proactive in building new stars, but when you have a guy who just hit the main event, when is it that he has to start making new wrestlers stars, and how often does he need to do it?

That brings us to "Public Enemy #1", Triple H.

By the time SummerSlam had rolled around, it was a year or so since his official elevation so to speak. However, you could argue that he really wasn't cemented as a main eventer until the Royal Rumble and No Way Out, when he and Mick Foley (as Cactus Jack) tore the house down in two consecutive title matches, the latter being a Hell in a Cell. There's no doubt that he was entrenched as a main eventer by SummerSlam, but at the same time, he really was only cemented for eight months as a top guy. For Trips to start hearing the catcalls that he was a diabolical scoundrel after less than a year of really coming into his own as a main eventer in retrospect, when guys like Steve Austin and the Undertaker, just to name two, had years on top before the bloom came off their rose and they were called upon to put people over (and even then, you could argue that Austin never really did that anyway) in order to let them join the main event pantheon, seemed really premature.

I think the perfect example here is Bret Hart. While he went into WrestleMania IX as the WWF Champion, I think we can all agree he really wasn't "made" until a year later, when he finally felled the sumo warrior Yokozuna and got his first real (and one could argue only) WrestleMania moment. He was on top really for two years, I'd say, before he was called to the carpet to put over Shawn Michaels at WrestleMania XII. In that time of course, he didn't win every match, but at the same time, the people he put over in high profile matches at the time - Bob Backlund and Jerry Lawler - were established in their own ways. I'm sure if the Internet were around as prominently in 1995 as it is today, there'd have been people moaning that Hart didn't put over Jean-Pierre Lafitte or his brother Owen.

However, when he put Michaels over at WrestleMania XII, it ostensibly made him. The same could be said for his role in playing the foil for Steve Austin the next year. Even though Hart won that "I Quit" match, Austin came out of it looking like a million bucks, and Hart changed roles in order to further enhance the budding star of the man who'd become Stone Cold.

Of course, knowing what know now, it did take Triple H a lot longer to put someone not on his level over in a meaningful way (Chris Benoit at WrestleMania XX and then Batista the next year). And yeah, Trips did weasel his way out of putting over a lot of guys who could have used the bump, from Kane all the way up to Goldberg (whom you could argue didn't need the bump to be considered a main eventer, but at the same time, the iron was hot at SummerSlam in 2003). But that's where the question comes in... how long should a guy be continually put over before he starts returning the favor?

Whether you think it should have been Kane at the end of that horrible Katie Vick angle, Rob Van Dam, Booker T after the horrible racism angle or anyone else in the stretch between his comeback in 2002 until WM XX, can we all agree that maybe our angry mob was unjustified in 2000?

Then again, the reason why I rejected Triple H, at least at first, wasn't because of any political machinations. Seriously, I didn't really become "aware" of the backstage stuff until around early 2000, and by that time, I was already sick of Triple H. When he turned heel, he turned boring to me. The 20 minute promos to start RAW grated on me. He didn't have good matches with anyone not named The Rock, Undertaker or Mick Foley. So yeah, the political stuff was a great cover for the wholly subjective reasoning that we just didn't like the guy.

So, we now flash back to SummerSlam 2000, which for me is when the Triple H backlash kicked into high gear, ESPECIALLY since his relationship with Stephanie was being reported as more real than they were letting on on screen. Especially given that Angle at the time was a rookie himself, would you really blame WWF for putting a commodity they were trying to build at the time at risk for the benefit of a guy who wasn't even a year into his tenure on the main roster? Looking back at it, I'm not really sure I can.

If anything, I'd blame the braintrust in 2000 for booking the wrong angle. Yes, the love triangle was a good build, but they didn't pay it off correctly for various reasons. They would have been better served focusing Angle directly on The Rock, especially since the endgame was going to be Angle upending Rocky for the title anyway. Then, maybe you have Triple H continue his feud with Undertaker or Kane. Maybe he tangles with Rikishi or some other act that didn't have a whole lot of upward mobility. I don't know.

But what I do know is that a lot of the rage directed at Triple H at that time period might not have been justified. Granted, I'm still not happy at the way he refused to share the spotlight in 2002-04, and maybe he spent too much time as a Hulk Hogan when he was meant to be a Bret Hart all along. However, maybe we all got off on the wrong foot when it came to judging him outside the confines of whether we liked him or not.

OF COURSE CM Punk Was Involved in the Best Contract Signing Ever

Tense negotiations
Photo Credit: WWE.com

So did anyone else cringe when they announced a contract signing for the Undisputed WWE Championship match for SummerSlam? I did a little bit. Contract signings as a rule seem to follow a formula. Guys promo on each other, they sign the contract, then there's a pull-apart brawl. It's predictable, which in and of itself isn't a problem, but the execution is rarely ever done well. I can think of one contract signing off the top of my head that was done well enough to justify it, and it was the one between Batista and Rey Mysterio back in late 2009/early 2010 (I'm a bit fuzzy on when it happened). So yeah, the bar is set low to begin with.

Then last night happened, and of course CM Punk was at the epicenter of it. It's not like they deviated from the formula though. Punk and John Cena cut promos on each other, and at the end, there was a pull-apart brawl. It was all in the execution. Punk knows what buttons to push, and he has such a natural flair for working situations to get the maximum crowd reactions. It shone through again last night, with him defending himself from accusations from Triple H and Cena that he was the one who was the phony and continuing to tread the edge very finely, giving shout outs to Internet favorites such as Vladimir Kozlov₁ and Chris Masters (and Harry Smith, although really, he was never an Internet favorite and he was a guy who WANTED to leave to do MMA).

But let's not give credit to Punk alone here. Cena made this work as well. It wasn't just because he went meta either. I do admit though, Cena knowingly nodding to his detractors on the web was surreal, because you don't expect John Cena, Company Man, to mention terms like workrate or heel on camera. What I was more impressed with was again, his serious, moral hero delivery. When you combine that with Punk's voice for the voiceless narrative, you get something special.

I think the capper was that neither Cena nor Punk really came to blows with each other either. It was teased, but John Laurinitis and Triple H served purposes here other than to annoy the shit out of me. Well, Johnny Ace didn't do anything to annoy me, but Trips' interruptions were really uncalled for. But then again, maybe that's the point? Maybe it's foreshadowing a heel turn that will cement him fully as Mr. McMahon for a new generation? As much as his butting in was frustrating in the moment, I'm willing to give it a shot because hey, out of the last eight weeks in this feud, only one has been a dud, so maybe they're on the right track here.

So last night's final segment proved a couple of things to me. One is that the right talent can make even the most tired and lame-sounding of segments become must-see TV. Two is that the writers really are superfluous to the whole narrative. It's guys who know how to work crowds. It's Punk, Cena and to an extent, Triple H. That's where your bread and butter is.

1 - Am I playing fast and loose by calling Kozlov an Internet favorite? Maybe looking at everything macrohistorically, but at least in recent weeks, people have been gravitating around him from where I sit.

Instant Feedback: Triple H Is Solar Powered

Any momentum that was lost last week from the main angle was regained. Why did we have any doubt? Did we think the soul-sucking WWE machine could take CM Punk and rob him of his ability to entrance crowds? Turns out the answer to that is now. Punk, who got loud reactions from an iffy crowd all night, a crowd that faded in and out all night long, showed that he can curry interest for a wrestling match by opening his mouth, not by holding a belt up to new theme music.

And let's not take credit away from Cena. He went meta at one point, mentioning workrate in his nerdy voice, and that was great from a different standpoint, but the rest of his delivery showed him at his best. He needs to be the strong, moral, lawful good voice that counterbalances the Punk who's chaotic good persona draws in the male fans who like people who like to watch the world burn. The WWE could really be onto something if they cultivate a split fanbase and start exploring the fact that different wrestlers appeal to different demographics.

They'd also be wise to have Triple H play as much of a background role as possible. Of course, his forced star turn tonight couldn't come at a worse time in terms of selfish reasons, as I'm planning a bunch of entries that look to reconcile my past as a wrestling fan re: Trips, and if I end up coming to a conclusion that forgives him and he ends up fucking up SummerSlam? Yeah, I don't even want to imagine that. Triple H as a forefront character for this angle is bad. As someone in the background, he works, especially if he lets Funkhauser, err, I mean Super Dave Osbourne, err, I mean John Laryngitis... err, Laurinitis become the real lightning rod proxy. It also helps that Mr. Ace has a puro education, because I doubt that flash kick from Punk was the last bump he'll be taking.

Of course, the perfect contract signing wasn't the only thing going on here. A lot of stuff happened on RAW tonight, including two potential SummerSlam matches being taken off the card. The first saw Miz continue Rey Mysterio's injury angle with a STELLAR beatdown. Again, he shows why he's the best at the Pearl Harbor, bar none. Obviously, since Rey will be back next week for his rematch, it lends credence to the report that his injury is just a "tweak". The other match taken off the books potentially has been R-Truth/John Morrison. Some have been speculating that it's a warning shot to go along with Melina's firing. It makes sense to me, but again, no primary source, no reporting as fact. That being said, with those two matches being moved off the card ostensibly, is it too much to ask to see Miz and Truf win the Tag Pennies and become JeriShow 2K11 at SummerSlam? Please?

This was a banner night for promos. Alberto del Rio's spot before his match with Punk was pretty good. Truf was hilarious as always. Punk's line of "Triple H needing the spotlight so much that he's solar powered" was GOLD, JERRY, GOLD. Of course, the wrestling was good for the most part too. Cena/Swagger was good. Kofi/Truth was deceptively excellent. After a week where they may have taken off, RAW bounced back with a strong show, one that gives me hope that maybe, just maybe, they won't fuck up SummerSlam.

The Wrestling Podcast, Episode 14: Spencer Hall (EDSBS)

Photo Credit: Every Day
Should Be Saturday

Episode 14: Tiny Luchas: Songs from the Mexican Gift Shop

Spencer Hall, or Orson Swindle if you wiiiiill, is this week's guest on The Wrestling Podcast. He's the head guy at Every Day Should Be Saturday, so we'll talk a little college football. As is the custom, we talk about CM Punk as well, including describing him in ways that maybe others haven't thought about before. Also, why Sheamus' being an Irish stereotype is a good thing, why he hates John Cena and of course, some obligatory laughing at the expense of Darren Rovell.

Direct link for downloading

Your Favorite Wrestlers Ever: Don Owens

Now that my own favorites list is out of the way, I posed the question to some of my colleagues in the fan/writer community. Who are your favorite five wrestlers?

Today's list comes from Don Owens of the Future Endeavors podcast. He's a fun guy, and I enjoy him both on Twitter and when he guests on Jason Mann's podcast after WWE PPVs. Here is his list, back do descending order:

---

1. Shawn Michaels - THE Greatest of All Time! There is no doubt that HBK is #1. This is the man that has blown away audiences for decades. His list of accolades is long - the 1st Grand Slam Champion, Tag Titles, IC Title, European Title, World Title, WWE Title, 1st Hell In A Cell Match, Elimination Chamber match, 2 Royal Rumble wins, revolutionized the ladder match, best Iron man match, best WrestleMania match. The list goes on and on. No one made their oponent look as good as Shawn Michaels did. The greatest to ever do it, NO DOUBT!

Don's top two
Photo Credit: WWE.com

2. Triple H - The King Of Kings is easily one of the greatest of all time, a true student of the game. I was a major fan of his since the day I saw his debut on WWF Superstars and saw him hit the move known as the pedigree for the 1st time. I said, "That Hunter Hearst Helmsley is gonna be a big star!" and boy was I correct.

His transition into Triple H was amazing - so many good feuds and another Grand Slam Champion. Triple H has done it all. He was a part of D-Generation X, then lead the group when HBK retired, went on to form and lead Evolution. He was the 1st WWE World Heavyweight Champion. As with HBK, Triple H could make a match work with anyone, a true in ring general. In the last year he has become more of an office hand backstage, but when the time calls for it as we saw at Wrestlemania 27 with his amazing match with Undertaker, he can still hang with the best of them.

3. Kevin Nash (Diesel) - My favorite big man ever. The day Diesel made his debut as HBK's bodyguard I knew I saw a star in the making. Seeing in that 1st year in the WWF, Diesel won the Intercontinental Championship, Tag Titles and the WWF Championship in a record 8 seconds from Bob Backlund to become a Triple Crown winner, and he went on to be WWE champ for almost a full year. Big Daddy Cool was the Man! He dominated in Rumbles, had a great feud with HBK, had the best WrestleMania match with the Undertaker (at the time) and had the match of his carreer with HBK in his last WWF match before going to WCW at In Your House: Good Friends, Better Enemies. Diesel went to WCW and went by his real name, Kevin Nash. He was the single reason why I started watching WCW, and then we saw the birth of the nWo, one of the greatest factions and most influental groups in all of sports entertainment. Nash went on to win more titles and had a great run in WCW.

After the company went out of business Nash did some movies and returned to wrestling and the WWE with Hulk Hogan and Scott Hall to debut the WWE version of the nWo. After some ups and downs in WWE, Nash left again and had a good run in TNA. At the 2011 Royal Rumble, Diesel returned and a surprise entrant. One of the greatest moments for me as a wrestling fan. Kevin "Diesel" Nash is now back as part of the WWE Family. What his future hold no one knows, But for me, he will go down as one of the best.

4. The Rock - Not much to say here for the Most Electrying Man in Sports, wait I mean ALL of Entertainment. Rock is easily the most entertaining man ever on the mic, and that definately translated into the ring. A superstar who has done it all, left WWE to become a true Hollywood actor and successfully made the transition better then anyone that tried before him. Rock's charisma made him a huge bankable star, and just when we thought we would never see him back in a WWE ring, 7 years later, he returned! He electrified audiences again like he never left, instantly he went from Dwayne back to The Rock. He went on to host WrestleMania 27, and will lace up the boots once again to take on John Cena at WrestleMania 28. FINALLY!!!! The Rock is back and is no doubt in my top 5 of all time.

5. Rob Van Dam - I have lost a lot of respect for RVD since he joined TNA, but I cant let that take away my love for him the rest of his career. RVD amazed me in ECW and instantly became one of my favorites to watch. The guy I always hoped would make it to WWE one day. Then that day finally happened. He came over after the buy out of WCW and was a part of The Alliance. His first ppv match in WWE against Jeff Hardy for the Hardcore Championship at the Invasion PPV was a classic. I was hooked and wanted more. For years I got to witness amazing matches with RVD and many other great opponents. He had great runs as Tag and IC Champion, but one belt always eluded him, the WWE title. At WrestleMania, RVD won the MITB briefcase and cashed in against John Cena at One Night Stand to become WWE Champion finally! Not only was he the WWE Champion, he was also awarded the ECW Championship for relaunch of that brand. RVD had made history. Unfortunately some bad things happened shortly after his win that led to him losing the WWE and ECW Titles back-to-back in the same week. RVD retired soon later after being frustrated with the direction of the new ECW. He made a couple surprise appearances that made me totally mark out for a full-time return. Unfortunately that never happened in WWE as he decided to join TNA. Although I'm not happy with him there, I am proud that he became TNA World Champion and had a great run. He definately deserves it. The Whole F'n Show!

Pipe Bomb!

CM Punk is rad, yo.

Thanks to Friend of TWB Zia Hiltey for finding this!

Is the Thrill Gone?

Not the best show, but I'm not jumping yet
Photo Credit: WWE.com

They couldn't keep up that pace forever, right? Right? Well, if you ask some people, the string of epic RAW endings ended last week with Punk's allegedly premature return to action. I will still say that it was a right call (admitting that there were several potential right calls in that scenario), but a lot of it was very much dependent on how they followed up this week. In my eyes, they really didn't follow up that well at all.

The angle has been predicated on being cutting edge, or at least on the pretense of such an ideal. We had Punk venting about perceived wrongs, showing up and cuckolding Triple H at ComiCon, showing up at AAW, pulling a Chuck Taylor in Jimmy Kimmel, bolting out the genpop exit at Money in the Bank with the title... and we're reduced to dueling themes and holding up titles in the overrun? Yeah, you'll have to forgive me if I'm not enthralled with that cheese when in the last month, we've gotten nothing but A-list material.

That being said, it is the first time they've faltered on a consensus scale. The rational explanation is that it's impossible to keep up a string of excellence at a 100% clip. This is true. We were meant to get a lull in the action sooner or later. However, time and time again, wrestling fans, especially ones who reside on the Internet, myself included, have a tendency to overreact at times.

Then again, can you blame us? Asking fans of WWE (and even moreso, Impact) to trust the company on a new direction or an exciting storyline is like asking Charlie Brown to keep trying to kick the football even though every time, Lucy pulls it away. The question might then shift to why do we keep trying to kick the ball when we know the result, but hey, no one ever said that wrestling fans were the most rational bunch when it comes to how they allocate their time.

So here we are, back on the ledge. Personally, I've trained myself to be less cynical (and on the flip side, more set up to be disappointed), and yet I can't help but think that they took the thrill out of CM Punk last night. Is it an overreaction? Probably, but that's what we do. We overreact. That being said, they have two more weeks to try and get the thrill back, and given that the angle still contains Punk, they have a damn good chance to do it. Here's the thing about Punk; he's one of the rare talents who overcomes bad circumstance like Michael Jordan made fools look silly on the court in the early '90s. So right there, this angle has something going for it that the Nexus angle, or several other false start angles in the past didn't have going for them.

So yeah, maybe in this one instance, we shouldn't be so quick to jump off the ledge. The thrill may seem like it's gone now, but at the same time, you can never tell when Punk's got the power to turn a microphone into a pipe bomb. Granted, it's looking more and more like Triple H won't be as giving with him as Vince McMahon was with Steve Austin, but you know what? Punk can overcome that. Why? Because he's awesome, that's why.

And as long as CM Punk remains awesome, I'm not sure the thrill will ever go away from professional wrestling as long as he's there.