OldStingberg

And I see I need to act condescending and simplify things for you: I disagree. It's ok. Reasonable people can disagree.

I think anything they'll lose from WM, which I think is between minimal and non-existent, will easily be made up for in the increase in SS. I just don't think that there will be many, if any, who around WM time will be thinking, "I'm not so excited about Rock/Cena now because I saw The Rock wrestle five months ago."

I really liked Smackdown tonight. Good show. Michael Cole even tried to not bury Daniel Bryan.

The Raw Supershows would suggest otherwise. On the other hand, maybe not. Maybe they're really thrilled that they're beating summer shows like Hell's Kitchen, Rizzoli & Isles and repeats of Hawaii 5-O. If that's the bar they've set for Raw, then mission accomplished I guess.

Second part first. This is kind of true, but mostly irrelevant. TV ratings are down from the 90's because there's more quality shows on basic cable, which has spread viewers out. TV watching in general is actually pretty flat. But those sort of trends are pretty irrelevant when we're talking about just the past couple of years. For example... Very true, which is why comparing Raw's rating last night to its rating in previous years against week 1 of MNF is very relevant. Like I mentioned, Raw's rating in that situation is down about 33% from just four years ago. And that 33% drop is pretty consistent with Raw's yearly ratings this year compared to four years ago. That's not good. And bigt, I don't know why you'd go with snark for this. No one is saying this is the end of wrestling. I'd argue this past month has shown that there will always be an audience for what the WWE does, no matter how relatively bad it is. But if you're a wrestling fan, and you're not concerned about a 33% drop in viewership in just four years, I mean, I don't know what to say.

Raw got a 2.7 rating last night with 3.86 million viewers. According to PWTorch, there's only been seven episodes of Raw that have had a worse rating in the past 14 years, and five of those happened on a major holiday. And looking at the past five years of Raw against week 1 of Monday Night Football, viewers have dropped from 5.52 million viewers in 2007 to 3.86 million viewers this year. So, um, yeah, that's not good.

I'm loving this whole Supershow thing. I mean, Jerry Lawler, Bret Hart, Ricardo Rodriguez, and Vickie Guererro wrestling all on the same night? Truly that is only made possible by the Supershow. Anyway, the first 110 minutes of the show was very meh. They re-did the Lawler thing for some reason, but with Sheamus this time (Supershow!). They continued the abrupt ADR turnaround from a confident badass dude that defends his belt and hurts guys every show to a weasely little guy that runs away from fights. This might be the first time a simple and short visa mix-up has dictated a main eventer's character. They did the Dolph and Swagger thing a couple times, because we were in danger of forgetting that they had issues. I assume they're turning Ziggler face at some point, so it'd be cool if some of this TV time was spent setting that up. They did the Smackdown main event again three days later, albeit with a "better" finish at least. The final face-off, though, was at least interesting. It felt like a really awesome promo for a different storyline. They spent 10 minutes going back-and-forth about stuff that wasn't really relevant before Triple H seemed to realize that and said how they were going in circles, it's not about business, it's personal, grrrrr. To be fair, for all the crap I've given the WWE the past month, I am legitimately excited now for a Punk/HHH feud where Triple H is an actual heel and he actually puts Punk over. I'm not confident they'll give me that, but if they do, I'm on board. We'll see what happens at NoC.

Oh, I get what you're saying. I just find it ridiculous.

Wait a second. Is there any area, outside of cardio, where Diaz outclasses Penn?

Could he? Or could he only headline against Cena or Orton? Serious question.

You're more concerned with the people being misled than the people doing the actual misleading? That's absurdly ridiculous. I mean, it's so absurd I can only assume you're just trying to rile people up.

To me, the key is "returns to action for the first time in almost eight years." We saw The Rock lay out Cena at WM this year, but his last match was about seven-and-a-half years ago. I think the implication is pretty clear. If The Rock's not wrestling at Survivor Series, I'd say the WWE was being intentionally misleading with that promo.

I'm not sure Team Rock vs. Team Cena works too well if they're both faces. Same with Team HHH vs. Team Punk. Besides the weird 'who do people root for' factors, who would the heels wrestle at Survivor Series?

There's a featured video section on the front page of that site currently showing a Survivor Series promo hyping the Rock's "return to action for the first time in almost eight years."

It was kinda amusing to hear the crowd cheering his entrance. Poor Daniel Bryan. I think they did a better job this week of conveying, "Seriously, stop cheering for this Sin Cara."

That's...not what was said. But I literally can't think of a way to make that clearer for you. Um, people are mad about the reveal because it was bad, not because it was unexpected. Nash texted himself. Think about that. Nash texted himself. For no reason. It is literally inexplicable. That's just bad. The fact that it was unexpected had nothing to do with it. But I think it's clear that, for whatever reasons, we're not going to see eye-to-eye, and we're not going to have all that productive of a discussion, so I'm gonna stop here.

I like Condit, but let's not forget, he struggled hard against Kampmann, Ellenberger, and MacDonald. That's not exactly the resume of the guy I'd expect to knock off one of the two most dominant fighters ever. Don't get me wrong, Condit's got as good a shot as anyone to land something hard or lock something in, but I don't think it makes a ton of sense to actually pick him in this fight.

I think the difference is that there are a lot more people that really want to love Punk. His MitB program energized existing fans and created a lot of new fans. Now the WWE just needs to give those fans more reasons to get excited about him. The Nash/HHH/Punk storyline has obviously missed the mark in that regard so far.

The writer very specifically referenced "CM Punk's summer". Considering summer is generally considered June-August, that is in fact over. This is a good bit of deceptive wordplay. The writer said anyone who thought Punk reached Cena or Orton's level was misguided. You countered by saying that it's obvious that Punk had jumped up several rows of stairs. Ok, but that's not what the writer said. He said Punk hasn't reach Cena or Orton's level. And he hasn't. He doesn't get nearly the reaction anymore that those two guys get. Again, more deception. You take umbrage at his characterization of one of the WWE's lesser PPVs, while ignoring the main, and nearly undisputed, points regarding Nash's disappointing performances, the mind-boggling reveal to the whodunnit, and the hotshotting of the Punk/HHH match onto a lesser PPV. But clearly going after the writer calling NoC a September B show was the most relevant thing there. And we end with what, no offense, has become my least favorite argument, that of "But Punk's getting so much time!" No one's arguing that. No one's saying that they're not letting Punk on TV. The main argument is the WWE's handling of Punk after MitB has wasted an opportunity to cement him on Cena and Orton's level. And so far, that's undeniably true. He doesn't have the heat Cena or Orton has. Not at all. Punk being on TV a lot doesn't by default change that. Nexus was on TV a whole lot last year, but that didn't mean Wade Barrett was anywhere near Cena or Orton's level. Granted, the WWE might be able to redeem this whole thing if they do something dramatic soon. But that's no reason why they can't be criticized for what they've already done.

I certainly see their potential. But that doesn't mean the WWE has made them stars. In fact, it's probably the opposite. If we're still talking about their potential, it means they're not stars yet. No one talks about Tom Brady's potential anymore. But it's needed now. The WWE has 2.5 stars, all of which are faces. Now's the time for credible, mainstay heels. Instead they jobbed Christian to Orton nearly every other week over the summer, and now they've moved Christian into a feud with Sheamus, a feud Christian will probably lose considering the heat Sheamus has. They held Punk off of TV for a single week. That's gotta make it impossible to say the angle wasn't hotshotted, right? Personally, I would have kept Punk off TV the entire month following MITB. Spend that month building the WWE Championship tournament with the finals between Cena and the Miz at SummerSlam. Keep doing little viral things like the Comic Con stuff throughout the month to keep the whispers about Punk going. At SS, Punk shows up with his title during the main event, accidentally distracting the Miz. Cena capitalizes, wins the belt, and him and Punk end the show staring each other down with their titles. Then they would build to Cena/Punk at NoC. The Miz interferes costing Punk the match, evening Cena/Punk at one apiece, and afterwards Del Rio sneak attacks Cena to cash in the briefcase and win the title. That would lead into Punk/Miz and Cena/Del Rio feuds with still some simmering tension between Punk and Cena. That gives Punk a legitimate heel to draw heat off of in a program that would feature great matches and even better promos. Hell, they could even turn Triple H as part of the story and have Triple H and The Miz be the heads of a new Corporation or whatever, which would be a tailor-made feature match for Survivor Series. Let's say they wrap those feuds up around TLC in December with Punk and Cena both coming out on top. They could then do Cena/Punk as the Royal Rumble main event. Punk would win that match clean, cementing his place as a main eventer for life. They'd shake hands afterwards, and they would move onto their WrestleMania feuds. Cena/Rock obviously, and Punk/Rumble winner for the title. Imagine a WrestleMania with potentially Orton/Barrett for the World Championship with DBryan cashing in afterwards, Punk/Ziggler for the WWE Championship (which I'd love for Dolph to win), and Cena/Rock closing it out. With the exception of the Rock, those are six of the guys they could be building the company around for the next 5-10 years all showcased in a PPV guaranteed to do bonkers numbers. That's what the WWE needs to do. My off-the-top-of-my-head scenario certainly isn't the only way to do it, far from it, but it's one way. Point is, the WWE needs to be looking at building stars to go alongside Cena and Orton. Pushing HHH, Nash, and Mark Henry isn't giving me a ton of confidence that they're doing that.

Don't forget Jericho or Kurt Angle, either. Seriously, looking at the stars the WWE had nine or ten years ago, it's crazy how things are now. And it's not like it's all hindsight, like trying to claim Cena as a big star in 2002 or something. You could say that Edge & Christian weren't there yet, though I think the argument could be made that as a team they were a great draw, but Austin, Rock, Mankind, Taker, HHH, HBK, Jericho, and Angle were all legitimate stars. Now there's Cena, Orton, and maybe kinda Punk. Yes! Or, even more bewildering, why isn't someone like Mason Ryan in the Mark Henry role? All that role has required is a big muscular dude that can bodyslam people. No charisma or mic skills required! No in-ring talent required! Why waste this ridiculously easy monster push on Mark Henry, a guy the WWE universe has time and again not cared about? Why not use this ridiculously easy monster push to start making a new star? I was joking with a buddy that Mark Henry must be blackmailing Vince, because that's the only plausible explanation why he would get this push at this point.

That's some pretty crazy logic. In reference to Christian, I said 'shuffling', present tense. And I fully believe they're currently in the process of working him down the card, much in the same way they moved Barrett, The Miz, Ziggler, Swagger, etc., right back down the card. Why end the program with Cena? Seriously, why? It was the hottest story the WWE has had in years, possibly a decade. Why hotshot it to a poor conclusion? But if you have to end it, why move him into a feud with Kevin Nash and a face Triple H? Nash is old, irrelevant, and bad, and won't be able to deliver any good matches with Punk at PPVs. And Triple H is just a terrible foe for Punk right now. Like I said before, Punk's schtick of speaking truth to power doesn't work when the power is incredibly popular. Again, Triple H was getting the crowd to pop in support of Vince McMahon. What can Punk do to draw heat from Triple H right now? All they've got him doing is insulting Stephanie and criticizing Triple H's manhood. Punk is currently a face acting like a heel to a more popular face. This is the biggest non-title angle Punk could be in? A terrible whodunnit with no proper foe and little in the way of PPV payoffs? To be fair, if Triple H or Cena turns heel on Punk at NoC, they can salvage this story to a point. I think no matter what they'll have missed a huge opportunity with Punk, but they can at least undo the damage of the past month if they get their **** together going forward. I don't have a ton of confidence in that happening, but I'm willing to wait and see what they do at NoC.

Diaz, is that you? Where have you been, man?

Who isn't? Here's a couple guys from PWInsider: http://www.pwinsider.com/article/61385/looking-at-when-zack-ryder-is-the-only-positive-you-know-this-show-was-awful-edition-of-monday-night-raw.html?p=1 http://www.pwinsider.com/article/61440/an-exasperated-look-at-cm-punk-triple-h-daniel-bryan-jack-swagger-and-why-wwe-makes-it-hard-to-care-anymore.html?p=1 PWTorch: http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/The_Specialists_34/article_53001.shtml http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/absurityofitall/article_52989.shtml http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/hitsandmisses/article_53014.shtml http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/Torch_Feedback_17/article_53026.shtml Bleacher Report: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/839511-wwe-news-release-of-kevin-nash-is-prime-example-of-poor-storyline-direction 411 Mania: http://www.411mania.com/wrestling/columns/200481/411%5C%5Cs-Instant-Analysis-09.05.11:-Monday-Night-Raw.htm http://www.411mania.com/wrestling/columns/200660 That last one has an especially juicy bit. I can quickly and easily find more if you want.

Nick Diaz is a douche. That is all.