Loss

This was doubly frustrating after Luger did an arc with Flair, Sting and Savage out where he had to finally grow up and became the unlikely hero that dethroned Hogan. That meant nothing as soon as it culminated because WCW.

The angle where Papa Shango made ooze come out of Ultimate Warrior's head was awesome, dark shit. NWO Souled Out was not a great PPV, but was ballsy and daring in a way wrestling rarely is that I respected.

I like the idea on the merits, but it sounds like the issue at hand that prompted all of this is that USA wants Smackdown ratings up because they are paying a lot of money for it. So I think Smackdown needs heavy presence of big names (read: The only difference maker, John Cena) if that's the main goal.

There's always the stories with the gaming panels about some guys being really good at cutting promos off the cuff and some not. Last year, the note was that the only guy who could keep up with Cena was Xavier Woods. The year before that, it was that Cesaro, Sheamus and Reigns were actually charming and witty.

What he also said with regards to the Styles turn is that if people read between the lines, that angle should answer a lot of questions about their plans for the next few months. So I'm guessing AJ Styles will be a heel champion on Smackdown.

They know they're getting destroyed tonight by Game 7, so this is the show we're getting. I understand the logic, even though it's pretty brutal.

At its core, all of this is is a case of which people feel is more important -- selling and storytelling or action and innovation. There's rarely if ever innovation in storytelling or match structure. There's rarely innovation in character portrayal or innovation in selling. We don't see innovation in heeling or babyfacing, really. The innovation comes with moves and pacing. I think you can have both and I don't mean to create a binary, as I personally think there's lots of room for increasingly athletic and daredevil moves in wrestling if everything else is right. I think it's wrestlers themselves that created that binary. I think about why I value what I value, and the reason I have those values is because I think it's fun to pretend that something so ridiculous is real. That contradiction of excess and devotion to an internal fake truth fascinates me, and for me, the more serious it is, the more fun it is. But if people feel insulted by such pretense now and it no longer works, maybe that's the case, but it's hard for me to see what is artful about wrestling without those elements. Wrestlers have known forever that people pop for action. I see the skill in executing a difficult move and making it look great, but not much more than that. It doesn't feel smart, especially when it shortens careers. It definitely doesn't challenge anything I thought I knew about wrestling. I have no problem with aspects of wrestling changing over time. But when we move from Thing A leading to Thing B leading to Thing C in a match, and move toward Thing A happening, then another Thing A, then another Thing A, it loses me. That's my big question. Why are the athletic advances in wrestling usually at the expense of psychology instead of being used to enhance it? And by "psychology", I don't mean matches making sense exclusively. The whole reason wrestlers cared about matches making sense for ages was because the idea was, 'if we do something that doesn't make sense, we lose the crowd.' I mean fans connecting to matches and caring about the winners and losers, and finding that connection more accessible because matches make sense. I planned to watch Ricochet-Ospreay last night and didn't get to it, so I'm not even accusing that match specifically of this stuff. Just talking about what I see happening. I don't know. Maybe a lot of this stuff needs to be reconsidered. The origins of psychology were that if people realize it's fake, people check out. I don't think that's true anymore, if in fact it ever was. So how do you work a match in a smart way where everyone is more hyper aware than ever not only that it's a show, but in the specifics of how it works? I'd like to think the current approach isn't the only way.

I prefer one champion, but I think if we look at second-rate champions, in most cases, we're looking at MITB winners more than we are Smackdown champions. Think Del Rio, Ziggler, Punk, etc. The briefcase made Edge a star because he was the first, but all it's done for everyone else is bring the title down to their level instead of bringing those guys up to the title level.

I think Tamura had better matches with Kohsaka and Yamamoto myself, even if I do think the Han matches are pretty great. I think from a match quality perspective it's definitely possible, but Flair-Steamboat was sort of a torchbearer rivalry for all of wrestling. Han and Tamura were considered -- right or wrong -- more as torchbearers just within their wheelhouse. I can see re-evaluating that, but I think that's the biggest difference.

Moving to Military Industrial Suplex, but have at it.

No way is Reigns-Rollins a one and done.

Thread closed. Poster gone.

According to Dave, Vince has a match and scenario in his head and knows exactly how he wants to get to the point of another title. There will be no Eric Bischoff handing HHH a belt this time. That could entail anything.

I would support Jericho wrapping a scarf around the briefcase.

All the talk of Vince being full of ideas and very pumped up right now combined with a better WWE since Wrestlemania tells me Vince is tired of the "HHH should take over" talk and it has lit a fire under him, for better or worse.

According to Dave's breaking audio yesterday, at least right now, the plan is for two champions. They have yet to discuss what happens with the women and will figure that out in coming days. They are also planning a massive and aggressive frenzy of signing guys from outside the company to fill the roster without killing NXT, and that includes guys from Japan and Mexico.

Shows in WWE that aren't micromanaged and are less of a priority tend to be better.

I would be shocked if Vince doesn't take full credit for New Day's reversal of fortune, arguing that all the naysayers said it was an awful idea, yet here we are. He argued for a long time that with Daniel Bryan, he taught a great worker how to be a superstar.

Jericho is supposedly not going anywhere for a long time.

Stephanie flies home on Tuesdays to be with her family. Vince currently doesn't even travel to Smackdown. HHH and Ryan Ward write and run the show now, so the politics of all of that will be very interesting.

It's neither a good nor bad idea on its own. It all comes down to details and execution. It did fade out before, but maybe with the deeper roster now after they have changed their hiring practices, it will work better this time. Time will tell either way. The best way to establish Smackdown is to move John Cena there. That also has the benefit of getting him away from Reigns for the time being.

And Sheamus. And Stephanie. And Cena.

Their value is limited even if they do sell merchandise. They've tried having heels beat them up and it never gets heat, because people only care about New Day's antics, rather than caring if they win or lose.

The writers wanted to do a double turn in their Survivor Series match and Vince would have none of it.