Loss

Did I say that? I don't remember saying that, but thank you. Anyway, I think if they don't want anyone getting "too big", it's a subconscious thing. I don't picture Vince and HHH discussing how guys are starting to get a little too over and need to be humbled so much as I do them being cautious and overlearning lessons of the past. The funny thing is that having guys who were "too big" wasn't really hugely detrimental to the company. Punk walked and aside from the chants, they went on without a beat, and the salvaged storyline was way better than the original plan. Brock had just put over Eddy and his next scheduled feud was one where he'd put Undertaker over. Brock in 2004 was not at all Brock now in terms of how hot he is. Still, the overall point is correct. Forget Austin or Rock or Cena, they can't even create a new Chris Jericho, Edge or Randy Orton.

Roman is still supposedly the guy they want in that spot long-term. It's not working, but I think in their minds, they are trying to make it seem like he's not a hand-picked star so that people stop resenting him.

How are people going to rate Toyota?

I would love to see a long list of recommended matches of hers from the last 10 years, aside from the occasional Aja Kong match that got some love. Surely, she had more than those, right?

It's hard for me to hold Murdoch's comedy against him. The key is not having the comedy in his arsenal, but rather the ability to switch gears, which Murdoch showed he could do many times. Plus, his comedy is actually funny. I even think Dick Murdoch could have had a great match in Michinoku Pro because he had enough schtick to work on the heel side.

Do you think they were thinking in 1984 how they were going to get the belt off of Hogan, and when, and who it will be from? That's not really how wrestling works. It will be an opportunity that will present itself. They will either pick up on it or they won't. (Chances are they won't.) But I see no reason to plan an end game for something that's clearly working. Instead of thinking about how to end it, they should be thinking about how to prolong it and get the most out of it. Ending it shouldn't even enter their thought process until signs are there that it's no longer working. And at that point, they can weigh whatever options they have at the time. It's really self-defeating to say "Ok, we want to have this guy ready in six months", but what if Cena is still going strong in six months? Are they supposed to still get the belt off of him because they said they would months before that? Long-term planning is great, and I wish they did more of it, but long-term planning that's so etched in stone doesn't really help anything either. You mentioned Bryan, and that was where they failed. They were so married to their WM plans that they didn't see what was right in front of them. And what's in front of them right now is a credible champion who's having a strong run. That's great! How do they make Cena's time with the U.S. title build up that belt as much as possible? I think that works for transitional champions. With guys at Cena's level, it seems to make more sense to just run with it until it starts seeming like a bad idea. Cena shouldn't lose to guys where a win can "make" them or you get short-term stars instead of ones that stick. He should lose to someone that fans have already ordained at that level who can sustain and build on that momentum in the U.S. title picture when the day comes. So yeah, WWE should work on getting someone to that level, maybe even two or three guys who seem like viable candidates, but I don't see the hurry to have him drop the title, or the need for them to think too much about that right now. The most rewarding moments in WWE the past few years have been the spur-of-the-moment decisions.

Right now, hopefully there are no plans to take it off of him. They will know when the time is right. It's not.

WWE can't seem to understand why they don't have any midcarders that draw the highest TV ratings and sell the most merchandise without any semblance of backing from the company. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

This isn't actually true, for what it's worth. It was a delayed cover attempt because he spent time selling his back, then had to clear the table out of his way as he crawled over to Rollins, and then got to Rollins for the cover but saw Kane get onto the apron before a count could be made and knocked him off, at which point Rollins was back up. My apologies, I shouldn't have spoken on this from memory. You are correct. What actually annoyed me at the time was doing a big spot like that and then just moving along. It's not exclusive to that match, but if the guy who took the move can get to his feet and be fine not long after hitting it, he is a superhuman.

When a superplex gets over as either a finisher or a big highspot that leads to a great false finish, that's when we'll know the excesses of the WWE style are gone. I actually think the superplex is a great barometer for that sort of thing. As it stands, yes, it's a dumb move to take when it's just a move in a match.

I will say it drove me crazy in that match with Rollins on RAW last year that he did a superplex off the top rope through a table ... and then didn't even go for a cover.

Just that one second he's down and the next he's up, and there's no in-between.

That's actually the match they panned, specifically pointing to Dean doing his comeback without any transition at all after being down for so long. Bryan went as far to say that Dean no-selling everything is his gimmick.

Can someone explain the logic of Seth going through the table and thus not being there for the finish? If the goal was to get The Shield over as a three-man unit, why were only two of them involved in the finish? I thought this was an okay match, but Reigns looked pretty awkward even doing basic things like kicks and The Shield was wrestling too much like babyfaces for my tastes.

Dave and Bryan were talking about how Dean doesn't sell for anyone and he doesn't transition before his comebacks. For those who watch WWE regularly, I just wanted to ask if that's a fair criticism, and if Dean is a worse offender than anyone else here.

Oh God, please don't let someone in WWE read this and get the idea to do a Corporate Ministry 2.0 by combining The Wyatt Family and The Authority.

Maybe Stephanie will join.

I know, but I remember him taking some time off at one point to go home to live with his parents and enroll in college.

Doesn't Bryan have an English degree? What an awesome high school English teacher he would make.

Hogan said what he said and will have to deal with the results of his words, which we all do in various ways everyday. My sticking point (which I wouldn't label outrage) was WWE taking such a cheap route to distance themselves when the situation calls for a more thoughtful response considering Hogan's stature and wrestling's own history of racial issues. Whitewashing Hulk from their history makes them seem awfully delusional and self-interested, as if not acknowledging his existence moving ahead somehow reflects well on them as a company. As much as they hate the low-brow perception of the company, the right response could help combat that. They need to get out of their own way sometimes.

Bryan was still over when he left, and the people certainly still reacted to him like he was a star. But 2015 Daniel Bryan reactions are not 2013-2014 Daniel Bryan reactions. I think if he did come back, the fan outrage over him not being the top guy wouldn't be there this time around. Of course, it was his ringwork that started the groundswell of support for him anyway, so if he started delivering in the ring again, the same thing could happen for sure. But I think the chances of it are fairly low. WWE pretty much beat their fanbase into a state of submission between the Rumble and Fastlane.

I thought the WM28 story was originally supposed to be the WM27 one, but they decided to postpone it a year. I know Dave has written something to that effect quite a few times.

What about nearly a decade of being presented as a kids' hero while on steroids and lying about it when asked in a mainstream outlet, all while marketing vitamins to kids? What about the Graziano stuff? I believe he was caught saying some ugly things about John and his family when he thought no one was listening that time too. (You'd think he would learn his lesson.) What about being the only person in WWE who didn't send a card to Warrior's family, according to his wife, all while playing up how broken up he was about the whole thing when cameras were around? The general scumminess mentioned has nothing to do with not putting over young guys in late 90s WCW or telling lies about his career or whatever other thing *wrestling* fans want to throw at him.