kjh

Last week's real rating is believed to be between a 2.8 and a 3.1 rating, so it was a very significant rebound. That said, a 3.8 rating for such a major episode of Raw would have been deemed a bit disappointing a few months ago, so WWE shouldn't rest on their laurels too much, particularly as the novelty of seeing Vince and Hunter again will have been worn thin by September.

He did run for mayor of Memphis in 1999, but he didn't come close to winning, as he finished in a distant third place with only 12% of the vote.

Evil, nah. Possibly a bit reckless and dumb, yeah, but I doubt any senators watch WWE programming, so they should be OK. Me, I'm looking forward to the ensuing train wreck that seems inevitable. Oh and Kevin, I must say WWE management deserves a ton of credit for still being able to work Meltzer after all these years. I get the feeling Meltzer may have been genuinely surprised by last night's performance.

I wasn't confused by that, but I think tomk's point that Austin's whole "Stone Cold" run shouldn't be lumped into one category is a valid one, because his character and wrestling style changed numerous times in that near 7 year run. Indeed, that category is longer than the previous five categories combined! Personally I'd split it up into these more manageable chunks that are all worth talking about seperately: 1. The rise of "Stone Cold" spanning KOTR '96 to SummerSlam '97; 2. The period where he was recovering from the Owen driver while being groomed for the top spot from SummerSlam '97 to WrestleMania 14; 3. The pinnacle of "Stone Cold" spanning WrestleMania 14 to Survivor Series '99; 4. The babyface return of "Stone Cold" spanning Unforgiven 2000 to WrestleMania 17; 5. The heel run spanning WrestleMania 17 to Survivor Series 2001; and 6. The final babyface runs spanning Survivor Series 2001 to WrestleMania 19. I'll try and write a bit about each when I have the time.

Reply to Loss - potential spoilers for tonight's Raw:

Of course, one of the problems with WCW was they continued to push the same stale acts on top for too long, so I don't think any of those returns will be enough to save them unless they are really well booked. Early indications aren't good though. Triple H's return programs against Booker and Orton are two feuds that have been done before. Moreover, he dominated both those feuds and one can argue that neither Booker nor Orton have fully recovered from their mishandling in those feuds. I don't sense anyone itching to see those matches again. Meanwhile, Rey is set to return at SummerSlam against Chavo. Though that match makes storyline sense, they haven't protected Chavo well since Rey has been gone. After losing to Benoit on a regular basis last autumn, he's been stuck in cruiserweight purgatory.

I'd say WWE is right to be extremely worried by this. Bonnie Hammer of the USA network was already known to be frustrated about Raw's soft ratings. If Raw's ratings continue to crash, cancellation of the show, the ultimate Doomsday scenario for the company, is definitely a possibility, especially with more bad publicity seeming inevitable.

I'd say it was Vince who was the one doing all the conning. I'm very sceptical that Vince ever intended to fulfill the terms of the 20 year contract that he gave Bret. Given that Vince conned Bret's father Stu in a similar manner over the sale of the Stampede territory, Bret really should have known better than to trust Vince to abide such a lengthy contract. When Vince decided to kick Bret to the kerb, he orchestrated things so Bret could fleece WCW for as much money as possible and then lured a gullible Bret into the Montreal screwjob.

I'd imagine there are plenty of incriminating documents that WWE could shred that have nothing to do with Aegis Labs, especially as the scope of the investigation is far wider than simply their most recent drug testing policy. For example, I'm sure Congress would be interested to see the memo WWE was supposed to have sent their wrestlers after Brian Pillman died telling them to stop seeing the mark doctor Pillman used to get his drugs from, Dr Joel Hackett, because he was hot and the feds were on to him.

The advantage of the rounds system is it gives matches a more sports like feel similar to boxing. I think the rest periods can also help the action to breathe. It doesn't really bug me at all, I find the unique dynamic it gives matches refreshing. The match itself was very good, though I felt that Rocco and Dynamite had a better match in them if they were given more time. One thing that hasn't been touched upon is how the match really built well as the rounds went on with tempers flaring more and more, blows becoming stiffer and the pace becoming faster and faster. Personally I loved the finish. I thought they sold the finish really well and made the high spot seem a lot more dangerous than it really was. Unlike most double count out finishes it didn't feel like a cheap cop out.

Very heated and intense brawl, but I think it was the post match angle that put it over the top as such a lengendary deal. I don't think I've ever seen an angle that evoked such raw, visceral and genuine emotion. It seems like it was perfectly played to make Chigusa more beloved and Dump more loathed and hated. Good stuff!

Really? I see him as being very similar to Ric Flair in this regard, someone who is a lot more comfortable as a heel and will eventually want to turn for that reason even though he has probably built up enough respect by this point that it will be difficult to get the fans to vociferously boo him. This gels with Dave Meltzer's reports several weeks ago that Hunter wants to turn heel after his comeback program with Randy Orton. I don't buy that HHH believes that. I think that the lack of credible heels on Raw is more indicative that his DX nostalgia inspired babyface run was always supposed to be fairly short lived and that he didn't want anyone gaining traction as a top heel in the meantime. That's why I believe Edge was jobbed out when he left Raw for Smackdown - he didn't want the long term Smackdown heel champion to be credible, because that's the role he was planning to take on Raw. He doesn't need credible heel fodder because he isn't staying face long. Booker and Orton are going to be squashed to guarantee that he's the only credible heel in the promotion.

Here's another money quote from Nash's Torch talk interview: "Is it a Gacy situation? I don't mean this to be disrespectful in any form or fashion, but there were so many guys that said that Chris was an incredibly intense worker and he was this and he was that. I'm sure there were people who would have said that Gacy was an incredibly great clown at the kids' birthday parties."

The time line of that is wrong. Nash did the banana peel finish with Misterio after he had beat Goldberg and took Rey's mask to attempt to divert heat away from his self indulgent booking. As a con it really wasn't that good, because I don't think it fooled the boys in the back at the time. A better con was Hogan and Nash working an argument behind the scenes in the summer of 1998 to make Nash the champion of the boys who by that point hated the interfering, ego driven Hulkster and weren't keen on Nash either. It worked for a while, though they were too arrogant and brazen with the "finger touch of DOOM" angle to keep the con going.

Actually Chris Jericho stringing TNA along by allowing them to air a Fozzy music video wasn't a bad con.

Burying his best friend, Steve Austin, on WWE Confidential, after Austin had walked out on the company was pretty bad. Especially as Austin had helped save his play by play announcing job a few years earlier. What narks me about Jim Ross is that at times he's been treated badly by the company and has played that up for sympathy (his two firings, trying to kick him out of his Raw announcing position on numerous occasions, being potatoed by Triple H on purpose, making fun of his colon cancer on the air, etc), yet he still stoops to the lowest levels possible to defend the company when the Benoit tragedy happened.

Not necessarily. Sometimes WWE executives get stock options where they can buy shares in the company at below market value and usually they sell the stock to the public not long after making a nice profit. I don't think that is the case here though with Kevin Dunn - your scenario sounds more likely. Most of the trading doesn't look that suspicious. Kevin Dunn obtained more shares than he sold. Michael Sileck sold more shares before the Benoit tragedy than he did now. The sales by Shane and Stephanie were so insignificant you wonder why they bothered. The point about them possibly acting on inside information is a valid one, but if you were currently a WWE excutive, wouldn't you also be jittery over the possibility of more negative fall out from the Benoit tragedy adversely affecting WWE's share price?

That reminds me of how Nash and Hall both got huge pay rises from Eric Bischoff in September 1996 because he was genuinely worried that they were returning to the WWF, even though they were under WCW contract, when the WWF started the whole fake Razor Ramon and Diesel angle. He also had a clause in his contract which stated that he had to be the second highest paid wrestler in the company behind Hogan (though out of the goodness of his own heart he did let Bret be paid more than him), guaranteeing himself several raises for doing sod all and his spot as a headliner. What I admire the most about Nash though is how everyone by now should know that he's a carny con artist, yet he's still able to pull off cons like making TNA management believe he was willing to job for Chris Sabin and Wade Keller believe he's being completely honest in his shoot interviews with him.

Pete Doyle talks about WWE booking I also like how he mocks John Cena's wrestling ability and promos, but then advocates Bobby Lashley to take the title from him!

Perhaps more accurate would be Vince McMahon cons Vince McMahon into thinking that the mainstream media is out to get him?

Yeah, Storm's column was pretty messed up. I get a sense he doesn't realise how lucky he was. He was someone who was blessed with a great natural physique, so he didn't have the same pressure to bulk up like those less fortunate than him. He was also lucky that he didn't have any major injuries during his career, so he didn't have the same pressure to use pain pills to rush back to work for fear of losing his job. Mero on the other hand tore his ACL in February 1997, had major reconstructive knee surgery and reinjured his knee in training for his comeback, but was back wrestling by September, a shell of his former self. Given that Lance Storm was given gimmicks that openly mocked his real life personality, I'm surprised he hasn't yet realised the personal choice argument for the red herring that it is. Was he oblivious to the messages being sent when he was booked as a sanctimonious heel who was too serious and a face who was too boring and needed help lightening up? Did he have to put up with so much hazing from the likes of JBL due to his stubborn sobriety that he forgot that the company condones and breeds that mentality?

I wouldn't say WWE are completely out of the woods just yet. Dr Phil Astin will almost certainly be prosecuted for illegally overprescribing drugs to Benoit and other wrestlers. Nancy Benoit's family are going to file a wrongful death lawsuit which could name WWE as a defendant. Former and current WWE wrestlers may be forced to testify in both cases about their drug habits. That said, I doubt either of these developments will do much more than cause another bout of bad publicity for the company. It's scary though how WWE isn't taking the Benoit tragedy and subsequent mainstream media blitz as a wake up call. Sure, they've dodged a bullet here. The media can't pin the death on roid rage as they've been craving for. But, if they go back to business as usual, there is a strong possibility that someone else will die on their watch in the next few years for reasons the media can blame them for. In the meantime more people like John Kronus whose past abuses finally catch up with them will die and the death lists will continue to grow making wrestling seem even more deadly. WWE should be asking themselves whether they can survive another tragedy like Pillman's or Eddie's, because next time the media won't be so ignorant or willing to buy their BS.

Is Paul London doing well in WWE in your opinion anarchistxx? I ask because that's about as successful as Matt Sydal would be in WWE in a best case scenario.

I suppose it depends how you define success Loss, because Wade is quick to point out how proud he is that his website has gotten more traffic than any other wrestling website over the last 3 weeks.

I really would like someone to ask the obvious riposte to that talking point that everyone is forced to squeeze in: How does so many of your current and former wrestlers dying put smiles on people's faces?