Dylan Waco

This has come up recently on Twitter and in private conversations I've had with several people, but I think it's time to ask what exactly the future of NXT is. This weekend they ran two very successful house shows under the NXT heading in Ohio, filled almost exclusively with NXT talent. The shows sold out quickly and were critically acclaimed, as has been the NXT TV show, and of course the NXT Network specials. We also know that WWE has been: Bringing in veterans to NXT to add a bit of depth and different dynamic to the roster. Aggressively pursuing new talent from the indies (Uhaa Nation, Samoa Joe, possibly Biff Busick, ROH talent according to Dave, which I have strong reason to believe is true). Looking to develop NXT into it's own tour-able brand. Increasingly focusing the shows around "known" international and indie commodities like Zayn, Owens, Balor and Itami. Given all of this it's time to ask - is NXT even a developmental territory at this point? According to Meltzer in this weeks Observer a lot of the interest in potential new signees is based around whether or not they can headline (i.e. draw) on NXT branded house shows. Guys like Zayn and Neville have been in NXT forever as pushed talent, and in the case of Zayn it appears he will be around for a while longer even though absolutely no one thinks he needs to "develop" anything further before being called up. Along those same lines the top feud in NXT right now is Zayn v. Owens, a feud that is widely regarded as one of - if not the best - indie feud of all time, and a feud that is highly marketable as a part of the "WWE does the indies" traveling road show. As has been mentioned in a lot of the Demott discussion, it's not like the homegrown guys have been successful at all, and I think it's hard to see a path for many of those guys going forward, particularly if the NXT as a traveling brand stories are true. Obviously the WWE has invested a ton in the training facility, and it's not like that work is going to stop, but if these plans come off it's worth thinking about what the role of NXT actually is. Put another way, can NXT be both a functional third brand, with the demands that come with that (need to draw, need to develop stars for it's own show independent of the needs of the main roster) and a developmental league who's primary goal (in theory) is to get guys ready for the main roster?

I'm starting a thread on some of this NXT stuff in the regular pro wrestling folder. It deserves something more focused.

I would order this show if I trusted AAA IPPV at all. I don't.

The Taker match was the obvious match and the match that should have been done if you are going to bother with Sting (or Taker for that matter) at all this year.

HHH v. Sting is a Mania match because HHH wanted a high profile match on Mania. It's that simple. There is literally no other logical reason why that match would take place.

Worth noting that Albert is a Kowalski trainee, so it makes sense he'd have the fast track to this job in HHH's NXT.

Cabana had done or said fucked up or sketchy shit to fans, refs, promoters and wrestlers I know. Some of the negatives I have heard about him fit the "always looking to work his hustle" gimmick that Hollinger mentioned before, and I can't really fault him for that in isolation. But when it is combined with him telling people I know to quit what they are doing because they suck at it (coming from a guy so shitty he couldn't have a good match with indie tour era Finlay that is rich), not voting for the RnR Express for the WON HOF because he was an obnoxious know-it-all when he was in the developmental system (big shock that he didn't last there), screaming at refs because of his mistakes and failings as a mediocre talent, and screwing with promoters in a variety of ways I can't go into..well...fuck him. It probably wouldn't offend me as much if it wasn't for the phony "aw shucks, I'm such a swell dude" act, but that irks me in and of itself, and all the shit I've heard/know that conflicts with that just screams "this guy is a phony." Which is also my big criticism of Nigel and others I could mention in this thread

Colt Cabana. An obnoxious, not funny, prick, who's gimmick is that he's a lovable, funny, nice guy. He annoys me as a personality, as a "public figure" in wrestling, as a podcast host, et. He's been a dick to so many people I know, and his old act is "above the fray, wrestling ambassador," which in a sense is admirable carny work I guess. But when you are an uncalled for douche to some of the nicest people I have ever known/met through wrestling, you have opinions as terrible as Colt, and you suck as bad as he does as a performer, you have no redeeming qualities. Fuck him. I dislike Nigel for much the same reasons, and another person who I won't mention so as to not cause needless personal drama on this board.

I just watched the show myself. I won't do a full review, but a few quick thoughts: I thought it was a good, not great show. The worst things on it from my perspective were the Goto v. Nagata match which felt really, really long even though it wasn't and Yujiro v. Yoshi-Hashi which wasn't awful, but had nothing going for it either. I thought the performances of both Ibushi and Honma were impressive. I like Gallows, but he doesn't click in NJPW at all for whatever reason, and I thought Ibushi carried that match with his selling, bumping and timing. I'm still not convinced he's a great wrestler,but he's had a hell of a run when it comes to output this year. The Honma performance was even more impressive because it was a complete and total carry job of a really mediocre wrestler in Makabe. It probably wasn't at the level of Honma's G1 2014 carry job of Fale, but it wasn't far off as he was making Makabe brawling spots look impactful and violent which is a tall order. Match built really well and the finish was great. I'd say at this point Honma is as good a pick as anyone for number one in the World so far this year. Kojima/Shibata and Anderson/Naito were both frustrating to me in their own ways. I thought both were good matches, but both could have been great. Anderson/Naito was shockingly good as I'm not really a fan of either guy (I kind of loathe Anderson to be honest), but they built a nice match around the early Anderson assault, Naito making comebacks and Anderson killing him with big offense before he could put anything together. The problem I had with the match is that the final Naito comeback felt both flat, excessive and inorganic. It had a real post-comeback Shawn Michaels feel, where Naito was done being on the defensive, decided he had some spots he wanted to get nearfalls off of, and then he was going to hit his finish. I actually think Anderson should have won the match anyway given how it was set up, but if Naito was going to win that last comeback should have been more gradual and/or had less shit shoehorned in. With Kojima/Shibata the problem was the ridiculously long opening forearm exchange and the stupid and wildly unnecessary mirriored no sell spots down the stretch. Just lazy and pointless nonsense that is so overdone it doesn't even have meaning as a novelty anymore because you know it is coming. Shame because I liked the rest of it. Captain New Japan doing parity mat exchanges with Sakuraba was absurd as was the effort of Tanahashi in his match with Yano. I can see why both things would be done, but both fall in the category of "if the WWE did this they'd be eviscerated" category. I think shoe is being way too hard on Okada v. Fale. I thought it was perfectly fine as a main event, better than I thought it would be, and way better than it should have been considering how much time it got. That sad Okada's offense is pretty dire and it hurt the match at times as his offense is both fairly weak and not nearly varied enough. Say what you want about Fale, but his offense is actually better than Okada's.

I said when they announced the Never Title could be the title match that the winner requests that Makabe would win and challenge Ishii for the belt he never lost. I have no reason to believe that's not the case based on the first nights results.

So basically the only bad thing on Raw was the CM Punk chant

I have some great suggestions for who could have replaced Gallows, but I'm saving them for my VoicesofWrestling review/post show podcast

I'll talk more on the podcast about this, but not filling Gallows spot on the show comes across as so bush league, and there were easy ways they could have solved it

Just finished that Atlanta show and I thought it was very good, if not great. Before I talk about the matches themselves I've got a few general comments about the product. Firstly, the commentary was generally good, and I've gotten to the point where I actually think Kevin Kelly is the best regular commentator in wrestling. I have been as critical of him as anyone in the past, but he's started to feel like the "voice" of ROH and he says little things that add to the matches, and almost never does anything to hurt them. I also thought Caprice Coleman was generally very good in the booth with him for the last few matches, though I did think he had some pretty embarrassing flubs too. Wrestling announcing is so terrible, that's it's not saying much to be the best of the field, but it has helped the tv recently, and it helped this show. The hot crowd helped most of the show, though I think you could argue they hurt the main event a little bit. It almost felt like a lot of the people there came to see Styles, and/or were just waiting for the final fall brawl to break out between The Briscoes and Kingdom. A shame because I thought that was a tremendous match which I'll address in detail below. Another thing that stood out as I was watching this was the number of black wrestlers on the show and the way they are generally depicted in the company. If Loss finds this too political I'll delete it, but there is something really absurd about the corporate liberal framework of the WWE and TNA giving us what they have given us over the years on this front, while the right wing media conglomerate-owned ROH has relatively inoffensive depictions of their black stars, who are a substantial percentage of the active roster, and fill a multitude of different slots on the card. Comparing the booking of Titus to the booking of Moose tells you a lot. The one thing that keeps me from saying it's likely to end up a top show of the year contender for me is that it felt like a pretty self contained show baring the main event (again more later). You could even argue that some of the booking choices were not wise, though I think every finish on the show was at least defensible. Still this almost felt like a collection of novel matches with no real purpose, capped off with a blood feud main event, which makes for an incredibly fun show, but not necessarily a blow away great one. The worst match on the show was the opener, which was five minutes long, perfectly fine and exactly what it was supposed to be. I liked Mike Posey's ridiculous Cheddar Bob tribute gimmick as it is an absurdity that I am subjected to on a semi-regular basis. In some ways this was the ideal opener as they did some cool stuff to pop the crowd, but didn't overstay their welcome and nothing they did couldn't easily be topped by the bigger stars to come. The Hollis/Gresham match being interrupted by BJ Whitmer doing a terrible Ric Rude impression pissed me off at first, but to my surprise it actually turned into a really good little tag match. The match had pretty solid psychology, Page hit his big shooting star body block in a logical way, and I really liked the fact that they made Hollis and Greshem look great in losing, even as it was clear they weren't quite on the level of the regular ROH team. Greshem and Hollis deserve to be getting regular bookings. I will also say that if ROH is going to keep doing these Atlanta shows I'd like to see them book Kyle Matthews some time. Hollis is one of his best friends, and he's a hell of a worker who ALWAYS gets over regardless of opponent. Would like to see them bring in Slim J and Fred Yehi too, but Matthews is such an obvious choice that it annoys me when he's not on a show like this. Sydal v. Delirious was pretty good, though I may not have liked it as much as others. It was helped a good deal by Kelly putting over their history against each other and just their backgrounds in general. I will say I thought they did a very good job integrating Delirious schtick match into the match without making things silly. I didn't care for the way some things were sold down the stretch, but it was still an engaging, well worked, different match. I see a lot of people who I normally agree with really praising Strong v. O'Reilly. I liked the match. It was definitely good. But I also really wasn't surprised by this. Strong had a good year last year and has been good so far this year. O'Reilly has improved a ton since separating himself from Davey Richards to the point where he is now someone who's work I actively seek out on a regular basis. So I expected this would be good and it was good. The arm work from O'Reilly was sharp, intense and violent. Strong did a good job selling it throughout for the most part (far better than most would). I also liked Strong going for the big kill shots as a contrast to O'Reilly, at least in theory. That said I thought at best it was the fourth best match on the show, and that's largely because of the pacing. I have no problem with these guys working fast, athletic sequences, but it really felt like they were trying to shoehorn in rope running spots and strike exchanges when none were needed and it didn't really fit the story. Even still I would have been fine with this if they had let the arm work sink in at any point, but it almost felt like the arm work was a backdrop for the workrate spots rather than vice versa. It just seemed to me the match would have been better if Strong had been working underneath in a more clear fashion. As an aside, though I it arguably makes sense from the perspective of booking for the ppv, I don't really like the idea of O'Reilly jobbing clean to Strong at this point in each guys career, though that is really a minor hangup. I don't want to come across like I'm burying the match, because I thought it was good and would recommend people watch it. But I thought at best it was the fourth best match on the show, and could see it as low as sixth on the depth chart. By contrast I was was really blown away by how much I liked Moose v. ACH. Part of it may be that my second favorite Gamecock ever was sitting ringside for Moose, and John Abraham actually added to the match in that role, but what's really enjoyable is just watching Moose develop. Moose has come a long, long way quick. He's far from great, but he's almost Rusev like in the sense that he feels like a big star in the making, he's been booked well, and he's clearly gaining confidence every time out. I also think this was the best ACH showing in a long, long time. Here they worked a smart Big Man v. Little Man match, where ACH's big spots meant something, and Moose's power was the neutralizer. It's a simple formula, but it's one that works when both guys understand that it's simple and don't try and over complicate it. I really enjoyed the fact that ACH failed when he went to the power well and Moose failed when he tried to go to the top rope. ACH's bumping probably put this match over the top, but Moose throws his shots with conviction, and the charisma of both guys jumps off the page when they are working. My biggest criticism here is that you could argue this match should never have even been booked as Moose had to win, and on paper ACH could have used a win coming into his ppv match v. AJ Styles, but this was done in such a way where I don't think ACH was really hurt by losing. 6 Man Mayhem was another match that was way better than I would have guessed if I was just looking at the match on paper. Don't get me wrong - it was basically a spotfest, and if you are looking for slow building, psych heavy stuff, this isn't it. That said each guy in this had a clear role and seemed to add something different. Ferrara was the opportunist rookie, happy to be there and trying to steal a win with surprise big spots. Hanson was the big babyface hoss. Lethal was working his role as cocky TV champion, quasi-ace even though this wasn't a title match. Cedric Alexander was the almost star, looking to get that big win that would finally get him over the hump. Ciampa was probably the least defined guy, but came across as the crowd favorite. In some ways the star of this was Michael Elgin of all people who's chickenshit heel act was a good way to set up certain spots, and added a bit of nuance and purpose to the bout. The announcing did a good job putting all of this over, and also covered for a bad Hanson botch down the stretch to the point where it didn't even hurt the match for me at all. I even liked this one for what it didn't do as it was loaded with crazy spots, but instead of delivering the tired Tower of Doom spot they teased it, which was a way better use of that overexposed bit. This was another one where I sort of felt like the wrong guy might have won though. I get why Hanson won as he is the guy getting the big push, but I don't like a champion who has been pushed the way Lethal has (i.e. arguing his belt is really the top belt in wrestling, not the World title) "losing" here, especially when it would have been exceptionally easy for him to steal a fall. Still that's a minor gripe. Styles v. Fish was yet another good match. Not a top level Styles indie match from the last couple of years, but certainly another feather in his cap. Fish was good too, which isn't surprising as he can be really sharp when he wants to be. Match was the sort of slow developing match I generally lose my shit for, though I don't think this ever quite hit a second gear. That said I like how they used the time to develop something, and thought the pacing of this is what the pacing should have been in O'Reilly v. Strong. I would have liked the rib/back work on Styles to have been a bigger part of the match, but I don't think the lack of a full commitment to it really hurt the match. This also had a great, definitive finish, with the IWGP champion going over decisively, but in a fashion where you left thinking that Fish gave him his best in defeat. As for The Briscoes v. Kingdom? As soon as I finish watching it I said on Twitter that I thought it had potential to be one of the most polarizing matches of the year and I think this thread is probably already evidence of that. On first watch I can't say it's my MOTY, but it's in contention. Part of this might be that I'm just a huge mark for The Brisoces (they are easily my favorite thing in wrestling right now), but I also thought it was a rare match with obvious, inherent flaws, that should have crippled it, but the parties involved managed to make it work. For example on paper 2/3 Falls matches like this almost always result in falls that feel rushed or end illogically. Here while the first two falls weren't particularly long they had time to breathe, the ended logically and definitively, and they were well worked. More than that I thought the double doomsday device in the opening fall made the matches finish feel even bigger than it already would have, and the finish of the second fall with spike piledriver through the table made Kingdom look like they were on the level of The Briscoes as brawlers coming into the final fall, while also giving Bennett a fall over the World champ. Another thing that normally should have fallen on it's face was Jay being able to come back to fight in the third fall after eating that piledriver, but I actually thought he put in a remarkably nuanced performance from that point forward. I have no clue if he was gassed, legitimately hurt, or was consciously doing it, but even though he was involved in the third fall, he never felt the same again in the match after taking that spot. I have seen countless matches where guys don't carry that sort of thing over when they move on to a new segment, so that really stood out to me. I wasn't enamored with Bennett's "bring it on!" stuff to Jay down the stretch, BUT I do like the idea of Bennett as a potential new challenger to Jay's title, and this match could have set that up with Bennett kicking out of Jay's big finish. All of this said, the real workhorse to this match was Mark Briscoe who's spots, risk taking, bumping, charisma and dynamism were incredible all throughout the first fall, and right through to the crazy dive and bump in the last fall. I wasn't bothered much by the lighting on the crowd brawling, because I watch so many scuzzy handhelds and low rent indies it was nothing I'm not already used to. In a way I thought it added to the match. I also didn't have much of problem with the lack of fall attempts on the floor that Tim pointed out. That's another thing where in theory I should be irked, but the idea of the match finishing clearly and noncontroversially in the middle of the ring - especially because it was so unexpected - feels bigger to me than finishing the match on the floor even if it technically could have ended there. To me a lot of how you see the match is dependent on how much you are invested in the respective acts, the feud and the possibilities that could come from the match. The Briscoes v. Kingdom feud has been my favorite U.S. wrestling feud of the last two years (low hurdle but still), so there was a lot I got out of this that others might not have, even if some of it may have been me reading into things that "weren't really there."

I watched Ishikawa v. Okabayashi last night. I enjoyed it and would recommend it for sure. To me it was the best I can remember seeing Ishikawa in a singles setting, and Okabayashi - who I generally think is entertaining but wildly overrated by some - put in a better performance than I would have guessed. I actually thought the pacing and selling was better than could have been expected if you were just looking at this match up on paper. They made rare good use of a 1 count, and even though I thought Okabayashi's loopy legged selling at the finish was a little hokey, I think the spirit of what he was going for added to the finishing stretch. I can't call it a MOTYC with a straight face, but if you are someone really inclined toward either guy you might disagree.

Have you watched Go v Zeus yet? I thought it was hurt badly by the poor and uninventive hope spots of Go, but I thought Zeus was shockingly good, as was the match for the most part.

I'll write more tonight when I'm free but this is a bit of a false debate, because losing to a part time attraction, who is never around is different than losing a feud to a star that is integral to the established product. And the issue is not entirely "new" guys beating "old" guys, but also the broader issue of whether wins and losses matter.

I think ROH has been the best tv product on a week-to-week basis for the last year or so, and I say that as someone who absolutely loathed ROH during the Davey Richards years, and the subsequent "Elgin is the new guy" mini-period. Even guys who I think are absolute shit like Jay Lethal, have been put in positions where they at least have a purpose and an on air presentation that adds to the shows, though I can't imagine any scenario where I would want to see him have a wrestling match. I'm not the biggest Hanson guy in the world, but I do think it's weird to bitch about his push. The only strong argument I could see against pushing a guy with that look, size and raw talent - something that is rare on the indies - is that there are other guys who "came before it" who are as charismatic and have "earned it" more. But I'm not sympathetic to that argument at all for a variety of reasons. I mean yes, ACH is very charismatic, and probably underutilized on some level, but I don't think that is an argument against Hanson. There are people in the promotion who I do think are overpushed - Lethal who isn't any good (but at least is presented very well on tv and I like what they've done with him and that title), Elgin who is awful and has lost the fans, Roddy who is coming off of his best in ring year in close to a decade but is badly overexposed - but I don't think Hanson is one of them. I actually think ROH has a very good core talent roster, and I think the way they use their part timers is very smart. The part timers (Styles, Bucks, Patron) win their matches, but they aren't beating their top guys decisively, and they are enough of a looming presence on the shows where even when they do get wins over top guys it doesn't have the same feel of The Rock or Taker stopping by once a year to beat the biggest names on the WWE roster. It's a balancing act because those guys have to be protected, but I think matches like Styles v. Fish or ACH is a great use of a guy like Styles. Far better than putting him into a main even with Jay that would likely lead to a fuck finish. When I look at the ROH roster I see a great tag team in reDRagon, ACH and Ced who I think are very charisamatic and talented performers who could main event there, The Briscoes who are the best tag team in the world and nearly as good as singles, Kingdom who is extremely underrated as a unit and stand out as different on the roster, Moose and Hanson who are big young guys who have improved a ton, have charisma and also feel different on the roster, the part timers who I generally feel have been used well, Ciampa who has improved a ton, Sydal who seems to be getting his groove back this year, and they have Ray Rowe and Silas Young waiting in the wings to return from injuries, both of whom have a lot of potential and can add a lot to the shows. I'm not saying its' a great, great roster, or that everyone is presented well, but I'll take what they currently have over the Richards/Edwards/Elgin/Oreilly before he got good/et. stuff every time.

I think goodhelmet had that as a MOTYC. Not sure who else did. I thought it was a unique, rare, WWE match that was made to feel special, where a secondary title felt significance, and the work was very strong, but didn't have it at MOTY level. But if you are someone who looks at the stakes of a match as something that it enhances it, and you primarily watch WWE, I could see it at the MOTY level.

Then HHH should win

Honestly if they aren't going to push anyone coming off the Battle Royal then Mizdow should probably win it. He's one of the five most over guys in the company (at worst), and his winning is likely to get a massive reaction, especially if he dumps Miz toward the end. If they are going to push someone coming out of it Ryback should probably win it.

I wouldn't call Rusev v. Cena a match of the year. On some level I thought Rusev v. Ryback from SD was a better, though it didn't have the drama of this match. Having said that I do love that PWO is a board where someone can write a detailed review/analysis of that match, explaining why they regard it at the MOTYC level at it isn't dismissed with "lulz dude haven't you seen the New Japan or DragonGate?"

Imagine the hilarity of R Truth having a higher stakes match with a stronger purpose than Bryan

Legit flabbergasted that anyone would compare Cena/Rusev to a Goto match

The match built well to the finish. It had a natural progression to the work that most WWE matches lack. I still have no clue what the botches were, but I haven't gone back and watched the match a second time. Perhaps they'd be more apparent if I were looking for them, but I can't characterize them as obvious if I missed them the first go around. It's possible that I overrated the match on first watch because it's been so long since a WWE C-Show had a match of that length, with that much meat to it, but I'd fairly shocked if I thought it was anything less than very good even on a second watch. I might watch that tag match you loved a second time too, though I can't imagine being terribly impressed by it on a second go around, as I've tired of Bryan worship, and the "tag team partners don't get along!, but still get one over on the regular teaming champs" concept is something that is so transparently shitty it's hard for me to look past even if the work is good.