Dylan Waco

The important thing here is that I'm currently running away with the VOW pick em, out to a commanding one point lead at the end of Day Three. Time to close things down to avoid embarrassing others and hand me my reward

I'm certain I've said something along those lines before, but I can't think of a single scenario where I would have said that because of the number or type of offensive moves used in the match.

It's a well established fact that Cena reads this board

I don't want this to turn into a political discussion, but it's a well established fact that bureaucracies trend toward continued growth over time. Many people believe this growth in turn leads to inefficiencies and internal conflicts that cripple productivity and innovation. Publicly traded companies in year one, are almost never going to look like publicly traded companies in year fifteen

Not surprising at all since it's now a publicly traded company, with layers and layers of bureaucracy

Cape coming in second was utter shit

I don't disagree with that take, though I would note that I don't think the major direction shift is even possible without a Cena heel turn. Or at the very least it is massively unlikely.

Up until the Summer of 2011 I was one of those people that felt they should never really turn Cena unless it was something like having him cheat to beat The Undertakers streak (I still contend leaving that match on the table is one of the most idiotic things this company has done in decades). What changed my perspective was not the Punk stuff, but rather the night Rey won a tournament for what ended up being an interim title, and then Cena got a title shot the same night (even though he was completely fresh and hadn't had to beat anyone) and then beat Rey for the belt the same night he won it. That came across as a real douchey, heel thing to me, but more than that it killed wrestling forever for my daughter. Up until that point she was a big fan of the WWE, bought tons of merch (action figures, masks, John Cena chains, et) and was incredibly invested in characters (trying to rush the ring to fight CM Punk after he cheated to beat Jeff Hardy live, writing a letter to the WWE, being terrified of bad guys, et.). That night was almost like a toggle switch going off with her. She thought Cena was a jerk for what he did, and by November of that year she had pretty much sworn off wrestling almost entirely because she had a visceral hatred for John Cena. Now I can't even get her to go to a live show with me unless it's a local indie fed - she we will watch Lucha with me and obscure indie feds, but she has no time for the WWE...because she hates John Cena. The point is not that all young fans are like my child. While that anecdote is very real to me, I can also point to Cena getting an all time level pop the last time I saw him live (earlier this year) and being the biggest live gate and merch draw in the company by a clear margin. The point is that my daughters reaction really made me believe that the constancy of Cena, his portrayal as an entitled dick star and some of his more "unique" attributes (i.e. his ability to heel from injury really quickly) may hurt the WWE in hidden ways. Furthermore for much he same reasons, I began to see the Cena heel turn as something that might have more money drawing potential than keeping in the same slot year after year. I do admit it's a massive gamble and I see both sides of this. On the one hand do you really want to throw away the one thing that has been consistent and stable for the unknown particularly during a massive money losing time for the company? On the other hand I really believe as long as Cena is the top babyface star there is zero chance of another hot period. More than that though I think as long as Cena is presented exactly as he is - even if there is an attempt to push him down the cards - it is going to be very hard to get over another 1A babyface. The reason is that people simply don't trust the company to go all the way through with elevating the next guy. For all the talk about how over Daniel Bryan was and is, he didn't draw nearly as well at live shows as Cena. Why? I don't know why for sure, but in talking to people I am always amazed at the number of fans who just assume Cena will ALWAYS be elevated back into the top spot no matter who else is around or how hot they get. To many fans, including fans that would not qualify as "hardcore" using the standards of this site or anything close to it, Cena is basically the equivalent of Taker, HHH or Rock during Mania season except he's there year round. He's always going to take up a top spot, if not the top spot. It's always going to be at the expense of others. While he could be used to get over new talent he won't be, or if he is they will almost immediately work to undermine it the first chance they get. These are things I hear all the time from people who have never been to wrestling message boards in their life. So it would not shock me if the failure of guys like Bryan and Reigns to draw on the road at the level you would hope for is wedded to the fact that at the end of the day no one REALLY believes they are top stars as long as John Cena is around. Does this mean Cena has to turn heel? No, but I do think if they don't turn him heel it is going to be vastly more difficult to get over a new top babyface. I also think if they don't turn him heel the temptation is always going to be there to put him back into the top spot if somebody has a run of six bad weeks on the road and/or on t.v. And if they don't turn him heel they may in fact miss their window to make another star at his level, because he will not be around forever and the absolute worst thing that could happen is him retire and/or be forced out by injury while still in the same position he is in now effectively rendering everyone on the roster "second best" types who couldn't beat the real man. To me it comes down to this - Do you want to hold steady at the level you are at, minimizing risk, and continuing to sell shirts at a huge clip? If that is your goal you keep Cena face forever. Or do you want to make an admittedly big gamble with the hope that it will heat up your product, something that I believe is necessary for the Network to have any chance of hitting it's goals? If that is your goal I think the idea of a Cena heel turn is something that at bare minimum has to be strongly considered.

Subjectively, maybe not. It is still getting emotionally invested in a match in whatever way it is that excites you. Objectively though, a dropkick isn't exactly a killer high spot anymore. (Damn.....two days on the board and I'm already saying things like highspots). I swear I'm not trying to be a contrarian, but I don't even agree with that. Okada is one of the top two or three stars in Japan (at worst). Aside from his finish (which is a clothesline), I'd argue that his most effective highspot in terms of getting a reaction is his dropkick. Dolph Ziggler is one of the most over guys on the WWE roster from week-to-week. He doesn't exactly have an expansive offensive arsenal, and is a guy most known for his bumping, but he's consistently been able to get compelling nearfalls and/or dish out compelling hope spots based around a dropkick. Kyle Matthews is one of my favorite indie workers over the course of the last five years. He works primarily Southern indies, but is one of the best guys at the indie level at getting a crowd involved in his matches and building sympathy as smaller babyface. If you are someone who has watched him a lot (as many of those fans are), his comebacks are usually designed to build to his finish - a running corner dropkick to a standing opponent followed by a small package. While I have seen people criticize his finish online, it pretty much universally gets over huge live. The point isn't that a dropkick is as athletically impressive as Ricochet vaulting over the corner post with a hilo, but rather that there is absolutely no reason that much "simpler" moves can't be hugely over and massively effect highspots.

I agree that there is not a "need" to turn Cena, and if you want to keep steady it's probably wise not to. He's still the top house show draw in the company, as well as the top merch guy (by far). But I still contend that there is absolutely no chance that the WWE will heat up again as long as he is a clear 1A babyface. I don't say that as a way of attacking Cena. I'm not a Cena hater at all. In fact I think at his peak he's the best big match worker in the history of the WWE, and in many ways he saved the promotion from HHH hell when he was pushed to the top. But his act has leveled off, comes across as incredibly stale, and is not in a position to "re-heat" any time soon. There is an argument that with the Network/TV Rights failings, turning Cena now would be an unbelievably dangerous thing to do (I actually made the argument at length on a recent reaction show podcast at P2BN), but if you aren't going to turn him you have to quit presenting him as a cheapshot artist who undercuts other big faces who are arguably hotter with the crowds, and you need to think seriously about scaling him down after he loses the belt to Brock. Again I just can't see anyway that John Cena in his current form can be the 1A babyface of a meaningful hot wrestling company. On the "hot chix" thing I'm fairly indifferent to it, though I do think if you are trying to create stars and/or appeal to different audiences then you have to ditch the obviously hokey stuff and present characters that are "cool." I can see the argument that "hot chix" aren't the best way to do it, but I have pretty "meh" feelings about the "I feel more comfortable watching with my family!" talking point in general. I've made the point a million times and I will forever stand by it, that if you are looking for a "safe" family show you probably shouldn't be watching a show that's entire premise is "guys solving their problems and disagreements with one another through extreme acts of sanctioned violence. With Adam Rose I'd just as soon cut him precisely because of the fact that he's a shitty comedy character. I agree with Will's point that if you are going to present him seriously you go that way, but I actually think the plan all along was for him to have this role as a 87th rate Santino and/or 3MB and it annoys me to death because he's not in the same universe as either one of those acts. With almost all of these guys it's more the booking than the general character portrayal, but some guys strike me as being clearly more marketable, interesting, fresher characters as heels than faces. Sheamus is one of them, and he's probably my favorite worker on the roster at this point and a guy who I think is a better worker as a face, so it's hardly playing to my selfish interests as a fan to make that point

I thought that Naito v. Archer match was off point, and I'm actually fairly surprised people were high on it. I thought the transitions were really weak and a couple exchanges looked off time to me. I liked the idea of the match, but didn't think it was executed that well, though the build to the chokeslam was something they delivered well enough. Still thought it was a middling-to-weak match. I haven't watched AJ Styles indie matches from that era since they happened so I'll take your word for it. My point was more or less that the match was worked as a flashy/"real" wrestler v. a bullshit artist, limited heel which is something I expect to see on an episode of Anarchy, not a New Japan post-intermission match

I think Ishii has had a great year, but he's not at the level of Nak, Okada or Tanahashi. He could be but he isn't. The goal of this tournament should be to get him and at least one other guy there. My top choice even though I'm not a huge fan of his would have been Ibushi. Now that Ibushi is out I"d go with Shibata

I do think the roster is really stale. There are lots of guys who I either don't like or don't want to see work at all. But worse than that they haven't really successfully elevated anyone since Okada, so the roster feels really weak relative to the top tier.

I don't feel compelled to do full reviews of these shows at this time. If people want very brief snippet thoughts on each match they can check my Twitter (@DylanWaco). Instead I'll just continue to give my general thoughts. Over all I thought Night Two was better than Night One. Night Two definitely had lower lows, and I think the undercard matches on the show have been wildly overrated as a whole (generally I think hardcore NJPW fans elevate the average to good and the good to great in most cases) but it had more good matches and I think what made it for me was the variety and oddball nature of some of the match ups. The worst match on the show was Shelton v. Fale which was just dreadful. My favorite match on the show was AJ Styles v. Yano which was completely fresh and different, and felt like the sort of match AJ would have had in a Georgia rec center fifteen years ago opposite Iceberg. I'm not necessarily saying it was the best match on the show, but I loved the way it was worked. Similarly I really enjoyed the front and back end of the Tenzan v. Okada match, though it went too long so they had to cram in some clear filler that keeps it from being a really special match. Nak v. DBS was well put together over although DBS is still missing something for me in the NJPW setting (and Nak's knee finishes did not look great). Honma remains one of the only guys who does the fighting spirit stuff well, though I fear he's not winning anything until the last night in the tourney an they are going to wear out his act before then. I liked Ishii v. Kojima, though Kojima looked really bad at times in that match, and would be getting absolutely crushed by a lot of the same people praising him if he was a WWE guy pulling such weak looking shit. I would say six of the ten matches were above average, with a couple of others at the middling level (though I did like the finish of Anderson v. Makabe and as a whole it was better than I would have guessed), and a couple of matches I thought were pretty shitty.

Matches based around sustained runs of momentum are much better in my view because to me the key to a good match is building heat. Without the build I don't give a fuck how many gainers or suplexes you do. On the flip side (get it) if things are too back and fourth, with no sustained runs the near falls come across as replacing the build to the heat and the match puts me to sleep. That style is what I would call your turn, my turn (not there are occasions when that sort of thing can work, but they are generally the exception not the rule).

Because I thought then and think now that standards for what makes a match good do not change.

Probably not something we should be discussing outside of PM

The copy I have of night two doesn't have Honma v. Nagata which is highly annoying

I don't think Cena has to turn heel, but I do think the "safe" booking that he represents is something that makes it absolutely impossible for the product to grow. As long as he is the top guy things will be exactly as they are, or worse. I see zero hope in things getting better with him as the tip top babyface. On the Ryback/Rusev idea, I have developed it much more. Here is what I would do. This week on Raw Rusev puts down Jack Swagger in short order. Next week on Raw he's in the ring and Lana is doing her thing, when Mark Henry's music hits. We get the face off, maybe some physical stuff. This is your Summerslam program for Rusev, and you play up Henry as a former Olympian, with Lana talking about how he failed his country then and he will fail them now. At Summerslam Rusev beats Henry clean there in a ten minute match. Post-match Henry turns heel (possibly attacking the ref, or even someone sent in to interview him after the match) and goes on to work with Xavier Woods led stable. The Raw after Summerslam you have Rusev come out and Lana says they have proven their superiority over the U.S. but now it's time to set it in stone. She says they are setting their site on the U.S. title and they are going to bring it home and lay it at the feet of Vladimir Putin. Sheamus comes out and you have a brawl. This sets up the Night of Champions match. On that show Rusev becomes the first guy in forever to kick out of the brogue, which they have spent months heavily protecting. Post-match Sheamus blows off an interview and the next night on Raw he too turns heel. Fast forward to Raw the week after NoC (8 days later). Rusev is out with the belt and he's got a Russian flag on the plate of the title. They announce that they are going to declare the title the Russian Heavyweight Title and bring it back to the motherland. Ideally you do this with a video package showing the history of the title and Lana laughing about how that lineage will be effectively dead. Rusev is about to leave when John Cena's music hits. Cena at this point will be coming off the loss to Lesnar (possibly two ppvs in a row), but of course he's still Cena and he's not going to let them walk out with the belt that has that much history. Lana manages to keep Rusev from getting physical but they set up a match for the next ppv between the two with Cena aiming to bring the U.S. title back home. There are plenty of things they can do in the weeks leading to that but that's not important to me. The key is at the ppv you deliver all the signals that Cena is winning. I would keep Rusev from ever getting locked in the STF and would book the finish this way. Cena hits the STF once, but doesn't cover him right away. Instead he sort of looks around, does the Cena weird facial expression thing, than after about thirty seconds he hits a second one. He goes for the cover and Rusev kicks out at one, with a huge powerhouse kickout. Cena is completely shocked and looks at the official, turns right around into the big Rusev kick, gets locked in the Camel Clutch and passes out with Rusev winning. Cena does the full stretcher job and is not on t.v. the next night. At the next nights Raw Lana and Rusev come out with the Russian Heavyweight Title. They announce that they have beaten everyone from "We The People," to American Olympians, to Irish immigrants, all the way to the ultimate here John Cena. Lana says they are leaving that night for Russia where they will take an extended tour around the country with the belt, which will only be defended on Russian soil going forward. Lana says they have no doubt in their superiority, so they are putting forward one last open challenge to anyone in the back who wants to be Rusev's last victim on American soil. There is a referee at the ready with them and several seconds go by with nothing. Lana goes to lift the mic to her mouth when you hear "Feed. Me. More!" over the P.A. Ryback hits the ring as Lana quickly jumps to the floor. Rusev tries to ambush him but gets hit with the meathook clothesline and then the shellshock and is pinned in about fifteen second. This accomplishes several things 1. It gets both Henry and Sheamus into the heel column and does so as the result of a loss, which is something I like in my heel turns. 2. It gets the U.S. title over as a meaningful belt. 3. It gets Cena off t.v. for a while and you can toy with the idea of Cena turning heel because Rusev's previous two victims had gone down that path. He doesn't even have to go heel, but that tease would build big interest in him that is lacking right now. 4. It gets Rusev over on another level and the loss doesn't really hurt him because A. look at what he had already done and B. he wasn't ready! 5. It gets Ryback back over as a main event player/major star. 6. It sets up a potential money rematch between two guys who are still fresh as main event players

I like modern New Japan. I just don't think it's one of the greatest products in wrestling history. I enjoyed the first night of the G1. I posted my thoughts on Twitter and Alan's board at the Observer, but I"ll C/P them over here: Thought the first night of the G1 was pretty good overall, but it didn't blow me away. The big positives to me were that there were no bad matches on the show (and on paper there were a few I was really worried about) and the best three matches were the main events each of which may have gotten progressively better. The negative is that I didn't think anything before those three matches was better than average, and the tourney has a lot of guys I either don't want to see in it (Shelton, Yano, Anderson) or don't care about (Kojima, Nagata, Goto, Makabe). More specifically the things that stood out while watching... Ishii v. Fale was fine, but Fale running out of offense with several minutes left in the match is a bad sign. Tenzan is still very over and while I wouldn't call the match with Anderson good or even as good as their match from last years tourney, it gives me hope for him having value in this tournament. Nagata bores me to tears even when he is working hard. I like Honma, but that Tanahashi match is being wildly overrated. It was pretty good, but Honma - even with limited opportunities - has had several matches I would rate as clearly above it just in the last couple of years. Raw has matches as good or better many (if not most) weeks. Shibata was the best guy on the 7/5 NOAH show and I thought he put in a very good effort against Nakamura, though as with the aforementioned match I think the hype it's getting from some is generous to say the least. Not only do I not see it as a MOTYC, I'm fairly certain their have been 20 matches in New Japan alone this year I've liked more. Amazingly I thought AJ v. Okada was the clear match of the night, the best Okada match of the year, and another really good performance from Styles. It was also the only match on the show I didn't really think was overrated, though I do agree with that Dave saying it was one of AJ's best careeer matches is a bit much I haven't watched night two yet, but I was predicting on Twitter/The Board that Styles v. Yano and Okada v. Tenzan would both me unique and good matches and it seems that happened. I'll post my thoughts on Night Two when I watch it.

Abby is a great pic for this. Maybe the best possible pick. I was terrified of him after seeing him live

Damien Sandow was incredible the two times I saw him live. The Divas as a rule have come across as better workers live.

Already hearing conspiracy theories that Russo is a Jarrett mole who intentionally emailed Mike Johnson outing himself to sink negotiations with Spike. It's notable that the first person to mention this theory to me is actually someone in the business.

To me the most interesting and challenging part about these lists (and yes I take them seriously enough for them to be challenging) is trying to weigh things like output, talent, consistency, volume, et. Last year was a good example as I got some shit for having Regal in my top fifteen at the end of the year, but how could I drop the guy any farther when he was in my top two U.S. matches of the year, with only Hechicero v. Lucero ahead of the matches globally? It's tough trying to work out that balance and there isn't a fixed formula I apply, but I do have a way of thinking about those sort of things that I try to navigate when I'm throwing together a list.

Wyatt presents a dilemma because his worst moments have been terrible, and he can't carry a match, but how do you leave out a guy who has been in four of the top ten WWE matches of the year?