DMJ

Just read that Beth Phoenix is leaving NXT. Personally, I never really dug her on commentary. I didn't necessarily hate her or anything, but in the pantheon of commentators, she was maybe average at best. Its a whole other conversation and I'd readily admit to coming off a bit sexist here, but I would've loved to see her maybe have a spotlight role in commentating women's matches as part of a 2-person team or in position not dissimilar to the way Mike Tenay was originally used on Nitro because that is her area of expertise and (I'm guessing) a passion of hers. Then, maybe once we'd gotten a sense of her commentary personality/style, it would've worked for her to be on more and more of the show. As it was, I just can't think of a single time that I ever thought Beth offered much insight, though I also can't recall a time when it even felt like she had the opportunity to share real insight or her experience. If she'd commentated the Mae Young Classics, for example, that would've probably come across much easier. Instead, she was just a voice to me.

I'm not as down on Nia as others. Really liked the Jax/Rousey matches from Money in the Bank 2018 and TLC 2018, enjoyed her tag work with Baszler, and liked her match against Bayley at Takeover: London. There are some other matches of hers in my database that are in the slightly above-average range too. Granted, they often featured women who I think are/were among the best working in the US, but hey, that just shows that when you put a limited worker in a setting that maximizes her skills and hides her flaws, she can bring value and variety to a match. That being said, I don't think she'd fit in well in AEW or is a great investment. I'm not saying AEW's women's division doesn't need more star power and credible performers, but at the same time, they turned Britt Baker into a huge star, Ruby Soho still feels more important than she ever did in WWE (even after a relative "cooling"), Thunder Rosa is still a fresh and exciting character, and while I know she's not everyone's cup of tea, that Abadon hardcore match was unique and cool at a time when I don't think there's been a truly unique WWE women's match in years. AEW's track record of creating stars might be strong enough to make Nia a real waste of money when maybe they have somebody already in their pipeline who can get over beyond whatever level Jax's ceiling would be.

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree about the "That's so 1989" thinking. The younger audience is digesting content - like TikTok - with runtimes of less than a minute. I think there's plenty of fans, especially younger fans, who would get behind an "all killer - no filler" match where someone awesome, like a Keith Lee but also a Ricochet, just bulldozed some loser. Its also an "everything old is new again" scenario. I'm not saying that the whole show needs to be built around squash matches, but jeez, for newcomers like Karrion Kross, going 10+ minutes with Jeff Hardy did absolutely nothing that a vignette + a squash match couldn't have done. I know, for me, the Xia Li comic book vignette had me much more curious about this new character than I would've been if she just debuted and a had a 50/50 match with Natalya. The idea that its a TV show and not designed with a "house show" mindset would also seem, to me, to be a reason why they should be upping the variety and increasing the number of segments per show. For example, I know that 20+ minute promo segments aren't always good (for example, any time Seth Rollins and the Authority opened RAW), but that CM Punk/MJF segment had me much more engaged than the subsequent Punk/Marshall match on AEW. In WWE, there are guys and gals that can do a 10 minute promo and make it feel special. There are guys and gals that would be better served with squash matches. There are guys and gals that are better served in competitive multi-segment matches. I think we're splitting hairs a little when ultimately we all agree that the WWE booking/production is just outright awful, but to dismiss squash matches as being passe seems silly to me when, Goldberg chants aside, there was a time not too long ago when Ryback was actually kinda super over as a babyface.

At this point, I think actually seeing someone - whether its a Sheamus, Ricochet, or even a *puke in my mouth* Austin Theory - go in and destroy some unlucky schmuck would be more entertaining than the usual fare. (And, I hate to say it, this would be especially useful for a guy like Theory as I see absolutely nothing in him. Maybe if he was allowed to showcase all his offense and be in full control of a match, not doing back-and-forth but just dazzling me with cool moves and character shtick, I'd see him as more than a CAW with a lame gimmick that was done better by Tyler Breeze.) I mean, the ratings are what they are and they've clearly stopped trying to even shoot for the ceiling. They might as well find out the floor. My guess is that a show that was 50% jobber squashes would maybe go down a negligible amount of viewers if at all. And, in the long term, it would allow them to create stars that people actually want to see. I mean, at this point, Belair has been on the main roster for what? 2 years? Save for a match with Asuka, I think we're officially out of big matches that I want to see her in and I'm as big a Belair fan as anyone. In 2 years, we've seen her face all the Horsewomen and because Ripley and Baszler were bigger deals in NXT anyway, its not like rematches with them would feel any bigger than they did there. Countless wrestlers have talked about it over the years but it remains true today. The old school method of building Wrestler A through squash matches and Wrestler B through squash matches and setting them on a collision course has just been completely forgotten for no reason at all.

The fact that Vince doesn't know/see/care about performers like Keith Lee, Ruby Riott, and even Adam Cole (who I'm not a big fan of but clearly he has a fanbase) but believes Ridge Holland and Austin Theory could be future stars is as much proof as anything that he has lost touch with the wrestling audience. I know AEW isn't flawless but it is night-and-day when compared to WWE's ability to create stars. Does the WWE even have any babyfaces that are as beloved by its audience as much as the AEW audience loves Jungle Boy? Aside from Jeff Hardy and New Day, none of whom could be considered fresh new talent, I can't think of anyone. If you named the top 10 babyfaces in American pro-wrestling right now, I'm not sure the WWE would have anyone in the top 5 and that's kinda baffling.

I'll check this out in chunks while I jog on the treadmill as I usually do... - I'm of the belief that the Becky/Charlotte "shoot" thing is mostly a work. Based on interviews from months ago, when Charlotte is relatively out of character (like she was when she did Renee Young's podcast), she admits that her and Becky aren't super close anymore but they're both obviously in serious relationships and not in the same place they were 2 years ago, let alone 5. I give them credit for trying to build this up as something you have to see because they might go "off script" because there are definitely people buying into it. I think the element missing, though, as compared to Survivor Series 97' and even Money in the Bank 2011 (Punk/Cena) is actual stakes/threat of leaving. It might have been overdone, but Lynch saying something like "Win or lose, I'm gonna beat your ass and then I'm going home to be a mom again" or Flair saying "I've done it all here and it seems like I'm no longer appreciated so, after Survivor Series, I'm going to go find some new competition" would've added even more intrigue. - Big E/Reigns and Nakamura/Priest are matches that, on paper, are things that I should be psyched about...but, again, the lack of real stakes don't have me very buzzed. I really feel like Big E could've been built up as the guy to topple Reigns at WrestleMania but that would've meant a lengthy storyline with twists and turns and character growth like that other company do. WWE is too lazy for that so they just gave Big E the title win on TV and called it a day. Now, I'm not really invested in his climb anymore because he's reached the top. Nakamura/Priest is to me a match that would be/should be good - like Sheamus/Priest was a month ago - though Nakamura is much less consistent than Sheamus these days. Still, again, on paper, it feels like a match that could be hard-hitting and physical and fun but probably will underwhelm, which is sadly almost a full encapsulation of Nakamura's WWE run. - There's a 25 person interbrand battle royal on this show? Why? To me it reads that this company is so out of ideas, they can't even make it till the Royal Rumble to basically have a Royal Rumble match on their show. And maybe I missed it, but what does the winner even get? A personalized tweet from The Rock?

Last week, on Veteran's Day, Hit Row were heavily featured in segments on RAW Talk about not only honoring people's military services but hiring veterans. And they paraded Hit Row out there because two of them served in the military. And a week later they fired them. Now I'm not saying every veteran deserves a job for life, especially if they're bad at that job. But Hit Row seemed like they were fun enough and getting over. its just such a dick move to use them as the WWE's "Look, We Support Veterans!" poster boys and then drop them like this. Just the most hollow public relations ploy imaginable. I hope the WWE gets roasted on social media when Tribute to the Troops airs.

I wrote it elsewhere/awhile ago, but I'll say it again, there's definitely an alternate timeline where AEW didn't end up with such a stacked roster and Eddie Kingston challenged and beat Omega at Grand Slam/Arthur Ashe Stadium to a mega babyface pop (only to then drop the title back at some other special episode of Rampage). Its not surprising that the guy gets his fair share of cheers against any and everybody they put him up against. His piece in the Player's Tribune this past week was incredible. His interviews on various podcasts are incredible. He's a brutally honest dude who admits to many, many shortcomings and its just impossible to really root against a guy like that. And even if you don't know his back story (like I didn't when he first debuted on AEW), he's easily the best promo guy I've seen in maybe 20 years. He's Austin/Funk level with the believability of who he is and what he stands for. Eddie Kingston is not a guy who is just really good at playing a character - like MJF - he is the real deal to me.

I read somewhere that only a small number of the people released were unvaccinated. For example, a cursory google search for "Mia Yim Vaccinated" reveals she was fully vaccinated in April as she posted a pic with the caption "Fully Vaccinated" on Twitter. Is the vaccination issue more about Vince fearing that certain talent won't be allowed to perform in every state/country? Like, if specific arenas or cities require vaccination, that the WWE would have to book around them? I'm just wondering because nothing we know about the McMahon's political/social views or practices would make it actually be about preventing the spread of a dangerous virus. Surely, it has more to do with the WWE wanting to save themselves future headaches, right? Wasn't there even a rumor that they'd be doing a UK PPV at some point again? I really think it more comes down to Nick Khan and maybe to a lesser extent Bruce Prichard realizing/convincing Vince that the WWE is a TV show like any other, first and foremost, and you don't have 30 leads on a TV show. So, even if you need to fill 5 hours of TV a week, you can get by on maybe 40-50 wrestlers total (like they did for much of the 90s). I mean, they clearly don't mind running lots of rematches or turning a singles match into a tag match to make a 10 minute segment into a 25 minute segment or filling up their shows with recaps, ads, and bad comedy skits. And every year they get more money for doing less new matches, less new wrestlers, less new storylines. I saw someone in another thread mention they were excited to see another Usos/New Day feud and I'm just like, holy fuck, were the other 1000 matches they had not enough for you? I'm not even saying the Usos and New Day don't put on good matches, but this is the exact line of thought that makes the WWE wonder why you would even have more than 4 tag teams at any given time, 2 on each brand, and just re-shuffle them every year via a draft. Which is basically what we have now only there's maybe six tag teams instead.

Well, if he ever gets sick of being a wrestler, John Silver just found his back-up plan.

From my blog review of Survivor Series 95' (Kwang The Blog): Main event time - Diesel vs. Bret Hart for Diesel's WWE World Championship in a No DQ/No Countout Match. Considering that the mid-90s WWE is known for outrageous gimmicks and all sorts of goofy storylines, this match has a remarkable "big fight" feel, a much more serious and competitive tone than most of the main events of the time. Part of that comes from this being a rare babyface/babyface contest and the commentators having no choice but to essentially call it down the middle, giving each guy credit for their abilities. Diesel controls early, dropping Hart neck-first on the guardrail and then continuing to punish him on the arena floor. Hart's hope spots are all cut off by Diesel's power, leading to the Hitman getting sent into the steel steps and then ran back-first into the post. Diesel grabs a chair and smashes it over Bret's back, which seems overly heelish, but he still has some fans cheering for him when he calls for the Jackknife. Diesel attempts it twice, but Bret is able to fight (and bite!) his way out! Bret applies a "sleeper" that is more like an eye rake and then goes after Diesel's legs, the Hitman finally able to get to work on his gameplan. Bret applies a figure four, which gets a huge reaction, and, as pointed out on the commentary, is a callback to their second match. Speaking of the commentary, its worth noting just how many times JR makes reference to their previous matches - its the kind of thing we don't get enough of and the attention to detail is just another reason the presentation of this match feels different and more legitimate than anything else on the show. Bret attempts a Sharpshooter but Diesel shoves him away and then kicks him off, sending the Hitman into an uncovered turnbuckle. Bret manages to slide out of the ring, though, pulling Diesel's legs with him and sending them into the post. Bret then grabs an electric cord and ties Diesel's left ankle to the corner. Tied to the corner, Diesel can not escape a double axehandle and the Hitman grabs a chair to try to capitalize even more. As Bret approaches, Diesel is able to fight him away at first, but the Hitman then delivers a series of strikes into Diesel's back and leg. The crowd turns on Bret a little bit there, shocked to see him go to such extremes. Bret manages to him with a backbreaker, Diesel still tethered to the corner. Bret makes his way to the top rope with the chair, but Diesel crotches him. Diesel then sends him to the center of the ring with an awesome press slam and then unties himself. Diesel sells the damage to his knee very well but still has the strength to hit Bret with a sidewalk slam and then an irish whip back into the exposed turnbuckle - a trademark Bret bump. Diesel delivers some of his own trademark offense, but its all labored and broken up by lengthy gaps of time because of his exhaustion. The pacing is just beautiful, the match really feeling like a struggle, not the "you're turn/my turn" bullshit we get too often today. Bret takes over again, but ends up crashing to the arena floor when he attempts his over-the-top rope splash and Diesel dodges it. Bret tries to make his way back into the ring, but Diesel meets him at the apron and shoves him from the apron through a table! That is one of the all-time great table bumps and the crowd's reaction is unreal. Diesel calls for a Jackknife, but Bret is just dead weight. Diesel lets him fall and then attempts it again - only to get rolled up for a 3 count! Diesel shoves Hebner down to the mat and then powerbombs Bret before taking a number of other officials. While most fans boo him, there are still some audible cheers for the post-match attack. An absolute classic match that absolutely deserves consideration as being one of the Top 10 WWE matches of the 90s. I was shocked to see that this match was 25 minutes because it was so good and spirited and suspenseful from beginning to end. (5/5)

I think the thinking was that Funk (and Mike Awesome and Shane Douglas and The Sandman...) were ECW's top stars so WCW thought they were good hires and might help WCW regain some credibility/cool factor at a time. And, at least in the case of Bam Bam Bigelow, it definitely worked at first. A few years ago, I was rewatching some of WCW around this era and the Bigelow/Goldberg segments were excellent.

I actually love Reigns in interviews and how effortlessly he works the fans. His title defenses are also usually the only reason I watch WWE PPVs these days. I don't think he's a lapdog or a baby at all. My comment was really just to jokingly pile on about how poor the WWE's booking has been for years and years and that while we've had multiple threads now discussing how Reigns should've beat Lesnar way back at WM31, we tend to forget that the WWE also used the real-life drama of Roman Reigns beating the most deadly disease in the world to *checks wikipedia* propel him into midcard feuds with Drew McIntyre and Elias. Ironically, AEW has kinda done the same thing with CM Punk after the Darby Allin match, which I think is equally fair to criticize even if, in both cases, Reigns and Punk were the ones who wanted to work off the ring rust in low stakes matches or hand-picked their first matches back.

And just because it always make me smile to bring up other non-Brock-related ways the WWE screwed up Reigns, let's remember that his big return storyline after BEATING CANCER was a midcard feud with Dolph Ziggler's heater.

There's also a "What If..." regarding Lesnar not leaving in 2004. If Lesnar doesn't leave and become an even bigger star in UFC, I don't think he becomes the same level star he is now, a star that ends the Streak, a star that gets to toss Cena around for 20 minutes, a star that can come and go as he wants and still have the most lucrative contract in the company. But already in 2004, Lesnar, the Next Big Thing, the guy the company was supposed to be built around from 2002 on, was out of the Mania main event. And, by the next year, Cena and Batista seemed to be "locked in" as the next two major babyfaces with Randy Orton right there too. Meanwhile, Eddie, Benoit, Angle, Jericho, and Shawn are all shuffled down the card a bit. If Lesnar doesn't leave, I'm not sure he doesn't end up shuffled down the card too as crazy as that seems in 2021. The rest of his run could've been at a Kane or Sheamus level. Would he have made good money and had good matches? Probably. But he's not ending the Streak. So not only is being good at comedy a potential pitfall, but signing any kind of long-term deal would also be a real bad move (at least in terms of maintaining his own star power/credibility).

This is probably a topic on its own, but if Gable Stevenson's ceiling is Kurt Angle Level, that's not a good thing. An Olympic Gold Medalist coming in at the peak of WWE's popularity should've theoretically been an even bigger star. As it turned out, he obviously was a big star within the WWE bubble, but in terms of actual drawing power I'm not sure he ranks in the Top 10 of the past 25 years. It just doesn't seem likely to me that Gable Stevenson is going to somehow move any needle anywhere anytime when the WWE has failed to make a single big star in years and arguably didn't even capitalize on Angle as much as they could've when the WWE machine was operating much better than it does now.

This definitely feels like a key time in AEW as to whether Tony Khan is really going to go "all in" on a booking philosophy that Vince McMahon has never or, at most, very rarely attempted and that is to give 100% trust in the workers and the audience too in regards to what Ws and Ls mean and how that plays into future matches. The current WWE Philosophy would dictate that either Page loses because he's "still not ready" or Page wins, but its by shenanigans involving run-ins that lead to a future match (for example, if Adam Cole botches his interference, planting seeds for Page/Omega, or if Danielson comes out and gives the "assist"). The philosophy goes that if Omega just loses clean, you'll be hurting Omega/Danielson, which is the "real money match" and both guys need to be protected to get there. And, generally speaking, I'm actually kind of a fan of that sort of booking. Its what I grew up with. It undeniably creates drama. When it works well and with the right ingredients, like the end of the 91' Rumble and how it reset the course for WrestleMania VIII or when Austin returned to to help Foley win his first WWE World Championship, it can absolutely work. But AEW is changing a lot of preconceived notions about what is and isn't "the right way" to do things, especially because "the right way" was interpreted as the "only way" and the "only way" was the "WWE way" because they were the only major company around for the past 20 years. I think AEW fans can not only handle Page beating Omega clean and still view Omega/Danielson II as a top-level dream match, but would prefer it to the "overbooking" and shenanigans that the WWE would likely utilize in this same scenario. The question, of course, is whether Tony has the booking finesse to keep a number of guys - Miro and MJF currently, for example, but presumably Omega too - "hot" even after they've suffered major losses. So far, he's been able to do it with the Young Bucks by keeping them in high profile matches and storylines, though, on the other hand, it does seem to have led to the Lucha Bros not necessarily dethroning them the way their win could've/should've. It will be interesting. Which is why AEW is interesting.

Just finished watching, some takeaways I haven't necessarily seen mentioned... - The Usos/Street Profits match was good-not-great. Unfortunately, the positioning of the match immediately after a 6-man tag did it no favors and, though they did win over the live crowd, there were also audible chants for tables early on as the fans had just sat through a non-extreme tag team match featuring even bigger stars. To me, even just switching those two matches on the card would've been smart. Both matches could've stood to lose a few minutes too and the Usos double superkick and double splash at the end looked very sloppy and lazy as they barely made any contact. - The Finn Balor/Roman Reigns match kinda reminded me of another match: Roman Reigns vs. Brock Lesnar at WrestleMania 31. Please let me indulge in some history here for context's sake. Prior to WM31, there was alot of anti-Roman sentiment among "smart" fans and many people were sickened about the foregone conclusion that he would go over clean and that Reigns would then take over as the de facto top babyface for years to come, essentially replacing Cena. Now, in hindsight, none of that happened and Seth Rollins cashed in his briefcase and so on and, internally, Vince and his yes men believed they had averted the disaster of having Reigns get booed by doing a swerve ending and cementing Rollins as the new top heel (who was also a "smart" fan darling, thus pleasing that portion of the audience). But even a day after it happened, those same smart fans (who should've been over the moon that Reigns had failed) were posting about how it was actually the wrong decision. Why? Because the match was damn good and Reigns looked damn good in it. The idea that Reigns should've won isn't some 2021 hindsight misremembering either. Re-watch the match and judge for yourself. The live crowd wanted a clean ending and would've popped for Reigns. The Rollins cash-in gets a big reaction because cash-ins always do, but ultimately, they blew their moment. As we saw over the years to come, Reigns' subsequent and endless feud with Lesnar has never yielded another classic (in fact, their rematch at a WrestleMania a few years later was one of the worst matches of the decade). Here, we had a similarly awesome match between Balor and Reigns. I'd go as far as to say that Reigns' performance here was the best work of this entire run - just the right amount of trash talk, so many great facial expressions, putting a mask on before he hopped the barricade (!), the friggin' SPEAR through the barricade spot. It was an unbelievable performance out of him. And then you have Balor, who looked valiant and heroic and like he might just be able to pull out the victory if he could manage to neutralize the Usos and land a second Coup De Gras. And then they overbook the finish to the point it becomes WrestleCrap because, I'm guessing, they didn't have enough confidence in Balor to maintain his credibility just losing clean (or cleanish). Their attempt to protect Balor ended up making him look worse than actually just losing, which I think he could've survived if given a few weeks off and maybe quietly drafted to RAW. Of course, moving him back to RAW now after losing in that way kinda makes that "quiet" part hard. It also doesn't help that RAW still has the lingering odor of of Bray Wyatt in the air, another guy with super powers that made little sense and only led to creative dead-ends. Besides, who would Balor even feud with on RAW?Even in kayfabe, wouldn't Balor's next target be the ring crew? Their shoddy work totally fucked him. When the WWE gets too cute, it really sucks the life out of a match to me. Balor/Reigns was like a gymnast who does an amazing routine and then instead of sticking the landing, they land face-first on the mat and flop around as the lights inexplicably turn red and music that sounds like the Trans Siberian Orchestra plays.

This came up in the Dynamite thread and I've obviously seen it elsewhere (r/sc), but can someone explain to me how and why Cody became one of the most despised people in wrestling? So much of the criticisms lobbed against him are provably false and some of them are super nitpicky (my favorite current criticism is that he hasn't lost to Aleister Black clean enough yet.) Are his matches and angles the best part of AEW? No...but, like Jericho, the dude helped launch the company so he's going to get his minutes. And I'm not sure one can really argue that he's gotten time at the expense of anyone else. The QT Marshall feud sucked, to be sure, and it certainly reeked of Cody pushing his buddy more than he deserves/deserved, but it was midcard filler and treated as such. It just seems the vitriol against Cody is a bit much considering his biggest crime seems to be having entrances that are too grandiose. Like, yeah, sure, but I also think one could argue that (a) having those entrances helped AEW not look bush league when it first started and he was undeniably one of the bigger "names" and (b) it has played perfectly well into what most people consider to be an impending, inevitable heel turn. As for him as a worker, I'll just say this: he's not a super worker and I don't think he's ever claimed to be or even really tried to work like one. But I don't find him to be offensively bad and am kinda shocked that some do.

I'm not so sure. I hate to turn this into more of a political talk, but part of what is so scary (to me) about Trump is that he radicalized the "common sense" Republicans who initially voted for him as the "Anyone But Her" candidate but then became dyed-in-the-wool acolytes who now view him as not just a great president, but the greatest president ever, a demigod. That's my father-in-law. A steady diet of Fox News and Trump sloganeering turned a principled person who leaned conservative but also had a "live and let live" social view into someone who vehemently believes that all Democrats are either pure evil or just ignorant about the fact that the DNC is a cabal of child-raping sex traffickers and inexplicably fears that Joe Biden is going to personally take his guns, give his home to a drug-dealing immigrant family, and require him to self-identify as a trans woman the next time he goes in for a driver's license. I'm not sure Vince has gone that far, but like the rest of the Republican party, the power of Trump has probably pushed him much farther right than he would have ever been if someone like, say, Jeb Bush or John Kasich, who weren't as eager to spark a full-on cultural civil war for their own gain, had become President in 2016. The Joe Gacy character popped Vince and the only silver lining is that someone - maybe Steph but who knows - probably told him that pushing a character like that would turn away fans and Vince still views money as the number one deciding factor in his promotion. So, once again, his love for capitalism outweighed his love for offensive, borderline sexist/racist/homophobic gimmicks. Some things never change. But back to the wrestling talk...I tried NXT 2.0. Still doesn't do it for me. Bron Breakker is cool, I guess, but there are still some elements on the show that are really off-putting. I want to like Beth Phoenix because she seems like a great person, but I don't love her commentary. The production style is still very much WWE and not different enough for me. The setting is obviously not nearly as hot as tuning in to an AEW show. If I only have 2-3 hours of wrestling to watch each week, NXT is still going to fall behind Dynamite, Rampage, and whatever old PPVs/shows that I'm watching for my blog or on recommendation. I'm not sure the ratings will ever drop to the point that USA pulls it because its probably cheap filler for USA to air and they want to keep their partnership with WWE obviously, but will this new version of NXT ever catch hold of a wider audience? I doubt it.

I find it interest in some way that NXT 2.0 could become more "adult" in the near future - which I'm guessing means more T & A, innuendo, and maybe even a lifting of restrictions on some blood - and that among many fans, the feeling is that AEW has pushed them to make these changes. While I think AEW's success is part of it, I think the bigger part of it is that Vince's own tastes are basically that of a middle school boy and, as a middle school teacher, it would make your head spin how fast a 13 year old boy can go from making poop jokes like they're still in elementary school to getting caught in a school staircase engaging in sex acts. That's basically Vince's brain if you look at the Attitude and Ruthless Aggression Eras up till 2005. Vince is obviously smart enough to realize that it is far more lucrative to do a PG show and I think that's why RAW and SD will never get much edgier aside from the occasional angle here or there (the Lashley/Lana/Rusev angle, for example). With the low stakes of NXT, though, it doesn't surprise me that he may view it as a sandbox to do the stuff that he himself finds entertaining - scantily-clad women, anti-PC characters, sexual innuendos that only a 13 year old would find clever - but that he knows he doesn't actually want to promote as a full part of the WWE brand.

I would easily call this his biggest match since SummerSlam against Cena. I know the WrestleMania title win is, by its very nature, seen as a "bigger" match but, to me, the real star-making moment was when he beat Cena clean. After that, they basically booked everything in such a messy fashion that by the time we got to Bryan not being in the Rumble, then having to beat Triple H in the opener to get into the main event, it just all felt so overwrought and, dare I say, on the night of, predictable.

I don't necessarily think Dreamer is being "scapegoated." I think there's plenty of guilt, blame, etc. being placed in all the right directions - from JR (Head of Talent Relations and on the plane) to Vince (the buck stops there) to Flair and Scott Hall and Dustin Rhodes and Lesnar and on and on... But I would argue that Dreamer's comments are arguably the most news-worthy and that is why they are catching people by surprise - especially wrestling fans who gobble up this sort of stuff via Twitter and reddit and places like here (myself included). With Flair, we, as wrestling fans, have been in a weird place for at least a decade. We are constantly reconciling the TV character of Ric Flair, who we love, with the emotionally-fragile, tragic figure that we also feel some sympathy for, while simultaneously having to come to terms with the idea that his philandering, his ego, his self-destructive behavior is his own doing and that there were real victims to Ric Flair being Ric Flair. And we have the added weight of knowing that one day, sooner than later, we'll be eulogizing him. Listening to his recent podcast appearance on Renee Young's show was not easy or even all that enjoyable. Flair is going to go out as Ric Flair and that's not a great thing aside from the sick adoration that one might have for his undeniable cavalier spirit. I mean, I think we'd all want Ric Flair to have settled down by now, but its not going to happen. Ever. And there's a twisted beauty in the way that he is going to defy that until his last breath. So, in summation, the reason that we're not all exploding about Ric Flair sexually assaulting someone is not just because we've all heard the stories before, but also because, we've already had this very conversation before - after the 30-for-30, after the last hospitalization, after #SpeakingOut - and we'll have it again in the near future. With Lesnar, Hall, Rhodes, and others, the stories are not only old and well-known among "smart" fans, but most didn't appear on the show. They added no new insights nor did they defend themselves. Like any other news/social media, to really gain traction, the "monster" needs to feed on something new. Tommy Dreamer provided that new blood, that new fuel to the fire. His comments may not have even been all that bad compared to what kind of crap Curt Hennig or Brock Lesnar or Dustin Rhodes would have said at the time...but in 2021, none of these people would or could say anything. But Dreamer did. And what he said was gross. He downplayed a sexual assault because of his pro-wrestling blinders and that was much more shocking, or at least newer, than hearing Story #781 about Ric Flair exposing himself or "the boys" roughhousing, or even H-bombing each other.

I couldn't find a catch-all Talk is Jericho thread so I thought I'd just dump my thought here: Mark Henry was on recently and, as I supposed all along, he left the WWE because they didn't see him as the "executive type." I wonder what could possibly make Henry not look like an executive... Henry has enough class not to just come out and call Vince or the corporate culture he's built outright racist, but I'm guessing that thought has crossed his mind. Henry is also smart enough to know that making such an accusation would be a huge heat-seeking move and would get him blackballed from the company entirely but, again, based on what everyone has said about Henry, the mentorships and scouting he has been a part of, his work as a brand ambassador, his experience...it does raise eyebrows as to why a guy who clearly wanted to be a producer/agent/talent relations employee, checked pretty much every box for it, and was a staunch WWE/Vince supporter, was told to get lost as soon as he dared ask if maybe - just maybe - he could contribute with his knowledge and not just with his brawn. (And before we get into whether or not Mark Henry is "smart enough" to be an executive, when one of your company's vice presidents is racist ass Michael P.S Hayes, you can't tell me that Mark Henry, who comes across as plenty intelligent and knowledgeable in interviews, etc. wouldn't cut it.) Vince can talk all he wants about MLK being his hero, but I'd be curious to know how many people of color he's actually elevated into executive positions over the years. I'm not incredibly knowledgeable about everyone at the top of every department, but I'm willing to wager that the number is close to 0.

In another one of those fun ironies, the WWE has also thrown huge money and cushy contracts with limited dates and main event booking to a whole bunch of guys well into their 40s over the past few years that the best time to leave the company would probably be in your mid-to-late 30s. Based on recent history, at 40 years old, Daniel Bryan can have a great 3-4 year run in AEW and *still* come back, for even more money and even more favorable booking, when he's 45. Goldberg got booked stronger in the WWE after his 48th birthday than he did in his 30s. Edge is getting treated like a bigger star now than he was before his retirement. Obviously it goes without saying how much The Undertaker's been protected over his whole career, but I'm guessing Kane's one-night-return paydays over the years have been sizable. Danielson hasn't burnt any bridge. In fact, he's arguably done the opposite, paving the bridge with gold for his eventual return and Hall of Fame induction.