DMJ

No way Bray Wyatt leaves with the title. They could've done Braun a huge favor by having him take the title off him last month and, though I would've opposed it (along with most of the fan base), could've given an even bigger rub to Baron Corbin by having him screw Rollins out of the title in that tag match. The second victory over Brock sealed it, though. The company is "all in" on Seth Rollins, which makes total sense - he's the most Triple Hish wrestler on the roster. I could elaborate here, but I'm trying not to be so longwinded. Like Triple H, his reign of mediocrity will last a long, long time and diminishing ratings and house show attendance won't change a thing.

Like Vince, I'd say HHH has gotten into the very nasty habit of letting guys die on the vine for whatever reason - whether its "longterm booking marred by unforseen injuries" or "making a young talent prove they can get over and stay over after a loss." One could argue that Gargano should've won the title back when he faced Andrade and, with that timeline, that Velveteen Dream should either be NXT Champion today or been NXT Champion by now. I guess because its now a weekly brand and not a developmental league (and, presumably, they've been making that shift for 9+ months), they no longer want to simply hotshot guys to the NXT Championship after a couple months - the way they did Owens and Nakamura - but it sure seems like things were fresher and more exciting when that was the case.

- I don't get people that think Brock Lesnar being at the top of the card is bad in 2019. If there were even one other guy on the main roster that had his aura and cred, I'd be fine with him not being the top guy...but because they ruined Braun, Seth sucks, Cena's retired, and Reigns, Bryan and AJ have all already been fed to Lesnar, well, Brock Lesnar remains the company's biggest top-of-the-card act. His destruction of Rey and Dominic on tonight's show felt like a big angle and got great heat and Lesnar's 6 minutes of screen time felt more "must see" than anything Rollins has done since the last time he was in the ring with Lesnar. - I dug the Lashley/Balor sprint at Mania this year and I also liked the Lashley/Strowman LMS match they had some months back, so I'm not anti-Lashley as much as I'm anti-repetitive "Lana is a Cheater" angles. They've done this gimmick at least once before with Ziggler and it flopped then too. Lana and Rusev as a package deal worked as heels. I'm not sure the act would get as over when both were babyfaces, but hey, they didn't run with "Rusev Day" anyway so its not even clear Vince himself knows if he wants Rusev to be a menacing foreign heel or a somewhat comedic fan favorite. As someone else said, though, if Lashley's string of big matches in 2019 is any indication (save for the forgettable Reigns match), I actually agree with the poster who said Lashley/Rusev is going to steal a show (not that its too hard to do in this landscape of samey matches).

On my blog, I had the HIAC match as a 4-out-of-5, which I don't think is too exaggerated a score (I don't do quarter stars - only halves - and the scale only goes to 5). A 4 is basically a "must watch"/"should watch," a match that will likely end up on my Top 10 list of WWE Matches of a given year. I'd also add that its really not too hyperbolic to praise Sasha in 2015 as one of the best in the world, male or female. The match against Bayley at Takeover: Brooklyn legitimately had people tearing up (myself included). You can say, "Well, it was because of the build" or "It was because of the atmosphere" or whatever, but how many friggin' matches have actually brought tears to people's eyes? Flair/Vader for some? Shawn/Flair? Maybe Daniel Bryan at WM30*? Its a rarefied air that Sasha and Bayley wrestled in that night. And if it was so easy to elicit this genuine emotion from the audience, so reproducable, so manufacturable, the WWE would deliver that sort of match every week, every month, or at least every year. They would have people getting misty-eyed for Seth Rollins overcoming Brock Lesnar. There wouldn't have been a dry eye in the house for Roman Reigns comeback match. Daniel Bryan whupping The Miz's ass a couple SummerSlams ago would've been a huge cathartic moment. But none of those things happened because the elements have to be damn near perfect to elicit that response. That includes the build, the production, the atmosphere - but it also takes two strong performers that the fans are fully invested in. Kofi Kingston's ascent this year is comparable (and I'd put his Elimination Chamber and Mania match against Bryan in that upper echelon of Best Of The Year matches/moments), but before him, it had definitely been awhile since the audience was truly emotionally invested in a character. That's not to say that making the audience cry is the ultimate goal of a pro-wrestling match. There are obviously lots of matches that didn't make me cry that I'd still call all-timers. But, yeah, when a match hits that note, it can't be denied and its participants absolutely deserve to be considered the best in the world at that moment. (And, yes, that means Bayley was probably a top 5 babyface in that year too.) * I mention Bryan at WM30 because I know some people really love his WM30 matches. Personally, I liked the opener against Triple H but found the main event overwrought and had no emotional response to it, that having Bryan carried out on a stretcher was cloying and unoriginal and made his victory even more inevitable/predictable than it already was. Again, all the elements have to be right to make me actually tear up and feel fully invested in a match's outcome and those misteps diminished it for me.

I guess he appeared on a couple Being the Elite episodes semi-recently? That definitely couldn't have hurt him in contract negotiations. Always thought it was a matter of time before he was back in the WWE. I haven't kept up with his work at all but vaguely remember some praise for a PPV main event he was involved maybe a year or two ago? Always seemed like a guy that could've been a bigger star in the WWE to me with his look and ability. Like Kofi Kingston, he "came up" at a weird time in the late 00s/early 10s when Cena, DX, Taker, Orton, Kane, and others were main eventing every PPV and no one was breaking through. Nowadays, those guys are just main eventing 4-5 PPVs every year, so, y'know, progress. All kidding aside, along with Kofi and Ziggler, JoMo (so excited for that to come back as a thing /s) was in that weird position of being a "WWE Guy" that hit a ceiling but ultimatley got surpassed by Punk and Daniel Bryan and The Shield dudes. Kofi stuck around, but had to wait years and years to get a legit main event opportunity. Ziggler's career has been ups-and-downs. Of that entire class of guys, The Miz was the most successful with guys like Carlito, Kennedy, and Elijah Burke, if one were to include them, probably being at the bottom.

I also haven't kept up with the weekly shows, but was thinking along a similar train of thought. There's was/is a way to book it that doesn't need to have Bryan getting beatdown by his supposed "ex-friends," but if they already put on Rowan vs. Bryan on TV and they had a legit match, to me, that's stupid and a heel turn doesn't make sense. Even if the idea is that he "took a beating" to trick Roman, it instantly buries Rowan (and Harper if he was involved) in my eyes. We're supposed to think that these two monsters, if they get their hands on you, can end your career, would maim the average joe, that "taking a beating" from one would be disastrous and that even the toughest good guy gladiators like Roman Reigns and Seth Rollins are putting their bodies at extreme risk by stepping in the ring with these 7-foot, 300 pound wrecking machines. I didn't see the match so I'm not sure if they played it ambiguous or if it was a back-and-forth "realistic" match or whatever, but two guys "staging a fight" in a business built on trying to get literal staged fights to seem real is just so, so dumb to me. Plus, as I said earlier, there were a dozen cool ways to bring Bryan back in an ambiguous way that could've still led to a Bludgeon Brothers vs. Bryan & Roman match where it was still unclear whose side Bryan was on.

Disagree. ECW on SyFy, 12 years ago, when RAW and SD were routinely getting higher ratings than they are today (and, I'd argue, the business was "hotter"), never really maxed out too far beyond 1.5-1.6 million viewers - and that was with an objectively strong brand (ECW) and "name" talent like RVD, Sabu, Kurt Angle, as well as emerging young talent like CM Punk on the show plus the odd "guest star" like Batista. By the end of ECW's run, in 09', it was getting the same the 1.1 rating that NXT got last night. I haven't checked the numbers, but I believe this means that NXT actually brought in a higher percentage of viewers from RAW and SD than ECW was doing in 09' and with no "name" talent and a much weaker brand than "ECW." As Burgundy LaRue said, the real question is, in 6 months, if this 1.1 is going to be the high watermark or if they can build on it (or at least sustain it). There was never a chance that the debut of NXT was going to get more viewers than RAW or SD, so the fact that they actually scored a rating that's close to half (and not a third or a quarter, which is what many were expecting), is a definite success. Plus, from what I read, NXT was a loss leader on the Network and is now a $30 million enterprise. I do think that oddly bodes well for AEW too. Its now proof-of-concept that there are at least million wrestling fans who will watch wrestling on Wednesday, even after a Sunday PPV, Monday RAW, and Tuesday SmackDown. AEW can certainly fight for 500k of those fans and, if they keep their costs and overhead low, and rake it in at live shows with some big gates (which I don't think TNA/Impact ever did - even for their biggest events), I think the business could be sustainable - though, I'm no economist and know close to nothing about what AEW's costs are vs. their profits.

Watched the Sasha banks doc on the Network. Nothing really insightful here. It was like the anti-Moxley interview on TIJ. Sasha gave no reason for being burnt out or being depressed or unhappy. It was 40 minutes of her just saying how much she loved wrestling and missed it when she took 6 months off to "find herself." I actually like Sasha less having watched the doc. Not because she didn't come off as honest, but because I didn't find her story to be all that interesting or even sympathetic. I mean, based on this doc, she really just wanted a vacation after 7 years - which is somewhat sympathetic, sure, but also, kinda like, duh. Not exactly the makings of a great documentary. Also, I'm not exactly sure why more wrestlers, especially ones that have established themselves to the level Banks has, still feel like they're "replaceable" or doing their careers damage by demanding a break from the road when their contracts are up or, in Banks' case, just walking out. Sasha Banks went home for 6 months and is now back in a position that someone like Naomi or Dana Brooke have been fighting to be put in for even longer (if I'm not mistaken). Abandoning the company is actually maybe the best thing you can do for your career. I think Sasha is very talented and one of my favorite performers, but the documentary is a definite "skip" if you were at all curious about her reasons for leaving. Its almost Stepford Wives-ish in how "happy" she comes off despite the fact that, y'know, 6 months ago she walked out of the company for, according to this doc, no tangible reason.

Its been a tough two years for Cass and I do hope that he reassesses and seeks outside help if needed. In terms of reassessing his priorities, I'd hope he think about whether the business of pro-wrestling is one that is suitable for a healthy, happy lifestyle. Obviously when you devote your life to a job, you don't want to abandon it and find a new career, but ultimately, sometimes that's what you need to do to be happy and healthy. I say this as someone who went into tremendous debt changing careers because I wasn't happy and knew that I would only grow more depressed and frustrated and stressed and withdrawn if I continued in the field I was in. I didn't want that to be my existence for myself or my wife (fiancee at the time), so, yeah, it was tough to take on that financial burden - but 12 years later, I don't regret it. BIg Cass is 7'0 feet tall. When in good health, he has a great look. He may not be headlining arena shows, but he could probably land on his feet playing Biker #3 or whatever in any number of Hollywood productions, film or TV, big or small.

Yes, of course. But I think the reason they kinda need to push other people is because Vince has refused to play his hot hands and his booking has purposefully halted the momentum of otherwise strong performers. I know he's back in the main event now, but they iced Braun Strowman. They've iced Rusev a couple times now. There have been some questionable decisions around Finn Balor and Lashley. I'm not as big a fan as others, but McIntyre has had to wear two albatrosses since his call-up (Ziggler and Shane). There was a time not too long ago when The Miz was a very, very viable option to be the top heel on RAW - a role he really hasn't played since that one WrestleMania run. I've written elsewhere at some length how underutilized Big E is (and, specifically, that a Big E/Lesnar face-off at a Royal Rumble, for example, would've popped the megaverse). So, yeah, they need to push other people...but only because so much of the talent they have has been cooled or underutilized. Right now, in 2019, a Strowman/Rusev match doesn't sound like a PPV main event any more than a Balor/McIntyre match or a (heel) Miz vs. Big E match. But there is an alternate universe where a number of these guys were given better booking and these matches would pop off the screen. I don't hate Baron Corbin. Looking back at my own reviews, I've said positive things about his work in the past. But, yeah, if you look at the roster for the past 3-4 years and imagine a scenario where everybody was healthy for that whole time (including guys like Rey and Jeff Hardy who could've been sprinkled into a main event here or there, not to mention Brock and Cena), Baron Corbin is not cracking my list of 20 guys that deserve to be main eventing a PPV.

I know it probably won't get covered here because its not so much a "classic arena," but I've longed wanted to write a detailed argument for Cleveland being a top 10 WWF/WWE city. I think 3 out of 4 of the early Survivor Series shows were at Richfield Coliseum (which was where the Cavs played and was situated roughly halfway between Cleveland and Akron), but when Gund Arena was built in the 90s (it is now Quicken Loans Are- wait, it just changed, its now Rocket Mortgage Fieldhouse), Cleveland remained a fairly notable WWE town. I'd argue it has often served as a "litmus test" city for better (the Terri Invitational Final) or worse (the birthplace of Brawl for All). I'm a Clevelander so I'm definitely bias, but one day, I will write it all out and hopefully convince people that, at least in the WWE/WWF history, we're an underrated setting of historic events.

I don't watch the regular TV but based on what I read I know Corbin has been impressing people as of late with some good showings against a number of opponents - Ricochet, Gable - and a few years ago, I think he had a match against Kalisto that was good too. That being said, I do find some of the praise on the previous page to be a little funny and reminiscent of the praise that Jinder got a couple years ago. I know its kinda slim pickings in the WWE these days, but it irks me to see people praising abject mediocrity. I'm tired of all the guys who "overwork" - like Rollins - as much as the next guy, but Corbin and Jinder pale in comparison to comparable "bigs" like Rusev and Luke Harper and its not even an argument really. Obviously Sheamus too but, probably in a couple years time (if not already), Dijakovic in NXT. Can Corbin be really good one day? Maybe. But the anti-backlash against him is premature. He's had some good outings recently, but come on, people, he and Rollins tanked as a main event program for a reason and its not just Rollins' fault. They were both equally overexposed and have been since last fall.

It doesn't help the WWE that the two peaks of national/mainstream prominence were under the initials WWF. What does help is that the younger fans

https://screen-queens.com/2019/08/22/fighting-with-my-family-finally-a-feminist-paean-to-pro-wrestling/?fbclid=IwAR1m0fAnCmPu1ThnKgL2PeYpapCGG0TUEE5pO8C8jmhxX3Rsd9908younlM Wasn't sure where else to plug this, but my good friend Abbie Weil wrote an excellent review of Fighting with My Family that posits that the movie is the first ever feminist wrestling movie. I strongly recommend giving it a read. I read it before watching the movie, but have since seen the film since it was released on DVD, and it doesn't contain too, too many spoilers - plus, considering its about Paige, its not like anything in the film is going to be a huge shocker. (Plus, the film isn't 100% factual anyway, which shouldn't be surprising/bother anyone because what bio-film ever really is). Anyway, just wanted to plug it for her.

Add me to the team that says that Kevin "doing this for his family" is shitty no matter how you slice it. "Family Man" is not a good gimmick. I mean, aside from Ricky Steamboat, are there that many guys that have gotten this sort of thing over? And even then, we're talking about Ricky Steamboat in the 80s. Its 2019 and Kevin Owens is not Ricky Steamboat. What worked with Stone Cold was that there was always the veneer (if I'm using the term correctly) of his chief rival Vince McMahon trying to fire him with one hand, but also bring him under his control in the other. Whether or not it was explicitly said, Steve Austin was this guy making Vince McMahon a ton of money - and Vince only became hellbent on destroying him when each attempt he made to turn him "corporate" or force him into submission was thwarted. It was a delicate (well, maybe that's too strong a word) balance they struck. Austin wouldn't kowtow to Vince so Vince forces him into impossible title match scenarios where he will embarrass him and show him that he can't beat the odds. Then Austin would beat the odds. So Vince was forced to stack the odds higher. Vince threatened firing him damn near every week - but secretly we (the audience) knew that Austin would be back the next week, raising hell, because Austin would play Vince's ego like a fiddle. "Oh, you've fired me? Well, I'm gonna still gonna kick your ass!" To which Vince's response is basically, "Oh yeah?!? Well, you're not fired after all - you're reinstated...but now you have to face the Brothers of Destruction in a handicap match!" I'm as sick of Authority angles as anyone else here but there are still right notes and wrong notes to hit. Kowtowing to the Authority, regardless of reason, is a wrong note.

Its anecdotal, but I liken it to the "major indy" here in Cleveland - AIW (Absolute Intense Wrestling). AIW runs well-attended shows that bring in people I'd consider "non-wrestling fans" - basically hipsters and heshers who hear about the experience and go see it one time, have a blast with the people-watching and beer-drinking and chanting, and end up going to at least one show a year. These people don't follow WWE or really even AIW - they're people who get caught up in the entirety of the experience. There's also another category - the small percentage of AIW "converts" (these would usually be WWE fans who go to AIW shows) who actually, over time, become mega indie fans that practically stop following WWE entirely. I have two buddies who started a wrestling zine (Wrestle Void) that I'd put into this category. While they still keep abreast of WWE stuff, they're much bigger fans of the indie scene and they're "all in" on AEW. (In fact, they're hosting a party for All Out at a local restaurant/bar, which is something they'd never do for a WWE PPV, even Mania) In summation, even in a microcosm like Cleveland where the WWE is king, there is a healthy alternative promotion here that runs successful shows and has been doing it with mostly homegrown talent for years. On a national level, AEW can absolutely exist as an alternative in the same way. And while there will always be an overlap - just as there was with WCW and WWE - AEW also has the possibility of bringing in some eyes (the hipsters and heshers) that have zero interest in the WWE and never will.

I'm predicting McIntyre wins. I think the WWE thinks that winning a KOTR tournament can revitalize a dead character or fast-track someone into the main event when they need someone there - hence the wins for William Regal and Wade Barrett. Plus, the British thing seems to be a trend too. That being said, like with Regal and Barrett, I don't think it will work. You can't reheat someone overnight - especially not in this way in 2019. McIntyre might work as a challenger for Kofi - but Rollins/McIntyre is a feud we've already seen and is really no better than Rollins/Corbin. Rollins needs some genuinely fresh opponents - Andrade, Lashley, even Samoa Joe or Daniel Bryan - to make things interesting. Recycling the same stuff we already saw in late 2018/early 2019 is not going to help business.

Yea, I definitely wouldn't put Austin in this category. Sure, he seemed like he'd just be a midcard "mechanic" in WCW and was not ever going to be given a real chance but its not like nobody saw potential in the early 90s or ever thought he sucked. Even pre-internet, he was often described as a "blue chipper" or a promising young talent with a "bad attitude" in the Apter mags. I know among my friends and I, who were like 11-12, we thought he was a good wrestler - but because he was a heel, we wanted to see him lose to Steamboat, Dustin Rhodes, etc. I wouldn't call that a rehab. Mark Henry is a weird one. I'm not sure I'd call it a "rehab" because, to me, his trajectory doesn't fit. He didn't have a career to rehab. He sucked for the first 8-9 years. You can enjoy the comedy (I didn't), but his list of good matches from that time is non-existent. Then, around 05'-06', things started to turn a little bit - but he still mostly sucked. Then, it just clicked. To me, that's not rehab as much as things just "clicking" after a decade. Rehab is more like a guy who had a promising start, maybe a good run, then, for whatever reason (drugs? personal issues? bad marriage? etc.), lost his way and became terrible, a shell of their former self...and then got good again. With Moxley, "rehab" works for me because he fits that narrative. His first few years in the WWE were good. But more than anything else, that last run he had was just awful - a complete character nosedive. By that point, he'd been exposed/labeled as a worker who just wanted to "get his shit in" (the rebound lariat, the tornado DDT), make goofy faces, and then cut awful promos. That feud with Rollins was dogshit. His stock had really lowered to the point that even his biggest supporters had to be biting their nails a bit when he left. I mean, now, without the shackles, he had to actually prove he was as good as they wanted/believed him to be and that it was the WWE system that had ruined him. I mean, isn't that essentially what happened with Ken Anderson? Elijah Burke? Dustin Rhodes, to me, is a clear case of rehab. One of my favorites in the early 90s, the original Goldust was run was great, and then...things got weird and he was terrible for awhile (with a good performane here or there, but mostly, yeah, he looked like he couldn't care less). I didn't read his book but I'm sure there were specific reasons for the dramatic drop-off. And then, boom, in like 2006, the guy was just completely rejuvenated. The ECW run and matches against Sheamus were terrific. He made me care about Ted DiBiase Jr. for a minute (I loved how that feud teased that he was obsessed with Maryse [who would've been his "new Marlena"] but ended up being about his obsession with the Million Dollar Belt !!!). Teaming with Cody and his dad against The Authority. I think there was a tag team with R-Truth there for a minute that was good. If you told me Dustin Rhodes never worked again after the SeVen bullshit, I would've been like, "Yup, dude really let himself go, so tragic." But 10+ years after his rehab, he's still kicking ass too.

This. The WWE can push "Sports Entertainer" or "Performance Fighter" or whatever else they come up with all they want - but the men and women who appear and perform and sports entertain are professional wrestlers or just wrestlers. This isn't "secretaries" becoming "administrative assistants" or how now, men and women, can both be called "actors" (with the term "actresses" slowly being phased out). In those cases, and in many others, there are political or status-driven reasons that people felt these terms undermined their skills or carried with them a negative/disrespectful connotation. Maybe the clearest example is how "stewardesses" became "flight attendants." But no pro-wrestler is ashamed to be called a pro-wrestler. No pro-wrestling fan prefers to say they watch "sports entertainment." The "WWE speak" is driven completely by one man and his bizarre unwillingness to admit that he's in the professional wrestling business. I don't think anyone at FOX or USA give one shit what they call themselves. They know what shows they bought and who "performance fights" on them.

The first Gargano/Cole match was a 2-out-of-3 falls match that went 38 minutes and featured lots of finishers (including Fish & O'Reilly's) and lots of finisher kickouts. They basically did it all in this match. It was dizzying and jam-packed with crazy offense, much of which was arguably undersold. The second Gargano/Cole match was a 30-minute Ironman match that started with both guys suffering arm damage - and then proceeded to feature just about every move under the sun: Ushigoroshis, backstabbers, bicycle kicks, discuss clotheslines, topes, spears and, oh yes, there were still plenty of superkicks. Again, much of this was arguably undersold to get to the next breathtaking sequence. The finishing stretch was terrific - but, again, it was dizzying and jam-packed with crazy offense. This weekend, they wrestled in (essentially) a Three Stages of Hell match for 46 minutes. If you're counting at home, that's 114 minutes of action between two guys over the course of the past 3 Takeovers and all the matches, except for the last two falls (because one was no DQ and involved brawling in the crowd and the other was in the cage) looked and felt very much the same. Were the moves well-executed? Sure. Were there some slick counters and nasty-looking bumps? No doubt. But if you saw the first match, you saw the second, and you saw most of the third. You can only go through the alphabet of crazy moves so many times before it stops being impressive. In other words: Cole/Gargano 1 was indulgent. Cole/Gargano 2 was excessive. Cole/Gargano 3 was whatever the most extreme synonym of those words is.

I'd have to look back, but I thought this was one of the best WWE PPVs of the year. - DId this thing only go 3.5 hours? I don't watch the pre-shows and don't consider them part of the real show. 3.5 hours felt like the right amount of time. One more match added onto the main show would've hurt the overall presentation. I was expecting a Reigns/Bryan segment, but the show didn't suffer without it. In fact, one could argue that it benefitted from the slimmer runtime (especially compared to the slog that WrestleMania has become). - There were at least two matches I would consider for my annual Top 10 list of WWE Matches of the Year. I thought AJ/Ricochet was their best offering yet and could easily sneak on my list around 8-9. It was everything that Cole/Gargano wasn't - it didn't overstay its welcome, Ricochet's selling was awesome, AJ Styles wrestled as a heel instead of trying to wow the audience. Speaking of Ricochet's selling, I'd argue that him incorporating the damage to his knee into his offense made perfect sense and was terrific - I mean, what else is he gonna do? He's not a submission specialist. He's not going to mat wrestle. Instead, he does insane shit like one-legged springboards because he's that agile. I want to cheer for this guy! Even with a bum knee, he's still flying, and I never felt like he was taking me out of the match. Once he rallied, he got the same recovery powers afforded to every babyface since the dawn of time and that's okay too. Its guys like Gargano, Cole, and Rollins that bother me because their ignoring of damage is so obvious and blatant. If you can't see the difference in what Ricochet did in this match and what the aforementioned often do, then I don't know what to tell you. Trish/Charlotte was probably the best or 2nd best Trish match ever (I remember fawning over the WM23 match against Mickie James) and much of that has to do with Charlotte and the crowd. Since Becky's reign has been a bust, I think its fair to say that this was the best women's match we've seen since Mania (at least in terms of Network specials/PPVs, which is all I really watch). - The crowd was dead at times and I disliked the finish, but Kofi/Orton, before the final minute, had me hooked. So, so, so much better than Kofi/Ziggler or Kofi/Owens. - Whoever said Owens/Shane was the best possible version of that match nailed it. I was not excited about that match at all, but they kept me entertained. - Goldberg/Ziggler was also funner than expected. Ditto for Wyatt/Balor. To be honest, I didn't even like Wyatt's new entrance all that match - what did it for me was the exit. That was cool and different. - The main event was the best Rollins match I've seen in months, maybe longer. I loved the opening stretch with Rollins back-flipping his way out of the german suplexes and then Lesnar wisely just switching to non-release versions. As a Lesnar fan and a pretty vocal Rollins non-fan, I was hoping for a different finish, but oh well, the WWE made the "right decision" in the sense that someone needed to topple Lesnar and, because they didn't pull the trigger with Roman or Braun, they were basically out of options in 2019. Also, like at WrestleMania 31, it did seem like the crowd - which was 50/50 at the start - warmed up considerably to Rollins as the match went on (the same way that, at 31, even Reigns detractors probably would've been okay with him getting the W because it felt earned).

Yeah, I don’t think Gargano has been “turned on” - but I think he’s had bad luck. Obviously the Ciampa injuries meant that, because he was tethered to the guy, his own arc was going to effected. Then he has a great match against Andrade but because they still need him to tread water and get to a predetermined “moment” (Ciampa vs. Gargano for the title), they were forced to do convoluted shit - like turning him heel. Simultaneously, he got positioned to *always* put on 20+ minute matches on every Takeover, with his main event ones going even longer. Even for a guy as talented as him, that’s a recipe for overexposure. Diversity in match types would’ve went a long way in keeping him fresher. At least for me, the 100% certainty that his match tonight goes an hour is not intriguing, it’s a challenge to the viewer.

I know this is way off track now, but I'd be curious if someone were to do a real, thorough, legit survey if The Miz was more well known than Roman Reigns. Or if they'd be equal. I lean towards thinking The Miz is more famous/well known. The survey could be something where you show someone a picture of each and ask them to name them. Part of me thinks that anyone who could name Roman Reigns would be very, very likely (maybe even 99%) be able to name The Miz. It makes sense too because Roman Reigns is most famous for being a WWE Superstar. If you know Roman Reigns as a WWE Superstar, you probably know a whole bunch of WWE Superstars and The Miz has been around for a long time in many high-profile positions. But is the inverse true? You might laugh at The Marine or 12 Rounds or even wonder how people who don't watch WWE could possibly watch Miz and Mrs., but there are certainly people who, even if they don't watch these things, are at least exposed to them peripherally. And that would mean, even if they only know his name and his (often mugging) face, The Miz is more famous than Roman Reigns. To make another comparison, around 2007-08, I technically became aware of who Madea was without trying. It was just a character I'd see randomly on the cover of a DVD at the checkout counter or on a Redbox screen or in a commercial. At this point, Perry was not remotely in the mainstream and I'm not even sure the Madea films were theatrically released until a bit later (maybe 2009?. I wasn't a fan, I wasn't someone who regularly consumed "urban" media, I didn't have any interest in Tyler Perry or Madea, but over time, I (and millions of other uninterested people in America) became aware of it just because it had been on the periphery of the mainstream for so long. The Miz, from The Real World to Real World/Road Rules Challenge to Tough Enough to WWE TV to schlocky straight-to-DVD movies and back to another reality show has been on the periphery of the mainstream for what? 20 years now? So, yeah, I'm wagering that The Miz is more famous than Reigns too.

I disagree. If anything, them keeping Roman on TV every week, headlining PPVs, and doing WWE-centric media appearances makes it clear to me that they don't even want him to "surpass Cena" and become a more mainstream star. When a WWE guy becomes a mainstream star, in Vince's eyes, it means that they are going to leave the company or demand a limited schedule. If you check out the wikipedia page about WWE Studios, you might be as surprised as I was to learn that they're still putting out non-Marine movies, that one of them featured Seth Rollins, and that Roman Reigns did not appear in any of the live-action ones (I'm guessing he did do voiceover for the Jetsons/Scooby Doo/Flinstone crossover movies). The company clearly sees him as more valuable in-ring, touring, than on a movie set. I also don't think that the people at the top are so naive as to think anyone, especially Roman Reigns, in 2019, is going to touch Cena's level of popularity when you think about historical context. Cena debuted at a time when RAW and SD were consistently drawing ratings that the WWE would dream of getting today, with ratings still in the 3s and 4s through the first decade of the 2000s. As the company expanded into more global markets, Cena was the company face (and a much more kid-friendly one than Reigns ever was or will be).

I totally agree that Rollins as "default top babyface" after Reigns had to take medical leave was an unfortunate thing - but, again, the other main issue is that, going as far back as 2015, it was clear The Shield were going to be the top 3 pushed guys and a number of really hot acts - from Braun to Finn Balor to even The Miz's great heel work in 2017 (?) - were kind of unappreciated. I'd also posit that Samoa Joe showed some life in that time, though, again, his booking has been all over the place (the feud with Lesnar, for example, was very well-received). There was also Rusev Day. There was also John Cena essentially stuck in WWE Purgatory for the past two Manias and, in 2018 at least, he was actually around and on TV for all of the Mania build. This one is a stretch but I'd also throw out Big E's name. I think if you had orchested a situation where you had Brock Lesnar staring face-to-face with Big E, although the height difference would be noticeable, a live crowd would lose their shit at those two dudes - and, though its diminished now - New Day was still plenty over in 2017/2018. Now, I don't think Samoa Joe or Rusev or Braun or heel Miz could be more successful than Rollins in the role that Rollins is playing as the fighting babyface World Champion who is main eventing the show every week for months at a time. Maybe Finn or E could pull it off. But any of the other guys listed could've worked in a slightly different - daresay more traditional - World Champion role for a couple of months. I'm not a huge fan of Kofi Kingston's post-Mania run, but at the very least, him being World Champion still feels fresh and different. That's something you can't say for Rollins (or Reigns) in 2019. At least Lesnar, who I really hope wins on Sunday, still has somewhat of an aura and mystique in my eyes.