DMJ

For sure. It makes me think back to a show like WrestleMania XIV where you had this incredibly popular star on top (Austin), a big attraction with Tyson, and a co-main with Taker/Kane, but not really that much else on the card. Imagine that show going an extra 3 hours with an extra hour-long pre-show. Would that crowd have cared at all about Austin's coronation? Obviously, Austin in 98' was a much hotter act than Becky, Ronda, or Kofi or whoever...but that's what makes it even more ridiculous and, in a way, detrimental to the star power of the show's headliners. If there is some question as to whether, in 98', with Steve friggin' Austin winning his first World Title in a main event featuring "Iron" Mike Tyson, the audience might've been burnt out then there is NO WAY POSSIBLE that the audience is going to give a shit about Becky Lynch. I'd love to see WrestleMania crowds start treating these shows like big fights in Vegas, where the place is relatively empty until the last hour or so. Maybe it would inspire them to cut the shows back to 4 hours (which is probably still at least 30 minutes too long, but whatever).

While I was definitely more interested in Joe/Cena, I'll gladly take Cena over Corbin. I'm not sure I believe what a poster said on the last page about Corbin being "over (as a face)" on the house show circuit. Like, I'm going to need video evidence of him getting big reactions from multiple shows to believe that. I haven't read anything about him being a merch mover and, while I put much of the blame on the RAW ratings drop last fall on the shoulders of the main eventers, Baron Corbin was in multiple segments every week so he clearly wasn't helping there either. I was higher on Corbin than many in '16 and '17 and I'll continue to say that he has potential. But, like The Miz or Mark Henry during the first 4-5 years of their career, he's a guy that hasn't put the pieces together yet and it goes beyond just being dressed like the floor manager at a J. Alexander's Steakhouse. Corbin has some decent offense, he's naturally unlikeable, he's got size. I see what Vince sees in him. Unfortunately, his matches are generally boring, his promos feel inorganic and overly scripted and like he's "playing heel" instead of being a heel. For a Golden Gloves boxer, his punches don't look good at all in the wrestling context and he telegraphs a lot. His selling isn't great. Again, I'm not saying he's a lost cause, but he certainly shouldn't have been relied on to carry RAW the way he was in the fall and hasn't gotten any better since. In fact, I think he's gotten worse as even his gimmick ("The Lone Wolf") has vanished to be replaced with...nothing. Now, he's basically a henchman without a boss, a "bad guy that wants to team with other bad guys to do bad things because he's bad." But he's not the leader of that outfit and he's the least successful guy in the outfit too.

While I agree with the above sentiment, I think even the biggest pessimist about Braun's ability to be a top guy would have to admit that when they say "There's only so much you can do with a giant who can't work long singles matches," what the WWE has done with him has been far short of ideal. I mean, I'd argue that The Giant in 94'/95' - hell, I'll say through his whole WCW run - was a more limited worker than Braun and was utilized far better. Sure, there was some utter crap in those years (Halloween Havoc 95', obvi), but I also remember some Nitro and PPV matches against Hogan, Sting, Luger, Flair, and later, against the nWo, that - while not "mat classics," got big reactions from the live crowds and felt like big matches. I know, I know - the late 90s is a much different time than 2019 and the fans expect more. But we've seen Braun have some good matches against Reigns, Sami Zayn, and even Big Show. I don't think its hard to imagine him having good matches against AJ, Bryan, Rey, Andrade, Ricochet, Mustafa Ali, Jeff Hardy....The WWE roster is pretty deep with talent. The best they could do for the past 4 months was Braun vs. Corbin?

I completely agree. I was just pointing out that more and more people are making the very natural shift from "Can you believe the WWE is doing this?" towards "Can you believe Ronda is doing this?" And the WWE is banking on that shift. She definitely has input on her direction - but I don't think she walked into a meeting 6 weeks ago and said, "I'm going to start throwing the words 'fake' and 'real'' around and nobody can tell me not to." This is all orchestrated. This is all at the WWE's behest. They're working with her to develop these promos/vignettes and I'm arguing that the WWE's creative team is more responsible. Of all the things Ronda has been called, she's never been called a "creative." She's never been described as a genius self-promoter. She's not Connor McGregor. She's not Floyd Mayweather. I won't go as far as to call her a puppet because she's a sentient human being, but like Brock Lesnar, I don't think she's pitching storyline concepts as much as she's running with the bullet points and ideas that the WWE's producers are pushing her to do. On a separate note - I'm not knowledgeable of NJPW, but I don't "get" the Good Brothers. They were super, super funny on Austin's podcast, but I didn't see them do anything great in the WWE context. That's probably unfair, but I don't know, Mark McKinney was brilliant in Kids in the Hall, but outside of that context, he didn't burst from the screen the same way on SNL. Now, he's killing it on Superstore. Context matters even when the talent level is high. The Good Brothers, whatever they're supposed to be, just weren't in the WWE. Weren't over. Weren't entertaining. Weren't special. I don't see the Good Brothers leaving as any kind of loss to the WWE. Maybe they needed an NXT run to establish a gimmick?

I feel like the above two points are kind of proving the WWE"s point. Like, at first, everyone was just "I can't believe the WWE is scripting this fake shoot shit." Now, there's more and more people who have been worked and are conflating the WWE's scripting of Rousey with the actual Ronda Rousey. Look no further than the above post, where a smart, respectable fan wrote, "By all accounts she's such a big wrestling fan yet her idea for a heel gimmick is to be a Vince Russo character." This blatantly assumes that this storyline is Rousey's idea and not something that a team of writers and producers are fully controlling. (Elephant in the room: Wasn't IWC darling Paul Heyman working closely with Rousey this whole time? We all love to call this "fake shoot" stuff Russo-rific, but Paul E. wasn't a stranger to it either.) I dislike building a whole feud around the words "fake" and "real" and "scripted" and "off script." I think its awful. But I don't think Ronda Rousey is pulling the strings and writing this angle single-handedly. This is fully a WWE production and this is what the WWE creative team is fully behind. That is what sucks about it.

If the options are a rumble, a multi-man ladder match, or a tournament like they've been doing, I'd also vote Rumble. I'd lean more towards a tournament if it were a one-night deal ala the 93' KOTR or WM4, though.

I hope they keep this dynamic the whole time. Triple H getting all red in the face and "breaking the 4th wall" and Batista nonchalantly owning him by being bigger than Raw. And then, at Mania, Batista beats him clean. Of course, that will never happen, but one can dream.

This might be one of those things where age plays a factor. It may seem ludicrous in a wrestling hall of fame, but this is the WWE Hall of Fame and Torrie Wilson (and Stacy Keibler too) are, to me, bigger "names" than Brutus Beefcake. I say age plays a factor because I do often feel like older fans have a much better knowledge of Beefcake's popularity whereas I, only getting into wrestling around 90'/91', really only knew him after the parasailing accident. Sure, I'd seen his PPV matches in the 80s on the VHS tapes I rented from the video store, but as a weekly, regular TV character, he was basically just an interviewer when I was growing up and I kinda didn't appreciate that he'd been an upper midcard guy in 89'. I hate to reduce what Torrie Wilson and Stacy Keibler were for WCW and WWE from 99' through 02'/03', but I will: they were the two top "eye candy" characters during a time when "eye candy" characters were part and parcel with US pro-wrestling. I wasn't a WWE viewer then and, watching some of those shows from that era more recently, its not interesting or entertaining to me now, so I get that they represent an era that many of us would like to forget. That being said, the one thing that is undeniable is that their segments got big responses. I cringe when I watch Torrie and Stacy rolling around in their underwear while the camera men try their best to get the best wedgie view possible...but the live crowds are clearly loving the 3-minute softcore sex shows they'd put on each month. So, if the reason Beefcake is going in is because he was undeniably over in 89', the same concession should be granted to Torrie Wilson (and Stacy Keibler), who sold a ton of magazines and probably DVDs too. * I wanted to note, too, that Torrie and some of the other non-wrestling women (and men) of the time and even today were/are frequently used for charity events, photo ops, and other brand promotion. Her work in that role is why I didn't want to just reduce her to "eye candy" a few paragraphs up (even though I did).

I actually agree with you. I was just bringing up bulimia as an example of getting really nasty/controversial/envelope-pushing. Like, didn't Paige one time make a dig about Reid Flair when she was feuding with Charlotte? It was uncalled for and awful, but they did it. I'm sure Triple H has also gotten a few asides in that were meant for us "smart" fans over the years too. Even in the 90s, there was the "Sunny Days" comment that went over 99% of the audience's head. As you noted, Rousey and Becky have enough fodder to not have to go there and I agree. Maybe "kayfabe" wasn't the right term, but what I was suggesting was that, while they don't need to go there, there are really ugly things they can say that would potentially make fans believe that this fight is "real" without outright saying "I don't care what the script says!" Some of these things, like bulimia, would be in very poor taste - - but we've all seen the movie where the school bully taunts the protagonist by bringing up their dead mother or their alcoholic, abusive father. In the real world, we'd be appalled. In a fictional narrative, it is just part of the hero's journey. And while Becky's past eating disorder has not been a part of her on-screen story, she has spoken about it in interviews and in the blurred lines of kayfabe/reality, it is not some well-hidden secret. Paige's sex tape isn't canon but wasn't there a New Day/Usos segment that made a not-so-veiled reference to Xavier Woods' dick size? Can you not envision a scenario where, if it was Dean Ambrose who got a drunken disorderly charge and not Jimmy Uso, we would've heard Corey Graves make a slight about it to Renee Young? Hell, I'm not sure the only reason he didn't mention it during Naomi's match at Elimination Chamber was because he himself was going through a twitter-feuled personal scandal. All of these examples are/would be very distasteful and would be unnecessary in selling a good wrestling match - but hey, 20 years ago, an aging Big Bossman and an overweight Big Show needed a hook so they hitched a casket to a squad car. And it was distasteful and dumb and it didn't help that match one bit. So, again, I agree - doing these "shock"/"only smart fans get it" angles is not good writing or booking, but I still think its better than "I'm not going to stick to the script!"

^ How can we reduce this into a sign I can pass out outside of Fastlane next week? (I'm not going, but its near my house) I'm not as down on the Twitter beef stuff as most, but yeah, this just didn't click with anyone. Like, usually, if people hate it here, you might still find fans who think its cool or even buy into it on reddit, but everybody is shitting on it. If you're going to do the Twitter thing, why not take shots at each other that still work in kayfabe? Rousey can say how nobody thought a women's match would headline Mania till she showed up and Becky is just the lucky contest winner to lose to her next. She can say that nobody outside the WWE Universe knows who she is. Hell, get personal and talk about how Becky was a failed actress or, get real nasty, and throw in a line about how she'd like to shove her fist down Becky's throat - but Becky would be too used to that*. And Becky, well, she can retort with any number of failings - personal and professional - Rousey has had in the public eye. You can push the envelope and "blur the lines" and build mystique and have people wondering if these two have real, legit beef without going over board. In fact, does anyone recall the Alexa Bliss/Sasha Banks match from last year (or the year before)? People were wondering if they were going to potato each other based on random, cryptic tweets from months prior and IIRC the fact that they didn't follow each other on Instagram. I think someone reported that they weren't friends in NXT and peopled believed we were going to see a shoot fight. Maybe the lesson is less is more? EDIT - * that was meant as a reference to bulimia, not fellatio.

I'm not sure what Reigns (or Rollins or really anyone) can say or do to convince Dean Ambrose to stay if he wants to leave. The irony is that Ambrose's heel turn flopped so hard that they nudged him back into being a face weeks ago...while, if he was still a heel, they could've had him jump Reigns after his return announcement and actually build towards a match between them at Mania (if Reigns is, in fact, returning to action by then). Reigns/Ambrose as a personal grudge match feels more Mania-worthy than any other match either guy could have.

I'm not sure I quite understand the full meaning behind what TJP said about "writing" Ricochet's match or having the WWE take the "bat that [he] carved" and giving it to someone else. I didn't see the Ricochet main roster debut, but is he implying that he had the original idea to debut the way Ricochet did? As part of a 205 Live call-up? Or is he talking about a specific move sequence? His comments are too "inside baseball" for me and I fashion myself a pretty knowledgeable fan. Maybe someone can clue me in that saw the segment/match. For comparison, in Bret's book, he talks about pitching the ladder match concept a couple times to Vince before WrestleMania X and actually having ladder matches on house shows (against Shawn no less, IIRC) and being miffed that Shawn and Razor get the credit for "inventing" the match. I get that. But stealing a move? I don't know. Its 2019. Springboard missile dropkicks (which is the gif that TJP put on his Twitter above his comment) don't belong to anyone.

Not to be that guy, but if Nia Jax had done the same thing, I could see many jumping on it as proof that she's sloppy and unprofessional. My guess is that these three, like Sasha Banks with her crazy high spots a few years ago, are thinking they need to lay everything in and push the limit to prove a point. I'm not sure they're wrong either. With Nia, there's a history of unsafe work, but then again, Becky Lynch having her nose broken was also a character-defining moment and now she's going to main event WrestleMania. I don't want to see people getting hurt needlessly, but it ain't ballet.

I highly doubt they're going go with Wyatt. I think they want a strong babyface in that spot and Wyatt isn't a strong anything right now. My dark horse pick is Cena. The few reports I read said that his schedule makes it unlikely that they would feature him so prominently - as he won't be able to do weekly TV - but I also just can't believe they're going to do this Mania without him when, in terms of star power, they are probably at the lowest point they've been since what? Maybe 09' or '06? Maybe even the pre-Attitude Era 90s? Granted, this is a company with Lesnar, Rousey, Bryan, Becky, Mysterio, Orton, AJ, Jeff Hardy, Seth, and Braun - so its not like they don't have popular stars - but it still feels light because the past 10 Manias have been so centered on what Cena is doing, what Reigns is doing, what Triple H is doing, what Taker is doing, and what Brock is doing (but only if he's working one of the other guys on this list because his feud/match with Ambrose was treated like an after thought).

I was surprised by the reactions on here for this show. I have it as one of the worst in recent memory with only the main event delivering. - The Women's Chamber Match is like that "Young Woman/Old Woman" optical illusion as it seems you either thought this was awful or you thought it was great. I didn't like it. I went in hopeful, but it just didn't hook me at any point. I like the Iiconics as an act, but they didn't back up their taunts with anything special in terms of double-teams (which should kind of be their thing). I've seen some praise the work of Sonya and Liv's bumping, but I found it to be just okay - nothing star-making. Nia Jax running into the pod didn't look good to me, like (out of safety) Bayley wasn't positioned in front of the pod wall (so Nia basically just ran into the thing despite Bayley being closer to the ring post and barely having to sidestep). Did Naomi, Carmella, or Sarah Logan do anything cool? I don't recall. I liked the finishing stretch, but I didn't think any of the sequences/stretches in this match made me go "I can't wait till we see these two teams square off again!" I mean, Sasha and Bayley kind of dominated the whole division in one night. This match would've been better with some of the more established personalities and workers involved (Alexa, Mickie James, Alicia Fox) or even Kairi Sane and Io Shirai. My wife was watching with me and she called it boring and too long. I had to agree. - If I had tickets to this event, I'd have been disappointed with the Rousey/Riot non-match. Was the post-match angle great? For sure...but if I'm paying $50 for a ticket to a show, I kind of want to see the major stars actually, y'know, wrestle. No Brock. No Cena. No Asuka. No Seth or Dean. Becky and Charlotte aren't wrestling. Then Ronda Rousey squashes her opponent in under 3 minutes. This card was really thin to begin with and she's been so dependable (and Riot has also excelled in the rare spotlight matches she's had) that even 6-7 minute match would've helped this show tremendously. - I know complaining about bad booking in WWE is like complaining about cold temperatures in Juneau, but jesus, the Balor match and Braun matches were practically neck-and-neck in the What Storyline Is Hurting Which Guy Worse competition. With Balor, coming off the Lesnar match, they had the opportunity to either get behind him or not, and they opted to half-step. I don't think he came out of last night's match stronger than he went in and Lashley certainly didn't gain anything either (and why again are we breaking up Rush and Lashley?). Meanwhile, in what should've been the sole squash of the night, Strowman struggles to beat a lower midcard guy in a no DQ match and then Lashley and McIntyre come out as lackeys - because being the lackey to a lower midcard guy is definitely going to get you over. Is this building towards Strowman beating all three in a handicap match at Mania? Maybe he'll team back up with the 7 year old from last year? Whatever comes of this, I'm not interested. I was a little on the fence about buying tickets for Fastlane, which is happening like 15 minutes from my house. Last night's show made that decision much easier. I'm staying home.

Just came here to self-promote a little bit. Almost 10 years ago, I recorded an album of songs inspired by the Hart Family and Chris Benoit called Sheer Hart Attack. Its self-made, lo-fi punk weirdness - an aural battle royal of Guided By Voices, They Might Be Giants, and Husker Du - and it is available on Bandcamp for the first time ever now. You can check it out here. Originally released under the band name Double Murder Suicide, I've finally re-branded as Double Moonsault as the original DMS name certainly pushed away a lot of potential listeners with the offensiveness of it. In 2017 I released my last album Razor's Edge Suitcase, but this one, from 2009, is probably my favorite album that I've done and I hope you give it a listen. The full download comes with 21 bonus tracks too and you can read about those on the Bandcamp site. Check it out, PWOites!

Bayley was a tough one. I wasn't watching for the full Bayley origin story in NXT but wasn't the idea that she rose the ranks over a lengthy period of time? That it was a slow, gradual process where the underdog eventually became the Champ after, like, 2 years of just showing strong effort but not beating Charlotte, Sasha, etc.? When she got called up, they had two options - restart the entire storyline and have her lose immediately, basically showing that she was a big fish in a small pond that couldn't compete with the Alicia Foxes and Nikki Bellas of the world. She plays the underdog for 6-8 months and you hope the wider audience rallies like the NXT one did. Or you push her as a legit threat from the jump and hope that the niche NXT audience would be vocal enough for a "monkey see/monkey do" reaction to happen when she was in front of the wider audience (in other words, if those guys sitting in my row are cheering for her, I'll cheer for her too even though I don't know who she is). I'd say they went more with the latter than the former and it didn't really work...but if they had done the reverse, I don't think that would've been 100% guaranteed to work. I'm curious what they do with Gargano and Ciampa as they're in a similar position. They too are in this weird position where it feels like their career-defining angle happened already. What do you do when you call them up? Repeat the original angle verbatim with #DIY and everything? They should try something fresh, obviously, but in doing that, there's no guarantee you're creating characters that can carry shows/connect with the audience the way they do now.

On the Bryan/Creative Control thing, I agree that its a team effort. Bryan's got a good rep backstage as a creative thinker and is well-liked (meaning collaboration with the producers/agents/writers is likely more fruitful). He's proven he can get over. The company also invested in him with what was probably a lucrative deal so there is incentive in keeping him happy. Plus, he's on SmackDown - the show Vince cares less about and has historically been less controlling over - and his heel turn came at the exact right time when the title scene needed freshening up (after AJ/Nak and AJ/Joe). But does this same run happen on Raw? With all the "trimmings" like Ali and Almas getting more exposure? I don't think it would. I like the phrases "loosening the reins" and "more creative input," but Vince has the pencil. We know bigger stars do have more input than others about who they want to work with and even sometimes who they want to put over (Austin's beef w/ Jarrett, the Cena/Nexus SummerSlam thing, Brock and Braun seeming to clash), but ultimately, Vince is in charge. If Vince wakes up tomorrow and decides Bryan is going to drop the title to Corbin, its going to happen - even if it would be the dumbest booking ever and Bryan presented his case against it. Isn't that essentially what happened with Austin and Brock? Vince wanted one thing, wouldn't budge about his plans, and his top star disagreed so vehemently that he breached his contract. Neither side wants to get to that point so, hey, why not let Bryan wrestle some 205 guy on the B-show if that keeps him happy?

- I don't think people have to bend over all the way backwards to explain it. While I agree that Lynch/Rousey would be preferred (much like Bryan/Batista or Bryan/Orton would've been better at WM30 or Benoit/HHH would've been better at WM20), I don't think its that far a step down. Its obvious the company views Charlotte as their top female talent - not just in 2019, but for the past few years and for the foreseeable future. They want her to be able to say she was the first woman to headline WrestleMania. Rousey is not long for the WWE and, right or wrong, I think they believe Becky will flame out. Its not fair. Its not right. Its not as good as what you or I might fantasy book. But Becky Lynch is winning the big one in the main event of WrestleMania and I'm okay with Charlotte being there too. Maybe its just me, but I also like Charlotte's work and, if she goes full-blown heel now by aligning with the McMahons, I'm even more likely to enjoy this. - What's crazy to me about Braun is, last year, when they had nothing for him, they teamed him up with a child and had him win the tag titles in a "feel good" moment slotted before the main event to cool down the crowd. It was widely criticized. Here we are 9 1/2 months later and its clear to me that they have nothing for him again. I predict we're getting Strowman vs. McIntyre, which is a pre-show match to me. You can put it on the main card, but, at best, its a RAW main event when Brock isn't there to be in the last segment. Its a feud that's been orbiting the RAW scene for months too, so its not exactly fresh even if they've yet to have a definitive 1-on-1 match. Its two mid-carders squaring off in a match for no stakes. I understand the "Creative Has Nothing For You" trope when it involves guys like Crews and Ziggler and Ryder, but goddamn, how is a 6'8'' 350+ pound strongman not a top priority in booking meetings?

I watched two episodes today. I think the nostalgia factor helps, but these are really watchable shows. I know the average WWE fan is aged like 50 or whatever, but it does kind of confuse me as to why, with the PG rating and all, they haven't actively tried to produce a syndicated kid-friendly show to air on Saturday/Sunday mornings. These shows were probably pretty cheap to produce in the early 90s and in 2019 I'd assume they'd be even cheaper. Like, they invest money and time to producing Network-only shows like 205 Live but that isn't bringing in a single new viewer. Why not produce a syndicated show for kids with the chief goal of bringing in viewers aged 7-10? The "next generation" of fans, if you will?

Fair enough. I think one could still argue that any of this stuff is inexcusable and they wouldn't be wrong. But from what you have both added, I think we're in agreement that, in 2019, in the current context of what the WWE promotes itself as, this sort of stuff just doesn't work as well. You could point to the Rumble and say, "Hey, Nia taking all those dudes finishers was the biggest pop of that match!" and you might even be right - but I'd counter that this being true has more to do with the Rumble being pretty lackluster more than 40k fans desiring to see Nia take an RKO because there's been a huge build towards that moment.

Yuck at that news about Nia/Dean. I'm not opposed to some sort of mixed tag at Mania, but this all seems like its building to an inter-gender match where the woman is a heel and that just doesn't sit right. Like the end of the Rumble this year, it doesn't matter how much heat Nia has, watching her get RKO'd and hit with a 619 isn't "fun" for me as a viewer. 20 years ago it wasn't right either in retrospect...and I know I will get eaten alive (deservedly) for this comment, but a key difference is that when Austin was giving Stunners to Chyna (and Linda McMahon at some point?), we were talking about the most wildly popular character in WWE history delivering the Stunner to a woman at the crescendo of a show filled with sex, violence, and boundary-pushing storylines. It doesn't make it any better and actually makes it worse because the whole show was filled with misogyny and exploitation, but it also meant that when the "good guy" Steve Austin gave his finishing move to one of the villainous women, the show was so far down in the gutter of tastelessness that blatant man-on-woman violence was the only "topper" left. So, in 97/98'' when he stunned Chyna, I cheered for it. (By 01' I was barely watching, but would imagine, if I was still a fan at the time, I would've liked him delivering one to Steph too.) But today's show is different and this week's RAW segment, where Dean teased Nia by claiming she has lust for him, was awkward and gross. And, actually, it made me want to see Nia beat the shit out of him because "Cool Handsome Guy" mocking the "fat girl" for having a crush on him (which we, the audience, had ZERO reason to believe was true) is all sorts of disgusting to me. And this segment was also Dean's face turn because Cool Handsome Guy mocking fat girl is funny? So, yeah, at least 20 years ago, when they did man-on-woman violence they had characters that were over enough, in a context that was tasteless enough, with storylines that positioned the hero as being justified enough to pull it off.

Just watched the segment and its some fun stuff. A Van Hammer that can actually wrestle? Ain't nothing wrong with that. Its one-note, but I like that one note more than No Way Jose and that "Get Me To The Greek" guy from a few years ago. Just don't add groupies. There's nothing funny about a rock star surrounded by people who treat him like a rock star. The comedy comes from the fish being out of the water, not in it. The Gulak/Riddle match was the best Riddle match I've seen - though, I'm pretty limited to what I've seen (read: only his NXT matches and probably not every one of those). After seeing this match, I definitely get why he's a big deal more than I did before it. That deadlift powerbomb? My god. Then a knee to the jaw? I think that should've been the finish instead of having Gulak tap a few seconds later. I know Riddle said he was going to tap him out before the match, but that combo was fierce.

I'm fully in support of the Becky push but, in my post in the last page, made sure to note that the booking of it hasn't been perfect. To me, the clean loss to Asuka (and decision not to challenge her at Mania) is the one thing that is really hard to defend. I understand that Asuka needed the win, but considering they ended the Women's Rumble with a knee injury angle, they could've had Becky injure her knee against Asuka and lose by ref's decision that she can no longer compete (or count-out). Later in the show, you cut backstage and maybe have Rousey walk by Becky as she is being checked by a doctor and Finlay. Ronda doesn't need to say anything. Just a smirk in Becky's direction would be enough to get over the idea that these two still have beef and Becky is furious, wants into the Rumble, and has more personal animosity against Rousey than Asuka*. Having Finlay there to witness the interaction would subtly imply his respect for the fighting spirit of Becky and foreshadow his decision to let her into the Rumble later. * In this scenario, Asuka doesn't injure Lynch's knee intentionally with repeated strikes or submissions. Its more like Lynch lands badly out of the ring - the kind of injury that isn't meant to lead to a revenge storyline and is sold more like an occupational hazard that could've happened to anyone regardless of opponent.

- I was really hoping not to see this "Stephanie is right!" stuff here. I saw on a Facebook post someone said "Stephanie is just looking out for her employee like a good boss would" and a few posts above someone argued Becky shouldn't have even been in the Rumble anyway. Jeez. If some of you had the pencil, Vince McMahon would've went out of business in 98'. I get that in real life, if your boss came to you and said you needed to take a sick day to see a doctor, it would be seen as caring. And, yes, Becky forced her way into a Rumble she wasn't originally entered in (which is some sort of egregious crime because the fucking Royal Rumble is sacrosanct? Like every Royal Rumble ever has been 100% on the level?). But this is a scripted drama and I don't think bootlickers and goody-two-shoes are characters fans are getting behind in 2019. I'm not saying this storyline is flawless - it isn't and the dots could be connected better - but it was clear enough to me when Stephanie McMahon, the most absolute heel of all the McMahon Family, tried to tell "The Man" Becky Lynch what to do that Stephanie should be booed and Becky should be cheered. Its like that "80s Hogan was a heel" stuff. Yeah, we get it. He broke rules and did multiple asshole/bully things. Its a funny thing to talk about - but anybody that truly believes the audience somehow "got it wrong" or was "dumb" in cheering the Hulkster is just being purposefully dense. Hogan was a babyface. Austin was a babyface after WM13. Becky Lynch is a babyface now. - I'd be curious to hear more about the female viewership numbers. I didn't hear the full context, but I'm not sure if this is a trend or just a one-week slump or what. It may also be a that a particularly popular show with women restarted on Monday? I don't know. I just hope that it doesn't steer them away from Lynch/Rousey in the main event. I mean, RAW was doing its historically worst ratings ever with Seth Rollins wrestling on top every week and he's still likely winning the Universal Championship at Mania.