DMJ

SDL being on a hamster wheel with AJ/Ambrose and Ziggler/Miz heading into third rounds seems a bit tedious to me. Ziggler really needed to lose on Sunday (and come back at Rumble) and, playing Monday morning QB, considering the big main event at Survivor Series, you really could've run AJ/Kane with Bryan using his "pull" to make his old partner the number one contender (Ofcourse, this would go against the idea that Kane kayfabe ended Bryan's title reign in 2014, but since when does storyline continuity ever come into play with Kane?). Miz fending off midcard challengers or heading up a mixed Survivors team with Maryse and Usos against Swagger, Lynch, and Hyoe Bros would've been okay with me and could've led to some easy booking (Miz vs. Ryder, Maryse vs. Lynch, etc. aren't MOTYs but they would be fine as fun TV filler)

Same world class care they gave Punk? This whole situation is a dumpster fire. What I don't get is what the WWE has to gain by keeping/lose by releasing Paige. She's been off TV so long that her absence means nothing to the casual viewers. Last I checked, TNA, ROH, and LU were not even competition. I know she was popular once, but I'm willing to bet that between Bayley, Becky, Sasha, and even Charlotte, the Divas Revolution talent has made her irrelevant in terms of revenue anyway. Just release her and call it a friggin day. The WWE just looks petty doing this shit.

I'm not opposed to running Ziggler/Miz last, but it does seem a bit silly to open the show with the World Title match. Considering the ratings that the debate will draw and, according to Lance Storm's twitter (in another forum someone mentioned it, but i didn't check myself), Cena needing to make it somewhere on Monday morning, and the recent buzz around the Network changing into a tiered system, I actually think this is a fantastic opportunity for the WWE to really see if, promised what is likely to be the Match of the Night as your opener, more subscribers are actually gonna tune in live rather than watch later. I know I will be for the first time since Mania. (Of course, after the opener, I'll proceed to not watch the rest of the show and finish it Monday or Tuesday afternoon) I'd also add that this set-up will give Wyatt/Orton a better shot of getting a big reaction. Whenever Cena's been put in the middle of a show (like SummerSlam or the 2015 TLC&S), he's basically killed the crowd because nobody can really follow his act. Putting him on early might help because, even though I'm still guessing he'll get the biggest reaction of the show, the crowd will have more than enough time to get back into the show via Wyatt/Orton (I'm guessing that'll go on around 10:10) and Ziggler/Miz (which should go on around 10:30, right as the debate wraps up).

Anyone else hear the podcast with the blogger obsessed with Attitude Era? One of my least favorite eps, and I usually love Austin's show. I'm definitely jealous that this fan got to shoot the shit with Austin for 35 minutes, but it would sting less if he'd had any comments or questions that were actually thought provoking. His opinions weren't offensive or anything, just not interesting.

I'd agree. With Sheamus, you can look as recently as last year and say he was getting pushed above how over he was. With Miz, you have maybe the most consistent heat magnet in the company but the dude hasn't even sniffed a main event push since 2011. It's absurd that he wasn't at least put up against Ambrose during Ambrose's meh title reign this summer. Miz would have been a great opponent and would've made Ambrose seem more popular than he is, an area that was woefully exposed by how little anyone cared about Dean's SummerSlam match and how much AJ was cheered in their match last month.

I'm guessing/hoping that this will lead to Ziggler taken off TV till the Rumble. There's simply no reason for him to be around until then. Him being gone for good doesn't sound realistic, but 2 and a half months? Doable. I also plan on eventually writing a whole peice about how Ziggler has terrible luck when it comes to heel/face timing. For example, right now, AJ could really use another over babyface to feud with and there was a time when Ziggler could've been that guy...but he's not nearly as over as he once was and, based on his actions over the past year, he seemed to be inching towards a heel turn more than another hot babyface run. Of course, both RAW and SD are kind of chock full of heels right now so turning him won't help him a bit right now.

Just posted my review over on my blog. As others said - not a terrible show (in fact, I don't think there was an outright bad match on the card), but just not one I'd consider worth sitting through, especially if you're someone who likes their wrestling with clear winners and losers and clear heroes and villains.

I'm a bit of a Fox mark, but I also had this at slightly over 2-stars. With Fox, I just feel like, heel or face, she carries herself in the ring as if winning and losing matters and while she knows she's not the most "gifted" athlete, she's scrappy and capable. Her Scissors Kick is rarely pretty and her forearms don't always connect with the right part of a person's head - but that almost makes me love her more because, in a real life, not every jab connects with the jaw and not every kick to the gut hits the exact right spot of the midsection (for example, Fox's Scissors Kick doesn't always hit the intended back-of-the-neck target, but she hits the move with enough force that you know, wherever it lands, it doesn't feel good). Nia Jax, meanwhile, is as good in her role as one could ask, especially considering that according to Wiki, she's only been wrestling for 2-3 years. Good "monster" selling, more than sufficient offense, and seems to know the fundamentals well enough to hang with more experienced grapplers like Fox and Bayley.

I wouldn't be surprised if ADR edges him out on PPV main events (Rey's biggest main event run was probably his 06 reign during the brand split when Cena routinely headlined the co-brand shows like Mania 22), but there's also Reys feuds with Eddie in 05, Jericho in 09(?), his debut bout against Angle, his tag run with Edge, even his rivalries with Cody Rhodes and Kane that were treated as way, way, way bigger deals than anything ADR ever did with anyone not named Cena. So, yeah, if the argument is ADR is a bigger star than Rey because he got to wrestle John Cena more, then, well, yeah, Rey doesn't hold a candle to the greatness of Del Rio. And, honestly, Rey might not even be as kayfabe important as John Laurenaitis under that lens.

Sorry to be late on this, but I can't believe someone would argue that, even in "kayfabe" terms, Alberto Del Rio was a bigger star/better wrestler than Rey Mysterio based solely on World Title reigns. That means he's also four times the legend as Piper too? Than Andre the Giant? You have to look at length of main event runs AND, most tellingly, the "push" they received in terms of marketing and positioning. Yes, Mysterio's win/loss wasn't always great...but that was because he was so immensely over that the bookers viewed beating him as a way to elevate a talent. The fans viewed talents that beat him as being a big deal too. You could win or lose to Del Rio and it meant nothing either way. Plus - neither guy is on the best terms with the company, but there's only one that the WWE could make money on with a HoF induction, yet another DVD set, and a Legends Contract. There's only one that, even if he's on dicey terms with the company, warrants a continued presence on future video games and whatnot. Only one of them made the company any real money in merchandise sales. These may not be purely "kayfabe" metrics, but they are sports-entertainment metrics (and sports-entertainment is much more of what the WWE is than a "kayfabe" sport). In the kayfabe history of the WWE, one could be essentially written out and one never could and it has nothing to do with World Title reigns when determining who is who.

Hit up my own database for a few that I thought were particularly good, but not quite great... - Chris Benoit vs. Meng (Slamboree 97') - Bayley vs. Nia Jax (NXT Takeover: London) - Brock Lesnar vs. Test (King of the Ring 2002)* - Cobra vs. Sgt. Pittman (Fall Brawl 95')** - Austin vs. Steamboat (Clash of the Champions XXVIII) - Vader vs. Bossman (both 94' PPV matches)*** * I haven't watched enough Test nor do I want to watch enough Test to judge if this is the best match he's ever been a part of, but I'm going to go ahead and say its the best Test match I've ever seen. ** This is one of those matches that is so bad that it is tremendously entertaining. I mean, it is just batshit crazy to the point that one has to wonder who came up with the sequences involved. A desert island Wrestlecrap match. *** Great chemistry. Matches I strongly recommend to my friends because, though PWOers might be very familiar with Bossman and Vader, moderate-level fans don't necessarily know them aside from their respective "peak" years or top-shelf, most highly publicized matches.

Just finished the show. AJ Styles is the best worker in the company right now and I'm not sure there is anyone even close to second, especially if you consider "freshness." I mean, Cena can still be great and Cesaro is a beast and Rusev is awesome and I like Zayn and Joe and Owens and MIz, but they all have holes in their game or in their booking or what have you. Styles is just the man, straight up. If I were the WWE,I'd spend the next 6 months figuring out who Styles is going to drop the belt to. It might be Cena. It might be someone else. Till WrestleMania, though, Styles should remain champ and beat a cavelcade of challengers - Ambrose in a rematch, Orton, Kane, maybe a multi-man defense involving Wyatt and some of the aforementioned, and let his run last. Then, come April 2017, you can run Styles/Cena or Styles/Nakamura?

Here's hoping they put the title on Styles tonight. Seems like the only positive that could come out of this event. Also, would love them to tease an appearance by whoever the next NXT call-up is (I'm thinking its Joe). I'm not sure what kind of angle they'll run between Orton and Wyatt, but I'm not hopeful about it. The fact that they are even running this feud, when I believe they did it last fall or at least attempted to (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2574073-randy-orton-vs-bray-wyatt-feud-would-take-wwes-fall-season-by-storm), just shows how piss-poor they booked the return of Orton, literally not thinking beyond "Gets killed by Lesnar at SummerSlam." The loss Orton suffered from Lesnar was not going to easy to bounce back from, but to go into a bone-chillingly cold feud with Bray Wyatt, one of the most irrelevant characters in WWE programming in 2016, was bound to lead to fan disinterest. Miz/Ziggler Round 89,403 should be lame. This is what Miz gets for delivering a buzz-worthy promo on Daniel Bryan and being one of the company's top 2-3 true heat-getting heels (I'd put Rusev and Styles on that list too as Styles, to his credit, works hard to get heat even when he's getting cheered and Rusev does the same even when he's getting booked to look vulnerable and sympathetic). The Miz would've been a great, natural challenger for Ambrose at SummerSlam or even for this show (Styles could've wrestled in some sort of Number One Contender's match against Kane maybe?), but alas, Creative sees lemon, sugar, and water, and doesn't know what to do with it. American Alphas not being on the card makes sense storyline-wise or whatever, but one has to remember, you have a live crowd to please. Not putting your best tag team on the show (maybe they're on the pre-show?) is not going to make the people paying $50+ a ticket happy when you're already running a bit of a skeleton crew without Cena (and now Orton too).

There's a pic floating around of Triple H smirking with CM Punk getting his eye worked on in the background on a TV screen. Not sure if it's real or fake, but if it's real, Triple H really is an absolute carny genius because his smile makes my skin crawl and I really loathe how self-satisfied he is. He's also a total moron for this sort of shit because for every time he posts something like this that makes me want to boo him, he does something on-screen to make himself come off as a smark babyface saving the company from a "dreaded Roman Reigns championship run" or positioning himself as the mastermind behind NXT.

I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth, but I think what Johnny Sorrow might've been trying to point out is that there is a certain portion of the internet that is still "butt hurt" that CM Punk left pro-wrestling and "quit on them." These fans are so eager to enjoy his failure last night that they see it as a personal victory (schadenfreude). Obviously, there are sensible people criticizing Punk too. I totally agree that Punk used his name to benefit himself and put himself in an undeserved position. I also think he has every right to and that he shouldn't necessarily be criticized for using that advantage to land himself a big money deal. I look at it this way - people complain about teachers having summers off all the time. They complain about this despite the fact that they themselves could've been teachers, that they themselves chose *not* to be teachers, even knowing, from first grade, that teachers have summers off, that this vacation time is just part of the average teacher's yearly schedule. In Punk's case, you can say he didn't "pay his dues in UFC," but he *did* pay his dues in the world of sports/entertainment and he took a route that is and was open to everyone (in fact, it's not even that rare of a route if you look back at MMA history). He earned celebrity status first through hard work as a pro-wrestler. He may have cut in line, but that's because more people wanted to see him cut in line than wanted to see some guy with no name compete. If you want summers off, go back to school, get your teaching license, get your master's degree, go seek a position as a teacher. If you want to get a huge pay day for your first UFC fight, go become a major star in pro-wrestling, go become known as one of the best self-promoters in sports-entertainment, sell a ton of merchandise, you'll get your pay day. If there's anything to criticize, it might be Dana White's willingness to tarnish his own league's standards by promoting what was not an evenly matched professional-level fight. To continue my analogy, don't blame teachers - blame the educational system that has maintained a 9-month school year despite an abundance of research that tells us we should have year-round school.

sounds horrendous. I think there is a "right way" to attempt this, but it would be somewhat experimental, maybe Gus Van Sant-ish/early Linklater for it to work? Like, have it really just stick to the last 3 days, with flashback but not overemphasize on the "WWEness" of his career. Like, really boil it down to the very core of a guy with post-concussion issues causing dementia and homicidal urges, not anything close to a typical biopic. Edit - also, no real names. Inspired by true events but abstract enough to not bother attempting to tell a factual story. I guess the movie I'm thinking of is "let's talk about Kevin" (or whatever it was called). Bummer of a movie but really, really gripping.

They're bringing back Braden Walker for an AMW reunion?

I can't believe how much praise this match got from not only Meltzer but from Wade Keller and Austin on his podcast. I found it overwrought. Sure, they busted out all sorts of fancy moves and AJ got the clean win, but nothing seemed effective or impactful until the final quarter, when Cena's facial expressions became the focal point of the match. I don't think the match was actively bad - nothing with this many good sequences and quality execution could be - but calling it even "great" seems like too high of praise. It was above average, but not that much above average.

Hated this one. Boring Suplex City stuff out of Brock. More finisher kickouts (just in case you hadn't had your full with Styles/Cena). Nothing new or fresh out of Orton, just signature stuff, which may make sense psychology-wise, but certainly didn't make for any suspense or drama. Non-finish "finish." Possible lead-up to a Shane/Brock match because he can't help himself. Taker/Shane at Mania was probably my least favorite match of the decade, but Shane/Brock may end up topping it. Gave it 1 star on my blog.

Totally concur. The only match on the show I rated above a 3-and-a-half. While I understand the arguments made by some that Banks took too many risks and the match featured too many high spots, I'd argue that the setting was appropriate for such big spots (RAWs and house shows are not) and that, to their credit, the big, risky spots were treated as important and game-changing in a way that not a single thing was in Styles/Cena or Rollins/Balor. Also, I believe that the concerns about Sasha Banks' risky decisions are a little bit misguided and almost misogynistic. Countless male wrestlers have wrestled hurt or taken insane bumps and, for years, were held as bastions of the sport. Just three years ago, John Cena put over Daniel Bryan with an elbow swelled to the size of a grapefruit and needing immediate surgery - his efforts and willingness to do "what was best for business" were praised far and wide. Speaking of Bryan, there are people who want to see him wrestle again despite the fact that it could lead to permanent brain damage. Mick Foley became a beloved figure almost entirely based on a reputation for mutilating his own body for the fans. Ditto for Jeff Hardy. You can hate the risks that Sasha and Charlotte took, you can call them stupid, but they paid off and Banks and Charlotte both came out of that match as even bigger stars than before.

^ Damn. That's pretty awesome. I had the match at 4-stars, but almost want to retroactively push it to 4.5 out of frustration with SummerSlam. Obviously the super smart fans or those that have been following NXT and the CWC closely knew Gargano and Ciampa, but I happen to think there are loads of fans like myself who would call themselves big NXT fans but only really catch the Takeover shows and maybe one NXT/CWC show every couple of weeks. The type, like myself, who'd definitely buy a ticket for a Takeover show, but not necessarily know every character (if you would've told me that that was Billie Kay *and* Ember Moon's debut, I would've believed you). I mention this because of how impressed I was at what I'd call a relatively "cold" match (it certainly didn't have the months-long build of the other title matches or the "marquee" appeal of Roode's debut) featuring one team that actively works a methodical style and a "no-frills" gimmick (which, of course, makes them great and unique compared to most other teams in the company) and a team of two guys that, save for their humorous Glorious Bomb videos, I don't think have really been given any character development or personality, at least to "part-time" fans like myself. The heat and excitement and suspense in this match was built almost entirely between bells for me and, boy, did I get caught up in it. In summation, I cared more about the outcome for a match I couldn't have told you was even on the card before it started then I did for Balor/Rollins and that match was designed to crown a champion of the entire fucking UNIVERSE.

I thought that was Nakamura's best performance in NXT yet. The match against Aries seemed a bit flat at times and, against Balor, I thought his selling was inconsistent. Last night, though, I just thought him and Joe put on a great physical contest where every strike and submission and grapple looked like it was taking energy out of both men. I didn't necessary like Nak kicking out of the Muscle Buster, not because Nakamura ended up winning, more because I feel like they could've played up the rematch as Nakamura hitting Kinshasa twice but not proving he could actually withstand Joe's finisher. Who should challenge next? I'm on board for a rematch anyway, but I do understand the complaints about predictably and repetitiveness. To some degree, though, I feel like NXT Takeover crowds (is the next one international again?) are "buying in" on the prospect of seeing a Match of the Year contender, not necessarily on whether or not the outcome is expected/unexpected. Joe/Nak II, based on the intensity of their first meeting, sounds like a MOTY contender. I'm gonna post my full write-up over on my blog, but just wanted to note - Bayley remains my pick as the best babyface in wrestling, woman or man, and what a year for Cleveland. First, we win the NBA Title, then we stay classy during the RNC, and finally, our hometown hero, Johnny Gargano gets to shine on the big stage. When he started showing up on NXT, I thought, "Well, he'll be good enhancement talent," but last night felt like a character-defining performance from him and Ciampa, the kind of match that exceeded expectations by doing nearly everything right and made both teams look stronger coming out of it. I'm not ready to see Revival on the main roster yet just because I don't think they should be dropping the straps, but they're obviously ready.

BAD - The debut of "RockaBilly Gunn." I remember being pretty interested in who Honky Tonk Man's protege would be in the spring of 97'. Why I cared is a question I don't know the answer to, but I'll chalk it up to being just a lame 13 year old wrestling fan. Anyway, in the weeks before Rockabilly made his debut (at an In Your House, don't remember which one), I believe Honky Tonk Man had asked both Gunn and Road Dogg to be his man. They both turned him down. This was intriguing to me because it meant that his mystery man wouldn't be either of those two guys, opening things up to a possible debut of a new superstar or maybe a former WCW/ECW talent. Then, it turns out it Gunn was the protege after all - turning the entire build-up of the debut into a complete waste of time and serious disappointment. GOOD - Its astonishing, but there is a guy who had not one, but two amazing debuts in the WWE. His name is Sean Waltman. Not only was his RAW debut as 1-2-3 Kid a star-making moment, but when he returned to the company the night after WrestleMania 14, it felt like the WWE had just struck a direct hit at WCW's warship after months of misses doing similar segments (Jarrett's shoot, Cornette's shoot). X-Pac joining DX revitalized the should've-been-dead faction and while I'm not sure any DX segment would ever hit the same "I can't believe I just saw that!" peak, there are less than a handful of moments throughout the entire Attitude Era that meet that high water mark. I vividly remember seeing the segment and instantly grabbing my phone, modem connection be damned, to call my friends about it.

I actually really enjoyed this one. Here's what I wrote on my blog... "Pillman [back] as a babyface is weird to watch after he had so convincingly played the villain as part of the Hollywood Blondes...Pillman looks motivated to keep up with Regal’s energy, stiffness, and execution. Unfortunately, around minute 5 or 6, it becomes noticeable that Heenan’s headset isn’t working and Tony Schiavone has to fly solo for an awkward stretch, hurting the presentation of what is an otherwise very good match, especially if you’re a fan of watching Regal stretch a dude out with a variety of submissions. In fact, this is possibly Regal’s most impressive PPV bout yet and certainly Pillman’s best PPV [singles] match since 92’. There’s an awkward miscommunication in the final third, but at least it leads to a nicely-executed “Regal Roll” (as Tony calls it). I’m not a huge fan of the finish, but in terms of quality wrestling, everything but the last 5 seconds is marvelous. (4/5)" I'm willing to admit that I reviewed this within the first couple months of getting the Network and going on a WCW binge after years of not having watching anything other than WWE or WWE-made DVDs, so I tended to rate many matches considerably higher than I might today.

One of my favorite pop culture writers is Chuck Klosterman. In one of his best pieces, he writes at length about how important it is to have a nemesis and an archenemy - and goes on to explain how these two people are not the same. Full text here Basically, your nemesis is a bit like your rival - you are constantly in competition with this person and want to beat them, but you harbor begrudging respect for them, maybe even secretly appreciate them. Your archenemy is someone you loathe. According to Klosterman, Larry Bird's nemesis was Magic Johnson. They were the leaders of their respective teams at a time when their teams were competing to be the best team in the NBA. However, Bird's archenemy was actually Isiah Thomas of the Detroit Pistons, a guy who notoriously insulted Bird by questioning whether his popularity had more to do with his skin color than his, y'know, averaging a double-double each of his first six years, winning three championships, etc. So...how is this wrestling? I thought it'd be fun to discuss who someone's nemesis/archenemy is. For example, John Cena's nemesis is Randy Orton. Their careers have been intertwined for over a decade and they're arguably the WWE's version of Rock/Austin (more on them below) for the 2000s. They've faced each other countless times, but even in their most intense battles, there has always been an underlying respect between them. Cena's archenemy is Edge, though, the guy that cost him his first and second WWE World Championships, building his career as The Cena Spoiler. Back to Rock and Austin. Austin may have hated the Rock...but the Rock was a wrestler, a worthy challenge. The Rock was Austin's nemesis. Vince McMahon was Austin's archenemy. Now, as Klosterman goes on to explain, this doesn't always work both ways. Austin's archenemy was Vince McMahon, but McMahon's archenemy wasn't Austin - it was Ted Turner. Austin was McMahon's nemesis, but even at the height of their feud, McMahon was always somewhat open about wanting the Rattlesnake to join him as his corporate champion. McMahon wanted Turner to die penniless. Finally, Klosterman posits that if you don't have a nemesis and an archenemy, you can't truly be great. I'm not sure this is the same in wrestling. I mean, Sting had a nemesis (Flair) and an archenemy (Hollywood Hogan), but I wouldn't call him any greater a character than the Undertaker (who only had a nemesis - Kane) or even The Ultimate Warrior (who only had an archenemy - Rick Rude). ANYWAY....I'm hoping others will join in on the fun. Who was Ric Flair's nemesis? Who was his archenemy? What about the Hulkster? Was Bret Hart's archenemy Vince or Shawn or was it really Triple H all along, the one guy he, to this day, has never said even a halfway respectful word about?