DMJ

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?

I would scoff at the idea of self-help, but I thought DDP's "Yogas for Guys" thing was ludicrous when I first heard about it at the start of the 2000s. Over the years, it seems that DDP has had tremendous success, though - not only in PR terms with him being looked at the guy who saved Jake Roberts and Scott Hall - but financially. I found this article through a cursory search on Google and its from 2014. It says since 2012, he's sold over 100,000 units of his DDP Yoga product. If all of those units were just the basic DVD pack (selling now for roughly $50, but originally $60), that's a cool 5 million bucks. I'm not sure what his profit margins are, but you'd have to think they're very, very good. DVD sets are cheap to produce and the brand drives for repeat customers. Plus, the entire operation is online, meaning his most expensive overhead is probably just storage? Marketing? If anything, DDP Yoga has only seemed to become even more popular since 2014 too with the explosion of wrestling podcasts. He's probably reaching more ears now than ever before. I'm not sure Ryback will find the some success, but one never knows. Legion of Doom got in on the ground floor of Zubaz and made a ton in the 90s. Duff McKagan was an alcoholic rocker, but he invested in Amazon, Microsoft, and Starbucks in 94' and probably made more money off of that than GNR and Velvet Revolver royalties combined. I don't know if Ryback-brand Vitamins is his ticket, but if he gets involved in the right product, on the ground floor, and it takes off, he'd be quite a spokesman.

Cobra vs. Craig Pittman from Fall Brawl 95' is one of the most entertaining matches in WCW history.

Agree with above comment. 3 hours is just too damn long. I know there are fiscal reasons why getting rid of the third hour is not going to happen, but, man, it just makes me think how much more possible another "hot" era would be if they cut RAW down right now. The last time I felt like WWE was legitimately "cool" again was 2006 - oddly enough, the last time they spent a summer building up the birth of a new brand/actually caring about the brand split, influxing both shows with fresh (if not young or even good) newcomers, and momentarily putting the brakes on their Chosen One (in that case, Cena) to push the guy that the internet wanted in the main event (Rob Van Dam...again, I'm not defending 2006 IWC sentiment, I'm just drawing some comparisons). The best segment of the show was the last one - which is the right idea. You shouldn't waste a segment that good in Hour Two when nothing else you have to offer is remotely as "must watch." I do think RAW is lacking a bit of star power. Cena's absence is going to take some getting used to now that he's healthy and, considering Lesnar ain't gonna be around much and Orton is a Blue Brand guy and your World Champion, Dean Ambrose, is on Tuesdays too...who is RAW's biggest "name"? I like the sounds of Reigns/Rusev, but its a step down for Reigns when they kind of need him in a more prominent spot now more than ever. Here's hoping Balor, Zayn, and Cesaro are booked strong in the next few months because RAW lacks a big name babyface currently. Did anyone else want Jericho's "back-up" to end up being Big Show as much as me? I've been a proponent of Show back in the tag division for awhile now and JeriShow/Enzo & Cass is a program I'd enjoy far, far more than seeing Enzo or Cass thrust into singles competition well before they need to be. With Charlotte and Sasha Banks opening the show, was this the first time that a "divas feud" kicked off RAW? If so, it wasn't a bad segment and I'd welcome more of them (especially if it means less purposeless Steph and Foley intros)...but I wouldn't call it a walk-on homerun either. Enzo and Jericho's involvement was a welcome addition, even if it didn't make much sense. Some Mark Henry return, eh? All in all, if you aren't DVRing these episodes or watching an abbreviated version, you have way too much time on your hands.

Not to be too morbid/insensitive but considering that the Limo Angle just morphed into the Paternity Angle and that the Paternity Angle ended up being a total joke with a lame punchline (it was...Hornswoggle! So funny I forgot I laugh!), I kinda wish that entire storyline would've been in the house when Benoit did his thing. And, while I know the original concept had some people intrigued (probably myself included back in 2007), when you consider the way Mr. Kennedy turned out in TNA and you really look at his track record of even just "good" matches, I don't think even the original concept, executed perfectly, would've bore fruit.

From reading everyone's comments, I feel like one of my questions has been answered - Is Roman Reigns still being "groomed" as the next John Cena? No. Once the rocket was strapped to Cena's back (I'll say 2005), there really never seemed to be serious conversations about the likelihood of him "spending some time in the midcard." Now, obviously, 10 years later, Cena did end up competing for the US Championship and blah blah blah recent history....but we're talking about Cena essentially voluntarily stepping down to open up the main event and maybe extend his own lifespan in the process. For Reigns to fall into the midcard in 2016, after only really a year and a half as a "top guy," puts him in a category of workers that will never be remembered as being "The Man." Its still esteemed company to be in - Eddie Guerrero, Chris Benoit, Chris Jericho, Rey Mysterio, Booker T, and Kane all followed similar trajectories of peaking in the main event but spending a majority of their WWE careers slightly below it - but its not necessarily the position that I believe the company was hoping for when it came to Roman Reigns. All evidence pointed to the WWE wanting Reigns to be the next John Cena, not the next Edge. To me, that's the big story coming out of this week. Not since SummerSlam 93' can I really recall a moment where, in the span of 24 hours, it became so crystal clear that Vince had decided to pull the plug on what was seemingly his top investment.

I'm not sure if this deserve its own thread, but I am curious what other followers of the current WWE product feel about Roman Reigns after this week's shows. I found it to be a very interesting two nights. At Battleground, Reigns got pinned by Ambrose clean, but even before that, one of the big stories of the match seemed to be that Ambrose and Rollins were almost actively serving as avatars for the "smart fans," at certain points teaming up (despite their years-long, bitter rivalry) to "bury him" via a powerbomb into an announce table. RAW opened up with Stephanie calling him a loser. I might've missed it (I was half-watching, admittedly), but was there any sort of retaliatory statement out of Reigns? Did Foley stand up for him? Did the commentators? Reigns got one big win early in the night...but it was, without question, in the "colder" of the two fourways. Call them "indie darlings," call them "the fresher talent," call them the whatever you want but Rusev, Cesaro, Owens, and Balor represent a "next generation" and their match felt like a bigger deal than its counterpart weighed down by two guys - Jericho and Sheamus - who, rightfully so or not, seem out of place on a show built around "RAW's rebirth." I don't think its just in my head, either. I think you can compare the placement of the matches and the commentary and tell which match was presented as more important. Then, the main event. Reigns did some roaring at the tail end, but for the majority of the match, he was stoic, no longer tossing out those sly grins or smiles that he'd been punctuating his offense with since last year's Mania. This was Reigns working an emotionless style on purpose, leaving plenty of room for Balor to play the clear underdog babyface. Even when Reigns has a clear size advantage (against AJ Styles some months ago or Daniel Bryan in 2015 or even against Rollins), he's always shown an ability to use facial expressions to get across anguish and rally support from at least a portion of the audience. Last night, there was none of it. All the while, the commentators seemed more hesitant to heap praise on the guy than at any time I've heard since his debut. This doesn't feel like the start of a "redemption" story either. So, what does everyone else think? Am I reading to much into this or did the ending of RAW seem like it could be summed up as "The Birth of a New Star...The Fall of Another"?

Overall, very good but not great...but I'd almost argue that it has very little to do with anything that actually happened between bells. For starters, this was essentially an unpromoted match, meaning you really didn't have the "air" of it being a big deal the way you would had they saved this exact same match (move for move) for SummerSlam. Similarly, as this was on a TV show, you're stuck with accepting a 4-minute commercial break (thankfully there was only one during the match). Again, this may just have to do with time constraints or whatever instructions they were given, but Banks' suicide dive and Charlotte's moonsault were BIG moments that I feel like would've been sold longer and given more room to "breathe" on a pay-per-view show rather than on RAW where, literally within 2 minutes of Charlotte backflipping from the top turnbuckle to the arena floor, we were seeing them trading submission finishers. Too rushed. Finally, the post-match. I sound like a broken record at this point but, again, just seems like it would've been a bigger moment in Brooklyn. The Pittsburgh crowd did their best to show their NXT love and obviously were behind Sasha (and Balor), but you really can't compare the crowds of a city like Pittsburgh (or even my beloved Cleveland) with the atmosphere of a NYC crowd. ***1/2 is how i rated it. It will likely make many lists of Best TV Matches of the Year, but I doubt it will make my Top 10...which is just a bit sad because I'm fairly convinced that, if you adjust the setting and add an extra 2-3 minutes of just ssstttrreeetttcchhhinng time between the big spots with ample selling or just letting the performers bask in the "Holy Shit" and "This is Awesome" chants that they received, this would've been an easy 4 stars.

Definitely a strange choice. I didn't watch and haven't watched regularly in awhile, but is Del Rio injured? Isn't he on SD? I'm actually a bigger Ziggler fan than a Del Rio one, but Del Rio was my pick to challenge Ambrose for a number of reasons. I'm guessing Ziggler is turning heel in the build, but it won't freshen him up unless they really alter just about everything about him. Maybe even give him a bodyguard like Nash suggested.

Was that roughly the same time period as Cornette's NWA stable in the late 90s? I remember that idea really sucked too, the kind of angle that, to a knowledgable wrestling fan made some sense, but, to the fan who had only recently been tuning into wrestling thanks to the nWo and Steve Austin would probably have come off like the dumbest "rip off" of the nWo, even if only because of their name and the fact that, IIRC, Cornette's goal was to somehow "take over" the WWE and written it to traditional wrestling.

The League of Nations immediately jumps into my mind. ADR and Sheamus weren't exactly hot before teaming up, but this stable put them in 3 Man Band range. Del Rio and Sheamus didn't even make the PPV card last night, so, just goes to show where they are on the pecking order...

Fan of this one too. On my blog I described it as "tightly packed with good work, nice sequences, and credible pin attempts." I gave it 3 stars and would've had it as my MOTN except I enjoyed the Macho Man/Flair match more. Meltzer gave it 3 and a quarter FWIW. DDP was awesome in 95.

I'm hoping that one of the ideas they have is to return to some squash matches ala NXT (where the idea of JTTSes has actually helped create buzz about the clear victors (your Corbins or Balors) *and* the jobbers who put them over, such as Breeze, Swann, and Dillinger). I'd go a step further and use locals or generic NXT undercard guys. For example, Orton is boring as shit at times, but I'm not opposed to watching him work a 5-minute squash where he essentially "plays the hits" and murders some jabroni. Then, as Corbin does the same elsewhere on the card for a few weeks, the idea of an Orton/Corbin match would be a bit more appealing. Instead, we'll likely get that match within the first month, cold, and it'll have no intrigue. For another example, yeah, the AA/Usos matches could be good, even great, but would it not be better to build up AA with vignettes and then "exhibition" matches where they just toss around and destroy locals, giving the wider audience a chance to familiarize themselves with their signature offense before we get AA/Usos?