Jesse Ewiak

As somebody who doesn't like either Punk or The Elite, this is win-win for me - Punk's still a goof who lost in a little over a minute after pushing that whole UFC deal, but the Elite are such goofs they got beat up by that guy. I'd argue that Cody made the correct decision not to be a miserable asshole, and from statements of people still in AEW, he was nowhere as isolated as Punk is, and for the last part, I'll make a Trading Space dollar bet with you the main event of Mania is Cody vs. Roman or if Rock is around, Rock vs. Roman and Cody vs. Rollins is the male main event for the other night.

Oh sure - there's a ton of FA signings announced at 12:01 or whenever FA starts, as well. But my point is, and I'm sure Tony knows this, and is just playing to his base, is that he can't actually do much about Trips texting Tommy End and sending him gifs of being in NXT main events right before he does the job to 65 year old Sting and Darby Allin. Or however WWE is currently reminding AEW talent of greener grass, currently open to them. Obviously, End can't break his contract, but if he can get Tony to release him, that's something else entirely.

Also, contract tampering isn't really a thing that exists in the actual legal world in the way people think happens - somebody at Google can call up somebody at Apple and see what their situation is. Sure, if they've signed an agreement not to leave for x time, they can't break that, but it doesn't mean nobody can negotiate with them, or remind them why Apple is bad and Google is good, or whatever. The only reason it's a thing in the NBA or NFL is all the teams agree not to do it. There's nothing Tony can't actually do much about somebody who is friends with Black texting him.

I mean, we have to remember, we're all old guys here, mostly. We grew up w/ Punk's and other guys in his generation rise. There's a whole mini-generation of younger hardcore fans who's way into the smart scene was New Japan, Omega and Being the Elite on Youtube, after Punk had gone to his really nice apartment building in Chicago for the past seven years. To that group of fans, that I see semi-regularly on Twitter and Reddit, Punk wasn't the guy leading the charge - he was the guy sitting on his ass for the past few years until he got a big enough check (and also, people are memory holing brave CM Punk's short return to the WWE, proving I think to many people it's not some brave, but a paycheck), since it sure wasn't Punk building the indies, bringing New Japan to prominence, betting on themselves to create a PPV, etc. Obviously, Punk is somewhat a draw (though not the kind of draw that people online and Punk were claiming last year), but if you already believe, as many smart fans do, that you shouldn't appease the casuals, why should they care Punk brings in fans? As somebody who actually thinks both sides are wrong, both the Omega/BTE/early AEW and the Punk/etc. fanboys, I can only say Let Them Fight. I could also an "everything for everyone" instead of a three ring circus is instead just a Golden Corral instead, where everything blends together and nothing stands out.

How did Becky Lynch become the biggest star in the company? By haviing more than two-minute segments on TV, even when they weren't 10/10. Also, you can make Thunder Rosa giving up the title a big deal w/out it just being an 8 minute promo like Punk. Now, yes, it might've meant somebody in another match would've been only able to kick out of 2 finishers instead of 3, runining their deep, intricate storyline that only 10% of the already hardcore audience gets.

I say this as a SJW left-wing social democrat - 95% of people don't care that much about politics, and also, this is the wrestling business. Plus, considering they're all pretty well-off and "independent contractors", and thus, have screwy tax situations, I bet lots of even the more socially aware wresters probably have some views on taxes closer to Kane than Bernie Sanders. When it comes to Vince specifically, the reality is most of these guys are still probably friends w/ people who the only reason they haven't done as shitty things as Vince is becaus they don't have the power to do so, because they're in a business of carnies. Look at the smoking crater that is the UK indy scene. Hell, look at the NFL - how many players on any other team are going to speak out against DeShaun Watson when a healthy amount of their current or former teammates have done shady things.

I mean, is it actually a shock that a guy who has been touchy his entire wrestling career continues to be so? Like, he stumbled into actually being correct w/ his treatment in the WWE when it comes to his injuries and such, but he also wanted to be the Top Guy, without none of the extra responsibilities that being a Top Guy for WWE has and got salty about that.

To the " if a Youtube kid can walk in and out-wrestle half the people on the roster" point. Indeed - perhaps that should be the point. If any athletic guy from the outside can be 80% as good as 90% of wrestlers as far doing impressive athletic stuff with a few months of training, than those wrestlers should maybe focus on stuff an athletic guy on Youtube can't do, like actually learning how to cut a good promo, or tell a story in-ring that doesn't need a frog splash through a table to get huge reactions. It's not 1997 anymore - everybody can do a plancha, so being able to four flips instead of three does not make you that special.

Speaking personally, putting aside the idea that the people you listed are actually bigger stars than they were before in any real way (and I guess in this version of reality, Moxley wasn't really treated as a top star because what, he wasn't pushed above Rollins and Roman and he didn't get to have a weapon and blood filled brawl w/ Brock like he wanted?), I'd much rather have the future of the WWE be in much of the NXT 2.0 roster, including Carmelo Hayes, the Creed's, Bron, et al than a bunch of 30+ year old guy w/ lots of indy miles on them. I'd much rather the WM 41 & 42 cards be full of folks currently either on NXT, in the performance center, or currently just getting started on the indies, as opposed to a bunch of guys who were on Takeover's a couple of years ago.

I trust neither the WWE or the people who make their money off saying how terrible the WWE is, but even if the latter group was correct, what's the point of reporting Brock isn't there, until you can confirm he's not actually coming back, outside of creating drama and farming clicks? Now, that's a problem w/ sports media in general, obviously, but that doesn't mean I can't make fun of Sapp and Alvarez for wanting to be the first to get the "WWE IS IN CHAOS" retweets. If there's an actual story, OK, report it. Otherwise, wait for actual confirmation there's an actual story, like journalists actually should.

Or ya' know, maybe people on Twitter shouldn't breathlessly report somebodies left, when it's entirely possible they blew up, and were back inside an hour later.

Yup, I'm sure Titus could've worked the past few years, but WWE gets a better ROI on him going to charity events than being another guy on the roster.

Also, Vince was not announced for RAW. A lot of things people online either dislike or try to argue is a waste/bad booking - Brock coming back, Roman's domination, the Owens/Ezekiel feud (even though that's more mixed), and the current women's roster appears to be somewhat clicking with people, as much as any booking can click with people.

RAW did nearly two million against the supposed new titanic of ratings (or at least it was argued last Wednesday) in the form of the Stanley Cup. I think at some point, people have to realize that the current WWE audience wants to see stuff like Brock vs. Roman part one zillion, the same way the people watching Marvel movies want to see the snark and CGI, and the people watching Fast & Furious want to see big stunts and don't care about the writing, even if people online complain about the death of cinema. Also, the other secret is this was always true - the WWE did its best business during the AE during its perhaps worst writing period - but that's because people weren't watching for the booking. They were watching because Austin, Rock, Foley, and McMahon were doing entertaining things, and there were hot women on TV in the era before easily accessible Internet porn.

Yeah, people forget that when Roman was actually treated like an ass kicking babyface, he got better reactions. They were just too focused on underdog Roman for whatever reason. But yeah, I'll die on the hill that Roman should've won at WM 31, had his long face title reign to Summerslam or Survivor Series, and then they could've made an actual decision instead of the heel run that actually killed RAW ratings (look - the first time RAW's drop in ratings outpaced cable TV in general was Rollins as top heel. To be fair, that's also the period when Cena became the US title guy and not as full-time, which I think was the larger reason, but it's fun to dunk on Seth).

I mean, just maybe the WWE had a point in booking Jeff as basically a midcard nostalgia act, doing largely safe stuff, including possibly 24/7 goofiness. Even if it appears that didn't totally work.

Sorry - double post

I mean, I was being somewhat hyperbolic for comedic effect, but the reality was, the "push Adam Cole as the top guy" was tried, and it lost decisively to AEW, and now I find it very odd Adam Cole is being claimed as this uber-popular guy when the actual ratings when the whole brand was built around him simply shows nothing of that sort. This isn't a Steve Austin/Foley/etc. situation where they weren't used properly - Cole was one of the main pillars of the NXT run against AEW and it failed, absolutely. As for disliking people - there are plenty of people on the AEW roster I have an antipathy for, but most of the main event picture, well I guess, the people who should be part of the main event picture (Mox, Omega, Bryan, etc.) can be argued as actually being somewhat of a draw and even Punk was initially a draw, but seems to have been hurt by weird booking, as seen by the Rampage ratings. Sure, that's basically true, but the issue is people were making the defense of Cole at the top by saying, basically, "too bad, he's really over, so it's right Tony should push him," when there's no evidence of that fact. If people want to say they like Adam Cole, and they're fine w/ him being pushed at the top, fine, that's subjective. You can want whomever you want to be pushed at the top. But, if you make a business argument about Cole being pushed at the top, have some actual evidence beyond people chant along with him. Now, as a side note I think a big part of why there's all this open disagreement over the booking and some discontent, even among AEW fans (of which I would not count myself as one), is because there's this slow realization after the summer where all the big guns came in, and people were fantasy ratings booking Dynamite actually passing up RAW that it turned out all those big guns weren't those actual big of guns, and despite proclamations to the contrary, Punk & Danielson weren't the modern equivalent of Hall & Nash jumping, and also, there's a large swath of the AEW fanbase that never wanted much of the NXT leftovers as Tony Khan does.

Adam Cole may be popular, but I have no evidence that he's over, as in actually drawing people's eyes to the TV. Hell, NXT 1.0 was built around him as it was getting killed by AEW when Joey Janela was still a major part of it's shows and ratings have stagnated as he's been pushed at the top of the card, so much that so that even Reddit is daring to critizing Saint Tony, savior of wrestling. The reality is, yes, I don't doubt he gets a giant pop when he shows up. But, in reality, and this is not an insult becuase you need people like this - he's basically a Jim Duggan for the 2020's indy crowd - an over chant, but not appealing to anybody not already watching.

Honestly, I could see a post-Vince decision by Nicky Khan or Peacock where the women get their whole entire show.

It's odd there's all this talk about 50/50 booking and how it achieves nothing for years, but when somebody actually does a series of jobs to make somebody a tippy-top guy, all of the sudden that person who does the jobs is a goober. I mean, was Triple H a goober when he put Batista over three times in a row? Like, Rollins is a made guy for the current WWE audience - he could lose every PPV match for the next year, and be just as over within a few weeks. Like, this is how you actually build up a babyface - the heel talks shit, and gets shut the hell up once he actually has to get in the ring.

Maybe between some wrestlers probably being lost in the shuffle because they're not all that creative and other wrestlers making questionable creative decision shows that sometimes, wrestlers being able to do whatever they want actually isn't good business, in the long run. Again, Punk being in overlong matches against low and mid-carders for months and Danielson & Moxley currently being in a faction where they have random matches against lower card guys and entertaingly squash them may be what they want to do, but perhaps, just perhaps, sometimes you need to be able to tell a wrestler, "you're doing this, because it'll make us money and it'll be good entertainment."

Yeah, I think the most likely thing is, "oh, my husband who I love just had a massive heart attack, and I'm incredibly rich, so why do I need to fly around the world and not be around my kids," Like, I'm sure people will fantasy book some Game of Thrones-esque political manuevering by Nick Khan or something, but this seems like the obvious and most realistic reason.

Well, not quite Billy Gunn levels of dissonance, the Hardy's coming up in the height of the Atittude Era means people forget they're only small by late 90's/early 00s standards, not normal human standards. Jeff is 6' 1" and is announced at 225, but even if you think that's worked a bit, the Bucks are working their stats as well, so he still has 2-3 inches in height and probably 25-30 pounds on him. For all the talk about size, the big thing that throws people off on the main roster is height. Well, for example, Pete Dunne looked slighlty small in NXT, it wasn't totally out of line. On the main roster, he's standing beside Sheamus and that's that.

Even a normal independent contractor deal doesn't mean an independent contractor can't sign an exclusive deal w/ the company. I'm sure there are consultants that sign exclusive contracts for company x in y field, where they can't work for any other company in that field while working for company x. So, that's sort of a false idea that being an independent contractor means contracts don't matter. Now, specific parts of WWE contracts may be BS, but if people don't fight them, then they aren't BS in reality, and this idea that even in a world with stronger independent contractor rules, that it'd mean anybody could walk out on the WWE at any time, is out there, since even NFL players, who have a union, can be basically cut at any time, any many contracts are non-guaranteed, just like WWE ones. Also, the same thing happens in sports - teams don't play players, but won't trade them either, until they get a good enough deal in their view. Should a team be forced to play somebody if they're under contract? When you're signing a contract for a job, you're not signing a contract for creative fulfillment, you're signing an agreement for money. Again - in any recent times, if you don't want that deal, don't sign a contract w/ the WWE. Period. On the second point, to make a devil's advocate, the idea isn't that everybody who doesn't become a superstar in 90 days is immediately let go, but 90-day cycles mean people who aren't improving according to the WWE can be let go without being dead weight for months. Again, might be a bad idea, but just like it turned out the WWE hadn't actually stopped hiring independent wrestlers, I highly doubt there are going to be tons of people who are let go after a single 90-day cycle of being hired.