Read on for my segment-by-segment thoughts on Smackdown.
At first I hated that Booker T. was made GM, but maybe this means we'll hear him on commentary less and he'll be used to elevate some younger talents (Rhodes, Ziggler, Miz, etc.).
Good segment with Booker, Sheamus, and Del Rio.
Solid match with Sheamus and Tensai. You can't teach veteran instincts. Both men benefitted from their time wrestling outside of WWE.
Not surprising that Teddy Long is back in the picture. It makes sense that they'd do something with him and Eve.
Cesaro finally gets mic time. Good. I wish 3 hours of Raw meant promos for matches on Smackdown instead of recaps and Tout.
As much as I like Santino, it was cool seeing Cesaro beat him. Both guys are good at what they do and I hope both have bright futures. I really hope we're in for a U.S. Title feud with those two.
I liked Bryan's segment. Maybe it is good to keep him heel.
Fine six-man tag. The right team won. Fresh stars over '90s/early '00s guys.
I liked the post-match from Bryan.
Fine Orton promo. He's not the most compelling character in 2012.
Good Ryback promo. Glad he gets to talk. He'll need that to make it far in the company.
I liked Jinder vs. Ryback. I think they might have something with this feud. Jinder should cut promos on Ryback in the weeks to come and keep escaping by an inch to build fan interest in Ryback.
Thank you WWE for giving character development to the tag team title feud with the backstage segment.
And that's how you build a tag team title feud. The two teams have issues with each other and the challengers have beaten the champions in non-title singles matches where the other people came to blows.
I'm glad WWE acknowledges Cody vs. Booker. I like that the match between Cody and Sin Cara is treated as important enough to give a week's build to.
Fine main event. The action was good, and Del Rio wasn't hurt by a pinfall loss.
Good ending to the show to continue Sheamus/Del Rio.
I'll be back for Raw on Tuesday and a news post later.
Two (hopefully last, for now) segments I'm interested to hear your thoughts on. You mentioned Young was a bit too intense in his promos, so how did you like this one here? My only "beef" with his promos and demeanor was the inconsistency at times. 4:45 into it.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idABIB_akQ4&feature=fvst
That being said, with Young's current gimmick and deameanor being more "natural", how would you rate him on a scale of 1-5 in terms of being "main roster ready"? I know it's hard to determine, but one can imagine the hypotheticals. I'd hope he's past the "B" and 4/5 range.
Here is one more segment I'm interested to hear your thoughts on.
http://www.telly.com/HMNQH
Oh, and one more important thing and article you would definitely like to see. Though Bleacher Report has some illegitimacies, this article was interesting. What are your thoughts on their opinions on Titus and this countdown?
ReplyDeletehttp://bleacherreport.com/articles/1267512-wwes-10-worst-in-ring-wrestlers-in-the-company-right-now#/articles/1267512-wwes-10-worst-in-ring-wrestlers-in-the-company-right-now/page/9
That was a better promo from Young, but it was just a general problem with his delivery that I never really liked. It sounded like he was trying to "put on a heel voice" during most of his promos. His voice sounds completely different now, to me indicating he was doing something he wasn't comfortable with on NXT.
ReplyDeleteI guess he'd be an A- or so, since he's clearly holding his own in the ring and his promos aren't bad. I don't know if he'd make it as a singles star, but for now he's fine.
I liked what Rhodes did, though using Titus' music was weird.
Someone's got to be in the bottom 10 of the roster no matter how good the roster is. Given the internet's distaste for big guys, it doesn't shock me that a number of them are featured there. I maintain that they have a place in the roster and aren't really "bad" most of the time unless they struggle to do the basic pacing of a match and are sluggish (Khali, Cottonwood).
And here's why I don't like (or read) Bleacher Report, based on that article (in order):
ReplyDelete1. "No-selling" isn't necessarily up to the performer. Otherwise, why wouldn't more people do it? Why look weak in a match ever if you have control over how much you can sell? Curt Hawkins could just sit right back up after a Ryback beating or kick out right at 3.
2. They're only judging Mahal by his appearances on the main roster.
3. How can someone know how good Ryback is when he's never worked longer TV matches? Antonio Cesaro works generally short matches, but he was critically acclaimed pre-WWE. We've never seen Ryback work long enough to judge how good he is.
4. Quoting any website that gives wrestling news, instead of the most credible sources. Meltzer isn't as accurate as other sources.
5. Camacho's barely wrestled on the main roster at all and we're already putting him on worst lists?
6. How do they know why Ezekiel hasn't gotten over with fans? Bleacher Report fans, maybe, but fans at large are different from vocal internet fans.
7. How do they know that WWE officials are hesitant to put the titles on PTP? They could just want to build them up for a bit first (you can only win the title for the first time once).
8. Again, judging Otunga just on his TV matches when he does more on live events. This should have raised a red flag not to take this article too seriously.
9. How else should they use Khali if they can't put him in the ring?
Yeah, as a Communications minor, I definitely see how Young's voice could have been more crisp and clear back then on NXT. It's a small factor, but it was still something to correct. On the other hand, I don't think the pros and fans devalued Young because of it (I don't think so, anyway).
ReplyDeleteIt's a damned if you do, damned if you don't thing with Bleacher Report. I mean, every time I type in a superstar's name or if I'm looking for info, literally at least five articles come up from that site.
My main criticism and why I don't take sites like that as credibly is that it's more about hypotheticals and "should be" or "should do this" stances instead of matter of fact and what is actually the truth. Some points on there and some of the wrestlers on there should indeed make that list, but need a little more justification and proof before that can be taken into a decent amount of advocacy.
Fair points there. I agree that with Cesaro, Otunga and Mahal that just because they haven't been involved in longer matches doesn't mean that's all they have to offer. Like you mentioned, House Shows and Live Events often feature longer matches, which result in more of a diverse moveset, with them not being live or televised. The main rosters are more error-sensitive and are live (except SmackDown) which is a big reason for less air time. It is mainly WWE's fault that happens rather than those wrestlers.
Some of those names and arguments the site mentioned seems like it's kind of penalizing guys purely based on size and that huge size means less mobility and technical skill. From that standpoint, I also devalue that article a bit.
I just don't think it sounded natural coming from him. I consider "out of ring" things just as important as what goes on in the ring, so cutting good promos was needed to get a 5. (I wasn't expecting as much out of Titus, since I felt he could be successful in a role like Ezekiel or Mason Ryan and wouldn't need to speak much. Darren would get lost in the shuffle more easily without a strong character since his style of wrestling in of itself doesn't keep someone around as long in WWE.)
ReplyDeleteBleacher Report has a lot of articles, but a lot of it is opinion. Not that there's anything wrong with that. I just wouldn't go there looking for inside info based on some of the places they cite as sources.
The original idea for TV shows was as something like commercials for live events and PPVs, so smaller matches and more angles makes sense. These days they revolve more around TV, but they still have PPVs and live events designed for longer matches.
I used to be one of the people who didn't see big guys as talented unless they were agile. Now I can at least see why they're used, even if I don't personally want to see them as much as I want to see more athletic stuff.
Yeah, I see where you're coming from with it not sounding as natural with Young at times on NXT. I think most of it was that he was a good guy for so long, that it took some gelling to get used to it. I'm not sure if it cost him with the other pros' opinions, but a good thing is that he did get used to the role and made it seem more natural as time went on (Exhibit A being his feud with Striker).
ReplyDeleteIn his current role, I definitely see Young as more natural. You can tell he's more of a goofy and entertaining character at heart than his NXT days, so it's good to see him do well in the ring as well as show some personality. Personality wasn't necessarily something his NXT Season 5 days were about, so it's good to see him in a more formidable role. I'm interested to see, if and when the PTP devalue, how he fairs as a singles wrestler.
That was seriously the whole thing I was harping on during NXT: he didn't fit his role as well as he does now.
ReplyDeleteIf JTG can surprise me and outlast Shad, Darren could theoretically outlast Titus. There's no reason to think of splitting them yet, though, as they're still finding their footing as a tag team.
Chuck, I'm sure you heard by now, but can you believe A.W. got fired? I mentioned to you before, I can understand how his mishap is unfortunate for the company, but mistakes happen. It seems like it's going too far and not considering the other alternatives, such as 1) Scripting his on-air comments via mic, 2) Taking his mic away, 3) Or just putting him in another role. Has there really been much public outlash to warrant this? Mistakes like this happen all of the time, so I'm a little upset here. Why fire him two weeks later and then change up and chastize Young and O'Neil for it when they're in the thick of a battle with Truth and Kingston now?
ReplyDeleteHow do you view this as affecting the Primetime Players now? I remember you mentioned A.W. being the mouthpiece was a good idea. However, I've seen personality from these two by themselves. What is your prediction or what are you hearing from here on in?
So I've been pretty busy lately- preparing to move into a dorm. Nervous and might be too busy to blog in the fall!
ReplyDeleteAnyway: If you haven't seen AW's post-release rant, I strongly recommend it because it's pretty much how I see things.
WWE's hyper-sensitive. That's about all I can say. They're not thinking about talent and storylines as much as sponsors and positive publicity. Linda McMahon's running for Senate (as she did in 2010) and they want to look like wholesome kid-friendly entertainment. If someone breaks that, they better have a lot of standing (Punk) to avoid backlash. AW was fairly new to the scene so they presumably felt he was expendable. It's politics.
WWE's hard to predict these days with the number of writers they have and Vince always having the ability to change things on the fly. I definitely think it hurts them since they got a bigger push with AW. WWE's about getting people to watch the show (in a PG way). Darren and Titus are going to have to be compelling enough to draw people in without AW. They have a chance to break out, but I think AW was their ace in the hole pre-Kobe joke.
Looking 2-3 months from now, titles or no titles I don't see them reigniting the division unless people with power push for it. They can only face Primo/Epico and Kofi/Truth so many times. They might end up like Santino- having the title, being on TV fairly often, but spinning their wheels because those in charge don't know what to do with them. Such is life in 2012 for a WWE talent.
Unfortunately, you're right in that the company really values politics and its own image over storylines and its talent progressing. It's a shame from our perspectives as fans, because storylines and the talent are big chunks of why we watch the show. There are probably newer fans who watch the show and wonder who Linda McMahon is, what she looks like and why she's never on television.
ReplyDeleteI could understand if A.W. did something breaching the WWE's code of conduct or rules and regulations CONTINUOUSLY or PURPOSELY, but it's a complete shame. A simple, innocent, and some would say funny slip of the tongue costs him his job. Another question it brings up is why would they let him continue on a live mic for THREE more nationally-televised shows if you'd ultimately fire him?
Honestly, I'd like to see what Young and O'Neil do from here and think they can do well without A.W. They really made that gimmick without A.W. early on right after they got on the main roster from NXT, and that's certainly not an easy task. Remember before A.W. with the "millions of dollars" promo and the other segments?
I also think the split could also prove a lot to the WWE by showing they don't need a mouthpiece (unlike Ziggler). In the tag division, they can make up for eachother's weaknesses without really losing any credibility. They've had good segments in the past without A.W. and I think can rebound without him. Then again, maybe in the more strategic future (2-3 months) maybe it's not up to them with the fickleness of the WWE. We'll see what happens.
By the way, you're done with your credits at that community college now and are on the second half of your degree, then? Congrats. I personally never lived on campus (I got my AA, BA and MA all by commuting), so I can't empathize, but can understand the sense of independence and self-autonomy that living on your own would bring.
WWE's now a big corporate entity that wants to be seen in a positive light. They probably are more concerned with the networks that carry their shows and their sponsors than what fans want.
ReplyDeleteThey might have waited to see how much publicity and backlash they'd get before firing him. I didn't hear of any WWE protests, but they didn't want to give Linda's opponents any more ammunition ("They kept this guy under contract after he made a rape joke?"). It's hard enough fighting off what they did in the '90s.
I remember their personality, but think they got further over with AW. AW's someone you want to see punched in the face by Kofi or Truth. I don't think Darren or Titus are quite that hateable.
I don't think Ziggler needs a mouthpiece, but having Vickie certainly helps him. He's held his own in big promos before.
Remember that it's not about how good of a team they are but how much of a reaction they can get (in theory. A lot of it is up to who backstage likes them). WWE might change their minds on pushing them. It does look promising so far since they've gotten angles past "team wants to challenge for the titles".
I'm just transferring to another 2-year school that has dorms so I can get more of a taste of college life before shipping out to a larger school. I don't know how long I'll have to be there. I kind of like not being a full-time student so I actually learn things and don't just spend time studying for things I'll never need to know. The people who just grind through a lot of classes and don't have a life outside of that worry me. I need down time to be creative and experience fun things instead of just trying to become another worker bee like others seem to be going for.
Fair point. Young and O'Neil aren't quite "hateable" YET, but a large chunk of that may not be their fault and indeed Creative's. Case-in-point being the Usos mocking that really had that "hate" factor to it. I think both of them (especially Young with him getting into the groove of being an intense character late in Season 5 of NXT) can combine that charisma with the intensity and "hate" factor given the right angle.
ReplyDeleteThat kind of goes hand-in-hand with a good reaction in that boos are like cheers for them (in my mind, anyway). We'll see what Creative has for them.
I hear you on wanting to soak in the information of college rather than blow through it. I had that mentality going in (I blew through my BA in four years and MA in one year) and by 22, I had three degrees with a small amount of experience. That may sound like a good thing, but now, I'll need this upcoming year to get my experience to match my education, when I really should have taken more time to do the degrees WHILE getting some experience. Definitely a good idea on your part there.
They were doing a good job building hate with AW. I hope they get another manager or something who can run interference since that's kind of rare these days.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I'm being pushed by my mom and a counselor I work with to get some job experience even if school's paid for. I wanted something like tutoring but I didn't take the "right" math class (they don't have Statistics at this school) and apparently they don't have English tutors since the teachers run a writing center. I don't know how much of a job plus school I can handle, but I'd rather be running errands for teachers or whatever than packing up orders.