DMJ

Haha! Never! I liked the Shane/Miz match plenty. The right guy didn't win there...but it was a clever enough way around that as, clearly, Miz beat Shane's ass up and down the arena and then "lost" because Shane landed on him when they were both out cold. It worked for me. The inclusion of Miz's dad was the right level of hokey. I liked that, from what I recall, Shane didn't attempt any of that MMA-inspired submission crap (which I was worried he would after that ultra-dumb submission he put on Miz's dad at Fastlane). Wisely, they kept it as just a brawl with spots that did seem to escalate in violence without becoming so ridiculously staged/convoluted that it took me out of the action (like, say, one of my least favorite matches ever - Shane vs. Taker from a few Manias ago). Also, god bless whatever agent or producer (or Shane himself) for Shane actually being a heel and not having a moment with his wife and kids on camera.* * If he did, I missed it.

I don't think I agree. I don't think the issue is when the show starts. I'm in Cleveland, so I could easily watch it from 6 to 12:30 and still get up for work the next day. My feeling is that, as a fan, I would enjoy the shows more if they weren't 6-and-half hours and I think, ultimately, overexposure and giving away too much and having so much filler is part of what has watered down and hurt their TV and house show business. Instead, like many fans, I watch these shows in pieces and parts over a half-dozen sittings and the idea of any of this being "event viewing" is laughable. It used to be that every Monday Night was "event viewing," that if you missed it, you were kind of stuck never seeing it or hoping a buddy had taped it. Technology changed that...but the WWE has also actively made it so that even WrestleMania isn't "event viewing" anymore. EDIT - Whoops! In my original post, I also forgot to note in my lengthy post above how the worst part of the Batista/HHH match, which I thought was actually kinda fun at first, then slow, then good again by the end, was Shawn Michaels on commentary. You know how some all-time great players don't make great coaches? And some coaches started out as just average or below-average players? Shawn Michaels was once an entertaining, energetic promo, but boy, he was AWFUL on commentary. I liked how they had guest commentators all over the show, but he was easily the worst (and its not like Paige had a stellar night herself).

Like the Goldberg/Lesnar match from Survivor Series, this one was better than the sum of its parts. For starters, Paul Heyman's pre-match promo was great. As we've all said, WrestleManias have become far too long and the shows are no longer building to "peaks" as much as having multiple peaks and multiple valleys. Having this match as your opener? Awesome, fun choice if you ask me. Then, you get Lesnar tossing Rollins for the first few minutes. This worked for me and Rollins, for once, actually sold some damage. Maybe it helped that he wasn't targeting a specific limb? I feel like Rollins isn't great at selling a damaged knee, but general pain/exhaustion? He's not the worst (he's not the best either). Regardless, I can watch Rollins get his ass kicked all day so I didn't mind that that was the meat of the match. And before you know it, we're wrapping things up. Lesnar suffers yet another nut shot and Rollins hits a bunch of Curb Stomps. While I don't necessarily "buy it," I do think that has more to do with how weak the move is (specifically Rollins' execution of it) rather than Lesnar being booked as "unbeatable." In this regard, again I point to the Goldberg match and, to a lesser extent, his matches with Taker, Reigns, and even Balor. If you want to beat Brock, your only strategy is to hit him in the nuts and blitzkrieg him with your finisher over and over. Silver lining: At least it was the Curb Stomp and not the Pedigree? The crowd, who was still fully awake at this point, popped huge. Rollins is not someone I rate very highly, but its undeniable that he was the clear favorite - and maybe more importantly - the one guy that the audience was still not 100% convinced would actually win. Having him go on first and set the tone also had the added effect of making the WWE Championship more of a toss-up as many fans, myself included, believed they wouldn't have babyfaces win out all three of the top title matches (I'm not sure the main event finish was ever in doubt). 3.5-out-of-5 is what I gave it on my blog.

Just finished watching the show last night. It usually takes me 5-6 sittings, but this one was really on 3-4. A few thoughts... - Overall, I thought this was one of the better death marches the WWE has ever had. The right guys won mostly (though I personally was pulling for Brock). When people argue about "listening to the fans/not listening to the fans," its not always so clear cut. Many of us dislike Rollins, but you're kidding yourself if you think he's not over with a large portion of the crowd. Is he over enough to be a top guy? I don't think he would be in any other era. In this era, though? He's in the top 5 babyfaces. And with so many titles and so many PPVs, if you're in that position (and you're the type the WWE wants to push), you beat Brock Lesnar. - There was a ton of filler, but surprisingly, I found that even the filler matches were good. In other contexts, I think they would've been better regarded. AJ/Orton was solid and I don't believe people saying AJ has lost a step. He looked smooth as ever out there but there were no stakes and the crowd was coming down from Seth/Brock. The tag match was fun (and considering how much The Bar was used this week, its no surprise that they were given so much of the spotlight). Balor/Lashley was a really good sprint that was so clearly hamstringed by time - move-for-move, I was impressed by Lashley's offense and I actually liked Balor working like Sonic the Hedgehog. They had chemistry. Give them more time to actually sell things, cut the Demon out, and put this match on a "B-show" and its a Match of the Night contender. Joe/Mysterio going under 2 minutes wasn't a shocker after Kofi and the right guy won with the finish (Rey has survived countless losses like this, while the opposite wouldn't have been true, plus Rey wasn't 100%). - Just as everyone predicted, Reigns/McIntyre was an unnecessary misfire. McIntyre was actually the star here - this might have even been his best performance since joining the main roster (it helps not having Dolph around). Unfortunately, for how impressive his offense was, the crowd was indifferent because this was a thrown-together match late in the show. I've always thought Reigns' bumping and selling was his strength and it was on full display here - unfortunately, his detractors hate this aspect of him (and maybe rightfully so) because his Superman Punch is eerily similar to the Hulk Ups and SuperCena stuff of the past. Basically, Reigns gets his butt kicked for 10 minutes, makes a comeback, and wins clean. So, even with some good ingredients, the resulting product did nothing for anyone. Reigns' win didn't really help him because it was a "same old shit" performance in front of a cold crowd and McIntyre, despite looking great, eats yet another loss while the commentators try to talk about him being "on a roll." A double DQ or CO might've been the way to do this. Or, y'know, just don't put this match on the show, period. - Bryan is great, obvi. But i just wanted to add, do you know what I didn't hear during the match? I didn't hear anyone saying "Fight Forever" or "Both These Guys" or even "This is Awesome." Its crazy! The crowd was invested in who was going to win or lose and that is so rare. Compare the reactions for this match to anything on the NXT show or really any other WWE show and you're crazy if this isn't on your MOTY list in December. - The flash pin the main event was a slight disappointment after an otherwise really, really good match. Considering the amount of pressure on the performers, I tip my hat to them. I liked this more than Bryan/Orton/Batista, which I thought got really convoluted and overdramatic when Bryan got on the gurney. This match was simpler - just a straight up fight with some cool spots and (surprisingly) not much overselling and "sleeping on the floor outside" stretches that tend to plague triple threat matches. Not everything was executed flawlessly, but like in the Bryan/Kofi match, the small warts made it feel like more of a struggle than an overly choreographed dance routine (again, I really liked the NXT show, but those matches tend to suffer from this). - If you had cut 2-3 matches from the main show, this could've been an all-time great Mania. I didn't watch a second of the Pre-Show, by the way, and never will. Those entire hours should be cut, period. Make the main show the 3.5-4 hours. Give us 1-2 matches in the Pre-Show. You could shrink this whole thing to 4.5-5 hours (which would still be long, but hey, nobody is forcing anybody to watch the Pre-Show) and it would be way more bearable. But with the Pre-show we're talking 7 hours, right? Yeah, that's at least 2 hours too long and good matches were fought in front of cold crowds because of it.

Haha. Obviously I wouldn't want anyone to become unhealthy on purpose, but Drake looking so ripped definitely caught my eye too. Maybe he can sit under Tim White's learning tree a bit and pick up a few tips about how to enjoy a cheeseburger and a beer every now and then?

According to reddit, Meltzer called Cole/Gargano "perhaps the best WWE match of all time." I'm not as down as others, but it definitely won't make my Top 10 of the year for WWE and I can say that with confidence. It was the worst match of the night. It was still an above-average match saved by a very fun final stretch and got an extra push thanks to the emotional post-match, but the first two falls had some flaws. Not a "must see" and not even close to the Gargano/Almas match from last year.

I thought it was the best Takeover in a long while. I became a bit cold on NXT/WWE in general after the last two Takeovers - which I felt like had some issues with match order and featured too many matches featuring the same styles and layouts. For example, when you've got Ricochet, Aleister Black, Adam Cole, FIsh and O'Reilly, and Gargano on the same show, you know you're going to get a ton of superkicks and knees and it all becomes too samey for me. I felt like this show did a better job of providing variety and if those previous shows had been filled with matches I'd rate 3.5-out-of-5 (above average but not "must see"), this show's matches often were just that half-point better. - The opener was great. As much as I don't think Black and Ricochet should've been teamed on the main roster, in the NXT context for a final "send off" run, it worked and this match delivered. Mauro can be grating, but I liked his commentary here as he told the story of how this was a match that was expected to be a clash of styles but wasn't. I liked this better than the War Raiders/UE matches (when Strong started doing power moves on 300-pounders, it took me out of the match). - Dream/Riddle was great. To me, Dream's best matches have always been against strong, definitive characters - Aleister Black, for example, rather than heel Gargano. Riddle's gimmick may not be a colorful, but he's got undeniable charisma. Dream's moves, size, and expressiveness set him apart and I liked Riddle controlling things. Another phenomenal match. - Dunne/WALTER was stiff as hell, told a great story, and truly introduced a ton of wrestling fans (like myself) to a guy that I'd really only seen a few matches and a couple of clips of. I'm hoping Dunne gets brought to the main roster sooner than later because he's obviously supremely gifted while WALTER (is it always all capitalized?) blew me away with all the cool little things he does. As an introduction to WALTER, I thought this was great - almost the same as Nak/Zayn in the level of hype and pay-off. - The Women's Match was great from bell-to-bell. Bianca's power spots were awesome. The Sky Pirates combo moves were great. Baszler had the least amount of spotlight moments, but then again, she didn't need them - she had the biggest target on her back and she spent the match bumping and selling and trying her darndest to just grab somebody and choke them out. Bianca is still not as polished as some of the main roster stars, but she's going to mix really well with them once she gets there. People have been clamoring for a Sky Pirates/Boss Hug Connection showdown and WWE would be dumb not to do it on a big show because it could be awesome. I don't understand anyone complaining about Baszler retaining - her title run and the expectation of who might possibly dethrone her feels way different than Asuka's run because we've seen Baszler repeatedly cheat to win/barely eke out a victory. We know she can be beaten (Kairi Sane did it), its just a matter of who is going to finally do it. To me, that's good, interesting booking as long as she keeps getting heat (which she does). - The main event was the only match I'd put below 4 stars. Hated the first fall, but place the blame on the fact that at the past dozen Takeovers, Gargano kicked out of gunshots so seeing him get put down with a kick to the back of the head was underwhelming. I actually liked the second fall - totally made logical sense that Cole would tap to not sustain punishment (if your gripe is that Gargano's submission isn't particularly well-executed, that's fair, but to me, its been made to look impactful like Cena's STF). The third fall had too much no-selling and "let's do 6 spots in 2 minutes" wrestling in it, but the crowd was obviously enthralled and I would say that the suspense escalated, especially once the rest of UE showed up. The last 3-4 minutes were super captivating, I bit on the near falls, and I liked the post-match. It was the worst match of the night and it was still a 3.5-out-of-5 for me, well above average.

The WWE announced that they will have a weekly studio show on FS1 starting in the fall. I'm hoping that they make this a E:60/Sportscenter-esque show. It doesn't even need to really break kayfabe too much. For example, I would've tuned in or DVR'd an episode where a respectable Fox Sports interviewer actually talked to Dean Ambrose. You don't need to use words like "heel" or "face," but question likes, "Since you came back, it seemed that you were upset with the direction of your career. Would you say that was accurate?" or "You've decided not to resign with the WWE. Why? Are you burnt out on the life of a pro-wrestler?" The WWE Network is actually full of pretty good documentaries, like the Mark Henry one, that use euphemisms to get real points across. For example, when describing Henry's title run, most of the talking heads described him as developing a "killer instinct" and being more driven - not "He finally showed the maturity and skill level to get the monster push he was too green to get ten years earlier." They could cover injuries and recovery, signings, do "human interest" stories, air highlights, and do sitdown interviews with relevant people (think Vince or Rousey as compared to Seth Rollins, who is important as a WWE character but isn't a genuine power player in the industry). What they need to avoid is using the show as an advertisement, insisting on their own staff of "journalists" to be a part of it (Corey Graves is already ruining enough programming), and allow for FS1 to editorialize a little. Let FS1 cover the business and athletic sides of the industry with a tacit understanding that they won't just outright complain about "the booking" or "Creative." Again, the WWE Network is full of programming that effectively toes the line of letting us see the real people and processes of producing a pro-wrestling show without stepping over it into "Yup, there's a couple guys in charge who plan which dudes in which underwear are going to pretend to fight and which one is going to win and then you nerds and hicks eat it up."

I hope you're right. With Reigns last year, there was an undeniable sense of "just get on with it," that Roman was the hand-picked successor to Cena and that it was time to just pull the trigger and move on. I don't feel that way about this year. Part of it is because the other World Title matches are already doing "childhood dream/underdog" stories that feel way more real and special. Part of it is because the Lesnar Experiment is like one of those jokes that was funny was at first, then less funny, and is now funny again. Like, at first I loved him as dominant champ who is only around for big shows, then it got stale, now it is so ludicrous that they gave him the title again in 2018 (and buried Strowman to do it) that I like it again and want to see him keep the title again at Mania. The last part is because I just don't like Rollins.

I hope that's not the reason. Not to say that if the accusations are true, they should be ignored. If they're true, by all means, keep him out. But I searched "Vader Leon White sexual harassment" and "Vader Leon White sexual" and then I threw in the words "handsy" and "allegations" and everything else I could think of and...there were zero hits. I tried as hard as I could to dig up this dirt (which I'd never heard before) and couldn't find anything about it. It doesn't mean its not true or that if he was inducted, we wouldn't hear more about it...but where there's no smoke, there's no fire? Aside from whatever Bruce described on his podcast (which does sound pretty damning), its not like there are infamous road stories about Vader's sexual appetite. Those stories would be easy to track down. The internet is full of them - some directly from the horse's mouth (search "Scott Levy Raven sex" - but not on a work computer - if you need proof). A couple years ago we all got video evidence of some of the consensual debauchery young wrestlers get into. But of all the road stories about Vader out there, none describe him as sexual aggressive. So, if that is what is keeping him out, I'd be surprised.

To some people, unless you watch every single match on every single show, you're not a "real fan" and are just trying to spoil there fun. These are the people that need to listen to every album cut from every Nickelback or Imagine Dragons record before they dare disparage these bands or say it isn't for them. Hearing their radio singles? Seeing their videos? Not enough apparently. You can't criticize anything you don't have absolute knowledge of. If you asked them if they like the taste of dog food, they'd have to admit that the answer is "maybe." The smell or look wouldn't be enough to know. They'd have to eat a can. Of every variety. I watch the Network specials in full. I watch clips on YouTube from the TV show. In the old days, this would make me a die-hard, but they produce so much TV, I've probably seen less than 30% of what they produce. I've still seen enough WWE wrestling in my 35 years on Earth to judge/criticize/praise what I like on a wrestling forum and feel like I can defend those positions.

^ Brilliant! (EDIT - This was in response to Savage's post a few responses above) Don't forget President Gorilla Monsoon's daughter also appearing on TV weekly because unless you have an Authority Figure spoon-feeding you how matches are booked, cancelled, changed, and also playing favorites with the competitors, the audience will be confused/won't care. EDIT - Also, there's a discussion going on elsewhere about the best/worst build to a Mania ever. It seems too "fresh" to call this the worst built Mania ever...but looking back, I'm willing to put it as one of the worst ever. I mean, what build has been worse? XI? IX? I wasn't a fan of the build for WM23, personally, and I attended that one. I'd still put this year's as one of the worst ever in terms of the build.

- In this scenario, Becky wins the Raw Women's Title in a hard-fought match and thenBayley and Sasha show up to celebrate with her. Understandable. But then Charlotte then joins them for a final posedown in a pseudo-face turn show of respect? Or would it be more like a "Curtain Call" moment where Charlotte being a heel is just ignored "for the moment"? Either way, yuck. - The argument that Asuka was "doing nothing" with the title is ridiculous. The entire SmackDown Women's Division has been on a hamster wheel for 3 months now by design. Could they have built up a legit challenger for Asuka in that time? Easily. They didn't. Instead, they devoted much of the time allotted to the women - on Elimination Chamber and at Fastlane and on the TV leading to those events- to the Raw Women's Championship scene and the Women's Tag Titles. Asuka, her title, and the rest of the division was left out of the mix. And to whoever said that Asuka could go undefeated for the next 5 months and nobody would care - well, wrestling history would probably disagree with that. Winning streaks tend to work well (Goldberg, Ryback, Asuka in NXT, hell, fucking Bryan Clarke had one going that got over in WCW when nothing was getting over in WCW). If Asuka had been kicking ass, consistently and in dominating fashion, for the past 3 months and the WWE had been simultaneously building up a fresh heel challenger (Lacey Evans? Rhea Rhipley? Maybe a big signee from the indies?), it would've worked just fine. - That being said, I don't think any WrestleMania needs 13 matches. I'm not advocating that Asuka deserves to be on the card at this point. The WWE hasn't booked her to be relevant, so she's not relevant enough to be featured. As others have pointed it, it is probably for the best that she's left off the show entirely at this point to protect some of her mystique. ...but I (and others) have made the same point about Reigns and McIntyre. Their forgettable, filler match in the middle of the show will do neither of them any favors. And the crowd will likely be dead for them after Reigns' entrance. I'd also cut the 205 Live "empty arena" title match. There'll be more eyes looking at the merch on sale than watching their match and they deserve better. - And, lastly, maybe I'm old fashioned and still believe that you can sell matches and events with carny bullshit, but if you're going to unify the titles, that's the kind of "special event" you can tack onto an otherwise cold match and make it a little warmer. Its a "hook." Asuka beat Lynch at January's Rumble. Lynch will likely win the Raw title at Mania next Sunday. Now they fight again with both titles on the line. Its a "hook" that they threw away for no reason.

WWE Audience: There's no way they can overbook the Rousey/Becky/Charlotte match any more than they already have. Vince (looking at SmackDown): Hold my beer, pal. If they don't unify the titles, I"m not sure what the point of the switch was. I'm not against the idea, but I still think the timing is dumb.

Oh, I don't think anyone's saying they're Chevy Chase/Eddie Murphy/Adam Sandler level of stars. Kate McKinnon is probably the most well-known SNL star on the current cast. But they're on the show every week in the longest-running segment in the show's history. Just by doing it, that comes with a built-in positioning and stature that others never got. Colin Quinn is probably more well-known for his years as Weekend Update anchor than anything else in his career. The same is probably true of Norm MacDonald. Again, the numbers don't lie. SNL earns ratings twice as big as Raw. We may not want to believe it, but that would indicate Beck Bennett is weirdly more well known in the US than Finn Balor.

Not to defend their involvement in WrestleMania, but SNL gets twice the ratings that Raw does and it airs on Saturday nights from 11:30 to 1 AM while Raw airs in primetime and, for most months of the year, against little sports competition. So, based on that, more people probably know who Michael Che and Colin Jost are than Seth Rollins, a guy whose been a WWE main eventer for years now. (I would say Braun Strowman, but just by his sheer size, people could probably randomly guess that he's a pro-wrestler while if you showed a random person a photo of Seth Rollins, they would just as easily say he's on Game of Thrones, is some sort of X-Games athlete or even NFL player, drums in a metal band, or is an MMA fighter.)

He's used sparingly. He's on RAW. I think he lost to Balor recently maybe? * I think, initially, there was some thought that he might've been fed to Reigns when Reigns was going to be the Universal Champion and needed heels to squash. This would've been last year right after Mania. I'm not sure if that was ever actually in the cards, but it did seem like something they might've done to get Reigns cheered...but then again, they also didn't give Reigns the win over Lesnar, so, the RAW scene was kind of a mess at the time. Who knows? They ran the Reigns/Lesnar feud past SummerSlam and by then Jinder was super cold. So, even if Reigns had not had to leave, it certainly didn't seem like Jinder was being built up as a challenger for him in the fall. The WWE will push Jinder again when its time for them to tour India, I'd assume, but even that would be a shocker to me. By most accounts, Jinder is a hard-working, nice guy - but I think he's the shits in the ring and hope they never push him again. * EDIT - Whoops. I don't watch any TV either, only the Network specials. Also, I could be wrong about him still sucking. I'm guessing he's a regular on the house shows and may actually be passable now based on what KawadaSmile wrote.

^ This is the right answer. Chyna, in her heel persona, wouldn't have been out of place beating Barry Horowitz with a low blow. As a face, at her peak of credibility, why couldn't she have been in a competitive match with someone the size of Lio Rush? To me, the Jericho and Jarrett rivalries were pushing things too far but I also give credit to those guys - they were smartly worked matches if not my cup of tea. For example, I don't recall Chyna's intergender matches starting with trading holds and whatnot. IIRC, they'd typically begin with the heel either mocking Chyna or refusing to take her seriously because of her gender and then getting slapped or otherwise shown that Chyna means business. This would now make the heel lose their temper and throw a wild haymaker, which Chyna would duck, and counter with a back suplex or something. Basically, she'd outsmart (not necessarily outwrestle) the heel in the early going for the shine, the heel would cut her off and dominate for awhile, and the finish would be her making a comeback - usually because the heel was back to underestimating/mocking her. I mean, its really no different than any of the countless female valet/male manager matches from the 80s and early 90s (I think Missy Hyatt had a few like this). What I don't like, and what I see often on the indies, is that the talents are so eager to do something new and not stick to that formula that they end up making these intergender matches silly and overly choreographed. Look up Gargano/LeRae from Smash Wrestling for an example of what I'm talking about. The video begins with a recap from a previous match that started with LeRae eating a vicious Biff Busick uppercut. I mean, we're supposed to be believe that if an Average Joe got hit with that straight to the mouth, they'd be incapacitated, right? Like, if he hit me with that move, I'd lose some teeth and need to take a day off work. Instead, she recovers and ends up winning the match. Then, in her match against Gargano (which starts out okay but still kinda questionable), she takes an absolutely nasty face-drop onto the top turnbuckle at one point. It is an unquestionably great moment that is captured on camera really well and LeRae sells it really well. It looks like if that happened to my wife, we'd be going to the hospital. And, in the context of the match, its presented as a big spot...but not as the finish, which, in my opinion, it should be. Candice LeRae is not Nia Jax or Awesome Kong or Chyna. She's 110 pounds and got dropped face-first onto a turnbuckle from a powerbomb position and it looked like it could've decapitated her. Continuing a match from that moment on is pulling the curtain back too far. And I know this is sexist to say, but it absolutely does have to do with her taking that move from a man. That same spot would probably not be so jarring to me if it happened in a match against Nia Jax - but in an intergender context, any time she gets hit with offense, it registers as that much more painful.

- If the question is, which show you would rather attend - and not be allowed to leave until it was over - its easily WrestleMania XI over this. Its not even close for me. Obviously, WMXI sucked...but, to me, its like being forced to eat pizza. Would you rather be forced to eat a large pie from Domino's (or your least favorite chain) or be forced to eat 3 large pies from your favorite pizzeria? I'll take a little too much of a not-so-great thing (its still pizza) rather than way too much of a pretty great thing (this is my favorite pizza, but I stopped enjoying this 8 slices ago and I just want to go to bed/puke). - I think I read somewhere (maybe here) that ticket sales for the Road to WrestleMania TV shows have not been great. I'm not surprised. I've cherry-picked some segments since the Rumble, but haven't bothered to watch a whole show or even fast-forward through one on my DVR. I skipped FastLane despite it being 10 minutes from my house and there were plenty of tickets left for it. - I'll watch this show as I've watched PPVs since the Network started: in chunks. On rare occasions, I'll get a group of dudes together to watch a show live, but for the most part, it takes me 3-4 sittings to get through a show. Its actually one of the best features of the Network to me - the ability to start a show and continue it on various devices everytime I have some time (lunch break at work, at the gym, while I"m cooking dinner, etc.). I can't believe there are people who don't consume wrestling this way in 2019.

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.