DMJ

Talking about it with a friend tonight - After Mania, Lesnar is most likely out (if he's not - he should retain there because he's the best thing going for the company today and the Rumble proved it). John Cena is either going to squash Rusev at Mania or lose...in which case, I think you're in a tough spot with Cena because he's already feuded with everyone on the roster and almost needs to take the same break Orton is now. If Rusev survives the Cena feud, he'll likely be fed to Reigns. Reigns is your top face, Rollins is your top heel, and who knows where Ambrose and Bray fall into things post-Mania (I'm not even going to mention guys like Cesaro or Ziggler because they certainly don't seem poised for any major pushes based on what I saw at the Rumble). Sting won't be around, though, I wonder how valuable he is even going to seem after the WWE Universe realizes that Sting in 2015 means a guy wit a receding hairline who wrestles in a tee-shirt. Daniel Bryan's momentum and idea of him being The Man will, unfortunately, after WrestleMania, probably be nothing but a fuzzy memory the same way Punk's run in 2011 seemed when he quit last year. In summation, after WrestleMania = No Lesnar. No "main event" Bryan. Directionless Cena with 1-2 "fresh" matches in Reigns and Ambrose (who are both faces). Directionless Ziggler. Directionless Cesaro. Most likely a "tarnished" Rusev. If the solution is a heel turn for Reigns, the WWE made the exact mistake we all said they shouldn't make - rushing Reigns to the title. You don't create "the next John Cena," the next mega-popular, kid-friendly babyface that will sell merch and grant kids' wishes well into the 2020s, by having him turn heel 12 months after he turned face. You'd be creating Randy Orton actually, which is fine and great and useful, but that's certainly not the bullseye they are aiming for. The burial of Daniel Bryan is frustrating as a fan, but what lies ahead over the next 3 months is even more frustrating because what seems to be coming down the pike is a whole lot of protecting Reigns at all costs and keeping everyone else on the same hamster wheel they were on in 2014. And no Lesnar to at least make 2-3 PPVs a year "must see."

The Outlaws beat the Usos at last year's Elimination Chamber PPV and the Usos were far more over and deserving of not having to lose to two old farts, so, it is not impossible to see the Outlaws win. Still, I think the Ascension goes over here because while the loss to the Usos didn't matter in the grand scheme of things (the Usos were over and were able to bounce back and get even more popular and stay credible despite the loss), if the Ascension loses, you might as well as release them because I don't see them "getting hot" as dominating heels if they can't dominate two retirees. The undercard definitely leaves much to be desired - especially as you have the talent represented in the undercard that could've actually produced some good action. For example, get rid of Adam Rose and Big E, and that 6-man turns into what would probably be a great 10-minute sprint to kickoff the show. Drop one of the other tag team matches (my pick would actually be the Tag Title one just because its the least fresh and could probably be held off till Fast Lane anyway, especially as we'll probably get some Miz/Mizdow tension in the Rumble itself). The Divas Match should be a 3-way or 4-way (not a tag). Rusev should've defended the US Title on this card (in place of the Tag Team Title match) because (a) the show is in historic Philadelphia and (b ) I haven't seen him really defend the title all too much since winning it. A squash over someone, even a someone like Heath Slater dressed as Uncle Sam, would've been good filler, especially considering that the Rumble consistently has the second highest audience of any "Network Event" every year. When you have that many extra eyes on your product, you need to be more strategic with how you highlight certain characters. Rusev will probably have a good run in the Rumble, but to me, he's a talent you should highlight independently of the battle royal.

Anyone interested in music about dead wrestlers, can check out the lo-fi, homemade album I made 5 years ago under the name Double Murder Suicide. Here's a review of the first album (there are also three more I made from 10' through 2012): Here's a review of the first one - http://cokemachineglow.com/records/joshua-goldberg/ PM me if you're interested in links to free downloads of any of the albums. I'd describe it as Ramones meets Guided By Voices meets early They Might Be Giants if every song was about wrestling nostalgia and tragedy. Labors of love that I'm proud of, even if they were probably heard by less than a 100 people around the world.

1. Cena vs. Bryan (SummerSlam 2013) 2. Cena vs. Punk (Money In The Bank 2011) 3. Lesnar vs. Punk (SummerSlam 2013) 4. The Shield vs. Team Hell No & Ryback (TLC 2012) 5. Daniel Bryan Gauntlet Match (vs. Cesaro, Ryback, Swagger) (RAW, 7/13) 6. The Shield vs. The Wyatts (Elimination Chamber 2014) 7. Sheamus vs. Bryan (Extreme Rules 2012) 8. The Shield vs. Evolution (Extreme Rules 2014) 9. Rollins vs. Ambrose (SummerSlam 2014) ( *This gets a spot mostly because I hate Lumberjack matches and this one is the best one I've ever seen. For overcoming what is typically such a terrible gimmick takes a great story with great performers) 10. Shawn Michaels vs. Undertaker (WrestleMania 26) Honorable Mentions - The Usos vs. Rowan and Harper (Battleground 2014) The Shield vs. Evolution (Payback 2014) Christian vs. Del Rio (Ladder Match, Extreme Rules 201?) I will admit my "ballot" is a bit bias as the Network has allowed me to watch way more of the current product, especially the PPVS, than I did from 2010-2012, when I just couldn't justify spending $60 on a show like Capitol Punishment (Capitol Carnage?) no matter how good it may or may not have been. I'm sure I missed a ton of matches that were better than my honorable mentions, but those matches do stand out to me from this year as quite good. I would also add that I do think the past 2 years have seen much better in-ring action than the 3 years that came before it. I mean, I'm not as down on Edge, Orton, Cena, etc as others...but even their biggest fans would probably have to agree that their "peak matches" in that timespan were not as good as the peak matches we saw from Bryan, Punk, and The Shield starting in '12.

Great question. Here's some that are probably not number 1 for anyone, but would likely make my top 20 and haven't been mentioned yet - Bret vs. Taker (HBK as Guest Ref) from SummerSlam 97' - I remember this match just having such a great "big match feel" at a time when WCW was still the industry front-runner in the US and, though Bret has said he prefers his other bouts with Taker, if I had to choose one to rewatch out of ones I've seen, I think this would be the one I'd pick just because of the story told. Guerrero vs. RVD (Ladder Match, RAW, May 02') - I remember seeing this match out-of-context as I wasn't watching WWE at the time and just being blown away by the violence and agility on display. A car-crash match, to be sure, but one I like to show to non-fans because of the entertainment value.

No knock on Balor's incredible talents and, personally, I don't find these things to matter to me as a fan, but looking at WWE's history, is there really a feeling that a non-North American guy under 6 feet tall could really be the focus of the WWE? I mean, sure, we saw something close to that with Benoit, Guerrero, and Mysterio, and if Finn Balor can achieve THAT level of success, he'd be a Hall of Fame caliber guy, but I just don't know if he could seriously be considered a potential "next guy" like Reigns, Ambrose, or Rollins.

On the Luger talk, I could be totally 1000% wrong on this, but I always felt that, for whatever reason, Vince held a serious grudge with Luger about the death of Miss Elizabeth. Now, obviously, she was a grown woman, who made her own decisions, and Luger was just the guy she was shacking with when she truly spiraled out of control...but I just always inferred that Vince, just as he had been very close to Randy, was equally "in love" with Miss Elizabeth (paternally almost?) and when she passed the way she did, Vince placed the blame squarely on Lex, for not protecting her. Contrarily, I don't think Vince blames anyone but the wrestler themselves, whether it was Test or Brian Adams or Rude or Pillman, for their deaths and certainly doesn't accept any responsibility himself...but Liz? She was the "First Lady of Wrestling," pure, innocent, etc. Again, I'm talking out of my ass about this and have no clue how Vince actually feels about Luger or Liz today (I know there was that WWE Confidential thing a decade ago), it's just, in the words of a mighty, mighty bosstone, the impression that I get. Anyone second me on the feeling or am I way wrong entirely?

Not looking at whole cards, but.... On Austin's podcast a few weeks ago, a caller phoned in and mentioned how he thought the 97' Rumble was pretty underrated in that it was such a pitch-perfect way to push the Austin character (and that Austin's work in the match is exceptional). I was pretty convinced by the guy - thinking back, Austin was the shit in this match. I could be mistaken, but at one point he did push-ups and looked at his wrist like a watch was there? Also, again, could be wrong, but I remember when Bret comes, Austin gives a look of astonishment first, but then, starts making the "bring it" gesture with his hands. I think Fake Diesel was close to the last eliminated and the roster was full of guys who had no chance of winning (when did it ever?), so I see the initial hesitance to pay respects to this battle royal...but, in the grand scheme of things, the way the Rumble was produced to build Austin and also lead to the Final Four PPV in an exciting fashion that I don't recall being tried prior to WM13 was kinda cool (title changes on RAW? In February?). So, all things considered, including hindsight, how does Rumble 97 rank? Personally, I'm a 92' man, but I definitely know what I'll be watching on the Network this weekend. I don't think I've viewed it for 16 years, but I'm kinda amped. I know there's no way JR's work is as good as Heenan's in 92', but I'm pumped for that too.

I didn't watch this week's RAW and, based on what I've read, I'm really glad but...Harper vs. Rowan happened? Good god - I know that they may have interacted a bit at Survivor Series, but there was a time, less than a year ago, when I remember writing in a PPV review that there was MONEY in these two squaring off, that these two monsters finally colliding could be a *moment.* Now, that was probably a bit hyperbolic and written at the peak of their feud with the Usos, when the two teams were consistently presenting great outings (and possible MOTNs), but I still think the WWE could have had a *minor* moment if these two were to have had a stand-off during the Rumble, even if just for 30 seconds or so in the middle. But like nearly every potentially-interesting pairing that the WWE could reasonably have as a strong midcard feud to help sell Network specials, they gave it to us on Monday on a show that has been widely disparaged. That kinda sucks for Harper and Rowan, who, in a more protected spot, on a better show, could have probably got a huge crowd response for something as simple as a staredown (again, it might have happened at Survivor Series, I don't remember, but it could happen a half dozen times and probably still get a big reaction each time). The lack of restraint in WWE's current product is just so frustrating. As Punk once said, McMahon is a millionaire who should be a billionaire and while the particular example above is a frivolous, minute one, it is one of a hundred that can be thought of and those hundred add up.

May not be the place for this comment, but I'd love to see someone go into the Lumberjack Match at SummerSlam between Ambrose and Rollins. At the time, I remember thinking it was the best Lumberjack Match I'd ever seen (I normally hate that stip).

Not sure if I labeled this match correctly (or even if one needs permission to post a match), but I was really curious what other people thought of this one. Plenty to touch on, but as I just watched this again after a couple years, some thoughts sprung to mind - 1. Both guys are ostensibly heels (?) as Shane is the "evil WCW" owner and Angle is a cocky jerk, but Shane obviously has much of the crowd support in the match (and in the build). This doesn't really hurt the match for me as ANY McMahon bout is really just about watching an untrained rich guy get mercilessly destroyed by a member of the roster and, with Shane, few did it better. The bumps he takes, particularly the nasty one that I can't believe didn't cripple him at the entranceway, are ridiculous. 2. In terms of hardcore, streetfights, I really like this one. At a time when the WWE were putting these sorts of matches on all the time, this one still stands out. I like how it starts with Angle bullying Shane, daring him to actually wrestle, before Shane wisely decides to use whatever he can (canes, trash cans, his own body) to hurt Angle. Angle, meanwhile, seems to be toying with Shane, more interested in watching him suffer than actually winning the match - something that seems logical to me (logic and Angle don't always go hand-in-hand). 3. Unlike in the Ultimate Submission Match with Benoit from a month or two earlier, where Angle's selling is stop-and-start, I only saw one time in this match where Angle pops up and "no sells" Shane's onslaught. In the last third, Kurt's expressions and (accidental or not) stumbling are really great. After tossing Shane-O like a rag doll through two glass walls, covered in blood himself, you finally get the feeling that Angle has been exhausted, not so much by Shane, but by his own relentless efforts to top himself, to dish out punishment, to prove his greatness (remember this is his 3rd match of the evening). At this point, he does try to end the match...but, first, he can't muster the energy to get Shane into the ring for the cover. Then, he can barely push him on the cart. Then, when he does cover him, Shane kicks out. Finally, Angle devises an (admittedly) contrived solution - the Angle Slam from the top rope with help from a wooden board - but its obvious that there is nothing left in the tank. But while I thoroughly enjoy this match and think both guys work incredibly hard and execute things flawlessly at times (Shane's kickout after he inadvertently hits a 7 Year Itch on a trashcan is remarkable), there is still the nagging sense that this match spits in the face of pro-wrestling a bit too much. I get it - this is Angle's third match of the night, Shane has the advantage of weapons and is the fresh man, Angle "toys" with him too much, Shane is battle-tested (having defeated Big Show, Test, and Vince McMahon prior to this)....but, at the end of the day, the untrained boss's son is able to go toe-to-toe with an Olympic Gold Medalist. He kicks out of the kind of beating that would've, could've, and probably should've paralyzed him. This match is an action movie inside a ring, but there will always be that sense that instead of pitting Schwarzeneggar vs. Stallone, we're watching The Terminator struggle to put away Rob Schneider. And like imagining Schneider get ripped apart and shot to shreds by a heartless cyborg, I'm not saying that this match doesn't bring a smile to my face. I'm just saying that, by its very nature, I'm not sure how I'd rank it on a list of best WWE matches of its time or any time. What are your thoughts?

I was definitely going to skip RAW tonight, as I typically do for most RAWs, but now I'm sitting in front of the TV, counting down the minutes, guaranteed to watch the opening segment. If anything, I'd say the WWE should've held off on the announcement for one week (and built up to it this week with music videos and hype) and maybe had a WWE writer edit his Tweet to be a more cryptic. His use of the word "excited" seems to point to him not retiring...but if he does announce his retirement, it would be an, at best, odd word choice (and, at worse, kind of infuriating and "trollish").

Right now, Cody Rhodes doesn't look like a future WWE Champion...but there was a time, in 2013, that he seemed poised for a breakout feud with the Authority. I could also see Miz getting another run sometime. He's been doing quite good this year, essentially wrestling handicap matches every night. In-ring, he's never going to be confused with (Insert Beloved Technician Here) but he's getting to that point where is consistently able to deliver 3-stars. When you add more sizzle, more build, and more theatrics to a 3-star match, you get a main event in today's WWE. Luke Harper may not be a WWE Champion...but I could see him in a "main event level" program. He's a monster of a guy, he's very competent in the ring, and whoever the babyface ace is over the next few years is going to need monsters to slay. Big Show, Henry, and Kane won't last forever and all have gotten multiple runs in the main event over the past 5 years. Mark Henry and JBL were definitely not on anybody's radar as potential WWE Champions in the late 90s and Henry was involved in a romance angle with an 80 year old woman (and a transvestite too, IIRC). Hell, Fake Diesel was a worse gimmick than anyone on that list. I think the larger point you were trying to make, though, is one I do agree with - that the writing/booking/promoting has done a miserable job of keeping character motivations and arcs consistent, which has led to meaningless rivalries and no upward promotion of anyone. Fans don't want to get behind anyone because everyone is on a treadmill.

I'd be surprised to hear that there's a counter-argument to that. Austin is definitely the "dirtiest" of the top level guys that Vince has pushed - not just Hogan and The Rock, but Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, Cena, Angle, Lesnar, Luger, Sid, Orton and Batista's original babyface pushes...all highly marketable "clean" presentations that were never about being an everyman and way more about being a Superstar with an uppercase S (Hart might be arguable). Warrior, Taker, and Savage were more cartoonish and "louder" personalities than Bryan, Punk, and Jeff Hardy (and we could, in 2015, be adding Ambrose to the list of very over guys that have an "earthy"/punk/redneck character).

On the Sting thing, I know its hokey as all shit, but couldn't they have run some segments/angles where there was (a) no Sting, but "technicality difficulties" that would lead one to believe Sting was the culprit or ( impostor/fake Stings that are shown to be fake. Y'know, "mind games." I just think, thematically, these are things that would keep the storyline going and be within Sting's character, but don't require Steve Borden to be anywhere near a WWE show.

Halloween Havoc 91'. I've seen HH91' get called one of the worst shows ever, probably due to the hokeyness of Chamber of Horrors match and Simmons/Luger obviously not living up to what WCW/NWA fans may have expected from a World Title main event match compared to what they got with Flair, but as a kid, this show was mind-blowing. The midcard of this show also includes some of the worst gimmicks of its time (Oz, The Patriots, Van Hammer). Still, even as a time capsule to go back and watch, this one puts a smile on my face from beginning to end.

I went to the show last night, had a good (albeit expensive) time. Some notes from the live perspective... * Not sure if they announced it as a legit sellout, but the Q was definitely packed pretty well. A few years back, the WWE set their personal best ticket sales in Cleveland for a RAW episode featuring The Rock and I'm not sure it was THAT crowded last night, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was close. All the lower sections and middle sections were full, with even the upper upper deck probably 80% filled. As far as I know, no papering either. Cleveland loves it some WWE. * Obviously, hometown hero Dolph Ziggler was very over. Great way to kickoff the show and it was cool to see him win the IC title in "his city." * A fight broke out in the crowd during Swagger/Rusev that distracted a fair number of people. Still, I think everyone bit that initial Accolade and when Swagger reversed it, people were genuinely shocked. * Everyone was surprised that Cena/Rollins went on early. This, in my opinion, was a mistake as the crowd was a bit burnt out for Ambrose/Wyatt. In Cleveland, Cena is still very over - aside from the initial Cena boos for his entrance, you could really tell that the crowd was pretty much 80% behind him by the end. Throw in Reigns showing up and it seems like that would've been a much more suitable way to cap off the night. * Half the crowd seemed to clear out to get food or use the bathroom after Cena/Rollins - but I'm not sure its because AJ/Nikki was a "bathroom break." Its just that, after Cena/Rollins, there was a feeling that this was "intermission." In fact, I wish I had waited and had my cigarette during Ryback/Kane instead, which was probably the deadest match of the night. Ryback got a decent pop, but nothing to write home about. * The main event was really fun, but it took time to wake up the crowd a little bit. Ambrose was very over. Bray Wyatt's entrance is AWESOME in person - comparable to what its like when the Undertaker shows up. With everyone holding out their phone and the non-dynamic theme song, it is just a surreal couple of minutes when you are there after all the heavy metal and pyro and cannon shots that typically announce a wrestler's arrival. The only complaints I heard were from people who wanted Ambrose to use the even-bigger ladders that were near the stage. Obviously, the ending was the ending, but overall, I think people were genuinely pleased with the show. As always, the funnest part of a WWE show might be leaving a WWE show - hearing the reactions of everyone and talking to strangers about what could happen next is always fun. Again, I think the crowd left overall happy. I didn't hear anyone call it a shitty show, just that it may have been better to end with Cena/Rollins, which I agree would've made more sense.

Personally, I don't have as much issue with Cena appearing on TV or not appearing - what bothers me is that he WRESTLES on TV mere days after being kayfabe injured or, in the case of SummerSlam, being destroyed. I get it - you have to keep him on the house show circuit because you can't disappoint the people buying the seats to see Cena wrestle - but the guy is incredibly overexposed on RAW when he participates in 40+ matches a year on TV. What I would've done, after SummerSlam or Extreme Rules (had Cena lost that match as most agree he should have), would be to have Cena come out and give a heartfelt promo about not being sure if he can go on anymore, that he tried his best and now he has to regroup, heal, and that he'll be on RAW in two weeks to announce his next step. RAW can survive 1 week without him, especially with the music videos and montages they could make for him (think "Tell Me A Lie" on steroids). Then, two weeks later, Cena comes out and is ABOUT to make his announcement, but gets interrupted by someone - Authority, Heyman, Rusev, who cares. Cena is almost goaded into fighting, but does not (which draws boos from the crowd). The next week (he has now not wrestled for 4 weeks), he comes out and says that he has been home thinking about how he backed down from a fight and that that is NOT who John Cena is. So, he challenges the heel for a match - but now the heel backs down. At the next PPV, it is hyped that Cena will be back to challenge the heel. At the PPV, he is beaten down through nefarious means. At this point, we've gone 5 weeks without Cena wrestling on TV, but you've really only kept him off-screen for 1 week. What's terrible is that the only time the WWE gives Cena a break is when he is legitimately injured with the potential of being out for multiple MONTHS instead of utilizing storylines to give him a much-deserved break from in-ring involvement for what would amount to be maybe 4-5 weeks (and, again, only TV matches - he could still do house shows without a majority of the fans being the wiser).

I'd heard that Flair/Hogan didn't draw on tour...but, then, in 94', IIRC, they do a big number for their first PPV match and have the most watched Clash in years (if not ever?). I don't know or have time now to look at the figures, but it seems to me that there has to be some other explanation for why those house shows did poor numbers and that, even if they DID do poor numbers, Hogan/Flair would've drawn in 92' just as well as it did in 94' (if not better) on PPV. Something doesn't make sense to me about that. The name CM Punk comes to mind. As part of SES, he had a natural feud with HBK he could've worked. Later, they also left money on the table by not really doing anything with his "walk out" angle in 2011 - the kind of thing that, I'd argue, could have been built up like a Mad Men or Breaking Bad storyline where you may not get the pay-off next week or the week after, but 5 weeks later, you have some fans who have been waiting with baited breath since he left and a growing number of new-ish fans who might have missed Punk's pipebomb and his walk-out at MITB, but then, thanks to the buzz, played catch-up, and now were tuning in. One could also call this the "Weezer Green Album" phenomenon where Pinkerton tanked, but years later, word of mouth made their return a bigger deal than even their debut. I'm not even a huge CM Punk fan, but it just seems like those two would-be storylines would've been done just as good ratings as anything else the company did during non-Mania season.

Slammy Awards 1994 on the Network (its just an episode of Mania). A few thoughts - 1) This Monday, I'd love the show to kick-off with a musical number the way Todd Pettengill used to do it. Those were so, so cheesy, but probably funnier than anything the writers have done in years. 2) Can't wait till the Network starts featuring more of the B-shows of the 80s and 90s. 3) Why didn't they upload all the other Slammy Award specials? EDIT - Also, they kept some of the advertisements from the sponsors in - which is excellent. The commercials for the Sega games and Magic Works toys are a real blast from the past.

I don't remember many of the details around it (I'm sure I could look it up, but feel lazy) - didn't Arn Anderson beat Hogan on an episode of Nitro at some point? (I'd also put the Luger title win over Hogan on Nitro in the build-up to Road Wild, I think, in 97', as a shocker and a bit of an upset considering Hogan had been champ for a good while by that point and didn't seem like he'd be dropping it - though, he did win it back days later if I remember correctly)

I'm one of those fans who left sometime after WrestleMania 16. It wasn't that it was offensive as much as that the entire industry had gone from something "outsider" and "niche" to the exact things I never wanted to be associated with - Kid Rock and Limp Bizkit entrance music, outright homophobia, sex-for-the-sake-of-sex (compared to, say, characters like Sensational Sherri and Elizabeth or even the little-bit-more-subtle Sunny in 96'). Not to mention that this is around when Austin got injured, WCW had been destroyed, and most of my favorites from childhood - Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, Ric Flair, even Hogan - were retired or not on TV yet. Undertaker, another childhood favorite, was a Biker. At my school, wrestling had peaked in popularity around 99', so, it's not necessarily that I loathed that "the popular kids" were now getting in on "my thing." It was more that, by 2000, the popular kids had moved on because it was a fad to them. I moved on because wrestling had morphed into repetitive, ultraviolent nonsense with absolutely no underlying morality.

While I don't think he's a Top 10 in-ring guy, I do think some of his offense looks good (the crossbody, the chokeslam), so, on that point, I do think he has plenty of room to improve but isn't awful or anything. But whether you call it booking or producing, I don't think its "reductionist" to put the blame on booking. If he is going to be a special character, he shouldn't just be attacking faces and trading wins on PPV (I don't remember Taker doing that when he debuted). If he has no coherent motivations, the writers/producers need to help him develop them. For example, I'm one of those people that think he should've actually HELPED Ambrose beat Rollins - not to get a face pop, but to try to lure Ambrose into his camp. Similarly, I think the mindgames with Cena weren't actually hokey enough during the build to the match (and then got a little TOO hokey during their cage match). The feud with Jericho was completely meaningless. Bray Wyatt was exposed - on that point, I agree with you - but it was someone's decision to treat him like your average character instead of someone who could be a game-changer. That person dropped the ball in utilizing a talent and minimizing their flaws. Obviously Wyatt had at least a little "it" because he got good crowd responses (unfortunately, they were face pops). Still, it shows that the audience, initially, viewed the character as special.

Agreed. From what I read (and I could be way wrong), Nikki essentially cut a spirited promo about working harder than anyone ever gave her credit for and, despite all the trolls who have said she's just a pretty face that got lucky (reading between the lines here, but this whole thing seems to also be about who she may or may not have slept with to get to the top), she is now Divas Champion and she earned it. This got cheered. As it should've. Because it does kinda ring true. As far as I know, the Bellas work a crazy schedule and do tons of media appearances and, from what I've seen, Nikki has improved in a way that typically only comes with hard work. She may not come off as the kindest person alive on Total Divas, but the show doesn't make her look evil either (and, again, really just leaves you with the impression that being a Diva is a busy life, not all glitz and glamour). But she's supposed to be a heel and, whether or not the writers/producers acted upon it, had a really clear narrative direction her promo should've went in. She should be gloating about how she outsmarted AJ and the entire WWE Universe, how nobody gives her credit but she's actually the most talented and smartest WWE Diva ever. If she wanted to get extra "insider" heat, how about a line referencing how she has everything a girl could want - a sister who supports her, a man is the envy of every woman in the arena, and the Divas Championship. (Switch the word "sister" to father and you basically have a classic Steph promo) Not to mention that if Nikki were to go in an anti-Authority direction, it'd go against everything her character has done for the past 6 months (if not longer, I don't remember).

I'm actually in the process (somewhat, not sure if I'll actually go through with it) with writing a very comprehensive look at 2014. I do think that this year, with the Network, and the Batista/Punk/Bryan/Streak stories and the TV rights campaign being regarded by most industry insiders as a bit of a flop, is the most important year, both on-screen and off, since 2001, if not 96'-97', if not 84'. The amount of industry shake-ups between January and today is just incredible and much of it is not positive for the WWE. I don't think the "sky is falling" regarding the demise of the WWE, though. I think it is too profitable, too popular, and too big to sink...but I do think this year has, at the very least and in a weird way, put a spotlight on what things WOULD need to happen to possibly end the WWE, for example, if the Network subscriber base shrinks by 50% *and* ratings drop by another 50% *and* the next time TV rights come up, USA/NBC ain't interested *and* if the WWE fails to elevate anyone post-Cena or post-Lesnar *and* the US economy takes another major hit and it has a negative effect on house show gates and merch sales. Basically, all of these things (and more?) would have to happen which is pretty unlikely, but 2014 was the first year I think I saw (and maybe the WWE sees) that there is actually a set of dominoes that could (however unlikely) fall. (Not to mention the ridiculously overblown and meaningless reports about investors possibly buying out the WWE - something that could, if it were ever to happen [probably never, but maybe decades from now], put them in a similar position as WCW by making them just a "brand" under a parent company that would cut their losses much sooner than the McMahons would)