The Look Versus Charisma

Randall Keith Orton was booked to criticise indy darling Kevin Owens' physique earlier this week, mockingly asking if the former NXT champion had put on weight during a promo on RAW. It's true that KO is something of an anomaly on the WWE roster, not possessing shredded abs or twenty-four inch pythons (not that that particular breed of python is en vogue these days after recent... revelations). But is that such a bad thing? Owens is far from a slob and his look helps him to stand out. Being able to pass as a cover star for Muscle & Fitness isn't the be all and end all for wrestlers, despite beliefs to the contrary over at Titan Towers.

Massively out of shape apparently.

This is an old problem within WWE. So much so that it's not really worth me going into great detail on the back-story here. These are issues that have been documented elsewhere by people far more knowledgeable than me. The gist, for any newcomers to wrestling and WWE in particular, is that decision makers in The Business frequently opt to push guys based on their "look" (that is to say their general attractiveness and dedication to hitting the gym) as opposed to generally more sensible qualities like experience, aptitude and ability.

It's a tendency particularly associated with WWE and Vince McMahon. There are dozens of stories floating around online and in shoot interview DVDs (most of which are also, I realise, available online, but whatever) about Vince's love of signing muscled up dudes to big money contracts despite them having little or no wrestling experience. They range from the signings of duds like The Great Khali and Lex Luger to the debacle that was the World Bodybuilding Federation, a company Vince set up to showcase muscled lads doing a flex and that, funded by money from his wrestling promotion¹.

The drawing power of lads with big muscles is not great. Yeah, Hulk Hogan and, to a far lesser extent, Ultimate Warrior did well and were by any reasonable definition, body guys. But in both cases a substantial part of their attraction lay in their charisma. People paid to see them because they were larger than life characters, not because they had big muscles. Their looks were definitely a part of their charm, I'm not denying that. A Hogan promo delivered by a guy with the physique of Mr Bean would not work anywhere near as well as they were delivered by a six foot six pulsating mass of steroids. But there was more to them than being big.

There are far more failures than there are successes when it comes to body guys in wrestling. Lex Luger, Kevin Nash and Billy Gunn (even Orton himself, ultimately) all have enviable bodies but none have ever proven to be a draw, and all were given ample chances to be. Meanwhile guys like Mick Foley, Ric Flair and Kurt Angle, while all in good shape in their primes, didn't have megastar bodies yet were successful contributors to the success of their employers. Meanwhile the closest 'Stone Cold' Steve Austin, a guy I personally believe to be the single most important wrestler in WWE history, came to a six pack when he was in his prime was his post-match beer-swilling celebration.

"Yeah, I see your double jump moonsault and Swanton bomb. What else ya got?"

Look is important in wrestling. Having a good body is too, and it has the added bonus of ensuring that you're healthier and likelier to live longer. But there's not really any tangible correlation between having the proverbial million dollar body and being of great benefit to the company. On some level the people that run WWE know this. If they didn't then Cesaro, who is a great wrestler, a great promo, can speak five languages, is very, very strong, and is in amazing shape, would be headlining pay-per-views.

WWE is wrong to criticise Owens based on his look alone, and even more wrong to use Orton as the man to deliver the message. Owens has proven is talent again and again during recent years, including his time in WWE's own developmental territory. I've not seen 'The Viper' bust out many double jump moonsaults lately, despite being in such better shape. I'd rather look like the one time 'Mr Wrestling' and have his attitude and outlook on life than look like Randy Orton and think it's okay to defecate in people's bags and be a general under-achiever despite being given every opportunity to become The Man in WWE. And judging by the comment made during RAW WWE seems to think it's Orton, not Owens, who's the better role model.

***

¹ A running theme with Vince is that he routinely takes money from the one thing he's successful at, that being promoting pro wrestling, and diverts it into vanity projects designed to show that he is capable of succeeding at literally anything else. These have included the WBF, a film studio, and, perhaps most ludicrously, a football league. That none of these things have never succeeded to the point of being self-sustaining has taught Vince nothing².

² In fairness this is part of Vince's charm.

The Certified Gs

Enzo Amore is a certified G and a bona fide stud. This, apparently, cannot be taught. Big Cass is seven feet tall. This definitely cannot be taught. Carmella is hot as hell. This is yet another thing that cannot be taught.

Despite their questionable grasp of subjects that can and cannot be taught Enzo, Big Cass and Carmella are one of NXT’s most popular acts. Considering the number of wrestlers on that show that can claim genuine popularity that’s quite the achievement. And what’s nice about their popularity is that the show’s writers seem in no hurry to rush them into something they’re not ready for, instead letting them refine what they do. Instead of being rushed into a split, as happens on the main roster, the three are simply being allowed to be a unit and perfect their team work and (hashtag) banter.

Nothing in this picture can be taught.

What’s interesting (to me at least) to note about them is how much they have in common with the New Age Outlaws. There’s the obvious fact that Enzo runs through some Road Dogg-esque spiel before every match, beginning with something people can shout along with before breaking off into something more specific to their situation. There’s also the fact that Cass, the larger member of the team, wears trunks while Enzo, the smaller man, wears… well, not traditional wrestling gear. Enzo has a peculiar hairstyle. Cass has one line that he uses repeatedly.

Those are visual things, but the analogy carries over to the pair’s matches. Generally Enzo gets worked over before tagging out to Cass. That’s the formula of many tag teams, but the Outlaws used it more the most. In fact they used it pretty much all the time, which is not necessarily a strength.

Carmella is not a natural fit in the Outlaws comparison. The closest the Outlaws ever came to having a manager was Chyna and (thankfully) Carmella is not in the Chyna mould. What we have in Carmella is a character who seems to have been introduced to give Enzo and Cass a long term story. It’s been made very clear that Enzo has a soft spot for the former hairdresser. His attempts to impress her have failed. She seems to tolerate him as a pal, seemingly getting along better with the more laid back Cass.

Right now it looks like Enzo is going to continue to try to impress Carmella and continue to fail. The likelihood is that his behaviour will keep costing he and Cass wins. My assumption is that Carmella will eventually reveal she’s more interested in the more relaxed, confident and friendly Cass than the overly-enthusiastic Enzo, perhaps leading to a break-up of the team. Although this being NXT, the place where WWE doesn’t just plough blindly through the obvious options, it’s possible Enzo will accept Carmella and Cass and continue the tag team.

It’s even possible the three will simply remain a group of pals and I hope this is what happens. I like them as they are and feel they’d be of more benefit to the main roster as a group than as unaffiliated acts. There are plenty of singles wrestlers in WWE. It’s tag teams that are needed. A split and a promotion to the main roster would likely see Enzo drifting aimlessly within months and Cass pushed too quickly, ending up a misfire in need of something to do before another headline push was sent his way (because size).

As a unit they complement one another and can contribute to making WWE’s doubles scene interesting. If they can get a team name sorted (I’d like to suggest The Certified Gs, because why not?) then they’d be pretty much ready to hit Monday nights. Not that that seems likely to happen any time soon.

Long Live the King(s)

I'd been watching wrestling for about six months when I was first introduced to the King of the Ring concept. It was a sixteen person tournament (the number of participants varied each year depending on the strength of the roster) that pitted various mid-carders against one another in a series of matches. There was no overriding point to the series beyond signalling a push, which obviously wasn't the on-screen reason given but it amounted to the same thing. It was an unwritten rule by the late nineties that headliners were above King of the Ring.

That year the tournament was won by 'Bad Ass' Billy Gunn. He was not a shining example of what winning King of the Ring could do for a performer. Kurt Angle's win in 2000 was a better use of the gimmick, as were the victories of Edge and Brock Lesnar after that.

While there's not really anything for the wrestlers to win with King of the Ring besides a bragging right it was still a very useful idea and annual event. It would be slightly overdramatizing things to say that winning the tourney launched the careers of 'Stone Cold' Steve Austin, Triple H and Bret Hart but it did play an important part in each man's rise up the card. The same is true for Angle, Edge and Lesnar. Winning King of the Ring was a sign that each man was above their mid-card peers and destined for better things.

When WWE retired the tournament both as a pay-per-view and an annual occurrence in 2003 a lot of people thought it was a poor decision. While not everyone selected to make it to the finals and win had become a player for the group (joining 'Mr Ass' on that list are Mabel and Ken Shamrock) there were more successes than failures. It was a useful tool for raising wrestlers' profiles and WWE casually cancelled it, preferring instead to push their solo brand PPVs.

 

Yeah, this actually happened

 

The tournament made a low key return in 2006 as a tournament exclusively open to SmackDown wrestlers. It was won by Booker T, who changed his ring name to King Booker and became the brand’s top heel. It would become one of the best runs of his WWE career and was a perfect example of how the tournament could be used to build a new character (even if it did ignore the unwritten rule that only mid-carders got to win King of the Ring).

The gimmick returned on the April 21^st 2008 episode of RAW. The finals came down to CM Punk and William Regal. They had a very good outing which ended with a surprising win for Regal. It failed to spark a career renaissance for the Brit. Two years later the gimmick was dusted off again, this time to give Sheamus a boost. That resulted in his bizarre run as King Sheamus that saw him dressing like Loki from The Avengers.

 

And so did this

 

The last time we saw a King of the Ring show was then. I think the event is due a proper, regular comeback. It's the ideal tool for launching new careers because it creates so many booking options. Anyone winning would be signalled as someone due for a shove up the ranks but even non-finalists could be elevated by a surprise win in preliminary rounds.

There are plenty of ways to utilise the tournament format. It could provide a solid month’s worth of programming for RAW. That shouldn’t be dismissed as the show is currently pretty aimless. You could have a heel dominate all the ay to the finals, only to be upset by a plucky, young babyface. It’s the sort of thing WWE were going for earlier in the year with Bo Dallas before they lost interest in him.

It could be used to start rivalries too. There would obviously be a favourite in every match, and it would be very simple to book one guy to score a surprise win over another. The problem of there being no actual point to the event could easily be remedied by granting the inner a title shot at SummerSlam. It could even replace Money in the Bank, of WWE were feeling daring.

The tournament would be something fresh for WWE programming and could be used to spark some new stories. That alone makes it worth considering.

Considering the size of the roster there's never been a better time to resurrect King of the Ring. The promotion needs to make new stars as well as flesh out TV with interesting and talented characters who aren't necessarily in the main event. They need something that can highlight multiple wrestlers at once and create some surprises that aren't just booked for the sake of being surprising. The King of the Ring is, as it always has been, the perfect tool for the job.