Capitol Punishment preview

I’d like to start this preview by talking about the job WWE have done of hyping Sunday’s Capitol Punishment show. Several years ago the company was known for doing a solid job when it came to promoting its pay-per-view events on television but in the last few months they have become noticeably lacklustre. Extreme Rules and Over the Limit were given just token mentions on both RAW and SmackDown each week, which has apparently resulted in one of the lowest buy rates in company history (for Over the Limit).

Instead of talking about the announced matches and trying to create some interest in the show the tactic for Capitol Punishment has been to air weekly videos featuring stock footage of Barrack Obama answering questions intercut with actors pretending to be journalists asking about WWE’s pay-per-view. The goal is for them to be funny. They aren’t, and they certainly wouldn’t make me want to pay forty dollars to watch the show.

At a time when the wrestling business in general is struggling with television ratings and live attendance WWE really needs to put a far greater focus on creating must-see cards and hyping them sufficiently. I hope the low figures for Over the Limit serve as a warning to the group and they make the necessary changes.

All that said the Capitol Punishment card looks pretty good. Part of the reason for that is that there are no gimmick matches announced. I have said several times before that gimmick matches should be used sparingly otherwise they run the risk of becoming devalued. I think the lack of such bouts on the announced card is a smart move and one that should be employed more often.

The match that probably has the most potential to entertain viewers is CM Punk v Rey Mysterio. They’ve had two very good matches on RAW in the last three weeks, and are two of the company’s best workers. It will take a very sharp match to beat these two to the match of the night spot. As far as a winner goes, I’ll pick Punk because of the non-title victory he got over Cena on RAW. That and the interaction with Austin make me think there are long term plans in mind for him (and the rumours about his general unhappiness at the way the company has used him lately make a win seem likely too).

The biggest threat to the match of the night crown Punk and Mysterio have is the Christian v Randy Orton match. This feud has been very well paced and is a good example of how the SmackDown writing team generally come up with a more enjoyable, consistent show than their colleagues on RAW. I did originally think Christian should be kept face as Orton works better as a bad guy, and while I stand by that I do think Orton has improved in his current role since moving to the blue brand. Christian’s a better natural face but he does his best work as a heel. I think we’ve got a very good situation with this feud.

The result could go either way, but I suspect Orton will win. Christian should win the title by cheating though. That would keep the feud alive until Money in the Bank in July and allow both men to look strong: Christian would be able to brag about being champion while Orton would be seen as the rightful champion as Christian cheated. I like this feud and want it to continue. That could happen if Orton retains again, but it would be tougher to maintain the current momentum.

A match I don’t expect to be quite as enjoyable is Alberto Del Rio v Big Show. This has been a ludicrous waste of a man who was such an essential part of SmackDown just two months ago. If this is the best he is going to get on RAW he should be moved straight back to Friday nights. The quicker this match is the better. Hopefully it will turn out to have just been a diversion for Del Rio until Cena becomes free for a title feud.

I have a lot more time for the Intercontinental championship match between Wade Barrett and Ezekiel Jackson than I do Big Show v Del Rio. Neither man has ever shown the potential that ADR has and so it’s less frustrating to see them lower down the card. It’s also been a more enjoyable feud than I expected, thanks partly to the pleasantly surprising reactions to Big ’Zeke since he left the Corre. It won’t blow anyone away, but it should keep the crowd pretty responsive. Jackson to win.

Miz v Alex Riley is another match that has featured pleasantly surprising crowd reactions. Two months ago I wouldn’t have considered A-Ry as a prospective babyface. He seemed too bland and generic, but he’s been accepted by the fans very quickly. The key to it is that he’s not been overexposed and audiences are pleased to see someone trying to shut The Miz up. I have a feeling it’s been a case of “right place, right time” for Riley’s success, but he and WWE deserve credit for capitalising on it.

Their recent brawls on RAW have been popular and had solid crowd responses so I expect the Capitol Punishment match to start in a similar fashion and not go too long. Miz winning wouldn’t be hugely surprising (I’m used to WWE messing up when it comes to the building of new stars) but I’ll assume they’re going to keep getting this right and predict Riley as the winner.

Ziggler v Kingston has, unfortunately, been announced for the event with very little reason and is clearly there as filler. If the two men (and Vickie Guerrero) had been granted a little more time over the last three weeks this match (and the United States title) could mean something. But that’s not the world we live in. I think the match will be very enjoyable as the two men work very well with one another, but it won’t be especially memorable. As far as a winner goes... Kofi? Ziggler won a non-title match a few weeks ago, which (according to WWE’s Big Book of Predictable Writing) makes it Kofi’s turn on Sunday.

The main event of R-Truth challenging John Cena for the WWE championship is something that intrigues me. Will Cena blow through Truth with his regular routine and pin him within ten minutes or will Truth be permitted to look competitive and be perceived as a genuine threat to the title? I’m hoping that they go with the latter considering the time and energy spent establishing him as such a great heel.

I’d have no problems with Truth winning the WWE championship: he may not be the company’s best wrestler but he’s certainly better than Cena and it would be a sign that WWE is trying something new. I’m expecting Cena to retain though: he’s a safe pair of hands and there’s a planned feud with Alberto Del Rio waiting for him.

Capitol Punishment appeals to me far more than Extreme Rules or Over the Limit did. I hope the available time is allocated wisely and the right people win. As long as Cena v Truth doesn’t get twenty-five minutes and a load of needless gimmicks don’t get added to half the matches I think there’s a very good chance that this could be a really good show. As ever with WWE PPVs, it’s now just a case of crossing our fingers and hoping for the best.

Truth Hurts

Here’s some truth for you: I’ve never really been a fan of Ron ‘R-Truth’ Killings. He was a babyface for around a decade, not once standing out as someone who would rise to the top of the business. Up until a few weeks ago if you’d asked me if I thought he’d ever hold a world title in WWE I would have quickly answered no, and probably added that even a mid-card title was unlikely.

Part of the problem was his gimmick. Whether in WWE or TNA he was always the same smiling, high-fiving generic babyface with the clichéd rapper gimmick. It’s not the stuff that world champions are made of.

But I had never seen him as a heel. He has been a revelation in the role. Under his previous babyface persona the only time he got on a mic was to rap, which immediately made me switch off, but when tasked with giving a more traditional style promo (you know, one where he speaks about his goals and achievements and tries to illicit a reaction from the fans instead of shouting as loud as he can over his entrance music) he’s very effective. His verbal skills now stand out as the strongest part of his act.

The development of his character has been well handled. The reason for the change in attitude is clear and understandable: he got tired of dancing, rapping and generally humiliating himself for the enjoyment of the fans without getting anything to show for it. Pandering to the fans held him back, which made him resent them. Anyone can follow that logic and it makes Truth more believable as a performer.

Of course, the true highlight of his revamped character has been his use of bizarre phrases. “Little Jimmy” is the personification of all the kids in the audience that Truth had to cater to for years, the reason he feels he has never reached the top in the company. Then there are the more esoteric phrases such as “Used ta is a rooster from Brewster!” which means nothing but sounds amusing and gets Truth over as the mentally unhinged crackpot we’re meant to see him as.

There have also been promising signs that WWE has planned a storyline out for Truth. On the May 23^rd RAW, while ranting at Cena, Truth blurted out that he wants his son back. Following that line he looked embarrassed and quickly went back to his verbal lambasting of Cena. The following week he victimised a father in the audience (well it was an actor, but we’re not supposed to know that) who was enjoying a night out with his sons. Coincidence? Or will it be revealed that Truth singled that man out because of his own issues with an estranged son?

I think the biggest sign that Truth is working out as a top heel is that he has successfully turned the crowd against him to the extent that they are willing to support John Cena. The WWE champion has received mixed reactions for years, and it’s rare for anyone to work a program with him with the heel/face dynamic working correctly. That Truth has managed this shows that the audience don’t like hearing what he has to say and are willing to support anyone over him.

R-Truth v John Cena for Capitol Punishment is expected to be announced on this Monday’s RAW. That match would be a big test for Truth, but it’s one I think he’d pass. He has shown amazing crowd working abilities in the past few weeks on RAW, and with the warm responses Cena has received lately I expect that fans at the pay-per-view will be solidly behind him. The match may not be a classic, but the crowd should be emotionally invested enough to make it memorable.

Will Truth win the title? I no longer think it’s impossible, but I don’t think Capitol Punishment will be his night. The match will likely end on a disqualification or feature some brawling after Cena wins to keep the feud alive for Money in the Bank on July 17^th. At this point, I think Truth’s one of the brightest stars in the company and someone who deserves a tryout with the top title some time soon. And that, little Jimmy, is the truth.

No Gimmicks Needed

In 2009 Vince McMahon decided to alter the WWE pay-per-view calendar. Gone were the days when shows would feature gimmick matches as and when they were called for, to be replaced by shows that were built around such matches, regardless of whether they were needed or could be written into a feud logically. It was an unpopular decision amongst fans, and over the course of the last two years the situation has only become worse.

I imagine the reason behind the change to themed PPVs came about as a combination of the success of previous shows that were headlined by gimmick bouts, the solid buy rates the Royal Rumble (a card built around one gimmick match that has been a staple for the company for over twenty years) draws each year, and the big match feel adding a stipulation bout can create. There’s logic there, but it’s not been properly thought through.

Unsurprisingly, the new approach to pay-per-views hasn’t helped increase the buys they get, with WWE PPV business having fallen since the switch. Vince McMahon, having being a promoter for several decades, should have realised it wouldn’t work. People order these shows because they want to see two people that don’t like each other face off in a match, or a popular wrestler finally beat the dastardly heel for a championship. They don’t order them to see three cage matches in one night.

It’s been suggested that the economic climate has impacted negatively on WWE’s PPV business. That’s an argument that can only be considered partly true at best. Ring of Honor has steadily increased its average number of pay-per-view buys over the last two years. It may be working on a smaller scale, but an increase is an increase, and they’ve managed it by giving people what they want to see. More indicative of there still being a market for Vince to tap into without resorting to these measures is the continued success of Dana White’s UFC, which regularly promotes cards that attract buys in the upper reaches of the hundred thousands with no irregular rules in sight.

UFC may not be wrestling, but it’s a comparable product that competes for the same audience. UFC achieves the results it does in the same way RoH does: by promoting matches fans want to see and charging them money to see them. The majority of WWE’s gimmick shows do not do this. The writing of WWE’s television shows is so rushed and sporadic that feuds quickly become overexposed, meaning that fans are not willing to pay to see PPV matches in the numbers WWE needs. If two men are going to face each other in any sort of speciality bout it needs to be after months of feuding and there needs to be a logical storyline reason for the stipulation to be added. The rushed approach does not achieve this.

The Hell in a Cell match has been the worst casualty of the last few years. That’s a match that should be used once every year or two, for big money feuds that need something special to end on. It’s not the sort of match that should be wheeled out three times in one night because of what the show is called.

When used sparingly gimmick matches can enhance shows and feuds, helping to end months-long disputes on a high and earn the promotion a lot of money. But theming an event around one type of match isn’t going to have the same effect. All it will do is numb the audience to future matches of that type.

Luckily, it looks as if WWE may be planning an experiment with a non-themed pay-per-view event in June. Emanating from Washington DC the puntastically named Capitol Punishment (let’s hope that name sticks – I love it) looks as though it’s going to feature stipulation matches only if they’re called for.

While July, September, October and December are currently set to have five gimmick events between them we can hope that the June show will be enough of a creative and commercial success to see a return to regular non-themed pay-per-views in 2012. It’s just possible that some of those shows planned for later in the year will be canned in place of regular shows too. Don’t hold your breath though.