Where's the Hate?

Last Thursday's episode of SmackDown was headlined by a singles matches between Seth Rollins and Dean Ambrose. Obviously this is notable for being a rare singles match main event, SmackDown usually having some sort of tag match on last. But the more notable thing about the match was that it was the first singles clash between Rollins and Ambrose since their Hell in a Cell match last October.

That HIAC match was the blow off to the long-running feud the pair had been having since June, when Rollins betrayed his Shield teammate Ambrose (along with Roman Reigns) and "bought in" to The Authority. Rollins came out on top in every (televised) match during that rivalry and ultimately won it. But at the time that didn't matter. Ambrose had stated that he wasn't motivated by beating Rollins. Instead he was motivated by the opportunity to hurt Rollins during matches. He also made a point early on to state that he would do anything in his power to stop Rollins successfully cashing in his Money in the Bank contract and becoming the WWE champion.

What motivates this man? Besides Renee Young.

Both of those things are rare in WWE. Generally speaking we're left to assume that any given wrestler is motivated to win because winning is better than losing. Which is, generally speaking, true but it's not particularly inspiring or interesting. There's never any mention of winners being paid more or a string of victories earning a wrestler a title match or anything else that would explain why guys choose to compete. It's a big contributing factor to WWE programming being so dreary. Nobody has a motivation to wrestle beyond the fact that they are a wrestler.

So when Ambrose said he didn't want to win, he just wanted the chance to hurt Rollins, it made him stand out. As did his promise to stop Seth getting a WWE title shot. The trouble is that his promise to try and stop Seth becoming champion was never fulfilled.

In and of itself this wouldn't necessarily be a problem. Ambrose could have been written out of shows before Rollins tried his various cash-ins, explaining why he didn't come out to stop him. But he wasn't. Every time Rollins tried exchanging the briefcase for a title match, up to and including his final and successful attempt at WrestleMania 31, Ambrose was, in storyline terms, perfectly able to dash to the ring and stop him.

An argument could be made in favour of this being the right approach. Ambrose moved on to programmes with Bray Wyatt and Bad  News Barrett after he'd lost to Rollins at Hell in a Cell. Having him still targeting Rollins would have jarred with the way WWE sequences things. It would have been a needless booking wrinkle too, each time Rollins appeared to attempt a cash-in Ambrose would either have to follow and be eliminated or provided with a suitable reason to remain absent earlier in the show. The writing team has enough headaches to deal with, adding another was less than desirable.

I don't think these are strong enough reasons to explain Ambrose failing to follow through on his promise though. If he truly felt betrayed by Rollins, and everything he said and did indicates that he did, he would have stuck to his promise and done everything in his power to stop Seth winning the world title. Being involved in a dispute with someone else shouldn't have been enough to stop him. You can, after all, dislike more than one person at once. That it would have upset the natural order of things on WWE television would have been a good thing, things on RAW are far too predictable and stale. The WWE formula has needed refreshing for years and this would have been an ideal first step to making changes. By forgetting that promise Ambrose has been shown to be just like every other WWE babyface. That may be part of the reason he's cooled off considerably since last autumn.

There is a silver lining to all of this. The writing team still has the option to have Rollins and Ambrose reunite at some point in the future (and that's going to happen, a Shield reformation is too lucrative a thing for WWE to pass on) and reveal that after they finished their initial feud they reached a secret understanding that Ambrose would not interfere in any of S-Roll's future cash-in attempts. They could even initially reunite the pair by having Ambrose aid Rollins in a title defence, perhaps in a match where there's a stipulation in place stating that no Authority members can interfere. That would set up the revelation of their secret pact nicely and create a new dynamic between the currently-still-friendly Reigns and Ambrose.

Motives need to be mentioned far more in WWE. They got it right with Ambrose last summer. Let's hope they can get back to that again, and with more wrestlers.

Ryback Rules

I think anyone who appreciates a good wrestling-based chuckle will have become a fan of Ryback over the last year. This is not the unstoppable jobber-demanding musclehead who was hot-shotted to the top of the card in late 2012, the guy who jobbed to Mark Henry at WrestleMania XXIX, turned heel the next night, and then did some more jobs to John Cena before tumbling down the card into obscurity.

Maybe the nip slip could become a regular part of Ryback's repertoire.

No, this guy sends himself up with YouTube videos and childishly mocks “internet wrestling fans”¹ during his ring entrances. His videos, often recorded in profile on an iPhone in a move that seems designed to further the perception that Ryback is a clueless, bumbling simpleton, have included him taking part in rib-eating contests, rocking up at drive-thrus with his own entrance music blaring from the stereo of his (rental) car, and laying in a hospital hooked up to an IV and heart monitor even though he’s only there to undergo a hernia operation.

With these videos he has created a deluded persona for himself. One that suits him and that he seems to enjoy playing.

It’s the last video mentioned (also the most recent) that really showed how much potential the character has for being used on television. After acknowledging that he’s been working injured for a while (neatly avoiding revealing the nature of his injury) Ryback says he powered through for the kids, grandparents, fathers and mothers, noting that the mothers are particularly fond of ‘The Big Guy’. He then references a conversation he had with his “good friend” Babe Ruth, who died in 1948, 33 years before Ryback was born, before promising he’ll return “in a big way” and drifting off to sleep saying his own catchphrase. And throughout he continually refers to himself in the third person by his ‘Big Guy’ moniker. It’s wonderfully daft.

WWE should make the most of the character the man’s created. Precede his comeback with a series of delusional videos, aired on RAW and SmackDown, in which Ryback does things like visit children’s homes and open supermarkets, giving speeches and referring to himself as ‘The Big Guy’. When he gets back to arenas have him reference his famous pals in interviews. Anyone from Abraham Lincoln to Arnold Schwarzenegger. The joke is that much more surreal if the alleged friend is dead but they don’t have to be: the base punchline is that Ryback clearly doesn’t know any of these people.

‘The Human Wrecking Ball’s’ chance to crack the top has probably been and gone but he could still play a very convincing mid-card beast. He could have great matches with guys like Cesaro and Ziggler, sending ‘The Show Off’ bouncing around the ring and providing a suitable slab of flesh for ‘The Swiss Superman’ to muscle around. Ziggler and Cesaro should be the two guys WWE builds their mid-card around, and if they are then they’ll need opponents. Ryback’s perfect for the role.

***

¹ Because apparently it’s fine to lump us all together with this “label.” Whatever, Ryback. You bigot.

That RAW Recap 13.10.14

I'm calling this That RAW Recap but it's really not really a recap. It's a series of observations regarding things that happened on RAW. Specifically things involving John Cena and Dean Ambrose. The title’s about as appropriate as anything else I could use.

The opening promo segment started off with Ambrose stating that he’d like nothing more than a Hell in a Cell match with Seth Rollins. That made sense: the pair have been embroiled in a very personal feud (what could at one time have been dubbed a blood feud) since June. There are no two men on the roster better placed for a Hell in a Cell match right now. Ambrose then acknowledged the finisher exchange he and Cena shared last and declared that his plan was simply to beat Cena in their contract on a pole match to earn his match with Rollins.

All of that was fine. Ambrose ran through what was essentially a recap and exposition in entertaining enough fashion and his motivations and “plan” made sense. He wants Rollins because Rollins wronged him and wants to beat Cena for no other reason than because he needs to to get to Rollins.

"I'm the star!"

Things started unravelling once Cena showed up. He patronisingly told Ambrose to relax, reminded him that their pole match (which he referred to as the match of Ambrose’s life) was still two weeks off, and offered up some veteran advice (which was basically “Prepare for the match”). As was the case on the October 10 SmackDown Cena seemed to be going out of his way to undercut and marginalise Ambrose, doing everything he could to remind viewers who was the bigger, more established star.

Ambrose offered up a spirited response. Cena came back with more of the same (although he made the addition of calling Ambrose “son”). The crowd booed Cena heavily. So much so, in fact, that Cena turned his head towards the entranceway, mistakenly thinking that The Authority had made their scheduled arrival early and without music. If even Cena is mistaking his heat for lead heel heat there’s definitely a problem.

When Trips and Stepher did join the segment they segued it into a triple threat match. Ambrose and Cena were paired up to face the Usos and the dust brothers. Naturally as the feuding main eventers who’d never worked as a tag team before Ambrose and Cena won. The Authority then returned to reveal that the pole match was being moved forward to the RAW main event.

And it was in that main event that the real hatchet job took place.

The match started with both Cena and Ambrose making a dash for the corner¹. Neither of them managed to grab the contract, obviously, and so they went into a regular match. The handful of times Cena had Ambrose downed he made a play for the contract, and got stopped. By contrast Ambrose was booked to ignore the contract on five distinct and separate occasions, opting to continue beating up Cena rather than grabbing the contract to win (which, remember, would have earned him the Cell match he desperately against Sethy B that he craved). Michael Cole made an attempt at covering for the way in which Ambrose was booked to behave by talking about how he wanted to prove himself against Cena (which in storyline terms was plausible enough). Sadly that was quickly trampled over by JBL, who was far more interested in denouncing ‘The Lunatic Fringe’ as an idiot. Oh, and for good measure Triple H, Randy Orton, Kane and Rollins, all of whom were at ringside for the match, had a good laugh about Ambrose ignoring the contract too.

Lovely font work on the contract.

The right decision was made for the winner at least: Ambrose left victorious. But the way in which he managed it was less than inspiring: after being tossed aside by Kane, Ambrose left the Authority henchmen to target Cena and took the opportunity to climb up the turnbuckle to grab the prize. So he was only permitted to beat Cena because Cena was distracted by heel interference (which he overcame, leaving him to dejectedly stare at Ambrose’s unassailable position). And that’s overlooking the fact that the reason this was a pole match in the first place was to avoid having Cena getting pinned.

The final touch was Cena’s response to losing. He applauded Ambrose’s ingenuity and gave a wry smile. The message he was conveying seemed pretty clearly to be that Ambrose had one because Cena took his eye off the ball, not because Ambrose was a serious competitor who was on Cena’s level.

I’ve defended Cena on this blog before. I’ll probably do so again. But he was wrong here. The booking was not designed to help Ambrose. In places it seemed to be intended to hinder him. That’s not Cena’s fault and ultimately he couldn’t do anything about it. But he could have done more to help Ambrose within his own, unscripted promo material. Not patronising, undercutting and generally belittling his foe would have been a start. And a slightly more heated reaction to the loss wouldn’t have hurt either.

I understand why WWE protects Cena so much. They rely on him a lot, and for far more than just merch sales. But protecting him doesn’t have to come at the expense of establishing new names. Sooner or later the company’s overly protective attitude towards Cena is going to do real harm.

***

¹ If you’re new to this, item on a pole matches see a pole attached to a ring post, from which the item in question is hung. Generally speaking you win by being the first to grab the item, although there are variations².

² Apologies if this explanation is patronising. I just feel that pole matches can be a particularly bewildering aspect of pro wrestling if you’re not au fait³ with the logic.

³ It’s French. Deal with it⁴.

⁴ Yes, that is a deliberate reference to Batista.

Uncrushable

If you saw last Monday's RAW you saw The Rock's surprise return. Even if you didn’t watch the whole show there's a good chance you've gone out of your way to see that segment. I mean, it's The Rock. Everyone loves The Rock, right?

I'm a fan of The Rock, and if he's available for unannounced appearances I'm all for WWE using him. It helps make RAW feel less formulaic and monotonous than it is. It helps to propagate that old line that used to be very common: anything can happen in WWE! When he makes these appearances sticking him out there to interact with a heel who ca benefit from a rub is the right thing to do. Talking and being charismatic are things Rock’s best at, so putting him in situations where he can do that is good.

What's harder to get into is the nature of Rock's interactions. Rock was always going to look a bigger star than Rusev but Rusev didn’t need to be so marginalised in his treatment. The segment ended with Rock standing victorious in the middle of the ring and Rusev, the man who'll be on RAW next week while Rock's a film set somewhere, standing in the aisle humiliated. It took eleven punches (one admittedly doctored with Rock’s apparently potent saliva) to dispatch ‘The Bulgarian Brute’.

Rock gained nothing from this. All he did was humiliate a pair of mid-card heels. Rusev wasn't elevated, and this would have been a perfect chance to do so. WWE got some press attention from the stunt but it was nothing mind-blowing. The coverage made it clear to anyone not watching WWE every week that The Rock can breeze back in with no notice and effortlessly shut down guys who are below his station. It’s what they expect to hear and so it’s nothing to get excited about.

Imagine how different things would have been had Rusev flattened 'The Great One'. It would have enhanced the Russian's status as the unstoppable monster, especially if Rock had sold the beating when asked about it in interviews (and considering his history with willingly putting guys over we can assume he would have). It would have gotten people talking, even more than they already are, about a Rock versus Rusev match. Even if WWE had no intention of promoting that talk of it wouldn't have done 'The Super Athlete' any harm. They could have paid the beating off in a return skirmish in which Rock got the upper hand. Or hey, maybe they could have altered their plans and asked Rock if he’d be interested in an official ring to the ring to face Rusev. However things played out Rusev would have gotten some attention from non-WWE sources, and that would have helped to establish him as a force.

This short-sighted booking and obsession with protecting guys whose status is completely safe isn't going to get WWE anywhere. Hopefully next time The Rock returns or Rusev is confronted by one of the big boys things will turn out differently.

Bad Bad Guys

Where’s the heat in WWE?

Look at any Randy Orton appearance over the last six months. The crowd will boo as soon as his music hits but there’s no passion to it. It’s done out of a sense of habit or because the audience knows that’s what’s expected of them. ‘The Viper’ is WWE’s lead bad guy and so he needs to be booed.

No wrestler should be getting booed just because they’re a baddie. They should be getting booed because the audience dislikes them and wants to see them receive their comeuppance. The wrestler should be genuinely disliked. And that’s not the case with Orton. He’s booed because he’s boring and because people feel they should play along.

And it’s not just Orton. Very few wrestlers in WWE seem to understand how to turn crowds against themselves or why it’s an important part of their job. That or they’re concerned about being genuinely hated by fans. While the latter is a worry it’s also part of the territory for a pro wrestler at the WWE level: people should be willing to make themselves hated so that their good guy counterparts can become more appreciated by contrast. Everyone in wrestling benefits from having heels people want to see beaten on a roster.

A leading theory is that cool heels like the nWo ruined the business. Now every bad guy wants to take that route. That, people say, allows you to act in a heelish manner, with all the creative freedom that entails, while still receiving a healthy royalty cheque for T-shirt sales at the end of the month. That’s a simplification of the argument, but it’s accurate enough.

The easy to hate Randy Orton.

I don’t agree with the theory. While I imagine it’s desirable for a lot of wrestlers to be the cool bad guy it won’t be for all of them. As I’ve already stated I think the bigger problem is that too many people just don’t want to be full-on bad guys because of the possible repercussions. That and WWE’s approach doesn’t allow for much variety. For the most part every bad guy acts like every other bad guy. Every good guy acts like every other good guy. It’s an approach which makes riling crowds up, or forming positive bonds with them, hard.

Of course, it doesn’t help that the good guys the company has on offer are limp and fairly uninteresting. With bland guys like Kofi Kingston and the Usos being the norm people gravitate towards the heels because, by their nature, they get to show a bit more personality and character. Look at Bad News Barrett earlier this year. He was set up as a heel for months on end but people took to cheering him because he exhibited more personality than the stock WWE babyface. Bray Wyatt has become a mesmeric tweener. Fandango, Cesaro and Bo Dallas have experienced it too, getting cheers when they are, apparently, supposed to be the bad guys.

It shouldn’t be hard for the writing team, and the wrestlers themselves, to come up with reasons for fans to cheer and boo with passion at the appropriate times. Although an inability to do so would explain the woeful lack of interesting storylines outside of the main event.

Narrative is a Draw Too

Is it enough these day for wrestling companies to put on excellent wrestling and expect people to watch their show or buy their DVDs? I don’t think so. While high quality wrestling is obviously desirable I don’t think it’s enough to sustain TV ratings, live stream buys, tickets sales, DVD purchases and so on in 2014. Or any other year come to that. There needs to be an ongoing narrative to hook you and keep you coming back to watch the great wrestlers doing their great wrestling.

A large part of pro wrestling’s appeal comes from its narrative. Its predetermined nature and associated theatrics mean that stories can be told in matches and, more importantly for the purposes of the point I’m making, across a number of shows to keep people entertained and tuning in. Y’know, like a soap, those things which millions of people become hugely invested in.

This isn’t to say that everything has to be in the Vince Russo-slash-Days of Our Lives mould. That approach has a very limited appeal and has been done very successfully before. There are dozens of alternatives. New Japan, for example, focuses on the journey up the card of a wrestler with wins and losses having a heightened meaning. WWE, generally speaking, tells stories about their mighty heroes overcoming long odds. Meanwhile TNA struggles with telling interesting stories and is floundering as a result.

The result of storytelling.

A continuing narrative is as intrinsic to pro wrestling as the wrestling itself. Without a compelling storyline people have no reason to invest in characters and keep watching. Wanting to see a babyface win a championship or a heel receive their comeuppance is something that can only be properly and effectively achieved if there are bookers or writers in place to structure plots over a period of weeks, months, or, in exceptional cases, years.

A roster filled with talented wrestlers is great. It’s ideal, in fact. But it’s not the be all and end all of a great wrestling promotion. If someone just wants to watch great wrestling these days they’re spoilt for choice. YouTube and similar sites provide countless great matches for free. Every promotion from New Japan to EVOLVE puts on its fair share of quality wrestling. Great wrestlers and great wrestling are not hard things to find.

My point (yeah, I’ve got one) is that wrestling companies need to offer people more than excellent wrestling. That’s good to have but it won’t necessarily keep people coming back. Give us reasons to support these great wrestlers and want to see them win. Narrative is a draw too.

How to Turn Laziness into a Positive

There are few better wrestlers in WWE than an on form Randy Orton. He can produce exciting matches and, when he’s in the mood, very good promos. The trouble is that he’s lazy. He’s a man happy to coast along, doing the bare minimum because he knows that he’ll be booked on top because he’s Randy Orton. There’s no reason for him to put in more effort than necessary and so he doesn’t. The WWE creative team are convinced that he’s worthy of a top spot and so he’ll always have a top spot.

I think this attitude should be embraced. I don’t mean that Michael Cole should inexplicably begin talking about Orton’s work rate, I mean that Orton’s character should be tweaked to reflect his “can’t be bovvered” attitude.

Look at this. He can't even be bothered to speak.

Instead of fleeing in terror Orton should calmly leave the ring when confronted by a good guy, strolling to the back like he doesn’t care. He probably genuinely won’t care about the segment, so that feat of acting shouldn’t be a stretch for him. Skip the usual stop at the top of the aisle to look back and grimace at the mighty babyface routine too. A lazy, arrogant wrestler would wander up the aisle and go backstage without ever glancing back.

The ideal way I’d like to see Orton booked would be as a heel who brags about being the most gifted physical specimen in WWE (and even if he’s not he’s a contender by any reasonable standards). Have him tell crowds that he’s more than capable of giving them the matches of their dreams and stealing every show he’s on, but that it’s not worth his time to do so. Make his athleticism a bigger part of his character and play on his natural, much-demonstrated complacency.

This approach would turn his very real laziness into a character trait designed to elicit a negative reaction and would allow for storylines in which ‘The Viper’ is outperformed or shown up and gets dragged into an excellent match despite himself. Opposite a guy like Dolph Ziggler (a very obvious example of an ideal opponent) ‘The Viper’ could lose his rag as Ziggler bests him in exchanges, taking a breather at ringside before getting back into the ring and pushing himself to best Dolph in a faster, more intense exchange before realising the crowd are enjoying the match and… stopping.

 

This approach would not only make sense, it would set Orton apart from every other bad guy on the roster by having him act differently. Current WWE lacks character diversity so much that introducing some variety should be a top priority. But I'm pretty sure it's not.

The John Cena School of Booking

I think it’s about time John Cena started trying to make some new stars. Considering the length of time he’s been WWE’s leading man (nine years and counting) he has a woeful track record in this department. He helped to establish both Edge and Rob Van Dam as credible main eventers in 2005, losing the WWE championship to each to kick off their respective first reigns. Since then, nothing.

In fairness it should also be pointed out that Cena didn’t exactly “make” either Edge or RVD when he lost to them. Van Dam had been ECW’s hottest act since 1998 until it ceased to exist and Edge had steadily been building up to a main event run since the closing months of 2003. A victory over Cena was, in each case, simply the final act that established that they were to be viewed as top tier names in WWE. In other words they would have made it to the top with or without a victory over Cena.

I miss the days of him wearing his baseball cap backwards.

The problem doesn’t lie with Cena. He has shown willingness to lose to a wide variety of names many times over the years. The problem lies with WWE’s creative department. Too great an emphasis is placed on protecting his image as the company’s leading man. I understand Cena is not a Jericho-like veteran figure who can routinely lose without suffering any ill-effects. He does need to win most of the time to maintain his status. Sadly, it’s part of his act. But when he does lose WWE should be prepared to have him do so cleanly, to ensure the victory means something for the guy getting it.

Take Cena’s Extreme Rules cage match with Bray Wyatt for example. Having defeated ‘The Eater of World’s’ at WrestleMania Cena had to take a loss at the Rules show to keep the rivalry alive for the third and final instalment. The overbooked finish saw Cena plough through Wyatt and his two henchmen with relative ease before getting distracted by a child with a strange voice, which allowed Wyatt to sneak up on Cena and ultimately win the match.

There was no need for Cena to job out Luke Harper and Erick Rowan, or for a child to be introduced to provide further distraction. It’s not that it made Bray look weak or ineffective, it’s that it cheapened the win so much that it was worthless. Wyatt had accomplished nothing by winning a match in such a wacky manner. The main thing that saved him from being harmed by the encounter is the fact that he’s such a charismatic performer that people will support him regardless.

That opens up a potential counter argument that the Extreme Rules kerfuffle was fine if Wyatt ultimately came out of it unscathed. Not so. Just because Wyatt was unharmed doesn’t make it right. He could still have been enhanced by a more convincing victory. And I’m using him merely as an example. Most other wrestlers on the roster would have been damaged by such a roundabout win over Cena.

I think the time’s come for Cena to start losing the occasional feud. I’m not suggesting he should be putting over Corey Graves in his inaugural main roster feud, rather select opponents who have been deemed future headline certainties. Rusev is an obvious example. He’s currently being presented magnificently, presumably in preparation for progressing to the top. He is also exactly the sort of man who would suffer at the hands of the current Super Cena model. Anyone familiar with WWE should find it all too easy to envisage Cena being the first man to power out of Rusev’s Accolade submission hold before hoisting the big Russian up to plant him with a match-winning AA.

Rusev... CRUSH!

Of course, somebody has to be the first to break The Accolade. But it doesn’t need to be Cena. Shouldn’t be, in fact. He’d gain nothing from it and it would prove a setback to Rusev. He’d be just another guy who lost to Cena. Conversely, imagine the reaction if Cena fell victim to the hold (even via referee stoppage). Rusev would be set as an unstoppable machine with an unbreakable hold. A victory over Cena could kick off a period of complete dominance for Rusev, which could in turn be brought to a hault six to twelve months later by a rising babyface who finally manages to snap The Accolade and put Rusev down for a three count.

Cena could not perform tasks like this all the time. As I’ve already said, he does need to win the majority of the time in order to maintain his status with Da Kidz. But he can afford to lose a big match or a feud decisively once every six months or so if it’s going to create a new star.

Mid-Cardonomics

Part of the reason WWE programming is so uninspiring these days is because so few wrestlers are given things to do. The most recent rivalry to feature non-main event talent was between Hornswoggle and El Torito. Before that the last one I can remember was between Cody Rhodes and Damien Sandow. While a feud between Sandow and Rhodes is no bad thing it took place in July and August of 2013. That nicely illustrates the distinct lack of frequency for mid-card feuds and the general lack of attention.

The trouble with concentrating exclusively (or as near to exclusively as makes no difference) on writing for the main event crew should be obvious. It means scenarios get recycled and become familiar, creating indifference in viewers. It also makes it needlessly difficult to elevate fresh acts, exacerbating the staleness problem.

Every Monday a three hour RAW airs but much of it can be skipped, too much of what takes place being inconsequential filler. The opening of the show, the close of the show, the first match, and whatever airs at the turn of each hour are the only things that are likely to matter long term. Even then the specifics are repetitive and uninspired.

Give this guy something to do. Please!

What’s frustrating is that things don’t have to be this way. WWE has more than enough guys on the main roster to be able to get a healthy mid-card scene going. Bad News Barrett, Sheamus, Dolph Ziggler, Damien Sandow, Cesaro, and Cody Rhodes all have significant enough followings and the required amount of wrestling ability and personality to draw people into storylines. That list omits tag teams the Uso brothers and The Wyatt Family, guys who are ready and waiting for their shot in NXT, guys like Dean Ambrose and Seth Rollins who are not guaranteed permanent top spots quite yet, and the entire Divas division.

It’s not just the talented wrestlers WWE have access to, it’s the writing staff too. Over the years WWE as a company has proven capable of creating balanced television shows that give people the top stars they want while prepping new talent for the future. It also has a history of putting out satisfying storylines (and stinkers too, but that’s always going to happen). That the writing team has changed a lot in nature over the years doesn’t matter. Nor does the fact the people drop in and out, coming and going from the company and the creative process. The WWE product is always overseen by Vince McMahon, and has been for over thirty years. He has proven he knows how to oversee a quality wrestling show, including the prep-heavy periods of prosperity. It just seems that right now he’s not bothered about quality (or that he’s distracted by other things like his company losing money, although in truth that’s not a completely separate issue).

Even beyond the fact that they still have Vince overseeing them we’ve seen the current WWE system has capable people involved. I’m not talking about Paul Heyman or ‘Dirty’ Dutch, although the writing team could do worse than tap them for mid-card plot inspiration. I’m talking about the team of writers who put together NXT.

NXT is a different show to RAW, SmackDown and Main Event. It emphasises wrestling far more and isn’t as long. The talent of those involved in its writing are obvious. They ensure everyone on the show gets an introduction that explains what they’re about, has something to do when they appear, and gets the chance to connect with the audience. Storylines progress logically with a clear beginning, middle and end, and there’s a reason for things happening, including losses in matches.

The NXT approach is not something that could be copied and pasted onto RAW. They’re different shows that target and attract different audiences. But the approach to storyline construction would be a welcome addition to RAW. How about handing over writing duties of Dolph and the gang over to the NXT scribes? The current main roster writing crew would be freed up to make their sections better and the newcomers would be giving meaning to a bunch of talented but overlooked guys.

Even if that’s impossible for whatever reason surely something could be done about the uninspired undercard. I’ve watched wrestling for long enough to know that it doesn’t take that much to get a good mid-card scene going. Have Wrestler A and Wrestler B interfere in one another’s matches and trash talk one another for a month as Wrestler C and Wrestler D do the same for the Intercontinental championship. Have Wrestler A win his feud and make fun of Wrestler C for losing, setting them off in their own feud leaving Wrestlers B and D to do the same, maybe mixing in the birth of a plastic hand or a mysteriously vibrating gym bag or honour being regained by chopping off reproductive organs for good measure (because, y’know, that’s entertainment!). Then wrap up with the final combination before introducing Wrestler E and possibly even Wrestler F for some fresh combos and new stars. Is having a meaningful Intercontinental championship match on a pay-per-view really too much to ask?

Give mid-card wrestlers things to do, basically. The whole point of the above alphabet string would be to create matches that have meaning, giving people a reason to root for certain wrestlers and against others. It would help create anticipation for future matches too. And as much as WWE may not want to admit it it’s the lure of a hot match that elevates a show from run-of-the-mill to red hot success.

Hour Two

Over the course of That Wrestling Podcast Michael and I began frequently using the term hour two. It references the fact that the second hour of RAW almost always playing host to good but ultimately inconsequential matches. These matches usually feature the likes of Kofi Kingston and Dolph Ziggler. Guys who can wrestle a top notch match but who, for whatever reason, WWE seem unwilling to push beyond this filler role.

Good enemies, better friends?

This is something that could actually be used to WWE's advantage. Kingston and Ziggler could be paired up as a team or, better yet, put in a trio (those are so in right now) alongside a similarly overlooked mid-card vet such as Tyson Kidd or Justin Gabriel. It would be creating a new dynamic for the matches of all three and opening up storyline options for RAW's second hour (and SmackDown, Main Event, and pay-per-views too, obvs). That RAW’s second hour is bereft of plots is particularly depressing and something I think most would like to see changed.

There are various ways the three could be brought together. They could simply announce they're forming a team. That's suitably bland enough to suit WWE but it would be particularly unimpactful (if that wasn’t a word it is now). They could interfere in each other's matches for a few weeks before officially forming a group. My personal choice would be for the three of them to be booked in a three-way match for a US or Intercontinental title shot and announce the formation of their group instead of wrestling one another, challenging any three wrestlers to come out and steal the show with them in a six man tag instead. Because a desire to steal the show would need to be the driving force of a faction of this type, naturally.

If the three members got into the idea of being a faction it could become a highlight of RAW. Wearing some colour-coordinated gear and working on some double and triple team sequences would help to set them apart visually. They could bring back the strangely out of fashion practice of being at ringside for each other's single and tag team matches. Kidd and Kofi could be paired up as a regular duo and 'The Show Off' could be booked to pursue IC and-or US gold, with all three coming together for six mans every few weeks and facing their various opponents (or three randoms).

If left alone to establish themselves as a trio over a period of months then encounters with the Wyatt Family could be big events (had The Shield not split they’d have been natural opponents too). Imagine if this proposed new group closed an episode of RAW by attacking and getting the better of the Wyatt Family after months of earning a reputation of being a formidable three man team. In fact, you don't need to. Just glance at the face-off between the Wyatts and 'The Hounds of Justice' from November 2013 to see how well crowds will respond to such a stand-off if both teams have been built up to matter.

This proposed group (or one thematically similar to it) would give some structure to WWE's permanently overlooked middle card and give three guys the chance to get over without too much time commitment from the apparently overworked creative team. If they were allowed to develop character and a group dynamic WWE could have another Shield or Wyatt Family on their hands. The name of this proposed group? To do it full justice only one name's appropriate: Hour Two.

The Power of Names

Remember when nicknames in wrestling were just nicknames? Steve Austin was ‘Stone Cold’ because it reflected the merciless, uncaring personality he wanted to portray. The Rock was ‘The Great One’ because it reflected his heelish egomania and belief that he was better than everybody else. Triple H was ‘The Game’ because he told Jim Ross that’s what he was in an interview (which ended up being a surprise high point of his career). The Undertaker was ‘The Dead Man’ because he’s supposed to be a zombie. And so on. You get the idea.

WWE seems to have forgotten the reason nicknames and monikers were introduced in the first place. The build up to WrestleMania XXX saw Triple H telling Batista that if he didn’t rediscover ‘The Animal’ he didn’t think he’d be able to leave the event as champion. That’s the same Triple H who promised Daniel Bryan that he’d be facing ‘The Game’ as though sometimes people face Triple H but not ‘The Game’. Before that we had The Authority telling Randy Orton to rediscover ‘The Viper’, which was used as shorthand for his supposed sadistic streak (basically little more than him punting people in the head, but still).

The return of 'Y2J', apparently.

The earliest instance of the practice I can recall came in the summer of 2012. The August 10 episode of SmackDown featured Chris Jericho announcing that it was time to bring back ‘Y2J’, a signal that the audience should treat him as a babyface (which they’d been doing anyway). ‘Y2J’ was intended as his babyface persona, but the moniker had been used for years beforehand, regardless of whether he was seeking cheers or jeers.

It’s clear from the way in which these nicknames are being employed by WWE that they are no longer intended as mere nicknames that add to a wrestler’s character. They are now supposed to be taken as some sort of totem of power, something that can be gained and lost, switched on and off, depending on a wrestler’s drive, motivation and success (or something). Which is something that can work in wrestling but not in a promotion like WWE.

It does not come across well and it’s something I think WWE should drop before they go any further with it. A lot of what they’re doing recently has worked very well but the nicknames as superpowers approach has been a miss. Nobody has latched onto it and everyone sounds stupid talking about channelling their inner-nickname. Let nicknames be nicknames and use good booking to get guys abilities over.

That Wrestling Podcast Episode 49

That Wrestling Podcast Episode 49 by Dave Hatton on Mixcloud

I’m not going to write loads about this episode. Basically, I think it’s one of our better episodes and it functions as a nice jump-on point to what we do.

Can this be improved on?

The opening natter covers a variety of topics. Included are niche manga available in Japan, the recent series of BBC crime drama Jonathan Creek, and an idea Michael’s had for months for a detective wrestler gimmick. So if you’re into Jonathan Creek, or the career of tousley-haired, large-chinned comedian-cum-actor Alan Davies, this is something you may find interesting.

Yes, it’s still a wrestling podcast.

The main topic is our second Three Improvements instalment. Last time we discussed tweaks that could be made to WWE tag teams. This time we discuss the more sombre matter of three TNA performers. Specifically we look at Rockstar Spud, a talented wrestler who doesn’t wrestle; Samoa Joe, a once great wrestler who’s let himself go a bit due to the indifference that TNA instils in everyone; and TNA world champion Magnus, a man Michael and I have very different views on.

The WrestleMania XXX Main Event

You may have noticed that Daniel Bryan’s been pretty popular lately. You may also have noticed that he was controversially omitted from the Royal Rumble match and that the man who won it has not been as well-received as WWE would have liked since his return. These things don’t bode well for WWE’s WrestleMania card as it currently stands.

Batista being in the main event of WrestleMania against Randy Orton is not a good idea. Matches have been getting hostile reactions for the last month or two. It’s already becoming the norm even in cities that aren’t particularly known for being home to internet-slash-smart-slash-passionate (delete according to preferable description) fans. It’s definitely something that will affect WrestleMania, and it’s obviously something WWE would like to avoid in the show’s main event. In that match more than any other they’ll want to have the audience cheering for someone in the match, rather than sitting backstage.

Even if we overlook crowd reactions I don’t think Orton v Batista is the right match to headline a WrestleMania, especially an anniversary instalment. It will feel old. For WrestleMania to be set apart as something special, which is what it’s supposed to be, the main event needs to feel special.

Something special could be The Undertaker because his Streak has become such a big part of the show over the last decade. It could be a returning star like The Rock or Brock Lesnar, who have proven crossover appeal and a track record as leading man in WWE. It could be John Cena because, like him or not, he is the biggest star on the full-time roster. Or it could be a currently hot star, given the spot to boost their popularity and credibility. Daniel Bryan, basically.

At WrestleMania 21 in 2005 WWE Batista was the right guy to go on last. Then he represented the future of the company, was someone new, and was in a very popular feud with his former Evolution teammate Triple H. But in 2014 he represents a company unwilling to push anyone new. He represents the past. There’s a place for the past in the WrestleMania main event but only in the form of names like Undertaker and Rock. They have the status to be accepted there. ‘The Animal’ does not.

Meanwhile Orton is viewed by most as stale and boring. His matches and promos do not excite and his presentation as the patsy for The Authority robs him of much of his credibility. On top of that he represents the past just as much as Batista. He’s been in the main event for so long that people are bored with him. Somebody new is needed.

The crowd will get rough if Daniel Bryan doesn't go on last at WrestleMania

Of course there’s still time for WWE to alter things. The simplest way to do it would be to have D-Bry leave Elimination Chamber as the WWE champion and officially turn Batista heel before ‘Mania. That would allow the reactions he’s been getting to be played to instead of (poorly) hidden. It would also put the man practically every WWE fan wants to see in the main event in the main event. Batista v Bryan could go on last and not feel out of place simply because of Bryan’s popularity. As long as Bryan’s in the main event the audience are going to have someone to rally behind and the match will be able to function.

I can’t see Batista and Bryan meeting in a singles match. That would leave Randy Orton without anything to do. Which makes me think a triple threat match is likely. There are two simple ways WWE could set that up. The first would be to have Orton lose the title to Bryan at Elimination Chamber and have Orton added to the WrestleMania title match. The second is to have ‘The Viper’ successfully defend his title in the Chamber but for Bryan to be added to the WrestleMania main event sometime between the Chamber and ‘The Granddaddy of Them All’.

Either approach could make sense. If he lost the championship in the Chamber Orty could get added to the WrestleMania bout with his rematch clause. That would help to ease Bastista’s need to be a full-on raging heel and allow him to play the tweener role he’s more suited to.

It’s the second option I prefer though. Bryan going into WrestleMania as champion would be nice, but it wouldn’t be quite the same as him walking into the event as a challenger and winning the gold. Bryan overcoming the odds would be a WrestleMania Moment™. Even he lost the title there (which is the sort of thing I can just about imagine WWE doing) the fans would at least have had the headliner they wanted go on last. It would be easy enough to set up too. The Chamber match could come down to Bryan and Orton with Orton cheating or have assistance to retain his belts, giving Bryan a valid reason to ask to earn his way into the WrestleMania match.

If Bryan is kept as the only man to defeat ‘The Apex Predator’ during his current series against the Elimination Chamber challengers then so much the better. That in itself could be given as a reason for The Authority acquiescing to public pressure and adding ‘The Dazzler’ to the ‘Mania main event.

However it happens Daniel Bryan needs to be added to the WrestleMania main event. If he’s not involved whatever goes on last is almost certainly going to play to boos. The fans want it and Bryan’s earned it. It’s what’s best for business.

The Summer Event

Over the last several years WWE has gotten into the habit of promoting a large-scale, "game-changing" storylines during the summer months, in a fashion not entirely dissimilar to comic book crossovers that hit the shelves annually. 2009 saw Donald Trump “buy” RAW from Vince for a week before selling it back at an inflated price. It achieved nothing and didn’t fit with the pattern that established itself over the following years of the Big Event being something that would change WWE’s creative direction in the long term. It was more of a learning curve, as was the exploding limo stunt of 2007.

 

2010 gave us the massively promising but ultimately disappointing Nexus invasion. The next year CM Punk cut that memorable worked shoot promo of his and rocketed up to the top of the card. They followed that last year by having him assault The Rock, turning him into a bad guy.

 

And this year... Nothing. There had been an absence of such a development in 2013.

 

About the closest they came was Mark Henry's retirement swerve. That did an excellent job of shocking viewers and reheating Mark Henry for his WWE championship match with John Cena. Which were its only goals. Henry wasn't and isn't the sort of performer who could be used to start a bold new creative direction.

 

It seems that the era of the summer blockbuster in WWE may have gone. For some that will likely be reason to rejoice. It had gotten to the point where we were expecting a big storyline to kick off around the same time each year. Predictability in wrestling is rarely a good thing so in that regard the apparent ceasing is good.

 

But there was a positive to be had from the approach. Predictable as it was it ensured the WWE creative team were trying something big each year in an attempt to excite more experienced (jaded, call it what you will) fans and attract new ones. The usual formulaic approach to writing RAW was tossed aside and something new was sought. It was an annual freshening up of what is often a tiresome approach from WWE.

 

They didn't always get it right. Vince McMahon's car exploding is remembered for all the wrong reasons and failed to actually lead anywhere. The same can be said for the Trump purchase, when it’s remembered at all. Nexus was bungled but it started out as a very appealing idea. Handled better it could have been a winner and memorable for the right reasons.

 

Spot the only guy no longer with the company

 

But they undeniably hit the nail on the head with CM Punk. They faltered a little in the late summer and early autumn of 2011 but by the end of the year they'd worked out how best to use and present him. The heel turn was essentially an upgrade of what we'd already had. It worked in part because WWE were willing to use ‘The Second City Saint’ correctly. The heel turn was a chance for him to do something different.

 

WWE have been doing a very good job this year so they clearly don't need their annual Event Moment. It's not as if not doing anything this year means they'll never be able to give us a shocking moment of RAW ever again. I'll miss the approach though. It gave us something to look forward to. And that's just as important a factor for episodic television as anything else.

Perfection on Hold

Well that didn't last long did it.

The man formerly known as Michael McGillicutty returned to our screens as the brand new Paul Heyman Guy on May 20^th. His first match under the new moniker was against Triple H, a match he won by count out (a win’s a win for a mid-card heel). At Payback he dethroned Wade Barrett, in a triple threat match also involving The Miz, for the Intercontinental title. As he celebrated the commentary team talked about how it was the championship his father had held before him and generally gushed to such an extent that it seemed certain he was being fast-tracked to the top. Being given wacky wins over Triple H and holding the Intercontinental title may not mean much in the grand scheme of things but they were signs that WWE was interested in and supportive of Axel.

After successfully defending his prize against Barrett on the June 21^st SmackDown Axel’s next big match was teaming with CM Punk to take on the Prime Time Players. The story of the match was that Punk didn’t trust Axel and didn’t want to team with him but tolerated him on the apron due to his friendship with Paul Heyman. It was a supporting role for Axel but he still benefited from the link to a star of Punk’s stature. At the end of the match he was portrayed as a glory-hunter when he tagged himself into the match for the winning pinfall after Punk had hit Darren Young with a Go To Sleep. It wasn’t a huge win but it was a nice bit of character work.

After that Axel inexplicably slipped down the card.

He defeated The Miz in a bland match at Money in the Bank. Later in the evening he was on run-in duty, attacking CM Punk during the WWE championship Money in the Bank ladder battle. That earned him a GTS and brought Heyman out to ringside so that we could all witness his turn on Punk.

That run-in was the last thing of relevance that Axel did for a month. It took just two months for WWE to lose interest in him and his push.

Axel had seemed promising when he was reintroduced to our screens. He got positive responses during his reintroductory segment and in his title winning performance at Payback. True they were more to do with his heritage and remixed entrance music than him as a performer in his own right, but they were still reactions linked to him. Many WWE wrestlers don’t receive anything when they perform.

The reason he found himself in a reduced role for a month was because Paul Heyman’s time was taken up feuding with CM Punk alongside Brock Lesnar. But now that Lesnar’s disappeared again, until the WrestleMania build begins next year if rumours are to be believed, Axel has found himself being used again.

Having Heyman appear in Punk and Lesnar related promos and accompanying Axel to ringside was probably considered too much by management. I can sort of see their point: it would have risked overloading us on Heyman. And it would also raise the question of why Punk wasn’t at ringside to attack him every time Axel wrestled. It was easier for them to simply reduce Axel for a bit.

 

Is Curtis Axel a future star?

 

Wrestling Punk is a boost for Axel. For Punk it’s a comedown but it’s also a logical continuation of his feud with Heyman. The two are scheduled to face one another on tonight’s RAW. I imagine they’ll end up tangling at Night of Champions too. I can’t imagine (or I don’t want to imagine, at least) WWE putting the IC belt on Punk which means Axel could be in line for an interference-assisted victory over ‘The Second City Saint’, possibly at Night of Champions. That would be another step up for the son of Perfect.

This start-stop approach to pushes is normal. The WWE method of elevating guys has changed over the years. At one point, many years ago now, a guy would be brought in and be pushed consistently for months on end. He’d be given plenty of chances to make it in the role that had been chosen for him and the plug would only be pulled after several failures.

These days guys will find themselves pushed hard and fast for two weeks and then forgotten about for the next two. It’s not an approach that makes the star building process any easier but it does seem to have its advantages. The constant halting of big pushes for CM Punk, Dolph Ziggler and Daniel Bryan meant that their main event pushes were incredibly successful when they did finally roll around. I can’t imagine Bryan would have become this over had he not been kept down in the middle of the card for several years.

If Axel can weather the stop-start storm then perhaps, in two or three years, WWE will activate a massive push for him. It’s not an ideal way of creating new stars. But it’s a way. More importantly, it’s the way WWE have chosen right now. If Axel wants to succeed he’ll have to get used to it.

The Matador Gimmick

You know how sometimes you'll have an idea and you'll think you should share it with the world before someone else does it? Yeah. That.

A few years ago I had an idea for a really gimmicky wrestling character. I've continually put off mentioning it anywhere because I wanted to save it and ensure it had maximum impact when it was finally used. In hindsight this was a stupid decision. It's not like I'm ever going to book an actual wrestling company. The closest I'll come is fantasy booking blog posts and they're not the sort of place to use this idea. Waiting hasn't saved the idea, it's simply allowed actual wrestling companies enough time to beat me to it. I should've known that would happen. I've watched the sport long enough to know that sooner or later everything gets turned into a gimmick.

The promotion that's beaten me to this incredible idea is WWE (hey, they'd already been there before with Tito Santana). On Monday's RAW they aired an introductory vignette for a new tag team called Los Matadores. It's basically a repackaging of the previously directionless Epico and Primo into bullfighters. It appears to be a comedy gimmick, which is good because outside of CHIKARA or a crazier Japanese promotion I couldn’t see it working as anything else.

 

This seems good, but I had something better

 

For the record I think this is a good move. Epico and Primo are talented guys but they failed to stand out. A bullfighting gimmick isn't the sort of thing that will take them to the top but it helps them distinguishable from their peers. More lower card guys in WWE would benefit from this treatment.

The idea I had was for a singles wrestler, dressed as a matador. He wouldn't just have been a matador though. Oh no. He would also have carried an encyclopaedia to the ring to show he was an intellectual. And to give him a handy foreign object.

Before each match he would have asked a member of the audience to ask him a question, at random, using the encyclopaedia. He'd either have answered it correctly or turned the question back on the audience member and used it as a way of insulting the town he were in. I’d have had him wrestling like a matador, sidestepping opponents with a heelish flourish. That's not something I'm expecting from Los Matadores.

This may sound a little strange and peculiar and ultimately pointless and I suppose it is. Without any sort of context explaining the concept of a wrestling gimmick is a little pointless. But you've not heard the name yet. It's the character's name that I was most proud of and the name that I think could have made it work.

The name was... wait for it... The Mind-Over-Matador.

Thank you for your time.

Power Game

Over the last few weeks we've been "treated" to the latest in WWE's long line of McMahon family storylines. This time they're bickering amongst themselves over who's really, actually, properly in charge of the company. So far this has been limited to comedy segments involving Vickie Guerrero being given conflicting instructions by different members of the family (oh the hilarity!) but sooner or later it's going to escalate. What would be the point if it didn’t?

It's that escalation that stands the best chance of interesting me in this. The McMahon family have been put into so many stories about who's in charge over the years that it’s not especially interesting anymore. They're all worthwhile performers (particularly Vince) but it's not an interesting situation for any of them due to the familiarity.

What may set this current storyline apart is its goal. It currently looks like the ultimate plan is to have Triple H acknowledged as WWE's top boss on-screen. Internet rumours back the presentation up.

Vince stepping down is nothing new. I remember a pay-per-view main event in 1999 that stipulated Vince would have nothing more to do with the running of the company if Undertaker lost. Guess what! 'The Dead Man' did lose and Vince was back on screen within two weeks. The final month or so of the (awful) invasion angle in 2001 revolved around Vince losing power too, as did his subsequent feud with Ric Flair.

So, no, Vince's on-screen authority being threatened is nothing new. But what sets the current plot apart is the fact that Paul 'Triple H' Levesque is the man expected to replace Vince as head honcho in real life. If Vince is replaced by ‘The Game’ as the on-screen boss now there's a very good chance he won't ever get the spot back.

The next boss?

I don't think this story is designed to coincide with a true exchange of power behind the scenes. Triple H, and possibly Stephanie, may be moved into leading roles on-screen but Vince is going to be the man in charge until he's dead or physically incapable of performing the role. It’ll probably be the former.

Another intriguing aspect of the current storyline is that real life elements are reportedly being included. Beyond the obvious acknowledgement of Vince, Steph and Tripper being related we've had Steph telling the Divas not to interrupt her and on-air nods to a shouting match between Triple H and Daniel Bryan regarding the latter's stopped match with Randy Orton. Both of those events are said to have occurred backstage. If true it's another instance of WWE blurring the lines between their real life locker room and the fantasy product they televise, something I think should do more of.

How the story's going to get where it's going is unclear. It's also not particularly important right now. What is important is that WWE provide us with logical TV show plots that please fans, attract new regular viewers, and have decent endings. Right now they appear to be on track.

The State of WWE: The Heel-Face Divide

Consider this a third part of the sort-of series I've done over the last two days regarding how WWE books their product. It will probably help if you've read them (check them here and here). I'm not intending to refer to specific stuff from them. It’s the general theme that will carry over.

Today's subject is, as you may have guessed from the title, the booking of heels and faces in modern wrestling (specifically WWE). Twenty five years ago a wrestler could devise a character or gimmick and be practically certain of what sort of reaction they'd get from fans. The latter half of the nineties changed that. First the nWo introduced the world of wrestling to the cool heel fad. Then 'Stone Cold' Steve Austin became the hottest thing since ever doing things that would traditionally would have been considered heelish but with such charismatic glee that fans backed him.

The Attitude Era is packed with examples of faces taking on heelish attributes. The Rock is the most obvious additional example, although once he became a force of good following his bad guy run in the Corporation his heelish traits were not as overt as the likes of Austin and D-Generation X.

Morally grey

It cut both ways. Kurt Angle was introduced as a clean cut American hero, draped in the red, white and blue of the nation’s flag and appearing in vignettes talking about being a national treasure. It was the sort of character that would have been adored a decade earlier. By 1999 fans saw this sort of act as dated and booed 'The Olympic Hero'. That was, of course, the response WWE desired. Angle had been introduced in that fashion to turn audiences against him.

Basically the nineties blurred the lines as to what made a heel and what made a face. The language of television changed and took wrestling it.

WWE spent a significant portion of the last decade seemingly trying to reverse this. They recreated the Four Horsemen, Angle became more generic as a heel but über-patriotic as a face, and feuds settled down into rhythmic exchanges of good versus bad, something the Fed had moved away from during the late nineties. It was an exercise in futility. But then so was a lot of WWE's output from that time.

What's noteworthy is that on the December 15^th 1997 episode of Monday Night RAW Vince McMahon opened the broadcast with a segment referred to on-screen as “the cure for the common show”. In that he announced to viewers that the promotion was going to begin moving in a new direction, heading away from good versus evil battles and offering characters with their own sets of morals to provide unique and interesting stories. Some of McMahon's comments were obviously digs at opponent WCW although the entire exercise was a retaliatory manoeuvre in the first place (because WCW had been hammering the Fed in the ratings).

That announcement was a signal to viewers that things were changing with the WWF product. Those changes to Austin and the various other morally grey personas of the era, freshened up the product and created a wealth of booking opportuities. Each guy, no matter their standing or spot, was distinguishable from his peers, having characteristics completely his (or her) own.

That's a far cry from where WWE was three years ago, a little over a decade after Vince’s speech was made. Every non-headline heel on the roster sounded and acted the same. They would hold the audience in contempt, cheat to win matches, and back down from fights. Meanwhile the babyfaces loved the fans, upheld the rules, and would routinely challenge whatever bad guy they were feuding with to square off outside of sanctioned matches "like men".

Okay, fair enough these are good basics to adhere to. It's difficult to imagine a babyface who insults fans for example (although Eddie Guerrero did pretty well for himself breaking rules). But these attributes don't add up to make a personality and they certainly don't create compelling television when they're the only things on offer.

What wrestling fans want are characters with their own opinions and ways of doing things. CM Punk turned heel last year but still received scattered cheers because people recognised that he was staying true to his overall character. All ‘The Second City Saint’ has ever cared about has been the WWE championship. When he went heel his approach to promos changed, as did the people he feuded with, but he was still adhering to the same set of goals he always had.
 

Another surprisingly good example in recent times has Big Show. Since aligning himself with John Laurinaitis and officially going bad last summer Show has been booked according to a set of principles whilst at the same time flirting with becoming a babyface again. The obvious example was his union with Randy Orton and Sheamus to combat The Shield. It felt a little strange but it could be accepted because he didn’t become a completely different character.

Look at a company like Ring of Honor. They routinely book face versus face battles and occasionally even go in for heel versus heel battles. They’re comfortable with doing so because they trust their audience to pick a favourite and back them, which creates a pretty interesting dynamic when bigger name matches occur.

They’ve also moved away from having everyone have a defining moment for a heel or face turn. At the end of last year Roderick Strong was most definitely a heel. Over the course of the year so far he has stayed playing the same character but has heard a growing number of cheers during his matches. ROH haven’t responded by putting him in an angle to say he is definitively a face again, they’ve simply booked him against a wider variety of guys and Strong himself has reacted to audiences in a less antagonistic manner.

Characters on non-wrestling TV shows are rarely black and white. People want more from television than that in this day and age. It no longer works to present someone as a good guy with no foibles anymore, especially when the likelihood is that they’ve played a reprehensible charlatan at some point in the not too distant past. Moral absolutes are not interesting to watch. Characters with moral grey areas should be embraced by wrestling as they have been with other types of television.

The way forward regarding wrestling personas is to let wrestlers develop something themselves. They’ll not only feel more comfortable but they’ll also be able to rationalise face and heel turns more easily when they have to perform them. The key is not to say that someone’s a good guy and then expect the audience to cheer them, it’s to present a character and see how the audience responds. Book them accordingly from there.