Pro Wrestling Torch was established in 1987 by Wade Keller. One of the primary traits PWTorch has been credited with over the years is assembling the best and most diverse staff of columnists with broad knowledge, but also areas of specialty where they have a particularly strong grasp of history. Every day PWTorch.com presents that team of writers answering your questions, some of which are fact-based and others of which are opinion-based. Either way, we've got you covered with Bruce Mitchell, Pat McNeill, Sean Radican, Greg Parks, James Caldwell, and Wade Keller. Collectively they have over 80 years working for the Torch, writing about wrestling and studying industry history and trends.

If you have a question you'd like us to respond to, send your question to askpwtorch@gmail.com. I, along with the Torch staff, will address your questions in this feature and also the “Ask PWTorch: All-Star Panel” edition which is also published most days here at PWTorch.

===

PWTorch reader Oren D. asks: Love the site and this section. I have a question regarding Daniel Bryan. To me it makes very little business sense for WWE to bury (which is very obviously what WWE are doing) their most over wrestler in the last year. He was making them money through merchandise sales and ticket sales. Now I understand that he may not have the look that the WWE wants for a top guy, but if this is true, why hire him in the first place? Surely their time would be better suited pushing younger talent through who can reach the top rather than wasting time on wrestlers that they know can never reach the top despite how over they are with the crowd. It just seems very counter-intuitive to me. I have been watching WWE for the last 20 years and I cannot remember a similar situation happening before. Has it happened before to the same extent?

PWTorch columnist Sean Radican answers: WWE sees Daniel Bryan as a very good wrestler capable of filling a role on the mid-card and visiting main events. They signed him because he's a heck of a talent and, even though they don't see him as a top guy, they can still make money off of him for the reasons that you mentioned. It wouldn't make any sense not to sign a guy as talented as Daniel Bryan. Not every wrestler WWE signs is going to be a top guy.

Wrestlers like Bryan are valuable because they fill a role. Bryan's size and look will always play against him in WWE because they don't see him as someone that can fill the role of John Cena and be the “Face of the Company.” I don't agree with WWE's position on Daniel Bryan, but no matter how popular he gets, they won't push him as hard as they push Cena or even Randy Orton.

I can't recall any wrestler who has come even close to matching Bryan's popularity with the poor push that he's gotten. There are wrestlers who have become more popular than their push through the years. The most recent one who comes to mind is Dolph Ziggler, but he's fizzled out due to his perceived attitude and concussion issues. The fan reaction to Bryan given his push and how WWE sees him is unique.

PWTorch editor Wade Keller answers: WWE values Bryan as an upper-mid-carder. They are thrilled, to a point, that he gets cheered so much. However, they think his popularity is greater than their willingness to invest in him as a top main event star. I think they consider Bryan popular among the “pro wrestling fans” who will “watch anyway,” but they need someone who looks more corporate and more like a tall wrestling action figure. It’s unnecessary resistance and certainly debunks the McMahon claim that they listen to the fans. 24 year veteran PWTorch columnist Bruce Mitchell has written a heralded three-part series in the PWTorch Newsletter breaking down exactly the situation you have written about as only he can.

===

PWTorch reader Ryan B. of Buffalo, N.Y. asks: Hey guys, love the site couldn't function without my daily fix of PWTorch. My question is regarding the infamous C.M. Punk pipe bomb. I've read on here before that practically every word Punk said was approved in some way before he said it. My question is right before the mic cut he was about to tell "a story about Vince McMahon" and he mentioned the anti-bully campaign the WWE runs. Is there any way of knowing if there actually is a story behind what Punk said or was that something he made up on the spot? Thanks for your time guys, and keep of the great work.

PWTorch columnist Greg Parks answers: If everything he said was truly approved ahead of time (and there's no reason to believe it wasn't), then there was no intention of telling any McMahon story, and the mic was scheduled to cut out when it did. It was just a way to get fans talking about what "possible" story he was about to tell before the mic got cut.

PWTorch editor Wade Keller answers: It was a total work. Not every word was scripted, but Punk knew what he could and couldn’t get away with saying. He very deliberately said things that would “convince” fans (and some sports reporters) that he was “shooting” and going rogue, but he stayed far, far away from any number of hot-button issues that would have gotten him in actual real trouble. There wasn’t one thing he said that didn’t have top management in back nodding and smiling at because they wanted to Punk to convince fans he was breaking from script.

It was very well crafted, and Punk was the perfect guy to do it. It’s not that what he said weren’t in many ways his true feelings, but it’s just a case of Vince McMahon & Co. not caring - they’re aware of the criticism of their company and believe they are justified how they run it. They felt there was money in Punk saying those things to cater to the “Internet fans” because then those fans would support a wrestler who seemed to be anti-establishment. The last line was devised to create that illusion that Punk was “about to go too far.” Had they not cut his mic at all, people wouldn’t have believed the promo wasn’t scripted.

I wrote a lot more about this at the time it happened in the PWTorch Newsletter and also talked at great length about it on the Keller Hotline that night. If you are a VIP member of PWTorch, you have access to all of that. In fact, our archives of newsletters and audio shows go back over 25 years. If this type of topic fascinates you, and you trust our analysis of these events, it really makes sense if it’s in your budget to sign up for membership and dive into our achieves of newsletter and audio coverage of all of pro wrestling’s biggest stories over the last 25 years. Sign up page: www.PWTorch.com/govip.

===

PWTorch reader Tony from Portland, Ore. asks: First of all, thanks for all you guys do to keep us fans drowned in content. If it weren't for you, I might actually get some work done. I was thinking about Ken Shamrock's role as referee at WrestleMania 13 and it got me thinking: Would pro wrestling benefit from establishing refs as no-nonsense figures as opposed to the frail weaklings we've become accustomed to seeing? Or, is the ref bump such an integral part of pro wrestling (at least in the States) that we shouldn't dare imagine wrestling without it?

PWTorch columnist Greg Parks answers: I would certainly like to see refs being taken more seriously and enforce a more consistent set of rules. But that would make WWE seem more sport-like, and WWE wants to err more on the side of entertainment, which means bending the rules based on the story you're telling, which doesn't mesh with stronger referees and rules. I don't think it has anything to do with the ref bump - used sparingly, the ref bump can still be effective, even with no-nonsense referees.

PWTorch columnist Pat McNeill answers: Thank YOU for all you guys do to keep us writers drowned in e-mails. If it weren't for you, I might actually get some work done. Oh, yes, the question! You're right. Ref bumps have been so overdone over the last two years that it's time to swing the pendulum in the opposite direction. I hope some promotions figure that out.

PWTorch editor Wade Keller answers: I’ve said over and over that the “next big thing” in pro wrestling might just be a pro wrestling company that presents itself more seriously as an “immersive sports-like experience” featuring competent, honest, mostly hidden management (no heel GMs or bumbling owners) whose sole goal is to create an even playing field for great athletes to battle it out to win matches and titles. It would be logical that such a leadership team would want strong, competent referees who couldn’t be pushed around, so it’s a good idea. I’d like to see bookers/writers be challenged to really break away from so many bad habits and paradigms, because if they did, things would look fresh and so many cliches would go away. I really think there’s a market for a dramatized version of what UFC is, where it’s more serious and respectable in nature, yet has all the benefits of dramatizing feuds, scripting great matches, and pushing the most charismatic, popular stars. The resistance or dismissiveness to this very concept within the power base of pro wrestling everywhere is pretty astounding to me.

===

PWTorch reader Brian A. of Long Island, N.Y. asks: With the WWE putting all their old PPVs on the Network, I was wondering if they will include Chris Benoit matches?

PWTorch columnist Sean Radican answers: All Chris Benoit matches will be included on the WWE Network with an advisory warning aired prior to the content that he's on starting.

===

Catch up on past Ask PWTorch articles...

-ASK PWTORCH - FREE WEBSITE.
-CLICKING HERE - ASK PWTORCH - VIP VERSION

********

(Send your question for PWTorch editor Wade Keller and the PWTorch staff exclusively to pwtorch@gmail.com for consideration! You can hear expanded conversation on the above topics from Wade Keller by becoming a VIP member and gaining access to the daily Wade Keller Hotline, posted every day for VIP members for over 1,000 days straight. Sign up at www.PWTorch.com/govip)

We suggest these recent related articles...

ASK THE SPECIALISTS ROUNDTABLE: Who will be WWE's Next Top Star?

SATURDAY’S ASK PWTORCH STAFF for 4/11: How should WWE cater to Texas at WM32? Does WWE using Sting and Hogan add to chances more TNA wrestlers are hired? Do NXT gimmick wrestlers have a chance? Is El Generico really Sami Zayn?

THURSDAY’S ASK PWTORCH ALL-STARS 4/9: Are El Generico & Sami Zayn the same person? Next MITB cash-in for IC or U.S. belt? What match do you show non-fans so they get it? Why don’t heel teams cheat?