The "Ask the Specialists" Roundtable is the latest spin-off from the "Ask the Torch" feature. CSI led to CSI: New York and CSI: Miami, which is where you'll find the Specialists tackling a daily topic submitted by PWTorch readers to askpwtorch@gmail.com.

Ask the Specialists Roundtable #64

- Question from PWTorch reader Forrest Mahaffey: I'm a lifelong fan of pro wrestling. I miss the days of shows where a wrestler used TV time to squash their opponents. It made the big events so much more exciting and must see... like the PPVs, SNME, Clash of the Champions, etc. I know that after the Monday Night Wars it seems like the fans will only accept big matches all the time. However, the business is declining. Would the old format of showing shorter shows with the main roster showing off their character and moves work today? I think it would make fans beg to see live events and big PPV offerings. I would definitely pay for that. However, I might be in the minority. Your thoughts?

- "Mr. PPV" Nathan Kyght responds: I totally agree with you. During the Monday Night War, writers felt that every match had to big huge, as the companies were fighting to stop the fans from changing channels. Today, squash matches would definitely work in that by the time the two 'big stars' face off, fans are excited to see what would happen. But, here's the problem. Fans have been conditioned for so long to expect stars in the matches, and that's why guys in the mid-card (Ziggler, Kingston, Swagger, etc) lose steam because without 'jobbers,' WWE uses them to enhance other stars, thus watering down everyone below the top-tier. The result is an overall watering down of the product. I think you're idea is proven, but WWE is already concerned about TV ratings slipping any lower, so I just can't see them bringing enhancement talent back in a prominent way.

- "Common Fan" Jimmy Eaton (@TheCommonFan) responds: I would love to see squash matches come back. They don't need them for every match, but one or two would certainly help. I think this helped Rusev when he first started on WWE TV. The issue becomes who takes the loss? Too often, WWE places talented people in a frequent losing position; killing any legitimacy if they're pinned in 30 seconds. I think Ryback's introduction was helped by legit, local jobbers. We've also seen it work on NXT. I think WWE just has to find a better mix of squash matches and unique matches that aren't always tag team matches to build a PPV.

It's so predictable, then we see PPV re-matches on TV every month! That's a slap in the face to anyone who pays for the Network. So, there are a number of problems in that regard, but bringing back a squash here and there wouldn't hurt by any means, and that's been proven with some guys over the last few years. It's after the squash match run when the real "push" begins that gets harder to flesh out. Usually people are fed to John Cena, though, and that stops them dead. Thanks for the question!

- "Hits & Misses" Jon Mezzera responds: I am in favor of more squash matches, but it can only be on a short show. I grew up watching late-'80s WWF with "Superstars" on Saturday mornings. That was a show that had almost all squash matches which like you talked about built anticipation for a Saturday's Night Main Event or a big match at a PPV. But, Superstars was one hour. So was Wrestling Challenge. Three hours of Raw and two hours of Smackdown is too much time for a series of squash matches.

- "Mr. TV" Justin James (@Justin_M_James) responds: I do like a show with more squashes and fewer appearances by champions in non-title matches. I think that NXT is a great example of that model in action. When you see a champion or a fan favorite in a longer match, it feels special. And because the mid-card and above are not constantly trading even-steven wins with each other, and a title match is earned by facing other non-champions instead of getting a fluke or tainted win over the champion in a non-title match. Viewers understand exactly why a particular wrestler is getting a title shot at any given time.

It also gives the idea of “champion’s advantage” a tangible meaning, as the champion gets to rest up while the contenders are in action every few weeks, scrambling to reach a title shot. And it makes those title shots mean so much more. Finally, as you say, it allows everyone else to develop their characters and get themselves over. If it isn’t clear, I’m a big fan of the formula. But will this formula draw? It seems to work on NXT, where the special events generate a ton of buzz and excitement. And the opposite formula is absolutely not working for WWE or TNA. So, I think it’s worth a shot.

- "Instant Reaction" Ben Tucker (@BTuckerTorch) responds: I personally find it doubtful in today's day and age unless backstage segments and interviews eats into more wrestling time and officially becomes the star of the show. Squashes can be used as buffers, but not the main attraction.

- "Showstopper" Shawn Valentino responds: Thank you for your question, Forrest. I have been a wrestling fan since the late '80s, and I grew up with squash matches as a regular part of wrestling programming. When Superstars fought each other, it seemed like a major event. It really made the matches seem much more important. Additionally, squash matches showcased the wrestler's finishing moves and entrance music and allowed his star to shine without distraction. It helped that there were great commentary teams that built up the stars's characters during these matches.

I do not think WWE could go back to filling television time completely with squash matches, but I believe they could have much more of these matches to build individual stars and not water down battles between Superstars. The main problem is that even matches between big names seem nearly entirely inconsequential. so why not just have jobber matches and build up to PPV matches between top guys? How many of you can even name the matches we saw on Raw yesterday? Can you name ten classic matches on Raw in the last five years, where there have likely been over a thousand matches between stars? There are nearly no dream matches left, and you can hardly distinguish a regular Raw from a special event so it is difficult to get excited about any matches anymore. I think one of the main things WWE needs to do is attach a level of importance to winning and losing matches, and bringing squash matches back to make the competitive matches seem more significant would be a great first step.

***

[ FYI: The specialists consist of a mix of current PWTorch contributors providing their opinion on today's wrestling scene and modern wrestling history questions, including Shawn Valentino, Michael Moore, Ben Tucker, Jon Mezzera, Justin James, Brian Leahy, Jimmy Eaton, Nathan Kyght, Tony Donofrio, and Mike Roe. ]

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?