Every Thursday or Friday, PWTorch staffers James Caldwell and Greg Parks have a Lounge-style chat reviewing the week in TV wrestling and looking ahead to what's next for key storylines, matches, and future events. Sometimes, there's an occasional "Seinfeld" or "The Office" reference related to pro wrestling mixed in for good measure.

James Caldwell: This is PWTorch assistant editor James Caldwell joined by PWTorch columnist Greg Parks for our weekly TV wrestling discussion. Greg, let's start right off the top with the Tough Enough finale. Andy goes over Luke after some close nearfalls and referee incompetence. Did you agree with the booking?

Greg Parks: I didn't; what surprised me most was every trainer unanimously picking Andy. It's tough to gauge too, because of how they presented the FCW match with DeMott. They said most of the consideration for the winner would come down to that match, yet all the viewers saw were snippets and highlights. I was greatly disappointed in how they presented that contest.

Caldwell: I definitely agree with the presentation of the FCW matches. That was just oddball weird. The whole thing came across like a put-on with WWE already deciding Andy would win. The trainers milking their picks and Austin & McMahon's "back-and-forth" came across like such a production. I thought it was a lame attempt by WWE to "take control" of the series for the season finale after the previous nine episodes were in the hands of the Tough Enough production company. At the end of it, especially with Andy being "initiated" after winning, I was left wondering what the point of the whole season was. And that's not what WWE should have had viewers thinking.

Parks: Yeah, even if Luke had won, I don't see anything in him more than "cocky mid-card heel" which is the same character that half the heels on TV are playing, anyway. I just don't like the idea of someone already under WWE contract, who has already had experience in FCW, winning (or even participating in) this contest. It just doesn't feel right.

Caldwell: Yeah, it was as scandalous as former Nexus member Darren Young back on NXT! Okay, just kidding. I'll stretch your point even further that Andy winning just seemed like a different type of promotional vehicle to introduce someone from developmental on the main roster. By the end of the season, I was so annoyed with Andy's outbursts and cocky attitude, especially with WWE trying to force-feed him on the show, that I want him to go away and he hasn't even done anything on the main roster. I agree Luke could fit that 2009 Miz mold of a cocky mid-card heel. I don't see him advancing past that, like you said. Overall, the end of the season just left an awful taste.

Parks: Yeah, it wasn't great, but I didn't think it was that awful. I didn't like the FCW stuff and I'm not a huge Andy fan, but the live finale didn't offend my senses that much. I just think they need to decide next season (if there is one) to either take those with experience in the ring, or those without, but not both. It's just not fair to have Jeremiah learning the ropes while guys like Andy and Luke could do some of this in their sleep and probably learned it years ago. The playing field isn't level coming in.

Caldwell: To use a school analogy on the casting issues, it did seem like there were first-graders, eighth-graders, tenth-graders, and college students all packed into a high school chemistry class. It seemed like most of the season was spent trying to spell everyone's name right in an entertaining fashion. I definitely think casting is the #1 issue to address if there is a second season. All right, Greg, Monday's Raw. Thumbs up, thumbs down, thumbs in the middle for you?

Parks: Thumbs down I guess; nothing seemed to stand out, aside from the opening Tough Enough overrun. The main event was well constructed working in two feuds and two matches for Capitol Punishment. Punk vs. Rey was fine, but we've read that book before. Cameos by Booker T and Zack Ryder were nice but ultimately don't matter in the grand scheme of things. And we had Del Rio's awful segment. So yeah, thumbs down.

Caldwell: I feel the same way I felt last week, but not as frustrated with it. I think I was just numb to the show, especially when Rey vs. Punk was announced before the show started. It sent a pretty clear message WWE is fresh out of ideas, so I lowered expectations. I think I'm just accepting this is where WWE is - creative is burnt out, WWE is out of ideas, they're going to be inefficient with their matches and TV time, and they're consciously and willing choosing not to effectively promote a PPV. There's no other explanation for the "we don't want to make money" PPV build-up. I want to get your thoughts on R-Truth, specifically, since he's in the PPV main event. I think WWE is in the danger zone of ruining something great. How do you feel about WWE's presentation of Truth the last two weeks?

Parks: Do you mean not effectively promoting a PPV? Didn't you see the Obama commercial?? As for Truth, I continue to like what he's going, even this week in the opening segment. He was the highlight of the show again. Wearing the Confederate get-up was what I'd imagine a crazy guy would do to make a point (whatever it was). I didn't really have a problem with how they presented him. What's the danger zone that you've been seeing?

Caldwell: I see him going from an effective, crazy (and entertaining) heel who could really present a threat to Cena to just a "WWE comedy heel" who the champion doesn't take seriously as a threat. It's like Truth was edgy, unique, and different, but now I feel WWE has taken more of an interest to Truth's character, leading to some of those ineffective lines like Truth can't spell "conspiracy," which gets a laugh from the kids, but won't make money. They're moving away from real heel heat to "WWE comedy heat," which has been the downfall of so many heels in WWE. It's mainly why I was afraid of WWE rushing into Cena vs. Truth - I thought they should saved that for down the road after Truth really built that "conspiracy" program to the point where he was a dangerous threat.

Parks: I could see that. I do think Truth needs to be taken seriously as a threat to Cena, but I wonder if people would tune into the PPV just because they like Truth's character, whether he's a serious threat or not. I think maybe WWE's take is "we've done so much to hurt Truth in the past that he's not going to be taken seriously as a threat anytime soon, so let's at least have fun with it while we're building him up to face Cena."

Caldwell: I think that's part of the problem - WWE has just given up on selling off-brand PPVs, so their focus is on trying to fill two hours of TV while devoid of ideas. I don't think WWE's audience would buy the PPV based solely on Truth being entertaining lately. That might drive someone to watch Raw to get some entertainment value on a Monday night, but not to drop $45. If WWE wanted their audience to order a PPV, they would put Cena in jeopardy by building up Truth as being a legitimate threat, and then encourage their viewers to buy the PPV to see if Cena can vanquish his latest obstacle...on the way to WrestleMania vs. The Rock, which would make the match seem all the more important. Greg, the other match added to the PPV is The Miz vs. Alex Riley. What's your take on the latest from them on Raw?

Parks: They didn't do a whole lot, so I think the feud is still relatively hot. I could've done without Riley faking hitting Cena in the head. What would be his character's motivation for that? He should be so pissed at Miz still that his complete focus is ripping him apart, not worrying about Cena.

Caldwell: Yeah, I felt like that was sloppy storytelling. It's like WWE felt the need to still tease tension between Cena and Riley because Riley tried to help Miz destroy Cena just a few weeks ago at Over the Limit, so that aspect got in the way of focusing on the Miz-Riley issue. The briefcase fake-out definitely came across like one of those dumbed-down moments where WWE tried to get the kids in the crowd to scream horrors at the possibility of Riley popping Cena, even thought it got in the way of the real story they should be focusing on. I still think Miz-Riley is the best program WWE has going right now on Raw, but I preferred Weeks 1 & 2 over 3. Greg, what else stood out to you from Monday's show?

Parks: WWE creative should be banned from doing the "wrestler calls out another wrestler, only to have it be someone short/fat/out-of-shape dressed as that wrestler" indefinitely. I've seen enough and even Del Rio couldn't save that segment.

Caldwell: I had a feeling you'd want to talk out your feelings about that Del Rio segment! In the back of my mind, I thought someone in WWE Creative must have been pondering Nitro thoughts with the "Best of Nitro" DVD coming out and decided it would be a good idea to channel the various dress-up-like-someone-else parodies on Nitro back in the day. That whole segment fell flat on the live crowd. I'm sure there will be a reaction when Big Show comes back for revenge, but, right now, the material isn't building that bridge to Show's return. It was baaaaad.

Parks: Yeah, the Nitro ones worked because the guys dressing up like other guys weren't nobodies.

Caldwell: Which was completely lost in translation when that that segment was put together. Greg, something we haven't touched on yet from the main event was Austin's role, the GM's subsequent over-turning of the decision in favor of the heels, and Austin being announced as GM-for-the-week on next week's throw-it-against-the-wall All-Stars-themed Raw. What's your take on the Austin and mystery GM situation?

Parks: I hope we find out next week why the GM would admonish Austin for overstepping his bounds as ref, then turn around and announce him as guest GM next week. Because that makes no sense to me.

Caldwell: A sarcastic view would be the GM realized making Austin return for a three-hour Raw next week would be punishment enough. But, yeah, aside from that, it didn't make much sense. Perhaps there will be an explanation, but we're still waiting on the Nexus higher power, Michael Tarver roaming backstage, and who was in the limo before The Rock's big return in February, so I'm not holding my breath. Greg, anything else from Raw?

Parks: Sure...but nothing I'm interested in analyzing.

Caldwell: Yes, things like Booker T's random in-ring return with no hype were just moments to shrug your shoulders and wonder. Greg, NXT on Tuesday night. Thanks for covering for me on that. I haven't caught up on this week's NXT yet, but it seemed like a lot of bland wrestling filled the show.

Parks: I prefer that to bland non-wrestling filled show.

Caldwell:Yes, like multiple challenges putting the audience to sleep. Are you as surprised as I am they've completely dropped the challenges?

Parks: Surprised: yes. Happy: yes.

Caldwell: Well-put. And for an NXT prediction ahead of next week's elimination episode: who gets cut?

Parks: Conor.

Caldwell: I said that last time around, so I'm not going to be burned again. I'm going with ol' Darren Young. Greg, let's quickly move along to Smackdown before you hop on the Livecast to chat with listeners. Christian turned on Orton at the end of last week's show - what do you make of Smackdown's top program and how long do you think this new feud could last?

Parks: Unfortunately, I don't think there's a lot of depth to Orton as a top face on Smackdown. Otherwise, I think this feud could last a while. The problem is when they try to shoe-horn Sheamus and Mark Henry into things. Sheamus I don't mind so much, but WWE should decide on who they want Orton to feud with: Sheamus or Christian.

Caldwell: What do you think is missing from Orton as a top face? You mentioned the back-and-forth on who Orton's top foe is, which I think is a factor. What about Orton's character isn't clicking right now?

Parks: Like I said, there doesn't feel like there's any depth to his character. WWE did so much for so long to establish him as a ruthless heel, it's still tough for me to take him seriously as a face. WWE should be thankful the fans aren't so fickle, because he's getting good face pops.

Caldwell: , I think he's reached that point where the audience just cheers him because he's one of WWE's only big stars. He doesn't have the "longevity face pop" like Kane, but Orton gets a similar "hey, he's a big deal!" reaction despite doing all sorts of evil things in the past. I think you nailed it that WWE has failed to go beyond that and actually give him a reason to play a face rather than simply being a face because he's accepted by the audience as a top star. Two things to get your thoughts on before we wrap up - the Cody-Bryan feud and the current Corre issues. What's your take on the direction of those two programs?

Parks: Cody-Bryan is exciting to me, and I hope they continue to utilize DiBiase in that feud as well. The Corre stuff I could take or leave. Doesn't affect me either way.

Caldwell: Agreed on Cody-Bryan. It certainly gives Bryan a purpose, which he didn't have during the tail-end of his Raw run and early Smackdown run post-Draft. I hope that leads to a PPV match of sorts to see what those can do in the ring on a bigger stage. Greg, we're out of time and the tape machines are rolling - any final thoughts before we wrap up?

Parks: I think that about does it for me, James.

Caldwell: Sounds good. We'll look forward to more of your thoughts on the Livecast today with Wade Keller. Always a pleasure!

Parks: Excellent! Good talk as always.

We suggest these recent related articles...

CALDWELL'S WWE "NXT: HOUSTON" LIVE RESULTS 9/17: Complete "virtual-time" coverage of Balor, Joe, Bayley, more from debut show in Texas

CALDWELL'S LIVE REPORT - 7/12 Lone Star in Houston, Tex.: Alberto El Patron no-shows, Dreamer vs. Hoyt new main event; plus Duggan, Snitsky, Cabana vs. Mahal, Joey Ryan, Rowe vs. Hernandez, Ivellise, Catrina, Houston Carson, one title change, more

CALDWELL: A Top 10 for 10 Years - Hall of Fame, George, Sweet Tea, Studio B, Duke, Three-Pack, and you!