CALDWELL'S TAKE CORNER CUBE THURSDAY 4/17: Juno, WWE Raw Ratings, and you Apr 17, 2008 - 3:00:41 PM

CLICK FOR BIO

Email This Article - Contact Us - VIP Sign-Up - Back to Home Page

|

Updated daily from the corner cubicle, Torch columnist James Caldwell's weekday blog focuses on hot topic current events and other items of interest from around wrestling.

Updated Thursday, April 17, 2008

Last night was movie night in the Corner Cube to temporarily escape from that ECW show on Tuesday night that I still can't seem to shake. Ironically, I remember more about that episode of horrible TV than I do about the previous five weeks of mediocre-to-decent, but always forgettable ECW television. But, that's another topic for another day.

In any event, I checked out the Academy Award-nominated "Juno" movie last night. If you haven't watched it yet, then walk into the nearest Blockbuster and select from one of the approximately 8.3 million copies in the New Releases section. It's a great comedy (not necessarily for the whole family), but you won't be disappointed, especially if you were a fan of Arrested Development.

Now, you might be wondering how in the world a movie about a pregnant teenager relates to wrestling. No, Juno did not give birth to a hand, and yes, I'm going to weave this back to wrestling, specifically Raw's ratings swoon.

As the name of the movie implies, the story is centered on one person, Juno. She's sassy and has a rather sharp tongue, which makes for great dialogue throughout the movie. The key, though, is that she is the central figure of the movie. Every scene relates back to her. Every piece of dialogue relates back to her. You can picture Juno in the middle of a diagram where all points extending to the other characters relate back to her.

Now that you've stuck with me thus far, let's relate this to Raw. Right now, there is no central figure on this show. We don't have a central storyline or figure, with the rest of the "supporting cast" feeding off that theme to develop their own storylines and personalities. The ratings are reflecting that, as fans aren't connecting with the product.

The WWE champion is Randy Orton, which should make him the central figure, but you and I know that isn't the case. Leading into WrestleMania, did you see him on Larry King? Was he doing promotional work? No, he's a mere placeholder with a somewhat-catchy slogan about the Age of Orton and those trademark piercing eyes. That doesn't make him a central figure on the show, though.

That's not even the main issue. The main issue is that John Cena and Triple H or Triple H and John Cena take away from each other if they're both competing for the top spot on Raw. The "specialness" that each one brings to the table is strong when alone, but weak when together.

When John Cena was on top throughout most of 2007 due to Triple H's injury, there was a central theme revolving around Cena trying to keep the WWE Title. When Cena suffered his injury and Hunter returned from injury, there was a central theme revolving around Hunter's quest for the WWE Title.

Right now, Cena and Hunter are together on Raw and it's not working out. Hunter exposes Cena for not being as cool as him, but when Cena is alone, WWE doesn't draw attention to that. On the flip side, Cena seems like more of a star than Hunter. When Hunter is alone, he's top dog in the game. But, when stacked up next to Cena, he doesn't seem like the biggest fish in the pond.

As a result, fans aren't buying into the current TV. There are factors to consider, such as post-WrestleMania hangover, but there is one too many "central figures" on this show. When there are two main characters competing for all the attention and exposing each other's weaknesses, the audience has a tendency to lose interest.

WWE has to find a way for Cena and Hunter to co-exist on the same show without taking away from each other. Otherwise, without a key central figure that all storylines are built from, this ratings trend will probably continue.

***

Updated Wednesday, April 16, 2008

Not since the first episode of WWE's ECW Television that aired way back 90-something weeks ago have I felt such frustration with the ECW brand.

Sure, there have been some bumps along the way, mainly revolving around the sudden implosion of the New Breed vs. ECW Originals feud that had such great potential last year. But nothing quite compares to last night's change at the broadcasting desk.

This won't be entirely a laugh-and-point-at-Adamle blog, as a significant portion of the blame lies on WWE management's shoulders. It's clear Adamle was not prepared for last night's broadcast. It's also clear WWE wanted Adamle to look the fool on their television. Otherwise, they would not have placed him in the position of handling a not-quite-live-but-no-time-to-edit broadcast on his first night calling a pro wrestling show.

WWE clearly sees something in Adamle after four months of stumbles, bumbles, bloopers, and Jeff Harvey-type references. Yes, he looks polished and well-groomed. He appears to shower on a regular basis, his nails are clean, and he sports the demeanor of a halfway-credible announcer.

Apparently that's all that is required to get a WWE announcing gig these days. Do you not look like a serial killer and have zero knowledge of the product? Good! Here's a mic, a script, and a five-page list of pertinent clichés for pro wrestling broadcasts. Now, go out there and knock 'em dead!

The problem is that WWE needs to be developing announcers off TV. They have a developmental program for wrestlers, yet they don't have a developmental program for announcers. Considering WWE announcers are expected to deliver a significant number of sales pitches on each broadcast, it might be worth providing the new salesman with training experience to give him a firm base to develop his own personality on the air.

If WWE truly wants Adamle to succeed on national television calling their ECW brand - and I hesitate to think WWE even gives a care about the ECW brand anymore after this decision - Adamle could have used a few months down in Florida calling matches and interviewing the young talent prior to being handed Joey Styles's spot.

Alas, WWE believes in their infinite wisdom they can simply feed Adamle lines through the headset and he'll do just fine calling the action. Well, clearly after last night, that simply won't work. WWE's attempt to mold Adamle's delivery in their own image was a stunning failure last night.

Adamle is certainly to blame for a lack of preparation, but WWE put him in a position to fail last night. Just like subtraction by addition of The Coach to Smackdown's broadcast, WWE's latest broadcasting decision appears to be headed the wrong way on a one-way street. Welcome to the Jamaican Me Crazy show every Tuesday night on the Sci-Fi channel.

***

Updated Tuesday, April 15, 2008

WWE's Women's division took a step forward last night when Mickie James captured the Women's Title. Well, at least, it appears to be a step forward. After all, WWE has started and re-started Mickie's push so many times that we don't know for certain whether the belt being around Mickie's waist will give the division any more credibility than when it was around Beth Phoenix's waist.

Looking at the top two women on Raw, Mickie and Beth haven't been featured acts in 2008. Your new Women's champion wasn't in the BunnyMania match, even after Candice Michelle pulled out with an injury. Then, there's Beth Phoenix, who lost to Maria a month ago and was a complete afterthought in the BunnyMania match.

The BunnyMania match, as the premiere divas match of the year, was a sign to the viewing audience of what WWE considers most important for their divas. WWE chose to feature the good-looking girls trying to be wrestlers (Maria, Ashley, Candice), not the good wrestlers who happen to be good-looking (Beth and Mickie). Yeah, and Melina just falls somewhere in the middle.

But on last night's Raw, WWE suddenly wanted the audience to care about the overlooked divas, Mickie and Beth. I believe it's the right move, as the law of diminishing returns says there's only so much T&A that can get over with today's audience when people can get their fill on the Internet or basic cable. WWE's task now is to re-educate the audience that solid-to-good women's wrestling is just as exciting as pillow fights and wet t-shirts.

TNA doesn't have to re-educate its audience because they established a credible women's division right off the bat. Sure, TNA has a host of interchangeable divas who found their way into the Queen of the Cage match at Lockdown, but at the end of the day, TNA has established a top tier of women's wrestlers.

There is never a question that Awesome Kong, Gail Kim, and ODB are the top knockouts. In a TNA mock draft, they'd be picked one, two, and three. (Excuse the analogy, I've read about 8,000 mock NFL drafts lately.)

Comparing Kong to Beth Phoenix, there is no question of credibility. TNA has protected Kong from Day One and she has carried her end as a believable, dominating force. Velvet Sky isn't going to score a fluke win on Kong like Maria did on Beth a month ago.

Then, the most important element is a babyface underdog taking on the monster heel. Gail Kim is a very credible wrestler and she's been protected as a top star, unlike Mickie James in the same role in WWE. Fans buy into Gail because she carries herself as a big deal, while WWE fans are still waiting for a consistent, five-to-six-week run for Mickie until they completely buy into her. There have been too many disappointments with Mickie's push to put faith in WWE to handle her new title run with care.

The variable in the mix is ODB, a credible tweener who became a fan-favorite with her off-the-wall persona that fits TNA. Raw doesn't have that x-factor like TNA. Smackdown has Victoria, who could fall into that category, but, again, WWE has limited Victoria's credibility by turning her into a comedy act complete with scuba gear.

The key is that fans have faith in how TNA will book the Knockouts division. They know what's important at the end of the day: solid wrestling. If WWE chooses to feature more credible female wrestling, they have to re-educate an audience that isn't sold on female wrestling because they've been hammered over the head with T&A as the most important factor for a decade. WWE has some catching up to do.

***

Updated Monday, April 14, 2008

I would like to think last night's main event at Lockdown was the start of a new era in TNA, with TNA presenting a more serious product in the form of Joe vs. Angle. But, we need to see more than one classic main event PPV match to get a firm read on TNA's philosophy going forward.

After all, TNA doesn't have a roster full of Angles and Joes. That's what made Joe vs. Angle special last night. That also means TNA has a dilemma on trying to present a more serious product when the majority of the roster isn't built to be serious.

If TNA desires to attract more MMA fans to the product, then TNA will struggle when the majority of their content revolves around cartoon characters, fake rockers, and comical monsters. It's an automatic turn-off for viewers who are used to 100 percent of the show being presented as serious competition.

Yet, for the pro wrestling audience, it's obvious that non-serious acts like Super Eric and Shark Boy are popular. Just ask the fans in Lowell, Mass. last night.

So, how does TNA solve this dilemma? Do they tone down the comic-relief characters? Do they re-train the wrestlers to work a more serious style like Joe vs. Angle? How does TNA try to present pro wrestling that's serious enough for MMA fans to tune in, yet doesn't turn away pro wrestling fans who seem to like the cartoon aspects to a certain degree?

I don't have an answer for this yet, as we don't have a large enough sample to draw a conclusion on how TNA is going to present the product going forward. We have one main event match from last night that followed cartoon matches, over-booked gimmick matches, and a bunch of highspots that would never take place in a pro wrestling/MMA hybrid match like Joe vs. Angle.

The follow-up question is whether a hybrid form of pro wrestling/MMA would be a ratings draw. Can TNA re-train their audience to take the action seriously when many viewers tune in expecting TNA's zany booking? Can they keep the current audience, while gaining new viewers with a more serious approach? Is there even an audience out there that will consistently tune in for TNA's version of a more serious product, which may or may not contain "worked MMA" matches?

I have a lot of unanswered questions on this. Joe vs. Angle was a special case of two of the best in the world putting together a worked match that looked and felt like a real competition. Unfortunately, there aren't too many people out there who can pull that off. TNA doesn't have the roster for it, and the key question is whether there is an audience that will tune in for "worked MMA" when the novelty of Joe vs. Angle wears off.

The compromise is simply presenting the product more seriously, yet not alienating the current audience that has loyally tuned in for TNA's often-times ridiculous product. It's difficult to find that balance, though, when TNA has cartoon characters up and down the roster who we've told aren't to be taken seriously.

Joe vs. Angle was a potential turning point, but we need to see more to evaluate the true direction of TNA's product going forward.

Comment on this Article Below

(CLICK FOR COMMENTS RULES OR TO REPORT ABUSE)

(CLICK FOR COMMENTS RULES OR TO REPORT ABUSE)

ALSO DISCUSS MORE SUBJECTS IN OUR PWTORCH FREE FORUM

For more BREAKING NEWS on WWE, TNA!
VISIT OUR AFFILIATE - PROWRESTLING.NET

For UFC NEWS & BLOGS:
VISIT OUR SISTER SITE - MMATORCH.COM

Upgrade to PWTORCH VIP: DETAILS & SIGN-UP INFO

(c) 1999-2009 TDH Communications Inc. - All rights reserved.