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

|

James Caldwell: This is Torch asst. editor James Caldwell joined by Torch Smackdown specialist Greg Parks for our Tuesday afternoon chat on the latest from Raw and Smackdown.

We're going to open up with a look at the Smackdown brand following last week's show and the Breaking Point PPV. Obviously, top story was the conclusion of the PPV with the re-creation of the Montreal Screwjob with C.M. Punk and The Undertaker. We sat here in this spot last week and predicted a screwy ending because WWE was backed into a corner. Where do you see this top feud going on this week's show following the PPV?

Greg Parks: Well, clearly, Punk will get his comeuppance and I'm guessing sooner rather than later. It'll be interesting to see him defend what happened since he's addicted to competition and what happened Sunday made a mockery of competition.

JC: Sooner appears to be at the Hell in a Cell PPV in less than three weeks. Do you see this developing with Punk aligned with heel authority figure Teddy Long or do you think it will just continue with McMahon in Teddy's ear to push him to be controversial, great (not good), etc.?

GP: I'm not sure. I'd keep Long face, or in this case, 'tweener, with the excuse that he was feeling pressure from Vince to do something big and what better way to get on Vince's good side than re-enact the scene that arguably sent WWE into their golden age?

JC: They could even incorporate McMahon's apparent distaste for Canada into the storyline where Long tried to re-create the scene to please McMahon. I'm wondering if we're going to get an explanation on how Taker was even entered into the title picture, which could have affected Long's "decision making." Do you think that will even be addressed or continued to be ignored?

GP: It would be nice if they addressed it, but it has happened so many times before where guys would return and automatically get title shots, that it wouldn't make sense for them to all of a sudden address it now.

JC: Agreed. It's one of the more frustrating aspects of how title matches are put together when there aren't "contenders" on a regular basis. How do you see Batista fitting into the Smackdown picture? I've given this some thought today and I really don't see where he naturally fits in right now other than feuding with Kane, which would be a near-disastrous follow-up to Kane vs. Khali.

GP: Yeah, Batista and Kane have had some train-wrecks before. But getting Taker back and having Batista is huge for the brand in terms of star power since they recently lost Jeff Hardy and Edge. I don't think Matt could pick up the babyface slack alone.

JC: Hopefully WWE will ease Batista back into a full-time wrestling schedule, so I don't think he'll immediately pick up a wrestling feud, but they obviously need star power on Smackdown. Speaking of Matt Hardy, he's been in two straight TV main events. Is he a guy that could eventually pick up the slack alone or will he always be one of those guys, like Batista, who needs to be surrounded by talent to be viewed as a singles star?

GP: I definitely think he needs to be surrounded by other talent; I just don't see him being able to "carry the ball" by himself, so to speak. It's not so much his in-ring stuff - that's part of it - as well as his mic work. He just doesn't connect to the fans like his brother, though they do get behind him a ton during his matches. I also don't think WWE really sees him as a full-time main-eventer.

JC: Right, or else they wouldn't feel the need to bring Batista back early and bring him over to Smackdown to boost the babyface roster. Matt talks about being a future heavyweight star and World champ in the future, but WWE hasn't shown they are believers just yet by bringing over a babyface star in Batista.

Switching gears to Raw, what did you think of last night's show? We received a lot of thumbs in the middle reviews. I have it slightly above thumbs up. Wade had it at a slight thumbs up in his Keller Hotline review. Did you feel strongly one way or another about the show?

GP: Not really - thumbs in the middle for me too... I was kinda disappointed at how Trish was utilized; not so much that she wrestled, which was a given, but they limited her backstage segments. I expected her to be involved more.

JC: And her first promo in the second segment was a disappointment. I think Wade put it best that she's been out of "wrestling acting" mode for a while. A normal conversational tone doesn't exactly go over well. Also, next week is Cedric the Entertainer. Has potential, but there isn't a real "hook" to that announcement. Do you think they're phasing out the guest host concept or just hitting a lull?

GP: I doubt they're phasing it out given the attention WWE received in entertainment publications for their guest host concept and the fact that ratings have been relatively high for them... Occasionally, the big stars won't be there, so you'll have to settle for a Cedric now and then.

JC: Still waiting for Reverend Al Sharpton to be announced.

GP: I'm not.

JC: Ha! Just wanted to throw that out at you to get a reaction.

GP: I wouldn't put him in front of the live crowd for long, that's for sure.

JC: Probably depends what's in the news that particular week and where they are. Might be in a city where no one cares.

Anyways, the Raw main event picture seems to be about the same, which we all expected. Orton vs. Cena and DX vs. Legacy in a Cell. What did you think of how they took Legacy's win at the PPV and built on it last night?

GP: I liked it. The finish to DiBiase vs. Michaels made sense. Part of me is just glad WWE didn't put Michaels over cleanly...it seems there is some attempt at least to make Legacy look credible the past few weeks. Color me impressed.

JC: I really liked it myself. Chaos can really enhance a feud and this feud has been enhanced by chaos. Ted and Cody look like stars every week and I was impressed with how much offense DiBiase was given vs. HBK last night. That was a very positive sign. Also of note, the Hell in a Cell is part of smart build, amazingly. The wrestlers can't be contained in the building, so stick them in a Cell to settle the issue.

GP: It's nice that WWE built the feud INTO that gimmick match, rather than haphazardly building a feud and then having to throw it into a gimmick match like a submission match, where the stip doesn't make a lot of sense. I'm thinking Taker vs. Punk

JC: Exactly. There was no reason for any of the feuds to lead to submission matches on Sunday. They're already addressing that issue going into the HIAC PPV, which is nice.

A few more points to touch on before we wrap up. The Raw mid-card. The Miz steals Kofi's title belt with no follow-up. Apparently Kofi just went home. No singles feud developed. More multiple-man matches. Where is any of this going?

GP: Clearly, the U.S. Title feud is on the low end of the totem pole for Raw, so creative isn't spending a ton of time on it...I'm just happy we have something resembling a feud and angles with Kofi and Miz, one that could (and has) brought out some good singles matches

JC: I thought Miz and Kofi were very impressive at Breaking Point in their singles match. I just see Jack Swagger scoring the pin in the tag match on Raw, so it would seem he would have a stake in the storyline chase for the title. I just don't know what happened to Swagger. Excuse the pun, he's lost his swagger on Raw.

GP: Swagger is getting lost in the shuffle, just what many feared when he was moved from ECW to Raw.

JC: Is there a solution? Is WWE just content keeping him on TV until they figure out what to do with him down the road?

GP: It could be...that's what they did with Jeff Hardy a few years ago by having him lose to Umaga cleanly every week before moving him to the main event level.

JC: Oh yes, I remember those audios on Mr. Teflon

GP: Those were the days.

JC: No one remembers him getting squashed to Umaga now. Hopefully the same will be said for Swagger in two years.

Final topic - Hornswoggle vs. Chavo...is it really dead or is WWE teasing the haters?

GP: I pray to God it's dead, but it seems like it's right up WWE's alley...and what kind of ending is it to this multiple-month feud to just have Chavo give up? And a day after Breaking Point, the submission PPV?

JC: Nice piece of irony there. Didn't even think about that. ... I don't see this ending. I wish it is, but it's too convenient just to end it like this. I tell ya, Chavo is lulling Hornswoggle into a false sense of security.

GP: That's 100x more clever than he has shown to be in this feud.

JC: Indeed. Greg, any final thoughts before we wrap up today?

GP: Looking forward to Smackdown this week to see how the dust settles.

JC: Should be interesting and news-worthy. Greg, thanks for the chat today and we'll talk again next week!

Send feedback on this article to pwtorch@gmail.com and we'll regularly publish reader feedback in the "Torch Feedback" category on the Main Listing.

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

For UFC & MMA 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.