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 a special weekend edition of our Weekly Chat on a Saturday night/Sunday morning prior to the Over the Limit PPV. Greg, the week took a different turn that anyone expected on Friday with the death of Randy Savage. What are your thoughts on Savage and how do you think WWE should and will handle it on TV starting with the PPV and then Monday on Raw?

Greg Parks: I think a video tribute would be the way to go; I understand WWE is hesitant to acknowledge wrestling deaths like that because that's shining a spotlight on them, but Savage is different. I applaud Savage for seemingly being at peace with his wrestling and post-wrestling career; he didn't seem to be a guy who was trying to get back into the business or waiting for that next phone call. Selfishly I would've liked to have seen him inducted into the HOF while he was alive, but I applaud him for getting out and staying out.

Caldwell: Good points all-around. It's unfortunate Savage will never get that Hall of Fame speech, but it sounds like he didn't want that spotlight anyways, like you mentioned. As tragic as his death was, he seemed to be at peace with his career and life at the time. I imagine WWE will have some acknowledgement at the PPV, then do a longer tribute on Monday's Raw. Savage isn't just another wrestler death, although the heart attack could point to the usual wrestler-cause-of-death issues, but being one of the top performers of the last era, he has to be acknowledged with more than just a 20-second graphic on PPV and Raw.

Parks: But, I think we should acknowledge the perceived bad blood Vince has had with him in the past and whether or not that will play a part in what kind of tribute he gets.

Caldwell: Optimistically, you would think Vince would put aside whatever issues there were between them and do right by Savage. Just looking at the outpouring from within and even outside wrestling, there was such a strong connection to Savage that WWE will have to recognize that. Also a factor for WWE is how much to acknowledge him if Savage's steroids past eventually becomes part of the story based on his death, but for right now, I think WWE will have to offer a proper tribute. I don't think they do an entire show dedicated to him on Raw, but what do you think a proper tribute would be? Is it soundbytes sprinkled in throughout Raw a la the soundbytes for Rock's birthday? Is it just a video package? What do you think it looks like?

Parks: I think it's just a video package. I understand that Savage is a bigger star than others who have passed in the past, but some other haven't even been acknowledged on WWE TV, many of them longtime WWE employees. With that in mind, I think a video package on Savage would be WWE's way of saying he was a big star and he deserves to be honored.

Caldwell: We definitely will see over the next two days of WWE TV. Any other thoughts on Savage in the immediate aftermath of his death?

Parks: I did have some thoughts on Savage, and they are available on this week's "Gonzo and The Greg" audio show for VIP members. And I'm sure you spent a lot of time on Savage on Friday's Livecast, so I think we've got all of our Macho Man bases covered.

Caldwell: Yeah, I'm still at that stage of processing the events, which was similar to how many listeners were handling it on the Livecast with Sean Radican and me. Until more information comes out via the autopsy and how WWE handles it on TV this week, I think what's said has been said. Greg, let's take a look at Sunday's Over the Limit PPV. Eight matches have now been announced, so there's a full line-up out now. With all of the build-up completed, what match has you most intrigued?

Parks: I'm intrigued about the finish of Cena vs. Miz, given Miz's comments this past Monday on Raw about there being a hundred ways to make Cena say "I Quit." Feels like one of those finishes that WWE could try to get too cute with. Other than that, Sin Cara vs. Chavo should be good and advance that nice mid-card feud.

Caldwell: It certainly seems like they're setting up for some sort of "Cena says he quits via voice recording" finish, especially after Alex Riley displayed his great technical video skills with the video package to start Raw on Monday. I'm more intrigued by Orton vs. Christian following their strong match on Smackdown two weeks ago and potential seed-planting for a Christian heel turn. I think there's a greater chance Miz takes back the WWE Title than Christian takes back the World Title, but do you think it would be a good idea to switch Raw's title back to Miz? Or, should Cena keep the belt all the way to Mania? Or, somewhere in-between?

Parks: Somewhere in-between. After Cena's confrontation with Rock a few weeks ago, where Cena said he'd keep the title 'til next year's 'Mania, it'd be too soon to take the belt off of him already (though I also don't see him keeping the belt for a year). But I agree, Miz has a better chance to win than Christian, since you brought up the screwy finish that Miz can win with, while Christian beating Orton seems more far-fetched at this point.

Caldwell: I think it would be best if Cena kept the belt all the way to Mania 28, but I don't think it would be realistic based on WWE's booking. I definitely think it would be too soon to change the title on Sunday, and I could see Cena losing the belt this summer and re-gaining it this fall based on the booking. If WWE does change the title between now and Mania, do you think it should be Miz, Del Rio, or someone else?

Parks: I think Del Rio would be a good choice. He has to fulfill his "destiny" talk, otherwise he gets taken down a peg. I wouldn't be against another Miz title reign, but to me, a short one does nothing for him at this stage. Any kind of reign for ADR, even a short one, helps him out right now.

Caldwell: If it's not Miz, I agree Del Rio would be a good option, per WWE's booking. I still say Cena should keep the title for a full year to go nearly circuit-to-circuit with an 11-month reign, but I don't anticipate it happening. Greg, you mentioned Chavo vs. Sin Cara earlier. I think that match has potential to boost what could be an okay-to-decent-to-maybe-strong undercard. What's your impression of how long the Chavo vs. Cara feud might last and the PPV undercard?

Parks: I don't think it'll last long, but I like what we've seen thus far. Having Chavo work with Cara will help ease his transition to WWE style, and it also gives Chavo something to do, which is nice to see. The rest of the undercard is a bit underwhelming, though the Rey vs. Truth has possibilities.

Caldwell: I can't remember the last time Truth had a PPV singles match, much less a strong PPV singles match, but perhaps this heel turn will give him something new to work with in the ring, plus working with Rey should make for a good match. Otherwise, there's Zeke vs. Barrett, which might be surprising or might be a letdown. The Tag Title match will probably depend on limiting Ryan's exposure in the ring. Then, there's Cole vs. Lawler. Hopefully it's more succinct this time around. Greg, is this the end of the feud or does it continue?

Parks: God, let it be the end. He spared us the rapture today, so maybe our luck has run out and the feud continues.

Caldwell: I don't anticipate Heel Cole disappearing any time soon, but I hope this is the end of the feud. But, how would WWE handle the end of a feud between two announcers who still have to share space on Raw TV every week? There's no way around that unless WWE does some sort of Loser Leaves Raw match, which I thought would have been done at WrestleMania until we saw how much WWE wanted to stretch this thing out.

Parks: I think there will be an end to the in-ring portion of the feud, but the feud on-air won't end anytime soon. That's my best guess. They'll still bicker on commentary, but they won't be in matches anymore when that part of the feud ends.

Caldwell: It seemed like that's where they were going after Extreme Rules, then WWE suddenly re-visited the feud. So, you're right, perhaps they'll just end the in-ring portion and resume bickering...until McMahon gets bored with the wrestlers on the roster and re-visits the announcer feud again. Greg, anything else from Raw or the Raw side of the PPV line-up worth breaking down?

Parks: I think we can move on.

Caldwell: Sounds good. Let's talk Smackdown. We actually get to talk about a fresh episode on the chat. What stood out to you from Friday's show? Honestly, I keep thinking about Randy Orton's odd post-RKO celebration and the direction of Khali/Jinder Mahal. That's all I'm taking with me from Smackdown. What were your impressions of the lead-in to Over the Limit?

Parks: I liked that they actually put people over. Christian got a good win over Sheamus, a relatively big name, heading into the PPV. Ted DiBiase picked up a squash win. Brie Bella beat Natalya, who has some cred, heading into the PPV. Chavo Guerrero didn't beat Daniel Bryan in five minutes, but showed enough to convince fans he could be more than a fly in the ointment for Sin Cara. I liked what they did with the matches.

Caldwell: I like that - fly in the ointment. Also, solid points on the right stars actually being enhanced. It seems like Smackdown was more focused on selling the PPV than Raw was, which doesn't help when Raw is the main vehicle to sell PPVs. Speaking of Rhodes, where do you see him fitting in - especially since he doesn't have a feud to get him on PPV - and what's up with Rhodes and DiBiase's relationship?

Parks: That kind of came out of nowhere, didn't it? I think they had a segment on TV the previous week, but it does give DiBiase something to do. I don't know what's next with Cody, though. Could be anything. I don't know that he'll have a place on this PPV, which happens, and I don't think it's a bad thing that other guys like Truth, Chavo and Cara are getting time to shine on the PPV.

Caldwell: It doesn't make sense to just throw Cody into a match with no back-story, as you don't want audiences sitting on their hands for anything Cody is involved in right now as they're trying to make him a bigger star. I like the idea of matching up Bryan opposite Rhodes and/or DiBiase in a feud building to Summerslam. What are some other potential foes for Cody that you see?

Parks: I think they could go Christian as well, depending on what happens after Sunday (with rumors of Christian turning heel). Cody could just bide time until Cara quickly disposes of Chavo, as Cody could have an extension of his feud with Rey, with Cara, since they have a lot in common. And he can keep up with the bag gimmick.

Caldwell: Good point there. It still seems like the Smackdown writers are feeling out the post-Draft roster getting to Over the Limit before they start looking at some of those feuds you mentioned. I feel there are more possibilities on Smackdown than on Raw, where it already feels like repeats. Would you agree?

Parks: I would. It's tough to explain why, but Smackdown does feel like it has the fresher match-ups. Top of the card with Christian, Orton, Henry and Sheamus are all different on that brand than they were several months ago, while Raw's upper card is relatively the same as it was. I guess that's why it feels fresher.

Caldwell: You look at that upper-card on Raw and it's Cena-Miz, Lawler-Cole, Nexus repeat material, and Del Rio-Rey in a repeat from Smackdown. The only new feud worth anything on Raw is Rey-Truth, which is really strong, but not at the level to make it seem like the Draft really, really made a difference so far. Greg, any other thoughts on Smackdown before we tackle NXT?

Parks: Nope. Bring on NXT!

Caldwell: Jacob Novak is now gone. Were you surprised he was cut over Conor O'Brian? They were on-pace to be the first two cut, but any surprise with Jacob?

Parks: Not really. He improved a little this time around, but not enough. If getting cut first overall two seasons in a row isn't enough of a message to WWE that this guy doesn't have it, I don't know what would be.

Caldwell: You mean you weren't buying Slam Master J II? Yeah, he can head back to FCW and see if spending some time down there honing his skills will lead to a third look. Do you think Conor is next out and who is your #1 right now?

Parks: Yeah, I would think so. As for my #1...no one is really standing head-and-shoulders above the rest. The other four guys have shown flashes, but they've all struggled with consistency. I don't know if I have a number one right now.

Caldwell: I still think WWE is presenting Titus as their #1, but I agree no one is actually standing out as a #1 based on evaluation. Lucky has improved immensely in the personality department, but he can't wrestle worth a lick. Most of the season has been focused on the Pros, so it's been difficult to evaluate the Rookies on a consistent basis. Final thought on NXT - how long is this season going to last if the first elimination occurred Week 11?

Parks: How can I answer that when it appears likely WWE doesn't even know the answer?

Caldwell: Ha! It was a bit of a rhetorical question mixed with an attempt to draw out an educated guess. I'll set a line for you - over or under 15 weeks?

Parks: Over.

Caldwell: I think that's the safe bet. All right, Greg, now time for the portion of the show where Chat Matters. Your thoughts on the Impact Wrestling re-launch Thursday night?

Parks: The arena looked better, I liked the graphics and the new color scheme. But the rest felt like it could've been on any other episode of Impact. It didn't feel any different, besides what was already mentioned.

Caldwell: Yeah, it was the same old, same old. TNA made big changes in the office Friday, but it didn't include a change to the bookers/writers. Until that changes, it'll be the same product. What will ultimately hold back TNA in this "campaign" is their inability to actually define what wrestling is. Right now, it just looks like they slapped the word "wrestling" onto the same vision for the product Russo has that doesn't draw money. So, their attempt to "emphasize" the word "wrestling" is merely a way to reinforce Russo's ill-fated and unproductive vision, rendering the campaign just a campaign.

Parks: Yeah, I mean, I give them credit for wanting to emphasize wrestling, since WWE is practically running away from that word. But there's got to be substance in there as well to let the fans know you truly are about wrestling.

Caldwell: Right. If TNA truly wanted to position themselves as the opposite of WWE in a way that would re-attract wrestling fans to the show, they would have re-launched the product and made a big deal out of major, wholesale changes to the actual product. Instead, by having the exact same product - and lacking the substance you mentioned - the audience isn't taking TNA seriously. Anything specific about the show worth breaking down - Angle-Jarrett v. 392, the X Division feud or anything else?

Parks: Eric Bischoff getting the pin in a tag match and Abyss winning the X Division Title? Both seem to go against the emphasis on wrestling, but TNA would argue they have to get heat on the heels, then the babyfaces would come in and show them it really IS about wrestling. Unfortunately, I still have the memory of the Front Line never getting over on the Main Even Mafia, so I don't trust TNA to follow through on this one, either.

Caldwell: Thursday's Impact was definitely all about getting heat on the heels, but I think you nailed it with concerns over whether the faces will ever get their comeback - and whether the audience will even care about it when they get their comeback. I think the problem is TNA doesn't have too many faces the audience can even rally behind or care about. It's exactly like the Front Line where TNA didn't take the time to make the audience care about the faces before getting heat on the heels. I agree with your concern over TNA following through, for sure. Greg, anything else TNA-related after this past week's PPV and re-launch?

Parks: Surprisingly, no. For a re-launch, there wasn't much else to talk about.

Caldwell: Agreed. Well, perhaps the most unintentionally comedic sell of all-time by A.J. Styles following that piledriver from Dreamer at the PPV. Combine that with Dreamer talking himself up like he was headlining WrestleMania in the '90s. I liked the basic outline of the Styles vs. Dreamer feud, but some of the promo lines for Dreamer just made it a wash.

Parks: Slumming it with Tommy Dreamer is not what A.J. Styles should be doing right now. Or Daniels, for that matter.

Caldwell: Same with Samoa Joe taking one step forward squashing Red, then taking one step backward being manhandled by Crimson without putting up a fight. Two of TNA's top "wrestlers" are not positioned to make "wrestling matter" right now.

Parks: Oh, good one!

Caldwell: Maybe I can come up with my own campaign! All right, Greg, I think that will about do it for us tonight. Any final thoughts before we wrap?

Parks: Nah, I'm pretty well spent.

Caldwell: Very good. It should be an interesting week ahead starting with the PPV Sunday night, so we'll see how things turn out for our next Chat in a few days back on schedule. Always a pleasure!

Parks: Sure enough.

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!