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 chat on TV wrestling. Greg, obviously the big topic of the week is C.M. Punk's promo. We'll avoid spoiler discussion on next week's Raw, so just looking at this week's Raw, give us an overview of your thoughts on the promo.

Greg Parks: I thought it was a good promo; an entertaining promo; and a promo that made sense from all perspectives. It's a promo that got fans buzzing, which helps WWE going into (a) a holiday episode of Raw and (b) a taped episode of Raw, both of which usually spell ratings doom. We'll see if they get a rise out of the ratings this week based on Punk's promo, and if not, check the DVR viewership. It also set up those on the fence perhaps deciding to buy the Money in the Bank PPV: Will Punk win the title and leave? Will he win and stay? Will he win and lose it to a MITB competitor? If he loses, how will he go out? Lots of intrigue and possibilities there. James, you took a lot of flak for your opinion of Punk's promo during your Raw report. Here's your chance to clearly state your case for those who are hoping that, with time, you've reconsidered your position.

Caldwell: Certainly. And I think I determined there's a disconnect between views on what the casual, general, mainstream WWE audience is. When I say casual audience, it's not fans who have gone away and might come back for a Summerslam or WrestleMania if Rock or Austin or someone of that ilk is involved. I'm thinking Cena Era fans/viewers/parents-of-kids who have discretionary income and may not have connected with portions of the promo. I'm thinking of the majority of the people I saw at a live WWE house show on Sunday night. Referencing brass rings, Paul Heyman, Hunter & Stephanie as heirs, etc., I felt got away from the actual story - Punk threatening to take the title away from WWE...

I thought Punk was there hitting on that story at certain points, but there were times when he I felt he veered away and started discussing items that were irrelevant to the story and may have missed the casual viewer I'm thinking of. Punk also didn't discuss winning & losing a match in order to achieve his goal of taking said title out of WWE. How is complaining about "behind-the-scenes, insider" type things going to help him win a match? I understand the part about him seeming like a Loose Cannon-type heel who is a threat to Cena, therefore making him a threat to the title and winning a match by any means necessary. If they stuck within the confines of the story, I thought it would have been one of the best promos ever on WWE TV...

But, I felt the promo veered away from the central story into places a casual viewer wouldn't understand and might be left with an indifferent feeling, which is the wrong emotion when trying to drive someone to spend money.

Parks: I guess his point is he was capable of winning those matches, but he was held back because he wasn't a cheerleader for the company like John Cena, so in a broader view, I think he was talking more about "opportunity" to win and lose meaningful matches. And again, this is somewhat "insider" stuff, but I think it accomplished what WWE wanted which is to create a buzz. They've got two more episodes of Raw to create that winning/losing issue for Punk; if this were the go-home show, I think I'd agree more with you that they didn't 100% focus on Punk winning or losing at MITB; but they've got two more weeks to establish that and continue the build.

Caldwell: Solid points there. And I believe the follow-up will determine whether there is a significant bump in the buyrate due to that promo. It's happened so often where WWE "creates buzz" that lasts a week or two, then it fades away and WWE doesn't translate it into money (beyond a tenth or two-tenths of a ratings jump) because the follow-up isn't strong...

It gets to a larger, macro issue I had with the promo, which is WWE increasingly needs something like a "worked shoot" or a big return or a themed episode to try to sustain the product on a year-round basis because they've lost sight of how to tell the week-to-week stories. Now, could the promo lead to a big story arc that carries Raw to Mania? That's possible. But, WWE can't have guys come out there and cut a "worked shoot" promo every week on a year-over-year basis. And, basic heel promos won't seem as effective for a little while now because they'll all fall short of Punk, who was able to "go places he wasn't supposed to go."

Parks: But, James, WWE isn't going to the worked-shoot well all the time. Yeah, they're overusing gimmick matches and themed episodes of Raw or PPVs, but adding this kind of worked-shoot aspect, WWE generally stays away from it. And one more thing...we always say (and those in the industry say this as well) that the best characters are extensions of the actual person. These feelings that Punk talked about on Monday, if they're not extensions of him they may be exactly how he feels. That's going to bring the best out of Punk for however long he's going to be in WWE because there's little acting that has to go into it. Not saying WWE is going to focus on this aspect of Punks' character, but it's out there now and they can at least play into it a little.

Caldwell: Yeah, I definitely acknowledge the argument "WWE doesn't attempt a worked shoot every week like TNA, so it's effective when it's done." My contention is I believe it's part of a larger issue of WWE pulling that out of the bag along with other short-sighted items to cover for their holes. 'Let's pull out a Raw theme, let's pull out a gimmick PPV, let's pull out a worked shoot, let's pull out a big return, let's pull out someone from the Attitude Era, etc.' I agree Punk's performance was amazing. He definitely came across like he was speaking from the heart and saying what he's wanted to say for five years. I question the decision-making behind some elements of the promo that I didn't feel fit within the confines of the "universe" WWE has created. Otherwise, I'd be praising the promo as well.

Parks: If you were a fan who was not "reviewing" this show for an insider website, would you have enjoyed it more? Or can you not take yourself out of the "reviewer" and "analyzer" mode? Just curious.

Caldwell: In a different context, as we discussed on the Livecast yesterday, I am stuck in my ways, so I'll have to take myself out of that mentality for a second. :-) I think it would depend what type of fan I were. If I were a newer fan who's come along in the Cena Era (which I believe makes up a significant portion of the current audience), I think I would feel like I was hearing something I wasn't supposed to be hearing, which would be what WWE was aiming for, but I also think I would feel left out of the club. "What's Punk talking about? I thought the Raw GM was the authority of the show. Who's Paul Heyman? Who's Colt Cabana? Who's Laurinaitis? McMahon is surrounded by yes-men? I've only seen him alone on TV." You know, those sorts of questions disconnecting what you and I know from what the TV viewing audience knows...

This might come across like I'm trying to defend my argument through a different approach, but I honestly feel that many viewers at home who don't know anything about the inner-workings of the business would have felt that way. The next question is whether, despite those questions, it effectively drove those people to want to spend money on a PPV or keep tuning in order to be driven to order a PPV once it was made more clear in the next two weeks of TV. That's where I think you have a valid argument from earlier in the Chat that I would give consideration to.

Parks: Okay, James, I guess I've grilled you enough on this one. I understand other things happened on Raw besides Punk's promo. Any you want to touch on?

Caldwell: It's a great discussion! I think it's worth discussing in great detail because there's a lot of different issues in-play affecting business. I think one aspect of Raw not being talked about at all was how Michaels was used. We talked a bit about this on the Livecast yesterday, but I felt WWE wasted an opportunity having Michaels on their show. It goes back to what I said earlier about "pulling out this guy or that guy for a big return," but I didn't think it was effective and it makes it even less effective next time. Your thoughts on how Michaels was used?

Parks: James, this time, I'll agree 100 percent with you. I almost feel like they had to have bigger plans for HBK that ultimately fell through. I just can't imagine they brought him back for some light interaction with Punk and superkicking a mid-carder.

Caldwell: Yes! Agreement! You could see this coming last week when WWE announced Michaels would be on this week's show and they seemed to have absolutely no idea what they were going to do with him. It does make you wonder if they had something bigger that fell through. The whole tease of "Oh, maybe I'll come out of retirement" was so weak. There was no juice behind that and it really seemed like WWE was just desperate for a talking point to begin the show. A couple of positive things I saw on the show: Mark Henry continues to be great, the Texas Tornado tag match would have been the show-stealer if not for Punk's performance, and the Divas submission match was kept short. So, positives there. Any thoughts on those elements or the middle part of the show?

Parks: Texas Tornado tag matches are so underused. I'll say that. And yes, I'm loving Mark Henry's trash-talking ass kicker. But how long will that last before WWE inevitably switches him again to big, lovable babyface?

Caldwell: I had a good chuckle on your Henry question. It's so true. But, I think WWE is finally committed to something Henry-related with this trash-talking ass-kicker, similar to WWE finally finding a significant role for R-Truth as a delusional, crowd-antagonizing heel. I don't necessarily want to see Henry involved in PPV main events, and I actually think it would damage him to feature him often in the ring or in big spotlight matches because he's so limited in the ring. I think if they keep him out of the ring for the most part and just let him destroy folks (and objects), they could space out his bigger matches to actually mean something.

Caldwell: Going back to the Punk discussion, I think WWE finally found something within Henry to bring out of him in a refreshing heel role.

Parks: Yeah, it reminds me of his run on ECW with Tony Atlas. That was another version of Mark Henry I liked, and I do think they're quite similar.

Caldwell: Very similar. I think that version was a bit more toned down and this one is a bit more in-your-face. I think the trash-talking is great for us reviewing his performance and I believe he's connecting with the audience, especially when he's challenging folks to come fight him if they want to boo or yell at him. I think it's great. Greg, anything else Raw related worth touching on?

Parks: I think we hit the highs and lows. Onto NXT! Conor O'Brian was finally eliminated! We were finally right in predicting him for like the third straight elimination time!

Caldwell: Finally! Last week, I did employ some reverse psychology by saying I was tired of picking Conor to be eliminated, so I went with another Rookie. And, it worked, as Conor was finally cut! I'm not one to critique whether someone is working hard or deserves a spot in WWE, as only that person can answer whether he or she is truly working hard, but I felt Conor just wasn't ready to get a sniff of the WWE locker room, even on NXT. Like Novak, it just wasn't there. The one thing I've waited for three days to talk to you about is...the return of Bateman. Surprised? Intrigued? Is he the new favorite?

Parks: Definitely surprised, somewhat intrigued. If I cared who won, maybe I'd pick him to be the new fav, but honestly, the fact that they can bring him back when there's two left cements the fact that the writing and booking of NXT is so minor league and bush league that it's barely a blip on my radar.

Caldwell: I hear you on that. I mean, we've spent agonizing week after agonizing week toiling through 17 weeks of discussing this season of NXT...and then WWE brings on a new character. All of that hard thought and effort now in vain! Alas, I think Bateman will be winning this season now. How awful would it be if WWE brought back Bateman and he were cut in the next elimination? That would be hilarious just for how absurd it would be from WWE. I think someone in WWE sat down, reviewed the options, and WWE decided they didn't want any of the remaining Rookies in another season of NXT. Perhaps NXT6 will be a Dream Season with Bateman and some of the FCW favorites who haven't been called up yet.

Parks: Who even cares, James? I mean really? I don't even want to think about next season's NXT. It depresses me.

Caldwell: We'll have plenty of time for that in future weeks. Assuming this season ever ends. I'm setting a new line - over/under 20 weeks?

Parks: Over.

Caldwell: Bold! I agree. Perhaps it will go on forever where every former NXT Rookie will be added after each elimination. It'll be three, two, three, two, three, two, three, two forever! Like that song that goes on forever. It's Friday and we're off the rails now. Greg, let's steer it back to Smackdown. We haven't seen this week's show yet, but your thoughts on current events on Smackdown and some elements seen on Raw that involved the blue brand?

Parks: Well, we saw Kane, Mark Henry, Big Show, and Alberto Del Rio this past week on Raw and they are all Smackdown property. They've all been tangled up in the Del Rio vs. BIg Show storyline, though Kane seems to be on the periphery at this point. Now that he's lost Show as partner, he doesn't have much to do. We already talked about Henry, and it seems like Show vs. Del RIo is a place-holder for bigger things for Del Rio.

Caldwell: Like we talked about in the Livecast yesterday, Del Rio could slide into a main event position on the Raw brand at Summerslam, if Punk truly does depart from storyline after MITB. What's your take on the current mid-card program involving Cody, Ted, Bryan, and Sin Cara? Singles matches last week. Tag match before that. Is this going somewhere or just keeping them involved in something with no upward movement?

Parks: Just seems like something to keep them involved. I don't think the storyline progresses until we learn or hear from DiBIase about why he's back hanging out with Rhodes. It's kinda been alluded to by the announcers, but their relationship needs to be at the forefront of things.

Caldwell: On a higher level, it's similar to Randy Orton's character needing to be fleshed out if he's going to be a #1 face on Smackdown and drive people to spend money to see more of him and his matches. How about the latest from Mahal & Khali, LLC? It seems like just basic re-building of Khali and introduction of Mahal.

Parks: Yeah, I think it's been fine. Like I said previously, I wouldn't mind Mahal and Khali as a tag team - you get mileage out of Khali but can mask his limited in-ring skills. And Mahal has somewhat of a star quality about him, and they're buliding him correctly, letting him work up the ladder in squash matches.

Caldwell: Agreed. Anything else Smackdown related, Greg?

Parks: Let's skip psychoanalyzing Christian and Orton for a week. I need a breather on that!

Caldwell: I'm sure there will be plenty of material in that area to discuss before the PPV! Any thoughts on last night's Impact? I haven't seen the show yet, so I don't have an opinion yet.

Parks: I'll say this: TNA finally paid off on something they promised. The show DID have limited commercial interruptions. Bravo for them.

Caldwell: Did it make it more unbearable to watch the show where a commercial is usually a welcome relief to catch a breather and actually digest what's going on?

Parks: Nah, because there were just video packages for Destination X or what not that felt like a commercial. Kinda put together the same way WWE would do the commercial-free Raw episodes.

Caldwell: At least they weren't those awful Geico spin-off commercials WWE tried with their last commercial-free Raw. I tried blocking those from my memory until they re-surfaced just now.

Parks: Ha, that's exactly what I thought of as I was typing about the commercial-free Raw too.

Caldwell: Oh, what fond memories. Greg, I think that will about do it for me. Any final thoughts before we wrap up?

Parks: I'm all set, readying myself for Smackdown tonight. Of course, all of our readers can join me here on pwtorch.com and follow my coverage of the show live, updated in real time.

Caldwell: Excellent! Of course, if I'm on the go on a Friday night, I always take Greg with me on my PWTorch iPhone App. Also available on Android! Be sure to download the Free PWTorch App through your favorite online retail outlet. Greg, how about a plug for what's on tap for Gonzo and The Greg this week in the VIP Audio section?

Parks: Sure thing...we'll be discussing our top five wrestlers we'd build a new company around. So if we were to start a company right now and had any wrestler in the world to pick from, we select our top five. Should be a good one! That'll be posted sometime Sunday evening, right here on the Torch.

Caldwell: I'm certainly looking forward to it. Greg, as always, a pleasure chatting and having a spirited debate this week. We'll talk again next week!

Parks: Thanks, James!

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!