On a weekly basis, 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. An occasional "Seinfeld" or "The Office" reference is also 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, I think the big topic on the tips of tongues from coast-to-coast is what mind games Zack Ryder was playing with New Nexus on Monday's Raw. Theories? Thoughts? Speculation?

Greg Parks: Clearly, Ryder will be the new Nexus leader once C.M. Punk takes his leave, turning Nexus into a Jersey Shore knock-off group. That, or he and a partner (Curt Hawkins?) will be challenging for the tag titles soon. I don't know which I'm more excited about!

Caldwell: Yeah, Curt Hawkins is still on the roster, isn't he? I figure it's just planting the seed for a Tag Title challenge, but New Ryder Nexus would certainly be an upgrade of the irrelevant Nexus stable. Okay, so that item out of the way, obviously the big story from Raw was the Punk-Cena-McMahon story following last week's Punk Promo. I'm sensing a lot of mixed reactions to the follow-up just look at opinions on the Torch and feedback coming in from readers. What's your evaluation of the follow-up?

Parks: I'm hesitant for two reasons: One, we just saw a "Cena fired" angle less than a year ago and it totally flopped, with Cena playing George Costanza - just kept showing up and pretending he didn't get fired. The second is WWE having Cena side with Punk on the situation- to hardcore fans, Punk was an idol for a week, someone who espoused the same messages they felt about the product. Then WWE had Cena agree with Punk. Talk about extinguishing the heat Punk had. To WWE's defense, both shows were taped the same night, so they may not have known what kind of reaction Punk's promo would get, but they had to know it was going to be much talked about.

Caldwell: It certainly had that feeling of dropping a big bucket of water on a fire. Even though I was opposed to the promo, I knew there would be tremendous buzz for it and thought WWE could keep adding fuel to the fire (extending the analogy) all the way to Money in the Bank in order to build anticipation for the PPV. I said last week on the Livecast I'm separating the promo from the follow-through to determine whether this has the chance to draw on PPV. I think we need to see next week - if they can clean up some things and get back to where they were last week in terms of creating buzz with the type of fans who would get behind Punk. Also, you're definitely right about it feeling like a repeat of last year's "Cena is fired" angle that turned into a big waste of time. ... Now having seen Week 2 of TV, how do you think things turn out at the PPV? Plain old Cena retains, Punk is gone, and Cena moves on to Del Rio at Summerslam? Or, is there more to it?

Parks: Even after Cena's promo, I think there are several ways WWE could go with the MITB main event. Getting Vince McMahon involved on Raw adds a whole new dimension to it as well. I think the worst thing WWE can do is have Cena beat Punk straight up and have that be it. This is a feud/storyline begging for something extra in or after the match.

Caldwell: Right. I think there has to be more to it, otherwise it will feel like another big waste of time. Let's add this to the mix - Cena and Punk "had each other's backs" in their respective promos the last two weeks on Raw. On the house shows in Australia, they continued that with Cena and Punk complementing each other, then cutting promos on Rock. Could the end-game be Cena remaining the #1 face for the casual/Cena Era audience and Punk eventually returning as a "Randy Orton when he was on Raw" #2 face to perhaps feud with Rock so that WWE can keep Cena-Rock fresh for WrestleMania 28?

Parks: I hadn't thought of that, but Punk did go out of his way to say he didn't hate Cena on Raw. Sounds an awful lot like Wade Barrett and the original Nexus, attacking Cena (hey...and Punk!) but saying his real problem was with WWE/Raw management. Oh well. I don't know that Punk would return soon enough to deal with the Rock before 'Mania, unless WWE has stealthily signed him to an extension.

Caldwell: WWE put that claim out there yesterday that he's gone - and it's not a storyline - after the PPV, but I could see Punk potentially returning leading up to Mania after taking a hiatus. He could be like Jericho and completely miss Mania, but I don't think WWE would put the complete, central focus of a key storyline squarely on Punk if WWE has no confidence he's coming back. Looking at some of the specifics of Cena and McMahon's interaction, at times during the promo exchange, I wasn't sure if McMahon was supposed to be likable or sympathetic. At some points, Cena was doing that "you're a fighter, Vince!" gag-inducing stuff, then McMahon was calling all the merchandise crap and heeling on the fans (right after playing to the fans). What's your take on how Cena, McMahon, and even Punk were portrayed by the end of the segment?

Parks: Yeah, the one nagging questions is "would WWE be putting Punk over like this if he weren't coming back?" And really, they did the same with Batista, getting PPV main event after PPV main event out of him before he left, so it's not unprecedented. Why not try to get the most $$ out of a guy before he walks out? As for the portrayal in the promo, I don't really know. On one hand, Cena should be mad at Punk for costing him the match the previous week with R-Truth (but hey, I guess wins and losses don't matter again this week). Vince was kinda all over the map, which actually sort of fits with his insane character. Still, there was something about that finale promo that I feel like I'm missing; something was "off" that I can't put my finger on.

Caldwell: Great point on Batista. That would be the plausible explanation for WWE trying to squeeze extra PPV dollars out of Punk's character before he leaves. It could go either way, for sure. I know what you're saying about the promo being "off." I didn't want to read too much into crowd reactions because it was the fourth hour of a double TV taping, but that crowd seemed to be sitting on their hands trying to figure out how to react. They only seemed to react when Cena told them to or when McMahon did the ol' "I look down on you peons" heel authority figure routine. I think one of the other issues with the promo that might be why it seemed "off" was that it felt like a "WWE promo," whereas Punk's promo was designed to seem real and authentic. This came across scripted and manufactured.

Parks: Yeah, I think WWE tried to make it feel unscripted by having Cena mention the Daniel Bryan firing, Hogan and others, but the promo was really all over the place and hard to follow, I guess. Cena respects Punk for standing up to McMahon? Is that what it's come to? What happened to the loyal-to-WWE Cena? Did he finally have enough when Punk was suspended? Still a lot of questions, I think.

Caldwell: Yeah, that whole issue is a mess. It can barely be evaluated because WWE has so many things to sort out on that aspect. Do you think this could also be leading to a full-blown Cena-McMahon feud and McMahon's next "hired opponent" is Del Rio? And McMahon just throws roadblocks in Cena's way on the road to WrestleMania vs. Rock? It seems like a potential way for McMahon to interject himself into the over-arching one-year storyline from WM27 to WM28. ... As in, McMahon wants to test Cena and make sure he's ready to beat Rock so that Rock doesn't "take the WWE Title out of WWE to Hollywood" or some cockamamie storyline like that?

Parks: I could definitely see that - in fact, it makes a lot of sense that McMahon would then be worried about Rock taking the title to Hollywood. Of course, the difference is Punk just threatened to take the title to a minor league organization, where Rock would be in the media spotlight in Hollywood, and the more press the better for Vince. But yeah, I could see that. But until Vince makes another appearance, I'm not completely sold that this wasn't a one-off shot on Raw.

Caldwell: It could be interesting or it could be a drag to next year's Mania. Either way, it will make for interesting discussion! That pretty much dominated the entire Raw episode, which otherwise seemed like complete filler. Greg, anything else jump out at you from Raw?

Parks: I'm surprised they didn't do any Mark Henry-Big Show follow-up, since that was the big move of the previous Raw. As for my thoughts on heels like Swagger and Ziggler not getting over and how Raw was a prime example of that, folks can check out my latest blog post on the front page of PWTorch.com.

Caldwell: Yes, it's a solid blog capturing a lot of the issues we talk about here in the Chat and on the Livecast. You're right that it was surprising they didn't follow up on Henry-Show. It seems like more of a Smackdown issue (even though Show is on Raw), but the meat of the story has played out on Raw. WWE just went with one of those in-between commercials Slam of the Week type videos to refresh viewers on what happened last week, but it wasn't even a talking point on this week's show, which is disappointing. Looking at the middle of the show - standard Divas action, standard tag division "action," a Fourth of July tie-in with Slaughter, standard Vickie-is-the-butt-of-the-joke fare, and a three-way #1 contender match. There just wasn't much there. Not even much on the MITB ladder match at the PPV. They just replayed some video packages from past editions. What did you think of that aspect and the overall ladder match hype thus far?

Parks: There really hasn't been much hype; on both shows, the participants were just thrown out there, no qualifying matches, no big announcement by the GM, no nothing. A little surprising, but making a big deal about who's in it goes a long way into making people feel like the match is a big deal. They could've even done a thing where they would reveal one member of the match each day at a certain time on WWE.com - I remember them doing that with survivor Series matches a few years back.

Caldwell: It definitely feels very thrown together. Like you said, they haven't made a big deal out of it, so it makes me wonder why waste a PPV on the MITB concept when they could save it for WrestleMania, have one MITB winner, have one briefcase floating around, and make it a bigger deal? It seems like WWE feels they can just throw out a themed PPV and wait for their audience to get in line to order. Granted, WWE is selling this PPV on Punk vs. Cena in Punk's hometown, but I think it damages the MITB concept to put so little emphasis on it. Do you have a firm pick to win Raw's MITB match right now? Heck, is Del Rio even still in it? Does Del Rio even need to be in the match now that he's #1 contender? That hasn't been cleared up. Removing Del Rio, who would be your pick to win?

Parks: First off, if WWE really thinks they can just throw out a gimmick themed PPV and people will line up like lemmings to buy, they need to look at the Extreme Rules buyrate again. As for a winner on Raw, personally I would've gone with R-Truth winning the #1 contender match, then have McMahon reinstate Punk, screwing him again. Or maybe this just means Del Rio will get his shot at Summerslam once Punk is gone and Cena has the belt back. But that would mean he doesn't really need to win MITB - I'd say Riley is a dark horse, but Miz is someone I could see winning again. With Punk and Del Rio already #1 contenders, I think we need to sort that situation out before I can make a firmer prediction.

Caldwell: Plus, Truth technically should be in line for another title shot because, as he said on Raw, he beat WWE champ Cena in the tables match last week on Raw. So, Punk, Del Rio, and Truth are all lined up for title shots and two of them are currently slotted in MITB. Many a situation to be sorted out, indeed. I don't see a babyface winning this, so, assuming Del Rio is removed from the match, I'm picking Miz to win again. Greg, anything else Raw-related worth breaking down?

Parks: Eh, I think we've hit the high points.

Caldwell: Speaking of high points, the return of Derrick Bateman on NXT last night. Well, what could have been a high point for the week. The whole show was a bit of a drag and WWE seems to be presenting Bateman differently than how he got over last season, so I was a bit let down by that. Your thoughts on NXT and Bateman?

Parks: It seems like Percy Watson syndrome - Watson's exuberance and enthusiasm got him over on NXT, but in dark matches before TVs, he seems to have tempered it quite a bit. I think Bateman shows promise, perhaps more than the other final two on this season's NXT, but it all depends on if WWE utilizes him to his strengths once he makes the main roster.

Caldwell: He seems like the character who could be a solid opening-match act on house shows to get the crowd warmed up, but stay at that Santino level with no chance of upward mobility because of the way WWE's system works. Like you said, what got Bateman over is also what will pigeonhole him in that slot. If it's stripped away like Showtime, then he's just another guy on the roster. He's stuck unless he can find a way to break out. This season is inevitably coming down to Titus vs. Bateman, so who's your pick to win whenever this season finally ends?

Parks: A Titus heel turn could be intriguing - I don't know why they'd bring back Bateman unless they wanted him to win, then again, it would be SO NXT to end up having Titus win anyway. So Titus.

Caldwell: With NXT, you never know if they're actually setting something up (a la Titus turning heel) or just completely out of ideas/booking out of convenience (we need a storyline, so Hornswoggle and Titus show tension and we have no other Rookies, so Titus and Young team up). After what I saw last night with the presentation of Bateman, I'm leaning toward Titus holding on and winning despite a teased heel turn. Maybe everyone wins by WWE scrapping the entire season and moving on to some new talent... Greg, let's move on to the State of Affairs on Smackdown. WWE still hasn't made Orton vs. Christian official yet after Sheamus interrupted the contract signing - what's your take on Sheamus becoming re-involved, especially so soon after being punted in the head?

Parks: I would've guessed a Triple-Threat match is in store, but Sheamus is also in the MITB match. Plus, why reward a guy for interrupting a contract signing and beating up your PPV main eventers? I think they need to keep Sheamus on the periphery of the main events in order for him to presumably be ready to face Orton once the Christian thing has run its course.

Caldwell: Yes, we've run into the MITB conondrum again. I think Sheamus is a good choice to be next in line as a serious threat to Orton. He still doesn't seem like a top, top, top #1 heel, but I think he would be a step above Christian in the #1 heel role. There's also Mark Henry and Cody Rhodes, who could be potential fall season opponents for Orton after Christian and Sheamus. Who knows, WWE might switch the World Title to Sheamus at some point to give Orton something to actually chase. Orton hasn't chased anything as a face...ever...and I think it would freshen up his character to be the hunter rather than hunted.

Parks: I don't think that would be a terrible idea. Sheamus would be a fresh face atop Smackdown, as it already feels like Randy Orton is stale. You've also got Christian, who really deserves to stay in the main events too, though I don't know how likely that is in the long-term.

Caldwell: I don't see WWE elevating Daniel Bryan anytime soon, so I think Christian vs. Sin Cara would be a nice fall-back feud for Christian after rotating out of the main event scene. It would also allow Sin Cara to take a step forward feuding with the former #1 heel. Plus, Christian can do all the talking to set up Sin Cara with the in-ring comebacks. I think the pieces of the Smackdown roster could come together nicely going into the fall season after going through a real valley in terms of TV ratings right now. It's summer, it's Friday nights, etc. Do you think WWE is just content with taking a hit right now and saving the better stuff for the fall when they can actually draw in an audience?

Parks: Probably; Their target audience of young kids is probably (or should be) outside enjoying the nice evenings and playing with friends. But really, they're in a unique spot becaues on Friday nights, kids can still do that during the fall and winter with no school the next day. I guess it depends on how much the nice weather affects their desire to hang out and play outside. But yeah, I think from looking at past years of Smackdown, they've kind of had it on auto-pilot during the Summer, at least until the build-up to Summerslam begins.

Caldwell: Speaking of Summerslam, what top match would you pencil in for Smackdown? I doubt they would do Christian vs. Orton again, unless Christian actually wins the title and they have the blow-off re-match at Summerslam. Outside of that happening, I almost sense a multiple-man title match. They could always do the Orton vs. Sheamus match, but it would seem somewhat "off" to go right into that match on the second biggest PPV of the year. What's your Summerslam prediction?

Parks: Yeah, I'm getting the Sheamus vs. Orton vs. Christian feeling right now. But, if Mark Henry keeps up his awesome performances...do you see him getting back in the main events at all?

Caldwell: It seems like they've been holding off on a four-way match between Sheamus, Orton, Christian, and Henry since the Draft. Perhaps they pull the trigger at Summerslam to put Orton in jeopardy and stack the deck. Or, the other possibility is Henry vs. Show in a blow-off at Summerslam. I definitely think they have to keep Henry in the main event picture right now, don't over-expose him in the ring, and keep building up that trash-talking heel persona as a potential #1 threat to Orton. I'm with you on a potential three-way at Summerslam or the possibility of a four-way if Henry doesn't end the feud with Show. Looking back on Friday's show, Greg, what else stood out from the blue brand?

Parks: Nothing else really. Just a continuation of Cody Rhodes and Daniel Bryan's story. Felt like that was the only thing of worth on the show. Oh, that and another Johnny Curtis vignette. He's got "superstar" written all over him after those!

Caldwell: I saw this theory floating around and I thought it myself last week - do you think WWE is using Curtis to spoof Ryder's YouTube bits (this is WWE missing the boat with Ryder, this is WWE not on the same page with Ryder, etc.) to mock Ryder? Or do you think they're unrelated and WWE just has no idea what to do with Curtis?

Parks: I think they just don't know what to do with Curtis. I really don't think it has anything at all to do with Ryder.

Caldwell: Fair enough there. Greg, any thoughts on TNA Impact last Thursday or the upcoming Destination X PPV?

Parks: Bringing back stars from the past and debuting new X Division wrestlers is a nice way to hype up the PPV, and something that sets them apart from WWE since they'd never do something like that. The Sting stuff isn't doing it for me, nor is Samoa Joe losing to Devon. Everything else is just like background noise.

Caldwell: I stopped trying to follow along with the Sting-Hogan-Bischoff-Anderson mess a while ago, so I'm just waiting for them to get it over with - whatever "it" is they're going for. I think bringing back X Division alumnus is good, like you said, but that contract signing was downright awful and there's still too much of this "we're a brand and we're not really fighting for anything and we're all buddies" X Division non-sense. That's rubbed me the wrong way on the PPV hype. Regarding Joe and Devon, I got what they were going for - Joe is desperate to get to the top of the Standings, so he went for a submission when he had Devon beat, which allowed Devon to win - but it's still Devon beating Joe. That shouldn't happen

Parks: Agreed. Then again, Joe is so damaged goods at this point, I wonder if it even really matters.

Caldwell: Right. You could apply that to 95 percent of the roster - everyone is damaged goods in some form or fashion, so does anything that happens matter? And, then, wash it all away with a good old fashioned manufactured Bar Fight!

Parks: Bar Fights = ratings, apparently.

Caldwell: It's just like TNA to try something like that once, then try it again a month later. Greg, anything else TNA-related on your mind you'd like to share?

Parks: Not really, no.

Caldwell: Very good. That's all I have for this week. We'll miss you on the Livecast this week, but give the readers a plug for the latest Gonzo and The Greg VIP audio episode and a sneak peek of what's next up.

Parks: Yeah, Gonzo and the Greg was posted on Sunday night, and it was a fun episode where we discussed the top five wrestlers we'd pick if we were starting a new promotion today. Very rich discussion about experience vs. potential, who would make us the most money, and what the philosophy of our company would be as far as what talent we'd be on the look-out for. This coming weekend, we'll take a stab a the top five X Division Champions of all-time, in honor of Destination X on Sunday.

Caldwell: It was a very good discussion last weekend. Nice tie-in there with the Top 5 X Division champions. I think Joe would have to be at the top of the list, but there are also some very good candidates. Looking forward to hearing that discussion. Greg, thanks as always for the Chat. We'll talk again next week!

Parks: Okay, James, sounds good!

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!