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 and break down. Greg, obviously the big topic of the week is C.M. Punk's return to WWE after a whole week away from TV for people to anticipate his return. Now, we know Punk will explain himself on next week's Raw via a live promo. What's your reaction to Punk's return and show-closing angle with John Cena on this week's Raw?

Greg Parks: No surprise of the announcement: WWE wants viewers to tune in to see what Punk has to say, so of course they'll advertise that ahead of time. We talked about this on the Livecast, James, it'll be interesting to see how they play this: Will Punk set up Triple H as his new buddy who gave him the contract he wanted and allowed him to return to WWE (since WWE was the big babyface last week, putting JR and Ryder on TV, etc); or does he say he re-signed with WWE DESPITE Triple H, and that becomes the next big feud when he's done with Cena? I think that's the answer I'm most looking forward to finding out on Monday night.

Caldwell: Yeah, there's a lot of unanswered questions regarding the "how" of Punk's return. I could see the explanation being exactly what Hunter and Punk said in their exchange at Comic-Con - Hunter told Punk there's a new regime and McMahon is gone, so give him a call and they'll get him back to work. I don't think they'll go the buddy route - just Hunter making a "business decision" that benefits WWE and...wait for the cheap pop...the fans. So, the next question is why would Punk want to come back? I think they have to tie that in with the idea that Punk's complaints have been rectified by Hunter, which, of course, brings up the problem of whether they end up stripping away Punk's entire purpose of "raging against the WWE machine."

Parks: Right...if Punk buddies up to Hunter, it certainly won't last long, leading to a match. I also mentioned they could do a Punk "corporate champion" heel gimmick where he sides with Hunter/WWE but it's too soon for that. I can't fault WWE for bringing Punk back so soon because I'm sure they saw money flying the coop when Punk did, but it would've been a lot more interesting had Punk laid (somewhat) low for the next few months and then returned with a bang when people least expected it.

Caldwell: It could lead to something bigger than it already is (I sense the program has already peaked, though) but I think now WWE is just looking to cash in on their TV time investment at Summerslam, house shows, and subsequent PPVs following Summerslam. I think they could have generated an even larger draw if they delayed the instant gratification of cashing in on Punk right now, but, like I said, there could be something bigger that gives them the immediate return of Punk being hot and a long-term payoff with, say, the Punk vs. Hunter match. If that's the case, I think our current concerns about Punk coming back too soon will be answered. But, I think it's a good concern right now that WWE might be giving up a big payoff for a few smaller payoffs right now. Do you think WWE does Cena vs. Punk II at Summerslam?

Parks: Oh, James, believing that Punk returning now means something bigger down the road. So naive! Right now, my guess is Cena vs. Punk 2 at Summerslam, with Punk vs. Hunter being a dark horse, but they should hold off on that (and we've seen how WWE is at holding off). The problem is if Cena wins (which I'd certainly guess was probable)...will WWE have lost all the goodwill they built up with fans who invested in the Punk character, only to have Cena ultimately come out on top? I mean, that's got to be the end-game for this feud, doesn't it?

Caldwell: If Cena remains positioned as the clear face and if Punk remains positioned as the clear heel (despite being cheered in his hometown of Chicago), then I think the story dictates Cena overcomes the evil, dissenting voice in the form of Punk. Now, if Punk and Hunter have this exchange where Punk accepts the "appearance of change" in WWE under Hunter, then I wouldn't be so sure Punk loses the match so that Good Cena conquers Evil Punk. I think WWE can still accomplish their goal of elevating Cena (with an eye on Rock at WM28) and not completely kill off Punk's heat and the goodwill you mentioned with the Punk supporters. I think we'll get some clues about how they try to accomplish that on next week's Raw. But, the concern for pro-Punk'ers is Punk just goes right back to the upper mid-card after this program is over, WWE re-focuses on Cena-Rock, and Punk's program is a fond summer 2011 memory. I think those are the concerns, despite Punk proving himself a capable and worthy main-eventer in this program.

Parks: Yeah, I've already seen folks speculating that Punk will be back to the mid-card after this feud. I think it'd be silly, but not totally unprecedented. But I also don't think Punk came back to be treated like that - he must have been given some creative control over his character and some kind of assurance that he wouldn't be tossed in the scrap heap when he finishes with Cena.

Caldwell: Very true. I don't think he got Hogan Creative Control, but I agree he wouldn't have come back and returned to the road essentially working full-time again unless he had some provisions and protections. Heck, perhaps even a request or two, such as re-hiring Colt Cabana. There's also news of Hero & Claudio reportedly signing with WWE. On the Livecast, we talked about a potential re-done faction under Punk's watch - do you think that's a possibility with those players involved or some other players, such as FCW call-ups?

Parks: The more I think about it, the more I don't like the idea. Punk has been the leader of too many groups now, and we've seen the law of diminishing returns so far with the SES doing well, but Nexus falling off when he took over. With some kind of creative control, it could be good, but on the other hand, we could see the Kings of Wrestling get fed to Cena/Hunter/whomever just like all the other groups/sidekicks in WWE who aren't the stars (like the Slaters, Gabriels, Otungas of Nexus/Corre, Alex Riley, Ricardo Rodriguez, etc.). I'd hate for that to happen.

Caldwell: I think the concept allows for some creative storylines and match-ups to roll around in people's heads, but I think Punk, for now, is better off as that lone wolf figure. I'm really curious to see how he's presented on Raw - the heel still antagonizing Cena or a respected babyface after the MITB PPV? It could also dictate whether Hunter starts shifting into power-abuse mode or continues to play a straight, babyface, lead authority figure. Someone else lurking in the shadows is Miz, who had an anti-Hunter promo on Raw and seems to be, along with R-Truth, the key heel dissenter against Hunter. Where do you see Miz fitting in right now?

Parks: Tough to say. I have a feeling, with him being in the finals of the title tournament, that they've got something in mind for him, whether it's in the main event or not. He seems to have moved on from Alex Riley (good for both men, really), and maybe goes into a feud with Rey after Rey lost his title to Cena.

Caldwell: I think WWE will have to create some sort of #1 contender match at Summerslam featuring a combination of Miz, Rey, and Del Rio, who is also lurking in this storyline somewhere. I thought a few months ago there would be Cena vs. Del Rio and Rey vs. Miz as Raw's top matches. Then, Punk blew it all up and WWE booked Miz vs. Rey on this week's Raw. So, perhaps Cena-Punk II and Miz-Rey-Del Rio in a three-way match at Summerslam. I definitely agree it's a good thing WWE has moved away from Miz and Riley, who needs to be own his man. I didn't like what I saw on Superstars this week, though, with Riley trying out some new hand-grenade "signature move" ala Cena's Five Knuckle Shuffle. But, the place to experiment is on Superstars, where no one watches!

Parks: It's so true. And it seems like a lot of babyfaces have to have those stupid moves in their arsenal, like Kofi's Boom Drop for instance.

Caldwell: We talked a lot about Dolph Ziggler on the Livecast today and I feel like Ziggler and Kofi are at that same level- just short of the main event scene for seemingly years, and missing just that little something to get to the next level. Besides John Cena being the #1 face on Raw and now Rey being #2 post-Draft, what do you see that's keeping Kofi just out of reach, like Dolph?

Parks: I don't know, to be honest. I think it's the lack of open spots in the main event, really. WWE has tried giving Kofi the big push, then pulled back on it. Unless there's something we're not privy to going on behind the scenes, that's the only thing I can think of: lack of opportunities at the top of the card.

Caldwell: Removing anything that might be going on behind-the-scenes, it seems like Kofi's matches have become too routine and robotic-like. Obviously, not every viewer watches every single show, so the repetition only gets to ardent, every-single-week viewers, but it seems like Kofi's work is too familiar or comfortable. Plus, WWE not giving him consistent mic time to get over his character isn't helping. Greg, on other Raw topics, what are your thoughts on Ross returning to broadcasting and Morrison's return to resume his feud with R-Truth?

Parks: I'm glad to see JR, but not if it's just going to lead to more bickering between Ross/Lawler and Cole; I can barely handle that on Friday nights, so I might just go mad if I have to listen to uber-heel Cole on Mondays too. Good to see Morrison back, for sure, as he gives the show a dose of athleticism. And it gives R-Truth something to do to keep his crazy character going as well.

Caldwell: Like we talked about last week, they needed to give R-Truth a soft landing coming out of the main event scene and without losing momentum he had during his Little Jimmy run. Working with a returning Morrison is good timing right now. I agree on the announcing front. I hope they resolve the Heel Cole program on Raw quickly and swiftly so everyone can move on and let Ross & Lawler call Raw. Somewhat related - do you think WWE is going to reveal the Raw GM soon, ignore it and pretend like it never existed, or wait a while for Hunter to get settled in as authority figure before they simply write it off?

Parks: I think some combination of two and three. I can totally see them pulling a Sheamus vs. Triple H...where for so long, it made so much sense for Triple H to come back to challenge Sheamus, especially after he won King of the Ring...and they blew it off in a mere few seconds. I could totally see that happening where after all the anticipation, Triple H just says, "oh by the way, I got rid of the anonymous GM. It was Sgt. Slaughter" and then just ends his promo, walks to the back, and the anonymous GM gimmick is never heard from again.

Caldwell: I could completely see that happening. Greg, anything else Raw-related worth breaking down?

Parks: It was a really tightly-packed show, even the Divas segment put Kelly over as champion (and I got a cheap chuckle out of the Keith Stone segment...sue me), so I liked the show for the most part.

Caldwell: I had awful flashbacks to Hornswoggle painting a black hole to escape Carlito. Sigh. WWE had to find that "light variety show moment" somewhere, I suppose. Who do you think wins next week's #1 contender's Divas Battle Royal?

Parks: To be fair, I'll have to go with the person most closely associated with The Miz - his girlfriend, Maryse.

Caldwell: I'll go with the Diva most closely associated with C.M. Punk - Beth Phoenix. It seems like there wouldn't be enough time to truly hype Kelly vs. Beth (not that a Divas Title match will boost PPV buys), but it could be a nice undercard match with proper hype. They could also pick Eve and set up that Kelly vs. Eve face vs. face "respect" battle. Heck, WWE could change their minds mid-match on this one. All right, Greg, let's talk NXT. Put a necklace on a pole, Bateman in Creed trunks, and Kozlov planking on a vending machine on one show and what do you get?

Parks: Vintage NXT!

Caldwell: Well played, sir. Oh, plus I forgot about the big payoff - A.J. revealed as Hornswoggle's secret admirer. Last week, we completely blew off the storyline and WWE paid it off this week! ... At this point, I'm looking for anything to be interested in on NXT.

Parks: I guess WWE writers figured AJ was closest to Hornswoggle's size.

Caldwell: And they probably wanted to re-visit the lineage and prestige of past NXT seasons in anticipation of NXT Season 6 coming at some point in the next year. The new line remains 25 Weeks of this current season. Are you still taking the over?

Parks: Absolutely. No end in sight. Not even a hint of an upcoming elimination. Do you think they'll do an episode where they eliminate the final two, or will they eliminate one and keep the other two on for another four weeks after that?

Caldwell: I think they'll eventually just eliminate one Rookie, then either have the Final Two battle for one week or stretch out another four or five weeks. How they could possibly get an hour of TV out of two contestants and whatever Pros are remaining is beyond me, though. So, it does lend credence to your thought they might eliminate two at once, then finish it off for good. Any other NXT thoughts, Greg?

Parks: Let's move on.

Caldwell: That should be the new tagline for Season 5 instead of redemption. In any event, Smackdown. Big show this Friday with Triple H's advertised State of Smackdown Address. Looking back to last Friday's show, though, what's your take on the current World Title scene with Orton and Christian, Sheamus's apparent face turn, and Mark Henry's continued path of destruction?

Parks: If it's anything like his State of Raw address, it'll be a big let-down. He did little speaking or revealing of any direction during that speech. Orton and Christian I guess are continuing their feud, but I feel like at any time, Sheamus or Mark Henry could be added to make it a three-way. Depending on who comes out with the title after this Orton vs. Christian deal, either Sheamus or Henry could be the #1 contender, with Sheamus a possible opponent for Christian if he turns face, and Henry an opponent for Orton if Orton takes the title back.

Caldwell: I really like the possibility of a heel Christian vs. face Sheamus after Summerslam to give the brand a new program going forward. I think Henry could move along to Orton - as unpretty as that might be - for Henry to take the next step forward in terms of opponents he's targeting. Going after the #1 star on the brand - without having to involve the World Title - could give Smackdown two strong programs going forward. I think WWE eventually wants to get the title back on Orton, but perhaps they could do that leading into the fall season as their big "re-launch" for the Smackdown brand, with it seemingly fresh that Orton is champ again.

Parks: Sure, plus you've got Cody Rhodes and Daniel Bryan in the mid-card doing their thing, Kane and Wade Barrett as utility players, plus young guys in Jinder Mahal, Justin Gabriel, and Heath Slater and all of a sudden, it's not a half-bad roster.

Caldwell: The pieces are there; they just have to arrange them on the chessboard to create some intriguing match-ups going into the fall season. Speaking of D. Bryan, what's your take on his MITB program vowing to cash in at WM28 and do you think he'll actually make it to Mania, or cash in early or have it stolen/won from him?

Parks: That's a tough one, because if he does follow through and Cena has the title at WM, you've got nothing for the Rumble winner as far as him being able to challenge for a WM title. You could always attach something else to winning the Rumble, but it just wouldn't be the same. In the end, I'd like to see Bryan challenging for the title, but having Cena vs. Rock be non-title, and the Rumble winner then challenging the WWE Champion.

Caldwell: I agree with that last scenario. WWE would run the risk of having too many non-title matches superseding title matches if Taker vs. ??? (likely Hunter) is added to the card. I could see a Big Four of Cena-Rock, Hunter-Taker, World champ-Bryan, and WWE champ-Rumble winner, with the title matches really needing to be protected. So, with some super-early predictions on the scenario - who do you think is World champ at WM28 and who wins the Rumble?!

Parks: Punk wins the Rumble - gosh....I'm tempted to say World Champ is Orton but I don't know if Orton vs. Bryan would do much business. But then again, right now, I don't see anyone on Smackdown who would be champion heading into 'Mania other than Orton. Bryan vs. Henry would be interesting if Henry wont he title and kept destroying people until 'Mania, when they could play up the big man vs. little man issue in that match.

Caldwell: Interesting on Henry. Yeah, they could play up a deal where Henry destroys folks all the way to Mania and then asks Bryan if he really wants what he wished for getting that title match at Mania. I could see Orton winning the Rumble and that being the impetus to move him back to Raw to face the champ. Otherwise, I see Orton holding the World Title until Mania to face Bryan. I'm really intrigued by that Henry scenario, though. Greg, anything else Smackdown-related worth breaking down?

Parks: I think we're set for this week.

Caldwell: Excellent. We're "recording" our Chat shortly after TNA Impact on Thursday night. What stood out to you on this week's show?

Parks: There was a lack of fluff and nonsense that really helped focus the show; like Raw, it was pretty tightly-scripted. The Knockouts got multiple segments with Velvet Sky actually cutting a well-scripted promo (rare for the Knockouts). The X Division also got multiple segments, yet they had time to continue Sting's antics, as well as add in a pinch of Kurt Angle and Mr. Anderson.

Caldwell: That seems to be where TNA typically gets in trouble - too much fluff, non-sense, and over-booking. We'll see if that's just a one-week trend or a trend that will continue. I still have issues with the use of gimmicks on Impact, especially when the gimmicks are typically undermined (see: cage match main event).

Parks: Yeah, and the Ultimate X Match with no build-up whatsoever. That was mind-boggling.

Caldwell: Like when they said at the Destination X PPV that there have been 25 of them in company history. That's way, way too much for a novelty match that has nothing to do with winning a wrestling match. It's that ol' Russo mentality of adding something to every match to "draw the eye of a channel-flipper," even if it makes no sense within the context of the story or show. What's your take on the build-up to Sting vs. Angle at the PPV? Are they doing enough to sell that match and the PPV?

Parks: It seems like, when Sting talks to Angle, he drops the craziness, at least in the last two weeks. I'm interested to see how that works in the continued build-up and what happens in reference to that at the PPV. Sting vs. Angle does not feel like it's as important as whatever Immortal is up to, and more specifically, Sting's interaction with Immortal (and the network execs).

Caldwell: Yeah, it seems like TNA is trying to create two separate universes for Sting to live in (ongoing fight vs. Immortal and PPV hype vs. Angle), and I don't know that they're mixing very well. Plus, Sting is way over-exposed on TV by wrestling so frequently that it doesn't seem like a special event to see Sting vs. Angle on PPV. Also, I think viewers considering a PPV purchase with Angle in the main event would rather to see Angle matched up with an opponent who can have a great match with Angle. Preferably, and ideally, home viewers would be so wrapped up in the story and build-up to whatever match Angle's involved in (e.g. Angle-Anderson at Lockdown last year), but in TNA, it's settling for what TNA is creatively capable of offering.

Parks: Sure. Plus, with Angle and Sting both playing babyfaces, it's just another one of those "respect" type matches it seems.

Caldwell: Yes, which is hit or miss in terms of execution and quality. Greg, elsewhere on Impact, what did you think of Matt Morgan's promo and the Aries-Shelley-Kendrick X Division exchange?

Parks: Morgan's promo was solid to get over what the BFG series really means. Kendrick's promo was awful and too often he sounds like an eight year old on the stick. Shelley was okay and Aries was awesome.

Caldwell: TNA needed a credible voice to finally capture the meaning of the BFG Series, and not just the announcers trying to force-feed the concept. I think Morgan captured that. Looking at the Aries, Shelley, and Kendrick segment, Aries carried himself like a star and really benefited from juxtaposition - he actually looked like a star next to them. I think Shelley is a star in a package deal with Chris Sabin and Kendrick's character is exactly like you described. They need to get that belt on Aries, actually define the division, and create some conflict and feuds centered on Aries.

Parks: Well, Bischoff admitted the network is forcing their hand as far as the X Division goes, so maybe we'll get that in the near future.

Caldwell: Some of the verbiage in that promo I really disliked in the context of a wrestling show - The Network is "pushing the X Division" and the five-star match discussion. I know the idea from Aries's character's perspective is he's not interested in having good matches, but winning matches & titles, but I think it defines down the angle only playing to a specific, niche audience that knows what a "five-star match" is. It's like TNA doesn't think the X Division can "play to a broad audience" and only exists to give the niche audience something to be interested in. It's really disservicing the X Division's capability and potential. I think it's insulting to the wrestlers how those lines are written in.

Parks: Yeah, but when you don't even have the division defined, the verbiage of the promo should be the least of their concerns.

Caldwell: Yes, that is quite true. Alas, it all comes down to that! Greg, anything else on Impact you want to touch on?

Parks: Not a thing, James.

Caldwell: Very good. Give the readers a plug for what's on the VIP-exclusive Gonzo & The Greg audio show this week.

Parks: Sure thing. On Sunday, we'll be recording The Top Five least-deserving major champions of all time. It'll be posted on the Torch sometime Sunday afternoon or evening. Plus, I'm on Twitter now, and I Tweeted my thoughts during Impact tonight and I'm looking to do that for all the major TV shows (schedule permitting) aside from Smackdown, which of course I cover in full for the Torch. Follow me @gregmparks

Caldwell: Very good! Everyone give Greg a follow and see what Greg has to say during the week. All right, that will do it for us. As always, a pleasure chatting!

Parks: Quite, James. Quite.

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!