On a weekly basis, PWTorch staffers James Caldwell and Greg Parks have a casual, yet insightful, 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 chat. Greg, first off, thanks for the Vote of Confidence as host of this chat. The Board of Chat Directors is pleased with your decision. In any event, Greg, your thoughts on the real (well, as real as Raw gets) walk-out that occurred on Monday's Raw and how do you see it playing out three days from now on Monday?

Parks: Hey, I've got your back James. Worry not. I thought overall, it was an effective segment to get fans to tune in this coming Monday on Raw as well as tonight on Smackdown. I think there are issues with the angle certainly, but it has people talking and there seems to be a buzz, especially because WWE has played this angle to the hilt, sending out notes about house shows and the like; they're really covering all their bases on this one. I understand those who hated the final angle and just want to be done with this Hunter-as-COO storyline, but I think this is at least an interesting chapter added to the storyline.

Caldwell: I think the key to the whole thing was that one little word you said: "buzz." Since C.M. Punk kicked off this current season back in June leading to Money in the Bank, WWE has depended on the risky business venture of trying to create buzz every week on TV. When they've failed, ratings have gone done. When they've been successful, they've found a few weeks of renewed interest. The problem is they have not been able to sustain buzz for any length of time, whether it's because of the title tournament right after MITB or Punk returning too soon after MITB or Nash being in and out after Summerslam. So, they're depending on shifting ground and the elusive buzz factor, which they have this week, but also makes the follow-up so, so, so vital this Monday... Right now, WWE has people interested in what's next, but I don't know how many more chances people will give WWE during this current Triple H storyline. I think WWE needs to deliver something substantial on Monday and not just have it be a "return to normalcy" like the chaos never happened. There has to be a payoff. I don't think they do the Big Reveal this Monday, but there has to be some measure of payoff on Monday.

Parks: Oh, definitely. You can't have all the guys who walked out just show back up on Monday with nothing having changed, and I think that's why you're already seeing Raw being advertised around the guys who didn't show up to walk out on Triple H. We talked yesterday on the Livecast about Hunter bringing up guys from FCW to fill the void; I don't think they'll go to that extreme and I'd be surprised if everyone wasn't back in some form the Monday after this; but I think a lot of people will be frustrated if this follows the typical sitcom formula of "everything is normal, something crazy happens, then everything is back to normal again." The fans want to know that what they're watching matters, so with all of these big threats, fans are looking for something to change.

Caldwell: Exactly. I will be curious to see if this is how WWE introduces a few FCW Rookies. At the same time, I could see "order restored" mid-way through the show and you end up with a Cena & Big Show & Sheamus vs. Barrett & Christian & Otunga type main event, which would signal to the audience a too-quick return to normalcy. If WWE is going with this Mystery Angle as the central focus of their company right now, though, they really need to go all the way with it. There is that one over-arching big "problem," though. They have a PPV in about two weeks with no matches, a completely devalued top title, and no real sense of matches mattering at this point because the Mystery Angle is taking up all of the focus. So, Creative has to find a way to weave this all together, which should make for an interest result on Monday. Greg, specifically looking at the walk-angle on Raw, what did you think of the execution and how everyone played their parts in the 20-minute segment?

Parks: I thought, for the most part, even if you hated the idea of the angle, it was pretty well-crafted. There are the usual complaints about Hunter no-selling it, but I thought Wade Barrett's speech was right on; William Regal's facial reactions were spot-on as always; JR being the last to leave was cool (and I thought he might actually stay), as were the cameramen dropping their cameras; and having the babyfaces huddle together to discuss it and be the last to leave (as far as wrestlers) also made sense.

Caldwell: I think a lot of people - and with reason - focus on the logic issues trying to do an angle like that, but my main issue was Hunter no-selling it, then Pedigreeing Zack Ryder after the show, as if he is completely unflappable. There has to be some emotional response to everyone walking out, even for the hardest, toughest, biggest Alpha Male character on the show. Otherwise, it's ineffective. Kind of like McMahon brushing off Punk leaving MITB with the WWE Title and just booking a tournament. Otherwise, I thought everyone played their roles really well, especially Jim Ross milking that moment as the Last Man Standing showing loyalty to the boss. Regal walking away, but looking back toward Hunter to show he was conflicted was also well done. It was nice to see Barrett back in a meaningful role, as well. I think the main hang-ups are the logic issues and Hunter no-selling it. But, I imagine some of the logic issues will be resolved in the coming weeks. Are we to assume Vince McMahon will be revealed as the Higher Power pulling the strings or do you think another candidate could be revealed?

Parks: The only ones who really make sense are Vince or Stephanie. Steph has been pretty much a red herring at this point after appearing at Summerslam and Raw, so you almost have to think she fits in somewhere, whether it's the actual higher power or just another part of the conspiracy. But yes, all indications are that this will eventually lead to Vince's return, for however long that'll last.

Caldwell: How about Shane McMahon? Is he a darkhorse candidate playing off a worked shoot of Shane being over-looked in favor of the son-in-law as the next "heir to the throne" or is just wishful thinking for some conspiracy theorists?

Parks: I think it's just wishful thinking. I actually haven't even heard people speculate that is a possibility, to show you how far-fetched even fantasy booking fans think it is.

Caldwell: It would be quite the twist, but WWE usually hits people over the head with clues before something happens, so I don't see them bringing out Shane out of the blue. As for trying to swing this angle around to a wrestling match, preferably on PPV, do you see Hunter back in the ring at Vengeance (say in a tag match with someone vs. Miz & Truth for Miz & Truth's jobs?) or what type of headline match could you see coming out of this?

Parks: I don't think Hunter gets back in the ring for a little while; maybe at Survivor Series if they do a United WWE vs. Outcasts match. Vengeance does need a hook though, and Hunter may be worth a few buys. I'm just not sure who you'd put him in with that would be worth it at this point.

Caldwell: I imagine Cena gets his title re-match against Del Rio (they could do something like Del Rio has to "return to work" after walking out to defend vs. Cena or he's stripped of the title and fired), which could leave Punk without a match. I don't see Punk and Hunter teaming up anytime soon, but it could be a way to create a headline tag match for Vengeance without really giving away a marquee match. Speaking of Del Rio as champion, Greg, has there ever been a worse follow-up to a WWE Title change on PPV?

Parks: Good question. I didn't think it'd be possible to have a more poorly-booked reign than his first one, but WWE is working on it. He was in a segment with mid-card heels, and he didn't stand out among them - that's a problem. I just don't know what they're doing with him.

Caldwell: I don't know if their mindset is Del Rio being in the ring with the mid-card heels gives those guys a rub or if they think Del Rio being in the ring with mid-card heels makes him look more impressive and like a stronger champion by juxtaposition. Either way, it's not working for anyone because the title is irrelevant at this point and Vickie is too over while the rest of them just aren't. It's puzzling. How long do you think this Del Rio reign lasts? Does he lose the title back to Cena at Vengeance, assuming they have another title match? Or, does he hold it for a few more weeks?

Parks: Ugh. I can't imagine them switching it AGAIN at Vengeance. I think he needs a long reign, but the problem is, I think Mark Henry is in for a long reign too, and I don't know if WWE wants to commit to two heels holding the major titles for a long time. Of course, this could work into Hunter's angle by adding to the craziness in that the heels are running roughshod over everyone.

Caldwell: Okay, that reminds me of another issue I had with the walk-out angle. Why was Jerry Lawler directing his anger toward Triple H when Mark Henry put him through a table? Now, the explanation could be Hunter has created an unsafe environment that has allowed chaos to occur, including Henry destroying wrestlers, announcers, stagehands, etc. But, Henry put him through the table and Henry was standing on the other side of the ring behind Hunter. Wouldn't Lawler want to get his hands on Henry? ... Or is the idea that everyone is looking for someone else to blame, so instead of handling his beef with Henry, Lawler was looking for someone else to complain to?

Parks: Come on, James, the King ain't stupid: He's in his sixties and Mark Henry is at his most dominant. You think Lawler is going to run his mouth and invoke the anger of the World Champ again? It might seem like he's weak for not confronting the bully, but he's also being smart. One of the bigger complaints is actually about something Lawler said: he believes there is someone conspiring against Triple H, yet he still voted for Hunter to be ousted. Isn't that just allowing those pulling the strings behind the scenes, to win?

Caldwell: I was perplexed by that line of thinking, too. I think what Lawler was aiming for was he believes it's not Hunter's fault, but because the circumstances are unsafe, he cannot give Hunter a Vote of Confidence. It was almost like he was giving a Vote of No Confidence to the circumstances, not necessarily Hunter himself, so he wasn't completely writing off Hunter like the conspirator would want. That needed to be cleared up, though... I think we've thoroughly discussed that major development, which pretty much captured the entire Raw. The rest of the show was Smackdown-related with Henry and Orton, plus Kelly Kelly screaming her head off. Your thoughts on WWE starting Raw with back-to-back Smackdown matches following up on the World Title picture?

Parks: It was interesting that the first half hour went to the Smackdown brand and Mark Henry and Randy Orton. Perhaps they did that because of the way the final hour was booked, with the long tag match and the final Vote segment. Still, they kind of trumped Smackdown in that regard, and giving fans the first reaction of the wrestlers after a PPV, and that certainly doesn't help the blue brand. Seeing Kelly Kelly smiling and waving on her way to the ring, only to be DQ'd 20 seconds in for pretty much going nuts was vintage Kelly Kelly - that's on the agents and/or Kelly for the ridiculousness of her not being upset when she came to the ring to start.

Caldwell: I wasn't a fan of Orton and Henry somewhat no-selling the effects of the Hell in a Cell match the night before (further rendering the HIAC structure ineffective) and I wasn't too keen on Henry having a near even-steven match with Morrison, but Henry's promo afterward was simply amazing to erase the visual of Morrison landing more offense than I expected that could have put a chink in Henry's armor. What did you think of the Orton-Henry brawl in-between their matches? Is that overdone on WWE TV or was that appropriate for this stage of their feud?

Parks: I think it's appropriate, but I agree that it's becoming overdone. And hey, Drew McIntyre lasted longer against Orton than Morrison did against Henry and Morrison has been shown as a bigger deal than McIntyre despite his recent setbacks, so I didn't have a huge problem with the way that match developed.

Caldwell: I was definitely surprised McIntyre got in as much offense as he did against Orton. I don't anticipate anything coming from that; I think Mac is just one of those guys who looks like a star, is tall enough to be a threat, and allows someone like Orton to pick up a credible win without damaging a wrestler in the process. As for tonight's Smackdown, WWE is re-incorporating Big Show into storylines. How do you expect him to fit into the Henry-Orton issue, and with Sheamus and Christian, to a lesser extent, hovering in the background?

Parks: He gives Smackdown another top-level babyface, something they're really lacking. We've talked about possibly moving into a Henry-Sheamus feud for the title, but Big Show could horn himself in there as well, wanting revenge on Henry. That could be more of a three-week program as opposed to a title feud, though. But then what happens with Orton? Feud with Cody? Back to Christian? Tough to say. I think giving guys like Big Show and Kane time off like this with injury write-offs is smart and I hope they do similar angles with others to give them a break down the line, even if they're not grizzled veterans who can afford to take that kind of time off.

Caldwell: I think you're right on with a possible Henry-Show PPV title match to break up the usual cast of characters in the title picture and give WWE a fresh match-up to market on a quick turnaround to Vengeance. WWE still needs to protect Sheamus and Orton by keeping them in the picture, so I'm not sure what WWE does with them if the next few weeks are focused on Henry-Show. Cody is definitely a good candidate to give Orton and/or Sheamus someone to feud with. Smackdown is in an interesting position right now drawing good ratings and having a fresh World champ on top. They just need to keep building up mid-card stars to rotate into the spotlight when the time is right. Has anything else stood out to you from Smackdown the past few weeks during this healthy ratings period?

Parks: Great Khali is gone for now (and maybe good) after the anti-climactic break-up of him and Jinder Mahal (who also hit a wall after a big initial push). I'd like to see Smackdown as the place where tag teams could develop and have Bourne and Kofi as consistent presences on the show. I think WWE wants to push Justin Gabriel, but they don't seem to know exactly what to do with him.

Caldwell: I've thought about whether WWE should take it one step further and create a sole tag division on Smackdown. Kofi and Bourne could still appear on Raw, but the actual tag division would be found on Smackdown. But, WWE likes to include a tag title match here and there on Raw, so it would handcuff the Raw writers to find a segment to fill a sixth or fourth quarter-hour slot. As for Justin Gabriel, yeah, I have no idea what WWE could do with him in terms of an actual feud. He just seems to find himself in matches with Heath Slater, but there's no teeth to that. With so little depth on the Smackdown roster, it's tough to see where he fits in right now.

Parks: True. They should really utilize some of the NXT stars like Tyson Kidd and Yoshi Tatsu. A lot of it also has to do with how they utilize the two Sin Caras going forward.

Caldwell: Ah, the Sin Caras. How quickly I (tried to) forget. The Sin Cara character is over, but that was such a booking mess leading up to HIAC and following through to the PPV match itself. Where do they go from here? They've already invested in a new Dark Sin Cara character, so they can't completely drop it, even though they probably should.

Parks: Right. I think they want to keep Hunico on the main roster in case Mistico screws up again and they need Hunico to replace him for good. But I'm interested to see if Dark Cara stays as that character and what name he gets, if the feud is in fact over.

Caldwell: Good point on needing to keep Hunico around as insurance. We shall see on tonight's Smackdown whether WWE keeps the feud going. Related to your NXT point, I agree on incorporating Kidd and Yoshi back on the main shows. Yoshi is struggling on NXT with this mix of Happy Fun-time Yoshi and Dark Yoshi, while Kidd seems to be aimless without a Yoshi feud or managerial try-out program. As for NXT, Greg, the show is down to two Rookies, but not via elimination; instead, a Wellness Violation for D-Young. Will this finally spell the end of NXT or is WWE content turning the show into Superstars and just rotating a bunch of regular-roster stars onto the show to give them something to do?

Parks: Just giving the mid-carders something to do, which is curious because they have Superstars for that. I guess NXT is more angle-driven. I just have no clue where this show is going in the long-term and I really wonder if the writers or Vince do, either.

Caldwell: It seems like NXT is just a simulation of Raw or Smackdown to give the likes of Hawkins & Reks, the Usos, Yoshi, Kidd, JTG, etc. a low-pressure/low-visibility situation to "get in some work" in basic storylines & situations. It's basically limbo where WWE wants to keep them around, has nothing for them on Raw or Smackdown, but wants to keep giving them work. And, they're under contract, so there are certain date requirements. Put it all together with no creative vision for this show and you get Week 31 of NXT Redemption.

Parks: It feels like it's been twice as long as that. At least.

Caldwell: And twice the pain. All right, Greg, let's talk some TNA. Last night, the big Hogan Retirement Tease was revealed. What's your take on how that played out and TNA inevitably re-incorporating Dixie Carter into the angle?

Parks: The reaction of the fans did not make that angle come across as TNA had hoped, mostly because they loved Hogan when he said he was going to retire, then hated him when Sting said "everybody can see through you." Well, obviously it wasn't everyone. I feel like we were actually supposed to be in on Hogan faking the retirement from the beginning, but it didn't work out that way. It felt like the joke was on the fans in the building.

Caldwell: The problem is people don't attention to or invest in TNA's storylines because of how convoluted the writing historically has been, so the audience completely ignored a full year of Hogan acting like a heel, which would mean "do not trust this man when he says he's going to retire!" Of course, that live audience was just thinking about 1980s, 1990s, or early 2000s Hulk Hogan with no connection to this TNA ordeal. It's funny because the sympathy in the segment went to the live crowd. And it wasn't like there was this huge ah-ha! moment during the Hogan-Bischoff conversation. When they really needed to take a WWE approach and hit people over the head with it, they went too soft, I thought.

Parks: Even with Sting cutting in to Hogan's interview and telling people last week that he could see through Hogan's retirement!

Caldwell: I know! But, because Sting's character has been so flighty and untrustworthy (not to Mr. Anderson's extent, but similar issues), could the audience take Sting seriously? The lack of consistency to these characters really hurts, especially when the writing has been lousy, complicating the matter. What did you think of the deal with Hogan "blurting out" that he would fight Sting and give back control of TNA to Dixie if Sting wins?

Parks: That was pretty cheesy, and I guess, somehow, that outburst is legally binding. Still not sure how that works.

Caldwell: It seems like the "legal issues" have always been subject to logic holes, as was documented during the Flashbacks that aired during Impact. Concerning the other big item on the show, your thoughts on Beer Money Exploding and the latest build-up to Roode-Angle at the PPV?

Parks: All good stuff. Anything Beer Money-related seems to be turning to gold for TNA. And I don't think it's a coincidence that they're newcomers to the main event scene.

Caldwell: What did you make of Angle interfering on behalf of Roode during the Roode-Storm match?

Parks: I'm hoping that's explained next week. Perhaps it'll be something like "I want you at your best and most confident when you face me so when I beat you, I'll beat the best you." Of course, that flies in the face of Angle wanting to book Roode against his Fortune brethren in the first place.

Caldwell: I think it could be that. I also thought of two other explanations: he doesn't want anyone else in the title picture after BFG (Storm would have been in line for a title shot if he beat Roode) or he wants Roode and Storm to be at odds going into BFG because Storm will "watch the tape" to see Roode beat him with Angle's help. Then, Storm could "accidentally" or purposefully cost Roode the title match out of selfish ambition, which would give Roode an "out" for not winning the title after this long build-up.

Parks: Yeah, you almost have to think a Beer Money split will be coming soon. Angle trying to drive a wedge between them could work.

Caldwell: Exactly. And, Storm made it clear that he believes he's the better wrestler, so having to take the bitter pill of a loss coupled with Roode not winning straight-up would make a hot-head character like James Storm go nuts, which is what Angle's character would want. We'll see. Greg, anything else Impact-related worth breaking down?

Parks: I'm all set for this week.

Caldwell: Very good. Give the readers a preview of the daunting task ahead of the Gonzo & The Greg crew this weekend.

Parks: Daunting is right; we're rating the top five greatest cage matches, which includes any kind of cage: Hell in a Cell, Elimination Chamber, Steel Cage, War Games, Six Sides of Steel, etc.

Caldwell: Not appearing on the list will be Kennel in a Cage, thankfully. I'm looking forward to that audio discussion this weekend! Greg, thanks as always for the Chat and have a great weekend.

Parks: And, James, enjoy your football game tomorrow!

Caldwell: Thank you! I will be listening to your update on the way home from Texas vs. Oklahoma, so hopefully it will be an enjoyable ride.

Parks: And if Texas loses, hopefully there will be enough laughs to cheer you up. As much as would be possible, anyway.

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!