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, let's start with Monday's Raw, which featured the first real hard sell for the TLC PPV in a few Sundays. What's your take on the title match involving Punk, Miz, and Del Rio? And, does Cena get added to the mix?

Greg Parks: WWE got it right by putting the babyface in peril, but the way they've booked Miz and ADR lately, I don't know how many fans think Punk is actually in peril even though he's facing two heels. They've built Miz back up, or attempted to, the past few weeks, so that's a plus. I think there's a good chance Cena gets added to the mix - I don't see a clear non-title opponent for him at TLC at this point. We discussed that he could be in Zack Ryder's corner when he takes on Dolph Ziggler, but that's not going to be enough for Cena fans to buy the show.

Caldwell: This will be an interesting case study to see whether Cena being advertised for nothing (or just in Ryder's corner) causes the buyrate to sink or whether it stays the same. I don't think Punk-Miz-Del Rio is a strong enough main event to get any more than the usual number of PPV buys, so if you remove Cena (after main-eventing 11 of 12 PPVs this year), will it lead to a portion of the regular audience checking out? That will be interesting. You mentioned Miz - I think he's in a strange position in his career. He has a very strong personality - as evidenced by an amazing appearance on Conan last night - but he's not taken seriously as a threat, despite WWE's attempts with the Truth and Morrison angles. Is he to the point where they can try to manipulate the audience to like Miz and do a Randy Orton face turn? Or, do they just keep him the way he is for now and try to build up credibility as a heel?

Parks: I wouldn't be surprised to see more and more fans cheering Miz, but that depends on what he does next; does he go into a full-fledged feud with Punk now? If so, I don't think he'll be hearing those cheers, but against the right (or wrong) face, I could see fans preferring to cheer him. But, I do think Miz has plenty of room to garner credibility as a heel, and I just attribute his lack of good work as a heel lately to WWE somehow forgetting how to book competent heels outside of Mark Henry.

Caldwell: We saw it back around Survivor Series time when Miz and Truth were treated like afterthoughts - understandably so with Rock and Cena in the mix - and now WWE is trying to rebuild Miz on a quick turnaround, so I think you're right Miz has room to garner credibility as they get back to the business of re-focusing on Miz. I assume Punk retains the title at TLC; do you see any scenario where either Miz or Del Rio (or Cena if he's added) regains the title?

Parks: Not really; the title has just been hot-shotted too much lately, and I don't think Miz or ADR are at the point where they're credible champions. Punk should retain.

Caldwell: What I found interesting on Raw was Cena reintroducing the idea of his match against Rock at WM28 needing to be for the WWE Title. That really hasn't been talked about in several months. Do you think it points to Cena regaining the title before WM28 or was it just hyperbole from Cena during his promo?

Parks: Just for something to talk about...I hope. I don't know that WWE's writing is clever enough at this point to be dropping hints like that so far in advance without coming out and saying it, or having the announcers over-emphasize it to the point where it's obvious.

Caldwell: It's similar to Swagger's eye twitch in my book - if it happens again next week or the week after, then there's something. Otherwise, it's just a one-week eye twitch. And, on that note, let's look at another big topic from Raw. Suddenly, Hunter-Nash returned to the forefront after not being mentioned at all last week. Nash gets a squash win over Santino to show he's a threat to Hunter in the ring, but no sign of Hunter returning. What did you make of them advancing the feud to a match at TLC and will Hunter return on Monday's three-hour Raw?

Parks: I always thought they were on track for a TLC match, so to me, it doesn't feel rushed. I think Hunter could return on Raw, but I also wouldn't be shocked to see them hold off his return 'til the PPV so people would pay to see the match and his return - it would just make it feel more special. James, do you think Triple H should be on Raw to help promote his match, or is his return something that should be saved for TLC?

Caldwell: I think they have to show a little to get people to pay to see the whole thing. I wouldn't have Hunter wrestle, and not even cut a promo. Perhaps more of a music video-style vignette, an intense stare down a la Hunter-Taker when both men returned to TV prior to WM27 to show Hunter is healthy, or something else that doesn't give away too much, but gets the paying customer excited for the match. As for the match itself, what are reasonable expectations for two men at nearly the combined age of 100 having a ladder match?

Parks: Not much of the use of the ladder, for starters. It'll be used as a weapon no doubt, as will others to cover up for the lack of in-ring ability at this point. But I certainly don't think either man - maybe Hunter - will be taking MITB-style bumps off the ladder here.

Caldwell: Yes, please no big bumps off the ladder. It will be interesting to see what they can do using the ladder as a prop to help tell the story. Another big item on Raw was the heavy use of Zack Ryder throughout the show. Eventually, they got around to Ryder getting a U.S. Title shot, Cena being "gracious" helping Ryder, and Mark Henry taking an AA from Cena. What did you make of Ryder's strong presence and how Cena was weaved into Ryder's story?

Parks: I didn't hate it. The story made sense for the most part, and they had to have something at stake so Cena didn't just "let" Ryder win, even if he didn't straight-up lay down for him. Also made sense that Cena would interfere in Ryder's match with Henry to help him win. I don't know if it did much for Ryder in terms of credibility-building, but then again, being all over the show makes up for not earning your shot cleanly. And by virtue of giving up his shot at the WWE Title, Cena came across as the ultimate babyface - a far cry from possibly turning heel, as had been discussed the week prior.

Caldwell: Yeah, I found that very interesting how they shifted away from the teased heel turn to Cena helping out Ryder rather than doing what was reasonable - but could have been perceived as selfish since Ryder is a popular and sympathetic face - holding onto his title shot. At the same time, they still played up the Internal Conflict aspect that has pointed to a potential heel turn. So, I think we need a few more weeks to see how this plays out with Cena's character leading into WM28 season. What do you expect from the Cena-Henry match next week on Raw? I don't see a clean finish either way, but is it a way to get back to Cena as a "scrappy babyface underdog" against an imposing heel?

Parks: It sure seems like it. Cena isn't facing an opponent where there'd be much internal conflict as far as deciding whether to stay face or go heel - Henry is the alpha heel in WWE, so by simply facing him one-on-one, Cena will look like an even bigger face. But, definitely don't put your money on a clean finish.

Caldwell: I don't think we're done with tweaks to Cena's character at this point. It's an interesting situation as they advance from Survivor Series to WM28 hype. Greg, did anything else jump out from Raw worth breaking down?

Parks: Let's move on. Stick with WWE with Smackdown, or go day-by-day to Impact?

Caldwell: Let's keep it with WWE taking a look at Smackdown. Well, we did cover last week's Live Smackdown in our Chat last week, but there were a few developments on Monday's Raw. Namely, the Orton-Barrett feud continuing and now WWE has announced the match for TLC. Is this the most under-appreciated feud in WWE based on a nice, steady build-up between two strong characters (now that Barrett has some credibility back)?

Parks: It certainly could be. WWE has done a relatively good job in putting Barrett back on the map; not only having him go on a winning streak but also developing the Barrett Barrage catchphrase, something fans can really remember him by. It's amazing what you can do for a feud when the babyface doesn't come out on top at every turn - it can actually be somewhat compelling!

Caldwell: Are you surprised by the number of losses Orton has taken lately? They're not exactly clean losses, but still, he isn't one to take a handful of losses in a row. Do you think it's WWE's way of helping heels gain some credibility and now viewing Orton as such an established star that it doesn't matter if he wins or loses in non-title situations?

Parks: I hope that's the reason; and I hope WWE learns from it and applies it to other faces.

Caldwell: Elsewhere on Smackdown, WWE has added a Chairs Match stip to Henry-Show at TLC. I think we've seen enough of them in the ring together without props, so is this just a way to get a final, watchable match out of them?

Parks: I think, given the heavy use of chairs in this feud from almost the time it started (when Henry used a chair to break Show's ankle), in this context, it makes sense. But like Hunter vs. Nash, it could be a way to make the match better by adding some plunder.

Caldwell: Plunder! Word of the Day selection there. Anything else noteworthy from the blue brand leading into tonight's episode following last week's live show? Other than whether Hornswoggle cuts a promo, of course.

Parks: Ugh, no. Just no.

Caldwell: Indeed. All right, let's tackle last night's Impact leading to Final Resolution on Sunday. The standout for me was Robert Roode spitting on Dixie Carter and the intensity of the exchange. I still remain opposed to the sudden change to Robert Roode and break-up of Beer Money, but I thought that segment stood out for good reasons. I don't know that it necessarily made anyone excited to see Styles challenge for the top title on Sunday, but that's another story about TNA needing to drop several PPVs from the line-up. But, back to Dixie-Roode-Sting. Your thoughts on that segment and where they're going with the program?

Parks: I just think using Dixie smacks of desperation and cheap heat, two things I don't think Roode needs to rely on this early in his heel run. I do think the intensity was there, but too often TNA is so tone-deaf that the intensity is ramped up to 11 when it shouldn't be, so the intensity I don't think would've had much affect on the average viewer.

Caldwell: That gets to my other disclaimer that I don't think Dixie should be on TV at all as a TV character, as I think there are way too many non-wrestling figures on Impact. I think the cheap heat you referenced is a product of TNA rushing into Roode's heel turn and having to ramp things up very quickly rather than letting it play out and steadily building. That's definitely an indictment of the booking and it stems from that Bound for Glory period when Hogan pulled a David Stern and vetoed Roode's babyface title victory, leading to what we have now. (You knew I had to slip in a Stern reference sometime during the Chat.) What else stood out to you from Impact?

Parks: Well...you had Abyss vs. Samoa Joe in what sure felt like a match that sealed Joe's fate as someone who has no discernible future in TNA. Do you think Joe can recover and still be a factor in TNA down the line, perhaps with different management, or is it time to explore other options (WWE perhaps)?

Caldwell: I don't see how he recovers unless someone comes into the Creative picture who has Joe's back and wants to push him as a top star. Otherwise, I think he's just going to be a mid-card player slotted in matches where they need someone to fill in for an opponent they're pushing. It's unfortunate. I don't see a WWE future for him at this stage of his career, either. That ship probably sailed a few years ago. Joe's just another guy on the TNA roster now.

Parks: Sad too, because I can see him being effective in WWE OR TNA. We got the next chapter of the Devon/Sons of Devon/Pope storyline after what feels like months of treading water. How did you think that angle played out, with Pope inviting Devon's sons in on the beat-down?

Caldwell: I felt like, "Didn't this feud end months ago?" And, they have a Tag Title match on Sunday, so I don't know what's going on here. I just hope someone doesn't end up being handcuffed to the ring ropes again.

Parks: True. I predict things will come to a head on Sunday as it pertains to that storyline.

Caldwell: All that leads to an overall question about the PPV. Do you see one, maybe two reasons to order this PPV or is this completely skippable?

Parks: I think the Roode vs. Styles ironman match may be enough to entice a few workrate fans, but I think their previous PPV match, somewhat of a disappointment, may have left a bad taste in some people's mouths.

Caldwell: And, the lack of a discernible reason to get excited about Styles's title quest is a hindrance. I think those workrate fans already order/watch most TNA PPVs, so I don't see TNA drawing in a larger audience beyond what they typically draw. Maybe the Jarrett-Hardy cage match or Storm-Angle? Is there enough there to draw in TV viewers who typically don't order PPVs?

Parks: I mean, Storm vs. Angle has been set up okay, and people might tune in to see what crazy stunt Hardy does off the cage, so I think there are more reasons than usual that fans could find to buy this PPV.

Caldwell: And, that my friend, could be a small victory for TNA. Greg, anything else TNA-related worth breaking down before a plug for Gonzo & The Greg this week?

Parks: Actually, even before the G&G plug, I got a story for you: during this chat, I was checking my e-mail. I received an e-mail from someone named "Mark Henry." In the subject line, it simply said, "READ," in all caps. Well, by God, James, when Mark Henry tells me to read an e-mail, I do it! Turns out, it wasn't the real Mark Henry, just Spam. But I didn't want to take any chance.

Caldwell: That's an awesome story! I'm with you - if Mark Henry tells you to read an email, you should read it. Even if it's a chain email or a poorly-written limerick. So, does Henry make this week's Top 5 list on G&TG?

Parks: It's quite possible - this week, it's our top five best and worst feuds of 2011. Henry has done some good work, but is it good enough to make our top five? Find out this weekend!

Caldwell: Excellent. Greg, always enjoyable chatting with you. Have a great weekend!

Parks: You too, 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!