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 off with the most-talked-about item of the week: Rock-Cena - work, shoot, a little of both? What did you think of their latest exchange and did it enhance their Mania main event?

Greg Parks: I think work all the way. It's almost romanticizing the issue by thinking it's a shoot. Do these guys get along? Maybe not. But, I don't think either man is unprofessional enough to go out and "shoot" on the other against the other's wishes. When Rock first came back, it was talked about how closely he was or would be working with Vince on his storyline, so I don't think he'd let it get away from him to this degree if we were to believe it was a shoot. Back to the actual segment: I thought Cena "beat" Rock as far as performance goes, as Rock's interview seemed to drag at times. And hopefully, this serious version of Cena is one we'll be seeing leading up to WrestleMania.

Caldwell: I think there's a certain understanding of the parameters they can operate in - Cena and Rock may not know everything the other is saying, but they know what they can "get away with" - e.g. Cena pointing out Rock's notes on his wrist. I think that could do damage, though, because it could take away some of the mystic for Rock in the eyes of casual viewers, who WWE is trying to sell this PPV to. And, by the same token, I want to see in the coming weeks how much Rock is allowed to say in response to Cena - e.g. calling out Cena on his misleading claims and propaganda about him being WWE for life because he would never be able to find full-time work at his payscale outside of WWE. So, I want to see how far the boundaries are going to stretch on the field, so to speak. I agree with you on Rock's interview dragging at times and being repetitive. Do you think that was a product of him not having much material to work with or is there some grand plan to "lower Rock" to elevate Cena?

Parks: The whole "notes on the wrist" thing is interesting. That to me says work too, because Rock is NOT a guy who would need that, and has never used that before, and it seemed, given the screen caps out there, that he was making sure he got the notes on camera so when Cena pointed it out, the fans would be able to notice. But, being a work, it sure makes the Rock look bad, and I don't know why WWE would want to do that, unless you're to buy into the fact that WWE is "getting back at" Rock for leaving by portraying him as this Hollywood so-and-so in this feud. Back to your question: To the live crowd, Rock was awesome and they were with him on every half-baked catchphrase he threw their way, but for those watching it home, it wasn't the best. He didn't really have the material to stretch it out to that length, but it wasn't the bomb that it would've been had most people tried to stretch it that long. It appeared WWE was giving Cena the opportunity to one-up Rock, and he did so on Raw. Do you think Rock will get the opportunity next week to knock Cena down a peg, or is this a WWE conspiracy to help bury the Rock?

Caldwell: You bring up something interesting about whether Rock, Cena, and WWE planned to have the wrist notes pointed out as one of those "oooh" moments to give the fans a "reason to respect" Cena for standing up to Rock, and they felt it wouldn't hurt Rock too much. I would argue it hurt his mystique, but they have some time to correct that, if they're smart. This Monday's Raw is very interesting because WWE hasn't even advertised Rock for the show other than on their event listings roster, so I'm curious to see if he's given more promo time or if they do something else with him. If he is given more promo time, I don't think Rock will tear down Cena. He might go after the same points about the cereal and phoniness and lady parts, etc. But, it almost feels like Rock is playing Undertaker and Cena is playing Triple H, where WWE is trying to elevate Cena/Hunter in the eyes of the viewers and knock Rock/Taker a bit to make it seem like the outcomes of WWE's top two Mania matches aren't 100 percent stone cold lead pipe locks.

Parks: I suppose, but I think plenty more people think Taker will win as opposed to Rock; the argument I've heard is, "well, Cena has to go over since he's the full-time guy." And I get that sentiment, and it make sense to me. Maybe the casual fans think Rock is going to win, but as protected as Cena has been over the past several years, I don't think anyone in their right mind would ever count him out.

Caldwell: And, that's something I think WWE needs to be showcasing on a regular basis - a highlight package on Cena's top moments entering Super Cena mode to overcome tough situations. We know quite well there is no shortage of material in that department! The "journey" video packages on Rock and Cena have been okay, but they could be doing more. I don't think Cena winning a four-minute match over Miz is the answer, either. As for physicality between Rock and Cena, do you think they will come to blows before Mania or continue to have stand-offs like on Raw? I almost thought they were going to blow the Mania hype having Rock land blows on Cena when they were face-to-face, but they smartly held off. Can they hold off another four weeks?

Parks: I think they almost have to. And maybe WWE can stretch things out by doing something we talked about on the Livecast yesterday, involving a third party into things, maybe someone "from the back" that Cena and Rock referred to on Monday night. I definitely think WWE holds off on Rock wrestling, but will Cena hit an AA on him? Or Rock hit a Rock Bottom? I guess it's possible, but I wouldn't endorse it.

Caldwell: I'm with you there. We also talked about the possibility of...deep sigh...McMahon returning to TV as that third-party intermediary for a "ratings save." It could be something along the lines of McMahon brought in Rock as guest host of last year's Mania and they could refer back to when McMahon was about to "fire" Cena last year before McMahon was fired himself. I don't know how they link those together, but those are two items in-play. We see it as something worthy of a deep sigh, but could McMahon add to the feud and enhance Mania in a non-match role?

Parks: No. WWE has two huge superstars in John Cena and The Rock; simply put, if they can't make that seem like a match with just those two guys selling it and they feel they need VINCE MCMAHON to come to the rescue, then WWE is in deep trouble.

Caldwell: That's for sure. The ratings picture is not pleasant right now, but, like you said, if Rock and Cena can't draw an audience, then WWE needs to re-examine their approach, not try to find a quick fix with McMahon returning to TV. Did anything else specific within Rock's promo or the exchange with Cena stand out to you?

Parks: Not really, I think we hit on the main points. How about CM Punk and Chris Jericho? They had their first real extended promo battle, but I didn't think it fleshed out Jericho's character as much as I had hoped. Did you think the effectiveness of the two in the promo masked the issues with Jericho's character, or did you see that Jericho's character as a glaring problem coming out of that segment?

Caldwell: I think Jericho had to walk a fine line of heelishly saying his 1-2-12 return was window dressing (and essentially meaningless) to get fans to want to see him lose to Punk, but not turning off viewers completely from the feud because it pretty much sent a message that he's not any different than he was before, except he has a shiny jacket. I thought about 70 percent of the promo content was good and the other part sort of had nothing to do with anything. So, I wouldn't say it was completely effective masking issues with Jericho's character, but I thought enough was done to advance their feud after having some time to explain it. Wouldn't be it nice if WWE just booked the two against each other with just a very simple premise of two very good wrestlers seeing who's the better wrestler in the ring? They seem to want to get there, but there's this extra fluff in the way.

Parks: Yeah, and I'd be more forgiving of Jericho's "window dressing comment," as you said, rendering the 1-2-12 videos (and the silent promo) as meaningless if he had actually won something since his return. He lost in the Rumble when many expected him to win; he lost in the Chamber when a lot of people expected him to win, with Punk challenging him at 'Mania; and winning a Battle Royal for a shot at the title at 'Mania with help from Cody Rhodes. So really, adding up the fact that he has no big clean wins, plus all of his hullabaloo at the beginning of his latest run meant nothing, and you're left with...well...not much.

Caldwell: Is that something Punk should point in his promos to "expose" Jericho as a fraud and a phony, like how Jericho tried to claim Punk is a rip-off? The risk they run is it could knock the match down a peg, but could Punk pull that off noting Jericho lost the Rumble, lost the Chamber, and needed help from Cody just to get a title shot at him?

Parks: Punk should only do that if they have a plan for Jericho to recover from that, say, if he wins a big match or two leading up to 'Mania, and wins it cleanly. Then he can throw it back in Punk's face and say, "see, I DO deserve this title shot!" and it also helps give legitimacy to the match by having people think Jericho can win it. He hasn't really proven much in the ring since his return so it's a risk to point that out, but again, I would do it only if you have plans for Jericho to counter that with something else.

Caldwell: I like that booking a lot. And, of course, Punk would be on commentary for Jericho's "proving ground" matches. So, that should be a win for viewers instead of them going back and forth about Dancing with the Stars and things that don't matter in terms of winning and losing a match. I feel like their issue still needs some to flesh out over the next few weeks that we can break down, but anything else from Jericho and Punk this week?

Parks: Not really. I do want to hit on the opening segment of Raw because there was just so much going on. They hyped Punk-Jericho, Bryan-Sheamus, the Long-Ace tag match or whatever is going to happen with them. Did it seem like too much to you?

Caldwell: It was way, way too much. I was not in favor of it from the beginning - Punk-Jericho ends, Bryan and Co. come out, and Jericho is made to look like a mid-carder just sort of leaving the ring with no one noticing him. Then, the camera shots throughout Punk-Bryan were of the announce table, then another non-finish, then focus on Long and Laurinaitis in the ring, then a sudden switch to Jericho attacking Punk on the ramp while Long and Laurinaitis were presumably about to have a fight. That was a poorly-planned segment that I'm surprised happened. WWE is usually very clean about these sorts of things, but too much was happening there. As for the Long and Laurinaitis issue, is this worth spending time on before Mania, or does it work out because WWE doesn't have to give away big wrestler vs. wrestler match-ups on free TV before Mania and they can use non-wrestlers to fill TV time?

Parks: It really felt TNA-esque, or at least the old TNA since even they've gotten past that stage finally. I think Long-Laurinaitis is in a fine spot before 'Mania. Without Shaq, this could be WWE's "Mania moment" match like Bret vs. Vince and Lawler vs. Cole. Plus, without MITB, it can give a handful of guys with nothing to do, a 'Mania paycheck by including them in this tag team match.

Caldwell: That's what I'm waiting for - the focus to shift to the actual wrestlers involved in whatever match is drawn up in the sand for Mania. They started shifting there with Santino vs. Otunga, but they need to get some big names feuding under the umbrella of this GM feud for me to feel like it's worth the TV time investment. As for the Hart comparison, I just hope Teddy doesn't get run over by someone if WWE runs out of ideas! We don't need to revisit that again. Also on Raw, Greg, there was the Tag Title scenario we talked about in last week's Chat possibly being saved for Mania. Instead, it occurred this week. What did you think of the match, and could it still make Mania either as a three-way, four-way, or...gasp...two-on-two standard tag match?

Parks: I wouldn't put it past WWE to put it on in some incarnation, even the one we just saw this week. That said, I don't know that they'd feature the multi-man tag match in Long vs. Laurinaitis, plus another tag match for the titles. The fact that they're getting TV time this close to 'Mania speaks well of the possibility of a match, but it could end up getting bumped to the pre-show.

Caldwell: I think one thing the Tag division has in its favor for Mania (or even the Mania pre-show) is the presence of Rosa Mendes. WWE is very quick to put the camera and focus on Rosa (over the tag champions) during intros, during matches, and during the post-match, so I could see a tag match making Mania simply due to the Rosa Effect. This can segue nicely into a little Divas division discussion. Eve had a big spotlight moment in the ring by herself to explain her heel turn. What did you make of the promo, the involvement of Kelly Kelly, and where does the actual champ, Beth Phoenix, fit into the picture right now leading to Mania?

Parks: That's tough, because Eve clearly is getting the focus, but Beth is champion, yet I don't see them on a collision course. I could see Eve playing a big role in the build-up to a Ryder vs. Kane match if they do that. That would leave Beth vs. whomever at 'Mania for the token Divas match.

Caldwell: They seem to be building toward Eve vs. Kelly in some sort of match. Perhaps they could do a tag match with Kelly and a recruited Trish Stratus against Eve and Beth, who Stratus has said she wants to face. I don't see how they connect Eve and Beth other than they're heels right now, though. But, as for Eve's promo, I thought her delivery was fine and she seemed to buy into what she was saying, but I agree with how Wade Keller described it as she was almost reciting a speech she memorized. I thought that hurt the effectiveness despite the other positives. What did you think?

Parks: Let's just say that, even though I share the sentiment of you and Mr. Keller, she still performed better than I expected.

Caldwell: I think that's fair. I will be curious to see how/if Ryder is re-inserted into the scenario. You would think he's involved somehow, but we'll see. Anything else stand out to you from Raw, Greg?

Parks: We're well over an hour into talking about Raw, so let's move on to break up the WWE discussion with some Impact Wrestling. I thought last night's show was really good, culminating with Austin Aries rubbing elbows with Bobby Roode and getting a main event (albeit tag match) spot on Impact. What did you think of the show and specifically, the use of Aries last night?

Caldwell: I thought it was about time TNA shook up the main event scene and added some new players to the mix. And, it was very well done. We've been talking about for weeks that it feels like the exact same guys rotating matches against each other that it doesn't feel special seeing Roode and Storm in the same ring together. Now, adding Aries, Joe, and Magnus to the mix is a step in the right direction. Despite his size, Aries has main-event talent, so I'd like to see TNA continue in this direction promoting Aries as a potential top star. I thought te promo with Aries and Robert Roode vowing to "sit in" on the show in protest was just okay, as I feel it can be presented with the wrong tone of being comical because no one buys it. But, what did you think of the overall night for Roode and Aries?

Parks: I thought it was very good (I don't mind the sit-in angle when used correctly, and it was here), and the best part? No one knocked Aries for his size or for being part of the X Division.

Caldwell: Yeah, where's Kurt Angle when you need him requesting two of those X Division guys for a warm-up match?! C'mon, TNA, you're slipping here! As for Angle's explanation of his feud with Hardy, what did you make of that?

Parks: I thought that was one of the weaker aspects of the show. His cartoony backstage promo before coming to the ring didn't work for me, but his in-ring promo was better. That's not saying a lot, though.

Caldwell: Do you sense Angle isn't feeling his material, TNA doesn't have any ideas how to use Angle while he's somewhat part-time training for the Olympics, or they just didn't know how to get to an Angle-Hardy feud?

Parks: I think they just didn't know how to get to a Hardy-Angle feud. I'm not exactly looking forward to the match either, knowing how often both men put themselves at risk more so than necessary in the ring. And, with a match likely to be at Lockdown? That's a little scary. That said, if they reign it in and don't do anything crazy, it could be a pretty good match.

Caldwell: I believe it's at Victory Road later this month, but your point still holds that it's scary any time they're in the ring together.

Parks: Right, Victory Road is next, but even if they fight there, I'm assuming they'll do battle again at Lockdown too.

Caldwell: I see. Yeah, I just hope they wrap this up at Victory Road, but I'm with you that I foresee a re-match at Lockdown. Given all that cage space and desire to "steal the show," that's a dangerous scenario. Another big story on Impact, Greg, was the latest from the Daniels/Kaz-A.J. Styles feud. What did you make of the gauntlet match and care to venture a guess on what secret Daniels has over Kaz?

Parks: I have no idea the "secret," but I'll say I am intrigued at the story developing as far as Kazarian kind of getting out from under Daniels's control. It's a little tweak to the usual "I'm going to have this guy do my bidding and withhold the reason he's forced to listen to me" story. Well, maybe the word "usual" doesn't belong there, but I feel like it's just a twist on what could've been a predictable story.

Caldwell: And, it seems like TNA is doing a better job with those sorts of things. The formulas are the same, but the execution is stronger. Now, it hasn't translated to PPV yet, where it still feels like everyone is going through the motions, but if they can start translating these improvements to PPV, then I will be more encouraged. Also developing nicely is the Knockouts division top feud between Gail Kim and Madison Rayne. What did you make of the Knockouts this week?

Parks: It was okay. I'm not thrilled with a heel vs. heel Kim vs. Rayne feud, but it could ended up being watchable. I'd like to see them do some lower level feuds and continue them like they seemed to start with Velvet and Angelina/Sarita this past week - though I don't know why Angelina is with Sarita and not Winter.

Caldwell: I don't want to even venture a guess, as I would be afraid of them trying to tie it back to the zombie bit with Winter. I think TNA has finally turned the corner on those sorts of things, but, still, I think we need about six months of good, solid booking and a lack of Russo Era awfulness before we say the coast is completely clear. We've talked about this before about the heel vs. heel feud potentially being a means to turn Gail face. Do you sense that's the direction they're going?

Parks: I don't get that sense right now, but for the long-term that might be for the best, especially if they're going to turn Mickie heel, which they've hinted at recently.

Caldwell: It would be interesting to see Mickie play a heel role after years of playing a face role. We'll see about that. Elsewhere, Greg, what did you make of TNA turning Jesse Sorensen's injury into a storyline with Zema Ion bragging about it?

Parks: I was a little uncomfortable even last week or two weeks ago, whenver they started doing those updates. I didn't feel any better this week. It's a fine line between updating a guy's condition and exploitation in this case, and I don't know that TNA didn't cross that line (TM TNA Wrestling).

Caldwell: That slogan was so five years ago! Haha. Yet, so appropriate. I know it's a classic wrestling angle of exploiting a real-life injury to get heat on a heel, but I'm also uncomfortable with it. Anything else stand out to you from Impact, Greg?

Parks: Nope. How about Smackdown? There hasn't been one in a week-and-a-half, and I'd rather not re-hash last week's show since it wasn't WWE putting their best foot forward with a rare live show. I was going to ask you what you'd be expecting tonight, but you've already read the spoilers! I guess we'll talk Daniel Bryan vs. Sheamus: What will be the issue, if any, between these two heading into 'Mania, and where does Randy Orton fit in?

Caldwell: I don't see WWE taking the time to build a real concrete issue between Bryan and Sheamus, especially because I don't see this feud lasting past Mania, as I think Bryan will keep focusing on Big Show or potentially Orton. So, I see something real basic between Bryan and Sheamus to fill a month of TV. As for Orton, it's hard to say until we see tonight's Smackdown and how things are presented with his comeback, especially how the announcers frame it. Plus, Orton's injury situation makes it tough to predict if he'll be 100 percent at Mania!

Parks: Yeah, for Bryan and Sheamus, just make it about the title. Bryan has it, Sheamus wants it. Right on with Orton, and with some of the other talents like Christian, Del RIo, and Mysterio; until their statuses become clearer for 'Mania, it's tough to predict the rest of the field.

Caldwell: How simple is that - just make Bryan vs. Sheamus about the title? I'm with you there. As for next week's TV with the Raw and Smackdown GMs switching, how do you think that will play out, especially affecting Smackdown with Laurinaitis in-charge, or do you need to see Smackdown tonight to better evaluate?

Parks: I don't think so, unless Laurinaitis shows up to announce matches/segments for next week, which could happen. I think we'll see a more Raw-like show for Smackdown next week with Laurinaitis once again trying to prove he's "Mr. Excitement."

Caldwell: Which should be fascinating, I'm sure. Very good. Well, Greg, we will look forward to your report on tonight's show. Also, Gonzo & The Greg this weekend. Give the readers a preview of this weekend's VIP audio show.

Parks: This week, we'll be ranking our top five greatest color commentators of all-time, after profiling the top five play-by-play or lead announcers last week. And also, I'd like to plug my Twitter account, @gregmparks, where folks can follow me as a Tweet live during Raw, Impact, and TNA and WWE PPVs.

Caldwell: Indeed. And I'm starting to collect the best PWTorch Staff tweets during shows, so you can find Greg's tweets real-time @gregmparks or after the show on PWTorch.com. Very good, Greg. We will talk again on Thursday's Livecast and right back here next week.

Parks: Looking forward to it, 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!