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 Chat on TV Wrestling. Greg, I say we start with TNA since they have a PPV this weekend. What was your overall take on Thursday's Impact and what's your evaluation of TNA's final sales pitch for Sunday's PPV?

Greg Parks: I was a little underwhelmed. Like on Raw this week, there wasn't a whole lot to remember after the show aired, partly because the lack of Sacrifice hype, which really stands out after how hard TNA pushed Lockdown last month; but partially because an RVD vs. Bobby Roode title match doesn't exactly set the world on fire. They didn't really do too much this week to fan the flames either. The main event was convoluted by involving Jeff Hardy and Mr. Anderson along with the stipulations.

Caldwell: I know there are only so many matches you can put together before a PPV when the main event is already set, but I didn't like the idea of RVD's title match spot on the line in the main event (especially after he agreed to a poor stipulation for the match) because I don't think it's believable that TNA would book a change to the main event literally minutes before going off the air on the PPV lead-in show. It basically became an excuse to have a four-way match, but I didn't like the set-up. And, the result was RVD standing tall (on the ladder), so you know Roode is getting his tainted win on Sunday. Even in the post-game show on TNA's website, RVD basically talked about just wanting to punish Roode in the ladder match and barely mentioned a title on the line. So, it's basically "order this PPV if you're into ladder matches and RVD." Putting aside Roode-RVD, did you feel they advanced anything else leading into the PPV?

Parks: Not really; I don't even think the tag champs were on the show. This is one of those PPVs that needs to be eliminated (that Dixie talked about in a recent interview) if this is the kind of "hype" they're going to put into it. What was your opinion on the overall PPV hype? Was it passable?

Caldwell: I thought the biggest indicator that this PPV is skippable was at the very end when the spotlight was on Abyss re-emerging after a three-month absence. That's a TV angle for next week's Impact, so I thought that message was very loud and clear to the home viewer. Overall, I thought they did the minimum, which is usually the case on the lead-in show for a PPV they're not concerned with. You touched on the tag situation perfectly, and I'll add that the #1 contenders Daniels & Kazarian were more concerned with "exposing" A.J. Styles than a Tag Title match on Sunday. And, the storyline development took away from focusing on the PPV semi-headline match of Kurt Angle vs. Styles. So, it was just clear by the end of Impact that this PPV is in the way. What did you make of the Styles "reveal" and doctored/misunderstood photos involving Styles & Dixie Carter?

Parks: I didn't really get it. In the back of my mind, more than just seeing what they had over A.J., I was specifically looking for how Daniels could've held this over Kazarian, since that's how this whole thing started. They kind of addressed that, saying Kazarian was covering for A.J. or something like that, but in the end, it still didn't add up to me. As for Abyss, I took that more as TNA was setting up the intrigue of how Abyss would factor into the Sacrifice PPV, so I guess they wanted to tease the viewers with that before Sunday. Was the A.J.-Kaz/Daniels reveal worth the payoff, in your mind?

Caldwell: I didn't feel the payoff was worth it. They started and stopped the storyline a few times (similar to Devon and The Pope's feud over Devon's sons a while back), so I felt they lost some steam along the way, then revealing some obviously doctored photos that will be cleared up in the coming weeks didn't seem like a strong payoff. You're right about the origin involving Kazarian not really fitting the reveal. Sure, they can justify it and try to tie it back together, but it would feel like if WWE all of a sudden revealed the Mystery GM - sure, they could find a loose string here or there to tie back to the introduction, but there's no way the whole picture could make sense. Do you see this storyline turning into a method to re-introduce Dixie on TV or just focusing on A.J. as he tries to "clear his good name?"

Parks: I hope it just focuses on A.J.; the last thing we need is more Dixie Carter/authority figures on the show. It's just strange timing since Styles is facing Angle at the PPV, but you'd think he was taking on Daniels or Kazarian (both of whom are challenging for the Tag Titles). Therefore, the matches they're actually in at the PPV were put on the back-burner on the go-home show. I probably would've saved the reveal for after the PPV. James, those were the big three items from Impact this week...anything else to touch on there?

Caldwell: I definitely would have saved those items for after the PPV. But, TNA seems to be going with a structure now of trying to "reset storylines" after PPVs, which will create weeks like this week where they payoff storylines before the PPV. The real payoffs should be provided via in-ring matches at the PPV, which has been the downfall of TNA's PPV business when they haven't shown the ability to build to those moments 12 months out of the year. We can hit on a few other smaller items before jumping to WWE - what did you think of the Crimson-Morgan blow-off with Ray taking out Morgan and the Knockouts match of Velvet vs. Tessmacher? And, for that matter, Bully Ray all over the show?

Parks: Ray I was fine with because he's awesome. The Crimson-Morgan blow-off that wasn't really a blow-off makes me think that when Morgan comes back, they'll have to have the REAL last match in that feud. But I won't complain if they just move on and don't revisit it. Velvet vs. Tessmacher was fine, just a way to put Brooke over one last time before her PPV match.

Caldwell: I'm with you on those points. Final predictions for the PPV - any title changes out of Roode-RVD, Joe/Magnus vs. Daniels/Kaz, Gail-Tess, and Devon-Robbie-Robbie?

Parks: I really don't see it. I guess I would put the chances of Joe and Magnus losing and Gail losing higher than the other two.

Caldwell: The only one I could see happening is Robbie E. taking back the TV Title. Otherwise, I don't see a title change. All right, Greg, let's move on to WWE with a Raw that, well, happened. What was your overall impression of Raw in-between PPVs?

Parks: Aside from Paul Heyman's reappearance and the Smackdown PPV title match being changed to a four-way, this was kinda like Impact: Not a lot happening. The tag match at the top of the second hour was good, but there wasn't a whole lot else to get excited about. Part of that is because Triple H and Lesnar both had the night off and Cena was only on via satellite, so it's not like every week is going to be like this.

Caldwell: The show definitely came across uneventful and I thought flat by the end of things. They were trying to force this idea of John Laurinaitis being so powerful that you don't mess with People Power (Cole tried to force in a final line about it at the end of the show as Bryan was submitting C.M. Punk), but I don't sense the viewers buying into it. Do you think they're building to a final bow for Laurinaitis as authority figure at the PPV (and perhaps the Raw after the PPV), or will this still be going strong well after the PPV?

Parks: It seems early to give up on Johnny, especially after his recent WM win just over a month ago that put him in charge of two shows - if they wanted to get rid of him, why book him to be in charge of two just a month earlier? But the way this storyline is headed, as much as they shoved it off to the side and had Cena address it this week, I just don't see how you can keep him in charge when his predecessors were relieved of their duties for less.

Caldwell: Right. I think if Cena didn't throw in that line about recommending Laurinaitis's termination after the PPV, I would think this will continue on for a while. But, I see a scenario where they relieve Laurinaitis of the Smackdown duties in order to have Teddy Long back in charge of Smackdown ahead of a Draft. Meanwhile, Big Johnny and Triple H continue to war over control of the company. What do you expect from Hunter returning to Raw this coming Monday?

Parks: I think he'll be there more to address the Lesnar situation than the Laurinaitis situation. That's not to say he won't say anything about Laurinaitis...like Cena addressing Ace's job status, Triple H, as COO, has to address the elephant in the room as to Laurinaitis and his future. That said, I'm thinking if not this week than soon, we'll see Triple H and Heyman square off in a battle of promos, which should be interesting for several reasons. James, how does Triple H keep Laurinaitis on the job, after Johnny allowed Lesnar pretty much to break Hunter's arm?

Caldwell: I'm kidding when I say this, but perhaps they build to No Way Out where Hunter gets his hands on Laurinaitis, then build to Money in the Bank where Big Show gets his hands on Laurinaitis, and they go on and on forever where everyone who has a beef with Laurinaitis ensures the Board doesn't fire Laurinaits until he or she gets a piece of Big Johnny. Seriously, though, I don't know how much longer Hunter's character can keep Johnny on the job unless they come up with a deal where Johnny is holding something over Hunter (maybe an A.J. Styles angle where he has pictures!) or is holding something over the fictional Board. Also in the Big Johnny mix on Raw was C.M. Punk, who I thought really didn't fit in that opening segment. I thought it was just a lazy way to get to Punk-Tensai. Overall, what did you think of Punk's role on the show interacting with Laurinaitis and the latest on Punk-Bryan for the title at the PPV?

Parks: I felt the exact same way: Punk came out and basically said nothing. It was one of the more transparent ways to set up a main event, and as the resident Torch Smackdown recapper, I've had to sit through MANY of those opening talking segments that set up main events. There didn't seem to be a lot to advance Punk vs. Bryan, but maybe WWE is saving the hardcore hype on that match for Smackdown (ha!) - after all, Punk could infuse some energy into Smackdown. How do you think they should build Punk vs. Bryan? Should Bryan challenge the "best in the world" moniker too, should it simply be about the title, or should A.J. get involved in there somewhere?

Caldwell: Yeah, A.J. needs to make a Raw cameo! I don't know what they do at this point with just one week to go. They could focus on their respective journeys to WWE through the independents, internationally, etc., and try to make it seem like this is a big match for their careers, but will that connect with anyone who isn't already ordering the PPV? Perhaps, perhaps not. I don't see them going the BITW route, though, as I still see WWE going back to Punk-Jericho after Over the Limit. It would be wondrous if they focused on the title - Bryan could make a boastful claim about being a World Title and WWE titleholder in the same year or something - but I don't see WWE doing that. It just feels like WWE has so many other priorities right now. As for Tensai's role in all of this, how long do you see WWE continuing to focus on Tensai in a main-event position before they take a different approach with the character?

Parks: Good question - WWE is known to be stubborn with such things when they can't get them over. So I don't think WWE will abandon Tensai any time soon...I see tweaks or an attempt to move him around (to Smackdown?) before they completely give up on it. Wouldn't surprise me to see them attach him to Laurinaitis's hip either in the next few weeks/months, to see if Johnny's heat will transfer to Tensai.

Caldwell: On a similar note, Greg, Brodus Clay had one of his first (perhaps his first-ever?) long-form match on TV working with The Miz and the crowd seemed to sit idly waiting for more dancing and music and happy-fun-times. Do you think Clay - with this gimmick - is stuck as a 90-second-squash-match act or will he eventually develop into a wrestler who can have a longer-form match and not lose the audience?

Parks: It's funny to think that four minutes is "long form" in this day in age, but oh well. He lost the audience on Monday night, but it wasn't a particularly hot crowd anyway, so I don't know how much to read into that. I'm more concerned with Ziggler and Swagger, who have been stuck with Clay and aren't gaining anything by jobbing to him. What do you make of this whole Clay vs. Vickie stable feud, and who is benefitting from this, if anyone?

Caldwell: I don't think anyone is benefiting right now. I think Vickie's character has lost steam, Ziggler is not positioned as a main-eventer anymore, and Swagger is Swagger. So, they're kind of riding the middle not moving up and down, then Kofi Kingston & R-Truth get thrown into the mix and WWE books the standard three-minute TV "victory" for a heel with enough chaos to fill an entire show to distract from the face champ taking a loss. To me, it points to the larger problem, especially when WWE re-writes the shows over and over, that these type of matches have a feel of "Let's get this over with to fill a quarter-hour, make sure no one gets hurt by the booking, and try to figure it out next week." But, "next week" never comes because something else pops up. So, once a group of guys are on that back-burner, I think it's really difficult for them to get back to an important role because the process repeats itself over and over. Ziggler is trying to keep himself in viewers's minds by bumping like a madman, but I don't think it's enough right now. Now, they're in a Tag Title match at the PPV next Sunday - do you think it's an opportunity to move up or is everyone just stuck for right now?

Parks: It seems they're stuck. I see no evidence that anyone is going to be moved up, but that's the thing with WWE: They could come out next week and have Ziggler put a string of wins together and challenge for the title at the June PPV. I prefer the Sheamus way, where on Smackdown earlier in the year he was winning and winning and winning, solidly defeating guys even without a storyline, then the Rumble rolled around and he won. All of a sudden, he was positioned as very strong and didn't seem like a fluke win at the Rumble because of how he had been booked for the time prior to that.

Caldwell: Great point - if WWE never starts a guy on a streak or just builds some momentum, they can't re-position Dolph Ziggler as a WWE Title contender all of a sudden and have the audience take it seriously. Another Monday "putting it off 'til next week" just delays the process. Speaking of Sheamus, we can talk some Smackdown events that occurred on Raw. Right here in this Chat last week, Greg, we discussed WWE not changing Smackdown title matches recently even when there were some opportunities. And, right here in the Chat, we discussed what Orton and Jericho could end up doing at the PPV. And, we've been talking about potential four-way title matches in the Chat for over a year going back to the Four Tenors of Christian, Orton, Henry, and Sheamus. So, now, they change the Smackdown title match to a four-way and throw Chris Jericho into the mix. What did you make of the change and the new title match of Sheamus-Del Rio-Jericho-Orton?

Parks: It certainly adds star power that was missing to the match, because even as they've pushed Sheamus as a big star, they're still not all the way with him yet. Same with ADR, who they've gone back and forth on too often. Putting established main-eventers like Orton and Jericho in the match makes sense from a business perspective, especially considering there was nowhere else for them to really go after recently finishing up feuds, yet they're guys who if you're WWE, you want on PPVs.

Caldwell: Especially when Jericho's window is limited. And, the Sheamus-Del Rio thing really didn't have any momentum, so I think this is a good trade-off, even if I'm not in favor of four-way matches. I have two different things to throw at you related to this - (1) Do you feel Jericho's character is stale now, not necessarily through his losses to Punk, but the somewhat repetitive, "it's just part of the show" feel to his ring entrance and the overall heel character? (2) How long do you see the Sheamus-Orton tension playing out before it leads to a one-on-one match?

Parks: I definitely think Jericho is stale. He came in with so much promise but all the air was let out of the balloon when a satisfactory explanation for him messing with the crowd wasn't really explained. At that point, it just became same ol' heel Jericho. He's entertaining, don't get me wrong, but I just feel like there's more to cultivate with that character. I'm not really sure about the Sheamus-Orton tension; it could be just to establish that it's every man for himself in the four-way at the PPV. But, Orton's been out of the title picture for a while, so it wouldn't surprise me to see him inserted into things over the Summer. He'd still be a face, but I think he'd be more of an aggressive, heelish face (if that makes sense) than Sheamus. It wouldn't be a real stretch for him.

Caldwell: I think we both agreed on the Livecast yesterday that we don't see it leading to a heel turn for either - just tension between the top babyface dogs on Smackdown. Do you see a title change at the PPV or is it too early to tell before tonight's Smackdown and next week's TV to evaluate the final build-up?

Parks: Nah, I don't think the title changes hands. I could see Sheamus holding the title for a while - not as long as Punk has at this point, but it wouldn't be out of the question. Let's move to Smackdown from last week: What did you make of how they treated Daniel Bryan, given the fact that he'll be facing Punk for the WWE Title at the next PPV?

Caldwell: It seems like WWE has created two separate universes for Bryan to exist in - the random WWE Title picture with Punk on Raw and the Sheamus/A.J. deal on Smackdown. So, it seems like a case of WWE still trying to keep Bryan front-and-center on Smackdown for after Over the Limit, while not really doing anything to promote his title challenge on Raw. It's odd. I'm curious to see how they handle it this week on Smackdown, especially with the new inclusion of Orton and Jericho in the Smackdown main event scene. Meanwhile, A.J. was limited to a backstage bit slapping Kaitlyn again. Do you think WWE has moved on from Bryan and A.J., or is this just a temporary deal for A.J. to focus on her former bestie before they revisit A.J.-Bryan after the PPV?

Parks: I think it's just temporary; I can't imagine they've moved on from Bryan and A.J. I don't feel like anything was really resolved there. The point of the feud can't have been to just turn A.J. heel; that's really the only difference that has come out of it so far. I remember when everybody thought there was this big face turn waiting for A.J. on the other side of her deal with Bryan. That still may come, but it doesn't look like it'll be for a while unless someone can talk sense into her or there's an event that happens involving her and Bryan that will allow her to "see the light."

Caldwell: I think it eventually leads to A.J. standing up for herself, too, - probably after the PPV when Bryan wraps up business with Punk. Plus, they're on the No Way Out PPV poster for June, so the program must continue, right?! Elsewhere on Smackdown, Greg, there's the Big Show-Cody Rhodes IC Title feud. They took care of Show's re-match clause on Raw. What's next for Show and Rhodes on Smackdown?

Parks: I think they finally go their separate ways. They teased Show getting involved with Laurinaitis on Raw, and it wouldn't surprise me to see the consequences of his actions bear out this Friday night. We tried to come up with a list of possible IC Title opponents for Rhodes yesterday on the Livecast, but there's not a lot of options. He may have won the final battle against Show, but I don't think he won the war, so WWE would be wise to put him with someone lower on the totem pole than Cody to help him get a few definitive wins.

Caldwell: It goes back to that momentum thing we talked about from your Sheamus example last year and what would need to happen with someone like Ziggler. I think Rhodes stringing together a few wins would be a nice change of pace from playing cat-and-mouse with Big Show for three months. We'll see what happens there. Greg, anything else jump out at you from last week's Smackdown prior to tonight's show?

Parks: Nope...I'm ready to see what they've got in store for us tonight. And I'm hoping the readers feel the same way about "Gonzo & The Greg," which we'll record and post to the site on Monday. This week's top five: Gimmicks that fit the bill; in other words, wrestlers whose characters or gimmicks fit them the best, or those who played the gimmick they were handed perfectly.

Caldwell: I am very much looking forward to what you guys come up with this week. All right, Greg, we will be back on the Livecast this coming Thursday and review the final Over the Limit PPV hype in next week's Chat. Good talking to you, as always!

Parks: And, with 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!