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 the Smackdown show you just covered here on Friday night. What was your takeaway from the show and final Over the Limit PPV hype?

Greg Parks: Remember that possible future Randy Orton vs. Sheamus PPV match we've talked about here and on the Livecast? Well, I think it took place tonight. I was surprised they gave away such a long match between the two and didn't involve Chris Jericho or Alberto Del Rio - so much of the build-up has been around all four men unable to stop themselves from interfering in each other's matches. It just confirms my suspicions that the focus of the PPV match will be on Orton and Sheamus and that it could lead to a feud soon.

Caldwell: It gets into one of my concerns for Raw moving to three hours - giving away even more big-time singles match-ups to where people won't pay to see matches on PPV when they get the same match or similar matches on free TV. But, we'll get into the three-hour business later in the Chat. Yeah, I agree that the four-way match will be focused on the Orton-Sheamus issue. Jericho just seems to be filling a spot so WWE can utilize him before he leaves for a break and Del Rio is stuck in the middle. Did the events on Smackdown lead to you to believe the World Title is changing hands or is it pretty much guaranteed Sheamus retains?

Parks: I wouldn't say it's a "guarantee" - he did get a clean win over Orton, after all. But, Orton one-upped Sheamus at the end with his RKO. Basic booking would say that Sheamus is going over on Sunday, not to mention the fact that WWE has pushed him quite hard over the past several months. James, if Sheamus doesn't win, is Orton the only realistic possibility to take the belt from him?

Caldwell: I think Orton winning in a four-way would be a little cheap, as I think when/if he regains the title, it should be a big moment. I don't see WWE going with Del Rio unless they think this is the way to jumpstart him again - basically trying to go from 0 to 60 MPH with no engine in the car. With Jericho, WWE could try to get one title run out of him. Jericho would heelishly claim all of his January promises have been fulfilled before Sheamus wins it back at No Way Out or Money in the Bank, then Sheamus faces Orton at Summerslam. But, I just think the best thing for Smackdown is to build consistency with Sheamus as champ and go into Summerslam deciding whether Orton or Sheamus should be champ leading into the fall season. Quality-wise, what kind of match do you see these four having on Sunday?

Parks: If you're talking in terms of star ratings, I would expect something above three stars and certainly nothing below two-and-a-half or two-and-a-quarter. Four-ways aren't my favorite, but you've got four good workers in there who should be able to make it...well...work. Also on Smackdown this week we had Daniel Bryan getting a quick win and one-upping C.M. Punk during and after Punk's match with Kane. Was this a last-minute boost by WWE to try to get people to believe Bryan has a shot to beat Punk?

Caldwell: I think it's two things - one is what you said trying to plant that last-second seed that the WWE Title is in jeopardy, so fork over $45 to see if Punk can overcome that wily Bryan! I think the other thing is they want to keep Bryan strong because they want to continue featuring him on TV coming out of this PPV. I don't anticipate a second match with Punk, so I think they may want to keep him near or around the World Title picture on Smackdown going forward. So, I see it as a way to use Punk to keep Bryan elevated as a heel, rather than setting up Bryan to just slide right on down the card once his match with Punk is out of the way. Meanwhile, I do not believe there was an A.J. sighting this week on Smackdown. Do you think they just wanted to keep A.J. away from Bryan this week to focus on Bryan's PPV match, or do you feel like they have moved on from the story?

Parks: There's still so much of the story to tell, I really can't believe they're moving on. Nothing has been resolved on A.J.'s end, plus Bryan left us hanging by mentioning going after Kaitlyn last week. I guess the big question is, did they take a week off from this story to plant the seed that it's over and then bam! hit us with it again on Sunday? Do you see A.J. getting involved in Bryan's match at Over the Limit?

Caldwell: Ahhhh. Yes, I could see the whamm-o happening Sunday. A.J. is out of viewers's minds (and in a storyline context, out of Bryan's mind by not appearing this week to give him a false sense of security), and then she makes a surprise return with a vengeance at the PPV. WWE did not have A.J. interfere in Bryan-Sheamus at Extreme Rules, but I think it's more likely here than it was three weeks ago. I'm not saying it will happen because WWE has held back on interference in PPV title matches recently, but I think it's more likely this time around. Greg, do you see her interfering? Also, what did you make of the Champion vs. Champion match between Santino and Rhodes on Smackdown, especially only going two minutes with Santino winning?

Parks: This one is tough - I guessed she'd interfere last month and didn't. You were right on that, so I guess I'll piggyback off of you this month and say simply, it's possible. It sure seems that Cody Rhodes has nearly hit rock bottom in jobbing to perennial comedy figure Santino Marella (his United States championship notwithstanding), but I was just happy to hear the announcers put so much emphasis on the titles during commentary of that match. Can you read anything more into Cody jobbing here to Santino - will this lead to a title unification match of some kind, or is it just Cody continuing to job for whatever reason?

Caldwell: I just found it highly inefficient. Why not save it for the PPV, give Cody some time to look dominant on offense in a 10-minute match, and then have Santino pull out an unlikely win? The only thing I can think of it's something behind-the-scenes we're not aware of because I don't see the sense in just throwing out Cody in a two-minute loss to a comedy act. I know WWE is high on Santino, but this was just inefficient all-around. I could see a re-match thrown out there at the PPV on Sunday, with Cody winning, but then they're Even-Steven. And, that really doesn't help anyone. So, I'm not sure what to make of it at this point. We'll see if there's more to it. On a somewhat related note...Zack Ryder. He loses to Bryan in three minutes tonight and he's on the PPV pre-show vs. Kane on Sunday. Do you think he gets Kane gets his comeuppance for all those months of pain and agony inflicted on Ryder, or was Ryder's loss tonight a sign of further pain and agony Sunday night?

Parks: Comeuppance against Kane? Hahahah, oh poor naïve, James. There will be pain, and there will be agony.

Caldwell: Ha! Well, it is a PPV pre-show. Aren't they supposed to give the fans a nice, warm feeling before the PPV starts? And, if Ryder were to win on YouTube, wouldn't it encourage people to order the PPV by showing WWE is in a really good mood tonight? ... No? It's Zack Ryder, you say?

Parks: I'd like to think Zack Ryder would win, but I really have no faith in WWE booking the poor guy.

Caldwell: I'm half-kidding when I say perhaps he's being punished for booking himself vs. Dolph Ziggler as the first match for WM29. But, it any event, Greg, Smackdown was light on recent call-ups/returning stars, only really featuring Damien Sandow. NXT call-ups Titus & D-Young took a loss, so that wasn't encouraging for them early in their SD run. What did you make of the newer stars who were on Smackdown and who were not present?

Parks: I guess I just figured that with the hype to Over the Limit in overdrive, those guys had to take a backseat for a week. This was a much tighter paced and focused show than last week, when we had ten matches. Good to give them a break every once in a while. Anything else from Smackdown before we break up the WWE talk with some Impact?

Caldwell: I think we'll save the Big Show well-wishes for the Raw talk. We need to devote at least two hours to Show-Laurinaitis this week to match WWE. In any event, yes, Impact. Solid show! They focused on a single issue - who's next in-line to face Bobby Roode for the World Title, had a little confusion involving Hulk Hogan (what else is new?), and built to Open the Fight Night next week. What did you make of this week's post-Sacrifice offering?

Parks: I liked it as well. One of the only items I'd complain about, and I didn't even notice it until today, was that Devon didn't defend his TV title, only a few weeks after Hogan decreed that the belt would be defended every week. Aside from that hiccup, yeah, we had the Hogan complication as far as finding a #1 contender for the World Title, but I didn't mind the way it played out. By the end of the show, James, were you okay with how they did it as well?

Caldwell: Since Devon was in the battle royal, I thought they could have done something along the lines of "Devon, you've successfully defended your TV Title five straight times, so we're going to give you a chance to get a TNA World Title shot as a reward." I would have been fine with that break in his streak of weekly title defenses. As for how things played out by the end of the show, I'm conflicted. I don't like the idea of giving away big, PPV-headlining singles matches on free TV without advanced notice (e.g. Joe-Angle & Anderson-Hardy four days after it was on PPV), but I thought the collective sum of the parts was good this week. I also felt like TNA was one-for-two following up on big events at Sacrifice. I thought Roode's show-opening promo gloating about beating RVD at his own game was the perfect way to build on his CLEAN win at Sacrifice. I didn't like the way Aries was used following up on his big win over Bully Ray at the PPV. I thought more could have been done with that potential star-making performance. They have some time to build on it, but I thought this week was critical. What did you make of those items?

Parks: I was just salivating at the tease of Austin Aries vs. AJ Styles, so you'll have to excuse me if the Bully Ray follow-up took a back-seat to that for me. And yeah, it's about time TNA gave Bobby Roode a clean win. RVD was the right guy to do it with, too. Do you see TNA giving Roode more clean wins to build him up for an eventual rematch with James Storm, or was this done just because RVD isn't on the level of some of the bigger stars so they felt they could afford to put Roode over him cleanly?

Caldwell: I can see two different views on the Aries-Styles teaser. It could be good as a way to start planting seeds so viewers have a chance to anticipate it. (Imagine that - being able to anticipate something in pro wrestling besides Rock-Cena for one year!) I could also see an argument against it because Styles is currently involved in this Daniels, Kaz, and Dixie Carter deal to where TNA has Styles's character going in a few different directions, and Aries isn't Styles's focus. But, I like being able to anticipate something, so I hear where you're coming from... As for Roode, I think it was a matter of TNA seeing RVD as Teflon, and Roode really, really needed a clean win. Plus, RVD was able to deliver on what he promised - he got in his "cool moves" - and didn't take a pinfall loss in the process. And, they really needed their champ to have some credibility heading into their big Slammiversary PPV next month and the first live Thursday night show in a few weeks. Greg, do you think Roode-Storm is the Slammiversary main event or will they go a different direction?

Parks: I think they'll go a different direction and hold off on Storm's return. They've teased it a bit in video packages (the week before anyway), but I think they could throw some combo of Hardy/Anderson/etc. in against Roode to give him another big win before Storm returns to save the day. James, anything else from Impact worth discussing before moving on to Raw?

Caldwell: I keep thinking King of the Mountain for Slammiversary, which would be another way for Roode to retain and get a relatively clean win without someone having to take a pinfall loss. I think we have to touch on some big Knockouts news this week. Brooke Hogan will be behind-the-scenes overseeing the KOs and also on-screen in a Karen Jarrett role, according to Hogan. What do you expect from TNA's new KO division hire?

Parks: Jeez. I was hoping we'd be able to ignore this. I think it shows just how clueless Dixie Carter is based on the quotes in the press release related to Brooke, as well as hiring her AND Garett Bischoff, the son of Eric Bischoff. I don't know how anyone with half a brain can look at a situation like that and NOT automatically assume they've got their jobs because their daddy is a high level exec in the company. Quite frankly, it's insulting on many levels.

Caldwell: It certainly had to be addressed with TNA making this out to be a huge deal, buying into their own hype. All right, Greg, let's move on to Raw as WWE counts down the days of two-hour shows. We talked at-length about the three-hour change on yesterday's Livecast, but any printed thoughts before we jump into specifics from Monday's Raw?

Parks: Bad, bad, bad idea. Just bad. I think most fans would agree, so I don't think we need to spend a lot of time defending our viewpoints. As for Monday's Raw, let's start at the top of the show with the Triple H-Paul Heyman promo battle. I wrote a blog earlier in the week about why I thought the promos were fascinating on a number of levels. James, what did you think of the exchange, and do you think it helped increase the anticipation for the return of Brock Lesnar?

Caldwell: I did not like the segment. I did not offer any instant analysis in my Raw report because I needed to process a lot that happened in the segment, but I've come to the conclusion that the negatives outweighed the positives. First, the positives. I really liked the Heyman-Hunter dynamic, and they showed great chemistry. They could have been arguing over whether the sky is blue or green and I would have been engaged. Plus, Heyman is terrific in his con-man/legal role. (It makes me wonder if there will be a storyline reveal that Heyman never was Lesnar's rep and he returned because he knew Lesnar doesn't watch Raw since he's a "country boy who doesn't own a TV.") Back to the point on the negatives outweighing the positives. I thought Hunter's promo went too far putting down Lesnar and discrediting Lesnar as a BA, I think WWE has way over-done the "us/the company vs. everyone else" storyline to the point of eye-rolling, and I felt they took away anticipation for Lesnar's return, making him seem not-as-special. Greg, do you agree or disagree on some or all points?

Parks: I'd agree on the WWE vs. The Universe point. Combine this with John Cena's rah-rah speeches when feuding with the Rock, and it does go overboard as far as WWE putting the brand before anything else. And I do agree that, to a certain extent, Triple H tore down Lesnar more than he should've. But I also think Heyman did a nice job pointing out that Lesnar is a fighter and when he fought, it upset people like Hunter. So it wasn't a total loss from that angle. Plus, the verbiage and wording of the promos were really well done, as was the repetition in Hunter's. Did Heyman's retort to Hunter save face for Brock at all as far as making up some ground after Hunter put Lesnar down in his promo?

Caldwell: Hm. Good question. My mind goes to accounting (it shall never leave me!) putting both sides on a ledger to see how it balances out. Hunter tore down and dismissed Brock, but Heyman restored Lesnar. So, is it a wash? Or, was Heyman strong enough to counter Hunter's damage? I may be trying to support my own argument, but I feel like the result was Even-Steven, which may be considered a victory when Hunter's character is involved! ... I think the bigger problem is WWE is so wrapped up in the "us vs. everyone else" speeches and storylines built around corporate control that they're missing out on building up big-time matches between big-time stars on big-time stages. Now, they may be building to a Lesnar-Hunter match-up on a big-time stage, but I feel like they're chipping away at that stage to where Lesnar-Hunter (or any other big-time Lesnar match) won't be as big as it could have been. I feel the same way about Rock-Cena - sure, it drew 1.3 million buys with international factored in, but could it have done 1.5 or 1.7 or even 2.0 million buys without the damage done to Rock and Cena along the way? I think that's my big-picture concern with the Hunter-Heyman deal. (I've written another blog in the Chat!) Greg, when do you anticipate Lesnar returning to TV? Or, is it too early to tell?

Parks: Too early to tell, but I think it'll be a while yet. Probably June. Let's move on to Big Show's segment where he was fired by John Laurinaitis. This segment has drawn a lot of different reactions from fans. I'm on the side that didn't like it - it was too awkward (and not in the good, Office-like way) and way too drawn out. I didn't think it made Big Show, a babyface, look like a strong face at all. And then WWE kept hammering this home with replay after replay like the segment contained the second coming. Were you more positive on the segment than I was?

Caldwell: I'm with you. It felt like WWE chop-blocked Show and worked over the knees for about ten minutes while he sold on the mat. It also fit into my big-picture concern on WWE enamored with these corporate-driven storylines that they hurt a big special attraction like Big Show in the process of trying to get heat on Laurinaitis. I think the better business move would be building up Big Show as a big star in anticipation of big matches to utilize however many years/matches/bumps he has left. I don't see this helping Show or business. As for Sunday, Greg, do you think Show interferes in the Cena-Laurinaitis match? And, if so, does he KO punch Laurinaitis to get him "fired" and then a new GM (or Teddy Long) re-hires Show? Or, does he become a reluctant hired gun for Laurinaitis to "get his job back?"

Parks: I like your analogy to Show selling the leg for 10 minutes. Certainly was as painful to watch. I think WWE would go with the hired gun angle to get his job back - we saw just how desperate he was to be a WWE Superstar (since, you know, that's what is so important to these wrestlers), and it would make sense for a heel like Laurinaitis to exploit that. So if he does interfere, I think there's a higher probability that he helps Laurinaitis than hurts him. I know on the Livecast you said your initial thought was that he'd help Cena - do you still feel that way?

Caldwell: I have to start with my prediction that Cena-Laurinaitis is the main event on Sunday. I don't see the title matches getting top billing over that match. Therefore, does WWE want to close on a happy note delivering on what was suggested in the final segment on Raw that every loophole is covered and Laurinaitis faces the wrath of Super Cena, complete with Big Show KO-punching Laurinaitis leading to Long re-hired to Smackdown and Show un-fired? Or, does WWE want to close the PPV with Cena destroying and toying with Laurinaitis for about 10-15 minutes before Show reluctantly helps Big Johnny in a "shocking swerve!" for the PPV audience? Lately, it seems like WWE has gone the happy-ending route (e.g. Rock over Cena in Miami and Cena beating big, bad, Brock last month). Do they change it up here? I feel like the tipping point is they continue to be high on Laurinaitis and they just invested an entire show on him. They couldn't possibly have him "fired" now, right? So, I'm leaning - just a little - toward Big Show helping Big Johnny, changing my initial stance. Looking at the final PPV hype, Greg, what are your thoughts on the show-closing segment with Cena and Laurinaitis and looooosers?

Parks: I certainly felt like a loser while watching it. This was unbearable John Cena turned up to about 100. It's everything people hate about the Cena character put on full display for everyone to see. I'm sure the excuse is that it appeals to the younger Cena fans who think it's funny (and the live crowd, which I guess this went over pretty well with). But it's one of those segments that treats the fans as having low IQs and just makes you hope nobody else is watching you watch wrestling at that moment. Was there any saving grace to that segment James, or was it all bunk?

Caldwell: I thought it was total bunk. And, I must have been so distracted that I erroneously referred to Cena's "looooser" bit from Dumb & Dumber instead of Ace Ventura in my Raw report. I've watched those movies countless times, so I figure Jim Carrey's movies just run together in my head. ... I think another angle is the segment was so unrealistic and made Cena look like a chump. Big Johnny tried to tear apart Cena's arm on Raw two weeks earlier, but the first time Cena had a chance to get his hands on Laurinaitis again, he decided to crack jokes and do weird voices? If wrestling is supposed by a simulated fight, Cena would have needed to have been restrained by security guards to ensure he waits until Sunday to get his hands on Laurinaitis. I think writers are so enamored with writing promos that they don't consider how unrealistic some of these scenarios are. There was so much wrong with Cena's promo, but, like you said, it played well to a very general, casual audience that got wrapped up in the live event experience that they just kind of went along with it. Unfortunately, that's all WWE will see.. .. By the end of Raw, Greg, what did you think of the overall PPV hype, and is there any way to justify a recommendation of this PPV with a Punk-Bryan match included, or is there simply not enough here in total?

Parks: $55 or $60 is a steep price to pay for Bryan vs. Punk, which is the only real guarantee on the show. The undercard hasn't been developed well so there's nothing there you can point to and say, "hey, at least THAT has a chance to be good!" I just don't think there's a lot to get excited about in the Four-way either. So I can't really recommend it at this point, but then again, I wouldn't have recommended TNA's latest PPV based on the card ahead of time, but it turned out to be one of their best in a while.

Caldwell: I have a feeling this PPV will feel like a three-hour Raw at times (downtime, thrown-out-there matches to fill time, and video packages in-between matches). I think we will soon see many PPVs feel like that when Raw moves to three hours, rendering the PPVs more and more skippable. Red flags, Greg! Anything else from Raw worth breaking down before we see what happens Sunday night?

Parks: Not really, but I will plug this week's Gonzo & The Greg: It's the inverse of last week's topic, that being the top five gimmicks that didn't suit the wrestler, or, gimmicks that didn't fit the bill. I actually think this will be easier than last week, gimmicks that fit perfectly with a wrestler. This will be posted sometime before Over the Limit on Sunday.

Caldwell: Excellent. Speaking of Sunday, we currently do not have a post-PPV Livecast scheduled because this doesn't feel like a big-enough PPV, but if something major happens during the PPV, we may hop on the Livecast for a post-game show. So, we will alert readers accordingly. If not Sunday, Greg, then we will talk again on Thursday and right back here in the Lounge next week. Always good chatting with you!

Parks: And with you, 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!