Miz Vs. Barrett At Wrestlemania

Wade Barrett is feuding with Miz over the Intercontinental Championship. This is a pretty basic feud. Nothing too amazing about this. Given Miz's success at previous Wrestlemania events, a new Intercontinental Champion should be expected. I really don't care which guy wins the title. It's not exactly like Miz hasn't held a title in years or has done something major since his last title reign. As for Barrett, it isn't like the WWE is booking him in interesting title feuds. Very dry midcard title scene.

Could this match have been better? I think this is one of those matches that could have used a few more guys involved. The feud between Miz and Barrett just isn't personal enough. Who do you add? How about Bo Dallas and Kofi Kingston. Bo Dallas is not worth a singles match with Barrett at Wrestlemania. Kofi Kingston is stuck only being relevant when chasing titles or in these multi-man matches. But when you combine it all, you might have something more than you currently have.

Chris Jericho Vs. Fandango

Chris Jericho has had some pretty big matches at Wrestlemania. Aside from being in the main event as Undisputed Champion at one time, he faced CM Punk for the WWE Championship last year and has faced Shawn Michaels at the big event. This year? Fandango. Fandango is going to make his in-ring debut at Wrestlemania against Chris Jericho.

Is this a waste of Jericho? Putting over talent is one thing, but is Fandango even going to get anywhere? I can see him eventually getting a run with a midcard title, but I don't see why you need such a big debut just to eventually get that. I could understand using Jericho to build up the credibility of a guy like Dolph Ziggler. I could understand a feud with Fandango any other time of the year. And if they would actually make this some kind of "Dancing With The Stars" storyline, I could understand that. But I don't see any of that happening. Why bother building up Fandango's credibility? Just let him entertain with his gimmick. And this storyline isn't really even that interesting. Fandango is mad because Jericho made fun of his name? That leads to a Wrestlemania feud?

Should Jericho win the match at Wrestlemania? I would say so. Even if Fandango wins, what then? He wins a World title before the year is up? I don't think so. Where would a guy like that go after beating Chris Jericho at Wrestlemania? Up or down? I don't see him getting pushed too much harder after that. No matter what, this is quite possibly the weakest Wrestlemania opponent Chris Jericho has ever had. I'm not taking a shot at Fandango's wrestling ability, but when you compare his credibility and star power to those other names Jericho has faced at Wrestlemania, Fandango is the weakest.

Cena About To Turn Heel?

That main-event segment on Raw looked like it was going to be the typical confrontation between The Rock and John Cena. Cena was going to talk about needing to win and The Rock was going to say he will beat Cena, again. But there was that one moment where Cena just gave out that vibe that he had enough. He tried to make it sound like The Rock did not beat him last year. He acted like he was tired of playing this character that led to him failing last year. He was actually whining. For that one brief moment, you could feel a heel turn coming.

Should this feud with The Rock finally lead to that Cena heel turn that many fans want? Part of the storyline last year was that Cena might have to turn heel to be able to beat The Rock. Kane tried to do it. Will they finally do it? I could imagine the kind of finish you had at the second Wrestlemania encounter involving The Rock and Austin. Austin turned heel and got help from Vince McMahon. But who would be in Vince's place today? Vickie? Doesn't seem big enough. Cena could turn heel by cheating in his match at Wrestlemania without interference, but it would be bigger if he aligned with a heel figure to drive the point home. Is Cena really willing to do anything to win this rematch and prove he can beat The Rock? If so, would he be willing to make a deal with the Devil? That's the question they should play with.

What Do You Do With A Midcarder Like Sandow?

The usual problem you see with midcarders in recent years is the WWE not giving them good feuds and storylines. In the case of Damien Sandow, you have a different issue. This guy has two feuds going for him right now. At one time, it looked like his partnership with Cody Rhodes was over and he would feud with R-Truth. Recently, it looked like the two were back together and were getting involved in a diva angle with The Bellas. Last week, it looked like they were going back to the singles feud with R-Truth a little.

What would be the best feud for Sandow around now? His feud with R-Truth isn't worthy of Wrestlemania, mainly because it just got started and isn't really that big of a deal. You can say the same for certain other feuds brewing, but a tag-team feud would at least be able to feature more guys, and possibly some divas. That could get more people involved on the card. That is what they should be trying to develop properly right now. Unless they plan to add R-Truth to that match, they should just give him something else to do. Sandow and R-Truth can always revisit their feud after Wrestlemania.

This is just another example of inconsistency. Why is it bad? What do you want your fans to get excited to see? You start going down one path, the fans start getting attached to it and get their hopes up, then you kill it and move on to something else. And then you try to get back on the previous path too? And you end up not developing either feud as best as you can. I spoke before about the potential in a feud between R-Truth and Sandow. What the WWE is doing is definitely falling short. The WWE needs to pick a path for their midcarders and stick to it.

Where's The Rock?

He won the WWE Championship and left with it. No, I am not talking about CM Punk. I am talking about The Rock. He will defend the title against John Cena at Wrestlemania. But he hasn't exactly been around much.

Luckily for the WWE, Wrestlemania season means that they have other big feuds going to draw attention for Raw. Punk/Taker and Triple H/Lesnar have been getting a lot of attention in recent weeks. And yet, the match most likely to be the final match on the card is still the WWE Championship match. Does it really deserve it? There is still time for the WWE to build it up better. The feud between Cena and The Rock last year definitely had better build.

Just for the sake of thinking about how things could have been, had they gone with a triple threat and threw in CM Punk in the match, John Cena would still have someone to do promos with and work against during those weeks when The Rock could not be there. I think it is better than these hype videos they are airing and having Cena beat random jobbers. With the way things are now, the feud can get stale with Cena always bringing up the same idea every week. The Rock ruined his life and Cena will turn things around at Wrestlemania. Okay. What else? Hype is there, but it doesn't seem like they have a good way to develop this until Wrestlemania. Luckily, there's not much time left now.

Ziggler And Big E Langston Vs. Kane And Daniel Bryan

Dolph Ziggler doesn't seem to be lost in the shuffle anymore. It also looks like Kane and Daniel Bryan have something else to do other than feud with each other. Putting it all together, Ziggler and Big E are teaming up to feud with Kane and Daniel Bryan.

Should they have stuck with a feud between Kane and Daniel Bryan? The tension between the two was definitely coming up again. They could have gone in that direction. Even though it can be seen as a little bit of inconsistency, having a tag team feud is better. And if Ziggler won't feud with Jericho now, this tag feud is better than nothing. And the fact that AJ Lee has that history with both Kane and Daniel Bryan makes the story more interesting and more worthy of Wrestlemania.

As far as AJ Lee goes, it just goes to show that the only reason why she did seem out of the way for a while was because Ziggler had no real direction for himself. You can see that she is a lot more relevant now. She hasn't been getting lost in some multi-diva feud. Attention is on her in this tag team storyline. That is one of the great things about being in the periphery.

Triple H Vs. Brock Lesnar II

The development of the feud between Triple H and Brock Lesnar this week added to the disappointment of this year's Wrestlemania season. Triple H was forced to sign the contract without knowing what the stipulations would be. They had the potential to make this count for a lot and be a really interesting match.

First of all, the actual segment last night wasn't too horrible. Paul Heyman did his job of selling that he and Lesnar could put Triple H in a match where he could be at a real handicap. Heyman also sold the idea that Lesnar could get something important if he should win. Triple H attacking Heyman and the security was fine. It was the reveal that was the problem for me.

What kind of match is it? It's one of those regular matches where anything goes. That's nothing too special. I am not saying that they should have run with some idea where Triple H had an arm tied behind his back, but an I Quit match wouldn't have been bad, or something like that. That is how you could have made it an interesting type of match.

And what is on the line? Triple H's career. Triple H's part-time career is on the line. Really? Triple H is pretty much semi-retired already. He may wrestle slightly more than The Undertaker, but he is pretty much in the same position, albeit he has a corporate job. They really could have made this count for so much more. How about control of the WWE? How about taking it all away from the McMahons. That would up the ante. Hearing it just be the career was a little lackluster. It doesn't make me eager to see what happens.

The "Anti-Diva" Divas

The "anti-divas" some people sometimes talk about are those women in the WWE who do not follow the typical mold of what a WWE diva is. They are not these glamorous models. They are often very different. Chyna, Serena, and Kharma are some examples of women who fit that profile in the WWE. There is that difference in looks, style, and gimmick.

The main reason to bring up this kind of diva is to point out that the WWE isn't entirely against them being successes. They are not all just credible jobbers meant to put over the glamorous eye-candy centerpiece. Chyna is a great example of that. When the diva division really started, Chyna was not exactly being poorly pushed. She was a part of DX. She soon found herself mixing it up with the men. They ran with her. After Sable left, Chyna was one of the top stars of the diva division, as a periphery diva. Even though she did eventually get a run with the Women's Championship, she was still booked as someone more dominant than the typical diva. You look at Kharma, she most likely would have followed in the path of Chyna to some degree. She was not going to be the centerpiece and she would not easily become a credible jobber. She would have been a periphery diva, if they had kept her or brought her back. Even though Serena did not last long in the WWE, the gimmick she had would qualify her as an anti-diva. They most likely would have turned her into a credible jobber after that debut angle, but they never got that far.

What would you call Mickie James? She definitely isn't exactly like Chyna and Kharma, but she wasn't exactly in the same league as Trish Stratus and Michelle McCool. But that isn't really the point I want to bring up. In terms of how the WWE runs their diva division, or used to run it back when it had not collapsed, women pushed in the manner Mickie James was are not meant to succeed. These are the women pushed to put over the centerpiece and act as filler when the centerpiece is not around or getting something else. Outside of that, they get poor treatment. With that kind of treatment, it's easy to see why so many female wrestlers would not become too over throughout the history of the diva division. Only periphery divas would succeed at that certain level. And Mickie James was not a periphery diva. And she was not the centerpiece. She was a jobber to the centerpiece and an interim centerpiece. What did she do with that career? She made herself into the most over diva on the roster. Does that make her an anti-diva? "Anti-diva division" diva? She definitely beat what the diva division was about. In the end, it wasn't exactly a gimmick. And while the WWE may not have a problem with some women having unique looks and gimmicks from the standard diva, they just might have a problem with the wrong women getting over and failing to succeed with the women they do want to be over. Mickie James was definitely not the typical story, but no one talks about it.

The People And Wrestlemania

This is quite possibly the worst Wrestlemania season I can remember. The build just isn't too great. Rather than complain about everything, I am just going to talk about the feud between Jack Swagger and Alberto Del Rio.

This is a storyline that had potential. I was expecting to talk about it in a different manner than I am going to. Mr. Whiskers, Zeb Colter, is an interesting character. Jack Swagger is a great wrestler in the ring. The gimmick works perfectly against Alberto Del Rio. What is the problem? It seems to have lost momentum. Instead of really developing the storyline further, you have Del Rio and Ricardo mocking what Colter and Swagger are doing and the WWE investing more in making Swagger look credible than push the gimmick. The gimmick can get stale fast. I feel this thing needs a really big segment. If they want to be edgy and get people talking about this, they have to want to push the envelope. This is not a situation where one person is blatantly being taken advantage of to put over someone that is having trouble getting over. This storyline is meant to get people talking and create a big title feud for Wrestlemania. Last year's title feud between Sheamus and Daniel Bryan was rather dry, but this one definitely has more of a storyline to it. There is still time to deliver hard, but they need to do more than just have Swagger beat people and say his line during Colter's repetitive promos.

Alberto Del Rio, on the other hand, is connecting well with the fans. For a face turn that came randomly, he is playing the role well enough to connect with the fans. This is not one of those feuds where they need to go overboard to humiliate him. I still think they can aim more at Mexico, or any other foreign country or politician that does not have the same philosophy the heels in this storyline are pushing. The storyline is getting too stale. I don't think it will hurt Del Rio, but it may not deliver as best as it could for Swagger.

Start Rotating Diva Centerpieces?

Maintaining the current mediocre standards of the diva division is not a good option. Putting all the emphasis on just periphery angles is an option, even though they may not aim for that. Third option, how about they start rotating centerpieces?

TNA rotates centerpieces. The WWE has been rotating centerpieces on Smackdown for over a year now. It isn't unheard of to rotate who your top star is for your company, show, or a certain division. With how centerpieces have been getting injured, leaving the company, and flopping for the last few years, you might make the assumption that they have been trying to rotate centerpieces in their diva division ever since Trish Stratus left. That is not true. There have been women the WWE wanted to develop to follow in Trish's place, but situations would frequently come up that spoiled things. And interim centerpieces are not the same thing as true centerpieces. Those are the filler when the centerpiece is not around. The WWE has definitely not tried to run a system of rotating diva centerpieces purposely.

What would be good about this? The woman holding the title would be getting pushed well while she is the centerpiece. They will try to push that woman to really deliver. Layla's last title run was long, but it was pretty poor in terms of how she was featured. Natalya's run with the title was a little better than that, even though it wasn't too long. What happened after she lost the title was an example of the women holding the title not necessarily being featured well. Eve and Brie Bella had poor title reigns while Michelle McCool was still centerpiece. In a system where they are actually trying to properly feature the woman holding the title, you would have much better title feuds. That might even lead to the WWE raising their standards for match quality. Maybe.

What don't I like about this kind of diva division? I really don't like the idea of rotating centerpieces in most situations. If someone proves that they deserve that position, they should have it. The only times they should lose it are when they are leaving the company, are no longer capable of bringing the results you would want out of them, or someone else comes along who shows even better potential. But there is more to it than that. Look at how Smackdown is run now. They may no longer have one top star who frequently dominates the main scene whether or not he's holding the title, but rotating stars is not hurting anyone. Sheamus had a long run with the title. Is he buried now? No. Is Daniel Bryan? No. Even Randy Orton is not completely buried. All of these guy's had a run as top guy of Smackdown in the last few years, but Alberto Del Rio is currently the top guy. The men's division is an open division. A lot of opportunities all over. Look at the problem TNA has with rotating centerpieces in their women's division. Women who looked great at one time now are treated as jobbers or can't even get featured at all. And you want to bring that to the WWE diva division? That is a closed division. Far less opportunities than in the men's division.

Of course, the WWE is much better with pushing their women with periphery angles than TNA. Even the lowly periphery positions are better than not being featured at all. Rosa may be paired with lower-midcarders, but she still can get featured without actually wrestling. If the WWE makes it so that the woman losing the centerpiece position still has a periphery angle right after to keep her interesting for a while, this might be a fair way of handling things. When the WWE gave up on pushing Maryse as centerpiece of Raw's diva division, they did move her off to a periphery angle with Ted DiBiase. Better than nothing. If I remember correctly, at the time she quit, she still was being featured well on NXT.

Should the WWE do this? It would give more women better opportunities, even though the woman who proves herself better than the rest may end up being treated just like the rest. Then again, this could be a way to audition these women to see who should be the next centerpiece. Of course, you can't expect these women to deliver when being pushed mediocrely. Push them well. I don't think the WWE is likely to do all this. I still think they want to pick the woman they want and develop her to succeed in the same manner they did with Sable and Trish. And as shown with Michelle McCool, you don't have to make that great connection with the fans prior to getting the most important position in the diva division. They will develop you to make that connection. With the power to do that, why should the WWE settle for rotating women who will always still end up losing their momentum?

Last thing, the return of the Bellas seem to have some fans thinking that truckloads and truckloads of former divas and female wrestlers from all over will be coming to the WWE. Really? Really? Unless the WWE plans to run an all-diva brand, they cannot possibly bring back as many women as people may think. And what do you do with these women? Like I sometimes say, 9 out of 10 of the women in the diva division can be female wrestlers, but if that one woman left out is an eye-candy diva pushed as the centerpiece, the diva division is still alive. And when the WWE fails with the centerpiece, you can see what happens to the quality of the division. To put it simply, bringing back all these women or hiring whoever will mean nothing if the WWE's overall goals are the same.

Rhodes Scholars And Bella Twins Return

A little bit of midcard inconsistency is showing. Cody Rhodes and Damien Sandow have reunited as a tag team again. Was it necessary? Both seemed like they had some kind of angle going for their singles career. They had something to get them utilized individually. And now, they are back as a team again. If nothing else, it isn't like the tag division had a lot of other teams the company seemed interested in pushing, especially in the title hunt. Rhodes Scholars might as well win the titles before breaking up again. Aside from The Shield, they are the top heel team right now.

The Bella Twins also made their return. Instead of debuting a female wrestler or bringing one back, the WWE chooses to bring back two eye-candy divas. Unless the WWE plans to push them as the centerpiece of the division, these two will not help get the diva division back on its feet. They will help with periphery matters. They returned in a segment involving Rhodes Scholars and Kaitlyn.

Combine it all together. What is the WWE likely to do with this situation? Title feud between one of the Bellas and Kaitlyn? They can also develop Cody's face turn by having him eventually side with Kaitlyn over the other heels. They could have done this without bringing the team back together, but it could make for a better storyline, if they follow through. It would be nice to follow through with something.

Less Wrestling, More Periphery?

If the WWE does make up its mind to take the diva division in a new direction, another option would involve only making a few small changes from what you have now. You currently have a diva division where nothing great is happening in the title matters due to a lack of a centerpiece the WWE wishes to develop as their big star. You have more going on in the periphery. You have these romance angles and dancers all over the place. Why not completely drop the Diva's Championship and put all the effort in bringing out more worth with these periphery angles?

You might have a hard time imagining this kind of women's division. Go back to how the division looked prior to the WWE bringing back the Women's Championship when Sable was still around. The division still had women, but they weren't fighting for a title. They were mostly valets. This possibility on what to do with the diva division I am talking about is just like that. There are two main differences. First, you would be getting rid of the title to get there. You're not going to be hunting for a centerpiece to put that title on. You are just going to try to let the women you have entertain without too much wrestling. Second, you have more women now than you had back then, including all those women in NXT. And they are still signing more. On the one hand, that might complicate things by having so many women. On the other hand, so many women might make things more interesting, if utilized correctly.

The obvious problem some fans might have with this kind of division is dropping the title. Does it really need to go? Fact is, look at how they are treating the title now. It's pathetic. Getting rid of the title would not entirely get rid of matches involving the divas. They would be wrestling about as frequently as you see them now. There would just be more focus on storylines and character development for them, which would be worth more in connecting them with the fans. The title would just get lost in the shuffle in this kind of division lacking a centerpiece. Just retire it.

The main improvement between doing things this way and the current way they are handling the division is that better emphasis on letting these women just go out there and entertain, even if it can't be in the ring. That is still using them productively. It is better than what you have now. Right now, that emphasis is not there in a proper way. A lot of divas like Layla and Aksana are stuck without a great angle. The women who are currently getting better angles are not getting as much focus as they could. Actually putting that emphasis there would be a great improvement.

Should the WWE really run this kind of division? Aside from losing the title, another big issue is that female wrestlers would have to settle for getting storylines over more time in the ring. That is kind of unfair, but it is not like this kind of thing has never happened in the company before. In the end, a chance to be used productively might be worth more than just seeing mediocre time in the ring. Is the WWE likely to do it? Aside from getting rid of the title, it is almost the division you have right now. They just can't put in the effort to make it happen. If they do start making the decisions to run this kind of division, that would be like turning back the clock to what you had with Sable. From there, if the right woman comes along, they might be able to resurrect the same diva division they created over a decade ago. Until then, they need to change what they have now.

Keep The Diva Division As It Is?

Since it is likely the WWE will never be able to get the diva division back to where it was a decade ago, how about looking at some of the ways they can decide to run the division from now on. The old plan no longer seems to be successful. I'll start with talking about the most obvious option. How about trying to maintain the kind of diva division you have now?

First of all, exactly what kind of diva division do you have right now? You have no true centerpiece. The Diva's Championship is still around, but the WWE is not developing good title feuds and is not even featuring the woman holding the title too well. You do have some periphery angles going on. Both female wrestlers and eye-candy divas are getting featured there. Natalya had her angle with The Great Khali. Kaitlyn has an angle going with Cody Rhodes. AJ is aligned with Ziggler. You have various other women acting as valets. You still have things going on for the women.

The pros of this kind of division? I would say periphery angles are often more interesting than title feuds. The centerpiece is frequently getting hyped up to be the best and may seem over-pushed at times. But periphery divas do not need to be pushed that hard and sometimes get more interesting gimmicks or storylines. There is a lot more potential there for entertainment. With the quality of matches deteriorating from what it used to be, that might be even more reason to just go with periphery angles. But when title matters may help a storyline seem more important, the Diva's Championship is there.

The cons? Where do I start? I'll probably end up forgetting something wrong with this division. Let me just say the reason that pretty much kills all that I said was good about this kind of diva division. Yes, the women are getting periphery angles, but development is still poor. Natalya's angle with The Great Khali looks to be over. I don't have too much faith in Kaitlyn's romance angle with Cody Rhodes, since the midcard is such a mess. And even AJ Lee is stuck in mediocrity right now. Moreover, what is the point in having a title when the woman holding it will not even be featured properly? The guys holding the midcard titles may sometimes job for stretches, but they are still wrestling on the major shows. Can't say that for the women.

I don't think the WWE should be settling for just keeping the diva division like this. I don't think they will. You're not developing any women properly to be stars. Even if they can't recreate Trish Stratus, they should be trying to make new stars in the division. Once they are made, you have to feature them to deliver. That is not going on well enough. They will have to get it going soon.

Big Show Vs. The Shield?

Big Show's match at Wrestlemania looks like it is starting to take shape. Big Show is currently involved with Sheamus and Randy Orton in their quest against The Shield. Those three against The Shield at Wrestlemania?

Does this mean Big Show turns face? It might happen down the road. As of right now, they are still pushing it as Big Show not getting along with Randy Orton and Sheamus, but not in the comedic way you have with Daniel Bryan and Kane. That actually adds more to the story. Not only are faces trying to find a way to knock off the undefeated heel stable, but the heel giant also has issues with the heel stable. Will he work with the faces? Can the faces trust him? Definitely makes things more interesting. And yet, I don't think this is necessary. You had a good story going just by whether anyone could knock off The Shield at Wrestlemania and who that team would be. I'm sure they could have found something else for Big Show to do. If they really wanted to turn Big Show face, have him revisit his feud with Mark Henry. Start developing him for a midcard title feud. They had options.

What really bothers me is that this takes Ryback out of the match. It looks like he might be starting a feud with Mark Henry, but that could have been done right after Wrestlemania, right after Ryback finishes with The Shield. Ryback deserves a match with The Shield at Wrestlemania more than Big Show. They have cost him more than any other wrestler they have attacked. It made perfect sense for this to be his Wrestlemania moment. It obviously won't make or break the card, but it can kill the interest some fans were having in this feud.

The Undertaker Vs. CM Punk At Wrestlemania

CM Punk won a match to earn the right to face The Undertaker at Wrestlemania. If CM Punk cannot be involved in the title match between The Rock and John Cena, which I would rather he would be, facing Taker is not a huge step down at all, win or lose. As for The Undertaker, CM Punk is obviously a worthy opponent. The issue was only whether or not he would be good to go in a big singles match. If not, having him be part of a tag match against The Shield would not have been a bad idea. As they said in their promo on Raw last night, they have a ton of momentum. Their undefeated streak is obviously not as impressive and hyped as The Undertaker's, but it could have been the start of a good feud. Nevertheless, singles matches are worth more. They are more personal. CM Punk and Taker should be able to put up a good feud.

Going back to what I said yesterday about Big Show and Mark Henry possibly needing to consider retiring, why didn't I say the same for Kane? That is a guy who has been there since I started watching in 1998, just like the other two. I just feel Kane's character has more versatility and is more intriguing. He can be heel one minute, then face the next. He can dominate, then turn around and job. And his credibility is never really ruined too much. It might get annoying to see him become a comedy character now and then, but that is part of his versatility. I just feel there are more options for him than Big Show or Mark Henry.

Sleeping Monsters Heading Into Wrestlemania

I once had a math professor who said, "Casinos are not in the business of giving money away. They are in the business of making money." Simple, but true. That statement is obviously not as specific as it could be on how casinos make money. But the idea is what was important.

How does that work for the WWE? Let me give my version of that same idea. The WWE is not in the business of featuring wrestling. They are in the business of making money. I'm going to be a little more specific. They make money mainly through creating stars and featuring them. These are the people that the company surrounds with hype. These are the ones they use to draw viewers and crowds to the arenas. These are the ones they use to sell merchandise. These are the ones they want to get over and connect with the fans, to put it simply. From there, everything else falls into place.

A lot of fans might forget that simple idea. The WWE isn't in the business of just pleasing wrestling fans or those fans who like to make Youtube videos to rate every match out of five or ten. How much money does pleasing those critics actually make for them? The WWE's main purpose is developing stars to connect them with the fans and featuring them in ways that work. If that fails, they can just rely on hype from all the years they used to be great. They can bring in former huge stars or celebrities. They can pull little stunts to get them big attention. In the end, it's still the creation of stars that keeps them rolling.

What does all that have to do with Mark Henry and Big Show? Not a thing. Looking at those two former World Champions, they seem somewhat lost in the shuffle heading into Wrestlemania. A lot of guys are in that position, so there is no need to believe Mark Henry and Big Show are in trouble. As far as short-term plans go, what can you really do with them? If one turns face, you might as well book them to face each other. They had a big feud a while ago. Should they get involved in The Shield's match at Wrestlemania, or some other multi-man match? Big Show just held the title a few months ago and Mark Henry had a lot of momentum with his return. It would be a shame to see it all unravel in the coming weeks to mediocrity.

Thinking about long-term issues, is it about time these two retired? These guys have been around since I started watching actively about fifteen years ago. What more can you really do with them? How many more times can Big Show feud with John Cena? How many more times will Mark Henry get injured? It would be hard to replace them, especially Big Show, but the WWE needs some former top names to retire to open up opportunities for other guys. I still think they can feature midcarders a little better than they are, but I know having so many former World Champions on the roster can make things hard. Shouldn't they be a higher priority? I just feel Mark Henry and Big Show should start thinking about retirement or semi-retirement.

The Truth Vs. The Scholar

I am a believer that good midcard feuds will help the WWE get back on the right track. It won't fix everything, but there are a lot of guys with potential and uniqueness the fans might be drawn to. On the road to Wrestlemania, the WWE has actually taken some time to formulate a midcard feud between Damien Sandow and the returning R-Truth. These are two true midcarders. Neither have held a World title in the WWE. And this definitely has potential.

You have two guys with two very clear gimmicks and styles. Just having them feud against each other is one thing. It isn't too hard to book. You can see the eventual tag match between Sandow/Rhodes and R-Truth/Kofi. After that, the 1-on-1 match between Sandow and R-Truth. After that, move on. But how about you drag it out just a little more? Have these guys actually have some real promos against each other. As I said, they have clear gimmicks. And these gimmicks kind of go against each other. R-Truth is a rapper and Sandow is an intellectual. Make use of that. R-Truth has also been a bit crazy in the past. They can even bring that in. Needless to say, this can be a very entertaining feud, if they allow these two to really do more than just attack each other and wrestle.

All that being said, I don't think they will do it. I remember seeing potential in a feud between Jinder Mahal and Ted DiBiase over a year ago. Nothing good came of it. And considering what time of year it is, even easier to lose focus on this midcard feud. It doesn't need to culminate at Wrestlemania, but it can bring some entertaining segments. Let's see how long until it ends.