Grading Triple H

This will probably be the last "grading" entry I write for a while. I like using it to analyze these superstars, so I might mention it here and there, but I won't devote an entire post to it. Since this all really became a topic during Daniel Bryan's feud with The Authority, and I already graded Daniel Bryan when I brought the topic up many weeks ago, I might as well end it with Triple H. In his mind, he is certainly an A+ player. But how does he really measure up?

Triple H has been pushed as an A+ player. He was the centerpiece of the company at one time. And he hasn't exactly been buried ever since John Cena took that spot. Those few times over the years where John Cena ever took a slight depush, it was usually because Triple H was getting the spotlight. You can even see Triple H in a better position than John Cena right now. You can say that the kind of career Triple H is getting is a cross between being John Cena and being Vince McMahon. He has managerial power, but he isn't exactly completely retired. In terms of career, you cannot deny he is an A+ player.

I have been a Triple H fan for years. I didn't like him during his DX days. I liked him when he was The Game. In recent years, I am not as big of a fan. I still like the guy, but he can be a bit much. He is great on the mic. It's easy to have that confidence when you are in the position he is in. He isn't as entertaining as The Rock. Moreover, some people criticize him for talking too much. As for wrestling ability, he is solid. The Pedigree is one of my favorite finishers. He can definitely play great psychology in the ring and tell a great story. Yes, he doesn't pull of 450 splashes, but I am not going to criticize him for that. He can look and act intimidating for a guy that is not exactly a monster. He definitely has the ability to connect well with the fans. All that being said, I won't say he is an A+ player in terms of critiquing him. He does have his limitations, which I pointed out. I don't think it would be fair to grade him all the way down there with Alberto Del Rio and Kofi Kingston. I give Triple H an A-.

How about when it comes to actually bringing results? You would think that a guy that sometimes gets booked better than the current centerpiece would be the kind of draw a centerpiece should be. People have said some interesting things concerning Triple H's drawing power. He spit all those bottles of water and he never drew a dime. He was never the top star of the company. He was the guy that worked with the top stars of the company. Ratings didn't exactly soar after Austin left and Triple H was pushed as the top star. People can make the argument that Cena draws in the children. He annoys so many others, but the kids love him. Can you ever make that argument with Triple H? Was there ever a fanbase that would be less likely to support the WWE if Triple H was not there? He has been injured before. He has taken breaks before. There has never seemed to be an outcry for his return. He usually gets a good reaction when he comes back, but I wouldn't say he draws in the viewers. However, fans don't seem to give him the mixed reactions that face Cena gets. I would say that Triple H is more well-liked than Cena. It could be nostalgia from his days in DX, but nostalgia from Cena's days as a rapper hasn't exactly helped him. Triple H has that better overness. That is why I will not grade him lower than Cena. I'll give him a B+.

I have been grading Triple H as a wrestling performer. Technically, he also represents management. Should I go a step further and grade how he is doing in that respect? I don't think I should. Main reason why, Vince McMahon is still around and you can't be sure how much of what Triple H wants to do is actually getting through. Will the WWE be better under Triple H? Worse? Time will tell. Right now, I would give the overall direction of things a C+.

Changing direction completely, let me talk about the women. When I talked about the diva division, I said it was unfair to hold the division by the same drawing standards as you would the men's division. The WWE has never put equal emphasis on the diva division as they do the men's division. You can talk about Trish vs. Lita in the main event of Raw, but Rey Mysterio vs. Matt Hardy for the Crusierweight Championship was also a main-event match, for Smackdown. Was that division really treated as a top draw? Yeah? Where is it now? Point is, how about TNA's women's division? TNA does not run the same philosophy as the WWE. People always say that TNA treats their women better. And it isn't just empty talk. Knockout matches and segments have been known to get the highest ratings on some nights in the past, without even being in the main event or other hot spots. They feature women in main-event matches a little more often, without it being an extension of men's storylines, which is what you would sometimes have in the WWE, like when Lita won the Women's title from Stephanie McMahon with The Rock, Triple H, and other guys also involved. They had a PPV special featuring just the Knockouts last year. There are better standards in TNA for their women. Are the standards equal to that of the men? I wouldn't say that. There are more men than women, so it would be crazy to make them completely equal. In comparison to the WWE, however, they are better. TNA has relied on their women to actually draw for them, like they do everything else. You can say they are desperate for something to work out and take them to that next level. Should the centerpiece of the KO division be held by high drawing standards? No. Keep in mind, TNA rotates their centerpieces. That kills off momentum. They shoot themselves in the foot. When TNA does settle on one centerpiece for their men's division and KO division, then those individuals should be held by those high standards of needing to be more than just over. Until then, there are better standards for TNA's women's division than the WWE's.

Grading Alberto Del Rio

For most of his career, Alberto Del Rio has been pushed as an A player. If he wasn't involved in a title feud, he was usually either involved with some other top star or out with an injury. Without two World Championships, it is no surprise that he is now being pushed as a B+ player. And it also doesn't help that he didn't really get over, as many people would jump to point out.

How would I critique Alberto Del Rio? I am a fan of this guy. I honestly think he has tools to be great. I like his submission finisher. He pulls off a great range of moves. And I think he has a great character. I like how he sounds on the mic. I am aware of the criticisms some have about his mic skills. Moreover, you might also criticize his look, although I think it fits his character. He isn't exactly young. How would I grade him? I gave Kofi Kingston a B+. I think Alberto Del Rio is worth more than that. At the same time, I have trouble really giving him an A-. Let's just leave it at A-/B+. Don't you just love seeing that kind of grade?

How would I grade the results Del Rio has brought? Obviously, he is no A+ player. He isn't that over. But I wouldn't say he has not connected with fans at all. I still remember riding on the subway and seeing ADR's logo scratched into the bench. But that's pretty much the same as one Cody Rhodes fan clapping, isn't it? He has shown sparks of connecting well with the fans here and there. And when he does eventually retire from the WWE and goes back to Mexico, I can imagine him getting treated as a big deal there. Problem is, the WWE's main audience isn't in Mexico. I would give him a C.

Whenever I have "graded" a wrestler in the past few weeks, I have tried to also include a little discussion about other aspects of how you should be analyzing their careers, efficiency, and productivity. I didn't just want to drop a ton of my personal opinion. I was hoping to say more that you can take away with you when judging these wrestlers for yourselves. When I talked about John Cena, I talked about the centerpiece of the company needing to be a good draw, not just be very over. When I talked about Zack Ryder, I was talking about a guy who may not have had the wrestling skill and potential to earn a better career, but he produced the overness to deserve it and the WWE did not give it to him easily. It was a sign of the times. When I talked about Batista's return, I talked about WWE-produced successes being pushed as A-range stars struggling to bring those kind of results these days. When I talked about Kofi Kingston, I went on a tangent about stars not being very over not meaning no one cares, which is a generalization some people sometimes make. When I talked about AJ Lee, I said a lot about the differences between analyzing the men and the women. I probably could have said more, but I didn't want anyone's eyes to start  bleeding. What more can I say about Alberto Del Rio?

How does overachieving and underachieving work in terms of all this grading lingo? If you have someone being pushed as an A-range player and he has A-range potential and talent, you would expect him to bring A-range results. When he does not, that is underachieving. On the other side of that, a B+ player might be bringing you A-level overness. That is overachieving. I think analyzing and critiquing the type of career a worker is getting, his efficiency, and his productivity can make it easier to discuss which wrestlers are the overachievers and the underachievers. 

Alberto Del Rio is an underachiever. This is coming from someone that likes him. He has had a great career, he has potential, and he does try, but he just hasn't gotten the job done. Whom do you blame? The fans? Can't really blame them. They cheer for whom they like. The WWE? I think they have made mistakes in trying to make Alberto Del Rio look so great. They should have tried to make him look interesting through his gimmick and storylines more. Nevertheless, I still think Alberto Del Rio could have succeeded. And he didn't. It just works that way sometimes. I am not going to say he deserves better than the B+ career he is getting now.

The Reality Era Is Here

During his in-ring interview segment with Michael Cole on Raw, Triple H seemed to have ushered in the "Reality Era". Seems like a promo he should have done back in 2011. I remember the term being used since all the way back then. It seems even more official now. What will make this era different from what you had before?

Start with the top star. Will John Cena continue to be the centerpiece? I have mentioned many times in the last few weeks that John Cena is currently taking a rest from bigger matters. I have also said that guys like Daniel Bryan may deserve a better chance to be pushed as centerpiece. I brought up the idea of separating the centerpiece from the face, so you can still have John Cena doing all the charity stuff and talk shows and being awarded for it with solid pushes, while the guy actually connecting best with the fans gets pushed as top star. I am looking for change to happen. I still don't think it is guaranteed that Cena is out of the main spotlight on a consistent basis for good. Who will get pushed as the top stars in the Reality Era? Vince and Triple H's goons? Or the fan favorites?

The tone also seems to have changed. Vickie Guerrero was not exactly too PG in her promo on Raw. Batista was his usual self. At the same time, you had Scooby Doo coming out. The WWE has tested the limits of family-friendly entertainment for a while now. Will they be doing that even more now that they are embracing this new era? I don't like it. Yeah, I don't exactly want my nephew, who sometimes watches wrestling when I'm watching it, to be hearing the word "bitch" too much. But it's more than that. What the WWE is doing is just arrogant. They want to have everything. They want to appear to be family-friendly entertainment, but then they do things where you pretty much need parental guidance. It is not simply suggested you have parental guidance, you need it. Some people had a problem with Daniel Bryan getting destroyed by Triple H last week. They say Triple H went too far. I didn't even bother bringing the issue up. It didn't bother me in terms of going too far. I just thought it lasted too long and it wasn't believable that no one would come out to help Daniel Bryan in all that time against just Triple H. But it's just another example of the WWE testing the limits. It irritates me.

What does this mean for storylines? Will they be taking advantage of real issues more often to make storylines out of them? Will they try even harder to make people think what is going on is real? Will injury angles look more realistic? The reason a lot of people bought into Cena's injury a few weeks ago, including me, was because of how awkward the whole thing was. Usually, an injury angle would actually make the attacker look strong. That injury angle, if it was an angle, looked like it was just dumb luck that Cena got injured like that. And what does this mean for larger angles than that? For the sake of argument, let's say CM Punk walking out was a work. It was part of a plan. The WWE sure fooled a lot of people. They got them to believe it was real. But will it pay off for them? Will it draw? Will it cause big buzz when CM Punk returns to get a ton of viewers? That is the question for all the storylines they try to sell as real. Will it draw?

Tie it all in back to John Cena. Let's say they keep him as centerpiece. Will changing the tone of the product and how they approach storylines change him? A lot of fans hate Cena for being this family-friendly guy. If he was more edgy, would that help? If they did more storylines about his personal life, would that make him seem like more of a normal guy? It would be pretty funny of things change all around John Cena, but the WWE keeps him exactly the way he is.

Grading AJ Lee

No diva on the roster has been pushed as well as AJ Lee since 2012. She has been getting an A career. What is stopping her from getting that A+ career? What is stopping her from being pushed as the centerpiece of the diva division? If you were to go onto some message board on the Internet and ask that question, they might start dissecting AJ Lee to see what is stopping her from having the WWE rebuild the division around her. The issue is that the WWE wants eye-candy divas to be the centerpiece. There is not anything necessarily wrong with AJ. Of course, being top periphery diva is not bad. It is not hard to imagine that you can have a periphery diva being pushed better than the centerpiece. What makes the centerpiece the A+ player then? The division is actually going to revolve and develop around her. Periphery divas add extra flavor to the division, but you can have a great periphery diva getting angles in the men's division and no centerpiece or a mediocre centerpiece when it comes to actual diva storylines and feuds. That is what you have seen with AJ Lee in the past. Even during this current period of pushing her dryly, she is still featured better than any one diva in the division.

Let me look at AJ's efficiency. Many view her as the savior of the diva division. Is that based mainly on her talent and potential? Or how the WWE has been pushing her? She has been extremely fortunate to run with a gimmick for as long as she has. And pushing her as a heel is better than leaving her as a generic face. Enough of critiquing her treatment. Can you tell I don't want to critique her? Can you trust a Mickie James fan to be impartial? This is the woman many said was going to be the next Mickie James. AJ hasn't exactly overcome being pushed as a credible jobber to succeed, but enough of that. Wrestling ability. She obviously had wrestling training prior to coming to the WWE. She demonstrates a wide range of styles. I like that she uses submissions. Let me talk about execution. I said my main problem with John Cena's wrestling ability was his execution, not necessarily the number of moves. And I'm not really drawn into AJ Lee's matches. She looks like a preteen running around the ring. You can say that is more her look than her actual wrestling ability. I think it is somewhat related. Your build will influence how well you perform. Some people criticize large wrestlers for wrestling boring styles a lot. What do you say about small wrestlers? If she incorporated more cruiserweight-type moves into her arsenal and pulled them off well, I might be able to buy into her better. Let me talk about her look. A lot of fans love her. She is cute. And creepy. I would like to see them push her as a normal diva again just to see how she would conduct herself and look. There is no going back now. She isn't absolutely horrible on the mic. People praise her "pipe bomb" against Total Divas as her best work. As I have said before, her execution of that promo was fine, but the message was an issue. Not going to criticize her for that. Some of her promos when she was a psycho face were a little awkward. Her overall charisma? She doesn't come off as natural to me. That is my only real criticism in that regard. She can show various emotions. She has some energy to her. She has some wit. But where would she be without the gimmick and being given the creative focus she has been given? I would give her a B+. And just to put things in context, there is no diva on that roster I would grade any higher.

Before I go into analyzing AJ Lee's productivity, let me just say a few things about grading how well divas are connecting with the fans. When I graded John Cena, I said there had to be higher standards when looking at the results the centerpiece of the company is bringing than you would have for the other guys. You are not hyped that hard on a consistent basis just for the sake of getting over. You are pushed that way to draw. I would not hold the centerpiece of the diva division by those same standards. No centerpiece of the diva division will ever be pushed as hard as the centerpiece of the entire company. Trish Stratus wasn't. If the centerpiece of the diva division was so vital, you would have had one at all times and never enter a dark age. And you would never rely on a woman that cannot connect with fans well at all as the centerpiece. You couldn't afford to. What really makes the centerpiece of the diva division an A+ career is that this is a woman that has to connect with fans very well and be able to carry the division as a wrestler. The WWE frequently goes to eye-candy divas to fill this position. In past years, these women could connect with the fans so well based on their looks and sexy characters. The challenge is getting them to see you as a great wrestler. Trish Stratus succeeded with that career.

In general, it is not fair to hold the divas by the same drawing standards as you would the men. The company has never revolved around the diva division. Trish and Lita faced each other in the main event of Raw. In the weeks prior to that, the company did not revolve around diva matters. It didn't revolve around diva matters after that match. I wouldn't make too much of that one match in trying to argue the WWE values the diva division as much as the men's division. If they did, they never would have let things collapse like this. Even though the men's division is messy these days, especially in the midcard, they still rely on guys to be the top stars.

There are not just separate standards between the women and the men. Even within the diva division, you can say that there is something. That is to say, when things are working right and particularly in the past. You have eye-candy divas and female wrestlers. Eye-candy divas sign with the company lacking wrestling training and having this glamorous look. Female wrestlers obviously have wrestling credibility and usually lack the look. In the past, it was the eye-candy divas that could connect so well and so easily with the general audience. Actual wrestling fans would drool over them, but they usually gave more respect to female wrestlers, who would not always get over with the rest of the crowd. This imbalance in terms of talent they possess when they are signed is not the only problem. The WWE does not allow female wrestlers to have the most important position. They can never be pushed as A+ players in a diva division. Female wrestlers usually get pushed as C+ players, at best. Occasionally, they get great careers in the periphery (A players). And the eye-candy divas? In the past, they were not pushed as serious wrestlers, except the centerpiece. These days, they are being used to do the same jobs credible jobbers would do. It makes for a messy, inefficient diva division.

Given this inequality in how these women are being pushed, it might be fair to judge them based on what they are being pushed as. In the men's division, you have wrestlers all up and down the card. The centerpiece is an actual wrestler, other main-eventers are actual wrestlers, upper-midcarders are actual wrestlers, and so on. In the diva division, when it was running the way it was supposed to, you have actual wrestlers and eye-candy divas. Someone like Torrie Wilson may get very over, but because she is not held in high regards by actual wrestling fans, does that mean you have to give her a B+? It isn't really fair. She definitely could have been pushed as centerpiece, which would have helped her connect better with all types of fans. On the other side of that, Ivory may not get very over, but she was never actually being pushed as well as others in a division that does not revolve around women like her. When you analyze productivity of some of these women, just keep in mind that you are not always looking at their productivity as wrestlers, as you would with most men in the men's division. How am I grading diva productivity? I am still paying attention to overall overness. But if an eye-candy periphery diva becomes very over without becoming a solid wrestler, I will likely not give her an A+. Those wrestling fans still matter. How well can these women bridge that gap?

AJ Lee is not an eye-candy periphery diva. She is a female wrestler who has gotten a great periphery career during this dark age. She was pushed extremely hard during 2012. There was no way the WWE would keep that going forever. It is still shocking that they have gotten this lazy with pushing her. No need to blame CM Punk, since the mediocrity started even before he left. A lot of fans were talking about her back then. How horrible would it been to push her that hard and not have people talk about her? They still talk about her now, but a lot of it is talking about how they are mistreating her and reminiscing about the days AJ Lee was in 5 segments every Raw. How over is she? I don't hear a great reaction for her on a steady basis. I cannot give her an A. Blame it on how lame she is being pushed? Blame it on her being a heel? Fans these days will cheer for whomever they want, regardless of whether that person is a heel or a face. They even cheer for jobbers. If AJ Lee could bring that kind of great connection despite the mediocre treatment, I would give her an A+. "A" for being so over and the "+" for going beyond the call of duty. I am not going to say she has done a horrible job. She has made a connection with the fans. Keeping it going at a high level is what needs to happen. In terms of her overness, she is a B+ player.

As for Wrestlemania, the WWE is going to have AJ Lee defend the title against pretty much everybody. This is the first time the title will be defended at Wrestlemania, and this is it? They are sacrificing quality for quantity. I will talk about it more next week. I've already written too much today. 

Bray Wyatt Out To End Cena

I just didn't feel like putting up a picture of either Bray Wyatt or John Cena. What does Shakira have to do with anything? Not a thing.

The WWE is really trying to make this feud between John Cena and Bray Wyatt seem like more than it really is. They haven't developed it enough to exactly steal the main-event slot from the title match, but they have tried to make it more worthy of Wrestlemania. And that is not really shocking. They have developed Bray Wyatt to be strong. They tossed in an injury angle, which they have failed to follow up on properly at all. Makes you wonder why they even bothered, if it was an angle. Hulk Hogan was involved slightly one night. But the main build has come from the promos. Both guys have done their usual thing, and it makes for an interesting feud. Bray Wyatt has talked about Cena's plastic girlfriend, Cena's castle, and Cena's entire legacy. It might make you think Cena's entire empire is at stake. That is how Cena has sold it in some of the things he has said. Cena pretty much has to put Bray Wyatt over like that to make this feud seem more interesting. Cena has faced worse than Bray Wyatt and been booked to beat them. Realistically, there is no reason to think Cena will be destroyed by Bray Wyatt.

I wish this feud was about more than just talk. I am not saying they should get rid of Cena. I am just saying that all this promo work is making this feud seem better than it really has been. If only there was a way to really make it seem like Bray Wyatt can do what he is saying. In some ways, Bray Wyatt has really failed to do anything major. His feud with Kane did not lead to him transforming Kane into a Wyatt and it ended without a proper finish. His feud with Miz went nowhere. His feud against CM Punk and Daniel Bryan turned into just a storyline against Daniel Bryan. The way the WWE ended up handling the storyline, Bray Wyatt failed to properly brainwash Daniel Bryan. Bray won the match at the Royal Rumble, but that didn't hurt Daniel Bryan's momentum and booking at all. It has had no impact on Daniel Bryan at all. The worse Bray Wyatt can possibly do is beat John Cena. He has not done anything else to make anyone believe he can truly ruin John Cena. It isn't even likely that he will beat John Cena at Wrestlemania. Cena has not won at the last 3 PPVs. They are really going to make it 4 in a row? And the fourth loss coming at Wrestlemania? Against Bray Wyatt? Is the WWE planning another "Worst Year In John Cena's Career" story? The Rock did not exactly ruin him. Why should I believe Bray Wyatt would? Because he has Thing 1 and Thing 2 by his side? Remember how well Nexus was built up and broken down after Cena was done with them? I can't seem to remember to forget it. Classic centerpiece booking, and it is even worse in recent years. Bray Wyatt will likely end up like that. But just for the sake of making it more exciting, coming up with a way for Bray Wyatt's actions to back up his words would be nice.

Let me change subjects slightly. I mentioned why I don't like John Cena very much a while ago. Let me compare him to another former centerpiece that I just mentioned. Hulk Hogan was in John Cena's shoes back in the day. He was pushed as the top star. As a performer, Hulk Hogan does not annoy me as much as John Cena. I have never seen Hulk Hogan wrestle an amazing match in terms of actual wrestling. His moves have always been basic. Nothing wrong with that. He wrestles like a lot of guys wrestled back then. What makes his matches fun to watch would be the character and psychology he would show. For what he did, he did it well. John Cena sometimes tries to bust out new moves here and there to silence his critics, but when his execution is not that great, that is what makes me not give him credit that some might give him. Whatever style you are going to wrestle, do it well. Do not try to pull off moves you cannot do well and that make you look even more stupid. As for promos, Hogan did not have the "politician" vibe that I sometimes hear with Cena. What kind of politician says "Brother" all the time? And he just talked the way that wrestlers did back then. There was energy in their voice. There is still energy in Cena's voice, but it often comes off as more self-righteous than entertaining. Even when Hogan is giving serious promos, the way he talks does not annoy me as much as the sound of Cena's voice. You can say it is nostalgia, but I am not really that nostalgic for the way wrestling was decades ago. Action inside the ring is definitely more exciting than it was back then. And I think you see more depth in mic skills these says, as well. I am just not a fan of John Cena in either of those two things. I am not a Hogan fan, but he does not annoy me that much, as a wrestler.

Grading Kofi Kingston

Kofi Kingston is a solid B. He is a B player. He is a midcarder. He is the king of the midcard. Even during this age of the midcard in the WWE being such a mess, the WWE's treatment of Kofi Kingston pretty much exemplifies what it means to be a midcarder these days. You get pushed well for a period of time, get lost in the shuffle, job to bigger stars, and you just wait around to be pushed well again. It wasn't that long ago that Kofi Kingston beat Randy Orton. Big moment for Kofi Kingston. And how has the WWE followed up? They haven't. That is what it's like in the midcard these days.

I always say Kofi Kingston deserves to be raised up to better pushes. But how would I actually grade him? As a wrestler, Kofi Kingston is definitely fun to watch. What stunt Kofi Kingston will pull off at the Royal Rumble is something I see some fans speculating on every year now. But he's not just good for a few good spots. He can put on great matches. His mic skills? He doesn't exactly get much of a chance to talk. His feud with Randy Orton allowed him to show an impressive side. He definitely has potential. But how high can you really grade him? The common criticism I see fans bring up for Kofi Kingston is his overall character. He is a generic face midcarder. That isn't his fault, but it's hard to say he is demonstrating A+ talent. I honestly believe he has the potential to do a lot better. A+ potential? I wouldn't say that. I wouldn't even say he has shown enough to be a regular main-eventer and be pushed as an A player. I would give him a B+.

How is he doing in terms of overness? Kofi Kingston is a likeable guy. He has definitely impressed a lot of wrestling fans. He has a fun character that kids can like. He can get a reaction and get fans going in his matches. All that being said, he isn't exactly bringing the results Daniel Bryan brings. Although people like him, how strongly do they feel about him? The WWE constantly depushes Kofi Kingston. I don't see fans chanting for Kofi when he isn't even in the ring. I can imagine Kofi Kingston eventually being let go quietly, fans being a little surprised they didn't re-sign him, but no huge plans for riots and protests starting. Definitely can't say he has an A+ connection with the fans. At the same time, he has not failed to make a positive connection with the fans. I would say he is getting a respectable face reaction. He is getting the kind of reaction from those fans that you would want a midcard face to get. He is not really going above the call of duty. I believe he has the potential to, but he doesn't have the connection with the fans that would help to argue for him getting pushed as an upper-midcarder.

Let me switch to the diva division for a moment. I sometimes might make it sound like credible jobbers never get over at all. That is a generalization some fans make about this wrestler or that wrestler all the time. Alberto Del Rio is not over. The Bellas are not over. Nobody likes Miz. He's not over with wrestling fans. He's not over with casual fans. He's not over with his hometown fans. He's not over with his family. His goldfish hate him. He may not be very over, but is it fair to say no one likes him at all? That is why I like grading the overness these wrestlers have like I have been doing recently. You are not stuck with either saying they are over or they are not over. A+ overness? F? Somewhere in between? The thing with credible jobbers, they can definitely connect with actual wrestling fans easily. A lot of times, they can get that respectable face reaction that I mentioned before with Kofi Kingston. I have seen some of these women get that level of a reaction as faces, like Ivory and Natalya. Do these women become the most over diva on the roster? Well, they are not supposed to. Mickie James did. I will talk more about the diva division when I grade AJ Lee next week.

I am going to end it with one more example of what I mean about saying that someone is not over not meaning no one likes them. And it is an extreme example. Back when he first debuted, Cody Rhodes was pretty generic and dull. Not a lot of people cared too much about him. He wasn't too over.  Here is a classic gif of his entrance.



One fan cared. Is it fair to say no one cared about Cody Rhodes at all? He had a fan. Would that fan be enough to drown out the fan support Daniel Bryan gets today? No. Cody has obviously become more over since then, as you would expect that he would. Obviously, this was an exaggerated example. Point is, just because someone is not bringing A-level results, or even B-level results, that doesn't automatically mean they have failed to connect with any fans to some degree. It takes time for some wrestlers to grow on the fans. And there are different types of fans with different types of tastes. Those fans may not always make as much of an impact as the majority or a vocal minority, but they still count. Don't get me wrong, I would definitely give Cody Rhodes a D or an F back then, but that is because he had not connected with enough fans in a strong manner, not because he failed to connect with anybody. Getting one question right out of a hundred on a test does not mean you passed.

The Wrestlemania XXX Triple Threat

There will be a triple-threat match at Wrestlemania XXX. The winner of the match between Triple H and Daniel Bryan will enter the main event for the WWE title. That made things a little more interesting. But not a lot more interesting. Why? The outcome is still pretty obvious. They are not going to have Randy Orton vs. Batista vs. Triple H. That would be heel vs. heel. vs. heel. And screwing over Daniel Bryan like that would probably cause a riot. Will there be some kind of finish to Triple H vs. Daniel Bryan that leads to both men heading into the title match? That is a better possibility than Triple H just winning.

The really interesting thing about handling things like this is all the tension it causes between the heels. You saw it on Raw this week. Orton and Batista are attacking each other. Triple H has had enough with both of them. The Shield turning face is just another issue following the same theme. The Authority have not really developed a great faction to support them. Tension is always there. Who do they have left in terms of wrestlers on their side? The New Age Outlaws are still around. You also have Kane. Triple H and Stephanie McMahon are in charge and have Kane, Billy Gunn, and Jesse James as henchmen. This sounds like something out of 2000.

Out of Randy Orton, Batista, and Triple H, it would be nice if someone finally turned face and broke away from this mess. It obviously won't be Batista. People hate him. Triple H turning face and feuding with Stephanie might be interesting, but I do not think they will go there now. Will they finally turn Randy Orton back into a face? All these guys just cannot coexist as heels.

Grading Batista's Return

Is it time to say Batista's return has flopped? Does he deserve the push he has gotten? He certainly did not return to be treated like some B+ player. He is pretty much an A player. No A+? I don't think he is back to really steal Cena's spot as centerpiece. If they wanted to develop a new centerpiece, I think it would be someone younger. And I don't see Batista as a major legend from the past that you can consider a true A+ player, like The Rock or Undertaker. He isn't getting that kind of push. And the bad reaction his return has gotten does not seem to have helped how well the WWE has decided to push him now. Triple H vs. Daniel Bryan is more important than Batista.

Let me start by critiquing Batista. If Batista was truly a great worker, you might feel some sympathy for him and say he still deserves better than this. Speaking honestly, I never liked Batista. I always thought he was a big idiot. In terms of wrestling ability, he is the typical big guy. His moves don't really stand out to me. Some say his best work was his heel work before leaving the WWE. Okay. He was a jerk. It does not seem to be a hard thing for him to do. I didn't really find him that entertaining. Since his return, he has not really done too much to impress me. He is a heel again, but his character isn't like it was back then. I pretty much don't like anything about him. I should probably try to think of something nice to say about him. Umm...skinny jeans? No, I should probably take off a few more points for that. I say he is worth a C. Why don't I give him worse? He is still pretty solid in some regards. He is not great, but I would just be a blind hater to give him a D or F.

Big question is, how has Batista's return connected with the fans? I think the answer is obvious. "Bootista" chants? Those didn't come about because Batista was doing such a great job as a heel. He hadn't yet officially turned when the fans were souring on him. Definitely cannot give the results he has brought with his return an A+. If he only came back to a mild and mediocre reaction, that might get him a C. But to come back and have the fans react the way they have, his return has to be considered a true flop. D or F? Is it worse to have the fans be so negative towards you or worse to have them completely dead. They hate Batista for all the wrong reasons. His return flopping is a combination of bad booking on the part of the WWE and Batista just not being a guy people like. As I pointed out before, if he was someone people did like, his reaction would not be so bad. I would say he is bringing D results. If nothing else, he has given the fans something to talk about and they are talking about him. Problem is, the fans aren't doing what the WWE would like.

Batista is a product of the WWE. I do not simply mean that he became a success in the WWE. I mean he became a success because the WWE took him and developed him to be a success. Had he not gotten injured so much, he might have been developed to be a true A+ player as Smackdown's centerpiece. There are guys that come into the WWE, don't get the type of treatment that Batista and Cena get, and still manage to bring the results in connecting with those fans that you would want from someone being pushed like Batista or Cena. Daniel Bryan is an example of that. As you can see, the WWE may have a lot of confidence in those stars they produce, but that does not mean they bring top-tier results, even with the heavy support from the WWE. So far, Batista's return has flopped. For the WWE's sake, they might want to find a way to help him become more likeable.

The Shield Going Face?

It seems the WWE is changing their minds about splitting The Shield right now. Instead, it looks like they are going face. It also looks like they might be feuding with Kane.

I normally do not like inconsistency. The WWE starts going in one direction, then they suddenly drop it. That can take the audience out of what is going on. They get excited for something, then you don't follow through. I am not going to complain about that in this situation. Two reasons why. First, The Shield as faces has some good potential. This is something a lot of fans will like. If the group did split up, at least one of these guys would be lost in the shuffle within a few weeks. Second reason I am not complaining, it isn't like they went too far down the path of splitting them. They were still in an area where it is believable that they could work out their differences. I don't think there is a need to be too critical of this. I could start talking about what this means in terms of The Authority losing allies and friction once again in that regard, but I'll save that for another day when I talk about Orton and Batista.

I do not think it is hard to imagine that the WWE could go right back to splitting them up after Wrestlemania. I think they should let the group stay as faces for a few months. Let them feud against The Authority. Going back to that feud against The Wyatts would not be bad. I would have them finally split up and face each other for Summerslam. I think something like that should happen on a big PPV. I still think the WWE wasted having the group suffer their first loss as a unit on Smackdown. Have them facing each other happen at a major PPV. In between now and then, there are still some 6-man feuds you can create for The Shield. This time around, they will be the faces.

Grading Zack Ryder

Zack Ryder was a F. He was not being pushed at all. He might as well have been released. He connected with fans through an Internet show. That soon led to fans chanting for him during events, even though he was not involved in whatever was going on. The WWE noticed. They skyrocketed him all the way to being a D player. That didn't seem to please fans. The WWE kept dragging their feet when it came to pushing Zack Ryder. He eventually won the United States title and got involved in a major storyline involving John Cena. That storyline, however, was more about making Cena look good. Ryder was just a supporting player and soon got depushed again. In terms of how he was being pushed, I would say he peaked at being a B+ player. He was never a true main-eventer, but he was pushed better than some midcarders at the time. Did Zack Ryder deserve better?

How do I view Zack Ryder as a critic? I am not talking about critiquing his Internet show. And that's not just because I have still never watched it. If you are determining whether this guy deserved a better wrestling push, you should be critiquing him as a wrestling performer. Let me start with his wrestling ability. He was not as horrible as The Great Khali, but not as great as a Kurt Angle. He was solid. I personally find someone like Kofi Kingston more entertaining in the ring. Even Ryback can be sold as a dominating individual. Zack Ryder's ability does not really stand out. How about his charisma and mic skills? Again, I am not going by how he performs on the web. I am sure he deserves high marks there based on how over it got him. He has a unique gimmick, which also includes him having a unique look. I like that. I am just not drawn to his charisma. Overall, I would give Ryder a C+. As a critic, I would not recommend Zack Ryder to get a push. He should be a lower-midcarder.

Of course, I never let my personal feelings determine whether or not I think someone should get a good push and good career. What matters is how well they can get the job done. Just how over did Zack Ryder get back then? Some say he only had a "cult" following. There may be some truth in that. He got over on the Internet. Internet fans can get very vocal. But the way the fans were reacting for him definitely does not seem like mediocre overness to me. At the same time, was it at the level that Daniel Bryan is at now? You can usually see a sea of fans supporting Daniel Bryan every week. I don't think Zack Ryder was that over. And you also have to take into account that the WWE succeeded in burying him. If Zack Ryder's overness really was stronger, they would not have been able to do it so easily. He does still get decent reactions whenever he is out there. No A+ results for him, but I think he was doing better than the respectable B that you can expect for most midcard faces. I would say Zack Ryder was bringing B+ results.

Taking everything into account, I think Zack Ryder did deserve a better push. Yes, he did not get over by doing what a pro wrestler is supposed to do, but he was not in a position to get over as a pro wrestler. He can even be criticized for not being too great, but I think he would have been a good fit for the midcard. That push he did end up getting was more about Cena and the WWE did not follow through properly with Ryder after it was over. There is nothing wrong with pushing over workers in the midcard. Did Ryder's complaining hurt his push? I think they would have found a reason to bury him no matter what. The fact that they never wanted to push this guy points to that. His whole Internet gimmick might have even led to some interesting storylines and segments. The WWE only did a little bit. The midcard is a mess. Zack Ryder could have helped make things better.

Why bother talking about a guy that is probably not an A+ player in any sense of the term? A+ players are not the only ones that matter. Moreover, the WWE's mistreatment of Ryder is another sign of the larger issue of not giving guys that bring great results better pushes and treatment. Ryder is still trying to stay relevant. Where will that get him?

Grading John Cena

I talked about this grading theme that has come up with The Authority storyline previously. I said that these performers can be graded by critiquing them, graded by how well they bring results, and graded based on the career they are getting. I talked about it in relation to Daniel Bryan. Why not do that for a few more individuals currently in the WWE? Today's subject will be John Cena.

As far as careers go, John Cena is an A+ player. That is just how he is pushed. He has been the centerpiece for almost a decade now. He has had a few rest periods here and there where he was not in either the title hunt or the main-event scene, including some periods where he was injured, but the WWE constantly keeps putting him back into that top spot. Even if they should start phasing him out now as the centerpiece, Cena will still remain one of those guys that they could insert into a major storyline at any time and it wouldn't look weird. And this treatment from the WWE is what makes him an A+ player.

What do the critics have to say about John Cena? This is where John Cena starts to not be an A+ player. Daniel Bryan is the guy with great wrestling ability, but he gets criticized for his look and mic skills. Cena is somewhat the opposite. He has the look and better mic skills, but it is his wrestling ability that people often criticize. He only knows 5 moves. He can't sell. His strength is overrated. I am usually not critical of anyone for wrestling ability. Number of moves does not bother me. It is how well the wrestler executes the moves and actually performs that I care more about. That being said, I don't like Cena much for his wrestling ability. He is not as smooth in the ring as others. People sometimes criticize his promos for burying his opponents. He did a number on Bray Wyatt this week. I don't have a problem with that. The Rock did that kind of thing a lot. It was entertaining. My problem with Cena as far as his promos and mic skills go is that I just find him annoying. I don't know whether it is the sound of his voice or that he often sounds like a politician, but he doesn't entertain me as someone like The Rock could with his promos. Even Cena's harshest critics usually give him credit for his loyalty to the WWE, including doing all those charity events. How much does that really define how great of a pro wrestling performer Cena is? I think it matters a little. But loyalty does not overshadow everything. Cena's harshest haters might give him a D or an F. It would definitely be wrong to critique him as an A+ player. He does have issues. I would give him a B+.

When it comes to actually bringing results, John Cena once again falls short of an A+. I have already said that Daniel Bryan is probably the only regular in the WWE today that I would give that grade to based on how well he is connecting with the fans. Cena cannot get the consistent reaction and fan support that Daniel Bryan has been getting for a while now. When you are getting pushed as John Cena is, as the centerpiece of the company, you are not only being pushed to be over, but also to be the top draw. I will get to that in a moment. Just looking at how well John Cena is connecting with the audience, the mixed reaction says it all. I even remember him getting "Boring" chants. It's one thing for a heel centerpiece to get a mixed reaction. Heels are pushed to be booed. And since the centerpiece is supposed to be such a great performer, you would expect him to get cheered by some, even as a heel. But a face centerpiece getting this kind of reaction? That is bad. You might say Cena should be getting a C if anyone ever evaluates the results he brings based on fan reactions. Women and children love him. Women love him for his look, while the kids love him for the character the WWE has made him to be. When you take it a step further and look at how well Cena is drawing, I think there is even more reason to not give him an A. Cena has been treated like a top draw, but the WWE's ratings and PPV buyrates have been mostly on a decline. They had to rely on stars they created a decade ago and celebrities to give them major boosts. You can say that it is the overall product's fault, not Cena's, but if the WWE had a centerpiece that was working out better, would they then better be able to turn their attention back to the midcard, tag division, diva division, and so on? Things weren't always as bad as they are now during Cena's reign as centerpiece. But as issues with the centerpiece have continued, that might have had an impact on how the bosses of the company are handling things. I would say John Cena is bringing B results. I am probably being too generous.

John Cena is pushed as an A+ player, critiqued by me as a B+ player, and brings B results. That's not good for a centerpiece. I don't think all the blame should go to Cena. That is why I don't give him a C for how poorly he is connecting with the audience for so long. Part of the blame should go to the WWE. They cannot come up with new ways to keep him fresh. There has to be a way to please the women, children, and the rest. However, Cena is not let completely off the hook. He definitely has some shortcomings that are holding him back. If he had the wrestling ability of Daniel Bryan and the promo skills of The Rock, I don't think a lot of his haters would still be haters. He got very over with his rapper gimmick. But when they started pushing him as the centerpiece, that gimmick soon went away. Would he be better with that gimmick again? Would he be better if he was never pushed as hard as he was? I don't think everyone who gets popular needs to become a main-eventer. Keep some of them in the midcard. You need over stars there. I am not saying Cena should never have held the WWE Championship, but there are a lot of guys who get that big win and remain midcarders or upper-midcarders after. Nothing wrong with that. Maybe Vince McMahon saw a ton of potential in John Cena, but Cena has not worked out as a great centerpiece.

Since I am on the subject of Cena, let me finish with talking about his Wrestlemania feud. He will officially be facing Bray Wyatt. This is a rest period for your centerpiece. There is more to it for that. This is the most mediocre match centerpiece Cena has had at Wrestlemania. Bray Wyatt, however, has been developed very well. When Bray feuded with Kane and Daniel Bryan, the subject of whether he would brainwash them came up. That does not appear to be an issue with this feud. No need to question whether or not Cena will become a Wyatt. This seems more about Bray Wyatt trying to take Cena out. He has his illusions of grandeur. It's seems obvious how this feud will end. I doubt the WWE will do anything in the coming weeks to make this feud too much more interesting. Re-injuring Cena might be an option. The Wyatts need more momentum on their side.

Daniel Bryan Gets Everything He Wants In One Night

Daniel Bryan will officially face Triple H at Wrestlemania. The fun doesn't stop there for Daniel Bryan fans. If Daniel Bryan wins that match, he will be inserted into the WWE title match at Wrestlemania. This all came about due to an elaborate stunt on Raw last night. "Fans" flooded the ring to support Daniel Bryan.

It was obvious that Daniel Bryan would face Triple H at Wrestlemania. That was the direction they were developing things for a few weeks now. And it is great that the stipulation to put Daniel Bryan into the main event has been made. A lot of fans wanted that. A match between Randy Orton and Batista alone would probably have been one of the worst Wrestlemania main events ever. I just roll my eyes at how it was done. This was obviously the direction the WWE was ready to finally go in, but they planned a way to do it that was really pandering to the fans. I guess they pretty much had to do it. I just feel they could have done it differently.

This pretty much makes the outcome of Daniel Bryan vs. Triple H obvious. Triple H won't be squashing Daniel Bryan in 10 seconds. If Daniel Bryan does not make it into the main event, the fans are either going to be dead for the main event or even more pissed off. That does not mean that Triple H and Daniel Bryan cannot put on a great match. And the fans will still enjoy that moment Daniel Bryan does win. A predictable match does not have to be a dull match. What about the title match? Who wins that? I'll save that for another day.

A+, B+, C+, And Such

Aside from the idea of what it means to be the "face" of the company, another major element coming up in this feud between The Authority and Daniel Bryan, especially in promos, is this "A+" and "B+" thing. The Authority does not view Daniel Bryan as good enough to be face of the company. He is not good enough to even face Triple H at Wrestlemania. But what does all this grading mean?

Obviously, they are critiquing Daniel Bryan as a WWE superstar. I have seen even some Daniel Bryan fans agree that he is a B+ player. He is great in the ring, but his mic skills are lacking. You can also make an issue with his look. Personally, I do not have any huge problem with Daniel Bryan's mic skills or his look. Besides, are these supposed shortcomings really holding him back?

Is this the way they should be grading their workers? When students are taking a test, the teacher isn't critiquing the effort they put into trying to figure out the answer or their penmanship. The most important thing is whether or not they are answering the questions correctly. Even in essays, the teacher is supposed to be looking for how well you can make your point and argue and support it. They are grading students based on their ability to get the job done.

How about we grade Daniel Bryan based on his ability to get the job done? His job is to go out there and perform to connect with the fans. Very over individuals should be getting an A. Considering how insanely over he is, I would even go so far as giving him that A+. Even though I am a Randy Orton fan, I would not grade him that highly. Not right now. There is probably no other full-time performer I would say deserves an A+.

The critics say he is a B+ player, while the results he brings make him an A+ player. Who really wins out in the end? To ask another question, how do you get these two ideas to coexist? Just ignore the critics? Or try your best to fit their standards? I see something else. A while back, I talked about the difference between being efficient and being productive. I said efficiency has more to do with the means to getting the job done, while productivity has to do with actually getting the job done. Assuming you have a critic that really is good at what he does, he can really point out the weak points of whatever he is critiquing that can hinder its overall productivity. Wrestling ability aside, maybe Daniel Bryan is not the most efficient WWE superstar out there, but can you deny his productivity? Meanwhile, there are guys critics can grade higher that are not bringing the results he can. There is nothing wrong with how Daniel Bryan has succeeded with the fans. It's better than being overrated to success.

There is still one more way to look at this grading theme that I want to bring up. This grading can be used to describe the type of career wrestlers are getting. If you are being pushed as the face/centerpiece of the company, you are obviously an A+ player. If you are one of the main-eventers outside of that top position, you are an A player. Top-tier legends, like The Undertaker, can also be considered A+ players. Upper-midcarders can be A-/B+. Midcarders can be a solid B. Lower-midcarders can fall in the C range. If you are one of those guys that are employed and absolutely never get anything to do, you are most likely not going to be kept around when your contract expires, and you are a D or even an F, depending on whether or not you ever get anything at all to do.

How does that translate to the diva division? The A+ career is the centerpiece. The top periphery diva, if there is one, will be an A. Other periphery divas will be B players in the division. Credible jobbers will be C+ or down. They aren't pushed to be over.

What kind of player is Daniel Bryan in the WWE based on how he is pushed? I would say he is an A. Although he is not pushed as the centerpiece, he has been pushed as a top main-eventer for months now. The only thing really stopping this guy from having the career of the centerpiece is that they are not letting him dominate title matters. They might as well just go for it and let him have a legitimate title reign for a few months. And don't bury him under Cena during that span. Treat him as if he were the centerpiece. If he does not work out, then you can have a legitimate reason to not push him that hard again until he does improve himself.

Daniel Bryan is pushed as an A player, viewed as a B+ player critically, and brings A+ results. Are we supposed to take some kind of average of all that? To me, the most important thing is the results you bring. And if you can bring awesome results from a position that is below those results you are bringing, you deserve added respect for that. What would it mean for a lower-midcarder, a C+ guy, to bring those A+ results? And if critics point out all these faults you may have, but you just overcome that to bring the results even those people perfect in the eyes of those critics cannot bring, even more power to you. I still don't consider myself a Daniel Bryan fan, but there is no denying what he has done. Will a legitimate run with the WWE title be in his future?

Alexander Rusev

Here is something different to consider, has any midcard heel lost a push recently or appears to be on the verge of losing that push? Someone has to be phased out of the main picture to allow Alexander Rusev to start getting his push. Some fans just seem to overlook that the WWE cannot possibly be consistent with everyone. Some people have to get depushed. And these days, the WWE is even worse when it comes to consistency than it has been in all the years I have watched them. Sandow and Ryback got depushed a few months ago. Recently, Titus O'Neil went from being relevant to lost in the shuffle again. I actually thought he was showing potential, but I never believed the WWE would follow through well with him. If I had to name a wrestler that has been depushed for the sake of Rusev, I would probably pick Titus O'Neil. I am not saying you should blame Rusev. I am just pointing out someone recently getting rotated out as someone else gets rotated in.


And how about Alexander Rusev? He kind of reminds me of The Great Khali. I'm not talking about his wrestling ability. Will he be successful? He probably won't be winning any World titles, but how about a midcard title? Or is the WWE just looking to develop another brute for John Cena to eventually overcome? Personally, I do not think he will be very successful. It will be up to him and the WWE to prove me wrong.

What do you actually do with him? Start off by having him go through a line of jobbers? That is what you would usually expect. But against whom should he face in his first legitimate feud? I don't see anything wrong with having him go right against Big E, assuming Big E still holds the Intercontinental title by then. This would be a solid midcard feud. No need to push this guy straight into the main event or against former World Champions. Build that credibility in the midcard. Nothing wrong with that. And if he should show signs of not working out, you can easily pull the plug on him with not much wasted. Imagine if you had this guy go over guys like Mark Henry and Dolph Ziggler, decided he wouldn't work out, and then just depushed him. You just wasted guys that should be treated so much better than they currently are on a flop. Will Rusev get anything to do for Wrestlemania? Hard to say. If he ends up getting lost in the Wrestlemania shuffle, you could say it was a mistake to debut him at this time.

Will Lana end up being the star of this duo? I have pointed out before that I feel Summer Rae is the one to really keep your eye on in the duo of Fandango and Summer Rae. She can fill that centerpiece void. Lana, much like Summer Rae, is in a periphery position during this current dark age. The WWE is having issues treating even periphery divas well during this dark age. As long as Lana is with Rusev, she will only go as far as he goes. Will she have a breakout, like I expect Summer Rae to? Too soon to tell, much like trying to figure out what will become of Rusev himself, but I think it will be some time before she is really doing too much to imply the WWE is breaking her away from Rusev. Right now, she is a manager. Hopefully, the WWE uses her as a good one. Not everyone used as a valet/manager needs to eventually be wrestling on a regular basis.

Sheamus Vs. Christian: Why Bother?

Before Elimination Chamber, it seemed like a feud between Sheamus and Christian would be likely heading into Wrestlemania. These two guys had already faced each other in a singles match, but the WWE could still develop a great rivalry heading into the big PPV.

So far, how has the WWE been developing this feud? It just feels disappointing. The storyline seems so basic. A frustrated Christian once again goes heel. These two have also faced each other too much in singles matches recently. To top it all off, it doesn't help that there are much bigger things going on and fans have not reacted well to these two going at it. This is just coming off as filler. Wrestlemania filler.

Obviously, recent developments in the last few months have led to the WWE changing things. But can this feud be saved? Can it be made into more than filler? Saying it is filler may be unfair. It featured Christian going heel, so it served that purpose. But this Christian heel character has been done before. And Sheamus is Sheamus. No real character development for him. I cannot imagine how they can make this storyline better. Having Christian go even more intense than he already has would be nice. Would adding in a few guys and making this a tag match be good? I don't think so. I think the best thing to do would be to develop a Wrestlemania match between the two as some kind of special match. Cage? Hardcore? Tables? You have seen these guys going at it in regular matches already. Raise things to another level for Wrestlemania. Make it more worthy for Wrestlemania. Right now, this feud is not worthy for the big event.

The Rise Of Emma?

The WWE shrugged off the crowd and CM Punk did not return. You ever read reports of morale being down in TNA? The WWE's victory last night had to be a morale killer for a lot of fans. Was that the best the fans could do? It didn't seem to make a huge impact. In any case, moving on to diva matters.

Title matters aren't worth talking about right now. The spotlight is on the periphery matters between Emma and Summer Rae. Summer Rae and her sidekick have been feuding with Emma and Santino. Is this the rise of Emma? She has a gimmick and is being allowed to run with it. Of course, what will really decide things is how the WWE follows through with her. And it doesn't help that the WWE has been very inconsistent with the diva division recently. Personally, I get the feeling she will end up like Jillian Hall. She has a comedy gimmick. Will it get her over? Does it matter? They will most likely be able to bury her very easily, should she get more over than they want her to be.

I believe this is all really for the benefit of Summer Rae. I have said before that she is the kind of diva they like to develop as their centerpiece for the diva division. Outside of title matters, the WWE has been very inconsistent with periphery angles. Nevertheless, it seems like Summer Rae has benefited the most in terms of being featured in these periphery feuds. She teamed with Fandango to go against Natalya and whomever her partner was at the time. I don't think this is all just random booking. Even The Bellas, two women many accuse of sleeping their way to the top, have not gotten even good usage in the periphery in recent months. They get random and inconsistent treatment. Filler. There have been actual feuds involved for Summer Rae, even if it was just a mediocre feud against Tyson Kidd and Natalya. If I had to pick which of the two out of Emma and Summer Rae is likely to be pushed well by the WWE in coming months, I would stick with Summer Rae.

When you analyze, you have to look at what is actually there, not for what you want to see. I always talk about looking for who is being pushed with great consistency, hype, and creative interest to understand whom the WWE wants to be their stars in the division. Well, no one is being pushed very well. What do you do? Look at what is actually going on. Who is being pushed better in relation to the rest? You have to stop and think about why you are not seeing what you would usually go by to figure things out. You are in the worst dark age the diva division has ever had. Issues in the men's division are also impacting the diva division. You don't need special backstage sources to tell you this stuff.

Chicago Fire

What has pro wrestling become that you get more excited for what fans might do than for the actual product? With the whole CM Punk drama, Raw in Chicago tonight looked to be very interesting. There was talk about fans pretty much taking over the show. Of course, the reports of CM Punk returning tonight pretty much kills all the enthusiasm I had for talking about this topic.

I have said before that the WWE is playing with fire. They play with giving the fans what they want, knew how over Daniel Bryan was, and just continue going down the road of what they would rather the fans want. Remember how crazy some Mickie James fans got after the WWE released her. Dirtsheets made it look like she screwed herself out of the WWE, but fans still really wanted her back. You have heard stories of how Daniel Bryan fans have reacted to his mistreatment in recent months. How crazy would Chicago have gotten tonight?

If CM Punk is really coming back, it might be wise to bring him back in the opening segment. You would normally save something like this for last, but you probably don't want to play with these fans too much. And what if these reports were spread just to ease some of the tension building? If CM Punk does not appear, that will make fans even more pissed off. If they sit through the whole show and don't get what they want, then they might really react badly. It would be like this year's Royal Rumble. Fans waited in hopes of seeing Daniel Bryan coming out in the Rumble match. Never happened. And fans can definitely react worse than they did then.

If CM Punk does return, should he be tossed into the title match at Wrestlemania? That match lacks a solid face. Being in the main event of Wrestlemania is something CM Punk would want. Of course, this should have been Daniel Bryan's match. And that feud against Triple H should have been Punk's. I doubt they will switch things back around. If CM Punk does return, he will need a match for Wrestlemania, and it will likely be that title match. I doubt they toss him back against Kane.