Wrestlemania 33 Preview: Part 4

It is Wrestlemania season and one of the World title matches I am talking about is Randy Orton vs. Bray Wyatt. I was a fan of this feud when it first started last year, but I never thought this would be a WWE Championship feud back then. Needless to say, this feud has had some issues.

Let me start with issues I have seen other fans bring up recently. First, Bray Wyatt and Randy Orton have not really interacted physically in the last few weeks with each other. It is obviously nothing wrong in terms of injury. Both men have had matches. The WWE has just kept them apart. Personally, it does not bother me. There are some feuds where you want to keep the guys away from each other to make their PPV encounter feel more special. I don't think this is the kind of feud that needs that, but there is that idea. Nevertheless, I can understand if some fans are irked by this. This whole feud has strayed from the norm these days, and people tend to have mixed feelings when that kind of thing happens.

Another issue I have seen some fans bring up is that the feud has become too much about Sister Abigail and not enough about the WWE Championship. And that goes back to a point I have made before, this feud did not need the WWE Championship and Royal Rumble victory involved. There was enough there to make it good. Even with the questionable storyline development it has gotten, it was still a good elaborate storyline. This is the stuff elaborate storylines are made of. Unique segments. Character development. Use of supporting players. And it has obviously been given a lot of time to develop. Again, the development could have been handled better, but it was good enough to not need a title.

Don't get me wrong, there are some good feuds that can also involve a title even when not necessary. Look at Chris Jericho vs. Kevin Owens. There is a good feud. Jericho and Owens were friends. Jericho helped Owens retain his title numerous times. But Owens turns on Jericho. Solid betrayal storyline. The United States Championship was not needed in this feud, but I am not complaining that it's there.

Go to TNA last year. Look at the feud between Matt & Jeff Hardy. I wouldn't have hated it if the TNA Championship was involved in that feud. It was the biggest thing TNA had going. The characters and segments were a success. TNA didn't really have anything else that great going on. But they chose to spread things around by letting other guys fight for the top title, and I can respect that decision. Matt vs. Jeff did not absolutely need the title.

Why do I not respect the WWE's decision to include the WWE Championship in Smackdown's most elaborate feud going right now? Because, unlike TNA last  year, there are other men and other feuds that could have used that title that the Wyatt/Orton feud does not need that badly. John Cena is stuck in a position that is beneath him. AJ Styles is stuck in a position many fans dislike. Dean Ambrose is in a midcard feud. These are all guys that were WWE Champion in the last few months that Bray/Orton has been building. They now find themselves in feuds that were thrown together in the last two months or less. Dolph Ziggler looked like he was on fire a few months ago, and is now in a battle royal on the pre-show. Miz looked like he regained his main-event form, only to be put in this feud with Cena that looks like it will do more for Nikki Bella than anyone else. The WWE very much could have put together better feuds for the Smackdown roster.

Regardless of all the issues, here we are. Who wins? The Royal Rumble winner has not been successful at Wrestlemania in recent years. Triple H won the Royal Rumble, and the title, last year and lost at Wrestlemania. Roman Reigns won the Royal Rumble and lost at Wrestlemania the year before that. The year before that was the Batista fiasco. I think the tradition continues. I don't feel Orton wins this match, even if it is so close to his birthday. Bray Wyatt retains.

Speaking of feuds that don't need a title, Goldberg defends the Universal Championship against Brock Lesnar. Letting Goldberg win the title is one thing. But did they really need to continue this feud? The guy is old and obviously cannot go like he used to. With what few matches they could get out of him, they should have built a fresh feud for him. His feud with Kevin Owens was hardly even a real feud. It was overshadowed by Goldberg/Lesnar and Owens/Jericho. The feud was really just used to develop these other feuds. Goldberg/Lesnar should have just ended for good at Survivor Series last year.

Unless some change of heart happens, it seems Brock Lesnar is winning the title. Even disregarding reports, what's the point of continuing this feud if Goldberg keeps beating Lesnar? But what has Brock Lesnar done since his last title win to deserve another? Get caught using illegal substances? Give Randy Orton a concussion? Nothing? Yeah, that's the one. And this will be the first time since the WWE started embracing part-timers so much that a top title will go from one part-timer to another. That is a terrible thing. Is this going to become a habit? I would probably be less against it if it was The Undertaker winning the title from Goldberg. I do not consider myself a fan of Taker, but it would be nice if he had gotten one more title run. But Lesnar? Not this again.

The story of this match is also an issue. Reports are claiming this will be a squash match. It seems kind of ridiculous for Lesnar to just squash Goldberg and end things there, but given that Goldberg doesn't look like he can handle a long match, I am not doubting the possibility this happens. Still, I feel like the WWE might pull some swerve to protect Goldberg. He won't just walk into an F5 and lose.

Wrestlemania 33 Preview: Part 3

Today goes to the Smackdown matches. I will talk about Randy Orton vs. Bray Wyatt on Friday.

Let me start with the Andre The Giant Memorial Battle Royal. It is not Smackdown exclusive, but I will include it here. Big Show is in this. His match with Shaq is not happening. That is sad for Big Show and too bad for the WWE. This match would have been a draw. Even if the actual match was terrible, the hype would get mainstream attention, especially during NBA season, and it would draw. The WWE really has no great feuds likely to draw big this year. As for who wins this, it should be either Braun Strowman or Luke Harper. Both these guys had a lot of interest on them this Wrestlemania season. Many fans might see it as a little disappointing that neither are doing anything more important, I will say Braun Strowman wins.

Dean Ambrose defends the Intercontinental Championship against Baron Corbin. An actual singles match for the Intercontinental Championship at Wrestlemania? I never thought I would see that again. I am not surprised to see Corbin getting this push, and I expect him to win. But I just feel it should have been Dolph Ziggler in the position Dean Ambrose is currently in. Ziggler had so much momentum when he won the title a few months ago. The WWE ruined that for no good reason and Ziggler is stuck with mediocrity for Wrestlemania. They ruined him. I am not saying it was intentional. They had planted the seeds for a heel turn since his WWE Championship feud with Dean Ambrose, but they should not have gone through with it. Fans have just not reacted to it very well. It should be Ziggler dropping the title to Baron Corbin. Free up Dean Ambrose for a better feud.

John Cena and Nikki Bella take on Miz and Maryse. Before I talk about what this match means for some of the performers, there is speculation that Cena might propose to Nikki after they win. I never thought this would be something I would preview for a match. It would be a huge Wrestlemania moment, but I will just leave that alone. If it happens, it happens.

What does this feud mean for Nikki Bella? This is a periphery angle. It is on the periphery of the title scene. The WWE created all their successful stars during the diva era through the periphery. The only woman during the previous era to get very over without proper periphery angles was Mickie James, and that was not because the WWE wanted it. But I would say this push is once again showing why so many women became stars in the periphery back in the day. Nikki Bella is looking good. She is getting a rub from one of the top stars in the company. She is knocking men around, even if they are jobbers. She is guaranteed a spot on the Wrestlemania card that is not on the pre-show. All these elaborate segments. Big Wrestlemania moment. This is how you push a woman as something special. I wish Mickie James had gotten these type of pushes back in the day, or even now.

Compare it to the mess that is the Smackdown Women's Championship match. It's Alexa Bliss vs. everyone. Naomi just returned. There might still be more women in this match. No one has gotten proper development here. It is just a cluster. This match is on the pre-show and it deserves to be on the pre-show. That is not an insult to these women. That is an insult towards how the WWE has handled the title picture here. No one should feel bad for Nikki Bella not being in this match. She is in a better place.

Does she deserve it? I think so. The WWE put a lot of work into her to make her into a star. She is not absolutely terrible in the ring. She is more over than some fans seem to want to admit. And since the WWE needs more women properly pushed as stars that can get over beyond just the wrestling fans, they should push her well.

What does this feud mean for John Cena? I will say that I feel Cena deserves better than this. When you think of all the big feuds they could have had this Wrestlemania season, Cena vs. The Undertaker was one. Or Cena could have continued his feud with AJ Styles to some sort of gimmick match at Wrestlemania. Or turn Ambrose heel and have him feud with Cena. I already said Dolph Ziggler should be in the spot Ambrose is in. Or a feud with Miz that isn't also about the women in their corner. John Cena will likely win this match, but I feel the feud is better for Nikki Bella than John Cena.

Lastly, AJ Styles vs. Shane McMahon. This is another match that really does not need to happen. AJ Styles should be doing better than this. And Shane McMahon does not need to be wrestling every year. Yes, welcome back. You've been gone a long time. That doesn't mean you need to wrestle every Wrestlemania. Whether it is the WWE wanting Shane to wrestle because they think it would draw or it is an ego thing for Shane wanting to go out there and sacrifice his body for cheers and respect, just ease it down. Save it for special occasions, which will hopefully not be forced.

And that is what this feud is, forced. Someone has issues with an authority figure, so they have a match. Stephanie McMahon has had issues with Charlotte, Sasha Banks, and Bayley in recent years. No matches ever came of it. You can run down the list of times a wrestler and authority figure have had issues and not wrestled each other. The WWE tried to force this feud through clumsy booking to make it seem like AJ Styles had a heated reason to want to destroy Shane McMahon. Yeah, some nice segments here and there, but it was still forced and not organic. Ignoring the botched battle royal result, AJ Styles wins a match to get a title shot at Wrestlemania, but then the WWE makes him put it on the line against Orton? How often does this happen? Usually, they just make a triple threat or some other situation where both guys get title shots. You would think that is what face authority figures would do. No, the WWE went with clumsy booking to sell this feud. The development has not been smooth.

What should AJ Styles be doing? As I said, he could still be feuding with Cena. And maybe it should have been for the WWE Championship. I have said before that I don't think Orton/Wyatt needs to be for the title. Why not send one of the best feuds of the last few months to Wrestlemania? Or they could have done Styles vs. The Undertaker.  Even Styles vs. Luke Harper might have been good, since it would have given Harper something meaningful and would have been a very good match. There were options.

Who wins? AJ Styles has still yet to win at Wrestlemania. He should have won last year. This should be the year. Shane McMahon does not need the win. As for match quality, Shane McMahon does have a history of going big in big matches. Let's just hope he doesn't injure himself.

Wrestlemania 33 Preview: Part 2

I will be talking about the Raw matches today. Goldberg vs. Lesnar will be saved for Friday.

Neville defends the Cruiserweight Championship against Austin Aries. Austin Aries can be seen as TNA's answer to CM Punk. He was definitely a poor man's CM Punk. He knows how to wrestle. In the WWE, he currently finds himself in the cruiserweight division. Even though I dislike too many multi-man matches, I wouldn't have minded a few more cruiserweights in this match. It just seems too soon to push Austin Aries. And yet, the WWE has shown that they will push men in this division too quickly, then pull the rug out from under them. Let's say the tradition continues. I'll say Austin Aries wins.

There will be a multi-man match for the tag titles. Anderson & Gallows defend against Sheamus & Cesaro and Enzo & Cass. Enzo & Cass should have won the titles since last year. This is the stage for them to do it. I will say they win.

The United States Championship match will not be a multi-man match. This is a personal feud. Chris Jericho vs. Kevin Owens has arguably been developed better than any other feud. It does not feel rushed. The development has not been inconsistent. Injuries have not screwed it over. This is what I had hoped for with the Jericho vs. Styles feud from last year. Owens and Jericho were friends for a good while. They both held titles at the same time, although not the tag titles. There were a few great elaborate segments. They just developed things well, building up to the obvious split and match coming up.

Who wins? It just seems obvious that Kevin Owens will win. Jericho doesn't need the title anymore. Moreover, he already got a Wrestlemania win he did not need last year against AJ Styles. No need for two in a row. I have seen some fans say Jericho will retain here and lose it to Samoa Joe after Wrestlemania, likely due to Owens interference. There is also the point of Owens eventually going back after the Universal Championship. But that will probably happen down the line. Right now, let Owens get his Wrestlemania moment. This feud is fit for a title change.

Roman Reigns vs. The Undertaker was another feud that just felt thrown together in the weeks leading up to Wrestlemania. That might be because it was just thrown together in the weeks leading up to Wrestlemania. And it has been a pretty lame feud. The WWE is once again selling it like this can be Taker's last Wrestlemania. They did the same thing last year to try to draw in more fans. There are also dirtsheet rumors about it. As I have seen other fans point out, if this is Undertaker's last Wrestlemania, the WWE has done a terrible job making this feud feel more special. I do not think The Undertaker's career ends here. The WWE has been pretty mediocre with a ton of things these days, but I doubt they treat the end of The Undertaker's career with such mediocrity. A feud over whose yard it is? Passing the torch to Roman Reigns? No, I would expect something bigger. Then again, that feud leading to Lesnar ending Taker's Wrestlemania streak was also pretty mediocre.

Who wins? Reigns winning this could very well make him hated. Would they then turn him heel? I don't know if he can even carry beating The Undertaker, and possibly retiring him, like Lesnar could carry ending The Streak. I don't know how much that rub would do for him. But I will still say he wins. This can build up to Undertaker's last match next year.

Triple H faces Seth Rollins in an unsanctioned match. On paper, this should have been the best feud this Wrestlemania season. You can say it was years in the making. Triple H chooses Seth Rollins to be the next big star. Seth Rollins fails to deliver. Triple H betrays him. Wrestlemania match. But the WWE just did such a terrible job after Triple H screwed Seth Rollins last year. Triple H never showed up. Seth Rollins lost his edge. There was even a span where it seemed Seth Rollins had forgotten Triple H. What was the story? Triple H didn't want to fight Seth Rollins? If you don't want to fight him, why screw him out of the title? Because you don't want him as Champion? Okay, so why didn't you try to screw him those other times he got title shots? And you are still going to fight him now? They just took what could have been an amazing feud and ruined it, and for lame reasons. Seth Rollins getting injured also hurt things, but you can argue that it added some value back into the feud.

What can you expect in this match? Samoa Joe will likely get involved. He doesn't have anything else to do. Stephanie McMahon will also likely be around. She might take a bump, like she has at Wrestlemania recently. Mick Foley might even show up to stick a sock in her mouth. As for the winner, part of me believes Triple H should win here and this feud should continue to Summerslam, where Seth defeats his former mentor. But I'll go against that and say the WWE has Seth Rollins overcome the odds to win it.

Wrestlemania 33 Preview: Part 1

I will be talking about the women's matches today. Cena/Nikki vs. Miz/Maryse will be talked about later this week. This is just about the women's-only matches.

First, the overall theme. Laziness. I have brought this up a few times over the years. Trish Stratus vs. Mickie James at Wrestlemania 22 was the last women's feud for Wrestlemania season that was personal and handled right. Everything since then has been tag matches, lumberjill matches, battle royals, and other multi-woman matches. You have had Playboy pushes and celebrity involvement. You might let some of this stuff go, but not having one heated singles feud for the women at Wrestlemania in all these years? Disgusting. This is an era where women want to be treated the same as men? Well, I see men getting heated singles feuds for Wrestlemania every year. There may be some multi-man matches, as well, but there are heated singles feuds. The women aren't getting this. No one is upset?

The laziness is most clear in Smackdown's women's match for Wrestlemania. Alexa Bliss vs. The World. Right now, it just looks like the other women will be Mickie James, Becky Lynch, Natalya, and Carmella.

There is speculation that the WWE might bring in Asuka for this match and/or women from the past. And I dislike that. What does that say about the WWE's confidence in the women they have now? They have mishandled the Smackdown women. The answer isn't to look over all of them and create hype through NXT or even more women from the past. The WWE needs to do better with the women they have now. If they bring in someone like Asuka and don't book her right, that's unfair to her. If they book her better than everyone already on the roster, that is unfair to those women already there that have been pushed poorly. Worry about fixing the issues managing the talent, then worry about debuts and returns. This is one of the reasons I said a couple months ago that Mickie James should not return. Smackdown is not as efficient as some fans make it seem. Being better than Raw isn't saying much.

Let me look at some of the women in this match. First, Carmella. She has her angle with James Ellsworth. Ideally, the story you would have is that Ellsworth helps Carmella win the title. Carmella can later reveal that she was just using Ellsworth to help her. But this just seems like a story better suited for a singles feud, and not suited for Wrestlemania. It could be a nice story, but with the way Smackdown handles things, I am not sure they would handle it right. They need to make better use of their depth.

Next, Mickie James. I wouldn't be surprised if she never wins a title in the three years she is back for. I am not saying they won't book it to happen. I am just saying I wouldn't be surprised if it never happens. I don't think it is anything personal. They might look at her and see whatever it is they saw in The Dudleys that got them booked like crap last year. They might also want to protect Trish's legacy until Charlotte breaks her record. When it comes to major World titles, the magic number for the WWE is 16 and the name is Ric Flair. When it comes to major women's titles, the magic number for the WWE is 7 and the name is Trish Stratus. Mickie James has already won more major women's titles than Trish, but the WWE will not acknowledge her TNA reigns. That is pretty unfair, since Ric Flair did not win all his World titles in the WWE. I have seen a Mickie James fan hoping she can get lucky number 7 and tie Trish's record. Instead of talking about getting to double digits, he only goes with the WWE only acknowledging the 6 title reigns. And if they want to bury the Diva's Championship reign, they will continue to say she is only a 5-time Champion.

Lastly, Alexa Bliss. She should not even be holding the title now. Naomi's injury led to her getting the title back. I have seen some Naomi fans dreaming that she returns and Wrestlemania and gets the title back. With her injury issues, she seriously needs to prove she can stay healthy. As for Alexa Bliss, she might as well retain the title. Lose the belt in a singles feud after Wrestlemania.

The Raw women's match has had better build than Smackdown's women's match, but it isn't too hard to have better build than a match where every available body is thrown in. But this feud is still pretty mediocre, and it is once again a multi-woman match.

Compare it to last year's triple threat. Fans were pretty hyped for the feud. It was Charlotte vs. Becky Lynch vs. Sasha Banks. Women's revolution! Death to the butterfly title! High expectations for a great match! Lita with the new title! Okay, that's nice. Now, take away all the hype. What do you really have? It was just a title feud. There was no rich story. They could have had one with Charlotte vs. Becky Lynch, but they inserted Sasha Banks and that story got diluted. And I would say the feud development was actually pretty sloppy. But when you buy into hype, you typically overlook things like that. And that is what happened last year. This feud did have issues, but fans overlooked it because of all the hype.

This year, it is Charlotte vs. Sasha Banks vs. Bayley vs. Nia Jax. This year, the same hype is not there. Without that hype it is even easier to see this feud for what it is. It is another lazy title feud. At first, it was Charlotte vs. Sasha Banks vs. Bayley. Instead of just trying to build that feud, they just inserted distractions. Charlotte has had to deal with Dana Brooke turning on her. Bayley had to deal with Nia Jax, which eventually led to Nia getting in the match.

Should Nia Jax even be in this match? It seemed likely for a while that it would happen, but should the WWE have changed their mind? As I said, it feels like including her has just been a distraction that has taken away from the feel of the feud. The WWE has done a terrible job keeping Nia consistently in the picture. If they had done a better job, things would have been smoother and I would not be bringing this up. You also have to think about match quality. Nia Jax might be good for a few spots during the match, but she might hurt the match quality, overall. Problem is, Charlotte vs. Sasha Banks vs. Bayley happened just a few months ago. It was not a stellar match. I am sure these three can put on a better Wrestlemania match, but the match did happen. Adding in Nia Jax does create a fresh match. Then again, what's wrong with doing Charlotte vs. Sasha Banks vs. Bayley again? Do it once with Charlotte as Champion, then with Bayley, and then with Sasha Banks. Make it a series. In the end, having Nia Jax involved does make a fresh match.

Who wins? Bayley. She can then feud against a heel Sasha Banks. The WWE has already taken steps to fix the depth issues a heel Sasha Banks would make. Dana Brooke went face recently. Emma can also eventually return as a face. Or Asuka can debut on Raw as a face. Until all that, there is no PPV streak to keep in tact here.

The Usos Win The Tag Titles

The major development for Smackdown this week was The Usos winning the brand's tag titles. They defeated American Alpha. It just seemed like The Usos would eventually get the titles, so that's not an issue. There are still a few things to bring up.

First, why not have the title change happen at Wrestlemania? There are some people talking like The Hardys will return and win the titles at Wrestlemania from The Usos, but ignore that. As it stands, there are a couple titles likely to change hands at Wrestlemania this year already. Because of that, I don't see a problem with having this title change happen outside the event. As it stands, The Usos vs. American Alpha is hardly worthy of Wrestlemania, But that doesn't seem to stop the WWE these days.

The WWE had a moment on Smackdown. There are a lot of moments on Smackdown. Whether you are talking about title changes, returns, gimmick matches, or whatever, Smackdown delivers when it comes to moments. Where they fail is properly building up to moments. They did not build up well to the 2 out of 3 falls match between Mickie James and Becky Lynch. They did not build Becky Lynch up well prior to her title win last year. American Alpha was not built up well to their title win. I have seen fans talk like the tag division was dead on Smackdown until just recently. The journey is sometimes more fun than the destination. Smackdown needs to do a better job making the journey matter for the audience. I would even question the journey for The Usos to their recent title win.

What about American Alpha? As I said, these guys were not built well. Was the title reign that great? No. These guys are flops. Giving them the tag titles does not change that. They are talented in-ring performers, but that is really all they have shown. The WWE should have done better with them. And if they still couldn't properly get over, depush them. There is still room for much improvement in Smackdown's tag division.

What To Do With Lana

Rusev once again is out with an injury. When this happened a couple years ago, he still showed up to try to help the storyline he was involved in with Dolph Ziggler and Lana. This time around, he wasn't involved in anything too important. His partnership with Jinder Mahal is nothing worth talking about.

But what about Lana? Without her man, she serves even less of a purpose on the main roster. Yes, she is training in NXT, but I'm talking about the main roster right now. Last year, there was a span where she was pretty much an afterthought. She gained relevance again when Rusev feuded with Roman Reigns, and then the storyline with Enzo & Cass. It was good stuff for a periphery diva, but it is obvious she is really tied to her man.

One option might be to give her more people to manage. Jinder Mahal? Unless they plan to properly push him, it is pointless to seriously pair Lana with him. Find someone else on the roster? Debut someone from NXT and have Lana manage them? I don't like any of the options right now.

They could try putting her in matches on the main roster now. With the women's revolution, I don't know how wise that would be. It might just lead to poor matches. This women's revolution shouldn't just be about forcing women into the ring or forcing them to follow a certain path. It should be about fair opportunities and using these women to the best of their own abilities and characteristics.

The option I like is one I have brought up before. Use her as an authority figure. Now would not be the best time. Stephanie McMahon and Triple H are tied up with Wrestlemania matters. But in a couple weeks, they might consider it. Lana has already looked like a boss in the past with her strong heel character. It is one of the reasons she did get over for a while.

It might be refreshing for when Triple H and Stephanie take a break. And they should take a break. They can be overbearing after a while. But what do you do when they take that break? Bring in a legend to run things? Yeah, or you can #GiveDivasAChance. Women have held authority roles before, besides Stephanie McMahon. Why waste Lana when Rusev is hurt?

The fact that she is training to wrestle will only add to her as an authority figure. She can take some bumps and occasionally wrestle the other women. It will add value to her matches. She can be a younger, fresher Stephanie McMahon. Could be very good for her.

Mick Foley Out As Raw GM

The writing was on the wall for a while. Especially after last week, when Mick Foley attacked Triple H, you just knew he was going to get fired as Raw GM. And they did it this week. Stephanie McMahon fired him.

This, of course, will not be the end of Mick Foley. He will probably be a part of Wrestlemania. He'll show up now and then down the line. But the guy obviously needed to take some time off. There were multiple reasons why, including a lack of freshness.

I will say that I liked the relationship Stephanie and Foley had when this first got started. Heel Stephanie McMahon and face Mick Foley? How is that going to work? But it looked like they were actually on the same page for a while. They might have had Stephanie turn back into her tough heel character too soon. It's a little refreshing to see her be something else besides this heel character that rarely gets her comeuppance.

Should Mick Foley be replaced? Maybe down the line. Right now, it just seems pointless. With Triple H back, Raw still has two on-screen authority figures. Bringing in a third, whether that person in aligned with Triple H and Stephanie or not, might just be too much. Down the line, however, you can bring up guys like Sting, Kurt Angle, and so on. Lana might get promoted. Lots of options. But no need to rush to that now.

Should Triple H Vs. Seth Rollins Still Happen At Wrestlemania This Year?

When Triple H screwed Seth Rollins last year, it looked like the start of a very good feud. Triple H eventually turns on and feuds with pretty much all his stablemates. He feuded with Randy Orton. He feuded with Batista. He feuded with Ric Flair. And don't forget Shawn Michaels. Even though this feud with Seth Rollins was no shocker, it still had potential.

And then all that potential seemed to go to waste. Seth Rollins did start off with a good face character. Without Triple H around to do anything, however, that character really went nowhere and Rollins lost his edge. I would say it was also questionable that Triple H screwed Rollins out of the title that one time and never really directly screwed him again out of his other title shots that came after. It is kind of like Mickie James supposedly being this thorn in the side of Becky Lynch that Becky is seeking revenge against, despite the fact the writers did a terrible job making Mickie look like that. She never screwed Becky Lynch out of her match with Alexa Bliss for the title a few weeks ago. Bad booking like that ruins the feel of a feud.

It looked like things were going to pick up again back in January. Triple H finally showed up on Raw. He finally addressed Seth Rollins. Even having Samoa Joe debut to attack Seth Rollins was a nice touch. Problem is, Seth Rollins suffered a legit injury during that attack. Is this feud just cursed? Seth Rollins would have to miss time and his status for Wrestlemania was then thrown into question. Even if he was cleared by the time Wrestlemania came, should they still have the match?

The big development from Raw last week was Seth Rollins coming out at the end of the show to confront Triple H. He tossed aside his crutch and showed the world he was good to go. And then Triple H got his hands on the crutch and destroyed Rollins. Nevertheless, the feud is back on.

Should they still have the match? I would say there are two things to consider. One is the health of Seth Rollins, while the other is the feud development.

First, health. You don't want to rush Seth Rollins back too soon. He has had multiple injuries in recent years that have slowed him down. But he came back with weeks to spare before Wrestlemania. Moreover, if he was still seriously injured, they would not have had that attack they let Triple H do and risk further injury. I know wrestling is scripted and all that, but they still would have been careful, especially these days. And Rollins looked smooth in the little offense he got in last week.

The other thing is feud development. This feud has been butchered over the last few months. If Seth Rollins couldn't come back until the last week before Wrestlemania, I don't think it would be worth it to rush this feud. It would just look terrible. Just have Rollins and Triple H do a segment at Wrestlemania or have Triple H wrestle someone else, like Finn Balor, and have Rollins just interfere. Save the match for Summerslam. But Rollins came back in time to give the WWE adequate time to properly push this feud in the final weeks before Wrestlemania.

All things considered, I think it is the right decision to still have this match. Rollins looks good to go and the feud still has time to be built well in what time they have left. Would it have been nice for Rollins to have a mini-feud against Samoa Joe before Triple H? Yes, but that obviously cannot happen now. These two can feud after Wrestlemania. Until then, Seth Rollins getting to wrestle at Wrestlemania this year is good after he was forced to miss last year's event due to injury.

Let me do an aside. This is about all the Paige drama. When I talked about Paige on Friday, I had planned to do it even before that day, before the leaked photos and everything else. On Friday, I saw the talk about the photos. I just shrugged it off. Just a part of a lot of other celebrities having their privacy violated. Nothing to talk about. I just talked about what I intended to talk about. It wasn't until later that I saw that there was more than just photos. That is an understatement.

Should Paige get fired for the sex tape? Keep in mind that Hulk Hogan didn't get fired for his sex tape. It was racist comments that got him fired from the WWE. Also keep in mind that Paige wasn't the only wrestler involved in this. The WWE should show some consistency in their policy. I don't think she will get fired for this.

I would say, however, that maybe the WWE should release Paige. It really isn't about recent developments. It just seems like a bad relationship is there or might be there. I already talked about the Cm Punk & AJ Lee comparison to Paige and Alberto Del Rio. The WWE obviously does not need her that badly. They have plenty of women to push. Paige can be more useful in other promotions. Separating from the WWE might even help her clear her head.

Might recent developments hurt her overness? Well, I see a lot of perverts and morons enjoying all this. I haven't seen any of the nude pics or the video. I'm not into that kind of thing, and I also think this is a violation of privacy. I don't feel the need to pry into the personal lives of celebrities. I am as interested in seeing all these scandalous celebrity pics as I am interested in seeing NXT. Not at all. Overall, it doesn't hurt how I view Paige. Younger fans might be turned off, or their parents will make them get turned off. Most of Paige's fans will remain supportive of her. Her critics and trolls will be enjoying all the drama. I don't think this will destroy her, unless she lets it destroy her. I do not think the WWE will handle this situation in a crass way to make it worse for Paige or anyone else involved.

Last thing to bring up, this is the double-edged sword of Triple H wanting to hire all these people. Yes, you get their talent, but you also get their baggage. In recent years, there has been a lot of drama. Hogan got fired two years ago for his racist comments. Last year, Brock Lesnar got suspended by the UFC for a drug issue. The WWE did not hold him accountable, despite their own drug policy and a few wrestlers being suspended around that time. They didn't have to, but some people definitely did view them as hypocrites. You now have the Paige drama, and the year isn't even halfway done yet.

You just have a lot of humiliating situations for the WWE and situations that put them on the spot. How are you going to discipline your workers? In what situations should you? Are you going to be consistent with the discipline? The WWE very much does care about their image. And their image always takes a hit with situations like this. And the more people they have associated with their company, the more they have to worry about these kind of situations popping up.

And What About Paige?

When I talked about Impact Wrestling recently, I used a picture of Alberto El Patron and Paige. Those two are obviously in a relationship. Paige has had a bunch of injury and suspension issues in the last year, holding her back in her WWE career. Nevertheless, the WWE is making a movie about her. But then you have her being backstage at the Impact Wrestling tapings a couple weeks ago to support her man. That is the kind of thing that can get you in trouble with the WWE.

There seems to be mixed signals here. How good is the relationship between Paige and the WWE? On the one hand, they are still trying to do something with her. On the other hand, she might not be that interested in being as supportive of the WWE. She might choose her man over the WWE. This sounds familiar. Reminds me of the drama with CM Punk & AJ Lee against the WWE a couple years ago. We all know how that turned out. CM Punk walked out and AJ Lee retired abruptly. Like an RKO in the night, no one saw it coming. There were expectations that it might happen, but AJ Lee retiring when she did came out of nowhere. Will there be a similar end for Paige? 

I have seen some fans say that Paige is throwing her career away. They criticize her because this was her dream and she is just turning her back on it like this. Some say that the WWE should just fire her.

If Paige is not as in love with the WWE anymore, I do not blame her. She didn't debut during the start of the women's revolution era. She debuted during the dying days of the diva era. And her career shows it. She may have won the Diva's Championship in her first night on Raw, but the reign was terrible. Her feud with Tamina was not properly developed at all. Her feud with Alicia Fox featured Fox's crazy gimmick, which really did not serve a proper purpose in the feud. It just took creative investment away from Paige. Her feud with Naomi had to share the spotlight with Cameron and Naomi splitting. It was like they were more interested in putting creative focus on anyone but Paige. And she lost the title back to AJ Lee when AJ returned from her hiatus. She was finally pushed better, but that is because she was working with someone they wanted to be a star. The more you invest in a jobber, the better the star will look working with the jobber. She won the title back on her birthday, but the reign was short and just seemed pointless, as she dropped it back to AJ Lee.

Everything after that was just jobber pushes. The women's revolution era started. Some might say she was the leader of PCB, but she looked like more of the jobber of the group. She got that heated feud with Charlotte, but it was obviously a jobber push. And her career never looked that interesting again since then. Instead of being passed over for eye-candy divas, she was being overlooked for the sake of the Four Horsewomen.

Throughout all that, Paige has done a ton of extra-curricular activities for the WWE. She did Total Divas, Tough Enough, movies, and so on. Of course, these outside activities do not decide what kind of career you are getting in the actual division. And I already talked about the kind of career she was getting. Definitely not being pushed as an A-tier player.

Why should Paige be so loyal to the WWE when they are not properly reciprocating it in terms of how they push her? Even if this was Paige's dream to be in the WWE, it can very well be the case that your dreams don't always turn out how you would have liked. A woman might meet her dream man. Handsome, smart, funny, and all the other qualities she wanted. Problem is, he turns abusive after a while. Why should she stick with him? Because this is her dream guy? No, move on. It is the same idea with working in the WWE. A lot of people are eager to come to the WWE, but then some of them might not be happy with how they are treated. Why should they force themselves to stick around and be as loyal to the company as they might have first been when they came in?

Look at Mickie James. During her first run in the WWE, she took the career of a credible jobber and fooled many fans into thinking she was the centerpiece. She had the overness and talent to deserve it. She was loyal to the company. She had drive. She was the best option they had. But the WWE was still looking to create another eye-candy centerpiece. And that kept Mickie James as a credible jobber. If I remember correctly, Mickie James was released on a day she was promoting the Raw draft special in Richmond, Virginia. That's loyalty for you. Why was she so loyal to a company that never pushed her as a star and kept using her to put over other women and as filler, not to mention the humiliation? If the women's revolution never happened, I don't think the WWE would have ever given Mickie James a second run.

I am no psychologist. I do not know Paige personally. But I can understand the kind of situation she is in. She comes into her dream job with this idea that she can make something of herself and be great. She does a lot of projects for the company. She has some success getting over. But she gets pushed aside for other women that she might feel have not done the things she has done. It's like a great worker in a company that does a lot for them, but does not get rewarded in terms of getting promoted. Now, I can respect workers that shrug that off and just continue to do their job as best as they can because of a good work ethic, but there is nothing wrong with knowing your worth and not wanting to stick around in a situation where you are being mistreated, might be taken advantage of, or are just unhappy. This kind of mistreatment can just make you lose your drive. Your eyes might start to wander elsewhere. In the case of Paige, it looks like she's given some of that devotion the WWE once got to Alberto Del Rio.

People always talk about the WWE giving workers second or third chances. What about the other way around? What about workers that feel the WWE messed up with them and might not want to go back to them? Should they give the WWE a second or third chance? As I pointed out, Paige has done a lot for the WWE and they did not push her right. You can blame it on the dying days of the diva era being so bad. Okay, but Paige still stuck around. She was there as the women's revolution era got started. And she was not featured that well there. Should she give the WWE another chance and refocus herself into her WWE career? This era is still messed up. Both divisions have issues, although this era is looking like it will be better for women's wrestlers than the diva era. And Paige will likely not get lost in the shuffle like she has been in the past. But that is up to her whether she wants to still be with the WWE. I would say you can argue the WWE has betrayed her trust and loyalty in the past. Even if this was her dream job, they gave her a reason to lose interest. It's not like she turned her back on them after the first depush. She gave them multiple chances to treat her right. And if they don't value her, just let her go.

Does that mean she goes to Impact Wrestling with El Patron? It is an option. I already brought up AJ Lee & CM Punk. It is a very similar situation. AJ Lee was showing signs for a while that she was siding with her man over the WWE, but the WWE kept on pushing her well and still lost her. Paige is showing signs of choosing her man over the WWE. The WWE is showing they might still be interested in keeping her with this movie, but it might be too little, too late.

What would this mean for Impact Wrestling? Well, they need a successor for Gail Kim. She's 40 now and still looks like she is coming back for more. But the company really needs to plan for the future. They just can't keep bringing back ODB and Angelina Love. And I'm sure Velvet Sky will come back sooner or later. Outside of that, they rotate in women from the indies, but they never seem to make anything out of them. I have seen some people say that Jade would be the successor to Gail Kim. Yeah? How did that work out? Paige, who is still very young, can be that successor. Some people might roll their eyes at another ex-WWE performer getting a spot in TNA. You do realize Gail Kim was an ex-WWE performer before going to TNA, right? And she is still the most respected female performer the company has ever had. There is no shame in going from the WWE to Impact Wrestling. If Paige thinks she deserves better than the WWE, she might switch companies.

Last thing to consider, will losing Paige hurt the WWE? Not at all. Even though their depth is terrible, they have a ton of women in NXT to debut. And they just have to learn to be more efficient with what they have. Paige was pretty popular, but so are a lot of women these days in the WWE. No one woman seems to knock it out of the park these days. Paige was definitely someone that should have been pushed as a star, but it might just end up being their loss. That is, if they even care. They are doing a terrible job building stars in the women's division these days. I am not even sure if that bothers them.

Dana Brooke Turns On Charlotte

Dana Brooke has been Charlotte's sidekick since last year. At first, the relationship was good. No issues between the two. Of course, Dana often proved to be a poor lackey. This led to Charlotte eventually pushing around her sidekick. On Raw this week, Dana Brooke finally snapped and attacked Charlotte.

This is a fine story for Charlotte outside of the title scene. Problem is, she is currently still in the title scene. And this is Wrestlemania season. Again, I am all for the WWE doing this, but now is not the time for it. This Wrestlemania season is just filled with mostly bad feuds, for various reasons. Raw's women's title feud was better than Smackdown's women's title feud, but it still had some issues. One of the major issues was the fact that it was another multi-woman match, killing the personal feel that Wrestlemania feuds should have. To make matters worse, the WWE decides to do this now. This is a distraction. Instead of focusing on Charlotte vs. Bayley vs. Sasha Banks, the WWE throws this into the pot. It hurts the build for the match.

I am not going to say it is pointless to turn Dana Brooke face. If the WWE is serious about Sasha Banks going heel, they desperately need to turn someone face. I can see what they are doing.

But did they need to do it now? Why not wait for the night after Wrestlemania? Have Dana Brooke accidentally cost Charlotte the match at Wrestlemania. Charlotte then chews Dana out on Raw the next night. Dana finally has enough and snaps.

As for Sasha turning heel, that could happen at Wrestlemania. Or let Bayley have a feud with Nia Jax after Wrestlemania, with Sasha Banks in the picture. Sasha then turns on Bayley when that feud concludes. There are multiple ways to go with this.

Another issue, what kind of face will Dana Brooke make? She is not good in the ring at all. The face style, especially for most of the women, involves high-energy and relying on agility. Dana looks sloppy even as a heel. The face style is not going to help her. There can be some ugly matches to come involving Dana Brooke. The WWE will probably limit her.

In terms of overness, I am not ready to say Dana Brooke will be a great face just off of watching how fans reacted to her on Raw. A lot of fans out there still love a good catfight or brawl. She's not going to be able to do that every night. Will she be able to sustain a strong connection with the fans? Or will her sloppiness hurt her?

Jack Swagger Officially Released

Jack Swagger had asked for his release from the WWE a little while ago. It became official now. He is no longer with the company.

I liked Jack Swagger. I liked his goofy heel character when he first started out in ECW. Even when he turned into a serious heel when he won the World's Heavyweight Championship, he still had potential. He saw his best days when he teamed up with Zeb Colter. Although I would not say he had A+ overness, he became a character most fans could get behind, especially with the "We The People" thing. Fans love having something to play along with.

But let's focus on the last few months of his career in the WWE. He was obviously not doing anything on Raw. They sent him to Smackdown. A lot of fans expected that to help his career. Proving that Smackdown isn't exactly paradise, Jack Swagger was mistreated even there. It didn't take long for him to become irrelevant.

I would say that mistreatment was totally uncalled for. Not only for the sake of Swagger, but it did no favors for Smackdown. Smackdown has a thin roster. There have been multiple nights where they only manage three matches. Three matches in two hours is kind of ridiculous. And it is not always quality matches. To make matters worse, there are a lot of nights where certain talent that should be getting matches don't get matches. I have seen fans say that the tag division on Smackdown is looking terrible. I don't need to say anything new about the women's division.

Even if they did not want to actually push Jack Swagger for the sake of Jack Swagger, they could have utilized him for the sake of creating fresh matches. He could have been a supporting player. He could have been a jobber to the stars. He didn't even get that. There are some humble wrestlers that are just content with being used and being on TV. They don't need title pushes and all that. I am not saying whether Swagger is one of those guys. He might end up in Impact Wrestling in a few months and continue his feud with Alberto Del Rio, this time for the title over there. But if the WWE had utilized him more, he might have been willing to stay. And he could have been useful.

What is Smackdown forced to do because of this thin roster? A lot of talking and brawling. I have pointed out over the last few months that you have seen it a lot in the women's division. It also happens in the men's division.

Just because someone is a good talker doesn't mean they should always be getting promo time. There just comes a point where they have nothing fresh to say, which will hurt their promos. I have seen fans criticize the great Paul Heyman. He can definitely talk, but if he has nothing new to say, his promos get annoying, even to some smarks that love him. Isn't that the point, though? Isn't Heyman supposed to be trying to annoy the fans or the opponent Brock Lesnar is currently feuding with? Well, this isn't a good kind of annoying. His character just becomes annoying when there is no freshness to him. It is the same kind of thing with Mickie James. She definitely puts emotion into her promos and is showing she is capable of doing different types of characters. As a heel, shouldn't she be trying to annoy people? But part of what hurts her character is that the character is bad. And because of the thin roster, they will have her talk even when she doesn't have anything new to say.

As for the brawling, I have seen a couple feuds on Smackdown involve these heated fight scenes. It's not really an issue about worrying that someone might get injured. For me, it is an issue of whether these feuds really deserve it. Last year, Carmella kept on attacking Nikki Bella like these two had some kind of serious blood feud going on. They didn't. In my almost 20 years of watching wrestling regularly, I have seen a lot of personal feuds, and a lot of them didn't have the two sides trying to rip each other apart every chance they got as badly as I have seen some feuds on Smackdown since the brand split. Now, is the issue that those feuds of the past were overrated or not handled right? No. The issue is that the WWE is just trying too hard with the feuds right now. When you spend this creative energy on these feuds, what's left for the feuds that actually deserve the bigger treatment? Have one guy burn down the other guy's house?

How can having more matches help? You can further a feud through matches. Matches aren't just there so wrestling fans can critique them. Take Jack Swagger. He could have had a match against Baron Corbin. Dean Ambrose, who is currently feuding with Corbin, could be out there for commentary. The two could then have a confrontation after the match. Or Dean Ambrose could cost Baron Corbin the match. Or Dean Ambrose could save Swagger from getting beaten down by Corbin. A lot of ways to further the feud without trying too hard. They can still do something like that, but how many free supporting players does the Smackdown roster currently have? How many have the credibility Swagger had? And how many of them are actually being properly utilized to help keep these feuds fresh? The WWE needs to do a better job finding balance between matches, promos, brawls, and other unique segments on Smackdown.

I would say Smackdown is definitely overrated by many smarks. I do not favor any brand. I am just critiquing it objectively. Yes, Raw has issues, but Smackdown also has some bad issues that lead to a lot of talent being mismanaged. To say Smackdown is better than Raw is like saying the New York Jets were a better team than the Cleveland Browns last season. Well, yeah, a lot of teams are going to be better than a team that only wins one game all season, but both teams were bad. Smackdown, for all its good qualities, is underachieving. And it can improve itself by managing talent better.

Back to Swagger. What will become of him? I mentioned Impact Wrestling earlier. I expect that he will end up there. Will the WWE want him back further down the line? I cannot imagine that. Regardless, Swagger now has a chance to reinvent himself or go even further with the gimmick he had that the WWE did not do more with.

The New Direction Of Impact Wrestling

TNA has had a lot of changes this year. They have been re-branded to Impact Wrestling. I'm only going to be here a few more months, so I'll just call them whatever I feel like before I'm done blogging. Aside from changes in name and logos, there has been a change in the roster.

First, the big loss. The Hardys are gone. Last year, these guys had a big hand in TNA getting their best numbers for some weeks. It's not just that they were former WWE guys and very popular. Face it, Jeff Hardy has had his issues over the years and even Matt Hardy was going sour with the fans before his epic gimmick change. But that gimmick and all the crazy segments and matches that came out of it really caused some buzz. Something that easily could have been viewed as Wrestlecrap was actually a hit. And now it is gone.

The big gain? That would be Alberto El Patron. That would be WWE's Alberto Del Rio. He has held multiple titles in the WWE and has already found himself in the title picture in Impact Wrestling. A point I have brought up a few times over the years is, as far as positions go, anyone and everyone is replaceable. But in terms of how efficient and how productive someone can be in a given position, some people cannot be replaced that easily. You might even say there are elites out there that simply cannot be replaced. I am not saying The Hardys were elites, but Alberto El Patron is not going to replace them. I like the guy, but he never reached his potential in the WWE. And this is one instance where most of the blame cannot go on the WWE. They pushed him very well, especially during his first run. Things just could not come together for him. Impact Wrestling gains a guy with some credibility and notoriety, but it will only take them so far.

Of course, there was more to The Hardys' formula for success than just them being liked before TNA. As I said, they were pushed in a unique way. And that is something the company will need to do for El Patron. I think there is definitely potential for that. It may not work, but they can try various things. Don't just push him as a guy that wants a title reign and all that. It was mediocre when they did it with Mickie James in 2010/2011, and it will do El Patron no favors. Develop a good gimmick for him.

I have said before that one of TNA's main issues for years was their failure to retain talent. They just juggle everyone around. They needed to find things that work and stick with it. There are a lot of coaches in sports that will agonize to find a starting lineup that works. Once they have it, they don't just toss it in the trash and continue going all over the place for no good reason. They stick with it as much as is needed to be successful. Wrestling companies need to follow that same idea. Find what works and try to stick with it. Issues might pop up, like injuries, but that doesn't mean inconsistency should be your goal. The WWE's main issue over the years has been trying to force things to work. They don't look for what works. They force things to work. That's not how you give people a proper chance to succeed and earn things for themselves.

Losing The Hardys is another example of TNA failing to retain talent. You can also bring up certain other men, like Drew McIntyre, but I would say The Hardys going is a bigger deal. It just impacts the audience. If the audience was getting attached to something, it is terrible to start depushing it for the sake of something else that will also get depushed in time. And to completely lose it from your company is even worse.

I talked about the impact The Hardys had on the viewership numbers. I felt that 2017 was a year Impact Wrestling could do just as well as 2016, if not better. Let me talk about the company's viewership as it stands now. I get my numbers from here. The numbers do not currently include the viewership for last week's episode, but I calculated that in myself.

For the first 10 weeks of 2017, Impact Wrestling is averaging 292,000 viewers. In 2016, the show averaged 273,700 viewers through 10 weeks. Through the first few weeks of this year, Impact Wrestling is actually doing better than they did last year.

How is it that Impact Wrestling is doing better than last year and WWE Raw is doing worse? Are none of the cord-cutters TNA fans? Is TNA unaffected by that? TNA just has a high ceiling. Just a couple years ago, they were doing over a million viewers. Multiple factors have contributed to their collapse, but there is still room for them to regain their audience, even in this era of many people saying no one watches TV anymore.

Has Raw really reached its ceiling? Is that ceiling really getting lower? I don't believe that. Just 2 years ago, the Raw after Wrestlemania did over five million viewers. I am not talking about a Raw from a decade ago. I am talking about 2015. I am not saying they can do just as well every week, but it is ridiculous to think that the WWE is already in a position where they may never see four million viewers again for their main show.

Back to Impact Wrestling. Even though they are doing better to start 2017 than they did to start 2016, I am not as confident as I was that they can still do just as well as last year for the remainder of the year. Losing The Hardys is huge. What can TNA do? Push people in unique ways. That is what got them good numbers last year. Don't be afraid to look stupid. Something stupid might end up drawing. That doesn't mean they should make stupid business decisions. I am talking about "look stupid" in terms of creative ideas. Most importantly, don't do what the WWE is doing. They do not have a winning formula right now. They are just working off smarks and trying to make as much money off wrestling fans as they can. TNA should just worry about entertaining and being unique.

Mickie James Turns On Alexa Bliss

The interesting developments on Smackdown this week, for me, involve the women. Mickie James turned on Alexa Bliss. Coinciding with that, it was announced that every available woman on Smackdown would get a title shot at Wrestlemania against Alexa Bliss. Two things to talk about right there.

First, Mickie James was disrespected a little by Alexa Bliss. That led to Mickie James kicking her in the head. Going by the interview Mickie James gave later on to explain herself, they are still keeping her heel.

I have said many times that I would not have brought Mickie James back the way the WWE did. I do not like her being heel. I do not like her playing this heel character. I do not like her being a sidekick. But if you are going to do it, there was potential to do a really great job with it. They could have built up a great feud between Mickie James and Becky Lynch, which Becky would have eventually won. They could have built a great relationship between Mickie James and Alexa Bliss, which would have really helped Alexa's character further shine. And the WWE just seemed to have ruined everything. The feud between Mickie and Becky was not built up to be as great as it could have been. And now the partnership between Alexa Bliss and Mickie James ends in a very mediocre fashion.

You can say all this is because Naomi got injured. The WWE obviously cannot do what they had planned with Naomi gone. She was supposed to be holding the Smackdown Women's Championship right now. The blame goes on the WWE, not Naomi. They were the ones that were wrong to rush the title on Naomi and they were the ones that chose to handle things like they have in response to it.

And with Naomi out, the WWE loses a face. You would think the smart thing to do would be to have Mickie James finally go face now that the depth issues in the division obviously call for it. But they still want her to be this bitter heel character. That is just incredibly stupid. Nikki Bella is getting an angle with John Cena. The only free face on the active roster right now is Becky Lynch. So are we doing Becky Lynch vs. everybody that's a heel in the next few weeks? Is it Alexa Bliss vs. everybody that's going after her title? Or is this just going to be a jumbled mess because there are not enough faces to run proper storylines and matches?

Let me talk about Mickie's heel character. First, her promos. Some fans hate her promos. She is dragging out her words. I can see what she's doing. She's trying to play a bitter, condescending heel. You look at how she talked during her 2006 heel run. She didn't talk like this. You look at how she talked during her 2013 heel run. She didn't talk like this. It's because she was playing different heel characters back then. She was a psycho heel in 2006 and playing a more delusional heel in 2013. And that's the difference, the character. This character she is playing now is just not good. It's not that Mickie James doesn't know how to talk, or whatever else some fans are saying. She has proven herself before.

There are also some fans out there I see that enjoy her promo work since coming back. She is putting that emotion into it that a lot of workers don't. They just talk. And that might be a reason why some fans don't appreciate what Mickie James is doing. This is not something she has done before and this is not something the other women on Smackdown are doing. It just looks weird in comparison to other women's promos and Mickie's own promo work in the past. I see mixed reviews on The Usos' promo work. Some people think they are botching their promos. Some people love it because they are trying to stand out. Same kind of thing with Mickie James.

Mickie James wasn't in the WWE when the Reality Era started. That's where a lot of promos just became about these self-righteous rants. It is a shame that some fans view the value of promos more on what is said than how it is said. All you really need to do is talk. If you say what the fans agree with, they will cheer. You don't need to put that extra work in to make your promos unique for these kind of fans. Mickie James is trying to be different, but she doesn't need to be. Of course, the promos the WWE wants her to do aren't even based on reality. She's not bitter. That's another reason this whole heel character is just not good for her.

In the end, if a lot of fans can't appreciate what she's doing, is it worth doing? Why try to stand out? Just talk like everybody else. I don't like saying that. Mickie James is a woman that got as over as she did because she stood out. She took a character and a type of treatment in which she should have just gotten a mediocre connection with the fans and did better than the WWE wanted. If she loses her drive to stand out, then that would just be terrible. The WWE is already failing on their end to use her properly. Personally, I do not like these promos, although I can appreciate what Mickie is trying to do. But the problem isn't Mickie James. The WWE needs to give her a better character.

The second thing I want to talk about her heel character is her emotion outside of these promos. She is still showing that charisma I have brought up before. And that emotion just does not match the character the WWE wants her to portray in terms of her booking and promos. If anything, I would say that charisma just screams to turn her face. This is a person fans enjoyed watching back in the day, and without the hype and creative investment stars would get. That is because she had the wrestling ability to connect with wrestling fans and other attributes to connect with other fans. And that includes her charisma.

Again, I am not saying she should never be heel. Turn her heel when her character gets stale, when there is a great storyline reason for her to go heel, or when a depth issue calls for a heel turn. There wasn't any of that when they brought her back in January. The depth in the division at the time called for her being face. Her character wasn't stale. She was just coming back. Fans were eager for it. And there was really no good storyline reason for her being heel. Instead of having her say that the women of today are not respecting her, just have her come out and say she's here to throw her hat in the ring and remind the women of today what she is about, without sounding like a heel. Now that the WWE is back where they were before Naomi returned in January, that is even more reason to turn Mickie James face.

There are some people that might say someone is a child stuck in a man's body. I was often told I was an old man stuck in a kid's body when I was younger. Regardless of that, when I look at Mickie James, I see a face stuck in a heel character. And it is a bad heel character. To make matters worse, the WWE has not even handled this bad heel character properly for the sake of those she is working with. You can talk about being out of touch, but it means more than just not knowing what your fans want. How about not even knowing what you have right under your nose? How about not being able to properly evaluate your own workers and properly utilize them? The WWE is just doing what they want and not doing things right.

Onto the Smackdown women's match for Wrestlemania. Essentially, just take every woman that has nothing to do and stick her in this match. Terrible. Mickie James vs. Trish Stratus at Wrestlemania 22 was the last great Wrestlemania women's match that wasn't a tag match, a triple threat, a battle royal, a lumberjill match, or some other match that involved sticking more people into the picture that really belonged there. Where are the personal feuds for Wrestlemania between two women? The WWE could have had one last year between Becky Lynch and Charlotte. They stuck Sasha Banks into the picture. Having a valet or manager at ringside is one thing. But this kind of booking is just terrible. And it has gone on now for over ten years.

Even ignoring the comparison to previous years, compare Smackdown's women's match to Raw's women's match. Smackdown has everyone being thrown into the match without much fuss over it this week. Meanwhile, Raw actually did more work than that. They had that promo this week that led to Sasha Banks defeating Bayley to earn a title match. It looks like it might be a triple threat. Regardless of whether or not Nia Jax gets added, there are less bodies involved than Smackdown's match, there is actually some development to building this match, and it was not just thrown together as lazy booking.

Let me just do a quick aside about the women's segment on Raw. Some people have criticized me in the past of undervaluing the overness and ability to draw of Sasha Banks and Bayley. These two wrestled in the third hour this week, which had that large third hour drop some fans have been talking about. Not only that, I was watching the end of the match on Monday, and Sasha Banks didn't get that great of a reaction when she won. That's because them Chicago fans never react to anything, right? Let's just be realistic. Face it, all these women can do better. In most cases, the fault goes on the WWE for mismanaging them. But I don't think I was wrong to question the overness and ability to draw of Sasha Banks and Bayley. There is a toxic environment in the WWE right now that will ruin the potential of a lot of workers. These two women have potential, but they are not there right now.

Back on track, let me continue to compare the Smackdown women's division to the Raw women's division. I would obviously say Smackdown has gotten the short end of the stick for Wrestlemania as far as the women go. But this is nothing new. Look at every major PPV since the brand split came back. I am talking about the big ones that featured both brands. Summerslam had Sasha Banks vs. Charlotte as Raw's women's match. Smackdown had a multi-woman tag match. Survivor Series had Raw vs. Smackdown, which was won by Raw. The Royal Rumble had Sasha Banks vs. Nia Jax and Charlotte vs. Bayley for Raw, while Smackdown had another multi-woman tag match. And now Wrestlemania will have Raw's Women's Championship match be featured better than Smackdown's Women's Championship match.

This is terrible. It is becoming a theme. You might forgive them for Survivor Series, but this is still three PPVs since the brand split where Raw's women are being featured better than Smackdown's. And is there an end in sight? Okay, so the WWE wants separate women's divisions. I can even agree with running them with different philosophies. But these divisions are separate, but not equal. The WWE has to be able to spread the spotlight better than this.

While Raw is featuring certain women as elites and prominently, Smackdown is just juggling multiple women around. I think that is one of the problems. Smackdown doesn't have anyone being pushed properly as a star should. And if the WWE looks at the women on Smackdown and don't respect them as elites in the same way they view some of Raw's women, it is no shocker to see this questionable booking for the last few months.

The WWE needs to start developing stars out of the women they have on Smackdown and stop juggling them. If this was their preseason to assess what they have, okay, time to make the tough decisions. I would build around Becky Lynch, Mickie James, and Alexa Bliss. You have a woman that has the potential to be the centerpiece of the division now, a woman that earned it ten years ago, never got it, but can still be featured as a star now, and a woman that may not be a great wrestler, but could be a great character. Carmella and Natalya can be supporting players. What about Nikki Bella? If she sticks around, send her to Raw. Send Emma or Nia Jax to Smackdown. For all the respect Smackdown gets over Raw, they still do some terrible things on the blue brand. There is room for improvement.     

Braun Strowman Takes A Hit

Braun Strowman did indeed lose to Roman Reigns at Fastlane. But he didn't want things to end there. He called Roman Reigns out at the end of Raw this week. Instead of Reigns, The Undertaker came out. Strowman then just backed off and left without any altercation. Roman Reigns then came out to confront The Undertaker, setting up their Wrestlemania feud.

How does this make Strowman look? The loss to Roman Reigns is one thing, but backing down from The Undertaker? The Undertaker is indeed a figure to be respected and feared. I am not arguing that. I agree with that. But it doesn't make the monster that Braun Strowman is supposed to be look good to back down from any other wrestler.

People might say the WWE is doing a terrible job building stars for the future. They have to rely too heavily on part-timers, like Goldberg. I am not saying Braun Strowman could have been the next Undertaker. I knew very well this guy was a jobber to the stars. But they could have done a better job with him right now to at least give him a better chance to stay strong.

What could they have done to set up Reigns vs. Undertaker without making Strowman look like a coward? How about let Roman Reigns come out and actually brawl with Strowman? Reigns wins the brawl. He can then proclaim that this is his yard. Cue The Undertaker. Or wait until the following week for Undertaker to show up and take exception to what Reigns said. Or cue The Undertaker's gong this week on Raw, which would symbolize he would show up next week to confront Reigns. I know some people are saying the third hour of Raw did poor ratings this week because Undertaker was not advertised. That's no excuse. It's Wrestlemania season, the time of year fans are supposed to expect big things to happen. Anyway, doing things this way would have set up the same story they are going with now for Reigns and The Undertaker, without making Strowman look like a coward. In terms of his image, it would be better to lose a fight than be afraid to get into one.

What can Strowman look forward to for Wrestlemania season? Probably nothing personal. I am not saying they should have protected him so well that he should be forced into the match between Reigns and Undertaker. But they could have protected his image a little better than this, even if no big push is immediately on the plate for him.

Orton Vs. Wyatt Development

Now that I'm done previewing Fastlane and talking about Beth Phoenix, I can get to the big development on Smackdown last week. I am, of course, talking about Randy Orton officially stabbing Bray Wyatt in the back, something you just knew would happen.

Let me start with something I like. The segment with Randy Orton burning Bray Wyatt's compound was nice. They need more segments where they are doing more than just talking, especially just "shooting" against each other. And they need segments that take place in different places. One of the reasons TNA had success with the Matt & Jeff Hardy drama last year was because of this kind of thing. And one of the reasons I liked the Orton/Wyatt storyline when it started last year is because it had that potential to be more than just the regular storyline you see these days.

Now that Orton stabbed Bray in the back, was all this worth it? I am talking about having Randy Orton join The Wyatts. I had pointed out numerous times how poorly it was done. It was like Orton just randomly decided to do it. Bray Wyatt had not done anything to really "break" Randy Orton to make it believable that Wyatt had won him over. And this storyline direction was where I started disliking what they were doing.

I don't think it was worth it. First of all, Bray Wyatt just looks like a big idiot. How could he have trusted Randy Orton? He knows Orton has done this kind of thing before. He did it just a few years ago to Seth Rollins.

Another thing to keep in mind is that the WWE spent the Royal Rumble victory and the WWE Championship on this feud. Was that worth it? Fans sometimes discuss whether a certain feud needs a title to be involved. Some say Lesnar vs. Goldberg going on right now does not need the title. I would say Orton vs. Wyatt needs it even less. You have a great elaborate storyline here, even with the WWE trying to get too fancy. There is fire here (no pun intended) even without the title.

That Royal Rumble victory could have gone to some other feud to help develop that. The WWE Championship could have been kept on John Cena or given back to AJ Styles, or even given to Miz, who many say has regained a lot of credibility in the last few months. It could have really helped other feuds. This feud between Randy Orton and Bray Wyatt did not need it. You now have certain individuals getting mediocre Wrestlemania feuds, while a feud that already had a lot invested in it gets the Royal Rumble winner involved and the WWE Championship.

I mentioned AJ Styles. He has to face Randy Orton to decide the #1 contender. It is obvious how this is going to end. Orton will win. This is just dumb booking. I know AJ Styles doesn't fit into this storyline, but you would usually expect in a situation like this for a triple threat to be made. And after Styles loses, what does he have left? A rumored feud against Shane McMahon? Why? Because a heel wrestler has issues with a face authority figure? This kind of thing happens all the time. You don't always get a match out of it. Even though Shane McMahon has stepped up in some matches in his years in the WWE, this is just a lackluster feud for AJ Styles for Wrestlemania season.

Another supporting player in the Orton/Wyatt drama has been Luke Harper. Many might wish he was in the spot AJ Styles is in right now. Many might also wish it was a triple threat. Luke Harper looked like he legitimately won the battle royal a few weeks ago. He might be viewed as a sympathetic character for being pushed out the stable. Some might argue he has been screwed over by the WWE. If they WWE didn't try to get fancy with Orton/Wyatt feud, they might have avoided this problem.

What's wrong with AJ Styles vs. Luke Harper for Wrestlemania? Yes, these two already faced each other not to long ago, but the same can be said for Goldberg and Lesnar. But you would have two smark favorites in this feud, so those fans should be more than content with the Wrestlemania match these two can put together. As it stands now, Luke Harper does not have a match of his own for Wrestlemania. Instead of throwing him into a battle royal or having him just interfere in Orton/Wyatt, a feud with AJ Styles might be better.

I would like to see how the Wrestlemania audience reacts to Orton/Wyatt. Randy Orton is a popular guy, but let's not ignore that there have been times smarks did not love him that much. Daniel Bryan just buried his overness a couple years ago around this time. Will the Wrestlemania crowd be more sympathetic to Bray Wyatt for how he has been made to look? Will they be chanting for Luke Harper? The WWE still has a few more weeks to develop this feud and try to make it less likely fans react in a way the WWE might not want.

Beth Phoenix Inducted Into The WWE Hall Of Fame

Beth Phoenix is this year's female representative in the WWE Hall of Fame. The customary response would be that it is well-deserved. No, I do not agree. Beth Phoenix should not be going into the Hall of Fame, especially now.

Look back at her career in the WWE. It got started in 2006. Some people might not even remember that. She debuted as part of the storyline between Mickie James and Trish Stratus, but got injured in her first official match on the main roster.

She returned one year later and quickly found herself in a title feud against Candice Michelle. It is not unusual for credible jobbers to find themselves getting a big push so soon after debuting or even returning from an injury. Candice Michelle got injured, and that hurt Beth's push. There were some weeks where she held the Women's Championship and they had nothing for her, a clear sign that you are a credible jobber. Candice Michelle returned and got injured again. Beth lost the title to Mickie James, then won it back when Candice looked like she was ready to go again. Mickie James wasn't the only woman getting pushes in 2007 and 2008 that were dependent on what was going on with Candice Michelle. 2008 was the year that Beth won a Slammy, which some people are bringing up like it validates her being in the Hall of Fame. This was not even a fan-voted award at the time. The WWE just gave it to her, and with the poor way they pushed her during the year, and in 2009, you have to wonder why. This was the year PWI honored Awesome Kong, so the WWE might have wanted to take the opportunity to put some hype on their diva-version of a dominant female wrestler.

Of course, as I just mentioned, 2009 ended up being pretty much a dead year for Beth Phoenix. If they really cared so much about her, that would not have been the case. She got overshadowed by Santino, then spent much of the year without any real direction.

Things picked up again in 2010. She was in the Royal Rumble, although not the first woman to do that. A few months later, she would win the Women's Championship from Michelle McCool. And she would suffer another injury just a few days into her reign, forcing her to drop the title and take more time off. She would come back later in the year, but soon once again find herself lost in the shuffle.

She would get a run with the Diva's Championship later on. Of course, she got injured again during that reign. You can blame Alicia Fox for that. The WWE kept the title on her this time, but she did miss some time in action. They took the title off her before she could become the longest-reigning Diva's Champion. Her reign was long more out of the WWE not having a woman they were willing to push as centerpiece, not their desire to push Beth as a star. There were really no epic feuds through much of the reign. Some wrestling fans can bring whatever matches they want during the reign, but I am talking feud development. If the WWE is building someone to be a star or featuring them as a star, it shows through feud development, not match quality. And after that, she never really did anything else major until retiring in October 2012.

Does this really sound like a career worthy of the Hall of Fame? It was filled with time spent away due to injury or just not doing anything important. Don't get me wrong, if Beth Phoenix overcame this to became very over, I would probably be on her side to go into the Hall of Fame. She would have done the kind of thing Mickie James did. But she didn't. She didn't become very over at all. Wrestling fans love her and her hometown fans love her, but she never became one of the most over female workers the diva era ever had. She would probably be better received in this era, but we will never know for sure.

Not only do I question the induction of Beth Phoenix, I question them doing it now. There are multiple women that I would induct before her. Let me bring up three.

Wrestling fans would definitely disagree with this. Sable? Rena Mero? Brock Lesnar's wife? People don't realize that she helped to start the diva era. "Diva" may be a bad word now, but the WWE shouldn't act like they were always above it and always treating female wrestlers great. If Sunny is in the Hall of Fame, Sable also deserves a spot. She helped to pave the way for Trish Stratus. It was the success they had off her that led the WWE to look for another eye-candy centerpiece.

Sable was also a star during the Attitude Era, the hottest time in the WWE's history. This era definitely preceded the era Beth Phoenix was a part of, but there are still a number of women from this era not in the Hall of Fame that should be. That does not seem right to me.

Here is a choice wrestling fans might love. Victoria, Tara, Lisa Marie Varon, whatever you want to call her, she's a respected female wrestling talent. She won two Women's Championships in the WWE, and then had a little more title success in TNA.

Victoria did not get that over in the WWE and she got the same type of career Beth Phoenix had, a credible jobber. But this is an era where they are doing some revisionist history and acting like these type of performers are more worthy to be in the Hall of Fame than they might have been under the old status quo. And you might say Victoria paved the way for Beth Phoenix. She relied on power moves, much like Beth Phoenix did. I would say Victoria was a better overall in-ring performer. Regardless of that, she preceded Beth Phoenix. With the women's revolution era here, she is obviously going in one day. But why is Beth Phoenix ahead of her?

This one just seems obvious. I mentioned that Beth Phoenix was in the Royal Rumble, but she was not the first woman to do it. The first woman to do it is not in the Hall of Fame. That would be Chyna (Joanie Laurer). Chyna was a part of multiple firsts for women in the men's world of wrestling. She held the Intercontinental Championship. Beth Phoenix never did that. Chyna was also one of those female stars from the Attitude Era that have not been inducted into the Hall of Fame. You can say Chyna paved the way for the kind of things Beth Phoenix did.

Of course, the big reason Chyna has not been inducted in the past is her personal issues. The WWE would have to be worried about giving her a live mic. But she past away last year. And the WWE already acknowledged her after that. It would just have seemed fitting to induct her, either this year or in the near future. I think that it will happen one day. But until it does, it seems a little insulting to put Beth Phoenix in there first. Beth Phoenix didn't pave the way for Chyna. Beth Phoenix was really just the credible-jobber version of what Chyna was back in the day.

Let me bring up a name that is in the Hall of Fame. Look at Trish Stratus. She was the greatest diva the WWE ever produced in the previous era. The WWE pushed her very well and have protected her legacy. She was even the youngest Hall of Fame inductee at the time in 2013. She was 37. She had to wait 7 years to get inducted.

Compare that to Beth Phoenix. Beth is 36. She retired in 2012. That was 5 years ago. Beth Phoenix is getting inducted at a younger age than even Trish Stratus and even faster than Trish Stratus did.

Tell me, what has Beth Phoenix ever done to deserve this? What has she done to deserve being inducted at a younger age than even Trish Stratus? What has she done to get inducted faster than even Trish Stratus? What has she done to get inducted ahead of women that you can argue paved the way for her, and some of whom were doing their thing in the WWE before even Trish Stratus? Nothing. Beth Phoenix does not deserve to be inducted into the Hall of Fame this soon, and ahead of many women that are not in there yet. I didn't even list all of them. Some of them from eras before the diva era should still get in ahead of Beth Phoenix. Some fans want Miss Elizabeth in.

I would also question whether she deserves to be inducted at all. She never got that over. I looked at her career and pointed out how inconsistent it was due to injuries and depushes. She never had a big impact on the status quo. And she never accomplished anything big outside of the WWE, whether in wrestling or some other industry.

I would say Beth should come back for one more run, if she or her fans really want her to be worthy of the Hall of Fame. I know she has kids, but she is still young. She's younger than Mickie James, another woman that has a child. Mickie James still came back for another run. I don't think Mickie James even needed to come back to be worthy of the Hall of Fame. She was the most over female performer the WWE had for a number of years, won more major women's titles than any other woman, and had an impact on the status quo. All she had to do was wait a respectable time to get inducted. But Beth Phoenix still needs to do more, in my eyes. This is the perfect era for that. They value female wrestlers more.

Where are the respected veterans? In a lot of sports, you will see players that are respected and have lasted a long time. These are the respected veterans. But they are not really the elites of their field. They are not the big names. Some of them might get into the Hall of Fame, but no one would be shocked if they didn't. In basketball, everyone knows Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant. These are the legends. But I sometimes hear the commentators talking about guys I never heard of. They stood out, had some good years in some regards here and there, but they were not the top stars.

Should Beth Phoenix be considered a respected veteran? I certainly do not consider her someone that should be getting inducted at a younger age and faster than Trish Stratus did. Trish Stratus is featured as a true legend. Inducting Beth Phoenix now is like saying she is in the same class as Trish Stratus. And she isn't. I would say she didn't even last long enough in the business to be considered a respected veteran. And let me repeat it again, to put her in there before women that helped to pave the path for her is just terrible.

I just want to make it clear, this is nothing personal against Beth Phoenix. When there were rumors Mickie James might get inducted 2 years ago, I said she should not. I am a Mickie James fan. She would have gone in at age 35, even younger than Beth Phoenix now. Even though I pointed out that she has a career worthy of the Hall of Fame, she should wait. She hadn't retired yet. I even would have viewed it as a little insulting if they did seriously want to induct her. Are they implying her career is over?

This is just a sign of the times. It is one of the bad aspects of the women's revolution era. They are trying too hard to honor female wrestlers, even ones from the era where most of them were mistreated. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure someone like Vickie Guerrero will be inducted one day, but there are still so many other women being left out right now that are more deserving than Beth Phoenix.

One last thought. I read someone on a message board say last week that the WWE should induct more than one woman every year to get in more women that deserve it. Terrible idea. After a couple years, you are going to have everyone in the Hall of Fame that actually deserves it. After that, they are pretty much scraping the bottom of the barrel for a while. Don't force these inductions just to meet some quota.