Previewing The Payback 2017 Main Event Matches

I would consider Seth Rollins vs. Samoa Joe one of the main matches of Payback. It is an extension of that big feud you had between Rollins and Triple H. That feud had its ups and downs. Samoa Joe being inserted looked like it would revitalize the feud. Of course, the injury to Seth Rollins happened. All that is in the past, but this feud still remains.

It just feels like this feud isn't as great as it could have been. It might have been better if Triple H was still around to help it. It just feels too routine right now. Samoa Joe lacks a major feel that he should be having.

Who wins this match? I can see Seth Rollins win this in a cheap fashion, like a roll up. Samoa Joe then destroys him after. They can always run with the injury angle. That keeps the feud going for a few more weeks.

Braun Strowman and Roman Reigns continue their feud. And these last few weeks have been pretty intense. Braun Strowman has been made to look like a monster. On the one hand, I can understand if the WWE wants to be a little more edgy. On the other hand, they have to be careful of not looking crass. Moreover, they have to be careful not to look stupid.

Braun Strowman flipping the ambulance a few weeks ago was a spectacle. Many fans ate that up. It helps that they hate Roman Reigns. It just reminded me of a certain angle TNA did with Mickie James during her last run there. That was Wrestlecrap to many fans. Isn't this the same kind of thing?

If that wasn't Wrestlecrap, maybe this week is. That whole Dumpster Match between Strowman and Kalisto was garbage. The way Strowman lost was trash. Wasting so much time just for the anti-climactic short fall off the stage was junk. How many more words can I come up with to fit this Dumpster Match? It just was poorly done. It wasn't botched. What they planned was just not good. The WWE's PG attempt to do something that would have gone over better in the Attitude Era just flopped.

And after all that, how can Roman Reigns and Braun Strowman have a regular match at Payback? This feud is obviously not ending here. But are they making Strowman look strong just for Reigns? Or for Lesnar down the line? Either way, I can see this match ending without a winner. Both of them might get counted out. They might take each other out outside the ring. They might brawl to the back. In the end, this feud will continue to a gimmick match.

House of Horrors. Randy Orton faces Bray Wyatt in a match that will finally end this elaborate feud that has gone on for months. I was a fan of this feud when it first started. But then it felt like they just tried to do too much. Involving the WWE Championship was one of those things they did not need to do. Since they did, I felt Bray Wyatt should have retained it against Orton. That didn't happen. Okay, I would have said that Bray Wyatt should win it back.

Problem is, the title isn't even on the line in this match. Bray Wyatt has gone to Raw and they have decided not to work any angle to make this a title rematch. I think that is just terrible. Randy Orton did not need a title reign right now. But let's move on from the title.

On the one hand, given everything that has happened in this feud, I am glad it is a unique gimmick match. And the WWE has not been 100% clear on what fans will see in this match. That should interest some fans to see what it is all about. That should make it a draw.

On the other hand, given everything that has happened in this feud, the way they have been treating it in the last few weeks is terrible. Randy Orton has moved on to Jinder Mahal. Bray Wyatt got into the groove of things on Raw this week. That is what happens when you separate the two. This feud had so much put into it. For it to just lose momentum like this heading into the big final encounter is terrible. While the unique match type might interest some fans, the poor feud development might also disinterest some other fans.

Who wins? Bray Wyatt. If the title is not on the line, Bray Wyatt might as well win to give him a ton of momentum. This can be a step towards properly building him to be the next Undertaker. Undertaker had a couple specialty matches to his name. House of Horrors can be Bray Wyatt's match. But it would suck if he lost the first one.

Previewing The Payback 2017 Undercard Matches

Even though this Raw PPV is missing the Universal Championship, there are still a lot of big matches on it. I am going to talk about the undercard today.

Enzo & Cass will take on Anderson & Gallows. Ideally, the tag titles would have been involved in this feud, whether it was Enzo & Cass defending the titles or finally winning them here. That isn't happening. The faces should at least win this match. Throw them a bone.

The tag titles will be defended when The Hardys face Sheamus & Cesaro. The Hardys just won the tag titles earlier this month. Is there a good reason for Sheamus & Cesaro to get another run? It might just be time for those two to split. The Hardys retain.

Moving out of the tag division, let's go to the cruiserweight division. Neville once again defends against Austin Aries. The WWE has been tossing this title all over the place since it was created last year. Austin Aries seems like someone likely to get it. Might as well happen here.

Chris Jericho vs. Kevin Owens is an interesting match. Not only is the United States Championship on the line, but these two will be switching brands if the title change happens. Will it? Probably not. Owens has a feud brewing with AJ Styles already. Jericho won't be here much longer. Owens wins.

Previewing The Payback 2017 Women's Match

As of now, there is only one women's match for the upcoming Raw PPV. That would Alexa Bliss going after Bayley's Women's Championship. There are a couple things to talk about before previewing the match.

First, go back two weeks to when Alexa Bliss came over to Raw, along with Mickie James. That segment seemed to have been overbooked. Let me just focus on one thing. Did Sasha Banks turn heel in that segment? Fans have been anticipating that for a while. Sasha Banks finally starts looking like she might go after Bayley for the title. Next thing you know, three other women show up.

Is it fair to Sasha Banks to just overlook her like this for the sake of Alexa Bliss? I don't think so. If nothing else, there was a story brewing here between Sasha and Bayley. Even if the WWE eventually goes back to that story, the sloppiness may just hurt the value. Beyond the story, how does this make Sasha Banks look? This is not the first time she has been pushed hard for a while, then gotten lost in the shuffle. That is how you expect a credible jobber to be pushed, but you would have hoped the WWE would be doing better than this these days.

Next, go back to last week when it was Alexa Bliss vs. Sasha Banks vs. Mickie James vs. Nia Jax. Who was the face in this match? Alexa Bliss is a clear heel, although they were in her hometown last week and she got cheered. Nia Jax is also a heel, although she is not an anyone's side. I just talked about Sasha Banks turning. Mickie James has had her character in limbo for a while now. I can't tell what she is. The WWE really needs to do a better job with the characters of these performers. I'm not even talking about gimmicks. I am talking simply presenting them as clear heels or faces. I am not saying they should never do tweener characters. And some tweener characters can be very entertaining. But you don't have that here. Nia Jax attacking both faces and heels is not that great. Sasha Banks having her heel character look like an afterthought so easily is not great. Whatever Mickie James has been doing in the last few months is definitely not great. The WWE needs to do a better job presenting these women.

Speaking of things that are not fair, is it fair to Mickie James that she has not been treated better since coming to Raw? The creative depth is not great with the Raw women right now. Yes, Dana Brooke and Emma are getting an angle outside the title scene. That's good. I have seen someone complain that Emma is being wasted. Emma is getting an angle, while certain other women have nothing to do. Mickie James is one of those other women. I have seen some people expecting Mickie James to feud with Nia Jax. And where's that? I think it is terrible that they have not made a better effort to create a feud for Mickie James for Payback. Even if it only gets on the pre-show, it can be the start of something that could last a few more weeks after April. Just dumping it on the card now is not the same as properly developing it prior to the event.

Onto the actual match. Bayley vs. Alexa Bliss will likely not be a classic. The respectable aura that the WWE had created on Raw's women's division may very well start to fade. I always felt it would be hard to sustain, but the WWE just better be careful with what they do. They might be entering another diva era.

Who wins? It should be Bayley. The WWE will likely have Charlotte win the title on Smackdown before Alexa Bliss gets any run on Raw. Besides that, I think it would be insulting to what has been created on Raw in the last year to give Alexa Bliss the title here. Yes, what she did on Smackdown might have been good enough to earn a title reign there, but Raw has had better standards. Alexa Bliss needs to show even more here. Then again, the WWE is terrible with maintaining standards. Nevertheless, I will stick with Bayley.

What About Baron Corbin?

There have been a lot of changes on the roster just this month. You have had returns, debuts from NXT, and the trades recently. With that has come some questionable pushes and the failure to push some people properly that might deserve it. I want to talk about another person being underutilized today.

Just a month ago, Baron Corbin was involved in a feud for the Intercontinental Championship with Dean Ambrose. I would have had him win the title at Wrestlemania. That didn't happen. Okay, no problem, just let the feud continue and he will eventually win it. The feud did continue, but then Dean Ambrose got sent to Raw and Baron Corbin lost any opportunity to get the title.

I don't think he can be the next face of the company, but he can be a solid midcarder right now. Midcarders can really help the WWE right now. The answer isn't to bring back guys like Shelton Benjamin and take guys from Impact Wrestling. There are midcarders on the roster now that can be used much better. Baron Corbin is one of them.

He is higher on the ladder than Jinder Mahal, but he was not even in that match last week to decide a new #1 contender. Not only would I have put him in, but if the WWE wants to give a big push to a new guy so much, it should have been in. Instead, he has just been a supporting player in recent weeks in the feud between AJ Styles and Kevin Owens.

The WWE just seems to be in one of those periods where midcarders are not doing well in the midcard. Kevin Owens, a former Universal Champion, is holding one midcard title. He won it from a guy with some World titles to his name, Chris Jericho. Jericho won it from Roman Reigns, a former WWE Champion. AJ Styles, a former WWE Champion, is feuding with Owens now. With the other midcard title, Dean Ambrose, Miz, and Dolph Ziggler are the only really relevant names in recent months. It might be time to let the pure midcarders shine again.

The Slow Return For Finn Balor

Last time, I talked about a lower-midcarder getting a great push he does not deserve. This time, I am talking about a guy that should be a main-eventer that is getting mediocrity he does not deserve. That would be Finn Balor.

What has Finn done since he returned to Raw earlier this month? Having him return to be Seth's tag partner was nice. Since then, however, he has just been facing jobbers in the midcard.

Obviously, the recent trades have left certain things in limbo. Certain guys on a new brand have unfinished business with someone on the other brand. You can understand if the WWE is a little inefficient right now.

Thing is, Finn Balor should be pushed as a priority. You don't see Roman Reigns and Seth Rollins in limbo right now. This guy was the inaugural Universal Champion. It seems the WWE has dropped the ball with all the inaugural titleholders they had last year. You would expect them to eventually move on from Rhyno & Slater. But Becky Lynch, TJ Perkins, and Finn Balor should all be featured better than they have. Don't hand someone a major piece of history unless they are hot enough to deserve it, are already getting legendary careers, or you plan to start giving them that great career. It looks like such a waste when you don't follow up on them properly.

Finn Balor obviously can't feud for the Universal Championship right now. The WWE decided to give the title to Brock Lesnar, who will not show up on a regular basis. Considering Lesnar already got a title reign a couple years ago and has not done anything since to deserve another one, this has just been a dumb decision by the WWE. Some guys could use that title to fight over right now.

Finn Balor is a guy with a lot of potential. They can push him as "Demon" Balor. They can push him as "The Club" Balor. How many guys come to the WWE with two different gimmicks they can go with that both have potential for interesting storylines, not to mention money off merchandise? But this current Balor looks very dull. It won't last forever, but it would be nice if the WWE figures something out soon.

Jinder Will Not Be Hindered

I have made fun of Jinder Mahal many times over the years. What else was there to do with him? He then eventually got released when the WWE was cutting costs a couple years ago. Recently, when they were busy rehiring people to add depth due to the new brand split, Jinder Mahal was one of the people they brought back. And this decision was a head-scratcher for a lot of people. Of all the people to bring back, this lower-midcarder that never really stood out at all? And for a long while, it looked like Jinder had picked up right where he left off. He was still a lower-midcarder. He was a jobber.

And then he got sent to Smackdown. And next thing you know, he is now the #1 contender for the WWE Championship. Huh? Where did this come from? Out of nowhere, just like Randy Orton's finisher move.

Let me go back a step. It was Jinder Mahal vs. Sami Zayn vs. Luke Harper vs. Erick Rowan vs. Dolph Ziggler vs. Mojo Rawley for the chance to eventually go after the top title on Smackdown. Looking at the names, this was a pretty pathetic field. The biggest name is Dolph Ziggler, but he has been pushed so terribly in the last few months, he fits right in with the rest of these guys. This is a match you would expect for a midcard title. This is not something you would expect to find a challenger for a main-event title. Yes, most of the brand's top guys are doing something else. Obviously, you can see I was not wrong when I said Raw won the trades last week just in terms of the names it gained from Smackdown and what Smackdown got from Raw.

Even then, just about all five of the other guys in this match were more deserving than Jinder Mahal. Mojo Rawley won the Andre The Giant Memorial Battle Royal a few weeks ago. Dolph Ziggler still has the credibility of being a former World Champion, as well as a ton of other titles. Both Luke Harper and Erick Rowan have been involved in the feud between Bray Wyatt and Randy Orton. There might have been storyline value in letting one of them win. And then there is Sami Zayn. There is freshness to him. Many fans have been hoping he would go to Smackdown for months now. They felt that was the better brand for him. They felt he would get what he deserved there. What happens? In his first opportunity to get a big push rolling, it goes to Jinder Mahal, not him. I think it would have been great if they let him get this push.

Back to Jinder Mahal. The only thing he has going for him is his physique. Some might argue Vince McMahon fell in love with it and wanted him to get pushed. Regardless of the WWE's reason to want to push Jinder Mahal, it should have been in the midcard. Obviously, he would not be chasing a midcard title at the moment, but develop a solid midcard feud for him away from the a title. If he did well with that, then promote him to a title push.

I would say the WWE doing this kind of thing is one of the reasons a lot of good to great performers are not as over as they could be. Instead of the WWE consistently and properly developing them, they kill their pushes for the sake of other things. That is why I am not a fan of James Ellsworth being hired and the push he got for a couple months. I would also say the development of American Alpha got ruined by the WWE getting distracted by other things. Simply tossing them the tag titles was not enough to undo the mediocrity that has hurt them. Instead of putting consistent work into certain things, the WWE just flips around with too many things.

And where are the WWE's standards? I have raised this issue before. I talked about it when it comes to the Hall of Fame. I talked about it when it comes to title reigns. With Jinder Mahal, what has this guy done to deserve this push? He's not over. He has not done anything impressive recently. A lot of fans criticized him for his recent match with Finn Balor. Instead of discussing whether he should be punished, we are discussing him getting a big push. If Jinder is not happy with being pushed as a lower-midcarder, he should step up and do more to get over. It is not enough to get Vince McMahon to drool for you. Get the fans to want you to get that better push. It was obvious that the WWE would have to push guys they would normally not want to push with the brand split back, but Jinder Mahal was just not someone I had in mind, especially when there were other guys available that might have been better options.

How far will this push go? I am not even talking about winning the title title or not right now. I am just talking about whether the WWE is serious about this. I can see it being a joke, like when Ellsworth got a title shot. Randy Orton will just knock Mahal and move on in an instant. Or it could just be a one-PPV thing at the most. I do not see this being something that lasts long. It shouldn't be. It would be unfair to other guys.

How Goes Things For Samoa Joe?

When Samoa Joe debuted a couple months ago to the main roster, it was an exciting start. Ignoring the injury to Seth Rollins, Joe was debuting under the wing of Triple H. That had the makings of a great push for him.

Since then, it just feels like Samoa Joe has been coasting. He is getting the expected feud with Seth Rollins, but everything in the last few weeks has just felt like he's been moving in a straight line. I would not say he is directionless. That is sometimes the issue with some wrestlers that are being misused. They don't have any real focus. With Samoa Joe, it just feels like he is moving along and there is nothing special about how he is being pushed. The commentators can say whatever they want, but the push is just stagnant.

I would say the problem is the same thing I said for Kevin Owens. Triple H has not been involved enough with Samoa Joe. Where was Samoa Joe to interfere at Wrestlemania? Where was Samoa Joe being more involved with Seth Rollins before that? His character can just be presented a lot better than it has.

There have also been some nights where Owens and Joe would team up. I feel like the pairing was just taken for granted. More should have been done to build a relationship between the two. Of course, Kevin Owens going to Smackdown would have made any desire to do that a waste of time. It isn't like it would have been hard to work around that. Just send another top Raw guy to Smackdown.

Overall, I would say that Samoa Joe could be presented to the audience a lot better. It isn't about title reigns. It is about character. The WWE has not put enough work into his character. It feels like they just did a little bit of work to explain his character, and have since been coasting in that one direction. It just gets dull, even for a guy that wrestling fans respect like Samoa Joe. Eventually, I would hope things pick up with him.

Playing With Your Back To The Wall

I have frequently made sports analogies when discussing various things about pro wrestling over the years. This is another one of those discussions.

Last season, the Detroit Lions won 8 games by coming from behind in the 4th quarter, an NFL record. They only won one game last season in which they did not have to fight back with their backs to the wall. Their 9-7 record was enough to get them into the playoffs.

Now, this was obviously something historic. The team got into the playoffs. And the fans of the team could be proud of what the team did. Nevertheless, if you are a fan of the team, wouldn't you like it if they didn't have to play with their backs to the wall so often? As I said, they only won one game without a comeback. They also limped their way into the playoffs and failed to do anything once they got there. You can blame it on Matthew Stafford, the starting quarterback, suffering a minor injury, but they still only got that far. It is great that they are capable of coming back like they did, it shows resilience, but it is less stressful on them and their fans if they had more games where they led from start to finish and just dominated. You don't get bonus points for all these comeback wins.

Bring this back to pro wrestling. Those Detroit Lions of the previous NFL season remind me of someone. Mickie James. From the time she debuted in the WWE on the main roster in 2005, she has never been pushed as a true star. During her first run, they gave her jobber and filler pushes. Even after she got over, she got this career of inconsistency, mediocrity, and just being used to serve various purposes and tossed aside. She went to TNA, where they do not know how to properly create stars. They pushed her with a serious face character that held back her potential. She soon got lost in the shuffle. She then had a short heel turn that looked good, but she left the company. I would say she finally got featured the way I had hoped when she returned to TNA for a few months, even though that featured the train angle that everyone hated. And now she's back in the WWE. Even though she is being featured regularly and allowed to do certain things she was not allowed to do in her first run, they are still mistreating her character and making her look terrible.

For a decade, Mickie James has been able to thrive without the treatment that a Trish Stratus or a Lita has had. She became the most over diva in the WWE and was able to maintain a solid connection with the fans in TNA. People cared about what Mickie James was doing. To me, this is like what the Detroit Lions had to do for much of last season. They had to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat on multiple occasions. Mickie James had to snatch success from the jaws of mediocrity.

Of course, luck, or whatever you want to call it, runs out. For the Detroit Lions, it very well might have been their quarterback getting injured. Overall, you should just not want to be in this position. What about Mickie James? She is not as over as she used to be. To be fair, none of the individual women there today are knocking it out of the park. But what is the issue with Mickie James? It is obviously not an injury. She is as solid in the ring as she has ever been. There are some nights where she looks hotter than the other women she is working with, despite being older than them. And you can still see her charisma shine at times. She's still got it. She has all the tools to still be an A+ player. The problem is that she is still in the same position she has always been in, just a different variation. She is still not getting the treatment someone like Trish Stratus or Lita got. She is not the same kind of credible jobber she was a decade ago, but the WWE is still booking her poorly and giving her a bad character. While TNA gave her a dull face character that only cared about chasing titles and getting revenge against those that tried to screw her, the WWE has given her a boring heel character that only cares about talking about how great she is and has not been backing it up properly with wins and momentum. And her character has been in limbo for the last month. Did she turn face when she turned on Alexa Bliss? Did she come over to Raw as a face? The inconsistency in which they are presenting her character combines with the lack of booking support to just put her in an extremely terrible position.

As a Mickie James fan, I can appreciate what she has had to overcome to succeed in her career. How many fans even realize it? But I am sure Mickie James fans would rather she not have to be in this position. I know I wouldn't. I would rather she finally gets featured as something great or unique, like Trish Stratus and Lita were. All she is doing is talking about it, but the treatment from the WWE obviously does not support it. When does Mickie James stop performing with her back to the wall and have to put in more work to get fans to care about her than the WWE is doing to genuinely and properly help her to succeed? Because this is the situation where it looks like she can't overcome. And it isn't fair to always expect her to. It's like thinking a sports team can always overcome any adversity. It just isn't a fair expectation.

What makes it worse is that she gets no recognition for what she has had to overcome to succeed. As I said, the Detroit Lions made history and everyone in the football world knows it. It will be brought up for years and years to come. As I also said, they don't get bonus points for this. Pro wrestling is a funny thing. Things like this actually do give you bonus points. It's all about overness. In a lot of situations, that includes the hype surrounding you and how well your character is featured. It helps you to get over. You look at little kids loving John Cena or Bayley. If their characters weren't presented like they were, would kids still feel as strongly? With Mickie James, what would it do for her character if she was acknowledged as someone that was on the wrong side of the status quo and overcame that to get the job done better than those chosen to succeed? What did it do for CM Punk to let him drop a certain memorable promo a couple years ago? It made him a wrestling god. What about Daniel Bryan beating the status quo? You can even bring up Zack Ryder. In all these cases, you have men that will at least be talked about for years when discussing guys that were not seen as good enough that proved the WWE wrong. In the case of Mickie James, she will only be talked about as a woman that screwed herself due to her weight, backstage attitude, and whatever else. Obviously, she does deserve to be in the same discussion as CM Punk, Daniel Bryan, and Zack Ryder. And if she ever was acknowledged for what she had to overcome, it will improve her respectability and make it very hard to deny her that better career she deserves. She's already a lock for the WWE Hall of Fame. With their standards these days, there is no denying that. But I would have liked to have seen her get featured as a genuine A-tier star before she does retire. Stop playing with your back to the wall. Be that team that dominates, not that team that has to always try to come from behind.

Lana To Smackdown

A few women were sent to Smackdown, but only one is worth talking about in any depth today. I don't mean Charlotte. I already talked about her moving a couple days ago. And I don't mean Tamina. Not much to say about her. She is not over and not a great worker. The WWE should use her as a supporting player on Smackdown. If she wants better, she needs to step up and do more. Of course, in this new era, and especially on Smackdown, they will probably try to give her some kind of meaningful angle even if she doesn't earn it.

I am talking about Lana. Rusev also moved to Smackdown. It would be easy to say that these two are simply filling the void Miz & Maryse left. Thing is, it looks like Lana will get some special individual attention. At least, that is what it looks like for now.

I have seen some fans question whether what they are doing with Lana is good or bad for the women's division. Some people just don't pay attention. Ever since Smackdown became its own brand again, it soon took up the identity of the diva era's last stand. They tried to do something meaningful with Eva Marie. Alexa Bliss got some runs with the Smackdown Women's Championship. Nikki Bella and Maryse got big pushes in the periphery recently. These are all divas. Smackdown's women's division has not been treated as being as elite as Raw's women's division. They still featured some female wrestlers feuding against each other, like Mickie James vs. Becky Lynch, but you have not gotten the hype that Raw has. I am not surprised at all that they would be willing to put some individual focus on Lana, and not be afraid to let that individual focus be based on her sex appeal. As far as I am concerned, this is just more of the same from the last few months.

Does Lana deserve it? I think so. Unlike some women, she has actually shown potential to connect well with the fans. Back when this new era was getting started and fans were complaining on the Internet for better treatment and respect for women's wrestling, Lana, an eye-candy diva that wasn't even wrestling, was having fans in the audience chanting for her. It just shows how polarizing this era is. Not everyone out there cares about it as much as some fans might think. Regardless, Lana has also been training in the ring. No one should expect her to be able to put on great matches, but Smackdown is the brand for her to be featured like this and not really ruin the identity they have.

Is she the replacement for Alexa Bliss? I talked about the fact that Alexa Bliss cannot really replace Charlotte on Raw. She is not good enough in the ring. Maybe that is why Mickie James also went to Raw. But who replaces Alexa Bliss on Smackdown? Charlotte doesn't have the look Alexa Bliss has, which is one of her best traits. But Lana does have the look and has been trying to improve her in-ring work. This just seems like a clear replacement.

Will Lana have the title success on Smackdown that Alexa Bliss had? Smackdown's standards would obviously make it more likely than if Lana was still on Raw. Problem is, Charlotte is someone I can picture the WWE booking to dominate the division, no matter which show she is on. Will Smackdown's identity trump her tendency to be pushed hard? Or will her tendency to be pushed hard impact Smackdown's identity? If it is the latter, it is less likely Lana has any title success. If all else fails, she can always lean on Rusev again. I think Lana is in a very favorable position.

Did Smackdown Shake Things Up?

It seemed like Raw took a handful of major players from Smackdown. To be specific, I would say Raw getting Miz, Ambrose, and Bray Wyatt was huge. Did Smackdown get back as much as they gave?

Looking at the list of male wrestlers that went from Raw to Smackdown, the only name that stands out is Kevin Owens. Not Jinder Mahal? No, not Jinder Mahal. Everyone else is just midcarders and tag teams. These are all guys that were not doing anything much in the last few months. None of these guys were ever a WWE or Universal Champion. That is why I say Kevin Owens is the only one that stands out. Smackdown lost three former WWE Champions that were all featured pretty well in the last few months. They gain only one main-eventer that was being pushed well in the last few months.

And I do not like that Kevin Owens was the guy chosen to switch brands. It has nothing to do with the fact that he is United States Champion. There is still title drama going on that will impact things, but I am ignoring all that and just looking at the names changing shows for the sake of this discussion. What I do not like is that I felt there was more he could do on Raw. Specifically, there was more that they could have done with his relationship with Triple H. Triple H literally handed him the title last year. A few months after that, Triple H was involved when Owens decided to turn on Chris Jericho. One of the WWE's biggest problems these days is not following through properly with a lot of angles that have potential. In some cases, they don't follow through at all. In other cases, they botch how they handle it. There is nothing wrong with having a heel authority stable. The issue with the last such stable involving Triple H and Stephanie McMahon was it just wasn't handled right. Some might say it lasted too long. There is also the issue of too much fighting within the group way too often. You can talk about Stephanie McMahon not getting her comeuppance enough. All these issues do not mean the WWE cannot try it again and fix some of the issues. And Kevin Owens could have been one of the guys in this new stable. Samoa Joe is another. What has happened to him is also an issue I will get into on another day.

If I would have kept Owens on Raw to eventually do more with Triple H, whom would I have chosen to be the main-eventer going from Raw to Smackdown? Seth Rollins or Roman Reigns. You can send Strowman to Smackdown to continue the Reigns/Strowman feud, or make a special arrangement so Reigns can have one last match with Strowman to write that feud off. If the WWE is so determined to keep The Shield on Raw, send Finn Balor to Smackdown. He just came back. He just got injured again, but it is likely not too serious, hopefully. Interaction between Balor and AJ Styles should make a lot of smarks happy.

So, which brand won the shake up? In terms of the actual moves, I would say Raw won. They gained three top guys, while Smackdown only gained one. Raw gained two women that can both be useful, Alexa Bliss and Mickie James. Smackdown gained Charlotte. Tamina officially joined the brand, but she has never been over and is not really that highly-praised for her in-ring work. Smackdown gained New Day, which might help their weak tag division. Or New Day might bury it. Overall, just getting three of Smackdown's top guys easily made Raw the winner in terms of the moves.

In terms of the overall rosters, I think most smarks would say Smackdown is still the stronger brand. They are so in love with AJ Styles, they would have crowned whichever brand he ended up on. Smackdown also still has Nakamura, another smark favorite. They have their part-timer, John Cena. Don't forget Randy Orton. I almost did, despite him being WWE Champion.

The last thing to take into account is how both brands utilize talent. They obviously didn't trade writers and bookers. Both brands have issues being efficient, including Smackdown. And even Smackdown has made some dumb decision with some talent that has really made them look bad, like what they did with Ziggler. Nevertheless, Smackdown still seems to be the better of the two brands. They can probably get something out of guys like Sami Zayn and Rusev that they have not been getting since the brand split started with them on Raw. And they will need to with some of the guys they have lost. Over on Raw, some of these guys they have gained might be hurt by bad booking. Overall, I would say Smackdown still has a solid roster and can continue doing what they have been doing for the last few months. It is up to Raw to take advantage of the talent they took from Smackdown. 

Raw Gets Shook

When the WWE said they were shaking things up, they weren't kidding. A lot more people than I expected moved from Smackdown to Raw. In addition, a lot more of Smackdown's top men moved from Smackdown to Raw.

I would have just had 4 or 5 individuals/teams make the move between brands. One would be a top star. One or two would be midcarders. A female wrestler. And a tag team. Also throw in one or two bodies from NXT. The WWE did about double what I would have done, in terms of numbers.

In terms of some of the names Smackdown loses, the three big ones are Bray Wyatt, Miz (and Maryse), and Dean Ambrose (with the Intercontinental Championship). Now, what makes both of these brands different is obviously how they are run, but certain individuals also help to make the show what it is. It is understandable that not all these individuals will get to stay on the brand they have been in prior to the shake up, but Raw taking so many guys is something.

Bray Wyatt was the WWE Champion just a few weeks ago on Smackdown. I don't think he should ever have lost it to Randy Orton. It is unlikely he wins it back now. I just feel like there was more he could have done on Smackdown. I do not know how likely it is he does these things on Raw.

Miz is a guy that seemed to reinvent himself on Smackdown. He looked like he could be a serious contender for the title again. He never got that serious push for the WWE Championship. On Raw, I doubt he will be getting it anytime soon, especially with Brock Lesnar holding the top title. Even if Brock shows up and Miz is the guy he feuds with, can you imagine that feud? I can't.

Dean Ambrose? Ignore the fact that he has a title for a moment. This seems like a good move. He held the WWE Championship a few months ago, but he really has not done anything fitting of him since then. He did not need a midcard title. He could be refreshed on Raw. I am not going to complain about that. Now throw in the fact that he is Intercontinental Champion. It creates a bit of controversy to have the title switch shows, if that is the path they are going. But I think they will work things out so Smackdown does not get screwed over.

A lot of fans were expecting AJ Styles to be sent to Raw. I don't know if that was based on just speculation based on his heated feud with Shane McMahon, backstage rumors, the WWE intending to do it and changing their mind, or whatever. I say that you should judge people based on the decisions they make, not what they could have decided to do. AJ Styles going to Raw might have been good for the sake of reuniting him with The Club, but some fans also dread that Raw won't feature his character as well as Smackdown does. Either decision the WWE made would have been okay. They chose to keep him on Smackdown, for now.

Smackdown will obviously gain some bodies tonight to balance out what they lost. I will talk about the big names sent there tomorrow, and which brand I think really might benefit from the moves in the long run.

Shaking Up The Women's Divisions

Less than a year after the brand split returned, the WWE is already going to shake up the rosters again. Rather than talk about every division, I am just going to focus on the women, a topic I have been talking about regularly since 2008. Whatever major moves happens for the men, I will talk about that tomorrow and later in the week.

It just seems like the obvious switch for the women will be Charlotte going to Smackdown and Alexa Bliss going to Raw. Both have been somewhat "written off" in the last week. They have jobbed. They have lost their momentum. If they are not being sent to the other brand, the WWE is probably setting them up to be released. I will say it is likely they are just switching brands.

As I have mentioned before, both Raw and Smackdown seem to have their own identities, although it has still been pretty sloppy on both shows. Raw has more hype and respectability to it. This is where the serious, history-making matches get most of the attention. The only women to have held the title on Raw since the brand split are the NXT elite. It has been the 4 Horsewomen. Over on Smackdown, it has been somewhat the last stand of the diva era. This division has frequently gotten the short end of the stick. As far as the title on Smackdown goes, Becky Lynch may have been the first woman to hold it, but the two other women since then cannot be considered in-ring elites. I am talking about Alexa Bliss and Naomi. Smackdown, moreover, has done a slightly better job with periphery angles. Nikki Bella and Maryse have been treated pretty well. Those two are obviously divas.

I don't remember if I ever brought it up before, but I always felt the WWE should have two different identities for the two women's division and maintain those standards. Let one show be the place for serious women's wrestling. That could be Raw. Let the other show be for the divas and more character-driven and storyline-driven drama. That could be Smackdown. If a diva wants to end up on the show for serious women's wrestling, she needs to improve her in-ring work. If a female wrestler wants to go to the other brand to improve her overness with fans wanting more than just wrestling, she needs to show some personality that might make her valuable on the other brand. Obviously, there will be one or two female wrestlers on Smackdown to act as jobbers and supporting players, like Natalya and Tamina. On the other side of that, there might be a diva on Raw for a periphery role, like Lana. Overall, however, both brands maintain their own identity. And fans of different aspects of pro wrestling could choose what they want to watch. Right now, you just have some women on Raw that are obviously not good and it gets painful seeing them work with the better wrestlers. Dana Brooke is one of those women. Over on Smackdown, you have some women that can just be great characters, but the WWE doesn't develop it properly. Alexa Bliss falls in that category.

Even though the WWE does not really uphold the system I just talked about, let me talk about the likely switch in those terms I just laid out. Can they really switch Alexa Bliss for Charlotte? Raw has been the brand for these serious women's feuds and matches since the brand split came back, and it seems Charlotte has been involved in all those matches. Alexa Bliss has improved, but she is still not someone I consider being that great in the ring. How many matches can the WWE get out of Bayley and Sasha Banks for a year? Throw Emma into the mix. She's pretty good. Outside of that, there's not a lot of women to produce the same quality matches you had for the last year on Raw. You can send Asuka there, but some might argue Smackdown can also use her.

Is there a possibility Alexa Bliss might get lost in the shuffle on Raw? Unless the WWE lowers their standards for Raw's women's division to let her be treated as a credible threat that can put on highly-rated matches with the likes of Sasha Banks, she is definitely going to be treated more poorly than she was on Smackdown, at least. Raw has never been great with periphery angles since the brand split. What can they do with her?

What about Charlotte? The WWE will have her make history by being the first woman to have held each brand's title. They did the same kind of thing with Michelle McCool. That is probably why they wanted Smackdown's title on face Naomi so bad, although I would say Becky Lynch also might have been an option. And with Alexa Bliss on Raw, they could try to sell it as a "chase" to see who will make history first. They used Mickie James to serve that purpose back in 2009. Problem is, as I mentioned, standards are different today and Alexa Bliss getting that serious push just would not be right.

Since I do not like the potential move to Raw for Alexa Bliss, which Smackdown woman would I send there? You are looking for someone with wrestling credibility that can fill Charlotte's spot. Natalya, Becky Lynch, and Mickie James are all options. Mickie James is one of those performers that could work out on either a wrestling-first brand or a storyline/character-first brand. It is just a shame the WWE has done such a terrible job with her character. Even now, is she really a face? Or still in tweener limbo? Either way, they could send her to Raw and just take her character in either the face or heel direction.

Let's say what the WWE really wanted to do, for whatever reason, was get Alexa Bliss to Raw. What would be a good Raw woman to send to Smackdown? Dana Brooke comes to mind. You are not looking to replace a great wrestler here. You are just looking to replace a heel that can show emotion and personality. That is pretty much what Dana Brooke does best. She has been involved in some botched spots and terrible situations since her debut. Going to a brand that lets her character shine and does not put much on her in terms of wrestling might be good for her.

On Nakamura & The Undertaker

One of the WWE's problems these days is how they debut people from NXT. Too often, they just have people show up and act like fans should know who these guys are. They just do not ease them in very well. I would say it is one of the reasons a lot of workers are not as over as they could be and the TV audience cannot get as invested into the product to tune in.

The week after Wrestlemania featured the expected returns and debuts. Smackdown got an NXT debut. That would be Shinsuke Nakamura. How did he debut?

He danced.

And that's it. I know it is part of his gimmick, but this was a really poor debut. Nakamura fans will disagree, but that's because they love the guy. Just to make it clear, I know he had a dark match that night, but why should the TV audience care about that? From the standpoint of the viewers, what are they really supposed to make of this guy? Is he a Japanese Brodus Clay?

What could the WWE have done? Hit the ground running. Don't just have him dance. Do a better job planting the seeds for his first feud. Have him knock around Miz. Or have him tease attacking Miz, have Miz run away like a coward, and then let Nakamura go back to his dancing.

I do not think this is a sign the WWE is out to screw Nakamura. But good starts can lay the foundation for what will come more easily. Then again, Samoa Joe debuted in a big way a few months ago. I would say he has just been coasting since then. You can blame that on Seth Rollins getting injured, but the WWE has had plenty of time since then to do something proper with Samoa Joe. I do not think that will happen to Nakamura anytime soon. With the way he debuted, he can only go on to better things from here.

Onto The Undertaker. Why have I not made a bigger deal of his loss to Roman Reigns and his supposed retirement? Because I do not feel that is the end of it. Not only did the WWE do a poor job of building this up to be a retirement feud prior to Wrestlemania, but the night after didn't suggest any finality to Undertaker's career. Michael Cole left it open-ended as to whether Undertaker had retired.

People are talking about Taker leaving his gear in the ring after his loss. I remember watching Lockdown back in 2011. Kurt Angle lost to Jeff Jarrett. After the loss, Angle took off his boots. TNA tried to sell it as a possible retirement. Kurt Angle obviously did not retire from wrestling back then. He didn't even retire from TNA back then. TNA has done this kind of thing a lot. A lot of retirements or people being forced to leave the company, only for them to come back. I have seen a lot of videos on Youtube over the years of people thanking Velvet Sky after it looked like she was done with the company. She always seems to come back. Point is, nothing is final yet when it comes to The Undertaker.

If that was his final match, however, it was a terrible match. There were some terrible botches that just make you want his career to not end like that. That is another reason I think he will have another match. Of course, you can't just keep extending his career until he gets the perfect match. He's old. His body can't take too much anymore. He might just have one more good match next year left in him. I think it would be easy to build to that from here.

If the WWE never really intended for his career to end there, what is the point of teasing that it just might be over like this? To try to draw. They did the same kind of thing last year when they made it seem Taker would never wrestle at Wrestlemania again if he lost to Shane McMahon, and some people read that as Taker would be forced to retire. Of course, Taker won. And Shane still got to run Raw for a while. Wins and losses don't matter.

How did the publicity stunt do? The Raw after Wrestlemania this year, featuring the fallout of The Undertaker's possible retirement, Brock Lesnar getting the title back, all the debuts and returns, and whatever else, only averaged 3.8 million viewers, down from last year's 4.1 million and the previous year's 5.4 million. Considering everything they did, that is pretty pathetic.

People want to blame college basketball finals. Okay, but the WWE didn't exactly do nothing on Raw this week. What is the point of treating Brock Lesnar like you do if giving him the title will not draw when he shows up? But sticking with The Undertaker, this is a legend that has been around for decades. He was there during the hot Attitude Era. Why wouldn't fans tune in to see if this was really the end of his career? Maybe the WWE wouldn't have gotten over 5 million live viewers, but they should have gotten over 4 million with everything going on. It looks like 2017 will indeed be a year they fail to reach that benchmark.

Part of the reason they failed to do better is obviously the poor way they sold this feud between Roman Reigns and The Undertaker. It was rushed. It seemed pretty lame. They were fighting over whose yard it is? It just didn't feel epic. But part of the blame might just be the WWE crying wolf too many times and in too many ways over the years. Everyone remembers Mark Henry's fake retirement segment. That was great. But might it have hurt the value of other retirements and retirement angles to come? With just The Undertaker, the WWE have gotten fans to believe it was over or could be over multiple times over the years. They thought it was over when he lost to Brock Lesnar. They thought it could have been over last year. As far as last year goes, I pointed out how the WWE showed that wins and losses don't matter by having Shane still run Raw after losing to Taker. How can some viewers take the outcome to things seriously when you make these kind of decisions too much?

It just goes to show that everyone is underachieving in this era. If the possible retirement of The Undertaker can't draw a huge ratings boost, what can? Obviously, this is not a criticism on The Undertaker. This is all the WWE's fault for not handling things better. I still do not believe this is the last people have seen of The Undertaker on Raw, and I'm not just talking about coming back after being inducted into the Hall of Fame. He will show up again, whether to start his final feud or just make it official that his career will now rest in peace.

Naomi Gets The Title Back

Of the handful of title changes that happened at Wrestlemania, Smackdown's Women's Championship was one of them. Naomi regained the title. She has already retained it against Alexa Bliss.

I, of course, think this is a terrible booking decision. I said it back when Naomi returned from her injury earlier this year. Before she gets a title reign, she needs to prove she can stay healthy. What happened? The WWE gave her the title in a feud in which she had all the momentum. She pinned Alexa Bliss numerous times. She never even lost a brawl. Just had all the momentum. Oh, and she got injured in the very match she won the title. She had to vacate the title. This is exactly what I was talking about. She came back in time for Wrestlemania, once again having the momentum heading into the big PPV, and she just beats Alexa Bliss again.

When I previewed this match, I said I would have had Alexa Bliss retain and build up a singles feud for her to drop the title. It would have been better. If Naomi was the woman they chose for that feud, fine, but she would still need to clean up her style and stay healthy.

Where has the WWE's standards gone? There are times when the WWE would not be too eager to push someone and fans would say the reason is that person is injury-prone. Wade Barrett is an example of that. I can understand that idea. Why give big pushes to people that might get injured? As far as Barrett goes, I was on his side when he won King of the Ring. The WWE gave him the accolade, then pushed him poorly for a while. Fans brought up the injury excuse. Well, if the WWE didn't want to push him because he might get injured, they shouldn't have given him the accolade. They finally gave him something good to do with The League of Nations. And he got injured. Oh well, that is why you should be cautious with people that get injured a lot. But where has that idea gone?

People are so busy being blinded by Roman Reigns, they often overlook that the WWE has gotten a little lax and careless with their standards. They are doing things these days that you would not expect them to do a couple years ago. Things going on in the women's division are an example of that. You also have people debuting from NXT that really only have smark appeal right now and the WWE is treating them like they are people everyone should know. Outside of Reigns, there are a lot of smark favorites being pushed well, like AJ Styles and Kevin Owens.

There is nothing wrong with having standards. The problem is when you have unfair standards, like treating someone like Cesaro like he has closer to a 0% chance than a 50% chance of ever earning a better career for himself, no matter what he does. There is also an issue with inconsistent standards. You can't say you won't push one guy because he gets injured too much, then push someone else that gets injured just as much. It isn't right. And the WWE's standards these days just seem to be a mess. What is it? Are they lowering their standards? Are the standards just becoming inconsistent? One of the reasons for the poor quality of the product is a failure to uphold a proper standard of excellence, or even just a standard of efficiency.

I just think the WWE has sent a terrible message with how they handled Naomi. Even if she does stay healthy during this title reign, that is not the point. How is it to look at a performer that gets injured multiple times in the span of the year just get pushed this hard in the span of a few months, despite an injury killing that push for a while just a few weeks after returning from an injury? What about those other performers that have managed to stay healthier than that and have been available more often than that injury-plagued performer? That can get annoying. In the men's division, it might not be that big of a deal. There is a lot of room to push multiple men properly, whether a title is involved or not. In the women's division, it is much worse. The WWE has tried to push multiple women consistently, and it just looks ugly more often than not. There are women being underutilized and misused that have to watch Naomi essentially run over the women's division twice after returning from injuries in the span of less than 4 months. She has not lost a match or lost a brawl in any night this year. Why? She's not Goldberg. She's not Finn Balor. Why should she be made to look this good? First things first, stay healthy.

Let me do a slight aside. The Smackdown women's match was initially supposed to be on the pre-show at Wrestlemania. Face it, that's where it belonged. I want to see women used properly, but even I have to admit that this poorly-developed, multi-performer match deserved the pre-show. That is not a knock on these women. That is a knock on how the WWE developed this match. Instead, Dean Ambrose vs. Baron Corbin got bumped down.

Now, I do not usually find it as a big deal if a match is on the pre-show or not. Years ago, throwaway matches that didn't get any real attention at all were there. These days, the WWE does a better job putting more important matches there. But a lot of fans still take it seriously, so I will spend time talking about this.

It is terrible that Dean Ambrose got bumped off the main card. This guy was WWE Champion just a few months ago. He is getting a personal singles feud. He is a pretty popular guy. Just terrible. This doesn't put him on the same level as Mojo Rawley, but you should treat this guy with a little more respect that this.

Even though I am all for women being treated better in the WWE, this whole thing was just terrible. Is feminism about women being treated as equals to men? Or is it about women being treated better than men? I think it is the former. Fans need to realize that the WWE does this to the men. They push certain feuds and certain men better than others. And those ones on the bottom are the ones that constantly get on the pre-show or don't get on the card at all. Ideally, you got to achieve to earn better for yourself. The WWE has to do the work to help you get over with the fans and get your feud over with the fans.

This Smackdown's women's feud did not deserve to take Ambrose/Corbin's spot on the card. No woman in either division is really knocking it out of the park in terms of being the most over performer. Even then, Raw's women's division is the one that has been developed better than Smackdown's. Raw's women's match got better development. Some women actually had to win matches to earn their way into the Wrestlemania match. That is already better than Smackdown's women's match.

If you are just going to say Smackdown's women's division automatically deserves to be featured at the same level as Raw's women's division, you are just giving the WWE the green light to be lazy. They have not put in the proper work into these women. Instead of treating them better and building those better feuds and matches for them that are worthy of being on the same level as Raw's PPV matches, they are just going to stick these messes out there. I have pointed out how inferior Smackdown's women's matches have been treated at the big PPVs since the brand split in comparison to Raw's women's matches. You can overlook Smackdown losing to Raw at Survivor Series, but everything else at Summerslam, the Royal Rumble, and Wrestlemania has been thrown-together multi-woman matches. The fact that the Wrestlemania match was bumped to the main card does not change anything.

Everyone talks about giving the women a chance. What most of those people meant was just treat them better. The WWE has done an inconsistent, poor job at that at times. But if just giving them more match time and booking them on the main card is enough to sucker some of these fans into being content, the WWE will never improve like they need to. These women will never reach their proper potential in this environment and the overall product will not improve.

Hardys Return And Win Raw's Tag Titles

Wrestlemania featured a big return. The Hardys returned and ended up winning Raw's Tag Team Championships. They successfully retained the titles on Raw last night.

Of course, I have to compare this to The Dudleys returning a few years ago. Not only did they not win the tag titles in their first night back, not only did they not win the tag titles at all, but they were made to look like pathetic jobbers. They turned heel and started to look pathetic again shortly after that. It is no wonder they no longer wished to wrestle for the company, although their leaving was amicable and Devon still works for the company.

The Hardys seemed to be featured better by the WWE in their previous runs than The Dudleys, particularly when it comes to singles pushes. Both Matt & Jeff won multiple singles titles. It is not too shocking that the WWE might treat them better than The Dudleys with their return. Nevertheless, I would not have given them the tag titles like this.

This is just really unfair to the other teams. Enzo & Cass have been on the main roster for a year now, have become a pretty popular team, but have never won the tag titles. They seem to be on the edge of greatness. They have feuded against Chris Jericho & Kevin Owens. Cass was in a match to crown a new Universal Champion when Finn Balor got injured. They teamed with John Cena to face The Club. Around there would have been a good time to give them the tag titles. They got a storyline involving Rusev and Lana not too long ago. They got title shots after that. But they have never been given the tag titles.

You can say that they just have to wait. Problem is, will they still be fresh by then? Moreover, more teams are always going to be coming in. You saw that on Raw last night. You got teams coming in from NXT, potentially other teams from the past coming back together, and don't forget teams randomly being created, like Sheamus & Cesaro. Realistically, the time may never come for Enzo & Cass. Don't forget that most teams also eventually split. That could definitely happen with Enzo & Cass without them ever getting the tag titles.

Am I a hypocrite for not saying the same thing about The Dudleys back in 2015? I don't think so. Look at what was going on in the tag division at the time. New Day was on their second run and still heels at the time. How many other good face tag teams were there that deserved a title run? Prime Time Players had just gotten a title run. I think The Usos were still dealing with injury issues at the time. Besides that, they really didn't need the tag titles back then. Lucha Dragons had not really gotten into a big groove yet. There were really no great face options. When The Dudleys came back, they had momentum and freshness on their side. They should have gotten the tag titles. They could have dropped it to The Wyatts or The League of Nations in a proper feud. Instead, they became jobbers and everything went through New Day for over a year. A lot of teams got screwed over back then.

Right now, I would say there was another face team worthy of a title run that were passed over for the sake of the returning Hardys. That would be Enzo & Cass. That is why I think this situation is different from what you had with The Dudleyz in 2015. I am not saying Matt & Jeff had to return as jobbers. Anderson & Gallows could have lost the tag titles to Enzo & Cass, lost the rematch the next night on Raw, and then The Hardys could return to confront them and start a non-title feud. The Hardys don't need the tag titles to be relevant. Bringing them back is one thing, but having them go over like this just isn't good.

Looking Back At Goldberg's Title Run

Goldberg did indeed lose the Universal Championship to Brock Lesnar at Wrestlemania. Now that it is over, was the push really worth it?

Goldberg returned last year for Survivor Series to squash Brock Lesnar. After that, he announced his intentions to be Champion again and entered the Royal Rumble to get a title shot. He lost that. He then showed up on Raw to accept another match with Lesnar, and also get a title shot from Kevin Owens. Wins and losses obviously don't matter. Goldberg lost the Royal Rumble match and just gets a title shot. Anyway, he did win the title. His continued feud with Lesnar now became a title feud. We all know what happened at Wrestlemania.

First thing to look at, ratings. Ratings were terribly flat this Wrestlemania season. Can you put all the blame on Goldberg? No, but what is the point of putting the belt on this part-timer, not to mention everything else they did with him, if you don't expect him to draw. I know some reports want to claim ratings were bad because the WWE did not advertise The Undertaker being there on Raw a few weeks. No, that is not an excuse. This is Wrestlemania season. Fans are supposed to expect surprises and legends popping up. Big things happen. Big storyline development happens. And that is the issue. The WWE has done a terrible job creating that kind of atmosphere, especially for Raw. Is it a surprise if the WWE tells you exactly when The Undertaker or The Rock will show up every time? No. I don't blame them for not advertising when legends will show up all the time. I blame them for not doing a better job making things fun and exciting.

The other thing to consider is WWE Network subscriptions. I haven't seen any numbers yet. But you can at least look at numbers for the prior few months with Survivor Series and the Royal Rumble. Those few months obviously featured Goldberg. Once again, I would say numbers were a little flat. The subscription pattern has already entered a seasonal roller coaster, much like you see with ratings. It is no longer steady growth every quarter. Goldberg's return has not been a massive success to draw big in this regard, either.

What are some of the reasons why Goldberg's return underachieved? I would say having him continue to feud with Brock Lesnar so much didn't help. Lesnar is another big part-timer that has lost his luster. Beyond that, people just want fresh feuds. This feud should have ended for good at Survivor Series. Create something fresh for Goldberg after that.

I remember watching the closing segment last week between Goldberg and Lesnar. The crowd reactions were weak. Yes, there were "Goldberg!" and "Suplex City!" chants, but they were not as huge as it should have been. Just because something is getting a reaction does not mean it is getting a great reaction. You would expect better for guys treated like Lesnar and Goldberg are.

Aside from having to work with Lesnar all this time, another issue is Goldberg just not showing up for a number of weeks. That is what you expect from a part-timer, but I would say it might have contributed to the poor ratings. What is the point of making him Universal Champion if his reign isn't going to be long and fans won't see him regularly on the show during that short reign? There were just some nights where it seemed like Raw didn't have a main-event Champion. The WWE did not create a draw here.

Was it worth it? Considering all the other sloppiness that went on this Wrestlemania season, I don't think so. The WWE just failed to create something with Goldberg that was a legitimate draw. They might have been better off creating another feud for the Universal Championship. Keep both Goldberg and Lesnar out. You now have another part-timer getting a title reign he does not need. One bad situation may have led to an even worse situation.