Lesnar Still Wants Goldberg

Neither Goldberg nor Lesnar won the Royal Rumble this year. But Goldberg did once again make Lesnar look bad during the Royal Rumble match. That led to Brock Lesnar and Paul Heyman showing up on Raw to challenge Goldberg for another match at Wrestlemania.

I am going to repeat one of my criticisms for continuing this feud. I have seen other fans bring it up now in response to the WWE still going with this. So what if Lesnar finally beats Goldberg? Goldberg still has a winning record over Lesnar. Wouldn't that still irritate Lesnar? Shouldn't it irritate Lesnar? This isn't a rubber match, which are usually more intriguing.

The dirtsheet rumored plans involved Goldberg winning the Universal Championship at Fastlane and dropping it to Lesnar at Wrestlemania. I don't know how that looks now. Kevin Owens still looks involved with Roman Reigns and Braun Strowman. Strowman had a title match on Raw this week. That ended by disqualification when Reigns interfered, paying him back for costing him the title the previous night. Reigns then speared Owens. Strowman still has an argument for deserving a title shot. Reigns left his mark on Owens. A triple threat just makes sense right now. If the WWE does go in the direction of Owens vs. Goldberg, I'll talk about that.

I will say one good thing about what they are doing. They are actually developing a storyline for a Lesnar feud. A lot of Lesnar's feuds have just been an opponent popping up and Lesnar having a feud with him. That's how his feud with Randy Orton went. That's how his feud with Goldberg even started. The challenge was laid down and the feud just started. But now there is an actual storyline to prolong the feud. Can Lesnar beat Goldberg?

Overall, however, this Wrestlemania season is shaping up to be pretty flat. I already talked about the Royal Rumble this year not being that great. You have the saga between Triple H and Seth Rollins, which I will talk about next time. Does the Undertaker really have an epic opponent in front of him this year? You don't have anyone as hot as Daniel Bryan has sometimes been at this time of year. The WWE might need to raise the heat somehow.

Next week on Raw, Goldberg will respond to Lesnar. Is that where they might raise the heat? Don't just let Goldberg come out there and just say that he accepts Lesnar's challenge. No need to set up a feud with Kevin Owens. But find some way to add something more to this feud with Brock Lesnar. I would rather Goldberg feud with someone new, but if this feud has to continue, so be it. Why not have Goldberg say that Lesnar and Heyman have to make it worth his while to face Lesnar again? Lesnar can then put his career on the line. Yes, it is only a part-time career, but the WWE has done this kind of thing before. How about making this match a #1 contender's match? Can The Undertaker be thrown in? These three were in the ring together on Raw last week. That got a lot of fans excited. I hate triple threats where nothing is on the line. Again, how about a title shot being on the line? Whatever they do, this cannot just be a typical continuation of this feud. It can lose steam real fast.

Randy Orton Wins 2017 Royal Rumble

I had said that this year's Royal Rumble was more unpredictable than the last few years. And Randy Orton  winning the Royal Rumble match was not something I even brought up. Yes, I saw the rumors and betting sites saying he was the likely winner. But how is something worth predicting when you are going by what sources are supposedly saying?

A lot of fans are just happy that it was not Roman Reigns, who was the big surprise entrant in the Royal Rumble. This was a really disappointing Rumble match in terms of surprise appearances. A lot of fans are also unhappy about how the match was booked overall. This will definitely not go down as one of the best Royal Rumbles.

How about Orton winning his second Royal Rumble? I am a Randy Orton fan, but even I am not too thrilled about this. I was just more excited to see other individuals get the big push that felt like they deserved it more. There were some part-timers that looked like they could use this win to create a great title feud for Wrestlemania. I am thinking about Goldberg and The Undertaker. This is one year where a part-timer main-eventing Wrestlemania might have been okay. Miz had been developing some momentum in the last few months. Winning the Royal Rumble would have been huge for him. He has his credibility back. Randy Orton just did not need it or deserve it.

There are two feud possibilities for Orton at Wrestlemania. The obvious one is him feuding against the new WWE Champion, John Cena. These two have gone at it multiple times over the years in title matches. They have never faced each other in a singles match at Wrestlemania. But how many people really care about this feud? Even though these two have been the top two guys of the company for a decade now, this isn't like Austin vs. The Rock. A lot of fans could have watched those two feud forever.

The other option is the continuation of the feud Orton has going on right now, and dirtsheets have penciled in as what will happen. Randy Orton vs. Bray Wyatt for the WWE Championship. Wyatt wins the title at Elimination Chamber. This is another option that is just not good. I was a fan of this feud at one time. That feels like a long time ago. At a time with so many sour storylines and bringing up real-life situations, this was a feud that just played off of both men's gimmicks. But then the WWE got too fancy and tried to do too much. They took a feud that could have lasted just 2 to 4 months and turned it into a storyline that will last half a year or longer. This feud doesn't deserve to be main-eventing Wrestlemania, and it likely won't. Even though these two main-evented a Smackdown PPV a few months ago, they shouldn't have. This is an upper-midcard feud.

And that is what Randy Orton winning the Royal Rumble feels like. It feels like an upper-midcarder won it. It feels the same way as when Sheamus won it years ago. When you have so many other guys with more momentum to them than Randy Orton, his win last night just doesn't feel as big. I just don't know if they can create something as epic for Randy Orton as they could have with certain other guys. As I said, his rivalry with Cena isn't as epic as Austin/Rock, and his feud with Bray Wyatt has turned into an example of the WWE trying to do too much.

As of right now, I am not too excited for this year's Wrestlemania. There is still a lot of time for feuds to fall into place, but the WWE killed a lot of epic possibilities already. And some of the other likely matches don't feel that epic. I wonder if the WWE will realize this and panic and try something big.

Previewing The 2017 Royal Rumble Match

This is one of the most unpredictable Royal Rumble matches in a while. Last year, Roman Reigns had to defend the WWE Championship in the Royal Rumble match. He had destroyed Triple H a while before that. It was obvious what feud was coming. And the WWE went the predictable route of Triple H winning the 2016 Royal Rumble. The year before that, the WWE was showing signs of giving Roman Reigns the big push. People could see it coming, and the WWE did what they expected. Reigns won the 2015 Royal Rumble. And in 2014, Batista made his triumphant return. We all know how that turned out.

One of the reasons the 2017 Royal Rumble match is more unpredictable than the last three years is that the WWE is back to having two top titles. Even if you want to argue that the WWE is telegraphing what the Wrestlemania title match will be for one brand, what about the other brand? There are now two Wrestlemania title matches to build, and which one will involve the Royal Rumble winner this Sunday?

Even before Raw ended this week with Goldberg, Brock Lesnar, and The Undertaker in the ring, I was going to say that these three look like the "Big 3" right now. I am not just talking about their size. These are the top part-timers being featured right now that will be in the Royal Rumble match. These were three names I just had to look at.

I'll start with Lesnar. He is probably the least likely to win the Royal Rumble match of the three. Do they really want to do Reigns vs. Lesnar again? That sounds like something they might want to do, but I don't see them doing it here.

Goldberg is pretty likely to get a title match. He just returned to the WWE a few months ago. Promotions typically like to give titles to people that have some hype around them. TNA (Impact Wrestling) usually gives former WWE guys title reigns when they come over. Even independent promotions have been known to put titles on former WWE guys. They have that notoriety. While Goldberg is still hot and the WWE doesn't look interested in booking him as poorly as they did Sting, I wouldn't be surprised if he wins the Royal Rumble and headlines Wrestlemania.

And then there is The Undertaker. He doesn't have many years left and one more title reign before he does retire would be fitting. I could see him facing John Cena at Wrestlemania for the WWE Championship. But does he need the Royal Rumble victory to get this match?

The problem with these three guys is that they are all part-timers. What about the guys on the full-time roster? I should at least mention a few names. I'll go with Seth Rollins for Raw and Miz for Smackdown.

I have seen some fans say that the WWE will pull some kind of swerve and Seth Rollins will find himself in the Royal Rumble match and win it. He has shown an obsession with title matches. Even more than being worried about Triple H. More than likely, Seth Rollins will find some way to get into the Royal Rumble match, but then Triple H will screw him out of it. Or maybe Stephanie will screw Rollins, cause him to go crazy, and Triple H will have to come back to protect his wife. Either way, I don't see Seth Rollins winning this Royal Rumble.

Why bring up The Miz? After that promo he gave against Daniel Bryan a few months ago, his value rose. People were expecting big things with him. Nothing really happened. The time just wasn't right. Is the time right now? A Royal Rumble victory would be huge for him. If AJ Styles ends up turning face in the near future, the WWE will need a top heel. Miz could be groomed to take that place.

Of the names I brought up, I am going to go with The Undertaker winning the Royal Rumble. He should get one more title win before he retires and a Royal Rumble win would just be a classic way to set up his final title win at Wrestlemania. As for Goldberg, he could find some other way into the title picture on Raw. The Undertaker will go after Smackdown's title.

Let me go back to that segment on Raw I mentioned. I noticed the fans were pretty flat for most of it. Maybe they were wondering why Goldberg's head was bleeding. The Undertaker appearing got a nice pop.

Point is, the ring contained the WWE's top 3 part-timers that will be in the Royal Rumble. They are not paid what they are paid and pushed and hyped the way they are pushed and hyped just to get a great reaction from the crowd. These guys are counted on to be draws. Short of putting The Rock in the Royal Rumble, the WWE has put together a big Royal Rumble match this year. Looking at certain indicators, I would say they are underachieving.

Start with ratings. It is bad enough that Raw has not seen a great ratings boost. This week's Raw, the last Raw heading into a big PPV, only say about 20,000 more viewers from the previous week, averaging 3,292,000. With so many big guns being pulled out, you should expect better.

Look at the Royal Rumble itself. It is still not sold out. I remember a time when WWE PPVs would sell out so quickly it would leave me shocked. These days, WWE PPVs, even the big ones, can't get sold out two days before the event, and that is leaving me shocked. The Royal Rumble is one of the WWE's biggest PPVs. It features 3 big part-timers. It also features guys like John Cena and AJ Styles. And it still has a lot of floor seats available. It isn't like they have 100,000 seats to fill.

I am not saying they should fire Goldberg, Lesnar, and Taker. But relying on them obviously is not getting the job done. Ratings are not great. The WWE is struggling to sell tickets. You can't say no one goes to any events anymore. I mentioned in the past that ratings for the NFL were down this past season. Looking at a chart, I noticed attendance actually improved this same past season, so it isn't that people stopped caring. What does the WWE do when they're draws stop being draws?

Previewing The Royal Rumble 2017 Undercard Matches

I talked about Raw's women's matches yesterday. Smackdown has since added a women's tag match, but it is really just filler, lumping together the various feuds they are developing there, so I'm not going to go back to talk about that. Today is about the men's matches at the Royal Rumble, outside of the actual Royal Rumble match. I will get to that on Friday.

Sheamus & Cesaro defend the Raw Tag Team Titles against Gallows & Anderson. And the WWE is highlighting that there will be two refs for this match. There are just times when the WWE tries to get too fancy. It is nice that they are trying to develop a storyline for a title feud that goes beyond just the titles, but this is a pretty dumb story. It is based on a story of clumsy officiating. You had an awkward ending to a match a few weeks ago between these two teams, and that has led to this rematch with two refs. The awkward ending you had to Brock Lesnar vs. Undertaker at Summerslam a few years ago was one thing. But the WWE needs to realize that they didn't strike gold with angles like this.

If you can ignore the ref drama, there are two teams fighting for the tag titles. Sheamus and Cesaro just really got the reign started. Anderson & Gallows still don't feel like they deserve a title run. I will say the titles stay with Cesaro and Sheamus.

Not everyone that gets a title reign is being groomed to be a star. Some people are given title reigns so they can drop the belt to the person the WWE intends to be a star. Some people are given title reigns just for the sake of filler, such as when a star is injured and the WWE is just killing time until they return. When I look at the cruiserweight division, I don't think the WWE is trying to make stars at all. None of the three men that have held the title so far look like stars. It looks like the WWE is just going through the motions with everyone. I won't say too much about that here. Maybe another day.

The Cruiserweight Championship will be on the line between Rich Swann and Neville. Neville turned heel and is getting the best push he has gotten on the main roster. He was on the main roster before the cruiserweight division returned. He has had his ups and downs, including an injury and coming back to not much of a response from the fans. But he is at least refreshed by this heel turn. Given what I just said about the WWE not developing stars in this division, I don't think they will have a problem taking the title off Rich Swann and putting it on Neville. But will it happen here? I will say the title change happens.



Onto the World Championship matches. For Roman Reigns vs. Kevin Owens, the match will be No DQ. Oh, and Chris Jericho will be locked in a shark cage above the ring. Here is the WWE just going too goofy again. I'm surprised they are not forcing Chris Jericho to also dress up as La Luchadora. Why not? He wore a mask a couple months ago to screw Seth Rollins. I am sure they can work the angle in there somehow. The WWE definitely should do more to make the atmosphere more fun, but there are just some ideas that are really stupid. They can ruin a storyline or hurt the performers themselves. There was a serious, strong storyline with Seth Rollins for a while, and that was good. But then the WWE couldn't sustain it and Seth started acting goofy at points, losing his edge. That storyline between Seth Rollins and Triple H, which I will talk about another day, has definitely lost value. As for individuals not working out when they get a goofy angle, remember Gallows & Anderson trying to be comedians? That flopped.


Chris Jericho being locked in a cage is bad enough. And then suspending it above the ring? I know this kind of thing is not unheard of, but it still seems dumb. Why not just say Jericho will get fired if he gets involved in any way? He has a title now. Why not say he will be stripped of the title? Why not say Kevin Owens will be stripped of HIS title if Chris Jericho even thinks about getting involved? Face it, Jericho is still likely to find a way to get involved anyway. They just wanted to come up with a goofy angle for this feud. In some cases, it could be a distraction.




If people watching this Sunday can direct their attention a few feet below Chris Jericho, they might see a match going on for Raw's top title. I cannot picture Kevin Owens heading into Wrestlemania as Universal Champion. I can picture him facing Chris Jericho for the United States Championship, which will be a feud featuring their friendship finally coming to an end. For that to happen, Owens must lose the Universal Championship. Losing it to Reigns at the Royal Rumble just makes sense. They can have their rematch next month, where Jericho will inadvertently screw Owens and set their feud up. Roman Reigns then moves on to a bigger opponent for Wrestlemania.

John Cena faces AJ Styles for the WWE Championship. Cena needs one more World title win to tie Ric Flair's record. He has had multiple opportunities to do it over the last few years. It is going to happen sooner or later.

Before considering the match, look at the feud between AJ Styles and John Cena. It has been the same complaining and self-righteousness you have seen a lot over the years with John Cena. It caused some buzz when CM Punk did it. It didn't draw, but it created buzz with smarks. And smarks are once again eating this stuff up. They have done it multiple times now. It isn't fresh anymore. It isn't entertaining. It isn't helping the WWE's numbers. If anything, I am getting to the point where I am ready to say that all this is laziness on the part of the WWE. They cannot come up with entertaining storylines, so they just look at smarks and base their promos and storylines off of what they want to hear. And they keep rehashing the same thing. There might be a different variation here and there, but it is all pretty much the same thing. There is a reason the Nexus angle led to a better ratings bump than the summer angle of CM Punk dropping pipebombs and walking out on the company. The Nexus angle did not even lead to any of the members becoming as big a star as CM Punk ended up, ignoring Daniel Bryan, who was kicked out of the group early. The Nexus angle was pure kayfabe, rookies going crazy and trying to take over. CM Punk's angle was based on reality, his issues with not being pushed better. AJ Styles is definitely following in the path of CM Punk and Daniel Bryan, another guy that got a big push involving real issues of the company not wanting to push him better. But the whole storyline just doesn't work as well here. AJ Styles has not been held back like other guys have been for years in the WWE. John Cena has not been pushed as annoyingly as he has in the past. A lot of these promos with Styles and Cena is just beating a dead horse. They are not really saying anything new to spark interest.

As for the match, the outcome might not matter. Smackdown has already announced an Elimination Chamber match for the WWE Championship. I don't think John Cena will have to wait much longer for his next title run. But I think AJ Styles will retain at the Royal Rumble. Cena can then win it inside the Elimination Chamber.

Previewing The Royal Rumble 2017 Women's Matches

Charlotte finally faces someone over Raw's Women's Championship at a PPV that's not named Sasha Banks. She defends the title against Bayley at the Royal Rumble.

Let's talk about Bayley. She debuted at a time Sasha Banks was taking some time off. Her push got screwed up when Sasha Banks came back. They looked like they were going to push her again, but then they once again went back to Sasha Banks. But here it is, Bayley getting a title feud on the main roster.

I see a lot of criticism for Bayley. For one thing, a lot of fans don't like some of her promos. Well, a lot of these women, including the highly-praised top women's wrestling talent coming out of NXT, are not that great on the mic. Charlotte often seems robotic with some of her promos. Fans, and the WWE, just have to realize that not everyone is the same. That may sound obvious, but you have to put that idea into practice. Bayley may not be the type of performer that can cut certain promos or handle certain storylines. It just doesn't fit her character. But her character does have potential. She's someone little kids can like. She has a friendly personality. Whether she ever develops greater depth or not, you just have to find storylines and angles that work for her. It is the old idea of trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. It can really ruin Bayley if they just take her and just try to make her into something she is not.

Another criticism I have seen brought up is that Bayley doesn't have that same magic she had down in NXT. People say she was so over in NXT. They say she had the greatest underdog story in women's wrestling. The WWE may think that the could just redo the same kind of things they did down there for her. But it isn't working. I am not surprised. I have seen it before that something that looks so amazing down in NXT comes to the main roster and loses that luster, even if the WWE does try to feature it prominently. But this criticism is more on the WWE than Bayley. They cannot take it for granted that something successful in NXT will carry over on the main roster. And they should be terrified if that ever becomes the norm. NXT only gets a fraction of the audience the main roster gets. Do they want Raw only getting a million viewers or less? Do they want live events featuring main roster talent to get a crowd of 300? Do they want to only appeal to smarks? Put the proper work in on the main roster.

Who wins this match? Charlotte. Not only does Bayley not look like she's ready, but I doubt the WWE ruins Charlotte's undefeated PPV streak here. It's not a draw. I doubt the person that gets the "rub" by ending the streak will really benefit. It is just a means of hyping up Charlotte. End it at Wrestlemania. End it against an opponent that has been developed better. Whatever the case, it is not likely to end here.

Further down the card, Sasha Banks takes on Nia Jax. As I have said before, in the previous era, it would be rare to see someone that was just used to put over the centerpiece in the women's division still get a proper feud after she has been rotated out. I am not talking about a periphery angle. I mean a female wrestler feuding with another female wrestler in a legitimate feud that will go to a PPV. I cannot think of one example of a credible jobber getting a proper feud like this once during the diva era off the top of my head. Sasha Banks fans should not be complaining about Sasha Banks getting something to do.

One of the problems with this feud is that Bayley already beat Nia Jax a few weeks ago in a singles match. Nia Jax isn't undefeated on the main roster anymore. If she still was, that would make this feud seem even more important. Can Sasha Banks hand Nia Jax her first official loss on the main roster? Of course, they couldn't really help it. The roster lacks depth. If they wanted to have a #1 contender's match, there aren't a lot of credible options for Bayley to go over available. You have to take into account injuries and other angles the WWE has going on. In the old days, the WWE might just do a battle royal to decide the #1 contender. Bayley eliminating Nia Jax to win that would not be the same as beating her in a singles match. Nia Jax would still be undefeated in singles matches. But it is hard to book properly when you don't have a lot to work with. Because of that, this feud loses some of its luster. Sasha Banks still has to beat a destructive monster, but people have already seen that the monster is beatable.

Who wins? It comes down to how long the WWE wants to prolong this. And the WWE has shown that they do love prolonging things these days. This is a feud for Sasha Banks to win, but the WWE might extend this feud beyond the Royal Rumble. If they do, Nia Jax would win at the Royal Rumble and Sasha would win the feud later on. That is what I will go with.

Should Kurt Angle Be The New Raw GM?

Kurt Angle is back with the WWE. He is going into the Hall of Fame. He is the kind of performer you don't expect to be inducted and never be seen again after Wrestlemania weekend. People expect him to be involved in something. People are talking about one last match. I want to bring up another role. How about General Manager of Raw?

Why not GM of Smackdown? Because Daniel Bryan is doing a solid job over there. Mick Foley has various issues. A fresh change wouldn't be bad.

Does Kurt Angle fit the GM role? He's done it before. He has been an authority figure before. He has pretty good mic skills. He has a history with Stephanie McMahon, as well as Shane. It could be a smooth transition for him to come in as an authority figure.

Just to make it clear, I am against the WWE bringing back too many people. Numbers show that all these returns are usually good for a temporary boost, but the overall loss in viewers is still continuing. The WWE should put more focus in the talent they have now and changing the atmosphere of their product. But if Kurt Angle is going to come back, you might as well use him for something. Outside of an in-ring return, a GM role is just an obvious option. And I think Raw would be the place for him.

On The WWE Return Of Mickie James

Mickie James returned this week on Smackdown. She helped Alexa Bliss retain the Smackdown Women's Championship against Becky Lynch. She is a heel. She was revealed as La Luchadora. I had said a while ago that I did not want Mickie James to return like this. The WWE did handle it somewhat well. Let me go back to some of the points I made.

I was worried that the whole thing just looked stupid. It's amazing how just taking away the cape makes La Luchadora look less goofy. In terms of handling this with respect, they did have this match between Alexa Bliss and Becky Lynch be in the main event. In her whole career in the WWE, Mickie James never wrestled in the main event of either Raw or Smackdown. People never stop and think about what that means. If you want this woman to be the top star of your women's division, why not feature her in the main-event scene like you did Lita, Trish, Chyna, and others? What is the excuse? She's over. She didn't have the injury issues that screwed over certain other women the WWE tried to push as stars. It is just one of the indicators that the WWE did not want Mickie James over during the diva era. She might not have wrestled in the main event of Smackdown this week, but treating her return as important enough to be involved in the main-event segment was a nice gesture. It is a good sign.

Another issue I had about Mickie James being La Luchadora is that it was obviously not her the whole time. I have noticed some fans bring it up. Well, there is nothing you can do now. This is like one of the issues I have had with the recent Bray Wyatt/Randy Orton storyline. Not enough was done to sell that Randy Orton was broken to the point that he had to join The Wyatts. Why should Bray Wyatt have bought into Randy Orton? Why should the fans buy into this whole storyline? Daniel Bryan looked broken when he acted like he wanted to join The Wyatts years ago. When Randy Orton faked being friends with Seth Rollins years ago to get him where he wanted him, The Authority wanted him on their side and that relationship was there for a while. You didn't have any of that with Wyatt and Orton. Orton didn't really look devastated. There was no friendship ever between Orton and Wyatt that Orton could play with. It was just weak development. After having said all that, there is nothing you can do now. And that is the same thing you have to say about La Luchadora being Mickie James. It wasn't her the whole time, but there is nothing you can do now.

What about Mickie James being a heel? Fans are excited to have her back. Whether they brought her back as a heel or a face, they would have been excited. And she's still showing that charisma that helped her to connect with the fans for the last decade. As long as the WWE doesn't do any stupid storylines, her overness should not be hurt.

The bigger issue about her being a heel is the depth. Naomi may be good to go in the ring again, but you still have more heels than faces. Natalya, Carmella, Alexa Bliss, and Mickie James are heels. Naomi, Nikki Bella, and Becky Lynch are faces. Carmella has not had anyone proper face to work with to further her angle with James Ellsworth. Natalya and Nikki Bella have just been doing promos and brawls for a while now. And now Becky Lynch will obviously need a friend to go against both Alexa Bliss and Mickie James. That can be Naomi, but the roster is still thin. Who are the full-time enhancement talents? Will the WWE just rely on local jobbers? Not much credibility in beating them. It's hard to have three separate women's angles going on at the same time, not even counting the angle involving Maryse and Renee Young. You might say that it is great that the women are getting things to do, but it really isn't practical in the long run. If they did not bring back Mickie James, just about all the fresh matches you could have had with the available roster would have been gone through already. Then what? Whether she is a heel or a face, Mickie James at least helps the overall depth issue. But I still say it would have been better to bring her in as a face and debut someone else as La Luchadora to team with Alexa Bliss. That would give even more people to work with.

Mickie James becomes the first credible jobber of the diva era to be re-signed to the active roster since the women's revolution started. The WWE first got called out two years ago on Twitter. That led to some changes. It led to three NXT women debuting in one night on Raw. They say the revolution really got started when the butterfly title was dumped and "diva" became a bad word last year. But then Maryse was the first woman they brought back, an eye-candy diva pushed as centerpiece during the diva era. It took them a while to re-sign a credible jobber. These were the women with wrestling credibility used to put over the centerpiece and used as interim centerpiece when the top star was out. Typically, they never got too over. Mickie James put an end to that trend. It is somewhat fitting that she should be the first one back. And as I said before, they are showing some signs of treating her better this time around. Will she get the career she deserves? You will have a few years to find out.

On The Ziggler Heel Turn

Dolph Ziggler turned heel recently. I didn't get around to talk about it. This week, they brought in Jerry Lawler to help sell the new heel Ziggler. The segment got edgy. Some might say it got offensive. I am going to talk about that angle, then the overall Ziggler heel turn.

Did they need to bring up that Jerry Lawler had a heart attack? I think the WWE sometimes relies too much on real-life issues for storylines and segments. They can sometimes go to a very sour, seedy place that just isn't entertaining. Even if they do have the okay of the people involved to go with it, it doesn't always make it right. The WWE has sometimes used death of wrestlers or family members of wrestlers for an angle. Even if the family of the deceased individual is fine with it, does that mean there might not have been some other viewers that lost loved ones that might find the segment hard to watch? When the WWE humiliated Mickie James for how she looked, I noticed videos on Youtube that would defend her. I remember one video where a girl said she hated that storyline because she has struggled with her own weight. The WWE just turns some fans off with this kind of stuff. Not only do you have to question the ability of these storylines to draw, you have to question if you might be losing some of your audience that just don't like this kind of thing.

That being said, I think the WWE has done worse than what they did last night. I don't think it was as offensive to any group as certain other things the WWE has done. Ziggler attacking Lawler is also nothing to get too upset about. He still wrestles. I remember when some people got upset when the WWE put Mae Young in a match. Considering she was over 80 at the time and looked like she could really get hurt just taking a roll up, they might have a reason to get upset. Lawler isn't that old. Overall, I won't criticize this one segment too much. But the WWE better not make a habit out of this kind of thing.

But let me just do an aside and mention one exception to what I just said about not liking the WWE relying on reality for storylines. I wouldn't mind if they ever did run a storyline that admitted that they never intended for Mickie James to get over and never gave her the career she should have gotten back then. I wouldn't mind Mickie James giving that self-righteous speech. It is not unprecedented. They let CM Punk sit on the stage and spit some reality. That big push Daniel Bryan got a couple years ago that turned him into an icon was based on the WWE legitimately not wanting to push him the way he deserved and fans wanted to see him be pushed. I don't think this would even really have to be a seedy, sour storyline that I just mentioned are not that great. How can you have a women's revolution without acknowledging that a major problem that existed in the men's division also existed in the women's division? People talk like the only issue was short matches and the WWE not giving the women proper treatment. The problem was deeper than that and it never got acknowledged. This is what caused the respectable years of the diva era to collapse. I think it would be good for Mickie James, the women's division in general, and might be even more empowering for some fans.

Onto the Ziggler heel turn. Go back a few months. Dolph Ziggler was involved in a heated feud with Dean Ambrose for the WWE Championship. It looked like Ziggler might turn heel. He did not. A while after that, Ziggler got an even more heated feud with Miz for the Intercontinental Championship. All that emotion led to him winning the title, but then he lost it back to Miz soon after. A little while after that, he failed once again to win the WWE Championship. And the heel turn came soon after.

What took them so long? With the brand split back, they are obviously going to drag certain things out, which you have seen them do on both shows already, but I think this just did not work right. This angle was obviously at its peak when Ziggler was so emotional about beating Miz for the Intercontinental Championship. Losing it back so soon was obviously the breaking point. And then you have to throw in the rematch. Why not turn him heel right after that? Ideally, they might have even tried doing it even before all that, possibly when he lost the title back to Miz and wouldn't be able to face Sami Zayn at Survivor Series. It would be nice to do it near when the emotion was at its peak. Waiting as long as they did, I don't think the heel turn had as much bite to it as it could have, ignoring what they just did this week to help Ziggler look more heelish.

It looks like they were going for the kind of thing they did with Christian a number of years ago on Smackdown. Christian finally won the World's Heavyweight Championship. It was a great moment for Christian. And along comes Randy Orton to win it soon after that moment. That left a lot of fans dejected. It became a real issue. Christian turned heel. Christian would regain the title from Orton, but in a cheap fashion and lose it right back to Orton. You can consider that whole situation as a precursor to the Daniel Bryan situation I mentioned before. The WWE got away with what they did to Christian, but had a much tougher time with Daniel Bryan.

What happened with Dolph Ziggler obviously failed to reach the heights of what happened with Daniel Bryan. Fans aren't going crazy for Ziggler to get back in the WWE Championship picture, or even get back the Intercontinental Championship. I would say this angle also failed to reach the level of what they had with Christian a few years ago. I am not going to compare Ziggler to Christian and analyze their situations too much. Both are guys wrestling fans can respect. Both have not been pushed as true A or A+ players. But as far as why this recent push for Ziggler didn't have that same feel to it, I think one of the main reasons is the development. As I mentioned before, they waited too long. Does the fact that Ziggler put all that emotion just for a midcard title matter? I don't think so. The emotion was still strong. But no one really feels like Ziggler was screwed the way they felt Christian was back in the day. If they made Ziggler look like he was more of a victim of the status quo, maybe it would have been different. Of course, I am not a fan of using those kind of storylines too much. Only on special occasions.

Something to keep in mind whenever there is a heel turn is depth. I talked about it with Mickie James coming back as a heel. I talked about it with Sasha Banks potentially going heel. I have to talk about it here. The depth in the men's division is obviously better overall than the women's division, even with the brand split. But Ziggler is an important player. He is an upper-midcarder that has been leaning more towards the main-event scene than the midcard recently. Who are the top faces now? John Cena, Dean Ambrose, and that is pretty much it. Top heels? AJ Styles, Bray Wyatt, and Miz. Randy Orton is interesting. He is a face in heel's clothing. This angle is obviously trending towards him turning on Bray Wyatt. Until then, however, he is a heel. That is how he is booked. Until he does turn, there are not a lot of top faces. Baron Corbin's stock has gone up in recent weeks. He is a heel. You can talk about Kane, but he is not used that well anymore. Just in terms of depth, I don't think they should have turned Ziggler heel. Not now. Problem is, the long wait would probably hurt the potential of the heel turn even more. Smarks typically love heels. Smackdown is preferred over Raw by smarks. But you have to wonder what the WWE is doing when you look at the depth. Of course, this is Royal Rumble season. Things usually get mixed together around now. But they do have to put some practical thought into what they are doing eventually.

Should Goldberg Vs. Lesnar Happen Again At Wrestlemania This Year?

Goldberg and Brock Lesnar have faced each other twice over the years. Goldberg won both of those matches, including a squash match at Survivor Series last year. Goldberg is sticking around for a few more matches. I see a lot of fans booking what they would like to see at Wrestlemania this year, or expect to see, and Goldberg vs. Lesnar is popping up a lot on their cards.

Why should the WWE do this match again? That is not a rhetorical question. I do love busting out rhetorical questions. But why should they do it? Even if Lesnar wins this encounter, Goldberg still beat him more times. Wouldn't Lesnar still be upset about that, which would warrant even more matches just between these two? If the WWE had let Lesnar win at Survivor Series, then the rubber match would have been so obvious. The WWE would have to do it. That is not the situation you have here. Why do fans still want to see these two again? And especially so soon?

The WWE should take the opportunity to create some fresh matches for Goldberg. One of the problems with Brock Lesnar since he came back as a part-timer is that it took him a while to feud with any fresh full-time talent. He feuded with John Cena, someone he had faced before during his first run. He faced Triple H a few times. Triple H was a part-timer by this point. He finally then went to CM Punk. And when the WWE has let him go against fresh talent he had never faced before, they often let him look too strong. They protected him too much. They even protected him in matches against people like The Undertaker. That loss to Goldberg was the worst loss he has taken in a long while. Point is, Brock Lesnar matches just no longer became something for me to get excited over. I think a lot of other viewers feel the same way.

Why make that mistake with Goldberg? While he is still fresh and booking hasn't ruined him, put him against someone he has never faced yet. There is potential for a lot of fresh exchanges with him in the Royal Rumble, but when you talk about Wrestlemania this year, create a fresh feud for him. A title does not have to be on the line. Or it could. It can go either way. As far as opponents go, Goldberg has never feuded against John Cena, Roman Reigns, The Undertaker, Braun Strowman, and a ton of other guys that have momentum right now. Some of these matches are obviously not likely, but there is potential for a fresh feud against someone that could put up a fight against Goldberg.

The argument for Lesnar vs. Goldberg III would be that Lesnar needs momentum back. First of all, he can get his momentum back by crushing anyone else. As I said, that loss to Goldberg was the worst he has had in a long while, but avenging it won't make a difference. And that is the other reason I feel he doesn't need the win back. It won't make a difference. What has Lesnar being so protected really done for the WWE? Ratings are going down. There have been some quarters where the subscription count for the WWE Network has dropped. The WWE has paced Lesnar out during that time and the count is still not consistently growing every quarter. Why the need to protect him so much? I would just move on to fresh feuds.

Looking Further Into Raw's Slow Starts To The New Year

One of the points that I have brought up when talking about Raw's ratings is that there has not always been that big ratings spike to start the year that you would expect. The end of the year features NFL action on Monday nights, going right against Raw. The start of the year features Wrestlemania season, which is the WWE's hottest time of the year. A lot of fans and wrestling news site writers just usually expect things to get better when a new year starts.

I am going to look at the viewership averages for Raw in the last three months of the year and first three months of the year, going back to 2012. Why 2012? Because that is as far back Wrestlingdata.com goes with consistent viewership numbers. I am also not going to include the Raws after Wrestlemania. Why? First of all, they usually don't happen in the first three months of the year. Second, this is more about looking at the build up to Wrestlemania and the viewership it gets. That is why I am not including the Raw after Wrestlemania from 2015, which was in March.

End of 2016 - 2,877,000 viewers

Start of 2016 - 3,603,000 viewers
End of 2015 - 3,300,000 viewers

Start of 2015 - 4,003,000 viewers
End of 2014 - 3,782,000 viewers

Start of 2014 - 4,444,000 viewers
End of 2013 - 3,925,000 viewers

Start of 2013 - 4,621,000 viewers
End of 2012 - 3,788,000 viewers

Start of 2012 - 4,500,00 viewers

What you can see is that the WWE has gained about 300,000 viewers from football season to Wrestlemania season in the last two periods. For 2013/2014, they gained about 500,000 viewers, which is a good amount. For 2012/2013, they gained a little less than 900,000 viewers, which is pretty big. Keep in mind that 2012 was the last election year before this recent one in 2016.

Something else you might notice from the data is how many viewers the WWE has lost from the beginning of the year to the end of the year. That is why I bothered to include the start of 2012. It matches the trend. From the start of 2012 to the end of 2012, Raw lost around 700,000 viewers. From the start of 2013 to the end of 2013, they lost about 700,000 viewers. Same in 2014. Same in 2015. And I also included the final few months of 2016 to show that it also comes out to around 700,000 viewers.

Keep in mind, this does not mean the WWE is losing 700,000 viewers every year. That is how many they are losing from the start of the year to the end of the year on average. From the end of the year to the start of a new year, they gain back some of their viewers. That's Wrestlemania season.

What you have to wonder is whether they are gaining back a good amount during Wrestlemania season recently. Only gaining back 200,000 or 300,000 viewers isn't going to cut it. The WWE is likely to lose more than double that by the time the year ends. 500,000 is a respectable number. I doubt the WWE gains back 900,000 viewers, like they did the last time there was an election year.

So far in 2017, Raw has gotten roughly the same numbers it got during football season a few months ago. No bump at all. You can say that they had to go against college football games that got a lot of viewers, but these college games have not always destroyed Raw in previous years. I don't think the excuse fits. But now that those games are out of the way, the WWE has pretty much no more excuses for Raw.