Part-Time Players Reign Supreme in WWE

Hell in a Cell was a history making event. A triple main event, headlined by women competing inside Hell in a Cell for the first time ever.

So, of course, Goldberg opened Raw and took out Rusev.

We all know that WWE has an obsession with part-timers. If The Rock is willing to come back for one night, you best believe that he’s laying the smackdown on anyone who stands in his way. If Steve Austin has another stunner left in him, it doesn’t matter if you’re a main event guy, you’re not one of the biggest stars of all-time, so you’re taking that stunner.

I’m not exactly sure when this trend started. It feels like it at least goes back to Hulk Hogan defeating Randy Orton at SummerSlam 2006, but I’m sure there are examples that are more than 10 years old. Still, ten years. That’s a very long time and it’s a major reason why WWE is hurting for stars right now.

Brock Lesnar is the obvious example of a part-time guy showing up the main roster. He wrestles 3-4 times a year, dominates, and then goes away the rest of the year. This wasn’t so bad when he was wrestling the Undertaker. While it overshadowed the rest of the roster and proved that part-time legends are more important than full-time players, at least it was two part-time guys wrestling and putting on an entertaining feud and matches. Last year Brock Lesnar was pretty acceptable, all things considering.

This year’s Brock Lesnar is a different story. Dean Ambrose was arguably the hottest act in the company in January and February. When it was decided that he would face Brock Lesnar at Wrestlemania, people got excited. We all knew Ambrose would lose, but we thought that he would take a great ass kicking, keep fighting, give fans some hope, and maybe lose via stoppage. Nope. He just got beat up and pinned like it was a house show match. Ambrose still hasn’t recovered. Same story with Randy Orton.

Lesnar vs. Goldberg is a feud that makes sense. The premise is pretty dumb, promoting it as a dream match because of a video game even though they’ve wrestled before and have been in the same video game before. But, it’s still a feud that makes sense. Being promoted as the main event, and definitely going on last at Survivor Series, doesn’t do the main roster any good and makes the traditional survivor series matches feel far less important. But, I swear there is some positive in this feud/match. It’s two part-time guys. No one can really lose momentum because one guy won’t be seen again until January and the other guy won’t be seen again until March, if at all.

But WWE just can’t help themselves. Even though Goldberg and Lesnar feuding makes sense and doesn’t harm the standing of anyone on the main roster, they just have to harm someone on the main roster.

Enter, Rusev.

Remember when Rusev was undefeated? He was running through guys and it looked like he would be a top heel for years to come. He was a good worker who showed diversity in the ring, and he had a presence and charisma about him. He also had a gimmick that created easy heel heat and a hot manager that only added to the heat. Then he lost to John Cena and was tossed in the trash.

He could have survived losing to Cena. After all, he had to lose at some point and losing to John Cena at Wrestlemania isn’t the worst way to lose your first match. Then he got stuck in that God-awful feud with Dolph Ziggler and it was all she wrote for the Bulgarian Brute.

Now, Rusev is the guy who lets The Rock verbally lay into him and his wife without doing anything, eats one of those stunners from Austin, and gets beat up by guys who like to spear people. That top heel spot is just a pipe dream at this point.

Why sacrifice Rusev, a main event guy, just to give momentum to a guy who doesn’t need any? Goldberg hitting a spear on Heyman would have sufficed. What did the jackhammer to Rusev accomplish?

WWE’s habit of sacrificing alleged top guys for part-time players is a big reason as to why no one cares about these alleged top guys. Why should we care about Rusev or Ambrose or Orton when they constantly look stupid against guys who just disappear? And why should we care about the guys who aren’t getting sacrificed, the guys like Styles, Owens, Rollins, etc… when they’re always playing second fiddle to the stars of the past?

Does WWE not realize that, by not creating any news stars in the last ten years, that twenty years from now they won’t have an old star to get one up on the top guys? Their approach is shortsighted and harmful to all involved. Unless you’re only involved a couple times a year.

Tweet me @jeremylambert88. Or don’t.