Ask 411 Wrestling: Who Should Be Booking WWE?

Hello, and welcome to Ask 411 Wrestling, your respite from having to hear people talk about how awesome Battleground and Raw were unless their name is Russo! I am your answer guy Mathew Sforcina, and with everyone cautiously optimistic about things right now, let’s delve into old stuff we’re still super cynical about!

Got a question about the past, the present, or the future? Well then, as long as it’s at least tangentially related to wrestling, send it to [email protected] to be answered!

BANNERY GOODNESS!!!

Zeldas!

Check out my Drabble blog, 1/10 of a Picture! Look for a wrestling thing I’ll be putting up there soon!

Me On Twitter~!
WWE Turn Alerts on Twitter~~!!
http://www.twitter.com/411mania
http://www.twitter.com/411wrestling
http://www.twitter.com/411moviestv
http://www.twitter.com/411music
http://www.twitter.com/411games
http://www.twitter.com/411mma

Feedback Loop

I got nothing, as per usual.

The Trivia Crown

What am I? I’m an event, live on PPV, where every title in the company was defended and retained. It was a bad night for people with corner people, as only two wrestlers with people in their corner won their matches (one of them over someone else with a corner person). One person wrestled two matches, both of which ended the same way, albeit reversed. One match was patriotic, one match was hyped, and another was mostly based around a single hold. A PPV that featured The Rockers, one third of The Orient Express and a guy you’d expect to beat math doing just that, I am what?

The Ghost Of Faffner Hall has the answer.

What am I? I’m an event, live on PPV, where every title in the company was defended and retained. (World, Tag Team, Intercontinental) It was a bad night for people with corner people, as only two wrestlers with people in their corner won their matches (Shawn Michaels and the Undertaker)(one of them over someone else with a corner person) (Giant Gonzalez). One person wrestled two matches (Bret Hart), both of which ended the same way, albeit reversed (disqualification). One match was patriotic (Lex Luger vs. Yokozuna), one match was hyped (Shawn Michaels vs. Mr. Perfect), and another was mostly based around a single hold (the Sharpshooter, Bret vs. Lawler). A PPV that featured The Rockers (Shawn vs. Perfect and Jannetty vs. Ludvig Borga), one third of The Orient Express (Akio Sato in Yokozuna’s corner) and a guy you’d expect to beat math doing just that (IRS over The 1-2-3 Kid), I am what?

You are Summerslam 93!

Who am I? A former world champion *cough*, I had several managers throughout my career, but only two nicknames. My finishers were location based. I predated Santino by a couple decades in one regard, and Umaga in another. One of my most famous career moments involved me winning a match, but not many people remember that. The first man to hold something, a man who teamed with a playing card, and a guy who got turned on by Angelica, I Am Who?

Getting Down To All The Business

Nelson has a hot take to start us off!

On tonight’s Raw, Stephanie McMahon stated there’d always been a WWE champion on Raw. Not true. Theres been Raws where the title was vacant, I believe. Wasn’t the title “held in abeyance” a few years ago when Bryan was feuding with Orton? My question to you is, how many Raws have aired without a world champion on it? To make it easier on you, include the big gold belt in the equation. What were the circumstances that led to the champion not appearing? Thanks, as always.

OK…

So Raw first aired January 11, 1993, and has been going pretty consistently since then. At what points has it not had a World Title?

Prior to the Brand Extension, it was the WWE Title, naturally. Up until Brock Lesnar signed with Smackdown that is. Before that point, did Raw ever air without a champion at all? (So the Thursday Raw where HBK forfeited the title, and when Vince gave up the belt, for instance, doesn’t count.)

Yes, there were seven Raws that aired between Breakdown: IYH where Austin lost the WWF title to Kane/Taker and Survivor Series, where Rock won the Deadly Games Tournament.

Then Brock, as Undisputed WWE Champion, signs exclusively with SD, and the following Raw, HHH is given the World Title. So now that’s the one we look at.

That title was vacated on December 6th, 2004 due to a double finish in a triple threat match the previous week, and there were five Raws (including one recap week) before New Years Revolution the following year to determine the new champ.

Then in June 2005, the belts switch, and we go back to the WWE title. You can then argue that when RVD won it, there was technically no world title on Raw since ECW held it, but he was on every Raw so I won’t count that.

Cena’s injury was announced on ECW, and the belt was put on Orton (eventually) before Raw happened… Then HHH gets drafted to SD, but the following week Punk wins the World Title for Raw, so both those shows count as having World titles. Then there were a couple months in 2009 where both World Titles were technically SD exclusive, from February 15, 2009 (No Way Out 2009) through to April 5th, 2009 (Wrestlemania 25) when Cena won the World Title. A week later Triple H brings the WWE title back, the World title goes back to SD at Backlash, and it’s the WWE title from then on.

Batista’s injury was announced after Raw, title put on Orton on next Raw… Then comes the long Orton/Bryan thing. Five Raws pass with no WWE title holder. Then a while later Bryan is stripped of the belt due to injury, and two Raws pass without a champion.

Then Rollins gets injured, and there’s two more Raws sans champion.

And then there’s this week’s.

So, excluding brand nonsense, counting only vacant titles, there’s been 22 editions of Raw without a World Champion. Not bad, considering how many there have been…

Joey Joe Joe Shabadoo wonders why WWE got rid of Sandow, as do almost all smart thinking people.

Love the column and look forward to it every week. My question is, with reports that WWE has been looking to bring back former talent (MVP? Jeff Hardy? Carlito? Kurt Angle? etc.), why did they make the recent round of talent cuts? Wouldn’t bringing back a Carlito be more expensive than having kept Sandow on the roster? As a corollary, do you think the WWE wishes it still had Barrett and Cody Rhodes? Thanks!

Because of freshness.

Most of the cuts that were made last time were housekeeping, guys like Hornswoggle, Colter, Santino etc, they were cut because there was no point keeping them on staff any longer. The list of guys who could still go who were cut were Cameron, Alex Riley (both of whom you can argue on merit/ability grounds), Barrett (asked for released by most accounts) and then Sandow, the big one.

But why cut anyone if you’re intent on bringing in old names? Because there’s only so many things you can do with a character and still make it fresh, there’s only so much you can do. With a guy like Sandow, they’d done pretty much everything with him (except a solid push, but this is WWE we’re talking about…) and so there’s little point keeping a guy on staff if you can’t use them in new stories.

However, older names, faces that haven’t been seen in a while, they regain their freshness. MVP hasn’t been in a WWE ring since 2010, and thus him coming back in would be fresh, since there’s a whole bunch of characters he hasn’t interacted with.

This is how things used to work, once you were in a region for long enough and people stopped caring about you, or ideally just before this point, you’d pick up and move to a new territory, with new opponents and new fans, and maybe a new chance to change aspects of your character and persona, and then after a while you come back to the last one, where everything old is new again.

It’s not about how old a person is, or how old a character is, but how much exposure they’ve had. You can wear out a welcome, but it regenerates over time, and you can come back.

So take heart in the idea that maybe, just maybe, we’ll see Sandow in the ring again.

Despite this, Barrett and Stardust are missed by WWE, solid midcard heel hands are needed, and WWE wasn’t tired of the characters yet, but obviously the performers themselves were…

Nate has a simple enough question.

Why in matches in the 70s and 80s (and perhaps earlier), did the wrestlers bounce off the ropes and criss-cross with each other to begin the match?

Because it looks cool.

The crisscross is a staple of wrestling that has fallen out of the playbook for the most part, although you do see it pop up from time to time.

The kayfabe explanation is that this is one of the logical results of wrestling thinking. In wrestling, you want to have momentum, and you don’t want to get hit. So, if someone is running at you, and you aren’t as limber and quick as some other wrestlers, instead of jumping over them or ducking under, you start running as well. So they can’t hit you, and maybe you can hit them if/when they stop and/or when you collide with more momentum, they’ll go down and you won’t.

The non-kayfabe justification is that it’s basically the big guy version of the indy wrestling stand off. In the old days, wrestlers generally were slower and less flexible, but they still want to create movement and action without hitting anything and showing off equality between the wrestlers. The crisscross is a good way to do this.

JJ wonders what we missed out on.

In the July 20, 2016 column, you wrote: “[Macho Man’s] original WWF retirement plan was the 2 year epic feud with Shawn Michaels that would end at WMX that would put him on the map.” Can you expound on this? Obviously Shawn worked the ladder match with Razor at WMX.

A couple people asked about this in the comments and such. I thought it was fairly common knowledge, but fair enough. Here’s the story from Lanny Poffo.

https://youtu.be/m1H44Z3LY88?t=9m2s

So Savage, in 92/93, was down in the dumps. He was being relegated to being a commentator, despite feeling he could still go for a while in the ring. But as part of that was a desire, a gnawing feeling that he could never top Wrestlemania 3, that his match with Steamboat was far too good for him to ever top.

Then Shawn Michaels comes along.

And Savage thinks, knows, perhaps, that he can beat his Steamboat match with this kid, that he can have a better match with Michaels than he did with Steamboat. So Savage plots out a two year storyline, starting with an in-ring spot where Savage brings a bottle of champagne and two flutes, and offers a toast to Shawn Michaels’ career, and then smashes Shawn over the head with the bottle, and that begins the feud that ends at Wrestlemania X where Shawn beats Savage, putting him behind the announce table for good. Probably there would be involvement with Sherri, since she was connected to both of them.

But WWF wanted to do the youth movement, and wanted to keep him behind the announce table. That led, in part, to Savage leaving WWF for WCW.

As for the actual components of the angle, what the plan was specifically, that hasn’t been made public. I wish I could tell you, but sadly I can’t.

Jon has a hypothetical for us.

Let’s say that post- brand split Vince had a mini stroke and decided to hire one booker for each brand instead of the current teams of writers (well, maybe I should say “team” of writers, as it’s probably the same group for both shows). Anyway, who would you select? My first instinct is Paul Heyman on Raw and Dutch/Zeb for Smackdown. Or is it time for HHH to have full booking control of one of them? Your thoughts, sir?

My thoughts are still consistent on this matter, with some adjustments. The fact is, that WWE has access to the largest collection of booking talent in history either under contract or on good terms.

So, what I’d do? You get Austin, Flair, JR, Finlay, Malenko, Laurinaitis, IRS, Arn, Hayes, Patterson, Del Rey, Hart, Steamboat, Michaels, Jericho, Raven, Dreamer, Sting, Regal, Heyman, Roberts, Hall, Nash, and anyone else they wanted to invite, find a hotel somewhere, put them up for a couple weeks, and ask them to think about wrestling.

Then take all the ideas they had, and give them to Heyman (Raw), Flair/Arn (SD) and HHH (NXT), who can then bring in a few assistants that they want, and let them utilize them.

Hell, you could keep the writing teams as is, but for goodness sake, all that talent on good terms, just let them spitball stuff for a few weeks. Stick cameras in there and if nothing else you can get a Network show out of it.

But yeah, Heyman on one side, Flair/Arn on the other, HHH keeping NXT until he’s ready to take over the whole thing.

Nick Mahoney just wants a little consistency with his superfans. Is that too much to ask?

In a recent column, I saw someone mention Brock Lesnar guy (an audience member at WWE shows).

I’m familiar with kool-aid shirt guy (or as I like to call him, Larry Csonka rip-off guy, since every time I’ve seen larry, before I ever saw this guy, Larry was wearing that exact same shirt), WWE sign guy, tall-skinny-long-haired guy with (sugar?) momma, pink shirt guy (don’t see him as much anymore), and a few ECW/Philly regulars, but not brock lesnar guy, so I googled him.

Still don’t remember ever seeing him (and as I’m watching Battleground right now, I see kool-aid guy and tall-skinny-long-haired guy with (sugar?) momma, but not brock lesnar guy).

So where is this guy? Kool-aid guy and the other guy are always in the first row or two opposite the camera, but where does brock lesnar guy sit? And how often is he there?

Brock Lesnar Guy, a.k.a Markout Man, is one of several guys who appears at many WWE events, he’s a superfan. He has made it easier for you to spot him these days as he now exclusively wears the shirt he was wearing when he became Brock Lesnar Guy, but the issue with spotting him is that he’s not consistent. As opposed to WWE Sign Guy, who gets moved to the same spot every time by the production staff, and Frank the Clown who has the obvious in with Noelle, Brock Lesnar Guy is a guy they like to have since he’s so expressive and such, but WWE doesn’t care about him enough to ensure he’s in the same place every time.

He sits where he gets seats. So just wait and if something big happens, wait and see if a guy in a green shirt is shown reacting to it or not.

Unless someone here can correct me on this.

Pedro gives us a local’s perspective on the Veneno/Flair incident, then a question.

My introduction, before my question is a feedback, reagrding your notes from the last week colum about Jack Veneno/Flair bout…First, as Rafael Sanchez himself (aka Jack Veneno), has told the story in many interviews about his in ring name, which he took the name from a western book, by the time, very popular here in the Dominican Republic. The name of the character was Jack The Venom, a gunman/bounty hunter, modified by the company creative as “Jack Veneno”. This man was a very popular, a true idol, a cult person here, and sill to date is very well respected.

Regarding the fear of a riot, that’s a dubious thing to happen since everybody knew by the time that Dominicana de Espectaculos (Veneno’s company) was an affiliated to the NWA. Kudos to the promotion for that match, still to date, one of the greatest sports-entertainment show in the country; the hype on Flair was exhuberant so he was sold here as the devil himself. We all enjoyed that match, a very good one, showing the greatness of Flair putting people over, and the good technician Jack Veneno was while active.

Now here’s my queston: Why, then, the WWF, gave up on Killer Khan? Since the match against Hogan, the man just went comedy, instead of the monster who fought Andre and even “injured” Ric Mcgraw’s neck so badly..??

Because he was brought in to be a foil for Hogan, another scary foreign guy, and after that would be dropped. In-between the Andre feuds, Hogan spent most of 87 fighting a few different heels, just strong enough to draw a crowd but not really a threat. Khan was brought in to be one such guy, with the mist and all, and after he did the Hogan run, he was pretty much dropped as his usefulness was over with. He had no illusions about his spot, like most guys had back then, everyone understood Hogan was the cash cow, Khan just got to suck on the dollar teat then move on. He didn’t suck, but he didn’t set the world on fire either. But he wasn’t meant to…

Ben asks about a Lucha Underground performer.

I have been highly impressed with a Lucha Underground performer. He seems to be almost revolutionary.

Tell me YOUR “impressions” on….. PENTAGON!

I think you have your details wrong there, Pentagón wrestled back in 95/96 as the evil twin of Octagón in AAA, before dying in the ring and then being revived and thus passing the mask on to Pentagón 2, Pentagón Harder Pentagón Black, which…

Oh, you mean Pentagón Jr… Well that’s different.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLYcogzox6I

… Apologies for the spelling in that video.

Anyway, he’s cool. I’d love to wrestle him, although I’m pretty sure I could take maybe only 3 of those moves…

I mean, unless this is some sort of hilarious joke that I’m not privy to, which is possible, there are many jokes I’m not privy to, you don’t really need me to say ‘Awesome Wrestler is Awesome’, do you? I appreciate that you apparently value my opinion, but still, Pentagón is awesome, go watch and buy his stuff, he is awesome.

I don’t do hard hitting, intelligent review stuff. That’s for the Csonkas and Greggs and Strouds and (Reviewer You Like)s and (Reviewer You Hate)s of the world.

Mike wants to indulge in a bit of fanfic fantasy booking.

Finally it’s fantasy booking time. I look at Sami Zayn and Becky Lynch as two of the purest babyfaces WWE could hope for. What say we have them both in upper mid card status for say the next two years, both having glimpses of the main event, but ultimately failing to win any particular “big one.”

Now, at some point in time they become buddies, maybe it starts with a mixed tag or something. Moving forward we see that they hang out, or congratulate each other after matches. When Heel champ and his bad bitch are beating down Zayn, Becky comes to attack the girl or whatever, just slowly over time establishing a bond between the two that remains friendly. No romantic stuff, no awkward flirting or anything overly contrived. However they’re solidly built in our heads as friends/allies/whatever.

Wrestlemania 34/35 rolls around with Becky fighting for the women’s championship and Zayn for the WWE world heavyweight title. Becky finally wins her big one, crowd loves it of course. A bit later in the show we see Sami psyching himself up for his big match. Enter Becky. He congratulates her, she thanks him for always being there and wishes him well, giving him a kiss on the cheek before exiting.

Main event time. Zayn of course wins his big one (Let’s say over Owens because why not). Confetti raining down, cheers, tears. Becky runs down to the ring to celebrate, jumps in and gives him a big hug. Zayn, in turn, plants a big kiss on Becky. Now she kind of pulls away as it was unexpected and has a bit of a shocked look on her face. Zayn is all oops this is awkward/embarrassing. He tries to apologize, being the consummate Canadian nice guy. Becky gets a big smile on her face and jumps into his arms, kissing him, they even fall over in a very awkwardly, dorky, yet sweet moment. They get up, Zayns music is playing throughout all this, celebrate, hold each other’s arms in the air, fireworks, etc.

I feel like this could be just the ultimate feel good babyface moment, and really Sami Zayn and Becky Lynch are the only two wrestlers WWE have that could pull it off. Would it work? What would you change? Would you replace either with a different wrestler? Let me know what you think!

I’m confused, you wrote about the two purest babyfaces WWE had, yet you spelt Bayley so weirdly throughout that storyline…

That said, I wouldn’t use Bayley in this, Becky’s the best choice, and Sami’s not horrible, but it just feel out of place with what WWE is putting out these days.

Being an adult in WWE is a bad thing, if you have any sort of adult emotions or relationships or responsibilities, you’re a bad guy. So building this long, involved angle about a relationship between faces just doesn’t fit in with the aesthetic of the company as it is today.

Don’t get me wrong, a long drawn out romance can absolutely work in wrestling, but not in current WWE, and my personal take is that it has to be something that the people involved either come up with or at 100% on board with. You don’t have kissing drills in wrestling school, and while most every wrestler, male or female, should have little issue with someone of the opposite sex superkicking them or giving them a headlock or something, asking a wrestler to take part in a romance angle can be problematic. Especially in a company that has a history of punishing/pushing for off screen relationships with on-air booking.

I dunno, it’s a valid storytelling technique, and maybe I’m just being a prude, but I’m hesitant to do this with two people who aren’t actually in a relationship, or who I don’t know for 100% certain are totally on board with this. But it would be a good visual/storyline ending for a WM, sure. Savage/Liz WM7 crossed with Benoit/Eddie WMXX. Works for me. And doesn’t work for me. Perfectly balanced response.

And finally this week, we come to a question asked by AG Awesome and Ryan both asked, one that I’m answering and not answering. I’ll include AG’s since his is longer more indepth.

I cannot stand this statement by James E Cornette regarding his thoughts on one Triple H: “In my opinion, he was never the star, he was always the guy that worked with the guy that drew the money…”.

IMHO Triple H was indeed a star and not just some dude selected to work with the main event guys due to his relationship with Steph or some such nonsense. The guy was must see in the late 90s and early 2000s and drew some major money with his amazing heel work from 1999-2001 before his injury. He also basically “ran” RAW in 2003 and 2004 as the main event guy. While that run may not be remembered fondly it does not negate that it happened.

Sure he was no Hogan, Austin, Rock, or even Cena but to say he never drew, that it was always just the other guy he wrestled, is crazy to me. It goes against the fundamentals of pro wrestling and the idea that it “takes two to tango”. If HHH wasnt an amazing heel that people wanted to see get destroyed the fans would not have spent the same money to see Rocky, Foley, Austin etc face some mid card heel during their main event runs. Also, HHH was predominately a heel when on top and WWE has always considered their number one face as “The Man”. Theory: I think that HHH being a heel could be the reason so many people refuse to think of him as a one of the greats in company history.

Back in 2005 Dave Meltzer wrote some interesting facts on HHH’s drawing power over the years.

So now it comes to my question/request of info. I want to know, based on whatever factual information you can dig up, if HHH is indeed a “big” draw or if Cornette is correct that HHH was just the guy who worked with the big names. If you can provide attendance numbers for house shows he headlined, total number of shows he headlined (house, ppv, raw, smackdown, whatever), buy rates for PPVs he headlined, ratings for RAWs during his time as champ (in particular 2002-2004 range). Basically collect whatever FACTUAL data you can to either prove Cornette right or prove him wrong, it would be much appreciated. I think it is long overdue to finally figure out where HHH lands on the grand scheme of “money makers” for WWE. Maybe you can even toss in Hogan, Austin, Rocky, Cena, Bret Hart, HBK, etc etc and create a top ten money maker list and show where HHH would fall.

I know the debate may arise about the guys HHH worked with when you find those numbers and it can derail the entire thing. Im honestly not sure how to address what a fan actually paid money to see. For example many people paid to see Sting wrestle at Wrestlemania, it didnt matter who he faced. Others may have wanted to see HHH and Sting lock up and both guys sold it. And some maybe are only HHH fans and will watch whatever he does regardless of opponent. That is kind of Cornette’s safety net. You may find that Austin & HHH rivalry sold ppvs/house shows/raws etc etc and then Cornette could just say “See, it was ALL Austin that did that…”. But Im hoping the numbers can show a pattern that proves HHH still did similar numbers no matter who he worked with, which can help turn the argument against Cornette’s statement.

If it helps with the discussion, maybe you can provide who he worked with when you start listing this stuff and we can try to narrow down who the audience may have paid for?

The problem with this question is that it needs a hypothetical universe wherein someone who is unquestionably a ‘name’ has the exact same career as Triple H so we can judge what the impact of his being in that spot is, which is impossible.

And/or you’d have to have access to how WWE was marketing every house show you want to compare, you’d need to examine and compare every marketing campaign for the house shows to determine who is being pushed as the big star on that show.

And/or you’d need to subscribe to the notion that WWE works like wrestling used to, in that individual wrestlers push sales. Triple H came in on the tail end of that, sure, but he also ruled the roost just as WWE started to push hard for the brand over any particular wrestler. So shows where the brand draws, do you count that as a credit to Hunter? A minus? Ignore it?

So it’s not possible for me to do this with any accuracy in a rational, fact based situation. And even if I could, the link you provided is what I’d come up with, if I had all the info and a few weeks to sift it.

So what we’re left with is what people feel, which is a hot topic these days apparently. And the issue with Hunter is not that he was a heel, but that throughout his career, there’s always something that either overshadows him or negates the influence he could have.

Did he draw or did DX draw?

Did he draw or did the Corporation draw?

Did he draw or did Foley?

Rock, Austin, Jericho? Michaels?

Did he make 2000 successful, or did 2000 make him successful?

Did Evolution sell tickets or just him?

Does he get credit for wrestling Bryan at WM? Does he get credit for being the ref at Summerslam when he screwed over Bryan?

And that’s the problem. There’s no strong period of time where Triple H drew gangbusters solely based on him carrying the promotion. He could argue he carried Raw during Evolution, maybe, but again, the brand was the selling point to some degree there.

I can see where Cornette is coming from, Hunter never had that run. But practically no-one could during the time Hunter was active, and compared to Rock, Austin and Cena no-one would look good except for Hogan or Flair. But does that mean there’s only been half a dozen ‘guys’ in wrestling history?

So I can’t answer this objectively. What I can say is, subjectively, Triple H is not a huge drawcard 100% of the time, and he’s had periods of overexposure, sure. But for the most part, he’s not driven the company into bankruptcy or the wall. If he doesn’t get the status of being the guy who drew, then the list of guys who drew is very, very short.

And, more importantly, that drawing method is dead, at least as far as WWE is concerned. Move on.

But if you disagree, do say so below, or if you have an idea on how to test this, do share! I’ll take a look for next week!