Ask 411 Wrestling 11.04.09: Sex Scandals, Parody Wrestlers & Banning Off The Top!

Posted by Mathew Sforcina on 11.04.2009

In this special practically almost totally Hogan free column, we discuss bookers doing TV shows, King Haku vs. King Race, Punk in the doghouse, rule ignorance, Death Match paychecks, Shamrock's failure, CM Punk's skull, title holders respect, and try to work out the best way to smarten someone up. Join us, do.

Hello, and welcome to this, the only column this week on 411 that can state that, while it cannot totally avoid mentioning that Orange Guy, is doing it's utmost to avoid him this week, Ask 411 Wrestling! Yes indeed, care has been taken to try and avoid all unnecessary mentions of Mr. Hogan.

Apart from that reference to Hulk.

And that one to Mr. Hogan.

And that one.

And the banner.

Backtalking

That's Not Ironic!: So I misused the word ironic? Well, in terms of the question, which implied that That Guy and Rude never fought, the fact that they did wrestle, twice on the same day even, is somewhat ironic, it's the exact opposite of the original statement.

That work? No? Darn, ah well, as a fell nit-picker, my bad.

Dave did remember seeing the match live in the Boston Garden however:

Anyway, Hogan wrestled Rude (I believe it was right before intermission) and the match ended when Ted DiBiase and Virgil did a run in for the DQ. Another clear memory was Bobby Heenan challenging Hogan to try and beat Rick in an arm wrestling contest prior to the match, with the taunt of "...or are you the same color as your tights, yellow?!" (Hogan won, of course).

The post match had Ted laying the WWF title across Hogan's fallen body, while throwing money down on him. Bam Bam may have made the save, it was a wicked long time ago, dude!

Thanks for that Dave.

Matt and Edge, sitting in a tree…: According to Steven and others, Matt has taken photos with Edge on Twitter, so the two have now made up, ‘5 years is a long time' is a quote from him about it. So, assuming that's true (while I fully endorse and support YOU joining Twitter and signing up to 411mania's Twitter account, I'm not going to join), good to know he's moved on a little.

Saturn V Malenko: It's an in-joke on the net that Dean wants to be the Last Standing Radical. 2 Down, 1 To Go…

Mankind's Debut: In an earlier draft, I had him as the joke, but then added in Khali, thinking I kept them both. My bad.

Your Turn, Smart Guy…

So yeah, no need to give the answers, since they came with it. So if you didn't try last week's Sporcle quiz, Clicky Clicky!

This week's (somewhat easy) question:

Who am I? A man who has never wrestled that guy I'm not mentioning this week, although it's now technically feasible. A man who is in contention for the highest number of total WWE title reigns of all time, more if you add in those titles held by people this person's managed. I've appeared in all of the Current ‘Big 3', as well as the older, proper, Big 3. Having gone through several looks, and at least one haircut, I am fairly easy to guess, since I am…?

Questions, Questions, Who's Got The Questions?

Jones starts with comedy, the immediateness of the ‘joke' forcing it's quick posting.

1 with Florida State having a less than great record this year and coach Bobby Bowden accused of NCAA violations, what do you think the first thing former FSU All American and WCW Heavyweight Champion Ron Simmons said? What do you think his VERY FIRST WORD was when he found out about his alma matter's problems? (this is supposed to be funny, I hope you get it.)

Oh I get it. I know exactly what answer you want. You want the expression Ron Simmons is famous for uttering in various situations, since it is appropriate here.

…



What was the other question?

2 the WWE has gotten criticism for hiring TV writers as bookers, what I am wondering is, what would happen if well known bookers tried to make it in TV? could you see Vince Russo scripting Family Guy or Dusty Rhodes writing for House or 24?

Actually Russo probably could pull off Family Guy. Given their Conway Twitty obsession, anything Russo can come up with wouldn't be too far off.

And most current WWE writers WANT to make it in TV. They use WWE as a job, like working on a soap or a teen drama, as a step towards making it big as a movie writer or as a sitcom writer who works on a sitcom about sitcom writers. So by all means they could.

But the really good bookers, probably couldn't pull off a regular TV role. Wrestling and TV, despite what WWE wants it to be, are too different. Which is not to say that a wrestler can't write, or that the booker of your choice might not be able to do it, but it'd be coincidental, it'd be an extra skill, as opposed to an extension of their wrestling booking.

Unless the story was about wrestling…

Brandon relies on his local newspaper.

I recently read in my local newspaper where the writer that previews the upcoming PPV said that CM Punk was in the WWE doghouse what did he do i thought he was doing good unless i missed something

Well, to be fair, CM Punk has been in and out of the doghouse practically his entire run in WWE. He is put in then wins the ECW title then he behaves and loses the belt and then goes back in and gets pushed on Raw and then he shapes up and is de-pushed then wins the World Title while in the doghouse then goes to SD and goes back in despite never leaving…

He seems to just rub certain people the wrong way. That, or the WWE Doghouse has a revolving door.

However, there is a recent issue that put him back, during the European Tour the WWE did just prior to Hell In A Cell. The story (which may not have happened this way but this was how it was told) says that:

"there was in issue with how Punk was dressed and The Undertaker tried to nicely tell Punk that he was the World Champion and was representing WWE overseas so he should dress better. Punk said something to the effect of "what about John Cena?"

This got back to WWE management and they took it as Punk thinking he was a bigger star than John Cena. Then the decision was made to take the belt off Punk at Hell in a Cell and put the match as the opener."

Now, depending on your viewpoint, Punk may or may not have a point.

It is true that John Cena, The Undertaker, and other such people are exempt from the WWE Dressing Requirements since it's incompatible with their characters. If someone were to debut with a gimmick of being a homeless person, they would be exempt from having to wear nice shirts and pants everywhere, since they should be dressed like a bum.

Now, with that in mind, one could argue that CM Punk could think he too is exempt from said requirements since he's a Smug Heel Bitch with a Superiority Complex.

On the other hand, he's not someone with a gimmick built around being a street born and raised type, plus Cena is much more popular than him.

Suffice to say, that seems to be where the Doghouse comments of recent stemmed from.

Mark also gets moved up since it's recent and I don't want to lose the video.

First time asking, read every week. Great Job!

Is it me or did everyone miss the fact that on this past Raw in the Miz v Bourne match, when Bourne jumped out on Miz and Swagger at the end, the ref did not restart the count? He just kept going and then Miz lost. Did WWE just not think of it or did they just figure no one would notice? Also, any other notable times when they have just blatantly ignored the rules of the match for one reason or another?



Well, the issue there was timing. They had to have Swagger cost Miz the match, but they couldn't justify Miz being distracted/KOed for 17 counts. So they used ‘referee's discretion' to say that he chose not to restart the count since Miz was clearly abandoning the match. But yes, according to the normal rules, the count should have restarted.

Of course, they could have had Miz toss Bourne out then go after Swagger, then Evan recovers, climbs the ring steps onto the apron and dives onto both, then slides back in, and that would have been one count, but that's logical! Can't have that…

Which is not to say rules aren't ignored all the time. Certainly watch any Botchamania, you'll see First Blood, Stretcher, Strap and lots of other gimmick matches end by pinfall. But in my mind the weirdest looking time that the rules were ignored in terms of counting was when Honky Tonk Man won the IC title.



Steamboat gets 1, Honky then gets the 2-3? Ga-Huh?

I'm sure the readers will now share their favourite rule ignorance moments.

Greg asks a question about an old rule that is viewed as being a very bad one.

Love your column. I look forward to it every week. I have a question concerning the AWA. I've been pretty much watching the AWA on ESPN every night now. I noticed that they pretty much skipped 1990 and went to 1991. In those episodes moves off the top rope were illegal compared to years past. How did they come about, and how did it play out in storylines?

Well, sadly I was unable to find the Kayfabe justification for bringing it in. I did however find a discussion about it, that occurred on one of the ESPN episodes, courtesy of Combat Sports Blog (and edited slightly).

The rule, as clearly defined by Lee Marshal of all people:

The guy coming off the top rope did a leg drop onto his opponent who was being held upright by his partner. AMW's Death Sentence is a pretty close visual for everyone. The referee immediately disqualified the guy for coming off the top rope, and both Lee Marshall and Verne Gagne on commentary protested. Marshall then noted that the disqualification is only put into effect when an opponent is laying prone on the mat. Marshall went further by actually saying if the wrestler had at least one knee on the mat, it would have been considered a legal manoeuvre.

This is very close to the rationale behind kicks and knees on the ground in mixed martial-arts (if one knee is on the ground, a fighter cannot kick or knee his opponent.)

Basically, the usual justification when bringing in rules such as this is that it's about safety. Moves off the top rope are far too dangerous, they might kill a man, hence they must be DQed.

Thus, when people do them, the effect is like a Piledriver in Memphis or a Hansen Lariat in Japan, that guy is dead. Hence heels are evil bastards for using it, and when the face does it to the heel we finally get satisfaction since he's now toast.

When you make something illegal, it instantly becomes cooler.

But I would welcome an old school AWA knowledge expert to step forward and give me the justification for this…

Jason asks a simple booking question.

So with the giant plate of awesome that is Smackdown these days, I was wondering, who is responsible? Who's booking the show these days? Michael PS Hayes? If not him, then who, and what is Hayes doing these days?

Yes, the old Freebird himself is the head SD writer at the moment. Below him is Christopher DeJoseph, a.k.a Big Dick Johnson. And below him are a bunch of minor writers and flunkies. Of course, above PS is Vince, but Hayes is the main writer for SD.

Next up is Sean, who's all about the Mon-Ay!

As with everyone else, my favourite column of the week.

I'm interested in finding out how much guys who wrestle for CZW get paid for doing what they do to themselves all in the name of (supposed) wrestling entertainment. I've recently watched some of this stuff on Youtube and some of the stuff they do (big bumps through tables from 40 feet up), light pole matches, fire, barbed wire, ultra-violence stupidity style etc makes the Foley – Funk death match look tame. And if the pay is rubbish, what else do these guys get from it and why do they do this to themselves? I'd want a huge paycheck (at least six figures) before I'd consider doing what they do even once.

Well, I don't have the exact fee structure on hand, but it's almost certainly far, far, FAR less than six figures. The figure I found was $70-$120 a show, which I can't verify but sounds about right, for those on the undercard.

As for why they do it, because they want to. They want to be a wrestler but don't have the skills to do it properly, or they grew up on ECW and want to top it, or they have a death wish or they had a bad childhood or… Who knows? Everyone has different reasons (some, for instance, can actually wrestle which makes their choices even more mystifying).

And like most indy wrestlers, they have day jobs, they work at various (mostly menial) jobs during the week, then ‘wrestle' on the weekends.

Of course, sometimes the pay isn't enough, at least once CZW wrestler (JC Bailey) has been arrested and put in jail for theft from a shopping mall, so clearly for some people, CZW doesn't pay the bills.

Also, do you ever wrestle in Perth?

As yet, no. My fed, Australisian Wrestling Federation has done stuff in Perth with Supanova, but I did not attend.

But in the future… It's certainly a possibility.

Sev asks about the World's Most Dangerous Man.

Did Vince McMahon ever have big plans for Ken Shamrock? For a while after he arrived, in 1997, he was portrayed as pretty badass. I remember watching him actually making then WWF Champion Bret Hart tap out in a WWF Title match. But they had done a ref bump. Then in the end Rick Rude clonked him with a briefcase so he won by DQ. The idea was that DX had saved Bret so that HBK could beat him up himself. But then Shamrock recovers and then goes nuts and starts beat the crap out of Shawn. I think the first Pay Per View after the Montreal Screwjob was Shawn Michael's defending against Shamrock. I didn't see the match, but I know he again won by DQ. And I think it was because Shamrock had Michaels in the Anklelock so DX interfered. I would have imagined that after beating two consecutive WWF Champions and actually all but winning the WWF Title, The WWF would have been building him as an up an coming star.. That's certainly what I thought back then, (at least in the capacity I could, being a little kid), but in the years he was with the company afterward he never turned into a star. He was in a triple threat number 1 contender match that he and Mankind lost to the Rock in the following year, but that's all I can think of that he even approached the main event during his WWF tenure. What happened there?

Certainly Shamrock was slated for big things. Bret Hart was a big fan (hence him tapping out). And even after Hart left, he did get a decent push. Rock only kept the IC title off him due to shenanigans, he ended up the 98 King of The Ring, then he turned heel and became a Dual Champ, which was pretty much the height of his standing in the company.

As for why he never became a huge star, there's a few factors. There's the old story that he never made it huge because he would always call out his spots really loudly, which was a deliberate move on Shawn Michaels part, he got him to do that so he could turn around and say that he couldn't work.

There's the fact that he was never a great interview, he never really learnt how to talk well.

But probably the biggest reason was incompatibility. You look at who was on top at that time, Austin, Mankind, Taker, guys that couldn't work well with Shamrock at that stage due to their style or personas. Had Shamrock either stuck around longer or debuted a little later, once the Radicals came across and Angle got established, then he really would have been in his element, since he had guys who could work with him in the ring and put on great matches.

Also, given that Bret Hart seemingly had no problem tapping out to him with the Title on the line, do you think he would he have found losing to him at the Survivor Series (or whenever) sufficiently less objectionable than losing to Shawn Michaels? Thinking back, he struck me as a viable candidate for a transitional champion, if nothing else, at the time. Especially given the guys booking, apparently thought he was good already enough to beat the champion.

Well, yes, if Vince had gone to Bret and asked him, Bret probably would have agreed to lose to Shamrock at Survivor Series, although probably not by submission. I don't think Vince would have done that, given how Shamrock was still somewhat untested and rusty, but it would have made sense.

And ruined the WWF comeback.

OK, so this is clearly advertising. It's shameless pap designed to sell cameras.

But still… BRAINBUSTAAAAA!


Chris brings us back to CM Punk.

While watching an old CM Punk vs. Chris Hero match from IWA-MS I remember hearing a commentator mention something about how CM Punk fractured his skull going for a corkscrew blockbuster. I've tried to find more information about this but I can't. Do you know anything about it?

Well, I did find this interview about it-

"The worst injury I've ever had was a fractured skull. I thought I broke my neck at the time. I was giving a guy a neckbreaker and his head wound up on top of mine and everything just sandwiched and hit the mat at the same time and my head was turned. It felt like somebody took a pot of warm water and poured it inside my brain. Everything got hot so I thought I broke my neck. I still had feelings so like a knucklehead I continued to wrestle for 12 more minutes. Afterwards it was a chore to walk from the ring to the back and as soon as I got in the back I hit the floor and couldn't get up. I couldn't open my eyes, I couldn't see and was throwing up."

On the reaction he got from doctors over the injury:
"No they didn't say anything like that they told me that they were shocked because I walked into the hospital. They were like 'how did you get in here?' I said 'I walked' so they said 'the bad news is you have a fractured skull. The good news is you should have died.' I was out two months."

This took place in 2002, so well before he began to wrestle for ROH. In 2002, Punk worked mostly for IWA: Mid South, and there is a big gap between May and October where he did not perform on any of their shows. So that would be roughly the time period, although who he was in the ring with I can't tell you.

Also, I noticed on his Wikipedia page they have a quote of him talking about CP Munk, the parody of him from CHIKARA. Their was one sentence in particular that I found intresting: "Sure it's no secret that the dorks that run Chikara and I don't get along, so they're [sic] judgement on trying to "mock" me is a little off." Now, I know that Mike Quackenbush runs CHIKARA. Does this mean CM Punk and him don't get along? Do you know anything about this? Since Chris Hero and Mike Quackenbush are friends, you think CM Punk would get along with Quack. Weird.......

Well, the problems with CM Punk and CHIKARA are more to do with the company vs. him, rather than any one person. Punk had to cancel an appearance at the very last minute, which CHIKARA didn't appreciate. So they created the parody, which Punk didn't like.

I'm not sure of the personal relationship between Punk and Quack, but he probably doesn't hate him, he just doesn't get along with him professionally. Although I'm sure if they had to wrestle he'd be professional about that.

Jason (again?) asks about the Icon… The Undertaker.

Phew.

Taker was one of my favorite wrestlers in the E. Now i understand he is older and probably cant work a full schedule. My question is that how come every time he makes an appearance he is always involved in the title picture. Is that something he demands or is that always Vince's call? Is he too good to feud without it involving the belt . Also what do you think are the chances of anyone ever ending the WM streak?

Well, the problem is that Taker is so well established and so high up that if he's not fighting for the title, then you have to work pretty hard to justify his not being in the hunt. Although during 2007 he was fighting for the right to get a title shot instead of wrestling for the title.

Taker doesn't come back and demand to be champion, it's more that he knows that he's high up the card and thus should be in the title hunt, a viewpoint Vince agrees with. He's proven that he doesn't have a problem working with and losing against new guys, it just has to be done right, with some build up. And putting the belt on him helps that, it helps make the other guy for taking the belt off him.

As for ending the streak, Vince is open to the idea, so if they found someone they knew they could rely on and who they wanted to build as a major name, it might happen. I don't think it will, and I wouldn't end it, but it's a real possibility. Especially if he fights anyone named ‘John'.

And ‘Cena'.

Next up it's Sunny, although probably not THAT Sunny.

1. I had a question about the late 80's/early 90's WWE sex scandal. I always notice most accusations are against Pat Patterson and a Terry Garvin. I was wondering if that is the same Terry Garvin that used to wrestle in the USWA and Global Wrestling Federation in the early 90's. It would make sense since that Terry Garvin's character was a flamboyant homosexual. But I find it odd that he would have been in a position of power in WWE in the late 80's.

No, that was not the same Terry Garvin. This is the GWF/WCCW Terry Garvin.



And this is the Terry Garvin that was embroiled in the Sex Scandal.



Not the same guy. The Terry Garvin in the video pretty much vanished after a while, whereas the photo one was big in the 60's and 70's, so when Pat Patterson brought him into the WWF he was already retired and into booking, and was co-owner of the Northern Ontario region. You can read more about the sex scandal Mr. Garvin here.

Sunny's second question comes later. Instead, we have Clyde.

Hi there, long time reader...

My question is, what was the issue about Harley Race and King Haku fighting for the crown in the 1989 Royal Rumble?

I admit, it is a good idea. Did it happen because Race got hurt, and they were trying to make Race a good guy (or Haku, for that matter)?

Did anything happen with the two men after that match? Shouldn't Bobby and Haku been nicer to Harley at the end of the match? Did Harley stay part of the family after that?

OK, let's go from the top.

Early 1988, Harley Race, in the closing stages of his career (although he wasn't about to retire any time soon), was in the WWF, playing a slightly silly "King" gimmick, with Bobby Heenan. All well and good.

Then on the March 12th edition of Saturday Night's Main Event, as part of the build up to Wrestlemania IV, Race wrestled… One half of the soon to be Megapowers. During the match, Race tried a diving headbutt onto a table. But Thunderlips moved, and Race hit the table hard. So hard, in fact, that a metal part of it jammed upwards into his gut.

After the match was over and he lost, he felt injured but kept going. A month or two later, he had to leave for a while, as he had a nasty hernia from the injury. WWF chose to acknoldge this injury, and they had Bobby find a new King while Race was out. He found one, in Haku.



And at the time, Race was for this. They had a video package (which I sadly was unable to find) of Race giving Haku his blessing before zooming off up to the stars.

I wish I was kidding.

So all was well and good, right?

Nope.

Harley returned in November that year, and Race began a rather odd feud. Race was still clearly a heel, as he teamed up with Andre the Giant at Survivor Series, but he was also anti-Heenan and anti-Haku, as he cut promos about how while he was out, Heenan never called, never visited, and he was back to regain his throne.

The two wrestled a few times up until the Rumble, where Haku won, kept his crown, and left with Heenan. That would be Race's last match in the WWF, as he left, in disgrace.

Of course, the reason he came back was to just put Haku over a bit, although him staying a heel was an interesting twist, both men were heels, but in the end we were supposed to hate Haku and Heenan more. Bobby especially since he cheered on both men and left with the winner, not even having the guts to pick one.

The final questions in this section this week are a bit metaphysical, from Jake.

I'm watching ECW, and the last match is Christian and Tommy Dreamer vs Kozlov and Ezekiel Jackson (with Steven "Evil Genus" Regal watching on), and a thought occurred to me that's occurred to me many times before, but I've never had a place to ask. Christian and Regal have a title match in "less than a week" (even though this was filmed when it was technically over a week away), so this match is put together clearly to weaken Christian at the hands of his underlings, while Regal sits back and watches. I've seen this same scenario a hundred times. There's always that "brutal match" just before the PPV involving someone in a major match .. and someone not on the PPV card at all. Have they ever done a story line or something, where someone just said .. no? I mean, what's the kayfabe reason for actually putting up a fight, and not just going in, and laying down for a 3 count to save your body for your title match? Would the fans really hate someone for laying down for a match that meant nothing, if it meant he could keep his title and not be so "banged up" that he loses? Since they don't say that winners of matches earn vast amounts of money more than losers .. and they make a big deal about how "having a title brings you respect in the locker room and money" .. it would seem to me that it would be a wise thing to do, and that someone would have done it by now. I'm not saying Fingerpoke of Doom lame .. but there's 20 kickouts in half these matches .. just .. don't kick out the first time. Something like that. So I guess my question is two fold, first .. has anyone done that before? And second, has there been an established kayfabe reason NOT to do something like that, given how important they make the titles sound?

Yes, at least once, someone has had a match that is meant to be a beat down match where they just lay down, or in this case, submitted. Although this match was not the week before but right before. I give you the glory that is Chavo Guerrero V Stevie Ray, followed by the proper match, Chavo V Eddie, Hair V Hair.



As for the reason why, for faces, it's about honor and respect. When you step into the ring, you give your all, each and every time. Sure, you could lay down, take it easy. But if you did that, why not just use an exposed turnbuckle to win? Or a chair? Why not grab the ropes for leverage? It's about how when you step into that ring, you're upholding fine traditions that go back a hundred years, and taking it easy, laying down, you don't just spit in the face of your friends and other wrestlers, but you spit in the face of every wrestler who ever stepped foot in the ring. Faces never back down from a challenge, never take the easy way. That's the general idea.

Or, they don't want to show their opponent that they are weak, they want to show them that they can beat their flunkies and thus they can beat them too.

Now, heels can and have set up matches like this and just gone and gotten themselves DQed deliberately, that has happened on occasion. But sometimes, heels have had to fight. In those cases, it's about ego. Some guys just refuse to lose, their ego will not let them lay down.

Or, if they lay down, they might get fired for not doing their job.

Or they too want to prove that they are better than their opposition.

There are plenty of justifications, and no one right answer.

Although as an interesting side note, at least once the opposite happened, where the guy who was supposed to be wearing someone down for their buddy won the match and thus the title. That's how RVD's run as ECW TV champ began, he beat Bam Bam Bigelow in what was meant to be a match to wear Bam Bam down for Sabu.

Oh, also .. I've heard various stories in the past about locker room things .. and it seems that some amount of pandering does go to the belt holders, and that just by virtue of having the belt, a person gets some amount of increased say within the company. Why? I mean, since it's not real, and the matches are fixed beforehand .. it seems rather odd that they'd suddenly start listening to someone, because he "won" the belt when it's something they can script off him anytime they really feel like it. Granted, the star still has to go out and drop the title to lose it .. but there's plenty of instances where for one reason or another, a title is vacated or whatever to move it without a match needing to be held. So .. why do title holders seemingly get special treatment, when the title is just a plot piece?

You kinda have the cart before the horse, in a way. Belt holders don't get special treatment because they hold the title. Those who hold the World Titles get the titles, in theory, because they are the best in the company, they are the best wrestlers, or the best draws, or the biggest names or whatever. When you are made champion, it's the company saying "We trust you to make us money, we believe you can draw crowds". Thus, with that, comes the implied idea that they are good at what they do, and thus know what they are talking about.

Hence some pandering is to be expected, since they are, theoretically, at the top of their game. Doesn't always work like that, and certainly not all title holders get such esteem, but that's the general idea.

My Damm Opinion

Told you Sunny would be back.

2. I was also curious about your opinion of Mr. Kennedy. I ask because I've noticed that most members of the IWC don't think his loss was a big deal. However, I think that he was a HUGE loss. In order to become a huge Wrestlemania worthy main eventer you need that special charisma and connection with the crowd. And I think Kennedy had more of that than just about anyone on the roster. Even though he had been injured and booked horribly, every time his music hit the place went insane. The crowd chanted along with him and he came across as a top guy. I think its a huge loss because they need new stars and I think Kennedy was a definite future main eventer. Your thoughts?

I'm torn on Kennedy, which is fitting, since that's what his muscles did all the time.

…



The thing about Kennedy is that while he is charismatic, and his youtube videos have shown that the guy has charisma in spades, the dude never had a truly great match, and was always getting injured or suspended at the WORST moment. When he almost injured Randy, that was the last straw, in that WWE has a bunch of people who, while not as charismatic as Kennedy, are close and much better in the ring.

If WWE were struggling for talent, he'd have been kept on. But being the big dog means you can play it safe sometimes.

I expect MVP to get the sack sooner or later for much the same reasons, honestly…

Gee, I'm skipping ahead a whole bunch of questions this week. But this one's important, from Jesse

I have a judgement call for you Matt. My son has been watching "sports entertainment" with me, literally, since the day he was born. He's become the kind of kid Vince targets…DX backpack, Cena lunchbox, etc…But he's in 2nd grade now and he's starting the hear the "it's all fake" talk from his friends. My question to you is, when do I "smarten" him up and how do I go about doing so? This question has taken on new meaning for me because Wrestlemania is being held here in Arizona next year and I'm getting ready to drop some serious cash for something that I'm hoping will create lifelong memories for us. I'm conflicted about telling him the truth because, well, it's still real to me dammit!!!

Well, it depends on what he says. If he comes to you and asks if Wrestling is fake, that's different than if he asks something milder, like why do people keep running after an irish whip or something, or if he's happy to ignore his friend's taunts.

But overall, I'd start with a WWE DVD, and the ‘Do Not Try This At Home' bit. (If that appears on TV on your channels, great, but the DVD is a better bet since you can pause it). Ask him if he understands why they say that. Explain to him that wrestling is really dangerous if you're untrained, they really are going out there and throwing each other around. While they are trained and they know what they are doing, it's hazardous. Mention that people have been severely injured in the ring. And even without getting injured, it still hurts. They still do it since they love it, and they enjoy entertaining guys like you and me, but it still hurts.

Let this sink in for a bit. You can go straight into the next step if you like, but you should probably let the idea that it's painful and injuries happen get in first, and let him accept that it's still ok to watch, despite this. It certainly gives him a response to "It's fake", if he needs one. "Guys get hurt!"

Once he accepts this, then you go into the next step, wherein, after a show, ask him about it, ask what was his favourite bit, did he enjoy Cena winning or whatever happened. Then…

It depends on the kid, and what else he's into. I can't tell you the exact words, obviously, but hopefully he's a fan of something else, like Ben 10 or some other animation or comedy show. The general idea should be that you bring up this other property, and you ask him that he understands that it's not real, that it's animation, and/or that they really aren't Wizards at Waverly Place or such. Well, wrestling is like that. While they do go out and wrestle, they are telling a story. They don't REALLY hate each other, but they're acting. But it's still dangerous and real in terms of the physicality of it. But they're telling a story, just like any show.

And that's the default response to teach him when someone teases him. "It's fake!" "So's The Simpsons, so what?" or whatever.

Hopefully that helps. But at the basic level, you make sure the kid understands that it's physically real, then you can reveal that it's a show. But I'm sure someone in the comments section will disagree with my approach. Timing… I can see the argument on holding off, but then you can also argue that you'd want the kid over the hump of understanding it's a show as early as possible. I guess it's a matter of how he reacts to the real physicality of it.

But what about you guys? How were you told? How would you tell him? Leave a message, and I'll see you all next week.