The MeeThinks Friday FreeThinks 09.26.08

Posted by John Meehan on 09.26.2008

RAW's tag ranks get Punked, and Crazy Kurt... MAKES SENSE?!?



Welcome back, all. And thanks again for tuning in for your regularly scheduled week-end dose of intrawebz' rasslin optimism. It's been a CRAZY week on this end in terms of non-wrestling news (don't ask ;), and so I'm happy to report that actual wrestling news items are a little on the lighter side this week. Good news for all of us, I guess -- as that means that I've had more time to deal with non-rasslin stuffs on this end, and you have more time to kill elsewhere on this beloved website and beyond, eh?

Rock & Roll.



In this feature, we'll make a quick note of those mini-news story items that have either already been covered in greater detail by other writers, or that haven't quite yet materialized into full-blown mega stories of their own. In either case, these items seem to warrant a brief mention nonetheless so that we can keep better tabs on what all's developing (and -- in theory -- end up with a better perspective in the long run) along the way.

The Doghouse
Kenny Dykstra (SD!) - Publically buried by Randy Orton in an interview this past week.

Notes: Orton's pretty well known as one of the "bad eggs" in terms of backstage reps around WWE lockerrooms, and so it should come as no surprise that he had some not-so-kind words to say about former Spirit Squad member Kenny Dykstra. According to Orton's side of the story, the two got into an altercation while on a tour in Australia a while back, and Randy got so fed up with Kenny's antics that he slapped him square in the temple and knocked the poor kid out as a result. Regardless as to whether or not this story is actually true, of course, the long and short of things is that Orton is not the first WWE star to come forward with a complaint about Kenny's "world owes me a living" attitude.

---

The Debuts
None

Notes: This week marks the first time in over two months that not a single new performer has debuted on either WWE or TNA programming.

---

The Departures
None

Notes: This week marks the first time in over two months that not a single performer has been released from either a WWE or TNA contract.

---

The Drama
Kurt Angle (TNA) - Gave an interview which criticized many of TNA's business practices and booking decisions.
Kevin Nash (TNA) - Still working out contract details in spite of rumors that he had re-signed.
Rey Mysterio (WWE) - Rumored to have signed a three-year contract extension with WWE.

Notes: Kevin Nash is reportedly still hammering out final details on his TNA contract, in spite of the fact that it was announced late last week that a deal had been reached between the two sides. Word has it that the agreed salary was amenable to both parties, but that Nash had wanted a bigger piece of the merchandise pie and negotiations fell through. Still, neither Nash nor TNA has officially come forward and broken their ties with the other side, and so MeeThinks the odds are pretty good that Big Daddy Cool will be sticking things out in Orlando just as soon as the details are sorted out.

Rey Mysterio's case is an interesting one, as the high flying superstar has reportedly signed a three-year deal to stick with World Wrestling Entertainment in spite of the fact that he was rumored to have been offered a five year contract instead. This seems to suggest that Mysterio is hedging his bets regarding the possibility that he'll still be able to deliver in the ring in four years time, and so it will be most interesting to see if Rey Rey can still go once his new WWE contract expires in 2011. Word has it that the Mexican superstar is hoping to make the jump to crossover media exposure, effectively becoming a "larger than life" luchador superhero in the mold of El Santo, El Hijo del Santo and others.

---

The Disabled List
None

Notes: This week marks the first time in over two months that not a single WWE or TNA performer has been added to the inactive list or injured reserve (though there are reports that WWE's Undertaker broke a finger and then popped it back into place after a match this past weekend).

On the flip side, this week has been particularly kind to returning stars and stars close to making their returns to television. WWE superstar Hurricane Helms -- who has missed over one year's worth of work with a neck injury -- began making non-wrestling appearances on Smackdown, while still-injured RAW headliner Randy Orton continued to make non-wrestling appearances this past Monday.

In addition, sources have confirmed that Edge will soon be returning to WWE programming in the near future. And in TNA, Scott Steiner is expected back from injured reserve any day now.




CM Punk Vows to Win Tag Titles
Former World Champ Sets Sights on Rhodes & DiBiase

Judging from the comments section shortly after this news item was posted, it seems that a LOT of people have taken this latest storyline development as their chance to pronounce the (ridiculously overused) "EPIC FAIL" assesment on CM Punk's reign as a credible WWE main event draw. In addition, there's a whole bunch of critics with their panties in a twist over this one on account of the fact that Punk's most likely partner in his quest for the gold will likely result in him pairing with former Intercontinental Champion Kofi Kingston -- thus effectively tabling each man's run at singles stardom, at least for the forseeable future.

(For the sake of argument, we'll go out on a limb here and presume that Scotty "Colt Cabana" Goldman ain't exactly in the cards for Punker's tag partner choice. Even though the non-WWE history between these two would make for a perfect reason for their pairing, WWE is traditionally *very* hesitant to acknowledge any and all partnerships and/or rivalries that exist outside of their corporate say-so... and so it's probably a long shot to see a Second City Saints reunion on WWE programming any time soon).

MeeThinks?

If we can't have CM Punk as World Champion (thanks to the HBK/Jericho rivalry -- which is absolutely deserving of all the screen time it's been getting), and if we can't have Kofi Kingston as Intercontinental Champion (because let's face it, Santino and the Honk-a-Meter are *gold*), then there are far worse things in this world than to see the Straightedge Superstar team up with the Jamaican Sensation in a high-profile fued to wrestle the tag team belts away from fellow newcomers in Cody Rhodes and Ted DiBiase Jr. And the way I see it, there are five key reasons why this particular fued works eight ways from Sunday:

Reason #1: Even though the kiddies and us 'web types can't seem to get enough of CM Punk, the fact remains that his run as World Champion was largely viewed by the average fan (and perhaps with good reason) as something of a fluke. From the "opportunistic" title victory over Edge right on through his loss of the gold several months later, the general question that seemed to haunt Punker at every corner was a simple matter of "just WHO in the world did this guy beat in order to *earn* himself a title shot?" While each of his title *defenses* were passable-to-good in their own right, it takes a lot more than a few solid retentions of a belt in order to establish yourself as a credible champion in the eyes of the average Joe, and the fact that Punk pretty much skyrocketed to the RAW title picture out of NOWHERE probably didn't do him any favors -- especially after spending the better part of three months dropping a slew of meaningless, low-profile curtain-jerking bouts on ECW and RAW.

But now that he's fighting Rhodes & DiBiase? All of the sudden, fans have a reason to care about the guy, as he's actually being placed into a mid-to-high-profile, long term program that should help him (and his opponents) to establish some serious main event staying power when all's said and done. Kinda like when Triple H (in the dX days) used to do battle with The Rock (as the leader of the Nation of Domination), come to think of it. Win, lose, or draw -- this feud gives fans a reason to care about the guy, and a reason to believe that the next time a title shot comes his way, he'll be more than qualified enough to chase for the gold fair and square.

Reason #2: From a storyline standpoint, Cody Rhodes and Ted DiBiase (plus Manu) had just as much to do with Punker losing the World title as did Randy Orton (who's still on the shelf, though seems to be due for a return in short order). Since Orton is still injured, Punk would pretty much have been left as a "man without a country" until his natural rival in Orton returned -- and so what better way to pass the time (and earn his stripes) than by exacting his revenge on the same crew of guys who helped Orton take him out in the first place? Plus, this dovetails beautifully with Orton's return, as it gives Punk (and/or his teammates/opponents/etc.) a logical stepping stone out of this fued -- and, in theory, onto bigger and better things -- once all is said and done.

Reason #3: While it is absolutely true that the tag team titles don't really mean all that much any more (shocking, I know), there is certainly something to be said for taking a few credible pairs of performers and throwing them into the title hunt in order to lend it some star power. Let's face it, any title (in professional wrestling or elsewhere) is only as prestigious as the competition who's gunning for it -- and if Punk and/or Kofi stayed out of the tag ranks, then just *WHO* exactly would be working through the ranks in order to win those straps from around Rhodes and DiBiase's waists? Outside of Cryme Tyme? Just about NOBODY, that's who -- and if Rhodes & DiBiase are ever going to amount to breakout stars or be taken seriously by the average fan on their own merits, then they are simply going to need a LOT more than a long-ass title reign for belts that were rarely (if ever) defended, especially in an era without so much as one credible pair of challengers.

Reason #4:If CM Punk was out of the World Title chase (as storyline logic dictates he *should* be, even if only for a little while), and if the same can be said for Kofi Kingston being dropped from the IC title hunt (which, again, has made way for Santino and his insane-heat-drawing Honk-a-Meter storyline... which should do wonders for the guy who inevitably beats him to recapture the gold), then where else would guys like Punk and Kingston end up were they not to give chase for the tag team straps?

Meaningless feuds against Kane (wait -- he's with Mysterio)?

Gumming up the works between Jericho and HBK?

Spinning their wheels against Bradshaw?

Waiting on the sidelines for Randy Orton to return?

Getting in *waaaaay* over their heads against Batista?

Bottom line is that the RAW main event picture is simply far too crowded for either Kofi Kingston or CM Punk to make a credible dent at this stage in the game. By giving them a meaningful undercard feud (even if it is a slight step down from the singles bouts in which they've been competing in the past), they stay relevant and continue to strengthen their fan following, which can only help to establish their long-term staying power once duty calls and the main event picture finds itself in need of a credible young star after all of the current storylines reach their logical conclusion.

Reason #5: Invariably, just about *every* single tag team in the history of professional wrestling usually ends up breaking up. And when that happens, the next logical step in the chain of events is to see the two former partners go at it in a quest to prove which of them was the stronger half of their duo. The longer and stronger the partnership, the higher the stakes and the greater the reward for the guy who comes out on top. And so once Punker splits from his soon-to-be-named tag team partner, fans can sit back and enjoy as not one but TWO singles stars are launched right back into the thick of things, courtesy of one good long run as tag partners followed by a starmaking split.

Can you say "inevitable heel turn?"

CM Punk vs. Kofi Kingston by SummerSlam 2009, perhaps?

Stay tuned.





Kurt Angle Criticizes TNA
Former Champ Decries Gimmick Match Overload, Inability to Properly Establish New Stars

Here's the news item that ran this week (interspersed with a few italicized MeeThinks as appropriate):

On TNA running so many gimmick matches: "Being in TNA is exciting and frustrating at the same time. We've been doing a good job but what we need to do right now is to simplify things. We get a little bit too complicated with our gimmick matches and run-ins. I've spoken to the bookers, writers and owners of TNA and said: "Listen. Wrestling is very simple, keep it simple."

Angle makes a fantastic point here. Sometimes, less really is more, and there is really no reason for them to overload just about *every* single match with an added stipulation, gimmick or ringside distraction. The problem, however, is that a big dog like WWE can get away with coasting on a reputation -- offering the "same old, same old" -- whereas an upstart like TNA needs to fight for a larger audience on a daily basis, which usually leads to all sorts of outrageous stunts (ala Jackie Moon from Semi-Pro).


On why TNA runs so many gimmick matches: "TNA do it because we want to be different from WWE and innovative. But what happens is sometimes we are, but then sometimes we are too old school. Let's face it, a tar and feather match today wouldn't go over too well. But we've actually done that. That's a 1960's match, this is 2008. We're in an MMA world. Fans want to see mano a mano. One on one. Let's go at it. We call ourselves Total Nonstop Action Wrestling. We say: "TNA – we are wrestling." No we're not. We're f***ing gimmick matches."

Again, Angle is dead on. It's pretty obvious even to the most casual of TNA viewers that the company often delves into the realm of "style" over "substance," busting out nonsensical run-ins and overly complicated gimmick matches in order to break from the typical mold of "every other professional wrestling show" in hopes to attract themselves a larger audience. While this sort of approach is great for the one-off curiosity appeal (say, to fans who are flipping the channels and desperately trying to figure out just why in the blue hell two grown men are chasing one another up a cage covered in barbed wire), the shock value wears off in short order, and so longtime fans can quickly become desensitized to the appeal of such specialty concepts.


On TNA not protecting wrestlers properly: "At the last PPV, No Surrender, we had a triple threat main event between me, Christian Cage and Samoa Joe. We had a great match, but Samoa Joe won because Jeff Jarrett came in and hit me with a guitar. I would have won if Jeff didn't do that. I believe that Joe should have kicked my ass and Christian's ass and won straight up and then afterwards Jeff could have come in or even waited until the next night on TV and attacked me. I'm trying to make our younger guys more popular. I let AJ beat me the last four times we wrestled for a reason. To make him a bigger star. I wanted Joe to beat me and Christian at the PPV to make him a bigger star. But what's been happening is we have run-ins to create the wins, so I get protected. I don't want to be protected and I don't need to be protected. I'm having a real struggle with it. We need to back up and realize who we are and what we're trying to get across. We have the best wrestlers in the world, WWE can't compare. But how do we use them to our advantage? By simply wrestling, because that's what they're good at."

Angle's right on the money here, but MeeThinks he's missing something of the larger problem that has been plaguing TNA Wrestling ever since they hired Christian Cage *waaaay* back in 2005. Coming out of the No Surrender PPV, the big story wasn't that Samoa Joe was able to retain his World Title, but rather that Jeff Jarrett had finally made his triumphant return to TNA's roster of active performers. This sort of trend happens WAYYY too often in TNA, as the arrival or return of each newly debuting star is almost ALWAYS the "big news" coming out of a PPV... which effectively tells your audience that your new star is a bigger news story than your World Title.

While making the younger guys look good is most certainly a vital avenue for TNA to explore, they simply need to do a better job of making *all* of their stars look good. And not just by cutting down on the number of run-ins or gimmick matches, either... but also by keeping their focus on established storylines and the stars working their way towards the top, instead of simply rewarding each new hire with a show-ending promo and a title shot.



Since news is light this week, I thought it was only fair to take a quick second or two to answer some of those plaguing YouThinks reader comments that y'all posted on the heels of last week's column. Kind of tangential and rapid-fire, really -- but certainly a great way to wrap up some loose ends and news bytes nonetheless.

Here goes nothing!

Meehan, what do you think about the new Disney Parks 2009 theme... free admission on your birthday, or a gift card if you have a pass?

Posted By: Andy (Guest) on September 19, 2008 at 01:01 AM I think it's a great idea, Andy. Very few (if any) people actually go to a Disney park by themselves, and so one freebie admission in a family of five still translates to big bucks for The Mouse when it comes to the other four paying guests. Plus overpriced park food, souvenirs, etc -- and all of the sudden the $80 comp ticket is pretty much paid for.

Moreover, you just *know* that there are going to be families out there with kids who whine that their sibling got to go to Disney World for their birthday while all mommy and daddy wanna do for *their* birthday is rent out a bowling lane or what have you... and so I'm guessing we'll be seeing a good number of parents-guilted-into-repeat visits in the year to come.


thought and prayers do go to the sakki family, and sonny being very honest as well that as a youngster was very cocky, but as he got older realized that if u have talent the orignizations will use u. again thoughts and prayers go to the sakki family and good luck in whatever u choose to do sonny

Posted By: coby preimesberger (Guest) on September 19, 2008 at 01:21 AM

Absolutely agreed, Cody. Well said.


Just a minor thing... and I could be wrong (god knows they change their minds enough) but wasn't Palumbo traded to raw in the supplemental draft? Did he go back to Smackdown? Why do you have him listed as "SD!" Otherwise fine outing Meehan, enjoyable enough to be worthy of being read during my morning coffee.

Posted By: M:-X (Guest) on September 19, 2008 at 06:43 AM

Good catch dude. Palumbo is indeed a supplemental draftee to the red brand, though he has yet to make it back onto WWE television since this year's draft. And thanks for the kudos. ;)


For fucks sake, the way you smarks have all reacted to the Jeff Hardy incident is so pathetic. We don't even know anything about it yet, and from what we do know, it appears to be VERY minor. So stop with the stupidly over-blown, pretentious, "Jeff and his demons" bullshit for once. And no, I'm not a "Jeff Hardy apologist", I'm just sick of the way all you smarks jump on any tidbit of news and distort it without thought.

I've said this before and I'll continue to say it: although you guys will never admit it, its all you fucking dickhead IWC smarks (e.g. Jarrod Westerfeld, or Darth Mortis) who are responsible for the decline of pro-wrestling.

Posted By: Big C (Guest) on September 19, 2008 at 10:13 AM

Pretty sure I'm not overreacting there, C. Hardy's latest run-in was absolutely blown out of proportion, no question -- but if you go back into my article on the subject you'll see that I encouraged everybody to give the poor bastard the benefit of the doubt until all of the facts were made clear. All that said, however, it seems silly to deny that such a "close call" from a notorious problem child wouldn't at least give the WWE honchos a moment's pause when planning their future with the guy.


Spending a lot of money on someone that can't wrestle... that's a good thing? Nash has always been in business for himself, even if it means screwing the company over. That's precisely the person that TNA does NOT need at the moment.

Posted By: Scott B (Guest) on September 19, 2008 at 11:05 AM

As I said last week, Scott -- there's a big difference between Kevin Nash the WRESTLER and Kevin Nash the CHARACTER (with limited in-ring performances, as necessary). Love him or hate him, Nash has a slew of real-and-kayfabe history with *both* sides of TNA's "new versus old" storyline, and so it makes good business sense to acknowledge his shared allegiances so as to add intrigue to what might otherwise become such a clear-cut divide between new and old stars (you'll note that they're doing a similar thing with Christian Cage, as a matter of fact).

I'm not suggesting that Nash be given the TNA World Championship or even that he be used as a regular in-ring performer to help further the feud between the new guys and the old guard, mind you... but it's pretty clear that a great deal of TNA's storytelling energy up until this point has been spent in crafting Kevin Nash as a key power player with ties to both sides of the turf war, and so it seems logical to keep him on the payroll (if only for the short-term) so as to let the story play out to its logical conclusion *without* having to deny the elephant in the room that is the unavoidable fact that the guy played a pretty major role in shaping the battle lines of this conflict to begin with. Once it's over, phase him out no harm no foul. But until then? No point in scrapping months' worth of momentum and creative energy if you can avoid it.


Hardy got drunk, so what. its no big issue.

Posted By: R9 (Guest) on September 19, 2008 at 12:28 PM

Normally, I'd agree. The problem, however, is that Jeff Hardy was rehired by WWE in 2006 under the impression that he had kicked his addiction problems and was supposedly drug free since making his return to their ranks. As we've seen, however, the Charismatic Enigma (what a terrible, terrible nickname) has failed a WWE Wellness test not one but TWICE since returning... and so it seems fair to say that the guy is (or "was," at least until recently) still dealing with some drug and/or addiction-related issues.

Any recovering addict can tell you that "cold turkey" is a longshot, and so many people who are trying to come down off of one addiction usually find themselves gravitating toward a second addiction instead. Such is the nature of the addictive personality, and indeed of addiction itself. Attend an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting and you'll see just about everyone in the room smoking cigarettes like they were a bunch of chimneys. Watch somebody try to quit smoking and see just how much junk food they can't help but suck down as fast as can be. And in Hardy's case -- maybe the hard drugs and the recreational drugs are, in fact, a thing of his past... but showing up in an airport too drunk to fly seems like a pretty solid indicator that "moderation" is still something that the guy is struggling to maintain. And as a result, you can't blame WWE (or his fans) for getting worried as to his future.


Everybody keeps talking about the low ratings, but what about all the damage from hurricane Ike? I live in Louisville and we had over 300,000 people without power. In Cincy, they had around 600,000. I know there are many people around the country who lost power due to Ike. Could that have anything to do with the low ratings?

Posted By: The Great Capt. Smooth (Guest) on September 19, 2008 at 06:08 AM

Well scouted. While I'm not entirely sure just how many homes in Louisville or Cincinatti actually watch RAW each week (or indeed how many of those homes are, in fact, Nielsen equipped) -- the ratings certainly took a bigger beating than normal (thoug have since rebounded back to usual levels), and so there's likely a good number of variables that contributed to that one-off dip, including the effects of Hurricane Ike.


I'm sure the hurricane played a part in all this as large communities throughout the country were affected by the storm.

Other factors to take into the account of a poor rating for RAW include:

* MLB playoff chases in several major markets: Chicago, NYC, Philly, LA, Phoenix, Minneapolis, Boston, and Tampa - all of which had games played Monday evening.

* The major networks are in either their first or second week of new episodes for their fall seasons.

It's not too difficult to believe that many people would rather watch their baseball team in the hunt for a playoff spot or catch with their favorite drama/sitcom rather than watch RAW. So with what else was on TV as well as the recent weather-related damage throughout the country, it's easy to see why RAW didn't have such a high rating and why it could continue to do so in the next few weeks.

Personally, I tivo RAW so I never watch it live. This week's episode lost my interest about 2/3 of the way thru and I sped thru the main event segments.

Posted By: JayHawkEvans (Guest) on September 19, 2008 at 01:33 PM

You make a good point, Jay.

For what it's worth, though -- I do maintain that a lot of RAW's rating woes from last week had to do with the NFL broadcast that it ran up against. As a frame of reference television-wide, Nielsen ratings for non-sporting events have actually fallen to lower levels across the board (while NFL games continue to rack up record numbers on the other end of the spectrum). The Emmys, for example, drew some of their worst ratings EVER this past week (yay football). And Monday night's much-hyped season premier of Heroes? Only managed to draw a Nielsen rating that was in line with their lowest non-repeat rating in history (and that was when it aired opposite the Jets and Chargers in a blowout!). So maybe it ain't just RAW who's feeling the pressure of NFL football.



If Hardy wasn't already sitting on two strikes it wouldn't really matter, but this is a guy who really needs to keep on his P's and Q's.

I agree with BigC, it's not about "personal demons" as it is just utter stupidity.

Posted By: jj (Guest) on September 19, 2008 at 02:17 PM

MeeThinks you've got it half-right, JJ. Hardy most definitely needs to mind his P's and Q's... but given the nature of addiction, one can't help but wonder if "stupidity" might just be pushing it a little. Sure Hardy is ultimately responsible for his actions, no doubt -- but a lot of addicts find that they simply are unable to excercise the willpower and self-restraint necessary to overcome their vices (or as WWE calls them, "personal demons"). So perhaps it has more to do with "weakness" (which entails inability) than it does with "stupidity" (which implies flagrant disregard).

But then again, I fell for a social worker... so I'm kinda' biased on that one ;)


There are people who BASHED OUT Booker Huffman for PROTECTING his HEALTH and HIS FAMILY in his home town ?

Go fuck yourself people who are bashing him, he is right and YOU are WRONG PERIOD

Posted By: Guest#3685 (Guest) on September 19, 2008 at 03:41 PM

The good news is that once the "stayed behind in Houston to be with his family" wrinkle emerged, I've not seen all that many people come out and condemn Booker T for doing what he felt he needed to do. Granted, however, Booker probably deserves a bit of criticism if he *wasn't* staying behind to be with family and was merely using the hurricane as a convenient excuse for not making a long-ass flight only to take part in a high-profile match simply because he already knew he'd be losing.

But around these parts, we're all about optimism -- and so I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt on this one. Family first, so no reason to flip a shit (see? And everybody says that I have an axe to grind with Booker T!).


So...
Randy Orton can do anything he wants to be a dickhead, and people let it pass by. But Jeff Hardy gets drunk, and taken off a plane without incident and he gets staked to the cross... Way to go guys.

Posted By: Travis (Guest) on September 19, 2008 at 05:31 PM

Not to sound smug, Travis -- but there aren't laws or federal regulations against simply acting like a dickhead. There are, however, quite a number of laws regarding public drunkenness as well as a clear-cut set of safety guidelines which prohibit passengers to board airplanes while visibly intoxicated. Sucky double standard? No doubt. But again, the law's the law.


Found Sonny had the look, but was allways missing something. always found him entertaining tho. God bless him for realizing whats most important in life- family

Posted By: markus (Guest) on September 19, 2008 at 07:01 PM

Most definitely, Markus. Thank God for YouTube, right?


I thinks meehann knows nothing about football the ravens are not terrible and have a good shot at beating the pittsburgh f meehan

Posted By: ravens fan (Guest) on September 19, 2008 at 08:54 PM

I think my 411 staff best post-season projection record from last year speaks for itself when it comes to knowing my pigskin, thank you very much. ;-)

And as for the Ravens not being terrible (perhaps simply because they came out of the gate with two wins)? Fair enough -- and tell you what. You go 2-o against two teams back-to-back who've won so much as ONE playoff game between them in the past ten years and then we'll talk. 'Till then, it's just the Bengals and the Brownies. Baltimore will be lucky to go .500 this year, period.


"There are people who BASHED OUT Booker Huffman for PROTECTING his HEALTH and HIS FAMILY in his home town ?"
How would he protect them in a hurricane? Would he Scissors Kick the Hurricane?

Posted By: Guest#1764 (Guest) on September 19, 2008 at 08:55 PM

That's a legit LOL, right there. Nicely done dude.


i hate wwe i wish tna actually were good to knock some sense into them...they have the roster to do it...they just lack real finishes and are so bush league

Posted By: Guest#4148 (Guest) on September 19, 2008 at 11:28 PM

It would seem that Kurt Angle agrees with you, actually. More on that one above!


Travis, you fail. Orton actually contributes something... Hardy is a liability.

Posted By: Brad (Guest) on September 19, 2008 at 11:58 PM

A quick look at the WWE shopzone would indicate that Hardy ain't too shabby in the field of "contributing something" himself -- namely? Merchandise, and quite a crapload of it. Hate all you want, but Jeff (like John Cena) is insanely over with the right demographic for merch sales (kids and girls), which could explain why he's been given so gosh-darned many chances to redeem himself in spite of his occassionally unmotivated in-ring abilities and his laundry list of offscreen indiscretions. Money talks, ya' know.


"Everybody keeps talking about the low ratings, but what about all the damage from hurricane Ike? I live in Louisville and we had over 300,000 people without power. In Cincy, they had around 600,000. I know there are many people around the country who lost power due to Ike. Could that have anything to do with the low ratings?"

******

I call BULLSHIZ on that one considering that Monday Night Football was somehow able (even with the outages) to post the highest ratings in the history of cable; and the TNT shows did really well also. So, in all, more people were watching cable Monday night than normally do (and maybe ever have). They just weren't watching Raw because it sucks compared to everything else . . .

Posted By: Timbo (Guest) on September 20, 2008 at 11:14 AM

Maybe so -- but again, I'll reiterate that ratings are down for just about *every* show that has the gall to stack up against NFL programming. From scripted television to awards shows to pro wrestling to crap reality TV -- it's pretty hard to draw record numbers when you're standing across the battlefield from the sport that one commentator so famously dubbed "America's Passion."


Meehan, how much do you actually know about football bro? The reason the Browns are on MNF so often is the fact that their fans will watch a winless Browns to the very end. They sell out the arena there just as often as the Pats do. You put the Indy/Tennessee game in red even though, tragically, both aren't football heavy areas like Pitts/Washington. That game will draw more viewers than Indy/Tenn. Just one dude's opinion.

Posted By: Guest#8088 (Guest) on September 20, 2008 at 06:30 PM

A lot of my "expert" analysis of the slate of MNF games is certainly no more or less "expert" than any other armchair quarterback out there nation wide. That said, I'm merely pointing to the historical truism there are certain teams that tend to bring in big Nielsen ratings nationwide *regardless* of the particular geographic region from which they hail. And traditionally speaking, for as diehard as Browns fans most certainly can be while attending and/or watching Cleveland football games the world over (and they are!), they are still a comparatively small host city for a football team, and thus translate to a pretty small representative sample of football fans nationwide. Compare a market like Cleveland with one like Dallas, New York, and New England -- and it's a no contest. Browns fans might watch Browns games to the bitter end... but casual football fans on the whole tend to flip the channel late in the season if a team isn't fighting for a spot in the playoffs.

Washington/Pittsburgh will air the night before the U.S. Presidential election, and so I've gotta believe that while all eyes will be on the nation's capital, most of the viewing public will be distracted more by last-second election coverage and less on pro football. Not that *some* won't, of course. Though I will say that if Indy keeps playing like they have, you are absolutely right that their MNF game won't bring in anywhere near the numbers they've drawn in seasons past.


And With That, I'm Outta' Here

That'll do it for Mee again this week. Last week I busted on poor old Chad Pennington on account of the fact that the guy simply can't throw more than 15 yards at a clip, but who in the HELL could have predicted that my beloved Patriots would have totally gotten blindsided by that bush-league backyard formation crap? Sigh. Ah well, we've got a bye week this Sunday to lick our wounds, and so I suppose it's off to rooting against the remainder of the AFC East teams for Mee. 'Till next time, have a great week and a great start to fall, and always stay positive.

- Meehan

The National Domestic Violence Hotline : [phone]-SAFE.