Welcome to “Interinactivity”. Good questions this week!

Foxxxy: I think it might be too late to remove Cena from tv and only show him on ppv to increase buyrates. Everyone is burnt out on Cena. (I do like the idea of paying him to take time away) However, I think the concept is a good idea. The reason it won’t work with Cena is because he are sick of seeing him. However, replace Cena with Punk. Imagine right now they didn’t show punk wrestle on Raw at all. Maybe at most let him cut a promo here or there. The only way you can see him is on a ppv. Of course the storylines around him still progress. but if you want to see Punk wrestle you HAVE to pay your 50 bucks and buy the ppv. That was the point about Cowboy Bob Orton/JTG who cares about those ppl? You aren’t paying for those ppl you’re paying to see Cena, Punk, whoever. Obviously this would place a lot more importance on the creative team to keep compelling storylines because writing/promo work would be a much larger piece of getting fans interested in buying the ppv. People would do it. It’s been years since I bought a ppv. Personally I don’t see the point of dropping that much money for something I can see for free each week. I wait the two months and rent the dvd when it comes out. However, I do not believe wrestling companies care as much about ppv buyrates as they did decades earlier. I think companies are just as interested or more interested in tv ratings to sell commercial time slots. Last point I remember as a kid being excited for weeks about seeing Hogan wrestle The Genius on a Saturday Night Main Event. The Genius…

Blair: Foxxxy, you’re right about companies not caring AS MUCH about PPV buyrates as they did a few years ago, but they still care. TNA in particular reportedly makes more on Impact than they do on PPV’s, but that’s mostly because no one is buying those PPV’s. And regarding Cena, It’s never too late. Remember, kids LOVE Cena. I’ve heard opinions saying that could change. Yeah, it could change, but if it’s going to, it hasn’t happened yet. And you can’t just replace Cena with Punk, because then you’ll run into the exact same problem down the road. Just because Punk is better than Cena in almost all respects doesn’t mean people couldn’t still get bored with him if he’s over-exposed. What they need to do is develop a whole roster, not just have the company running off two or three guys and only building guys up to lose to them. This is one of the many reasons why they need to re-build a mid-card, and have it be heavily emphasized – so they can build stars people care about instead of hot-shotting people to the top who can’t deliver.

MC Brown: As long as Russo is not there to screw up the Millionaire’s Club vs. New Blood Part II, then I’d be on board to give it a shot again.

Blair: I think you’re blaming Vince Russo for something that is the fault of a lot of different people. He’s in there for sure, but he’s not the only one. Why does everyone always blame Russo and Bischoff? No one ever blames Jarrett, or Laurenitis, or Triple H, or whatever.

MC Brown: Unless you are 40 year olds like RVD vs. Jerry Lynn and can still go and tear it up in that ring, then please step aside. damn near 50 in Lynn’s case, too.

Blair: What about younger guys who could never tear it up in the ring or on the mic? You know who I’m talking about.

MC Brown: Although Swayze’s TNA Genocide(PPV?) idea was comical, I like the Heyman theory. Keep Kurt Angle and wipe the slate clean of most of the other legends. TNA has way too much young talent to be taking a backseat to guys I personally don’t want to see wrestle anymore, let alone be the focal point every Thursday night.

Blair: I dig Heyman, but the thing is, TNA has bigger problems than the “legends”. Problems named Ken Anderson, Matt Morgan, Crimson and Gunner. If they’re going to get rid of the legends to push THOSE guys, then they may as well not bother, because that’s not going to get them anywhere. If they get rid of the “legends” to push guys people ACTUALLY care about, then sure.

By the way, what the firetruck happened to Ric Flair, anyway? I see nothing on him anywhere. Is he dead? In prison? Help me out here.

Swayze: WWE’s roster is way better than TNAs. Blair is living a lie there and deep down he knows it.

Blair: You know I don’t like fighting in front of the kids. I refuse to respond to this. If anyone else disagrees with me, then fine. Who’s next?

Owangotang: There is no way that the TNA roster is better than WWE’s. Jeff Hardy may have been a draw at one time, briefly, but in 2011 he’s just a junkie. Anderson is perpetually overrated and has never drawn a dime. The guys who have drawn money are woefully past their prime. Only Samoa Joe has any real claim to the underutilized argument. He could flourish in WWE.

Blair: Dammit! Allright. Here we go. You’re right about the guys in question, although I’d argue that AJ, Daniels, and those like them also have a very legit claim to the under-utilized argument, but I don’t know that Joe could flourish in WWE. But wait, you thought I was refering to Hardy and ANDERSON as the parts of the TNA roster that’s stronger than WWE? The exact opposite could not be more true. TNA has a ton of guys that people want to see. Just not the guys you named. WWE has Cena, Orton, and now Punk that people want to see. Maybe Kofi, but they use him to job to losers for the most part. That’s literally it. The difference is, the guys that people want to see in TNA are completely wasted, while the guys I named above are not wasted by WWE. (And with Punk, it’s more like “not anymore.”)

SDMCC: as for Kennedy and Morgan.. TNA looks like they are trying a formula that worked Big-time for WWE in the 1990′s.. taking those from the competition who hit the ceiling and were left in limbo and making them stars!! the differences though: WWE gave the guys they got different characters while the guys TNA got were all the same..(exception being the Pope.. who TNA probably should’ve done more with) and of course the big difference, the talent level between those the WWE got and the ones TNA got.. I don’t even list them because they can’t be in the same sentence..

Blair: Not that taking an idea that worked in the 1980′s and trying it in 2011 isn’t TNA’s style, but Kennedy and Morgan did not “hit the ceiling and were left in limbo”. They didn’t hit any ceiling. Ever. They were nowhere near the ceiling. Ken Anderson was a coffee stain on the carpet. Matt Morgan would have been under the carpet. WWE wanted Ken Anderson to be a star. They tried everything to get him over, they even had him win MITB and still nobody cared. They gave him a ridiculous amount of mic time. Ken Anderson is someone who can never complain about his lack of success in WWE, because they gave him all the tools, he’s the one who didn’t deliver. With Matt Morgan, they were smart enough to not try that hard for that long. Also, Vince didn’t go out in the 80′s and pick up a bunch of guys that nobody cared about that were recently fired.

Cynical Bastard: I did initially consider your idea of using Hogan and Flair in a meet & greet/autograph/fan service kind of manner. I rejected it on the basis of their legendary egos, Hogan’s reputation for demanding creative control, Flair’s recent alleged disputes with TNA over his pay, etc. I don’t think either of them would settle for being left out of storylines, or for the reduced pay that would accompany the position you suggest.

Blair: Yeah, you’re right, I imagine Hogan and Flair would both push back on that idea, but that’s only a problem for TNA if they let it stop them. They should tell anyone with that attitude that they can either do what they say or be released. Seriously, why allow to broken down shadows of their former selves boss around your wrestling promotion when they’ve done almost nothing for you? Flair really needs money at this point, and I don’t think he’d really be able to refuse. Hogan doesn’t need it as bad as Flair does, but he’s nowhere near as rich as he was thanks to his divorce either.

Cynical Bastard: This was why I had different plans for Sting. He’s past his prime, but not so far as Flair, and he’s definitely not as useless in the ring as Hogan. Also, by all accounts Sting seems to be a genuinely classy guy and would be willing to put over young talent and step aside gracefully.

Blair: Maybe, but I dunno, I haven’t seen a good Sting match since he got back. What he does have is a great crowd right now, to his credit, but Flair has that too and isn’t really that much more useless than Sting. The only difference may be ego, but I don’t know what Flair’s situation is right now either.

BlueLion: Question- How can Sting think that this HORRIBLE gimmick he has right now better than what he could have in WWE where he would be worshiped?

Blair: What makes you think he DOES think that this horrible gimmick is better? Sting has a reputation of taking what he’s given and trying to make the best of it. The man is a class act. Just because he’s doing it doesn’t mean he likes it. Maybe he does, but I don’t see  how or why. And, I believe the rumour was that Sting would be brought in to WWE to lose to Undertaker, which would have meant infinitely more than anything Sting has done in TNA in the past few years. However, I believe he had his reservations as to what they would do with him after that.

James Alsop: TNA just signed a former Big Brother star to a developmental contract. He’s being trained by Bully Ray. Expect to see him dominating Flippy Styles in a month or so.

Blair: Holy fuck. Seriously? You mean like Jenna Morasca? Because that worked so well? It’s very nice to hear that the runaway train that is TNA is still going down the tracks at breakneck speed. It’s kinda like when you date a girl for a couple weeks, and in doing so you find out she’s a psycho bitch, then you dump her, and a few years down the road you find out she’s still a psycho bitch. Maybe the psycho bitch even has a kid now, kinda like how TNA has a reality star now. You just have to laugh it off and say “good for them”. So, good for TNA. I’m happy for them. Say hi to their mom for me. Anyway, the last person that Bully Ray “trained” was Rosie Lottalove, and she almost fucking killed Daffney. We can only hope he does that well.

SDMCC: Hardy’s in ROH: I did see a couple matches with Matt in ROH. His did get a decent response from the ROH crowd because he was at the high point of his career at the time. He just came back to WWE and did some work shoot stuff that fans love and everyone was excited to see… it’s after he dropped the ball during the angle that his value started dropping.. but his time at ROH was at the beginning of what seemed like a hot angle and his value was very high.. so ROH fans in the matches I saw were split between him and his opponent in the dueling chant sort of way, but he was welcomed (although he won’t even be close to being welcomed now.. unless ROH fans got way soft over the years since I’ve last seen the product). As for Jeff, only from what I read, he was booed out of the building something fierce.. but he might’ve been messed up that night if i can remember. this was years before he was worth anything as a singles comptetitor. Also Matt was let go because he spoke his mind about the Edge/Lita thing and fans were sympathetic to him. Jeff was let go because of a drug issue.. and the fans showed no sympathy at all.

Blair: You’re bang on the money with Jeff. The Matt Hardy ROH appearances that I saw were the dates that he worked AFTER he had re-signed with WWE, so if he was getting cheered in ROH before that, then I never saw it. I’m not being willfully ignorant either, back then ROH shows were a lot harder to come by than they are now. I saw the appearances after that, where he tried to suck up to fans by grabbing a mic and saying stuff like “WWE FANS NEED TO GO OUT AND BUY SOME ROH DVD’S!!!” and the crowd just was laughing at him.

James Alsop: As an aside, I didn’t think that Matt did all that badly in ROH back in 2005. Like SDMCC says above, the crowd warmed to him a lot more than his druggie brother, presumably because his ‘love triangle’ story and unjust firing garnered him fan support. At least, he did ok until he tried four superplexes in a row against Christopher Daniels. Then they booed the hell out of him for being so dull.

Blair: I kind of already responded to this, so I’m just going to take this opportunity to mention how hilarious I found it when, after what James just described, Matt went back to WWE like a house of fire, only to get jobbed out to Edge a bunch of times and tossed over to the mid-card on SmackDown. The only time he saw any success after that was in WWECW for the VERY short term, and that was probably only because of his brother doing so well at the time.

James Alsop: Regarding the Hardyz in ROH, I agree that Matt by himself is useless, but as a tag-team in ROH the fourth-wall-breaking heat on Matt and Jeff would be unbelievable. Fans legit don’t like them. It’d make for an interesting show, regardless of their solo histories with the company.

Blair: I agree that it would draw mad heat, but ROH, at least to my knowledge, tends not to book that way. They wouldn’t bring on shitty wrestlers just for the heat of it. At least I don’t think so. They take their cred very seriously, for better or worse, and that would almost certainly damage it.

SDMCC: so my question is.. who in the WWE that has hit the ceiling and is in limbo (and actually has some talent) can TNA possibly pickup and with a possible makeover.. make him a star?

Blair: I don’t understand what you mean by “hit the ceiling” when you pair it with “is in limbo”. Sorry, I don’t. And now I’m doubting my answer to your last question. Anyway, very few people hit the ceiling AND end up in limbo. Even Kofi, although he’s wasted, is still a decent part of the show. If you clarify what you mean, I’ll take another stab at this one next week.

Swayze: TNA can’t make anyone a star. Duh. If they can’t make AJ Styles a star, then they can’t make anyone a star.

Mike Gojira: Besides Christian, are there any former WWE talent that Vince dropped the ball with whom you consider to have had more success in TNA, or do you think they’re all just being wasted (or wastes of space, in the case of Anderson, Morgan, etc)?

Blair: I would have said The Pope, until recently, but that’s it. For the rest of them, the lack of success is either due to TNA having no idea how to use the guys in question, or, and this is the case with 95% of them, they were never worth anything to begin with, which is why WWE got rid of them in the first place, and why TNA shouldn’t try to exist on WWE castoffs.

CB: Blair, on that night the original Nexus ended Raw by destroying Cena and dismantling the entire ring area, yes, that was awesome. I know what you are saying about the quality of the individuals that made up the group, but as a group they could have gone so much further. Also, if Bryan wasn’t fired, that would have helped immensely. Later on, they should have at least had Barrett get the WWE title at least once, even if it was because of that pack mentality that helped him win it. I really do stand by the idea that what they were trying to accomplish could have worked if WWE didn’t panic way too soon as they pulled the trigger on the whole angle. Once everything got so convoluted, though, I agree with you that it was a total waste. But it didn’t have to be that way.

Blair: I disagree. Yes, that first night was cool, I guess, especially if you really hate office chairs for some reason, and yes, if the new guys they selected had been ANY good, then yes, it could have done a lot better than it did. But even though that wasn’t the case, it sounds like you’re saying the angle should have gone LONGER and that it went TOO fast. And I just disagree with that, and I don’t understand what they “pulled the trigger on.” That angle lasted 4 or 5 months if memory serves. That’s a LONG time in present day wrestling. Yes, Bryan not being fired would have helped. Having him lead the group would have also helped. But I don’t see how, other than that, how they could have made it work without doing that, with those guys they selected to do Nexus. And I don’t understand why they dragged it out as long as they did, let alone why you or anyone would ever consider extending it. Wade Barrett with the belt would be a living joke, and I’d say it would be akin to championship suicide, if Shaemus hadn’t had the belt a few months before that.

CB: Here’s my comment / question for this week. Before Punk’s return to Raw, the commemorative T-shirts from the MITB PPV in Chicago were selling for up to $500 on auction sites. The same T-shirt is now available on wweshop.com for $24.99, except without the date of the Chicago PPV on the shirt. Comment: I think that’s hilarious.

Blair: I assumed when I saw the shirt that it was something Punk had done himself. I also assume that anyone who paid $500 for that shirt ended up crying in an empty bathtub for about 6 hours.

CB: Do you think Punk will now become a main event level financial draw / moneymaker now that he is back in WWE?

Blair: I’m still not convinced he ever really left, but yes. And, quite honestly, it’s about time. I don’t think they’d be able to un-ring that bell at this point. CM Punk will be the first guy of the new millennium to succeed IN SPITE of WWE. WWE will tell you different, and NOW they’ll start investing in him, but before a month ago? No way. Again, they’ll tell you different, and the only time where they’d have a point is his feud with Hardy in 2009 when he had the belt. But a month later they jobbed him to Undertaker for no reason and shotgunned him down the card fast. Good for CM Punk. WWE has tried, completely in vain, to elevate all those losers that they’ve elevated in the past few years, (and yes, they’ve ALL been losers) ahead of Punk, when they had Punk, who has been delivering all along. So, if they don’t turn this into another giant abortion, then this could be a welcome change from forced and mundane boredom.

D.L. Butcher: So my question this week is now that Punk is back, and Hunter could possibly be in the suit role for a while, when do you think they are going to have Punk roll out the Pepsi Cola Plunge? If they do, would anyone say it was a good move, or be negative? Just asking…

Blair: Ha ha! Yeah, I’d LOVE to see Trips’ reaction upon seeing the Pepsi Plunge move itself, and I’d LOVE to see WWE Legal’s reaction upon hearing the move name. I don’t see that happening though, although power to them if it did. As far as feedback on the move goes, if you eventually see it happening on TV, that means that WWE would see value in it, whether they think it’s a good move or not. If they don’t like it, you won’t see it. As for the fans, I don’t see any reason why the reaction to the move would be negative. Pepsi Plunge is an awesome move, and it would mean something with how it relates to Triple H.

CB: Here’s another question: What do you think of Triple H being back in charge on Raw, now in a more corporate role?

Blair: Triple H has a place on the show, and if he cuts his promo length by about 80%, it’s fine. Is it really any different than having a computer do it? To me it’s not, but I guess the big difference here now is that the guy pretending to be in charge of the show is actually kind of in charge of the show. As I’ve said, I think you can have an authority figure present on the show without having it be a premise of the show. But it remains to be seen what they’ll do with it. Fingers crossed.

Steven Gepp: Okay, so my question was not deemed good enough last week. But this week: Let’s say Randy does his shoulder again and Cena hurts his back (probably from carrying the WWE all on his lonesome). Who does the ‘E have to step into the breach? Old stalwarts, young guys, middling ones – whom?

Blair: I legit could not find your question from last week. Sorry about that dude. If Orton and Cena got hurt, then currently, they have CM Punk. But no man on his own can do it without a supporting cast, so they’d need more. If they wanted to, they could get Kofi Kingston and Daniel Bryan up to that level. Kofi in particular is already massively over with the fans. Bryan was as well, but I don’t know how much he still is. Or, they’d do some dumb shit like make Miz a babyface and put him against Del Rio. Whatever works.

Swayze: WWE doesn’t need Orton or Cena. Those two guys are worthless. They’ve had ten years to prove something. They failed. Anyone can replace them. Nobody misses Batista. Nobody will miss them. Bryan and Punk I guess will be fine, but really, anyone will work.

CB: Also, R-Truth just went “full retard” (credit: tropic thunder) by talking to imaginary friends around him. While it was a funny interaction with Triple H, I hope they don’t keep Truth on the side of being too overboard mentally.

Blair: Was it funny? It didn’t sound funny. Maybe I had to actually watch it. Triple H can be funny sometimes. With Truth, I’d rather have him acting insane than acting like how I imagine Vince McMahon sees all black people, but that’s just me. From all reports, Truth has somewhat shined in his new role. Truth has always been all right by me, so good for him.

Jader: Great article Blair – could you expand on WWE being racist? Do you mean in terms of who is on top, or just racist in general?

Blair: I mean both. When was the last time you saw a WWE World Champion that wasn’t white in the last 30 years? Let me help you – Eddie Guererro, Rey Mysterio, Bobby Lashley, and Yokozuna, who Vince made into one of the biggest stereotypes imaginable. No, The Rock isn’t black, he’s Samoan. And no, John Cena doesn’t count either. Have any asians flourished in WWE that you’re aware of? And also, if you need more proof WWE is racist, I got two words for you: Cryme Tyme.

Swayze: Did you not see Truth in a fucking confederate outfit?

Bill Hederick: just a historical note about owners and suspensions, this was common in the old AWA days, Wally Karbo, the putative owner, would come out threatening “Fines and Suspensions” all the time

Blair: Hey, I learned something! That’s way before my time, Bill, but thank you for letting us know that. There you have it folks.

ASGurl: Here’s my question – Montreal Screwjob – who do you side with?

Blair: Vince and WWE. I never saw Bret’s side of the whole thing. Ever. Bret has made a big show of saying in the last couple years that he never refused to LOSE, but losing wasn’t the point. He refused to  lose the BELT, you can even hear him on that whole “Hitman Hart” documentary suggesting that they can do a DQ or a schmoz finish or something. Which is basically the same as refusing to lose if it’s a BS finish, but whatever. Beating Shawn wasn’t the point. Vince needed Bret to lose the belt, and Bret didn’t want to lose the belt. And that’s where I lose Bret’s part of the argument. It was never Bret’s belt, because Bret never won the belt, because he never really beat anyone for it, because wrestling is fake and the belt is a prop. It’s the most important prop there is, and I get that it’s prestigious, but the point is, it wasn’t Bret’s belt. And yes, I understand that he had “reasonable creative control” but I don’t see how Bret’s position was reasonable as the entire premise for his argument wasn’t grounded in reality.

WaterDrip: holy shit, you thought zybyzko was a great commentator?

Blair: Well, given that he was commentating with Tony Schiavone and Mike Tenay, maybe back then I assumed he was awesome given who I had to compare him with at the time. Does he hold up as well over time? Maybe not, maybe he’s just a guilty pleasure of mine like Kevin Nash is.

Kliq: Hi Blair, love the column – and loved That Being Said too. Earlier today I tried to post what I’m about to post now, but it just might have been waaaaay too long for a single comment. So here it is once again – a recap of this week’s iMPACT (I miss your recaps so much I’ve decided to do one myself) – with the following question: Is it wrong to enjoy TNA for the sheer comedic value it possesses as a parody of a wrestling show? I’m not even angry about the mistreatment of AJ or Joe or anyone else, I’m beyond that now. So basically I enjoy it for the wrong reasons. What do you think?

Blair: Thanks for the kind words, dude. As for your question, if there’s any other level to enjoy TNA on right now, then I haven’t found it. You certainly can’t enjoy it on storyline or match quality, other than the odd X-Division match. You’re right though, you do eventually have to just get over the anger about the mis-use of talent and mind-boggling business moves. When I started recapping TNA, that was how I got through it – by laughing at it and hoping that it got better. When it became clear that wasn’t going to happen, then all I could do was laugh at it. That got old, though. Incidentally, if that was their goal, to have people enjoying the product on that “so bad it’s good” level, then they’d be killing it right now.

As for the recap, the part that made it up onto the comment, I enjoyed a lot. Anyone who didn’t see what Kliq wrote should go back and check it out. Unless I’m mistaken, we are still looking for someone to do an Impact Wrestling recap, you should inquire. I’d read it. But be warned – I thought it’d be fun too, until the third month when the hour before the show would come on, I felt like hiring out a hitman on myself.

Owangotang: My question this week is: Clearly you think WWE is boring, even now. What would you do to make it not boring? If you don’t like the fantasy booking thing tell me the last time WWE was not boring for you. Thanks.

Swayze: Hire New Jack.

Blair: The last time WWE was not boring for me was around 2004 or so, and even then it was getting pretty stale. Honestly, I can’t name much that I remember WWE doing at any level since then. Shawn Michaels and Undertaker happened, that was pretty cool. CM Punk and Jeff Hardy happened, that was well done. Cena, Orton and Batista beat everyone up, that sucked. Bret came back, that sucked. Rock came back, that didn’t suck, but wasn’t all that. Same with the DX revival. McMahon did some shit with Trump that could VERY generously be described as absolutely terrible. Nexus happened, that was just laughable. And I think everyone remembers that awesome Bobby Lashley experiment. That’s about all I can think of in the last 7 years. I find that sad.

I don’t fantasy book, and I think I’d be mentally deranged if I did. So I’d just say they should end the brand extension, as they just don’t have enough actual talent for two shows anymore. They don’t have to get rid of a show, just do 2 of them with the same stars like they used to. Failing that, they should do what TNA should do and drop the dead weight. The problem there is that, unlike TNA, this would require axing over 75% of the roster. I’m not familiar with the smaller names I see on the roster webpage now and I’m not going to judge guys I’ve never seen, but of their big names, they should get rid of Shaemus, Swagger, Del Rio, McIntyre, Mark Henry, Riley, any and all remaining members of NXT or Nexus or Corre or whatever the hell it’s called unless their names are Daniel Bryan, and last of all, The Miz. That guy sucks. Did you hear he was PWI’s Wrestler Of The Year?!?! Shit is crazy.

If they are actually planning a new direction, with guys like Punk and Bryan, then good for them. I know where they can pick up a ton of guys that are quite a bit like them for probably pretty cheap, and most of them I am sure would jump at the chance. Just head to the amusement park in Orlando and follow the smell of the guys you recently canned.

Owangotang: “And in that exact same way, will MITB change anything in terms of how boring WWE has become? I’ve yet to see any evidence of that. And that’s the important part.”

My only reply is that you must not be watching very closely. The Punk/HHH confrontation at Comic-con, literally under the Mattel banner, was proof positive that interesting, fresh angles can happen even in PG WWE. RAW had two really good matches with Rey/Miz and Rey/Cena. CM Punk is back and he’s electric. I will admit that perhaps some of the moments at MITB I listed for you are not all-time classics but that PPV, as a whole, is going to be remembered. That’s better than even most top tier WWE PPV’s.

Blair: First off, my response was written before Punk “returned”. And yeah, MITB was better than most of ANY of WWE PPV’s, and yeah, it will be remembered BUT, that’s because of the main event, not the rest of the show.

Also, you’re right, I’m not watching closely… or at all. But I am reading. And one good angle does not make a show, which is WHY I’m not watching. Take RAW for example. Yes, Mysterio flew around the ring trying to make two guys who can’t really work look good. Were they good matches? I did YouTube them, and in my opinion, no. But, were they better than what you’d usually see? Maybe.

Punk was on for 3 minutes. Out of a two hour show. Take the ads out, and the show is 88 minutes long. Considering a lot of WWE’s actual show is just ads for itself, let’s be generous and say 80 minutes of written material. I’m not going to sit through commercials and 85 minutes of shit every week, hoping that there might be 3 good minutes. Do you think I’m out of my fucking mind?

Also, you know I could just YouTube those 3 minutes, and not watch ANY filler or shit, right? ONLY wrestling fans will watch 88 minutes of pure shit for the CHANCE of 3 minutes of entertaining stuff. Imagine if CSI, a popular show which also follows a similar format each week, and is half the length of RAW, only had 3 entertaining minutes on it. They’d be cancelled and mocked endlessly.

Everyone is blowing their load prematurely on something that could turn out to be nothing. That’s all I’m saying. Could WWE get better? Of course it could. Is the Punk stuff solid? Absolutely. Is it a step in the right direction? For sure. Hell, they even gave Bryan a MITB, so who knows. But, is all of this, which has lasted all of a month, any reason to think that the next WWE golden age is upon us? For God’s sake, no. Also, let’s remember, 95% of WWE’s roster still really sucks. And until the show has at LEAST half of what sounds like watchable material, I’m not going to bother. Why the fuck would I? I already beat my head against a wall for months doing that while I was recapping TNA, waiting for THAT to get better.

James Alsop: Blair, how does it make you feel knowing that if John Morrison was cutting a promo on you he’d call you Mr Bliggles? Or perhaps Mr Biggles? Or – OH YES – Mr Bigglesworth! That’d be historic.

Blair: Ha ha ha, that’s brilliant.

… I have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about.

Good questions this week people, it was fun. Keep up the good work, and leave me a comment here or Twitter me at www.Twitter.com/BlairADouglas.

This has been “Interinactivity”. Thanks for reading and have a great weekend!

Tags: Abyss, AJ Styles, Anderson, Angle, beer money, Bischoff, Bully Ray, Cena, christian, Chyna, cm punk, Crystal, CZW, D-Von, Daniels, DGUSA, Dreamer, edge, Flair, Fortune, Hardy, Harris, Hogan, immortal, impact, Jarrett, Kaz, miz, NXT, Orton, pope, Raw, Rob Van Dam, ROH, Roode, Sabin, Samoa Joe, Shelley, Smackdown, STD, Steiner, Sting, storm, suicide, Swayze, Team 3D, TNA, TNA Impact Recap, tna impact report, TNA Wrestling, vince, WaterDrip, WWE, Yob