Rawful

Photo from WWE.com

By Chad Smart
@chadsmart & @my123cents on Twitter

It’s no secret amongst loyal readers or Facebook friends that I have not been too interested in what WWE has been presenting the last few months. After reading on Monday afternoon Vince McMahon had removed Brian Gewirtz from the position of Head Writer, I was curious to watch RAW and see if there was a noticeable change in the product. Obviously, I didn’t expect a complete change to occur hours after Gewirtz’s removal and I don’t know how much of what was already planned for RAW was changed after Vince made his creative decision. Maybe this was a stopgap show and the real changes will be seen either next week or after the Hell In The Cell pay per view.

One recurring thought I kept having while watching Raw was how almost every segment seemed to showcase what I currently find wrong with WWE as a whole. I expected once the show was over to read reactions that talked about how the show's horribleness exposed why Gewirtz got reassigned, or if it wasn’t his writing it showed he shouldn’t have been taken off the writing team. Instead I was reading comments about how it was the best RAW in months. If you liked the show, I’d really like to know why.  Since this is my blog, I’m going to go into what I hated about the show. Perhaps I’m just out of touch now that I have aged out of the target demographic. On to the show and what I disliked.

Team Rhodes Scholars wins
Photo from WWE.com

1)A few weeks ago WWE started a tag-team tournament to crown new number one contenders. A lot of people thought this was the sign WWE was serious about rebuilding the tag team division. Even though WWE had recently put the tag titles on two wrestlers thrown together as a team. After RAW, we’re down to the last two teams in the tournament and it’s two make shift teams. Granted, the team of Damian Sandow and Cody Rhodes has at least adopted a team name in Team Rhodes Scholars, but that doesn’t mean I should expect them to stay together after the tournament is over should they lose.

All the actual tag teams were eliminated early on in the tournament. After RAW went off the air, wwe.com had a video of R-Truth and Kofi Kingston dissolving their team since they lost in the tournament and have decided to re-focus on their singles careers. Former tag champions Primo and Epico were fed to Ryback in the build to his possible match with CM Punk. The Usos haven’t been seen in weeks. Huncio and Camacho must still be biking from venue to venue and showing up late.

Does anyone expect Kane and Daniel Bryan to be long term tag champs? Does anyone expect them to stay together once they lose the belts? While their, “I am the tag team champions” chant may actually put the tag titles in the spotlight, is it actually helping make the titles mean something or re-enforcing the Vince Russo philosophy that titles are nothing more than props?

The Miz is all wet, thanks to Shawn King
Photo from WWE.com

2) I know WWE likes to use mainstream celebrities to garner press, but did having Larry King on the show achieve anything positive? Having your Intercontinental champion getting punked out by an 80 year old man, who couldn’t even wait for Kofi Kingston to finish his big leap of faith before thanking the crowd and leaving, doesn’t make me want to see the IC champion in action. Why would I care about a guy who couldn’t go toe to toe in a verbal spat with a guy who probably didn’t know where he was or who was standing in front of him?

3) Vince McMahon doesn’t make me interested in RAW. Vince McMahon makes me want to turn the TV off. As we discussed last week on From the Rafter’s Radio, one of my biggest wrestling pet peeves is the fact people can’t accept the Attitude Era is over and move on so that a new period can be born. When I see Vince on TV playing the beyond stale Mr. McMahon character, I want to smash the TV. Not only was it bad enough to see Vince tell fans Truth/Kofi/Brodus Clay weren’t worth watching then we got Vince telling CM Punk he isn’t in the league of past champions. You know, guys like Steve Austin and The Rock. Guys from the Attitude Era.

"What a maneuver!"
Vince McMahon vs. CM Punk
Photo from WWE.com

Last night CM Punk got to beat up, but not defeat, a 67-year old Vince McMahon.  How does that make me want to spend money to see Punk face John Cena (for the third straight month) or Ryback, a guy who hasn’t beat anyone of value?

I DON’T GET IT! 

WWE has done very little to elevate new talent in the past few years. The format for RAW hasn’t changed in 15 years and has become stale. Vince McMahon demands the creative team to come up with good shows yet from all accounts Vince is the be all end all when it comes to what makes it to television. If he doesn’t like a new fresh idea how can the creative team come up with anything different than having John Cena standing tall at the end of the show?

Hopefully the removal of Brian Gewirtz will lead to some fresh ideas and a new change in direction. I don’t have much faith since the guy at the top is still the same but something drastic needs to be done. I’ll continue to stick my thought that if the plan is still to have John Cena vs. The Rock II at Wrestlemania, that right there sums everything that’s wrong with the WWE creative mindset. 

As always, be sure to follow my123cents on Facebook and Twitter.