Welcome to the first edition of True or False. Until I decide this has gotten stale, this will be my weekly column from now on. Every week, I will be alongside the very talented Joe Violet. To make things not complicated, I will describe how this works as plainly as possible.
There will be five questions on, of course, wrestling. The questions range from week to week. Sometimes it will be modern-day wrestling, sometimes it will be classic wrestling, and sometimes it will be a bit of both. Afterwards, Joe and I either have to answer true or false and then describe why the statement is true or false. Simple enough, right?
1. Brock Lesnar’s ass-kicker promo last week made you want to watch see his match with John Cena more.
Joe Violet: False. Brock Lesnar has never been the best promo man, as his in-ring work has told more than enough story to help an angle go through. For example, his Hell in a Cell buildup against Undertaker was built around not anything Lesnar had said, but Paul Heyman. If Lesnar hadn’t put in a good performance inside the Cell when it came time to do so, that angle would have fizzled. That being said, Lesnar can talk until he’s blue in the face, and it won’t make his match against Cena any better or worse. He could, however, use a good mouthpiece to draw some heat for him.
Kyle Fitta: True. In words of Brock Lesnar, I thought that was an ass-kicker promo. Lesnar has never been the strongest talker on the mic, but the way they did it was perfect. By him not being in front of a live audience, he spoke clearer and didn’t stumble over his words. The promo also established what Lesnar’s mission was and why he doesn’t like Cena. In a nutshell, it was a (very well-written) promo that made Lesnar feel like an unstoppable force and Cena seem as if he’s in serious peril, something that’s seemed impossible.
2. If John Cena loses to Brock Lesnar at Extreme Rules, he should he take some time off.
Joe Violet: True-ish. That depends on how said loss is booked. It also depends on who they are trying to make look good in this angle, which I will address here soon. Taking time off could be good if it is a clean loss like at Wrestlemania, as they could play it off as Cena re-assessing his priorities, or something to that extent. Take him off TV for a while, then have him come back with new purpose. Meanwhile, have Lesnar destroying people left and right, and maybe even have him with a title run in the process. Then, Cena can come back and stand up to Lesnar, and boom, you have money. If it’s due to shenanigans, then it’s a waste, and we’ll wind up with another Super Cena comeback angle.
Kyle Fitta: False. I’m all for John Cena getting time off. One, because people are sick of seeing him on TV every week. Going away would hopefully make people glad to see him return when he does. And seriously, when Cena injuried himself in 2008, the sky didn’t fall; therefore, it’s stupid that WWE’s so fearful that the numbers will drop if Cena’s off TV. WWE in recent years has been a machine that stays consistent despite who’s off TV, plus Cena being off TV may create intrigue as well as anticipation and thus help the ratings buyrates increase. Two, he deserves a break. A break would let him heal and, as a result, would make his matches and character better. That being said, I don’t believe this is the right time. There’s no indications that Cena is leaving if he loses, and the WWE should to announce his possible last match ever.
3. WWE will cure the lack of depth in their midcard once they bring up the indie stars from Florida Championship Wrestling.
Joe Violet: True but only if they’re used correctly. WWE has a habit of watering down talent to fit their own programming. Look at most indies darlings, and look what happens when they make it to WWE…prime example, Daniel Bryan. Bryan hasn’t even scratched the surface of his potential in WWE programming, and if he did, it would make for very good matches. Men like Claudio Castagnoli and Dean Ambrose are quality wrestlers AND workers, and could be major upgrades to the WWE midcard if they’re actually allowed to showcase their true talents. Blair will hate me for this, but Sheamus is another example of watering down. Look at his FCW stuff, and you would see that Sheamus can work well in the ring. It is what it is…WWE has a certain formula they have for matches and angles, and if they are not careful, they tend to take a talented worker and wrestler, and make him into nothing. See: Low Ki.
Kyle Fitta: True. I have to agree with Joe, though. Sure, they have talented wrestlers….but it’s moot if they don’t use them properly. Low Ki has oodles of talent, but the WWE didn’t use him properly as he was never able to showcase any of his talent. People like Chris Hero, Jon Moxley, and Tyler Black could be major contributions to the WWE, but if they use them improperly and exposes their weaknesses, it’s won’t to help the midcard one bit. I also agree with Joe about Daniel Bryan. Even though he’s in the main event, he still hasn’t been able to showcase a lot of his talent. We all know he could be putting on great matches every night if they allowed him to. For some reason, I believe WWE will use them properly and it will help the lack of depth in their midcard.
4. Bobby Roode going over at Lockdown was the right decision.
Joe Violet: True. With the rumors swirling around that James Storm is hurt, it may have been. The flaw here, however, is in the execution. The “accidental escape” finish is acceptable in some cases, but not after the buildup that had led up to this cage match. Roode, at first, had seemed like a good choice for champion, but he’s just not getting over. I feel his reign has ran its course, but the problem is, who could take over as champion now and be over? I admittedly don’t watch TNA as much as I should, so please correct me if I’m wrong, argue with me, whatever needs to be said or done.
Kyle Fitta: False. They put 6 months in building this match up. Actually, I should say they built up Storm getting his revenge/winning the title for 6 months. I’m no doctor but don’t believe Storm is that hurt; instead, I believe he just needs a short break to heal and this now is a perfect time to do so (since he just lost to Roode in an important match). At first, I thought this match would lead to more in the short run so I was OK with Roode going over until I remembered something. What I remembered was Bobby Roode built up for months heading into Bound For Glory but losing to Angle. Swerving the audience by putting a heel or someone unexpected over on a big show is good in moderation, but it’s becoming over-kill in TNA. It doesn’t send a good message to their fans as it seems like the fans are not going to get a feel-good moment when they order a big PPV. Not to mention that the main reason TNA did it was because they thought Roode going over was too obvious, which is like the WWF putting André the Giant over Hulk Hogan because everyone knew Hogan was going to win.
Well, that’s going to wrap up the first edition of True or False. Please feel free to speak your mind about anything in the comment section. And yes, you can tell us how much we suck if you truly want to. Until then, see you next week.
