The Triumvirate of Truth 5.20.12 Lord Tensai, Brock vs. HHH, Cena vs Ace, NXT’s New show, Raw to 3-Hours and More!

Isn’t there a PPV this weekend? Ah, there is! I won’t be watching it, since I have other plans, but I am pretty interested in the Fatal Four Way. It looks like potential to be a particularly good one. The rest of the card is hit or miss, especially a match with one too many Johns in it. Before we begin, I implore you guys to join in on the fun and answer the questions yourself, or even ask one of your own and we’ll throw it in here. One more thing; to the comment that assumes that “Tony’s column is failing” is sorely mistaken. My ego is not petted by your comments, so lack thereof does nothing, really. But it was a cute try there, buddy.

This week, we’ve got talk on Lord Tensai, the Over the Limit card, the new way NXT is being presented and how excited I am about it, some thoughts on Brock versus HHH and more! Let’s give the crew a hand and read on what they have to say!

1.Has Lord Tensai been a disappointment in the WWE?

Michael Uphoff: In some ways, Lord Tensai has been a disappointment in the WWE during his run. However, this is mainly not his fault. This is largely due to the fact that the WWE has failed to book him properly. I have spoken already about how squash matches should be used properly, and while they made Tensai look dominant, he has been in the WWE for a couple months now and has yet to have a feud with anyone. With what Yoshi Tatsu had been doing on Twitter, that could have been an easy feud to make that would have worked for a short-term program.

Instead, we see Tensai used as Johnny Ace’s lackey. Tensai has yet to have a good WWE match, and he came close with Cena on RAW. However, it’s very difficult to have a good WWE match when you are booked to have squash matches all the time and thus are not booked properly. Tensai needs to have a feud of his own where he is not in the shadow of a larger feud. Feud him with Yoshi Tatsu; feud him with someone else, I don’t care. Tensai’s character is getting stale due to the fact that WWE creative has done nothing to help him. And that, readers, is a major disappointment considering his talent.

Tony Acero: I’m going to go with yes on this one. Tensai was brought in with some high expectations, at least on my part. News that he tore it up in Japan and he was going to bring that particular style and newness to the WWE. I didn’t expect some flippity flippoty big guy, and to be honest, the growth in the man has shown, but the reality is that nearly every match he’s been in has been relatively short and one-note. He just started and already has gotten stale. Mike is so right when he says that it’s hard to have a good match when they’re all squash matches, and that’s essentially something I’ve harped on for a minute now. For Tensai, it made sense in the beginning to make him a “menacing force” but it wasn’t really all that important considering Brodus was doin it already and we’d have Antonio Cesaro do it shortly thereafter. I’m sure he has gotten better, and I’m glad he had a good time in Japan, but when it comes to his work since donning the red diaper, I can’t say that he’s impressed me.

Joshua Stangle: Yes. Speaking as someone who is not familiar with his work in Japan, I have no idea why he seems so special to many of the more hardcore fans out there. I’m not saying that he doesn’t have tons of talent, just that he hasn’t been shown in a way that would make me think he does. That’s a failure of the creative team/mentality. Mike is right when he says that they need to actually do something with him. His matches seem very slow and plodding. He has done nothing other than some minor heel work. Despite defeating John Cena in the main event on RAW, he was given no follow up.

2. How should the Brock Lesnar and Triple H feud play out?

Joshua Stangle: The promo between Paul Heyman and Triple H was my favorite part of the last Monday Night RAW. With Heyman maliciously egging Triple H into violence, the once Cerebral Assassin assaulted Paul Heyman and received another lawsuit. See, in pro wrestling, might is right; and lawsuits are for cowards. The very notion that Lesnar would file suit against Triple H after breaking Triple H’s arm is absurd. Which makes it all the more fun to watch, and gives the audience someone to root for. This match could have happened ten years ago after Summerslam 2002. It was being anticipated at the time, but then they kept Lesnar on Smackdown. I’m interested to see how they will get to the match, at this point. I’m also interested to see when the match will actually occur.

Rumors have said that the match could be as far away as Summerslam, or as early as No Way Out. I think the perfect setting for the match would be at Money in the Bank. In this, we are given enough build to make people excited for the match, while not waiting too long to get there. I feel that the lead up to No Way Out should build with Heyman and Triple H verbally jousting over what Lesnar deserves. At that point, Heyman wins, and Lesnar comes back to fulfill his contractual obligations. However, Triple H gets to choose Lesnar’s opponent and match type. He, then, chooses himself, of course. Lesnar and Triple H have to be separated to keep from destroying each other until the match. Thus, when they do finally get to the match, Triple H can finally destroy Lesnar…

Of course, Lesnar will win. Triple H doesn’t need to be getting huge victories at this point in his career, and the WWE needs to remind people that Lesnar is a ruthless monster.

Tony Acero: Sure, I guess. It wasn’t what I expected when we learned Brock was coming back, but maybe they feel that Brock is too big to put with someone else. I wouldn’t mind seeing him tangle it up with anyone else, but considering the storyline that brought him in, I suppose HHH makes sense as the next step. I’ll double up what Josh said about Heyman and HHH, though. That exchange was wonderful, and proved that Heyman has still got it and HHH ain’t a slouch on the mic either. It added a hell of a lot to a feud that doesn’t have one of the main players in it. As of now, we don’t even need Brock there, because Heyman is doing such a great job. For whatever reason, though, I feel something is a bit forced here. I’m not sure if this was their plan the entire time, but I don’t think I want to see HHH in another match after he was supposed to be “ending an era” recently.

Michael Uphoff: I think Josh is pretty much on the point here with how the Lesnar/HHH feud should play out. I don’t want to see the match at No Way Out, and SummerSlam, while the match would certainly sell the PPV, seems a little too far away. Brock hiding behind Heyman seems a little off to me, but as Josh says, it gives the crowd someone to root for in this feud. The one thing I want to happen is for Brock to get his heat back by destroying HHH and pinning him after an F5. Fans need to be reminded that Lesnar is a beast, like Josh stated.

3. How do you feel about the build to Over the Limit?

Joshua Stangle: I feel that the WWE doesn’t really care about this pay per view. Other than the Fatal Four Way match, every feud in this build up has been lacking. I have discussed the Smackdown World Heavyweight title match last week, so I’ll focus on the other matches.

Daniel Bryan versus CM Punk has been a rather dull affair so far. Why do they dislike each other? Why should we care? We shouldn’t have to go to WWE.com just to get some depth in the feud. This match could be superb, but the feud has failed to inspire my interest. Cena versus Laurinaitis is even worse. It’s like a poorly done paint by numbers version of the major face versus heel authority figure feud. Not only is it painfully dull to watch, but it actively dissuades me from wanting to see the pay per view.

Beth Phoenix versus Layla has had some build, I guess. Maybe there will be a tag team match at Over the Limit. I’m sure that Brodus Clay will have a match with either The Miz or Dolph Ziggler…even though the entire feud has been painfully one sided. There’s no Brock Lesnar on this show. There’s no Rock. Cena is stuck in a horrible feud. The Bryan vs. Punk match should be really great, and the Fatal Four Way match has been well built, but this pay per view seems really weak.

Tony Acero: I think, for a minute, I was blinded by the Fatal Four Way, because I was all ready to write down a bunch of praise for this PPV. I was so excited to see the World and WWE Championship matches that I forgot that there’s more to the card than that…or at least, there’s supposed to be. After some thought, I’ve concluded that the build to this PPV has been slightly below average. I say slightly because they have actually built up the two matches that matter the most. Not to say that others don’t, but really if they are going to see this bad boy then they need to accentuate the big matches. Of course, at the end of the day, Josh points out the obvious in that it is a throwaway PPV that WWE probably doesn’t care about too much, although I’ve spoken once before about them treating things as a “throwaway” anything.

Michael Uphoff: It’s a non-Big Four PPV, of course the WWE is not really going to care about the build as much as they would a WrestleMania or a SummerSlam. There aren’t really any big names for the PPV, and the only match with any decent build has been the Fatal Four-Way match for the World Heavyweight Championship. The WWE Championship match between CM Punk and Daniel Bryan has had little build, and that is very disappointing. Josh is correct when he says that it seems that the WWE doesn’t care about this PPV, because they don’t.

4. With the end of Monday Night RAW between John Laurinaitis and John Cena, what are your thoughts on their PPV match?

Michael Uphoff: Well, with the stipulations added to the match, I would say either Big Show turns heel to help Johnny Ace to keep his job, or Brock Lesnar returns and delivers an F5 to Cena to get his revenge. I did enjoy Cena being goofy at the end of RAW, and if he had done the LOSER! gimmick that Ace Ventura did, I would have marked out for that. On a side note, Eve gets hotter and hotter every day.

Back to reality, the stipulations really give away the result of the match, and that is a very bad thing. WWE is supposed to suspend the belief of the fan and at least TRY to keep us in suspense until the end of the match. With the stipulation that Johnny Ace would be terminated if he loses, there is no way he loses this match. Everyone I know can’t stand to see Laurinaitis on TV anymore and would love to see Cena hand his ass to him on a silver platter and see him fired, but it’s simply not going to happen as WWE is going to try and beat a dead horse with a storyline that only worked with McMahon and Austin because it was McMahon vs. Austin. Cheered babyface vs. heel authority figure is overused, yet WWE feels like they can go back to it as a fail-safe. Guess what, WWE? Laurinaitis sucks. We would really like to never see him on WWE TV again. But you are going to just keep on doing what you do and make mistake after mistake by letting this continue. I need some aspirin….

Tony Acero: I cannot say enough bad things about this bullshit. John Cena gets his ass handed to him by Brock – who Ace sent after him – but still wins. Ok, fine. His arm is damaged, and he pulls a promo out of his ass that makes the match beforehand look pretty unimportant. He shows up the next night and Ace screws him, pounding a chair into his already injured arm. So one man sends another after Cena, then reaggravates an injury, then kicks him in the head and pretty much puts him in his place, and what does John Cena do two weeks later? He shows up with a goofy ass grin on his face and pulls a joke that’s as old as the mindset of the WWE writing team. I’m hoping Mike was joking up there with his enjoying Cena being goofy. Nah, of course he was. Look, this thing was just retarded and made little sense. Johnny Ace is not the least bit entertaining and is one of the worst foils for Cena, ever. He’s not McMahon, and John Cena is damned sure not Austin. This – and the Big Show angle – just proves how bad Ace is and what damage he could cause.

Joshua Stangle: That promo was poorly done. Laurinaitis just humiliated and fired the Big Show, and then gets mocked and verbally crushed by Cena? It was the usual Cena goofy promo with lots of references thrown in to add extra insult just before the ppv where Laurinaitis is supposed to get his comeuppance. Add Ace’s dull and often poorly spoken promos into the mix, and the whole segment was just bad.

My thoughts are that this feud sucks. The match might just be decent. Who knows? They may surprise us. But I don’t care. I’m not remotely emotionally invested.

5. Making Monday Night RAW into a permanent Three Hour show is a bad idea.

Tony Acero: Hells to the yes it’s a bad idea, and not just because I’m not sure I want to recap a three hour show! Have you seen the three hour shows that RAW has put on the last year or so? They’ve been nothing but filler. The writers simply don’t know how to put together a three hour show effectively. A Pay-Per-View is different (theoretically), due to the lack of need for any storyline advancement. Episodic television is different. Aside from this obvious issue, how about overworking the talent that is already overworked? We also have to question the need for another hour of wrestling. I can’t recall the last time I was watching RAW and said to myself, “Gosh I wish they had another hour added on.” No, we ask for the matches to have more time, but that’s to hopefully persuade the cutting of bullshit – such as a grown ass man groveling for far too long. The news just broke, so I’m sure I haven’t given this much thought, but I don’t see one positive aspect of this. These three hour RAWs are damn near chores to get through, and I can almost see the John Cena Comedy Hour actually being an hour now. Even IF they were to add longer matches, I still don’t see this as a positive, because it’s going to hurt the product in the long run. How would this three hour RAW be any different from that thing you want me to shell out damned near $60 for? Why should I give you my money if RAW is three hours and could have just as much wrestling? Who told the office this would be a good idea? Who allowed this?

Editor’s Note: I just got note that the first hour may be more of a pre-show format. I’m not 100% sure that this changes my answer, though, as it sounds like just too much happening in one night. I can’t see them using that extra hour for good things and the way it’s been talked about, it’s not going to be much different than the 3-hour RAWS that we’ve seen before and let me tell ya somethin….they suck.

Michael Uphoff: I don’t think it is as bad an idea as people make it out to be. It can give some time to superstars who don’t normally get time to shine, but also can be a good pre-show to warm up the fans for the actual RAW. That being said, they absolutely have to deliver on the first few three-hour shows or everyone will be all over this. Also, while it is a poor idea, itmakes sense from the business perspective to do this. However, like Josh mentions, there is a risk of burnout with too many of them.

Joshua Stangle: WCW Nitro had three hour shows. Unfortunately, I didn’t watch wrestling enough back then to speak on the quality of those shows. This decision was likely a financial one as it gives more advertising revenue and original programming for USA Network. The first hour will be like a pre show to build up to the actual show. It will have interactive elements supposedly, which will influence the other two hours. I mostly agree with Tony on this one. This is a poor idea. Maybe there will be a silver lining and it will offer more time to Superstars who haven’t gotten enough before. The tag team division could be built back up with some time and effort. It’s just that there will be burnout, especially if the product isn’t that exciting..

6. Are you excited about the new proposed direction of NXT?

Tony Acero: For those of you that are unaware of the little show known as NXT, I don’t blame you. What started off with a bang quickly wimpered into the smallest flame ever. It has its random sparks of greatness, but by and large it hasn’t had all that much success. From TV to the internet, it’s taken the road of Superstars and displays the younger talent in a light that is supposed to accentuate positives but only ends up showing how much alike they all are. Sure, they’ve got some characters developing, but in recapping the show for quite some time, you realize how one-note a lot of their in ring work is. It’s so different recapping NXT than it is RAW, because I can practically do NXT without even looking at the screen. That is not good.

Anyways, the recent news is that they are going to be using a facility in Florida to film, sort of like TNA, and are going to have an influx of talent from FCW to add to the show. With the results of the fiirst few tapings, it looks like we’re getting a few new faces mixed with the current NXT roster. It also appears that there will be no more competitions and no more stupid games. This could be something magical, and may mean that I went from recapping the worst show WWE has to offer to one of the innovative and entertaining shows that they are putting on. Of course, what could – and probably will – happen is that the WWE will care for a week, then let it flounder away to nothingness. I’m going to stay positive, though, and say that seeing new talent and hearing that Dusty Rhodes will be the new GM, having Jim Ross and William Regal on commentary, and the end of what we have known to be NXT for the past couple of years has got me all kinds of excited

Michael Uphoff: I think that the WWE has potential here to really build a show that can showcase the next generation of WWE talent. However, they have to stay committed to the show. They cannot actively stay on board for a few weeks and then let it fall by the wayside. With Jim Ross and William Regal on commentary and Dusty Rhodes as the GM, I don’t think it is likely to happen. I am cautiously optimistic about the new NXT, but it has to remain backed by the WWE for it to succeed and accomplish its mission in producing new talent to keep the WWE going for future generations.

Joshua Stangle: I remember watching the first three seasons of NXT. The first episode still is memorable in my mind with the Daniel Bryan versus Chris Jericho match. As the season progressed, I lost interest. Between the stupid challenges and the poor booking (Daniel Bryan’s losing streak…), the quality of the show went downhill. The best thing that happened from NXT came during the end of RAW in June (2010) with all of the NXT rookies in the ring during a John Cena versus CM Punk match. I felt that the format was worse for new talent than (WWE) ECW.

These changes sound awesome. But they also sound like what (WWE) ECW used to be. A one hour show that showcases new talent, while also having rather good matches with established talent. There is also a really good commentary team (ala Matt Striker and Josh Matthews circa 2008) Maybe they will have an NXT belt, and book champions there like they used to book ECW champions. Is it that obvious that I really liked (WWE) ECW?

Who Drunk My Apple Juice?!