|
Welcome back to the EXCELLENCE IN COLUMN WRITING, as this Mr. Tito franchise that is exclusive to LordsofPain.net / WrestlingHeadlines.com is often imitated and parodied yet stands the test of time. I'm in a great groove right now as both a wrestling fan and an internet writer, thus, I'm here to stay whether you like it or don't like it. So yeah, life is good as Mr. Tito and I've been around for 17 years now. And you click into the link of my columns to see the following outrageous opinions that you have yet to hear anywhere else... But you know what, in a few weeks or months, what I say today will hit you like a ton of bricks as being absolutely correct. Then, the "Tito Echo Syndrome" will kick in and you'll hear this same opinion everywhere. Here we go... This relationship between WWE and the Cable/Satellite sports channel ESPN is a BAD THING. Now, I'm now saying that just to be negative or to be trolling. In my humble opinion, ESPN is making a critical mistake of trying to appease it's short-term issues with a quick ratings solution. Meanwhile, they risk harming their brand long-term giving time to a staged entertainment profession rather than devoting more time to sports on the rise, such as MMA. Meanwhile, the WWE will get dropped HARD by ESPN when they realize their mistake. You watch, some folks within the Disney or ABC Television ranks will become quite critical of ESPN's executives for bringing on the WWE onto their sports network. The termination of the working agreement will be so abrupt and newsworthy that it will HURT the WWE brand in the mainstream media. WWE foolishly believes that appearing on a Sports network will help boost viewership. Did you see that 3rd hour of RAW this week on USA Networks? Under 3 million! Somewhere, Seth Rollins is LAUGHING at his critics (which includes me) and any backstage blame that was aimed towards him since Wrestlemania 31. How on earth did ESPN arrive at this conclusion that they had to begin featuring WWE wrestlers on their network? For one, it could be fully bought and paid for advertising by the WWE. It wouldn't be the first time that an outside company paid to control a segment of time for a popular show. What's so different than the WWE placing a wrestler on SportsCenter compared to other corporations putting product placement in movies or television shows? Not different at all... Possibly wanting to recreate the buzz of Brock Lesnar announcing his WWE re-signing before Wrestlemania 31, the WWE could be paying for this spot. If so, that's good for ESPN because they could use the money... But what I fear for ESPN is that bringing on the WWE is a desperate move. Things aren't going that well for the Entertainment and Sports Programming Network (ESPN). Just this past Summer, Disney, owner of ESPN, revised its 2015 forecast for the revenues generated by ESPN. Cited for the reason was the declining subscriptions of Cable/Satellite which is reducing subscription rates earned by ESPN. On your cable bill, ESPN itself reportedly costs you about $6.00 per month. Thus, if the Cable subscription base declines, that's fewer revenues coming to ESPN's way. Within the past decade, it is estimated that there are 8 million fewer Cable/Satellite subscribers compared to the clockwork growth in the years before. Why? Well, why else would WWE offer a streaming service to replace their Pay Per Views? The younger generation would rather just pay for the Internet and stream stuff off of their Smartphone, Tablet, or even their Video Game/Blu-Ray consoles. Most people are on the go, too to make streaming services that can reach various devices more appealing than a television at home. As you can see by the recent trends, Cable/Satellite providers are trying to reach those devices too and are offering additional streaming services while traditionally Cable channels like HBO are offering streaming solutions. ESPN is still married to the Cable/Satellite model... They have extensive contracts with providers that will keep them away from their own stand alone streaming service. You need a Cable/Satellite subscription in order to stream ESPN legally and there's no way around that. Sling TV, the online cable provider, provides probably the most cost effective way to stream ESPN... But but but, you need to pay for the Internet and probably something strong at that. That's the catch of streaming services... Must have a decent Internet provider and that price has increased the most. Still, ESPN is mostly reliant on Cable/Satellite subscriptions and with that decreasing, it's not just the per subscriber $6 payment but the potential that Cable/Satellite channel advertisement rates are hitting a plateau. ESPN needs the revenues, too... Those NBA, NFL, MLB, and specific Conference deals are not cheap in terms of paying for content. Especially that NFL deal. For getting 1 game per week, and often now a very marginal game by NFL standards, ESPN is paying bigtime to air the only NFL games on Cable/Satellite television. During 2011, according to the New York Times, ESPN signed an extension (had to be 8 years for this math to work out) with the NFL through 2021 for $15.2 Billion which cost ESPN $1.9 billion per year. ESPN pays more annually to air NFL games than NBC, CBS, or FOX. Granted, CBS and FOX air more games but NBC gets the top game of the week on Sunday Nights and only pays $950 million per year to air those games (according to ESPN). ESPN is getting ripped off BAD but at the same time, that is probably the cost of placing the NFL game on Cable these days. Meanwhile, ESPN pays a reported $1.4 million for their deal with the NBA (source) and pays $700 million per year for airing Major League Baseball (MLB). ESPN presently pays $1 billion per year to air Big Ten College football games along with other conferences. Recently, ESPN partnered with the SEC conference to help start up and run their channel. Many, many other content contracts in place at ESPN like airing the first 2 rounds of the Masters golfing event. Expensive! Speaking of the Big Ten contract, it's set to expire soon... Recent cost concerns at Disney and the legitimate rise of competition on Sports Channels may cause tough choices for ESPN. Within the last 2 years alone, CBS, NBC, and FOX have become increasingly serious about their Sports Channels and there are reports that one of those channels will aggressively go after that Big Ten contract. While that may cause a Winner's Curse situation where one of those sports channels overpays for a product, the Big Ten conference is one of the most famous in the nation. That's potentially lost viewership for ESPN and could threaten their $6 rate forced on Cable providers. Forecast reductions, lost viewership, real threats from competition... This has caused ESPN to flip on its cost-cutting mode. Reportedly, an internal memo at ESPN suggested that 300 employees or 4% of its workforce would occur. This same CNN article suggested that Disney wanted ESPN to significantly reduce its budget by $100 million during 2016 and $250 million during 2017! Holy cow... On top of that, ESPN is also losing employment by choice. Top talent are exiting the company probably in anticipation of ESPN's reduction in size for the next few years. Top ESPN Radio host, Colin Cowherd, turned down a good deal to return to ESPN to join FOX Sports One. So many jobs out there for sportscasters and personalities... NBC, FOX, CBS, MLB, NHL, Golf, HBO, and any Big College Conference channels. Many online outlets, too, like Yahoo! Sports. So many places to go and their gain in talent from former ESPN personalities only strengthens the competition. ESPN has peaked has real downside threats... So, in order to sustain viewership and to replenish viewership lost, that's when gimmicks like bringing on WWE talent begins. Because ESPN watches Cable ratings closely, they are probably exposed to WWE viewership numbers often. In addition, ESPN actually has a few former WWE employees in Jonathan Coachman and Todd Grisham probably talking up the WWE operation internally. With some success of Brock Lesnar's pre-Wrestlemania 31 coverage and the SummerSlam 2015 live reports, ESPN probably thought that the WWE could present them with a bump in the ratings. After all, over 3 million fans (gulp) still watch WWE every week on Monday Nights and the WWE Network has over 1 million domestic subscribers. Sounds great on paper? Right? Great publicity for the WWE to get mainstream publicity... Right? WRONG... So far, the ESPN publicity isn't putting more eyeballs on WWE programming. RAW remains under 3.5 million viewers and for this past week, the 3rd hour broke 3 million viewers. Mind you, it was just for the opening rounds of a WWE Title tournament... The ironic thing is that ESPN has direct competition with RAW in the form of NFL's Monday Night Football yet ESPN is featuring WWE wrestlers just days later. Oops. But wrestling is staged athletic entertainment. I say that in confidence because I enjoy watching that staged athletic entertainment and am not offended by it. ESPN, however, features legitimate athletic competition with real, unscripted outcomes to games and events. By giving credibility and coverage to something scripted, ESPN opens themselves up to be mocked by other sports media and their 24/7 sports channel competition. Furthermore, it paints an unnecessary target on ESPN's back and may cause other sports leagues to stay away. With the NFL and NBA being accused of fixing games by conspiracy theorists and those highly critical of officiating, the last thing those leagues want is coverage alongside pro wrestling on the same network. ESPN may see reduced access by those leagues because ESPN has become the channel that considers WWE as a legitimate sport (or appears to be considering). There's a reason why ESPN stopped airing pro wrestling during the first half of the 1990's as more 24/7 sports content became readily available. That's Disney steps in and really drops the hammer. From the lost talent, peaked viewership, and the downside trends against ESPN, I believe that ESPN's president John Skipper will either have his job questioned or be told by Disney to "fix" ESPN and revert it back to a traditional sports channel. Disney is a corporation that pays attention to details and hates to spread itself thin in terms of identity. When the Disney executives start questioning the ESPN product, that's when the hammer falls HARD on the WWE. Suddenly, WWE won't even get a mention on ESPN and media outlets will pounce. When will that happen? I would call it either during February/March when year-end Disney financials are reported or following the 1st quarter. Disney is expecting HUGE returns on the new Star Wars film and will definitely boast about the absurd revenues that will bring. However, within that 10-K annual report or 10-Q 1st quarter report will be a blurb about ESPN's numbers. That's when the hammer falls. ESPN might ride the wave through Wrestlemania 32 but then the executives at Disney calls upon ESPN to eliminate WWE coverage because of the mockery covering a scripted form of entertainment brings. Hurts ESPN because of credibility and mockery while it hurts WWE to be abruptly dropped and NEVER taken seriously by a sports media outlet again. That's why this WWE and ESPN deal is BAD BAD BAD! ESPN is attempting to plug a short-term viewership concern with a popular form of entertainment that doesn't normally air on its channel. Meanwhile, WWE has survived for years without mainstream sports coverage and has been often marginalized by that same media. Would ESPN be ready to apologize for its aggressive reporting against the WWE for the Chris Benoit incident or wrestler deaths due to prolonged drug use? If ESPN is looking for newer avenues to boost audiences, give Mixed Martial Arts increased coverage. ESPN only steps up their MMA game when Ronda Rousey is fighting or when the stars align perfectly to hype up another event to prompt ESPN to cover it. Additionally, ESPN is still holding onto the hope that Boxing is still relevant... For the 1 shining example of Mayweather vs. Pacquiao, the sport is in rapid decline as a bigtime drawing sport. And in my opinion, that fight hurt the sport with its high price tag and not being a flashy fight. ESPN is very hesitant to cover Ultimate Fighting Championship because of its deal with FOX. OK, but doesn't FOX also cover many other sports that ESPN features as a lead on their shows? Sure, UFC is a FOX exclusive (whereas NFL and MLB are not), but if MMA is increasing interest with younger demographics that can increase viewership for your SportsCenter shows, why not increase coverage of UFC events? The WWE does NOT need sports media outlets like ESPN or other channels. Did the WWE receive regular coverage during the Attitude Era when viewership was peaking well above 7 million viewers every week? Nope... The show, itself, caused people to tune in. Ditto with WCW during 1996-1997. WWE and WCW created the pop culture with their amazing content that forced stars from NFL, NHL, MLB, NBA, etc. to want to imitate their favorite wrestlers the NWO and DX stables (wear their merchandise, too!) or to imitate the Rock or Steve Austin when possible. When sports teams win Championships, whose title belts do you see on television? You see WWE replica belts! WWE didn't have to pay or convince anyone to wear those! Those pro athletes decided to do that on their own!!! Ditto for the College Basketball fans at the Ohio State vs. Michigan State game during early 2014. Their massive "YES!" chants during the halftime of that game actually helped convince WWE Creative to change their booking on Daniel Bryan and eventually make Wrestlemania 30 about Daniel Bryan becoming WWE Champion. ESPN and WWE should have nothing to do with each other other than fun pop culture references when the timing is right. ESPN covers competitive sports and WWE is an entertainment company. ========================================= RAW is HULU - Review Missed the Cut X - Zeb Colter/Alberto Del Rio segment X - Backstage interview with Paige and Renee Young X - Naomi vs. Natalya X - Usos/Neville vs. New Day Ah... How dare the WWE deny my New Day fix! FINGER OF SHAME to the WWE and Hulu for that! I seriously just roll my eyes when I hear the God-awful Triple H "Bow Down to the Game" theme song that starts off any edition of RAW. In other words, I roll my eyes weekly... Nice "THANK YOU ROLLINS" chant by England, even if it wasn't in sync. It's the thought that counts! Officially, HHH announces the vacating of the WWE Title due to Seth Rollins's injury. Since Roman Reigns won the #1 contender tournament a few weeks ago, Triple H calls him to the ring. That makes sense... One could argue that Reigns should become WWE Champion via forfeit by Seth Rollins, but oh well. Logic escapes WWE often. Triple H cuts a scathing promo on Reigns that tears him down, brings him back up, and then hints at Reigns joining the Authority to become Triple H's "man". LOL @ Roman Reigns saying "I've never taken a handout". Ha ha ha... He's a product of WWE Creative giving him WWE Title shot after WWE Title shot. Because Reigns told HHH to "shove it", he's part of the WWE Title tournament now. Yep, that #1 contendership show was just flushed down the drain. Big Show vs. Roman Reigns was your first tournament match which instantly gave me low expectations due to previous encounters of failing to understand what selling and psychology were. Same match again, although Roman is showing a bit more energy now as a wrestler. He is improving... WWE Title ready? Not yet, although the WWE roster is thinning enough to make him warrart consideration. I'm LOVING these Kane/Undertaker highlight packages... Good stuff! Titus O'Neil vs. Kevin Owens is up next. I'm with my buddy Dave (@FFFightLeague) on Titus. Could have been a potential star. Big guy, loud personality, and seems to have fun as a babyface wrestler to help him draw. Not a bad wrestler, too... However, WWE Creative damaged him with that heel turn. He's just lost on the WWE roster now, including tonight by losing to Owens in his WWE Title tournament match. Not a bad match, but not much time given to it to develop any chemistry at all. Next up is Paige vs. Becky Lynch as I predicted this to be a Hulu cut, but I was wrong... Cool. Paige has a badass finisher, by the way, as shown by the replays of Paige turning on PCB last week. I am enjoying the heel character of Paige. This was mostly a storyline driven match as the ending had Paige locking in the "PTO" submission on Becky on the announcer's table to bait Charlotte into coming out. England fans gave Charlotte loud boos when she came out to save the day! Miz vs. Dolph Ziggler was up next. Both of these guys have impressed me with their chemistry together in the past, so let's see how this goes. Miz just gave Ziggler a DDT to his leg. Huh? How does that hurt? Some good back and forth and the match ended with a beautiful superkick by Ziggler. Nice! I could buy Ziggler as WWE Champion compared to the rest of the field... Wade Barrett was talking trash to Wayne Rooney during the break... Wade Barrett vs. Sheamus was up next for the WWE Title Tournament. Cesaro, as indicated by the signs, has his own "Cesaro Section" in the crowd which happens to be the TV angle. Nice. Yet another indication that people LOVE Cesaro. If only the WWE heard those cheers and cared enough to push him. By the way, Michael Cole suggested we'll see tournament matches next week on RAW so that means we'll see the Final Four and the Championship matches (3 total) at Survivor Series. That makes sense, particularly when you have other things planned that would require time (Kane/Undertaker & ?? vs. Wyatts, however that match may end up). Match ended with Wayne Rooney using slapping Wade Barrett to distract Sheamus enough to lose. Not a bad match, but like much of tonight, time constraints restrict any match from developing. Dean Ambrose vs. Tyler Breeze was up next and Summer Rae is ready to burst out of her blue shirt. You can tell that Vince McMahon/Kevin Dunn love Tyler Breeze based on the camera angles and high production given to his entrance. Come on, WWE, I'm on Hulu time here. You barely gave his opponent, Dean Ambrose, much time for his entrance this week. OK match... Both guys haven't worked together so the chemistry wasn't there on an emotional level but there weren't any flaws with the in-ring match. Decent WWE debut for Breeze and a good win for Ambrose. Seems like this tournament is pretty much rigged with the exception of Cesaro/Sheamus where I expected Sheamus to win. Ending segment had Wyatt Family coming out to "celebrate the spirits of Kane and the Undertaker". Lots of typical Bray Wyatt stuff here, not saying it's bad, but the same old same old from him on the mic. And then a massive Kane/Undertaker video package instantly hits the Titantron. Who is controlling Dunn's production truck tonight? I'm happy for the England fans as they get to see the Undertaker, live and in person... And they popped HUGE for him and Kane when they arrived. I am getting some chills down my spine in seeing Kane and Undertaker together again. Pretty cool... Undertaker is tanned and looking like a badass tonight. Before Kane/Undertaker get theirs, the other 3 Wyatts arrive. After fending off the other 3 Wyatts, Kane/Undertaker get their revenge on Bray Wyatt with a double chokeslam for him. OK, so why bother with Survivor Series if 2 guys are able to kick the asses of 4 people? LAST WORD: Not a bad show but I'm going to ease up on any criticisms due to how quickly this show had to be prepared due to Seth Rollins dropping the title due to injury. Very difficult time now for WWE... But, this WWE Title tournament is filled with upper midcarders at best. WWE bench is very thin and it shouldn't be. Guys like Ambrose, Cesaro, and Ziggler should be your next off the bench to main event yet those 3 are damaged properties thanks to WWE Creative. Didn't like the ending to Undertaker/Kane vs. Wyatts... Again, why have the match if 2 can beat up 4 people? B- for this week's show. ========================================= PHAT QUESTIONS Question #1: Did this ACL injury "save" Seth Rollins's career? That's a ridiculous question, for one... But in my opinion, what you see is what you get with Seth Rollins. Possibly the best in-ring athlete in the WWE today. If you watch his entire 2015 Pay Per View collection of matches, he's amazing... However, if you see his storylines and in-ring promos on RAW, he's very marginal. Combine that with stupid ideas presented by the WWE Creative, it's a losing formula for both Rollins and the WWE. In-ring ability, alone, doesn't draw. You have to have charisma, look, and personality along with the in-ring ability to get over. That's why Roman Reigns would fail now as well and he only has 1 of the 4 wrestler traits. WWE Creative owns more of the blame, though. They should have protected Seth Rollins and gave him a fresh stable of wrestlers to surround him. Instead, he had J&J Security (2 former smaller wrestlers) and Corporate Kane. I would have unloaded some NXT talent and in particular, use Baron Corbin in a bodyguard like role. ---------------------------------- Question #2: Will WWE and 2K Sports make games for the upcoming Nintendo NX system? See, you advertise yourself as a WWE and Nintendo fan and you constantly get questions on both... If and only if the Nintendo NX takes off and changes the industry. Problem with any Nintendo system is that Third Party Games do NOT sell well and that's been a consistent trend since the Super Nintendo. Seriously... The Nintendo 64 scared off many companies and by the GameCube, Third Party producers had Playstation and Xbox as competitors. The NX would have to change gaming and have absurd console sales to merit 2K considering placing any WWE games on the new Nintendo system. Even if the NX does well, that will be due to some innovative gaming gimmick hooking in different gamers or everyone just playing Nintendo First Party games. Like me... I have no interest in playing 2K games but on my Nintendo systems, I'm snorting lines of Mario and Zelda games. That's the way it is... ----------------------------------- Question #3: Would you buy WWE Stock as of right now? Disclaimer - what I write is for entertainment purposes and anyone who acts upon the advice of this column does so at their own risk. Stock closed at $17.00 today, 11/10/15. Nah, I wouldn't buy. Sure, it has a 52 week range of the price peaking at $23.63 per share, but to me, I've seen the WWE Stock being relatively capped at $20.00 per share at most. The blips above have been WWE Network induced or just the usual low interest rate Federal Reserve money pumping up all stocks. I would worry about the lower RAW ratings as we head into 2016 when Smackdown also joins USA Network. There is real potential that the deal with Comcast/USA Networks goes South if RAW viewership declines and Smackdown doesn't gain traction on USA Networks. HOWEVER, I'm willing to bet that Wrestlemania 32 does amazing business and could boost everything of the WWE's in the upcoming months. Right now, I'm watching the Federal Reserve closely for any interest rate changes. If the Fed decides to raise rates, stock prices will fluctuate between each rate decision. That could make it difficult in deciding if/when to buy WWE stock. Personally, I don't like the stock because it's too dependent on public relations and forecasts. All it takes is a big situation like Benoit or a missed forecast, like the new Comcast/USA Networks deal, to tank the WWE stock. I personally don't like those stocks and speculating stocks based on price is HARD... You need to have a better long-term commitment to stocks than trying to make a quick gain. Bear in mind, bigger banks are trading based on computer algorithms and that's you're facing on the market for a quick buck. ========================================= THE LAST WORD Watching NXT recently, I was completely baffled by seeing Eva Marie wrestle. Sure, she looks amazing... You cannot deny her beauty no matter how synthetic it may be. But she is wrestling as if she has 2 left feet. Her opponent on last week's show, Marley, did her best to sell but it wasn't just the wrestling moves. It was the lack of in-ring charisma, bad attitude, and the psychology that were lacking. Some people just weren't born to put on a scripted and convincing form of athletic competition. Yet, that's the pet project of Vince McMahon and Kevin Dunn, the horndog executives of the WWE who are still stuck in "Sable Mode" from the late 1990's. To them, they are constantly trying to promote the "next Sable" who was a beautiful lady that captivated WWE audiences for a brief period of time and received outside attention based on her looks. Mind you, Sable got big during 1997-1999 when there weren't as many options to view scantily clad females on live television or through other media. Since Sable, WWE has tried multiple options such as Debra, Torrie Wilson, Stacy Kiebler, Maryse, Kelly Kelly, Eve Torres, and more recently, Nikki Bella. Nikki Bella and Eva Marie both star on WWE's E! Network show WWE Total Divas which draws around 1,000,000 viewers per show. To Vince and Dunn, that's "success" even if the show's high cost of production causes it to run at a loss. Meanwhile, RAW's viewership continues to sink since Total Divas began... So, as a father, I watch various animated films with my kids and 2 recent films in particular caught my eye in terms of quality and the new trend that they are pushing. Specifically, I'm talking about Disney's Frozen and Inside Out (Pixar). Both were superior animated films and rank up there as all-time greats... But the particular themes and leading characters pushed are greatly appealing to a specific demographic: girls Disney is making money hand over fist on these 2 recent films with real earnings potential that can last for years. Inside Out is just starting, but you cannot avoid Frozen stuff. Merchandise, songs, and a big sequel on the way. Frozen's leading characters were both female and very strong willed ones at that. In previous films, they were princesses who needed to be saved by a lead male character or something about love. Frozen was much more and it appealed to the younger girl demographic. Ditto with Inside Out which features living emotions inside of a younger girl's head. It deals with her problems in life through the adventures of the 5 emotions running the show in her head. Very appealing to younger girls and this arrives year after year of Disney's shortcomings pushing their Princess lines of merchandise. OK, where am I going with this ending rant? WWE has this wrestler named Bayley who is currently the NXT Divas Champion. It is a proven fact that her merchandise, which has fewer items sold online than the Bellas, outsells the Bella Twins. What? I thought they were the princesses of Total Divas? Considering that Bayley can ONLY be seen on NXT which airs exclusively on WWE and the Bellas can be seen on Cable/Satellite channels RAW, Smackdown, and Total Divas, that's remarkable. Her appeal, as seen by the fans in attendance cheering her on and being emotionally engaged, is by that same younger female audience described above with Frozen/Inside Out... But we're missing something here... Should WWE market directly to younger girls? Well, that's the trick. These entertainment options like Frozen, Inside Out, and other movies like the Hunger Games, Twilight, etc. are appealing to them but also compels interest from their FATHERS. Males in their 30's were rabid WWE/WCW/ECW fans during the the late 1990's and early 2000's but have probably stepped away from pro wrestling once responsibilities (getting married, getting a house, having kids, new job) increase. It did for me... Why else would I briefly walk away from being Mr. Tito from 2006-2009 which also included almost no viewership of wrestling during that time as well? But if someone comes along like Bayley that causes a younger female fan to want to tune into NXT each and every week, that links the daughter to the father for a WWE viewership bond. WWE needs to seek that. In some ways, WWE knows that they need this female audience... Why else would you see so much Pink during October to raise awareness to breast cancer? Why else would the WWE rush Sasha Banks, Charlotte, and Becky Lynch to the main WWE roster following the United States Women's World Cup success? Seriously, and I fully admit being wrong on this one, WWE rushed those ladies to the main roster without much hype and in a pretty careless manner. But then, they had to sell for Vince/Dunn's handpicked Barbie Doll of the moment, Nikki Bella. Did you see how BAD those Charlotte matches have been? Nikki Bella dominated much of those matches with Charlotte's legitimate in-ring ability being hamstrung by the booking of the match. Charlotte is just not working as Divas Champion. Meanwhile, WWE has plans for Eva Marie to become NXT Champion and use that as a springboard into the WWE. How is that appealing to any younger female fan that the WWE wants to convert into a fan? Bayley is the answer and is the exact female babyface superstar that the WWE has been waiting for. Better yet, through her battles with her on NXT, they have a ready made foil or heel counterpart named Sasha Banks. Did you not see how AMAZING their last 2 matches were at the past 2 Takeover events? Why can't we see one of their matches on a WWE Pay Per View? Last time I checked, didn't Stephanie McMahon and Triple H produce 3 daughters? And wouldn't they be Vince McMahon's granddaughters? Why doesn't Vince ask them who is more appealing? The likes of Nikki Bella and Eva Marie or someone more real and naturally appealing as a female to females like Bayley. I bet that they find Bayley to be cooler... The beauty is that the WWE can still have the "best of both worlds". Eva Marie doesn't have to wrestle. Men find her stunning so why risk that due to injury? I see Lana getting over and she has yet to wrestle in the WWE. The famous Sable wrestled but not seriously... She got more over by just looking great and busting out the phrase "for the women who want to be me and the men who came to see me". The Bellas get criticized more when they wrestle and when they don't wrestle. Most wrestling fans have no problem with Total Divas but they have a bigger problem with enduring 1 year of Nikki Bella being Divas Champion and BARELY defending that title. WWE is about to repeat those failed Nikki Bella expectations with Eva Marie. But they can avoid that... Recognize the greatness of Bayley and push her to the moon (along with Sasha Banks). SO JUST CHILL... 'TIL THE NEXT EPISODE! Comments and feedback are welcome. Follow and Tweet me @titowrestling or login in below to post comments. © Mr. Tito and LordsofPain.net/WrestlingHeadlines.com - 1998-2015
|
