UFC 255

This weekend, two championship bouts will headline a UFC pay-per-view event, along with a legend on the card as well, but you wouldn't know it. The promotional machine and more importantly, any buzz ahead of showtime is noticeably absent. Both Flyweight champions, Deiveson Figueiredo and Valentina Shevchenko will defend their belts respectively against competent contenders, but even with UFC titles on the line, this card isn't garnering much chatter. Mauricio "Shogun" Rua is also scheduled for a bout just a few months after a tenacious fight about Antonio Rogerio Nogueira, but even the former Light Heavyweight champion hasn't sparked much interest for this pay-per-view.

The reasons for this lack of buzz around a fight card with two belts on the line exposes a glaring error within not only the structure of the UFC business model, but also the weight divisions.

If you remember, UFC president, Dana White had originally planned to end the Flyweight division until the now-retired Henry Cejudo rescued it from extinction. After Cejudo vacated the 125 LBS belt to focus on the Bantam weight championship, Figueiredo defeated Joseph Benavidez to win it and then again to successfully defend. However, the break in the linage of the championship didn't allow for a new star to be made in the Flyweight division. In truth, the entire concept of a 125 LBS weight class might've been too overzealous for the promotion, simply because there isn't as much depth at that weight and by nature, the division doesn't lend itself to dynamic finishes of fights. As dominate as Demetrius Johnson was during his heyday in the UFC, he had a slew of one-sided decision victories, and the bouts just weren't competitive. That's not to say that Johnson didn't fight good competition because he did, but there are only so many top quality competitors available at 125, and Johnson was able to use his speed to win most bouts on the score cards. Basically, Johnson's fights were predictable and from a promotional standpoint, there's not much to market to the causal fans because the result wasn't a selling point and often there wasn't a highlight reel knockout. Is this assessment unfair to the stellar skills of "Mighty Mouse?" Absolutely, but the harsh reality is, the purist that can appreciate Johnson's ability aren't the target audience for the UFC. 

As I've said before, the UFC is in the entertainment business as much, if not more so as they are in the fight business.

For whatever reason, Demetrius Johnson didn't translate to dollars. Figueiredo, 19-1 on his MMA record, is a well-rounded fighter that has striking and submission skills, but the vast majority of his three-year tenure in the company has been either on the prelims or the under card of some of the smaller events. This is the problem when the UFC churns out almost weekly fight cards to satisfy the ESPN deal, even prospects that have a lot of talent sometimes get lost in the shuffle of the dozens of fights that might take place within a month. Quite simply, Figueiredo hasn't truly had a chance to get himself established as a potential star so as of now, the fan base doesn't have much of a reason to invest $70 to see him fight. This isn't a jab against Figueiredo, but he went literally from prelim bouts to championship fights so there wasn't the opportunity for the fans to follow his journey. Granted, this is a headline spot and obviously, it's a chance for him to showcase his ability, but that will do nothing for the UFC 255 buy rate.

Figueiredo was scheduled to defend against former Bantam weight champion, Cody Grabrant, who rebounded from a three-fight skid with a victory this past June, but was sidelined with an injury. Alex Perez, a grappler even less known than the champion, steps in for the main event. I can't emphasize this enough, this isn't meant as a knock against either athlete, but for the entire existence of the Flyweight division, it's been presented as a secondary priority for the UFC so there's just not a reason for the fans to invest in this championship fight. Figueiredo is currently favored almost 3 to 1 to retain the belt.

On the flip side,Valentina Shevchenko is on a five-fight win streak ahead of this title defense. With a record of 19-3, two of those defeats via decision against Amanda Nunes, who is regarded by many as the best female fighter in the sport today, the kick boxer has made a name for herself with tremendous striking and judo skills. Her grappling ability allows her to be a well-rounded fighter, and considering that both of her losses to Amanda Nunes were via decision, with one of them a split decision on the score cards, it proves that only elite opponents have defeated her. The only other loss on her record was to Liz Carmouche via doctor stoppage because of a cut early over a decade ago. Shevchenko beat the extremely talented Joanna Jędrzejczyk to capture the flyweight belt almost two years ago and seems to be in the prime of her career.

The challenger Jennifer Maia garnered a record of 18-6-1, with a 3-2 UFC record. She won a unanimous decision this past August and strung together winning streaks at various points throughout her tenure in MMA. Still, the 32-year-old doesn't have the name value or the momentum to bring to this fight to create any intrigue about the result. Sure, Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu black belt could secure a submission to get the surprise victory, but does anyone think that's going to happen? The odd makers say no because Maia is an astounding 16 to 1 underdog to win the championship. On the surface, this is nothing more than a showcase fight for Vaelentina, but is that enough to justify the $70 price tag to watch the show?

The UFC has doubled in price on pay-per-view in the past 15 years, and if they can get ESPN to pay for the rights to broadcast events, as well as fans to pay for them then you can't blame the company for trying to get the most revenue they can from each show. At the same time, if a PPV is going to $70, you would think that there would be a specific standard of quality associated with it, and unfortunately, a title fight for a division that was nearly folded completely and a Shevchenko exhibition just doesn't seem like it's on par for it. Maybe this is a domino effect of running so many cards within a relatively short span and there aren't as many fighters available to take spots on the PPV card, but it will definitely be interesting to see the UFC 225 buy rate.

The WWE stock

I penned an article earlier this week about the lack of "must see" television within the WWE product, mostly because Drew McIntyre's run as WWE champion was interrupted for a three-week stint by Randy Orton that was essentially meaningless within the grand scheme of things. Orton is already established and over as much as he's going to be in his career. Instead of Drew potentially set up for an angle that leads to a big match down the road where he has a year long title reign at stake, that scenario was sacrificed for a three-week title reign that made no progress for storylines. As mentioned, if a viewer skipped a month of Raw, what did they really miss? Drew is the champion and still involved in a feud with Orton. During the previous article, I explained that too often, WWE uses wrestlers and storylines like interchangeable parts and thus often times the results of specific matches don't have any impact on the overall direction of the brands. The 50/50 booking aspect, something that the Drew/Orton exchange is a prime example of, created a level of mediocrity around the product. With the exception of very few on the roster, individual performers aren't put in a position where they could potentially affect the numbers since most wrestlers are kept at relatively the same level. Instead of making legitimate money-drawing stars, the WWE brand is promoted as the selling point, but there's a ceiling for that because there's not a direct connection between the wrestlers on screen and the audience, which is why WWE business plateaued at various points in the past few years.

It's very disappointing because as a fan of professional wrestling, you want to hope for the best product possible. There are so many thrilling moments and truly good things that can come from the spectacle of sports entertainment, but why have things become such a paint-by-numbers product?

I attempted to figure this out, and thought back to a grainy promo I found on Youtube over a decade ago where the late great, "Rowdy" Roddy Piper had the mic to hype an upcoming tag team title cage match with his tag partner Rick Martel against The Sheepherders, the wild pair of New Zealand grapplers years before they worked a comedy gimmick in the WWF. As Piper ranted, he smashed a legitimate beer bottle over his head and with blood streaming down his face proclaimed, "getting this title in the cage is going to make $45,000 difference in my annual earnings, brother!"

Bingo! That's the point, Roddy gave the fans the reason they had to be at the arena to see this cage match and he emphasized its importance. He claimed there was an extra $45,000 on the line for him if he could wrestle as one of the tag team champions, and something as simple as financial security is something the audience can identify with for the narrative of a storyline. Plus, if "Rowdy" Roddy was willing to smash a bottle of his head and bleed just to prove a point, what was he going to do when he had the villains in the cage with the World Tag Team titles on the line?

Granted, it's a different time, but the point is, when Drew can win the belt back within three weeks, should the fans really be concerned if he loses it again? Furthermore, should they be emotionally invested the next time the title is on the line? If he can win it back in three weeks, what's the point of the audience trying to rally around him for victory? More specifically, where's the heat for the heel that beats him? It's basically, "don't worry about it, Drew will win it back"

As I've written many times before, the emotional investment from the audience, even today, is still the key to drawing money. The problem of today is that WWE brass uses the emotional investment associated more with the nostalgia from the stars of the past than to present storylines that can allow the current roster to connect with the fans. Perhaps, some of the key mistakes made at critical times of the past decade have come back to bite the company in some form or fashion. CM Punk wasn't the next Stone Cold, but he made pro wrestling a part of the main stream discussion for the first time in years and within a month or two, he was pinned by Triple H to squash the momentum. Despite the injuries, Daniel Bryan should've been given the chance be the top guy in the company way before the audience taking over shows forced the writing team to take the product in that direction. Maybe if a few key guys got the chance to truly run with the spot as the top star, the ratings wouldn't have steadily declined the past few years.

Again, I ask myself, why isn't more invested into individual stars to allow for a broader draw to the general audience? For example, not everyone that started to watch pro wrestling in 1998 was a diehard wrestling fan, but they certainly became fans of certain stars. A lot of Stone Cold Steve Austin fans simply quit watching when he didn't wrestle on Monday nights.

As I said, the WWE brand is promoted as the draw, not specific stars. There are pros and cons to that, if a wrestler gets hurt, the writing team can plug someone else into that spot rather seamlessly and the shows continue without much inconvenience. Also, it gives the company more power because there's usually not one competitor with enough star to really shift the dynamic of the company. If there's a contract dispute and someone would leave the company, it doesn't have as much of a dent in the overall production. The flip side is the plateaued level discussed prior to this since there's only a specific group of people that will follow the WWE brand regardless of the wrestlers pushed on TV.

I searched my mind for an answer about why are things so bland. There was a title change on Raw, a very rare occasion, but the circumstances around it with the three-week reign take a lot of the sizzle away from it. There's a generic formula with the 50/50 booking element so there just isn't much at stake with the vast majority of WWE storylines. As complex as the subject might be with the numerous parts that fuel the WWE machine and the multiple points the company has to cover within the context of its product, the answer is rather simple.

The global publicly-traded company serves its stockholders ahead of its fans. From purely a business prospective, that's a very wise decision, at least for the moment. Keep in mind, the WWE landed its mega TV deals with USA and Fox that ensured them record-setting profits for the next five years because of the dynamics within the TV business, not necessarily because of a demand for more pro wrestling content. In order to satisfy those hefty contracts and to continue to tout the major profits they bring, the WWE machine continues to churn out countless hours of content. It's quite literally the quantity, not that quality that has allowed WWE brass to discuss the profit of the $2.4 billion TV contracts during conference calls. The easiest example is that Raw became a three-hour show because USA was willing to pay for a third hour, but the effect was a noticeable dip in quality because it's much more difficult to produce an extra hour of solid content that will retain the audience. WWE management continues it's usual approach because it's a steady path that keeps them on track to make the major TV money. The flip side is, while this cookie-cutter approach to the product maintains status quo for now in terms of profitability, it's also eroding the core audience. Does anyone really think the company will get another billion dollar contract for Raw when the current USA contract expires in a few years? All of this is done to keep the stockholders there, but is that really the same demographic that follows the product? The bottom line is, how many wrestling fans are corporate investors?

At some point, the WWE's corporate approach of the same play book is going to come back to bite them. They don't take any truly new chances with the direction of the promotion because they don't want to rock the boat or sour potential shareholders. It's much more typical sports entertainment to present Roman Reigns  as the top star than CM Punk  or Daniel Bryan. The fact that Reigns had to turn heel should be proof that the generic "WWE wrestler" hype that might draw the shareholders because of the numbers associated with Wrestlemania doesn't connect with the actual WWE audience. Don't get me wrong, the WWE is very successful from a business perspective, but it's very possible that the decisions to maximize the profit from the stock price now will be the reason the audience declines in the future.

Drew McIntyre wins the title

 Last night on Raw, Drew McIntyre beat Randy Orton to win the WWE championship, and it doesn't matter.

I say this because Orton, who can put his performances into the next gear when he wants to, just beat Drew three weeks ago to win the title at the HIAC pay-per-view, ending his six month reign as champion, a run that fans were never in the building for because of the restrictions of the pandemic. In truth, there's no way to gauge how over Drew is or isn't as champion because a live crowd hasn't been given the chance to react to him, and ratings are sluggish because of the pandemic era, not necessarily because of who is champion. Still, when Drew dropped the belt without ever appearing in front of a live audience as champion, it halted some of his momentum and if nothing else, created a pause in what could've been an extended title run that could've been referenced later to help tout his credentials when a crowd can return to WWE events.

The bottom line is, what was actually accomplished with Orton winning the belt for three weeks?

This summarizes why the WWE product in general has been very bland the past few years because the results of matches and even entire feuds rarely impact the direction or progress of the company. Other than adding another belt to Orton's resume, which isn't nearly as important as it would've been in years past, what effect did Orton as champion for three weeks have on the product? The ratings didn't improve, he's still at the same level in terms of star power, and it's not as though it was used for anything other than switching the title just to say that there was a title switch at the pay-per-view. Don't get me wrong, Orton has star power, but he's basically as over as he's going to be for the rest of his career so what benefit did another title reign, especially for three weeks provide him or the company?

This is a major example of a problem that can be seen across WWE programming. Too often, there's no consequence to the storylines and thus it's very rare that anything is "must see" for viewers. How often could a view skip a month of Raw and not really miss any key progress in the show? The Retribution angle is another example of the lack of meaningful storylines within the WWE product. This reveal was built up for months, and not only was the payoff a let down, but in a matter of weeks Bray Wyatt beat down the entire stable on Raw before Bobby Lashley squashed Slap Jack on pay-per-view. Why should the viewers invest the time into the Retribution stable? The entire narrative was supposed to be some attempted take over of the promotion, but what is the sum total of the storyline? It's a bunch of mid-card wrestlers in silly masks that didn't accomplish anything of any importance on television.

Now, consider how many times angles that were given substantial time on TV only to fall flat. If I had to guess, and this is only a guess, I'd say it must be a total lack of any long-term planning for the direction of the product. You hear the rumors online of Vince McMahon deciding that a show should be rewritten just hours before a taping starts, but most of the time you have to take that with a grain a salt because it's usually just from the online rumor mill. However, the decision for Drew to drop the belt at HIAC only to win it before Survivor Series suggest that it was only booked to make the PPV something more than just a gimmick show.

Speaking of which, why exactly should Survivor Series be used as a champion vs. champion event? Granted, Roman Reigns is doing the best work of his career as a heel, but is there really a demand for Roman vs. Drew? This will sound too pessimistic, but the attempt to promote any type of "Raw vs. Smackdown" narrative as a selling point for Survivor Series is silly. It's not as though each show has exclusive fans, but rather that people will watch the shows that they find worthwhile or have less competition for other programming that night. For example, the Raw number can be affected by Monday Night Football depending on what teams are playing, but it's not like there are "Smackdown fans" that will only watch the show on Friday night. The entire brand vs. brand concept seems like an excuse for lazy booking instead of storylines that would have more depth to them.

So, if Raw wins more matches at Survivor Series than Smackdown, does that mean that more fans will watch Monday and less people will watch Friday? That's very doubtful, and that ultimately goes back to the previous point that very few angles on the shows have a major consequence to the direction of the brands. If the results of matches don't have a major effect on the path of the company then what's the audience missing if they don't tune in to see who wins?

It's a more drastic example, but when Stone Cold beat Shawn Micheals, it was a meaningful result to the company. When Mick Foley beat The Rock in 1999, it planted the seeds to build eventually build The Rock as a heel with the infamous Royal Rumble match to lead to the Wrestlemania 15 match against Austin. When Randy Orton defeated Cactus Jack in 2004, it let the audience know that Orton reached a new level as a star. There are numerous examples, but the bottom line is, the results of storylines must be more than just a reason to churn out more content for the WWE machine. Quite simply, if a viewer didn't watch any of the WWE product in the past month, when they stopped watching, Drew was the champion and involved in a feud with Orton and The Fiend. So, when they tune in again, nothing really changed or progressed, which basically renders Orton's brief title reign useless.

If the point of all of this was to get to Drew vs. Roman at Survivor Series then the exact same destination could've been accomplished without halting McIntyre's momentum if he didn't lose the title to Orton. Recently, Triple H claimed that McIntyre vs. Reigns could be comparable to Hogan/Flair or The Rock/Stone Cold. First and most importantly, it's completely unfair for Triple H to make that comparison because those stars had big runs when pro wrestling was a part of pop culture. Plus, very few within the industry could reach that level, and as talented as both are, nobody has claimed that Drew or Roman will rank among the biggest stars in the history of the industry after their career are finished. No, Drew and Roman won't be as popular or as accomplished as The Rock, Steve Austin, or Ric Flair.

In fact, if that was even close to being possible, you'd expect their champion vs. champion match to garner a major boost in WWE Network subscriptions, but that probably won't happen. Similar to how most stars are more or less interchangeable, the vast majority of WWE events outside of Wrestlemania are at the same level. Those that subscribe to the WWE Network often do so because of the overall access to the extensive video library as well as the live shows. It's not as though most fans subscribe or unsubscribe based on a specific pay-per-view card. The selling point of the network is the overall package of content. The same way that the biggest selling point of most WWE events is the WWE brand, not specific stars. The example I've used several times is that regardless of their spot within the company at any given time, Seth Rollins and Finn Balor are at the same level of star power in terms of their ability to sell tickets. Brock Lesnar had a match with Seth Rollins at Wrestlemania last year, but would it have really made a difference in the numbers if it was Balor vs. Lesnar instead at the show? Again, too often the 50/50 aspect of the product makes things interchangeable and there's a level of mediocrity. Sure, Randy Orton won the title for three weeks, but what was the point? Now, Drew won it back, but does that really make Drew a bigger star as compared to a month ago?

I'm sure this sounds too harsh of a critique, but it's just disappointing that the argument could be made that as far as in ring talent, the company might have the best roster in its history, but the structure of the promotion prevents legitimate money-drawing stars from being made and there's a total lack of "must watch" TV for the company.

Pac returns

 Last week's edition of AEW Dynamite was fresh off of the Full Gear pay-per-view, an event that had some stellar matches and delivered a quality show that was worth the price tag. As mentioned, how the organization followed up on it was very important as well. As I've written several times before, not everything within All Elite Wrestling is perfect, and it would be unfair to expect it to be, but this particular episode highlighted some of the specific hits and misses of the upstart league.

Matt Sydal, who crashed to the canvas after a botched shooting star press during his debut a few months ago, had a terrific match against Brian Cage to open the show. Quite frankly, I was very surprised how solid this match-up was because it's a rather odd pairing on paper. Cage got the win, which makes sense because of his continuing push as a part of Team Taz, but the performance might open the door for a new chapter in the career of Matt Sydal. Some might be unaware, but during his time under contract with WWE, Sydal sustained a very serious foot injury from a motorcycle accident, and suffered injuries in the ring prior to that, which ultimately led to a rather underwhelming run in the company. The combination of damage from wrestling and more specifically, the bike accident seemed to slow him down substantially in the ring. While his time on Impact a few years ago got him back on television, he didn't quite have the spark in the ring he was known for. Thankfully, it appears that he healed up from those injuries and perhaps, the lighter AEW schedule will help him extend his career. All things considered, it's nice to see Sydal get a chance to rebound in his career because for a period of time in the mid-2000s, the argument could've been made that he was one of the top high-fliers in the world.

The Bunkhouse match was memorable because of its blood and weapons, but I have to wonder if AEW is overdoing it with the gore, and more specifically if this particular angle justified this type of match. Keep in mind, Eddie Kingston and Jon Moxley just had a brutal weapons match on pay-per-view. The feud between the Natural Nightmares and The Butcher and The Blade has been rather secondary, and wasn't spotlighted on TV much recently since the primary focus of the stable was rightfully on the Kingston title feud, as well as the Lucha Brothers in number one contender tournament. This angle was based on The Bunny originally being aligned with Butcher and Blade before she jumped ship to the Natural Nightmares without any explanation. It appears that the only reason she was placed back with the original team was because Kingston's arrival to form a faction gave a reason for her to be booked as The Bunny again. It's not as though there's some lengthy and storied feud between both teams. In truth, the storyline was based on The Bunny using QT's credit cards and it wasn't necessarily an angle that built over the course of months, it just because a better fit for her to be back in Kingston's stable. I think the company might be using weapons too often and eventually it won't stand out nearly as much as it has so far in the history of the company. Just because AEW doesn't have the PG restrictions of WWE, the repetitive weapons and blood will lead to diminishing returns. If the blood and guts are saved for the more select angles, those matches become more memorable. QT Marshall has a reputation as a solid hand in the ring and a good trainer, but as far as being over on national TV, he's just not at the level that justifies this type of match. The blood, ladders, etc. just seem unnecessary for a QT Marshall storyline. This type of violence should be used sparingly and be saved for pay-per-view in most cases, especially just days after a particularly bloody main event at Full Gear.

Jade Cargill made her AEW debut when she interrupted a Cody Rhodes segment before she was confronted by Brandi. I have to say, Cargill might have potential in the future, but she really fumbled this promo. I'm not sure if she got lost half way through it, but she dragged on throughout it and the point of the promo, the implication that Shaquille O'Neal will be involved in AEW, wasn't nearly as impactful as it should've been. With an announcement like that, it must be delivered in the proper manner to create a moment for the promotion, but Cargill just wasn't able to do that here. Brandi's involvement to protect Cody makes sense, but too often, Brandi's spots on the shows seem more like they're shoehorned into the narrative just to get her on camera. The bigger story is Shaq potentially appearing for AEW, and most importantly, the press it could generate for the organization. Obviously, TNT is one of the primary networks that broadcast the NBA so the crossover fits well. If Shaq has a full match remains to be seen, but if he does, Cody would be an excellent choice to have a performance that highlights Shaq without exposing his inexperience as a wrestler. When you consider that the show airs on TNT and Shaq's history in basketball, this will remind fans of the Dennis Rodman and Karl Malone appearances in WCW. While AEW is now a profitable venture because of the extension with TNT, it's even more important for the organization to continue to expand its fan base, and a Shaq appearance could certainly bring new viewers to the program.

Finally, Pac made his return to the promotion after being stuck in his native country of England because of the COVID travel restrictions. This worked extremely well because as I wrote in an article about Full Gear earlier this week, I wondered if the company rushed Kingston to the main event scene since he wasn't in the organization long enough for them to choose him to be the first non-WWE wrestler to win the championship. That spot appears to be for a long-term project in the company and might be Kenny Omega, who beat Adam Paige to become the number one contender. Just prior to the COVID shut down, Pac formed a stable with the Lucha Brothers, but with it being unknown when he would be back from England, the masked athletes were paired with Kingston. Pac's return to confront Kingston works because it gives Kingston something to do so that his defeat in the title match isn't seen as a plateau, and it allows Pac to be rejuvenated since he will be booked in a feud with a performer that garnered rave reviews for his work in the Moxley angle. A meaningful storyline gives both grapplers a way to continue to progress their careers under the AEW banner.

The Pentagon vs. Rey Fenix match was tremendous, and both of these luchadors have the potential to be major stars for the organization. Pentagon has a charisma that overcomes any perceived language barrier, and Fenix is one of the most spectacular athletes in the world today. So, while had some misses recently, the bulk of the product has the potential to continue to evolve and expand, which is the key to success for the company. Arguably, the most important aspect of AEW is how it has already shifted the industry and it will be interesting to see how that continues in the next few months.

Zelina Vega released

 Shock waves hit social media earlier tonight as Zelina Vega, praised by many for her work the past few years with Andrade at ringside, was released from the promotion mere minutes after she tweeted her support for unionization, an issue that was brought back into the spotlight after management recently decided to crackdown on third party deals, which ultimately bring WWE talent revenue from outside of the WWE bubble. This conversation brought up again the long-standing argument about professional wrestlers' status as independent contractors, an aspect that allows the WWE to run a publicly-traded global business without offering health benefits to its wrestlers or paying certain payroll taxes. Considering that a true independent contractor has no restrictions on where they can work, but WWE contracts are exclusive, it appears that this is probably more of a situation that nobody with the legal power to look into it wanted to take the time to dig into the "low brow" entertainment genre that sports entertainment is sometimes stereotyped with.

As I wrote at the time, the company wasn't going to be looked upon by the general public as sympathetic figures in the third party scenario because the wrestlers already work their without having health insurance offered to them, and the company that's worth a billion dollars wants a cut of their cameo and twitch money? It comes across as petty, especially when a slice of cameo cash doesn't make a dent in the company's bottom line, but is a considerable revenue stream for individual talents. It's just greedy and unnecessary.

Is 20% of someone's $50 cameo really worth the negative press?

Andrew Yang, former Democratic presidential candidate and long-time wrestling fan, took notice of the third party dispute. He appeared on the Talk is Jericho podcast a few weeks ago and expressed his interest to help pro wrestlers get a better deal with their employment status. Despite Trump's heelish attempts to leave the white house kicking and screaming like a villain that disagrees with the referee's three count, the fact that the Joe Biden administration will be in power in January could finally shine a light on the sports entertainment employee status, especially if Yang gets offered a spot in his cabinet. Speaking of the cabinet, Linda McMahon, who unsuccessfully ran for senate twice and spent $100 million in the process, is a former member of Trump's cabinet for the small business administration. Regardless of where you fall on the political spectrum, when you take into account that Linda McMahon donated millions to the Trump campaign, it's obvious that the WWE was safe from any government inquires while he was in the white house. That shouldn't be too surprising because millions of dollars are exchanged for political favor for both parties about topics much more important than professional wrestling.

However, the fact remains that early next year, there will be a shift in power and it will be very interesting to see if Yang or anyone else from the Biden administration finally takes a look at the 1099 status within the WWE. Furthermore, this rather abrupt release might be used as an example of a potential WWE attempt to quiet any talks of a union.

It wouldn't be the first time that the sports entertainment empire kept the roster from unionizing. Famously, Jesse Ventura tried to talk his peers into forming a union prior to one of the early Wrestlemania events. A few years later when Ventura successfully sued McMahon for royalties on video tape sales, it was revealed in court depositions that Hulk Hogan, who was in the dressing room the night that Jesse tried to explain the benefits of a union to the roster, went to McMahon and told him of Ventura's plan. As of now, the WWE Network doesn't offer royalties to former wrestlers that appear on the footage on the streaming network so is it possible history will repeat itself if someone takes it to court?

In truth, as sudden as the release might seem, it's doubtful that someone from the office was monitoring Zelina's Twitter page and she got released solely based on the pro-union tweet. If I had to guess, her Twitch channel and a newly-launched OnlyFans page were probably a point of disagreement, and she might've opted for a release instead of deleting those social media platforms. The tweet about unionization might've been a way for her to make a final statement toward the company prior to her departure. Still, you have to wonder if this will create a domino effect toward the rest of the roster taking a stand?

As unfair as the 1099 status might be for pro wrestlers, it's doubtful that there will be some massive walkout or stand by WWE performers. Different from the typical independent contractor, painting a house is painting a house and the results at the end are the same. Nothing against someone like Heath Slater, but the money he will draw in the main event of Wrestlemania would be different than the money John Cena would draw at the top of the card. Basically, those within the WWE would have to be willing to give up top money and financial security to try to get a better deal for everyone across the board. It would be a nice idea if someone was willing to make that sacrifice, but the bottom line is, integrity doesn't pay the bills. Hulk wasn't risking his payoff for the benefit of Mike Sharpe. John Cena wasn't going to lose money for Mike Mondo.

It's easy to say that the wrestlers should take a stand, but it's much more difficult to risk the financial security that goes along with a WWE contract. Plus, it's a competitive business, and with the past several years, management has worked to make the brand the draw, not any particular star so hypothetically, if Finn Balor would demand to get benefits or he quits the company, who's to say that Adam Cole, Keith Lee, or some other NXT star wouldn't just be put into the Balor spot? You can't blame anyone for it either because again, guys are trying to make a living, and the most profitable place to do that in the industry is WWE.

As far as Zelina Vega, she's very talented and there are more options in the industry now than in the past two decades so I'd guess that she lands in either AEW or Impact as soon as she can legally sign someone else. While he role on television depended on the often-changing direction of the storylines of the WWE product, her exit from the organization will have a minimal impact on the television show, but her release could have a major effect on the potential unionization of pro wrestling if anyone from the Biden administration examples the 1099 status within the industry. 

The status of WWE events

There was a point in time when the house show business, the non-televised arena matches, was the main revenue source for the professional wrestling industry. As you can watch now with the easy access of the WWE Network, the majority of the territory system of the 80s used their TV to showcase the stars and run angles that would entice the home audience to buy a ticket to see the grapplers square off live in the arena. Granted, there were some exceptions based on the size and nature of the territory. Bill Watts' Mid-South group covered several states, running his crew ragged, but he emphasized a much more competitive TV product to keep the promotion steaming along so that fans outside of that night's particular touring schedule would still be prompted to follow the product. Showing clips from a previous week's house show didn't cannibalize market, but rather allowed fans to keep up with the story. The fact that Watt's had a territory and a roster that was already selling tickets at the time allowed him the flexibility to do that. On the flip side, other groups took the traditional approach and it worked for them. The WWF specifically for most of its run through the 80s, kept to the house show model. Nobody expected Tiger Chug Lee to get the win over Paul Orndorff, but Mr. Wonderful's promo about his upcoming battle with Jimmy Snuka prompted fans to go to the box office for the house show where the two would square off. Some territories had more of a featured match to wrap up the main event spot of their TV program where two stars might be schedule for a match.

As is the case with the entire business, the TV aspect, as well as the revenue streams within the industry have evolved. Unfortunately, the house show business has eroded, both in drawing power and importance, over the past two decades since the end of the Monday Night Wars, which is the last time it was relevant. When the professional wrestling genre was a part of pop culture, just putting the letters WCW or WWF on the marquee was enough to sell tickets. The popularity of the brands and the overall star power of the organizations were enough to generate sell outs before a full card was announced. Just the fact that Steve Austin, Goldberg, Sting, DX, etc. were going to be in the building was enough of a reason that people wanted to be there. Fans wanted to see their favorite stars in-person and it didn't matter if the show was seen on television or not. The big angles were hot-shot on TV every week, but the overall star power of the national spotlight to record-setting ratings made the live event experience something that fans were willing to pay to get admission in the arena.

Without the wave of pop culture to fuel those house shows, and almost as important, the fact that television content fuels the current WWE business model more than anything else, non-televised events are viewed as inconsequential by event the most causal WWE fan. The notion that "if it doesn't happen on TV then it didn't happen" is probably more pertinent now than any other time in history. The WWE's biggest and most profitable revenue stream is their mega TV deals with Fox and USA. The company secured those deals because of its ability to deliver a consistent number for the networks. Obviously, the pandemic era has shifted those ratings, but that's another discussion for another time. The point being, the televised content, both for Fox and USA, as well as the content that fuels the WWE Network, another barometer of success, are the most important assets to the company.

We can debate and determine valid objections for the possibility that too many hours or content dilute the product and saturate the market, but the fact remains those hours of TV that the WWE machine churns out every weeks are part of the reason why the organization is on the stock market and worth nearly a billion dollars. Quite frankly, what happened at the Smackdown house show in front of a few thousand fans in  Des Moines, Iowa doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. (No disrespect intended to Des Moines.)

So, will there be house shows in the future?

The Wrestling Observer's Dave Meltzer reported that there were a few more released within the WWE, including Tony Chimel, known of his ring announcing, but worked more recently in the live event side of the organization. Side note about Chimel, when I was at a house show when I was 11, I saw him at intermission and asked for an autograph when he was standing next to the sound equipment. He said, "not right now" and perhaps the news of his release will end a nearly 20-year grudge. On a more serious note, Chimel's release isn't that surprising because the WWE hasn't toured for most of the year and its still unknown when they will be back on the road, but considering that the house shows weren't profitable before the pandemic, is there really a reason to bring back the non-televised schedule?

Some wrestlers have discussed that the house show tours can sometimes be more fun to work without the pressure and time constants of live television, but with as many injuries as there are now, it might be a better option to reduce the bumps the rosters takes as well as cutting down on their travel. Considering the lack of revenue, the extra travel, and the fact that televised content is the fuel of the WWE machine, it makes sense to cut down the house shows schedule to maybe a dozen or so key events a year in major locations. When you add that potential US schedule to the European tour, two dozen house show events a year might be a more realistic option to the current landscape of the industry. The only potential downside of that is the performers on the roster that need the experience of working in front of a live crowd, but considering the independent groups WWE has working agreements with it would seem at least possible they could be some type of deal that would allow newer members of the roster to get more experience in front of a live crowd. Don't get me wrong, there was something special about attending a house show and knowing that only those there were there in-person got to see the action. I was at an event in 1997 that my parents surprised me with tickets for when I got home from elementary school and Mick Foley pelted Savio Vega with a giant bag of pop corn. But, the same way that the internet made most wrestling magazines an antiquated concept, the climate of the television industry might lead to the conclusion of house shows for the company.

Full Gear review

 The results are in...for AEW Full Gear.

I penned an article just hours before the live broadcast to discuss some of the key points and potential booking decisions of this pay-per-view. More specifically, how the outcome of certain bouts could be a sign of the direction of the promotion ahead of 2021. While the pandemic more or less eliminated live attendance to any measurable level, the quality of not just the actual event, but the storylines that follow are still key to the company continuing to expand in a myriad of ways.

Kenny Omega vs. Adam Page to determine the number one contender for the world title opened the show, and it was a very wise decision to put them on first because it was a way to pace the card so that they could have the chance to work a longer match without burning out the viewers mid-way through the show. It also helped reduce other key bouts with the task to have to follow a match that was designed to build to high spots. These two delivered big time, and this was the type of contest that you want to be able to showcase the pure talent on the roster. Yes, you absolutely need the well-known names and familiar faces for the star power when the organization airs on TNT, but the bottom line is, especially in the modern era, you must have the in-ring substance to go along with the sizzle for these pay-per-views. Obviously, fans will compare this to the arrival of the "New Japan Omega," but all things considered, and as I've written before, Omega has always still had the talent that generated him such a following in Japan. He was cast for a role in the tag division that wasn't a place for him to have 45-minute contests every time he appeared on screen.

Speaking of which, now that Omega is clearly on a path to the world title picture with the victory here, I have to say, I still find the entire Omega/Page tag run odd. Perhaps some of the restrictions of the pandemic limited who AEW had available at certain times for tapings, but for a company that wanted to emphasize tag team wrestling, it just didn't seem like a natural fit to have two wrestlers that were more or less just thrown together have the longest run with the belts so far in the history of the promotion. More than anything, and I could be wrong about this, the Omega/Page pairing appeared to be more of a way to keep them busy while other angles were used for the title picture.

That being said, this type of match is exactly the performance that Omega needed to put him on track for a title shot and the top notch quality of the contest rejuvenates his status as "the best bout machine" from a few years ago. At 37, Omega should have the title reign while he's still in the prime of his career, not to say that he will be hanging up the boots anytime particularly soon, but he works a very physical style so if AEW is going to capture the aura he had in New Japan, it makes sense to do it sooner rather than later. The other aspect of this is that since Moxley retained, will there eventually Moxley-Omega title bout be a draw? I'm not trying to take anything away from either one of them, as their talent speaks for itself, but Omega's work is based on in-ring theatrics, while Moxley's career is based on the drama of storyline telling, similar to the angle of the Kingston match so there's somewhat of a clash of styles. Plus, they already had a hardcore match last year so it's difficult to top that type of match. But, the bigger point is that the Omega/Page bout accomplished its goal of getting Omega ready for an eventual title shot so it was mission accomplished.

Orange Cassidy/John Silver was a decent match and was used more to pace the crowd than anything, which is fine, especially because it was originally penciled-in for the buy-in preview show.

Darby Allin vs. Cody Rhodes was a really solid match, and again, as far as accomplishing a projected goal, this did the job because Darby's status is elevated with this title victory. All things considered, Cody had the run with the TNT title and that story worked well because he technically can't challenge for the world championship again, but at this point, he doesn't really need the belt. As far as the psychology of the contest, it made sense for Rhodes to be more aggressive because of Darby's natural role as the underdog in this scenario. The more important aspect was to make Darby here, but another element is that with it being well-known that Cody is one of the vice presidents, the company doesn't want the narrative that would essentially portray him as the New York Yankees of AEW. It's a thin line because if Cody is too giving in putting others over, it doesn't fully utilize his popularity, one of the reasons the company was launched in the first place, but if he wins too often, it could create some hostility from the fan base. The Team Taz attack after the match suggest that their might be some type of tag team feud going forward, which can work for now until Darby and Cody are ready for their next respective feuds.

The Women's title match was okay, but I think it went too long and instead of being something to pace the card, it somewhat dragged the event. Obviously, the pandemic affected the depth of the women's division, but the potential addition of Thunder Rosa and Allysin Kay are helpful.

The Young Bucks vs. FTR was the match fans had been waiting to see for four years, and while Meltzer already proclaimed it, "one of the best tag matches ever" I'm not going to go that far. Still, it was a stellar match that built well and there was an atmosphere of importance around it, which is rare for matches in the modern era. Too often, matches are presented as just gears of the wheel of a machine and can sometimes be interchangeable on the card. This had the environment a "special event" and the psychology and the pacing added to it. I'd expect rematches in the next few months, which is fine because this is quality wrestling. I hope The Bucks/FTR becomes a series of great tag matches, similar to some of the peak eras of tag team wrestling of the past. The Bucks winning made sense since some of their tenure in AEW so far was slightly underwhelming before this pay-per-view.

I've said several times before that I understand that the cinematic type of wrestling has a cult following, but it just isn't my cup of tea. (Well, an energy drink as I'm enjoying an Amp to power me through this review) However, outside of that, I thought the Elite Deletion was too long and ultimately wasn't really anything other than what was seen on Impact 3-4 years ago. In short, the Hardy compound has run its course and regardless of being a different organization, this came across as a retread. Hardy still has gas in the tank, though so it will be interesting to see his next storyline in AEW.

Chris Jericho vs. MJF was better than I thought it was going to be, and I'm still guessing this will ultimately lead to the Inner Circle turning on Jericho to make MJF the new leader. Jericho is already cheered and that scenario gives MJF a boost so it would be a logical path for the storyline.

The main event was a brutal fight that resembled something from more of an old school period of the business. As I mentioned in the previous article, Kingston hasn't been on the roster long enough for the company to book him as the first non-WWE performer to win the AEW championship, but I think this entire storyline proves that he undoubtedly has the ability to be the world champion at some point in the future. It can't be understated how important it is that Kingston has the ability to emotionally connect with the audience because that is what draws money. The fans can identify with him and he has a sense of authenticity that very few in the business can bring to that table. This isn't meant as a jab, but who on the WWE roster has the believably of Eddie Kingston? The corporate machine is so well-produced and packaged that they don't have a performer as gritty or as authentic in their system. WWE markets itself more as the athletics that portray superstars in sports entertainment. Kingston doesn't have to play a role, he takes his persona and amplifies it for pro wrestling. WWE is absolutely successful with that they do and their financial reports prove it. I've said it before and I will say it again, success for AEW is profitability, not necessarily competition with WWE. The TNT extension allowed them to be a profitable venture, and part of the reason is that they aren't trying to present the company as another WWE type of project. Performers like Eddie Kingston, Omega, Pentagon, Rey Fenix etc. are why AEW is an alternative in the industry.