Want more wrestling news, rumors, and results? Be sure to visit PWInsider.com and PWInsiderXtra.com.
You can send us questions for the PWInsider.com Q and A by clicking here.
While I think it's great that Smackdown us going live as I stopped watching and only read the spoilers, I do have a question. I understand why it's going to be on Tuesdays, however, do you think creatively it's better if Smackdown was later in the week to give viewers a little break from 3 hours of RAW? Plus on PPV weeks that's 3 days of live WWE excluding the Network. It's better to space it out.
If the product is booked well, people can’t get enough. When it’s not, they can. If WWE gives the shows a distinctive feel and direction, and the talents stay brand exclusive, I think they could actually do better having the shows back-to-back. If not, a few days in between to catch a break? It really doesn’t matter.
Do you think WWE will look to make 'The Club' bigger and more Bullet Club-esque? If they did, who do you think would make good additions to the stable? Personally I think having a heel stable dominating Smackdown when they separate would be a great idea... So probably won't happen.
I think they should add Finn Balor to the group, for sure. Hardcore fans will love it and it would (or at least could) put a great emphasis on the faction. Beyond that I am leery of adding too many members. Things can get out of hand when that happens (just look at the nWo in WCW).
I always needed some clarification on this. When TNA went into the Hogan-Bischoff era both parties were insistent they were mostly gonna be on screen talent and some consultancy work (which was apparent with the production changes from Bischoff’s production company). Who was truly at the creative helm throughout the 3 or 4 years? The level of influence they wielded suggested far more than just consultancy because of what you'd see on TV.
They had a lot of say in the segments they were involved in, and also in talents that were brought in. Part of the problem with TNA back then was that so many people had a say in the process. They were definitely doing more than just appearing on screen and consulting. Hell, part of the reason they went up against WWE on Mondays was due to Hogan thinking they needed to do it!
One thing I've always thought was kind of weird is how the WWE tries to avoid having blood in matches, and tries to censor it when it happens, which is something I totally understand, and I'm fine with, but they don't appear to have any issues showing, without any warning, what some might consider, graphic images/video of someone getting stitches, staples, or even surgery. I'm just curious, why is that?
They don’t want blood in their matches or in their presentation. But if injuries happen, they inform the fans about them. It never hurts to remind people how the supposed fake sport has very real repercussions.
Knowing how the landscape of professional wrestling was in the early 2000's, what would you have said then if someone told you that CM Punk and Bryan Danielson would be former WWE champions, Tyler Black and AJ Styles would be main eventing PPV's, and guys like Samoa Joe, Austin Aries, Kevin Steen, and El Generico would all be integral parts of WWE?
I would have said, “That’s great to know. All of those guys are great wrestlers and deserve the chance to show what they can do. I am glad that Vince McMahon gave them the chance to show that.”
You can send us questions for the PWInsider.com Q and A by clicking here.
If you enjoy PWInsider.com you can check out the AD-FREE PWInsider Elite section, which features exclusive audio updates, news, our critically acclaimed podcasts, interviews and more by clicking here!
Bang On Casino
