James Caldwell, Torch Assistant Editor (5.5)

I need to see more from this concept before I fairly evaluate whether it has a chance to succeed, but there is plenty of room for growth. The problem is that, at times, this felt like the same old ECW TV show with a mid-card tag match featuring house show-level wrestling (Christian & Slater vs. Carlito & Tarver). And without an explanation on what the competition aspect is or whether the matches even count for something, the show fell flat at times.

The focus on Daniel Bryan and David Otunga was clearly meant to condition fans to react to them more than the others. I say that with an eye on the future when I believe there will be some sort of voting process involving fans. WWE wants to get over Bryan and Otunga as their top two stars in this format and it was good to start establishing them as the stars of the NXT show on Week 1.

Michael Cole as the "Pro announcer" and Josh Mathews as the "Rookie announcer" created good tension for the show. I think it will become really messy if Cole is playing the babyface announcer on Mondays and heel announcer on Tuesdays. The easy solution would be WWE bringing back Jim Ross on Mondays and leaving Cole on Tuesdays. We'll see if that materializes.

Overall, the show was different than my own personal expectations. When I heard "innovative, never-before-seen" reality TV, I figured it would focus more on the stars themselves and interacting with the Pros in a more engaging learning environment with the occasional wrestling match sprinkled in that would mean something. Chris Jericho vs. Daniel Bryan was a great way to conclude Week 1, but the show format doesn't scream "innovative" just yet. It feels like a tweak of the same old corporate-friendly, sanitized WWE TV format without much imagination put into the "reality" aspect of it. I'm giving this show a chance, but I need to see more.

Chris Newth, PWTorch.com Contributor (7.5)

I believe we should follow Jim Ross’s advice and refrain from making a premature evaluation of NXT based entirely on the first few weeks. However, let me just lay out a few positives and negatives that I’m picking up from the show’s first episode.

One of the true benefits of this concept is WWE’s ability to depict their debuting characters’ depth from the very start. The promos by Daniel Bryan, the interview segments, the interaction with Pros, and the vignettes on stars like Tarver, Slater, and Otunga make much better TV introductions than other newly-arriving talent, like Caylen Croft and Trent Barreta, have received. Bryan in particular stood out. He seemed a little disconnected on the mic at first, but once he had the Miz to play off of, some sparks were ignited. And credit also needs to be given to Michael Cole and Josh Matthews for their fiery interchange during the main event.

Okay, now for my slightly critical take: WWE is showing a resistance to change. The look, feel, and tone of the show mirrors that of all WWE programming. I could understand WWE’s reluctance to let its version of ECW have a unique identity from Raw and Smackdown, but NXT is solely WWE’s creation--a different format with more reality-driven camerawork and new environments could help the company seem like its willing to step outside their comfort zone. I just get the feeling that despite the intriguing concept behind NXT, the show could slip thanks to the timeworn (but still upscale) WWE arena featured on TV four times a week. I’m not suggesting they avoid it completely, but they might want to consider placing their characters in other places - hotels, cars, bars, the beach, anywhere outside or away from what we’re all so used to seeing. As long as the WWE logo is comfortably sitting at the bottom left of the screen, they shouldn’t let the show feel as confined as it can be at times.

Greg Parks, Torch Columnist (6.5)

While I agree with James that WWE has a long way to go in hashing out exactly how we're supposed to keep score and find winners and losers on NXT, I'll admit, my grade is higher in large part due to Daniel Bryan and The Miz. Their interaction was well-done, and Bryan didn't seem too out-of-place with a mic in his hand. Talk about being thrown to the wolves, though. His match with Jericho was a crisp six minutes, including a big crash-and-burn at ringside. Not sure what WWE is trying to do with Michael Cole, but hey, Internet fans hate him already, so why not have him turn on them.

The other big positive coming out of the show was the Straight Edge Society's reaction to their rookie, Darren Young. Young displayed the right amount of enthusiasm for finally getting his shot, while C.M. Punk and his minions played their part perfectly as well, staring a hole through Young in the backstage segment and just plain not caring about what he did in the ring. It brings up a good question though: Who chose the pros? And what's in it for someone like Punk, who obviously doesn't care?

The matches and the overall presentation left a lot to be desired. Interviews from ringside while the match was going on and funky camera angles reminded me of the XFL. Of course, I hold that in higher esteem than most, so it's pretty close to a compliment. They're clearly trying new things, and here's hoping they take what they learned about what worked/what didn't work last night and apply it to future shows.

We suggest these recent related articles...

PARKS'S WWE SMACKDOWN REPORT 10/8: Ongoing "virtual time" coverage of Thursday show, including Roman Reigns & Randy Orton vs. Bray Wyatt & Braun Strowman

METZGER'S ROH TV REPORT 10/4 & 10/7: IWGP World champ Okada vs. Roderick Strong main event, plus Briscoes vs. Time Splitters, more from "Field of Honor," Overall Reax

MCMAHON'S TNA IMPACT REPORT 10/7: TNA Title Series kicks off, Bound for Glory fall-out, more; Overall Reax