On a weekly basis, PWTorch staffers James Caldwell and Greg Parks have a casual, yet insightful, Lounge-style chat reviewing the week in TV wrestling and looking ahead to what's next for key storylines, matches, and future events. An occasional "Seinfeld" or "The Office" reference is also mixed in for good measure.

James Caldwell: This is PWTorch assistant editor James Caldwell joined by PWTorch columnist Greg Parks for our weekly TV wrestling chat. Greg, I think we should start with Smackdown this week following last Friday's show and this week's live special. So, looking at four hours over a few days, what's the State of Smackdown right now?

Greg Parks: Despite this past week's holiday special, I think Smackdown is trending upward. It's more consistent than Raw as far as show quality, and they've focused on some newer stars lately as well, which makes the show feel fresh - something that Raw doesn't always do. The Daniel Bryan vs. Mark Henry stuff, with Big Show involved, has played out well thus far. I'd like them to reign back on Bryan vs. Henry now, and revisit that once we get closer to WrestleMania. I think Bryan vs. Henry could be a match people look forward to most (or second most) on that show if they wait 'til then to pay off the storyline.

Caldwell: What do you make of Bryan's explanation for the MITB cash-in attempt - that he is a hypocrite and his values changed to where he wanted the World Title (partly as revenge on Henry for Henry destroying him a few weeks ago) more than to main-event WrestleMania? It's a fine line to walk with a babyface character, especially a character they're still trying to establish with the casual audience.

Parks: I can buy it. Babyfaces are supposed to outsmart the heels, so I would've been fine with an explanation of, "I can't believe you really thought I was going to wait 'til 'Mania! Of course I'd say that to get the champion off-guard so he'd be surprised when I cash in earlier!" But what they went with wasn't bad either, especially since we know Bryan's story and what it would mean for him to be champion.

Caldwell: Overall, I see this Henry-Bryan program as a means to stretch out the larger Henry-Show issue without inserting another big-name (e.g. Sheamus or Orton) in the title picture to where that person's title quest would seem secondary. If/when Sheamus or Orton gets back in the title picture, I'm sure WWE wants that to be the main focus. But, could this also be an audition for Bryan going into WM season to see if the audience takes to his character and WWE possibly puts the title on him at or around WM28? Or, do you think Bryan won't get that title reign at any point and he'll be the first to unsuccessfully cash in MITB?

Parks: Given how close they've booked him so far, I don't think they can really do an unsuccessful cash-in at this point. If they hadn't teased it so in recent weeks, I think it could still be on the table. But they almost have to pay it off now.

Caldwell: And Bryan has stepped up his game - especially that promo on Raw - to warrant a title opportunity. That cash-in and three-minute title reign on last week's Smackdown seemed to be a way to test the audience's reaction to Bryan as champion, and I think Bryan passed with flying colors. I'm with you they have to pay it off now. How long he holds the title - well, that remains to be seen. Greg, what stood out to you (good, bad, or ugly) from the rest of the live Smackdown prior to the cage main event?

Parks: Nothing, honestly. It was a very light show, billed as the "holiday special" so they could do a bunch of humor bits. If you missed it, you didn't really miss much, unless you were pining for the long-awaited re-appearances of Johnny Curtis or Tyler Reks.

Caldwell: And that would be on the never-ending NXT program. One thing we touched on during yesterday's Livecast is Mick Foley's WWE return. He had the long return segment with John Cena a few weeks ago, then played a Santa role for some lighthearted, attempted comedy. Is this Mick Foley 2011 (part-time, bit-player, non-threatening character) or could they be doing more with him to elevate talent?

Parks: They could absolutely be doing more with him if you're talking about putting him in a meaningful role; the Raw GM spot is right there, after all. Right now, WWE seems content to use him whenever they need a legend to fill a spot. So yeah, they could be doing more with him, but as far as using him to elevate talent? I guess if he would have a change of heart and come back to commentary, but aside from a short-term feud with someone that ends in a big match, I don't know how else he could be used to put over other talent.

Caldwell: Leading up to his return to WWE, Foley talked about having a few more (or perhaps one more) big match in him, so is there someone on Raw or Smackdown you see as being a natural opponent for Foley, where he could "flip the switch" to wrestler mode and have a strong run with someone who could benefit from working with a more serious Foley? The Miz is the first name that comes to mind for me, but are there some other candidates?

Parks: You'd have to think of someone who could have a good match with him and maybe even do a hardcore walk-and-brawl. I'm thinking of someone who could duplicate Randy Orton's performance from Backlash against Foley several years back. Miz could be a good choice and I could even see Wade Barrett or Christian going at it with Foley.

Caldwell: The Orton program is exactly what I was thinking of when posing the question. I like Barrett as a possibility. I think they could have some nice verbal exchanges. What do you think of Ziggler as a possible means to advance Ziggler to the next level?

Parks: I was thinking Ziggler too but didn't want to push him in this spot; it seems whenever an opportunity to push a heel against someone has come up lately, Ziggler's name has been mentioned because so many people are so high on him; so I didn't mention him because at this point, I feel like his name goes without needing to be said.

Caldwell: Good point. Speaking of Ziggler, we can transition into some Raw talk from Monday's show. Last week, Ziggler takes a loss to C.M. Punk in a very nice match. This week, Ziggler picks up a tainted win over Randy Orton that mainly advanced the Orton-Barrett issue. What do you make of how WWE has booked Ziggler the past two weeks following his Survivor Series victory over John Morrison, especially that he didn't fall back into a filler program with, say, Mason Ryan?

Parks: So far, so good. They have a tendency to book him even-steven, as they generally do many of the heels, which is why so many are impotent, but that's an argument for another day. But I think he's on his way to having even casual fans taking him seriously. At this point, I wonder how long they keep him with Jack Swagger, who isn't on the same plane as Ziggler right now.

Caldwell: Or, how long they keep him with Vickie Guerrero, which is something we've been talking about for months. She seems to be less and less involved in his matches, almost like they're trying to wean his character off from Vickie. Perhaps they could have Ziggler branch out on his own and allow Vickie to "build up" Swagger, who, like you said, isn't in Ziggler's league right now. Looking ahead to the Rumble PPV about two months from now, do you think Ziggler is on a path to being slotted in a WWE Title match against Punk (if he's still champ) to fill in a blank there when the Rumble match is the main attraction?

Parks: I'd actually like to see him get a nice push during the Rumble match itself. We thought that maybe WWE would put Morrison against Miz at the Rumble last year, but they seem to prefer to have the bigger names in the title matches even at the Rumble, so I don't know how real of an idea that would be at this point. Do you think he needs room to grow before getting a title shot at a PPV, or do you think he's ready for that now?

Caldwell: I think he's ready, but not as the main event/main attraction. So, it would have to be something like the Rumble PPV where another match is the top draw. I don't think WWE has established him yet to the level of being able to carry the build-up for a PPV main event. Alberto Del Rio seems to already have that credibility of a main event attraction despite having those quick, non-credible title reigns. I think Ziggler needs more time to get to Del Rio's level. If WWE doesn't go the route of a Punk-Ziggler title match at the Rumble, I like your idea of Ziggler being pushed heavily in the Rumble match - perhaps lasting an hour to have some bragging rights on TV. Looking at the title picture as it stands now, what did you make of Punk's victory over Del Rio and what do you think is next going into TLC?

Parks: I hope Punk vs. Miz is next down the line, but with the way Punk beat Del Rio on Raw, I have a feeling we'll be getting yet another re-match at TLC. Problem is, if Del Rio loses, that'll be three in a row against Punk. Where does he go from there? Or do they put Miz in it to make it a three-way? It's a tough one, in my opinion. Does making it a Tables match (or other gimmick match) allow Del Rio to somewhat save face if he loses again at the PPV?

Caldwell: I think they'll keep Miz out of the title hunt for now just to let him breathe in some non-pressure situations post-Awesome Truth era. I think you're right on about a Punk-Del Rio re-match where Del Rio can "lose" without really losing. I do wonder if Laurinaitis will hold up the title, though, and WWE will contest the re-match in a ladder or TLC match (where they can use chairs, since a chair was introduced during the title match on Raw), and Del Rio could "lose" without losing. Then, Del Rio can have a strong showing in the Rumble match. Okay, I think I've figured out a Very Early Rumble Final Four - Del Rio, Ziggler, Orton, and Sheamus. On the babyface side, definitely Orton in his hometown and definitely Sheamus, who has dominated folks lately. Of course, that leaves WWE's top star, John Cena, who seems to be in no-man's land right now in-between Rock programs. And, cue the segue to Piper's Pit that opened Raw. What did you make of that segment and where they're going with Cena?

Parks: I haven't seen that segment a second time, but it felt like it was one I'd need to watch again to really try to understand what they were doing. After one viewing, I'm not so sure. They planted the seed of Cena being sick of the jeering, but he was very strongly against it on Monday. I don't know if it's just something to keep him busy 'til his next feud or if it'll play into his feud with Rock or what. But it certainly was curious. James, the $64,000 question: Is this leading to a Cena heel turn?

Caldwell: I don't think so. He sells too much merchandise, represents WWE corporately, and draws a reaction being who he is. So, I don't see WWE going that route. Now, could they be looking to stress the buzzphrase of the week - Internal Conflict - a la the Nexus program last year? I think so. I'd like to see Cena go through a period of contemplation, not just brushing everything off like nothing bothers him. I think it would make his character stronger and help recover from Survivor Series when he seemed like he was just glad to be there hanging out with Rock. I think it would make for more intriguing build-up to WM28 and allow Rock & Cena to have something more to talk about rather than re-hashing the same old talking points tearing each other down.

Parks: Cena....NOT brushing everything off? C'mon, James, that would make too much sense!

Caldwell: Apparently that's why it hasn't been done before! I understand they feel like Cena has to be a Superhero where nothing bothers him, but it begins to wear down the audience and his quests are rendered useless because there's never a sense he's actually in jeopardy. I'll be very interested to see how they handle him going forward. Greg, what else stood out to you from Monday's Raw?

Parks: Daniel Bryan's promo, which you touched on earlier. Probably his best work since coming to WWE, and even on Smackdown, he didn't hit the high he did on Raw. That, and John Morrison getting written off with an injury angle. I thought Morrison got a little more offense in than I expected. What say you about those two segments?

Caldwell: Bryan was excellent responding to Cole. I would have preferred a face-to-face stand-off with Henry on the stage rather than Bryan just kicking Henry in the leg, but I understood what they were going for with Bryan trying to win the title by any means necessary. I was also surprised - actually very surprised - by how much focus & offense Morrison received in his farewell. Perhaps one of those "thanks for your service, here's a nice parting gift on the way out" type things trying to extend a gesture so Morrison will consider returning to WWE rather than going to TNA. Morrison was definitely the right person to utilize in Miz's rebuilding process, so it worked out well. So, Greg, does Morrison return to WWE after a break or jump to TNA?

Parks: A little of both. I think he'll return to WWE after spending some time in TNA. I also think a lot of it will have to do with his relationship with Melina - if they break up down the line, the chances of him going back to WWE would increase exponentially, one would imagine.

Caldwell: I'm just waiting for TNA to tweet next week that they have a "surprise" at Final Resolution and it turns out to be "Nice Surprise Tommy Dreamer" returning to TNA, rather than a debuting Morrison.

Parks: Oh come on, it would be a nice surprise, wouldn't it?

Caldwell: Perhaps. Unless it leads to another ECW re-start. And we don't need that. Speaking of TNA, all I can think about from last night's show is TNA desperately trying to re-build Abyss as this incredible monster who could devour SuperCena in five seconds. First, the no-sell of the table spot. Next, Bully Ray still talking about it three weeks later. Then, Abyss is apparently a sexual king. Along with the Gunner bits in the gym, there was some great unintentional comedy on Impact last night.

Parks: Yeah, not a great follow-up to the Thanksgiving abomination. Gunner's segment, the women searching out Abyss, and the continued devaluing of the Knockouts just makes one shake his or her head when watching the show. What is with TNA's yo-yo booking of the Knockouts: first they're more than eye-candy, real athletes to counter WWE's models; then TNA puts them in segments like the last two weeks. What gives?

Caldwell: Not that I want to try to get inside the minds of the people who write these shows, but I have to think it's a combination of (a) wanting to give Karen an increased role bossing around the Knockouts, (b) promoting the KO Holiday Videos, (c) they're bored with trying to build up real feuds that focus on athleticism and competition in the ring, and (d) the writing team is back to That Bad Place in their personal lives and it's coming out through the show again. Whatever the reason(s), it's bad timing when Gail Kim just re-joined the company to create some buzz for the division, they put the title on her, and now they're letting slip an opportunity to capitalize on a strong roster. Rough times. As for the World Title picture, what did you make of the three-way main event and use of Roode's family to advance his heel turn?

Parks: I liked the videos using Roode's family to strengthen his heel character, contrasting the videos they used of family when they built him up as a babyface. It was a nice touch. It did border on overkill though as they played a whole bunch of them.

Caldwell: Yeah, I thought the videos fit well into the story of Roode's turn. I remain opposed to him turning heel in the first place, but they're doing their best to make it work now that they've chosen this path. What about the related issue between Storm and Angle? Storm being out of character for his Via Satellite interview was a little iffy for me. I understand putting a human touch on his strong babyface character for the audience to emphasize with him, but he's the freakin' Cowboy. I guess they did enter Cowboy mode at the end when Angle started talking about his family, so it worked out in the end. What did you make of it?

Parks: I thought it was a good exchange between the two, and they showed good chemistry going at it with one another. Shows that you can advance a feud without giving away big-time matches on free TV.

Caldwell: TNA used to do the split-screen promo exchanges more often, and I am certainly in favor of more Via Satellite verbal exchanges to hype a match. Very sports-like and, like you said, you don't have to give anything away in order to promote the fight. As for the actual PPV next Sunday, I felt like they did a better job promoting the Hardy-Jarrett cage match than Roode-Styles title match. Perhaps it's because I feel like TNA isn't sure how to present Styles right now, but Jarrett-Hardy seems to have more steam behind it.

Parks: It does because there's more of an issue there; the issue between Styles and Roode is almost non-existent, other than the TNA Title being at stake. It doesn't feel like they've played up Roode and Styles' history in Fortune enough.

Caldwell: There it is. That's what I couldn't put my finger on what was missing from the title match build-up - their Fortune history. It seems to be completely non-existent in this story now. Very true. As for Hardy-Jarrett, it seems like Hardy wins in December and gets the title shot in January (he is on the poster, after all). How do you see that cage match playing out with the variables of Karen and Sting ringside?

Parks: Who knows. I mean, this really feels like it could be a match where about 23 things happen during and after the match, making predicting the thing damn near impossible.

Caldwell: Darn. I thought you'd sort through all of this for me. Perhaps another week of build-up will make it crystal clear! Or not. All right, Greg, anything else TNA-related worth discussing or is it time for a Gonzo & The Greg plug?

Parks: I can't pass up a G&TG plug: This week, and for the next several weeks, we'll be doing top five lists reflecting the best and worst of 2011. This week: The top five best wrestlers AND best tag-teams.

Caldwell: With the tag teams, I believe the order will be the point of emphasis considering there are about six tag teams these days.

Parks: True enough. I have a tentative list made up, and it certainly isn't as impressive as it would be in past years.

Caldwell: Indeed. All right, Greg, always good to chat with you and we will talk again next week!

Parks: Great! Look forward to it.

We suggest these recent related articles...

CALDWELL'S WWE "NXT: HOUSTON" LIVE RESULTS 9/17: Complete "virtual-time" coverage of Balor, Joe, Bayley, more from debut show in Texas

CALDWELL'S LIVE REPORT - 7/12 Lone Star in Houston, Tex.: Alberto El Patron no-shows, Dreamer vs. Hoyt new main event; plus Duggan, Snitsky, Cabana vs. Mahal, Joey Ryan, Rowe vs. Hernandez, Ivellise, Catrina, Houston Carson, one title change, more

CALDWELL: A Top 10 for 10 Years - Hall of Fame, George, Sweet Tea, Studio B, Duke, Three-Pack, and you!