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 have to start with the top story of the week - Zema Ion wins a pole match to earn the fourth slot in an X Division Title match at Genesis next month. Your thoughts?

Greg Parks: This is such a big story, James, we might have to devote the entire chat to the subject. I mean, the return of pole matches in TNA is huge news. Ion and Nese put on a performance for generations to come. Okay, maybe not. But, it was a fine X Division match. And...that's all.

Caldwell: Best of TNA Impact 2011, perhaps? Oh dear. While we're on the subject of TNA Impact, which just finished as we began this chat Thursday night, your thoughts on the overall show and what did they accomplish on the final Impact of the year?

Parks: It was so-so. There wasn't a lot to get excited about, that's for sure. The good: Sting finally addressing heels being in charge of the KOs division; the KOs getting a main event slot, and the video package after the RVD vs. Angle match. The not-so-good: The screeching; the tag situation; Abyss as a babyface again.

Caldwell: Where do the Robert Roode family segments fall in the break down?

Parks: Good question! I didn't think it belonged in the "good" or "bad" in my last response, but somewhere in the middle. I don't know if there's going to be a payoff to Roode's family/friends being involved in his storyline or if it's just a way for him to get cheap heat. I thought Roode played his part well, and his buddy was predictably a little shaky.

Caldwell: It would be one thing if they were positioning Roode as anti-family and Jeff Hardy as the fallen star-turned family man to set up their title match, but I don't sense that's part of the build-up. It's not like TNA is necessarily in the business of promoting PPVs these days, but it feels like they're focusing on a singular issue with Roode and everything else is secondary, similar to the last two Roode-Styles PPV matches having very little build-up and there was barely a connection between Roode and Styles. But, do you think they came any closer to making people want to see Roode-Hardy after tonight?

Parks: I don't think they did anything to build that, like Roode-Styles. I think you nailed it where the story last month was Roode's heel turn and Styles, his opponent, was secondary (as evidenced by him being added at the last moment). It's the same here where TNA is continuing to try to get Roode over as a heel, and Hardy is just sorta "there" as his opponent.

Caldwell: Overall, does it feel like something is missing from the program? I feel the Roode issue has been stagnant for a bit and Sting as authority figure is already tired. Do you think they're just in a transition where they're trying to develop new stars and move away from the old stars, or is Creative just strapped for ideas?

Parks: I do think something is missing from the title program, that being an actual, concrete issue between Roode and Hardy. They haven't really developed that. I'm fine with Sting as an authority figure. Sure it's tired, but so are all authority figure storylines. At least Sting is a relatively benign figure who only comes out and makes decisions when need be and isn't dominating screen time.

Caldwell: True. It's like he's the Teddy Long of Thursday nights. Greg, anything else from Impact worth breaking down before we move on to WWE topics?

Parks: What's your opinion of women's matches in main events? TNA has done it rarely enough where I think it's a big deal when they actually do it; but then again, you wonder why they don't make the TNA title or another main-event program the focus of the main-event segment on TV. What say you?

Caldwell: I liked the match in the main event slot in this instance since it's two top women's stars with a developed issue. I think the problem is that TNA's line of thinking is the Knockouts are typically the best draw on the show, but it's usually not for long-form matches. Lately, KO segments haven't drawn as well as in the past, and it's confirmed to me what I've believed for a few years breaking down these quarter-hours week after week: Angelina Love and/or Love & Velvet Sky in the Beautiful People are the top TV draws for TNA in the company. So, I'll be curious to see what the match draws in the final segment. As for what they could have put in that slot, I think TNA has worn out so many matches and combinations (especially giving away Sting's return match last week with no advanced hype), that they just needed something else in that slot to refresh the main event slot.

Parks: True enough on all accounts, James. Refresh my memory...did we hit on last week's Smackdown already or should we start there?

Caldwell: I do not believe so, as we chatted before last Friday's Smackdown. So, let's keep flipping this upside down and break down Smackdown before the most-recent Raw. Greg, it was Daniel Bryan's first Smackdown as champion. What did you make of the Big Program with Bryan, Mark Henry, and Big Show?

Parks: They built the show around Bryan a little more than I expected as he was in the opening segment and the entire last half-hour of the show. I truly thought Ziggler vs. Bryan would've been 4 or 4+ stars had it gone another ten minutes. I can't say enough about how much I enjoyed their bout before it was turned into a tag-team match. I don't know how long Henry is out for, but it seems clear, in the short-term, they're setting up Show vs. Bryan.

Caldwell: Yes, it certainly seems like they want to focus on the Bryan-Show issue and flesh that out a bit before re-involving Henry or someone else in the title picture. We talked at-length about the potential of a short-term or long-term run for Bryan as champion on today's Livecast; based on what WWE has presented so far, is it clear to you which way they're leaning right now?

Parks: Based on every WWE title reign of the last five years, I'd say short term. But I truly do believe Bryan won't be the champion come 'Mania. I think it's a tremendous leap forward in WWE's way of thinking that the title even found its way around Daniel Bryan's waist, regardless of how he won. After all, they could've booked him to be the first MITB holder to lose when cashing in. The fact that they allowed him to win says something. That said, I don't think they're prepared to go with him as a long-term main-eventer at this point let alone champion. Randy Orton's injury and the severity of it could have an effect on Bryan's standing in the coming weeks and months, too.

Caldwell: The updated injury report that Orton will only be out for a few weeks re-affirms my prediction that Orton will win the Rumble. If that happens, who do you think would be the best opponent for Orton in a World Title match at WM28?

Parks: I don't think a Bryan vs. Orton match would be bad, but I've just affirmed the belief that Bryan won't be champion at 'Mania, and I don't want to talk out of both sides of my mouth (because I NEVER do that!). I don't know- it's hard to get excited about an Orton title match because he's been around the block with seemingly everyone on the roster so many times. It'd take a new guy like Ziggler or Rhodes to get me really excited, and even then, Orton has only a certain opponent with whom he can have a really good match with - some opponents he's had over the years where you think it would be a good match, just hasn't meshed for whatever reason.

Caldwell: I think that's also the issue with C.M. Punk perhaps in a title match at WrestleMania. WWE has gone through so many match-ups and feuds that nothing really seems fresh with the current roster. I think Dolph Ziggler could have a great match with anyone on the roster right now and Ziggler wouldn't have to be depended on to "sell WrestleMania" with Cena-Rock and Taker handling that, but I don't see WWE putting Ziggler in a WrestleMania title match just yet. So, unless they were to bring in someone else not on the roster, I don't what they would do with Orton. Like you said, Bryan vs. Orton wouldn't be bad, but I don't see a tangible issue - right now - they could play up. We'll see. What else stood out to you from last Friday's Smackdown?

Parks: The Miz's surprise was out of left field, considering superstars going from show-to-show is not a two-way street. And they didn't even really do anything with Miz, jobbing him to Sheamus. I didn't really understand that.

Caldwell: It seemed like they just needed a star to fill a spot and Miz filled the slot, but, like you said, it didn't make sense. Then, you have Miz take a beating from R-Truth on Monday's Raw. Is there something here with WWE losing confidence in Miz or just a coincidence of events? It's certainly not helping Miz develop some toughness, which is his missing ingredient as a heel.

Parks: It's almost like Rhodes and Ziggler are, at this point, bigger deals than Miz, which is a little odd considering Miz main-evented and won the title at WrestleMania this past year, and we haven't heard any reports of him running afoul of anyone backstage; on the contrary, he's gone above and beyond the call of duty as far as doing press for WWE. So I'm not really sure what this down-turn is about.

Caldwell: Like Jack Swagger doing an eye twitch (that will be my go-to example for this, forever), we'll see if it's a one-week thing or if there's something to it. Also on the Smackdown side, the Booker T vs. Cody Rhodes feud continued. What do you make of where they are, especially after Cody put over Booker in 10 minutes on Raw?

Parks: Well....the feud is continuing. I'm fine with it because in the end, Cody should be put over strong and Booker should (ugh) return to the announce table. It'll give Cody another shot of credibility as he reaches for that metaphorical brass ring that is the main event picture.

Caldwell: A final topic on the Smackdown side - since there's been speculation on Bryan or Show turning heel, which do you think would be best for Smackdown's top program and the World Title?

Parks: I really think both staying face would actually work best, and I'm not generally an advocate of face vs. face matches. I think they can tease enough out of this story to make it work. Show has turned so many times (like Kane) that it won't have any effect. A Bryan heel turn would be perversely interesting if only to hear Michael Cole no doubt sing his praises like crazy. Other than that, Bryan is a textbook babyface.

Caldwell: Would Cole's head explode if Bryan turned heel and he suddenly had to put over Bryan's virtues? It's like when Christian turned heel and Cole went from dogging Christian as washed-up to being full of valor and bravery. I'm almost in favor of Bryan turning heel just to see Cole's head explode. Greg, anything else on Smackdown before we tackle Raw?

Parks: Let's move to Raw. The big story was Kane speaking for the first time since his return and his attacks on John Cena. James, was it worth the wait based on what he had to say, or did you have trouble making sense of it?

Caldwell: I could come up with a list of about five reasons I didn't like it and five reasons I did like it. I think what stood out to me is how quickly they rushed through Kane's re-introduction by having him talking Week 3 and giving a long explanation for his purpose. I think it indicates this is a very short bridge to WrestleMania hype season, almost using Kane in a Roddy Piper way just being another person along the way trying to make Cena think about "embracing the hate." So, if this is just a short-term deal, then I was okay with it. If they want to use Kane in a more prominent role (either with Cena or with someone else), then I didn't like this since it removed Kane's mystique. Right now, I'm wait & see on both Kane's re-emergence and how it affects Cena. What did you make of it?

Parks: I think they had to make Kane speak on his intentions sooner rather than later. It's almost like some fans were wondering what the heck Kane was doing attacking Cena and not Henry and wanted an explanation, and then when Kane gave it, they decided, "gee, why did they have to have him talk already?" You can't have it both ways and play the result, folks. I thought it was good for what it was, which seemed to be using Kane as another guy (along with Piper) who wants Cena to embrace the dark side. Whether more wrestlers jump on this bandwagon and try to get Cena to do the same, or whether they'll settle into a Kane vs. Cena feud (despite Kane revealing no real issue with Cena in his interview that would make for a longer form feud) remains to be seen.

Caldwell: I think WWE could have hit in the middle by having someone speak for Kane. One of those "where's a male manager when you need him?" moments or calling up Jon Moxley to speak for Kane or something like that. What I found interesting about Cena on Raw was that Cena seemed to be more solidified as a face in that promo exchange with Miz where he challenged him to a fight, yet, by the end of the show, they were back to him teasing a heel turn. So, I'm not quite sure what direction they're going, despite them *seemingly* leaning more toward the inner conflict issue.

Parks: I think it's clear that in Cena's mind, he's still a face, but WWE wants to show that forces outside of his control are pulling him to the heel side, and for right now, he's resisting. So it made sense to me. Also made sense that they didn't have Cena respond to Kane on Raw; would've been giving too much away. Good that they're making fans tune in Monday night to hear Cena's response to Kane's points.

Caldwell: Agreed. I thought it was a good cliffhanger on paper with Cena selling conflict and having to tune in next week to hear Cena's response to Kane's big explanation. I just think the crowd involvement was a bit clunky at times. Speaking of the crowd, they were there for C.M. Punk, but seemed to die out after so many segments on the show and Punk making several appearances. What did you make of Punk's return to Chicago?

Parks: There's no doubt he's a star there; in fact, he absolutely demolished the competition on a Chicago-area website that asked who the Chicago Sports Stud of 2011 is, so he's seen as a huge star in Chicago. You described the law of diminishing returns, where his appearances on the show would get less and less of a pop. I think part of it was that WWE wanted Punk to get that good pop in his hometown (which they knew he'd get) over and over again so the fans at home would think of him more as a star the more they hear the loud pops for him.

Caldwell: That's a great point. I think WWE over-estimated a few things. (1) That their TV writing could hold the audience's interest over a two-hour period to where the crowd wouldn't be burnt out by the second hour. (There were just way too many segments in the ring and backstage on that show. And they weren't great. Kelly-Show fashion tips, anyone?) (2) That people care about John Laurinaitis at a level of McMahon-Austin. They are really pushing this Punk-Laurinaitis deal, but I'm not feeling it. Laurinaitis has about 0.00001 percent the credibility McMahon had as a heel authority figure. It's just not working for the audience, I believe. What do you make of where they are with Punk-Ace?

Parks: I think a lot of fans, at least online that I'm reading, are warming up to Johnny Ace as a character, especially after this past Monday's show. I have warmed up to him somewhat too, but I don't like Punk monopolizing his time by worrying about what Ace thinks; it seems almost out of character for him to concentrate so much on Ace when he should be a guy "addicted to competition" and worrying about defending his WWE Title. I get that it's fun making fun of Ace, but the focus is too much on Ace vs. Punk rather than Punk vs. in-ring opposition.

Caldwell: And that gets to one of the problems with how Punk is being booked right now: he doesn't have actual in-ring opponents to feud with. His scripted promos already cut down Miz and Del Rio to where no one cares. Now, he's kinda sorta moving on to Ziggler, maybe? It could depend on their title match on Monday. But, I think if WWE put as much effort into building up a good, solid opponent for Punk as they have with Ace-Punk, they could have a feud the audience can invest in. As for Punk-Ziggler next week, how do you see that match going down?

Parks: I hope it goes down like this: 15-20 minutes of solid in-ring action. Anything else on top of that is cake. If we get a clean finish, it'll probably be Punk winning, but a non-clean finish could mean WWE is nearly ready to vault Ziggler to the main events and they don't even want him doing clean jobs to the WWE champ while they do so. I certainly don't see Ziggler winning the title here, I will make that clear.

Caldwell: My gut reaction Monday night was Ziggler wins and becomes transitional champ to Cena. But, after some time to think about it, I don't see it happening. I'm going with your 15-20 minutes, then the DQ finish with Ace doing a run-in of sorts. I think Ziggler had his One Shining Moment running around with the title belt on Raw. Also on Raw, there's the 1-2-12 reveal, finally. Here it is, Greg. Your big chance. What is your expected, normal prediction and...what is your Darkhorse/Shock & Awe/You Would Never See It Coming prediction?

Parks: Gosh. I only have one real pick, and that's Jericho. My second pick would be Taker, but after that James, I'm at a loss with no idea who it would be that could match up to the hype and who wouldn't be a disappointment. What darkhorses do you think are possible?

Caldwell: I think Shane McMahon is a trendy darkhorse pick, and I like the suggestion on the Livecast today about the Raw GM being revealed. Perhaps it explains why the GM has been able to "insert the vignettes into the show." Although, that's clearly just a presentation technique. But, to me, I have a hard time believing it's a wrestler based on the power & control type teases as of late. It seems more like a new authority figure or someone entering to fight for control. I guess we'll find out soon enough. Greg, what else jumped out at you from Raw?

Parks: Not really; wasn't much to complain about, which is a nice change-of-pace. Raw has become quite watchable since Punk won the title (aside from the Slammy episode) and the last two weeks, after Ryder and Bryan have won titles, have been pretty good.

Caldwell: Ah, Ryder. So, instead of WWE beginning a U.S. Title feud post-Ziggler, WWE put him in a love angle with Eve. (Unless you count Tyson Kidd as a title opponent.) What did you make of Ryder's first full week as champ?

Parks: Not much to it really, but hey, he's champ, which is a success in and of itself.

Caldwell: Very true. All right, Greg, let's go ahead and wrap up with a plug for the final of 2011/first of 2012 Gonzo & The Greg episode this weekend.

Parks: We had planned to record this on Saturday as usual, thus falling in December, but with our schedules, we had to move it back to Sunday the first, but either way, it'll be our final top five encompassing the 2011 year - the top five best and worst matches of 2011.

Caldwell: Punk vs. Cena at MITB tops my Top Five Best list, so I'll be curious to see what else makes your cut! Well, this concludes a fine year of Chatting, so thank you, Greg, for joining me this year and we'll start it all over again next week in 2012.

Parks: That sounds like a plan, James. Talk to you then!

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!