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, this week's WWE programming felt like a calm after the Rumble storm and calm before the Chamber & WM28 storms. Lots of video packages and "Chapter Twos" on Raw, with heavy involvement from Smackdown. What was your overall impression of Raw - thumbs up or thumbs down? - and what stood out to you the most?

Greg Parks: It was a downgrade from the previous week's show, but I don't know if I'd go a strong thumbs down. Yeah, the video packages really disrupted the flow of certain segments and really, the entire show. I am interested in the Taker vs. Hunter story and they did a nice job balancing WM and Chamber hype, so I'll give them that, too.

Caldwell: It was odd for WWE to go so heavy on the Chamber PPV hype two weeks in advance of the PPV. They've formed a bad habit of waiting until the last minute, so I found that quite interesting. Perhaps they looked at those fourth quarter PPV buys and decided they need to come stronger with the PPV hype. With Shawn Michaels presumably added to the Hunter-Taker mix on this Monday's Raw, what kind of advancement in the story do you expect on Raw?

Parks: I don't know if they'll get Shawn directly involved this coming Monday, or if that's for later on. I think they'll continue to do the slow burn in this storyline and not reveal too much on this Monday's Raw; if the first two weeks are any indication, Taker vs. Hunter is a story that is going to take some time to get going. Eventually, Shawn will likely be the special ref, but I don't see them getting there this Monday.

Caldwell: Especially since Michaels is advertised for another Raw in a few weeks, so they can take their time with this. They started the Taker-Hunter program a few weeks earlier this year compared to last year, so they certainly have room to grow and time to get there. I'm with you - save the HBK announcement until later. Greg, I'll throw this poll question to you that we ran last week - should Taker or Hunter's career be on the line or could they create a strong-enough #2 match (behind Rock-Cena) with the expected items of The Re-match, The Streak, and HBK as special referee?

Parks: I think if either man's career is to be put on the line, it should be Hunter. There's already enough people who don't think Taker will lose...having him put his career on the line will only make people think that even more. But, I wonder how they'll make it make sense that Hunter's career will be put on the line. He doesn't want to face Taker, so it's not like he'd throw these stips out there to entice Taker into a match. The only thing I can think is if Johnny Ace forces Hunter to put his career on the line. That said, does this match NEED a career-on-the-line stip? Not really.

Caldwell: Right - how they get there to Hunter putting his career on the line would be quite the journey since he doesn't even want the match at this point! From a storytelling perspective, I think the main reason it would make sense is to have that symmetry with Michaels - failed in attempt #1, put his career on the line in attempt #2, and having Michaels as special referee would connect WM25 & WM26 to WM27 & WM28. Of course, Michaels requested the re-match with Taker, Taker denied it, and HBK eventually forced Taker to give him the match. The HBK and Hunter roles are certainly reversed two years later. It should be very interesting to see how things play out. As for the actual WM28 main event of Rock vs. Cena, Greg, how do you see things standing right now? This feud seems to be playing out more on Twitter than on TV at this point.

Parks: Yeah, and I don't know if that's WWE testing the waters to see if they can actually build a legit feud through social media or what. We'll get a clearer picture of where things stand once Cena ends his feud with Kane, presumably at the Chamber, and Rock starts showing up on Raw.

Caldwell: Rock isn't back on TV yet and Cena is still feuding with Kane, but, at what point do you think WWE needs to start talking about the actual ramifications of winning and losing the match? Or, are they find where they are just reminding people over and over of the match two months in advance? Or, do you think WWE will ever get to the point of talking about winning and losing as opposed to just saying, "Here's a big spectacle, dream match - order the PPV?"

Parks: I don't know that the stakes of the match will be anything beyond "who's better?" With Rock a part-time wrestler at best, it's not like you can build stakes to this match as if there are two full-time wrestlers going at it. I don't really have a problem with it being built around finding out who's better, but I don't know if WWE will even push that angle hard enough or, like you said, it'll just be built around the spectacle.

Caldwell: That's definitely the reason not to stress the stakes of the match. In my mind, I picture this being completely Even Steven or something similar to WrestleMania 18 - Cena gets the actual win, Rock is dominant and clearly the bigger star, and no one really remembers who wins the match. So, it would almost be like Miz getting the victory over Cena at last year's Mania to give him bragging rights, but no one will remember that Miz won the match because Rock-Cena overshadowed the main event. Do you think that's the right way to go or is there another picture in your mind of how the match plays out?

Parks: It's certainly not going to be "one guy wins...and that's it." There's going to be some post-match interaction, whether it's a handshake or whatever. I think the win will matter in that whoever gets the "W" will brag about it on TV for months to come, even if it's The Rock and he shows up every once in a while - he'll still remind everyone of it. Then again, perhaps a loss to Rock will be enough to send Cena over the edge into heeldom. Unlikely, but it's possible.

Caldwell: Very true. Whether Rock sticks around for a little while before filming his next movie could be a factor in the outcome, as well. Or, at least, how they handle the post-match, because there would have to be some sort of post-match to complete the story. As for the current Cena-Kane feud, Greg, very limited exposure for the feud on this week's TV, but they did announce an Ambulance Match stipulation. Your thoughts on the stip and WWE pulling back a bit on featuring the feud?

Parks: Ambulance match...oh boy. It's one of the cheesier stips in wrestling, but it certainly fits this feud. I did like getting the break from it on Monday's Raw and the Ambulance stip does make sense within the feud. But I don't know that it's a stipulation that a lot of people are going to get excited about.

Caldwell: I'm double-checking in my mind - it's the match with the yellow tape at the top of the entrance ramp and you have to wheel the opponent on a stretcher to the awaiting vehicle, right?

Parks: That sounds more like a stretcher match, but it's possible you're right as well - if they have to get the stretcher to the ambulance, at least that part is different than a stretcher match. Oh well. We'll find out soon enough.

Caldwell: The intricacies of WWE stipulation matches! That was troubling me all week because I kept thinking of how RVD was written off WWE TV several years ago and whether that's the same match they're promoting. In any event, it's pretty safe to say Cena wins and advances on. Speaking of advancing on, the rest of Raw was very heavy on Smackdown content, but, did anything else Raw brand-related stand out to you?

Parks: Chris Jericho did his first extended promo since his return, but I'm not sure he cleared much up in the way of his "end of the world" shtick. It did come down to Punk's Best in the World moniker as many had thought, but his claims of winning the Rumble were a bit odd since clearly he didn't. I'm still not sure what to make of this right now.

Caldwell: Perhaps that's why I completely forgot about this feud since I'm not sure what to make of it, too. It's not clear yet whether Jericho will be revealing more layers to his 1-2-12 return & "end of the world" proclamation or if those were just storytelling devices that will end up being disconnected from the Jericho-Punk feud. It's somewhat intriguing, yet also peculiar at this point. I hesitate to say frustrating at this point because they could still re-visit the origins. And, in the main event of Raw, Jericho secured the final Chamber match slot with a victory. Right now, 54 percent of Torch readers say Punk should retain at the Chamber, then face Jericho at Mania, and 46 percent say Jericho should win the title in the Chamber, then face Punk in a re-match at Mania. Where do you land right now?

Parks: I'd like to see Punk retain and Jericho challenge. No matter who has the title, the title of "best in the World" will be at stake just as much is the title is; I just hope the title doesn't take a backseat to being Best in the World.

Caldwell: If the Rumble winner, Sheamus, were not in the picture, I would say World champ Bryan vs. WWE champ Punk vs. Jericho in a three-way title unification match, with the added intrigue of Jericho being the first-ever Unified champion a decade ago. But, that would be a dream scenario. Overall, Greg, when you look at the Big Three feuds on the Raw brand going forward - Rock-Cena, Hunter-HBK, and Punk-Jericho - how do you think WWE will distribute PPV hype over these next two months on Raw?

Parks: I think we'll see a little like we saw this week with Cena and Kane, where it took a bit of a backseat to the others: Each week, one feud may be sacrificed so the other two can share the focus. Just keep alternating one out each week. I think if you tried to go hard with all three, plus involve Smackdown and the undercard, you're going to be in trouble as far as finding time for them all.

Caldwell: And, potentially wear out the audience on all of the big matches before Mania. I think how WWE divides up the hype will be an interesting story to follow leading to Mania. Speaking of Smackdown, Greg, you covered last Friday's show, then saw a lot of the same items on Monday's Raw. Included was the 2,000th re-push of Great Khali. Your thoughts on Khali's inclusion in the Smackdown Chamber and involvement on Raw?

Parks: I didn't like him beating Cody cleanly (though they need to build him back up for the Chamber, and there really wasn't another obvious "out" for that match) and I don't like him being in the Chamber. I'd rather they give that spot to someone young who can use the Chamber match as a launching point for their career, rather than Khali, who offers no upside whatsoever and has no real future in the company.

Caldwell: With Mark Henry out of the picture due to his injury situation, I thought they could have gone a different direction with the essentially throw-away spot since there are really only two candidates to win - Bryan or Orton, and maybe Wade Barrett on a stretch. But, why not give the slot to Drew McIntyre? They could have done a story where Teddy gives him the #1 slot, and he has to win the match or he's fired. I was definitely not in agreement with the Khali pick. As for Bryan and Orton, are you still leaning toward Bryan walking into Mania as champ or do you see Orton winning the Chamber?

Parks: Eh, McIntyre might be a stretch there James, but I like that you're thinking outside the box! I see Bryan winning here and taking on Sheamus at 'Mania perhaps with Orton getting involved - we can't ignore that Bryan celebrated during Orton's win on Smackdown last week. That seemed like the opening salvo in a feud to come now or soon down the line.

Caldwell: It's a throwaway #6 slot, so why not have some fun with it? Ha. Yeah, it is interesting WWE is picking up a Bryan-Orton feud while Bryan is still heavily involved with Big Show. Perhaps it's just the semi-regular "let's have Orton re-visit the main event scene" deal or a sign of Orton being involved in the World Title picture at Mania. Tonight's Orton-Bryan match should be interesting to see how WWE handles it. As for the Bryan-Show feud and A.J.'s involvement, what did you think of how the feud played out last week on Smackdown and WWE giving away the singles match with no advanced hype on Monday's Raw?

Parks: I think you're right and they may just want to set fans up with the possibility of Orton winning or at least having a reason to go after Bryan and the title at the chamber. I didn't like giving Bryan vs. Show away in the first match on Raw, given that it's been the main event feud on Smackdown for some time now. They haven't really advanced things much over the past few weeks, aside from moving Bryan into the more preachy Vegan character and having Show come close to running AJ over again on Raw.

Caldwell: Did time stand still for you, Greg, when Show nearly plowed A.J. into the ringpost, as it did for Bryan?

Parks: They really milked that moment, didn't they? It was nice to let everything sink in, but at some point, you go over the edge and pause too long, and the realism of the moment is gone.

Caldwell: Exactly. I'm sure Bryan was instructed to hold that Look of Shock for as long as possible, but it seemed a bit over-the-top, even by WWE's standards. Small item, but it stood out in my mind. Perhaps that's why they did it! Who knows. Elsewhere on last week's Smackdown, what stood out to you from the undercard feuds and storylines?

Parks: Nothing really, to be honest. Mark Henry gets suspended, but when you take into account the brutality he left in his wake some months ago, what he did to get suspended this time seems a little tame.

Caldwell: Yeah, they had to get him off TV for a bit, and this seemed to be a logical way to go, but, you're right, the suspension should have come a long time ago in the storylines. Henry has had a nice run the past six months and probably should be rewarded with something noteworthy at WrestleMania, but where do you see him fitting into the card right now, if at all?

Parks: That's another fly in the ointment as far as the World Title picture. Who knows, he could end up facing Sheamus, as the champion, for the title at 'Mania; there really are many different combinations they could go with at this point.

Caldwell: I'm not one to advocate a multiple-man match, but Henry-Sheamus would certainly call for another person to be involved. Greg, anything else on WWE before we move on to Impact happenings?

Parks: I want to avoid Natalya's storyline this week, so let's go to Impact. I liked this week's episode, aside from more Hulk Hogan zaniness on the mic, practically begging fans to cheer Garett Bischoff. That's not going to help the kid get over. Any thoughts on that?

Caldwell: I figured I would give you one last chance to visit Natalya's storyline! Yeah, again, I can't get past Hogan on the mic. If they removed that from the last two shows, these would be strong thumbs up shows, but Hogan on the mic and the Garett Bischoff storyline just brings down the whole show. The roster has proven once again they can take the ball and run, but another one of these storylines is stunting growth. As for TNA adding Garett vs. Gunner to the PPV, I don't think it will be a bad match (especially due to low expectations they can easily exceed), but it's the principle of the matter. They're taking up a slot and taking time away from more deserving wrestlers.

Parks: But, and I brought this up in my blog post a week or so ago about Garett, who exactly would you say really deserves TV time invested in them that isn't getting it? The only one I could think of is Doug Williams. Guys like Samoa Joe or Magnus, two guys who always come up when we talk about who is being underutilized, are actually being pushed right now. I see a guy like Doug Williams, but that's about it. This TNA roster is not as deep as it has been in the past.

Caldwell: I would say spreading out the four-way title match into a singles title match and #1 contender match, but those matches have already been done over and over again on TV. As for the undercard, I think you're right that it's a bit weak right now. Perhaps re-focusing on the tag division beyond the top two teams (and only two teams) would help bolster the tag division. But, that's four more wrestlers to focus on to set up a tag match on a PPV. Even looking at the PPV card right now, only seven matches have been announced, and they always, always have at least eight announced. Who knew that ending the Devon and Pope feud would leave a gaping hole in the undercard?!

Parks: Yeah, right? Maybe they'll stretch out the other matches and go with only seven this month. Then again, maybe they'll end up giving EY a match for the eighth. Sting returned to the ring on Impact...what did you think of how he performed and how TNA gave away his return for free?

Caldwell: TNA was in a tough spot with Sting, but it was their own doing. They advertised Sting in advance for a match at the London TV tapings, but he really didn't need to be involved and it hurt the "specialness" of seeing him wrestle, especially when it wasn't promoted in advance. TNA has to do a better job promoting when a specialty/novelty/nostalgia/part-time wrestler is going to be in the ring. Otherwise, it's a waste, as evidenced by little-to-no-movement in the quarter-hours the past few times they've done it. As for Sting's performance, I thought he did well. He looked inspired and fed of the crowd energy. I did have a problem with him submitting the champ, but I think we've, unfortunately, come to expect Roode to be booked this way. What did you think of that aspect?

Parks: Yeah, that was the only part I didn't like, him submitting Roode. Sting fighting on the last episode of the London tapings made the show feel like a big deal and was a nice reward for the London fans. He did just enough in the match where, if you watched the show to see Sting wrestle, you didn't feel ripped off.

Caldwell: As for Roode at the PPV, and with Sting as special enforcer, it fits the name of the PPV with the champion being "against all odds" having the deck stacked against him, so how do you see this playing out with Roode likely overcoming this month's situation to retain the title?

Parks: "Special enforcer" can mean so many things, so I'm not 100 percent sure what his role will be - but I can almost guarantee the ref getting bumped. Having Sting count Roode's pinfall would give Roode something else to brag about.

Caldwell: Yes, the ol' one...two...hesitation as Roode is pinning Ray, but Sting didn't see the belt shot during the chaos...three. Since we're assuming Roode retains, looking at this card, what can TNA do to ensure there are some satisfying moments for PPV buyers, unlike the last few PPVs that ended on down-notes?

Parks: They're clearly not in the business of ensuring there are satisfying moments, otherwise we wouldn't have had the last two main event finishes, so why waste time trying to think of how they can do it now?

Caldwell: Oh, Greg, so realistic. We do have a News Bulletin in to the Chat...Room. Greg, last night's Impact scored a 1.05 rating, down from a 1.16 rating last week. Your thoughts on why the audience did not respond to these London episodes?

Parks: That's disheartening news for TNA and Spike TV, and would certainly point to no more on-location tapings for some time. And, frustrating for fans, too, who enjoyed the atmosphere of these London tapings.

Caldwell: I'm half-serious when I ask this, but could the "Star Wars" theme have had a negative impact?

Parks: I don't see how.

Caldwell: Yeah, I had to mix in a "Star Wars" reference during the Chat, so I figured that was as good as any. Any final thoughts on Impact before we wrap up for the evening?

Parks: I'm good for this week.

Caldwell: Very good. Greg, let the readers know what to look out for on Gonzo & The Greg this weekend.

Parks: This week: In honor of Valentine's Day, the Top five greatest on-screen (romantic) couples in wrestling history.

Caldwell: Cue up this week's only NXT reference: BetaMax should make the list!

Parks: Never.

Caldwell: Sigh. Goldust & Aksana? Or, Teddy Long and Aksana?

Parks: Pass. If this was "Top ten of 2011" then maybe.

Caldwell: Oh well. It was worth a try. All right, Greg, good chatting with you, as always, and we'll look forward to your Smackdown report tonight!

Parks: Great, I look forward to the show!

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!