{"id":48998,"date":"2017-10-06T01:07:28","date_gmt":"2017-10-06T06:07:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.pwtorch.com\/site\/?p=48998"},"modified":"2017-10-06T13:33:35","modified_gmt":"2017-10-06T18:33:35","slug":"five-count-five-lessons-learned-wwe-tv-since-summerslam-everything-meta-bad-tv-bad-heat","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.pwtorch.com\/site\/2017\/10\/06\/five-count-five-lessons-learned-wwe-tv-since-summerslam-everything-meta-bad-tv-bad-heat\/","title":{"rendered":"FIVE COUNT: Five Lessons to be learned from WWE TV Since Summerslam &#8211; Everything is Too Meta, Bad TV is Bad Heat, more"},"content":{"rendered":"<div id=\"pwtor-680914954\" class=\"pwtor-before-content pwtor-entity-placement\"><hr \/><b>SPOTLIGHTED PODCAST ALERT (YOUR ARTICLE BEGINS A FEW INCHES DOWN)... <\/b>\r\n\r\n<iframe src=\"https:\/\/widget.spreaker.com\/player?show_id=3076978&theme=light&playlist=false&playlist-continuous=false&autoplay=false&live-autoplay=false&chapters-image=true&episode_image_position=right&hide-logo=false&hide-likes=false&hide-comments=false&hide-sharing=false&hide-download=true\" width=\"100%\" height=\"140px\" frameborder=\"0\"><\/iframe>\r\n<hr \/><\/div><p>Readers of this column might remember a couple of months back I did a piece after Smackdown\u2019s Battleground event diving into reasons why I was now being a lot more selective in what WWE content I watch, hence no more columns based exclusively on WWE PPVs since then. I did however end up watching the vast majority of No Mercy with the exception of Bray Wyatt vs. Finn Balor because life is just too short to be watching Bray Wyatt. So kudos to WWE on producing a build to a show that got me interested. Granted, the two matches I was most excited to see fell really flat relative to what I wanted each of them to be, but you can\u2019t ask for everything overnight I suppose.<\/p>\n<p>Anyway, without further ado, let\u2019s get straight into Five Lessons To Be Learned From WWE TV Since Summerslam. I may not be watching everything anymore but I am still watching anything of interest\/significance and following everything still. And with WWE producing so much content there\u2019s always plenty of lessons to be learned from what they\u2019re doing.<\/p>\n<p><b>(1) Everything Is Too Meta<\/b><\/p>\n<p>The build to the Cena vs Reigns match wasn\u2019t perfect but it has been really strong. It\u2019s impossible to deny that it created a buzz and got everyone talking about their promos each week. However, too many of these meta exchanges on Raw leading into No Mercy weren\u2019t creating interest in the match. There were too many lines by writers trying to appeal to the most in the know fans by showing them that they know that we know. The reality however is that the audience that they\u2019re trying to appease the most with all these meta lines are the ones who want it the least.<\/p>\n<p>We know that you know that we know. We don\u2019t need you to beat us over the head with it. We aren\u2019t all jumping around the room \u201cmarking out\u201d because The Miz references Enzo getting kicked off the bus. What we want isn\u2019t insider remarks but logical writing that enhances our interest in what you\u2019re trying to promote.<\/p>\n<p>Sure, we can appreciate the Daniel Bryan and The Miz exchanges on Talking Smack on a separate level but the important aspect of what made them a success is that they work on an universal level too. They were effective in making you like the babyface and dislike the heel and want to see the heel get beat up (granted by the babyface who can\u2019t wrestle but you take the positives where you can). We enjoyed them segments on the level that anyone watching could enjoy them but ALSO on another more meta level. The also is the key part of it working. If it\u2019s only on a meta level then all you\u2019re achieving is neglecting a huge part of your audience for the sake of at best a smirk from a niche part of your audience that isn\u2019t anywhere near as important as everyone seems to think these days.<\/p>\n<p>A cute line here and there that only the most knowledgeable of fans would get and smirk at is great. Think Punk calling Nash Oz. When it starts becoming the sole focus of an entire segment it doesn\u2019t increase our appreciation, we\u2019re just watching pointing out how ineffective and nonsensical the storytelling is.<\/p>\n<p>Meta comments in it of themselves aren\u2019t a negative. Some of the more \u201cshoot style\u201d comments during the Reigns\/Cena exchanges were really good. The Bootleg Cena line, \u201cit\u2019s called a promo, you\u2019re gonna need to learn how to do one\u201d and especially Roman\u2019s go home promo were great examples of edgy comments that work on an extra level for the more knowledgeable fans.<\/p><div id=\"pwtor-1723970503\" class=\"pwtor-content pwtor-entity-placement\"><div align=\"center\" data-freestar-ad=\"__336x280 __336x280\" id=\"pwtorchcom_test_300x250\">\r\n  <script data-cfasync=\"false\" type=\"text\/javascript\">\r\n    freestar.config.enabled_slots.push({ placementName: \"pwtorchcom_test_300x250\", slotId: \"pwtorchcom_test_300x250\" });\r\n  <\/script>\r\n<\/div><\/div>\n<p>Some of the meta lines, however, have been terrible. Roman \u201cshooting\u201d on Cena for holding talent down or anytime match quality comes up or the entire interaction between Miz and Enzo. There\u2019s two questions that writers should ask themselves when trying to produce this more meta shoot style scripting; (1) Will this make sense to the casual viewer who only takes in what we give them? And (2) Does this make sense to the narrative that we\u2019re telling.<\/p>\n<p>The casual viewer who isn\u2019t reading sites like this is the type of viewer that WWE should be targeting the most. That\u2019s the demographic that WWE have lost in the biggest numbers and are the ones that WWE need to start turning into money paying consumers again if they aspire for the Network to continue to attract new subscribers. One sure fire way to lose them is by confusing them. They\u2019re not fans for life who are in love with the art of wrestling. They\u2019ll tune out far easier than we will.<\/p>\n<p>WWE should be writing for their audience under the assumption that they know the bare minimum to understand the concept of a wrestling show. Not to an insulting degree obviously but write as if everyone watching is a new viewer. Instead what WWE are doing far too often now is writing the show for the target audience of the most informed viewer. When you do that you\u2019re neglecting the ability for the casual viewer to be able to follow what\u2019s going on.<\/p>\n<div class=\"ad-tag\" data-ad-name=\"pw_incontent_2\" data-ad-size=\"300x250\"><\/div>\n<p><script src=\"\/\/tags-cdn.deployads.com\/a\/pwtorch.com.js\" async ><\/script><br \/>\n<script>(deployads = window.deployads || []).push({});<\/script><\/p>\n<p>Soaps are really popular TV here in England. The shows have been running for decades and when they start referring to characters and storylines that happened before I started watching, I lose interest in the show. If you\u2019re at school and you\u2019re in a lesson that is just going way over your head then you lose interest and zone out. That\u2019s what will happen to the majority of your audience when you start bringing up stuff like Enzo getting kicked off the bus. It didn\u2019t work for WCW when they had Eddie Guerrero cut promos about coffee and it won\u2019t work now.<\/p>\n<p>The second point that writers need to consider is if the line makes sense to the narrative that you\u2019re telling. And too often it doesn\u2019t. What does John Cena and his golden shovel burying talent have to do with anything? Isn\u2019t the narrative of the show that you have to win your matches and the guys who win the most matches are the ones that headline the most cards? So what does John Cena holding down younger talent have to do with anything? If he keeps winning his matches then he keeps proving he\u2019s the best and thus deserving of being a headliner.<\/p>\n<p>What does match quality have to do with anything? Isn\u2019t the narrative of the show that wrestlers have matches against each other to determine who the better wrestler is? What is the reason within the narrative for having an entertaining match? It\u2019s not like there\u2019s a Match of the Night bonus. The overarching narrative of any wrestling show is that wrestling is about winning matches and the wrestlers who are the best and win the most matches hold the titles. If you take that away then what you have is something that isn\u2019t all that interesting and definitely isn\u2019t simple to follow.<\/p>\n<p>Trying to introduce more reality into the narratives of Raw and Smackdown isn\u2019t a bad idea in itself, it\u2019s the implementation of it that hasn\u2019t been a home run. Something like Natalya bringing up Ric to Charlotte and using that to build their match up is good. It\u2019s a reality that the vast majority of the audience is well aware of and it works in making you want to see Charlotte beat Natalya. It\u2019s something that everyone can understand and fits into the narrative of building to a match and making you want to see the babyface beat the heel. That\u2019s the direction that they should be heading in, not the direction that they\u2019ve gone in too often now where you frustrate and confuse viewers by referring to non-kayfabe events that they don\u2019t know about or understand that don\u2019t fit within the existing narrative of the show.<\/p>\n<p><b>(2) The Inconsistency Of Finishers<\/b><\/p><div id=\"pwtor-1660604386\" class=\"pwtor-content-1 pwtor-entity-placement\"><!-- Tag ID: pwtorchcom_test_300x600 -->\r\n<div align=\"center\" data-freestar-ad=\"__336x280 __300x600\" id=\"pwtorchcom_test_300x600\">\r\n  <script data-cfasync=\"false\" type=\"text\/javascript\">\r\n    freestar.config.enabled_slots.push({ placementName: \"pwtorchcom_test_300x600\", slotId: \"pwtorchcom_test_300x600\" });\r\n  <\/script>\r\n<\/div><\/div>\n<p>One of the biggest flaws in both marquee matches at No Mercy was the use of finishers. It\u2019s not like John Cena\u2019s AA was in any way a protected finisher but Roman Reigns took a massive hammer to the credibility of it. Contrastingly, the complete opposite was the flaw in the main event which saw viewers outraged that Braun Strowman went down for the count after only one F5.<\/p>\n<p>One F5 finishing a match isn\u2019t a bad thing. It\u2019s actually a good thing. Finishers should be protected and kicked out of once every blue moon. The drama and the suspense should be in the build to hitting the finisher created by counters and reversals, not by how many times does he need to hit his finisher before it ends the match. The entire concept of a finishing move is that when you hit it the match is finished.<\/p>\n<p>Then you protect it over a sustained period of time building equity up in the move that can then be transferred when you finally let someone kick out of the move. That sort of a rub is invaluable as it can allow you to put over someone really big without having to them beat another star that you also want to protect. Brock beats everybody over a two year period with the F5 until one day someone finally kicks out and he needs a second F5 to win the match. Huge rub for that guy who gets to kick out of the move without wasting the rub from someone beating an undefeated monster such as Brock. But if everyone always kicks out of the move then you\u2019re killing that equity for the sake of cheap pops.<\/p>\n<p>In an isolated context, I admire what is trying to happen with Brock and The F5. Like I just said, you want to protect finishers and build equity up in them by having them actually finish the match until one day you give a big rub to one guy when they do kick out. Brock pinning two strong acts like Samoa Joe and Braun Strowman with just one F5 does a great job of protecting the move and building equity back up. Here\u2019s the problem though, you don\u2019t get to make the rules up as you go along and have one rule for one guy and a completely opposite one for everyone else.<\/p>\n<p>Once WWE opened up the Pandora\u2019s Box of mass kickouts of finishers they made it virtually impossible to go back to the way things were beforehand. With anyone and everyone kicking out of finishers even in irrelevant TV matches, you tell everyone watching that that\u2019s what happens. That\u2019s the rule. You create an expectation that if the match you\u2019re watching involves two wrestlers of any note then they\u2019re kicking out of finishers.<\/p>\n<p>The other side of that is when you don\u2019t have someone kick out of a finisher, especially in a big match, it does a significant amount of damage to the perception of that wrestler. Roman Reigns can kick out of four AA\u2019s but Braun Strowman can\u2019t even kick out of one F5, well I guess Roman is a lot tougher than Braun. Or maybe more appropriately, Roman gets to kick out of four AA\u2019s but they won\u2019t let Braun even kick out of one F5, I guess that says a lot about how WWE view Braun.<\/p>\n<p>And it\u2019s not like Brock has always been the exception to the rule either. The F5 hasn\u2019t been a greatly protected finisher since he returned in 2012. He\u2019s been playing under the same rules as everyone else. When it comes to a big WWE match you each kick out of each other\u2019s finishers, that\u2019s just the formula for a modern day WWE main event. So it\u2019s not like you can point to Braun not getting to kick out of an F5 as something that barely anyone gets to do against Brock. We\u2019ve all sat through years of not just everyone kicking out of everyone\u2019s finisher but also all of Brock\u2019s top opponents kicking out of the F5. So when someone doesn\u2019t get to kick out of the F5, it leads to a very deflating ending because there\u2019s an expectation that has been created by WWE that if it\u2019s a big match the first finisher is never the end.<\/p>\n<p>If WWE decided that they were going to start protecting finishers again then it needs to be a show wide mentality. And sure it\u2019ll be rough at first as you get met with similar reactions to the finish of Brock vs Braun but the benefits of it are worth it as you begin to establish legitimate equity that lead to significant rubs. The key to making that possible is consistency. Without it, the concept is dead on arrival. You don\u2019t just get to say that you\u2019re now going to protect the F5 and not let anyone kick out of it while continuing to have everyone else on the roster kick out of each other\u2019s finishers.<\/p>\n<p>No Mercy was overwhelming evidence of this. You can\u2019t expect viewers to watch Roman Reigns kicking out of four AA\u2019s and then not be underwhelmed when one F5 finishes off Braun Strowman. You can\u2019t have it both ways and expect both of them to work. If you\u2019re going to decide to start protecting one person\u2019s finisher again then you have to do that throughout the entire card. If not then all you end up doing is producing flat finishes that completely undermine your own work.<\/p>\n<p><b>(3) The Importance Of Wins &amp; Losses<\/b><\/p>\n<p>The double main event of John Cena vs Roman Reigns and Brock Lesnar vs Braun Strowman may not have delivered on the night for everyone but it\u2019s without argument that both matches were massive attractions going into the show. For once, WWE\u2019s marketing terminology was actually in line with how viewers felt, this really was a show with two Wrestlemania worthy main events. The main reason for that? All four acts have been protected when it comes to wins and losses.<\/p>\n<p>That\u2019s how you make wrestlers important. Even acts like Roman Reigns and John Cena who a large portion of the audience very much dislike are still treated as stars whose matches even the fans who hate them as individual acts get excited for. You make wrestlers important by protecting them when it comes to wins and losses and you make matches important by featuring wrestlers that are important.<\/p>\n<p>The best matches in terms of builds are the ones where you have big personalities and you struggle to imagine either of them losing to the other. That\u2019s what the two main events at No Mercy had. Sure there will be people after the fact claiming that well of course Roman and Brock were both always going to win. And yes they were both the more likely outcomes but there was legitimate cause for doubt where you could buy into a whole number of outcomes occurring. That\u2019s what happens when you match up wrestlers that you protect. You create matches with a multitude of scenarios that not only do fans buy into happening but also care about because they believe that whatever does happen will matter.<\/p>\n<p>Take a match like Bobby Roode vs. Dolph Ziggler coming up this weekend. They\u2019re both good wrestlers and there\u2019s a good chance that it\u2019s a good wrestling match but nobody is really looking forward to it. That\u2019s because by not protecting him when it comes to wins and losses, nobody cares about the Dolph Ziggler character anymore and nobody buys into him winning so they see the match as a foregone conclusion. Or maybe more accurately with how WWE books these days, they don\u2019t buy into a Dolph Ziggler win meaning anything and if the outcome of the match is meaningless then who cares?<\/p>\n<p>Look at the reactions to Bayley since her return. Bayley being added to the title match at No Mercy was barely even a discussion point. It was literally only this year when she was still a hot act that beat Charlotte for the title on Raw. Fast forward nine months and nobody even bats an eyelid not only at Bayley being a late addition to a title match but to Bayley then being the one to take the fall. She\u2019s been beaten down so much now that when she took the fall in a match involving Emma there was no outrage, just apathy.<\/p>\n<p>That\u2019s the other side of the importance of wins and losses. You don\u2019t get to just continually beat babyfaces and then expect crowds to care about them in the same way that they do about acts that you very rarely beat. We don\u2019t want to support losers and we don\u2019t get invested in something that we have no faith in.<\/p>\n<p>Over on Smackdown you\u2019re seeing another layer of why wins and losses matter with Jinder Mahal. Everyone continues to not take anything that he does seriously because wins and losses matter. His history of losing to literally anyone and everyone at every level on the roster doesn\u2019t get forgotten about overnight. You don\u2019t get to beat someone over and over again and then out of nowhere give them a couple of wins and expect everyone to react to them like they\u2019re someone important. You do that by protecting them when it comes to wins and losses over a sustained period of time.<\/p>\n<p>Compare the hype for a Brock Lesnar title match with the hype for a Jinder Mahal title match. Even looking past the obvious talent disparity, people aren\u2019t even invested in the outcome of Jinder\u2019s title defences because nobody buys him as being something important and because of that nobody buys into it meaning anything when someone does beat him for the title.<\/p>\n<p>Wins and losses matter. I\u2019m sure that nobody reading this needed that reaffirming for themselves really, but if you ever wanted further proof, just compare the excitement for matches like Reigns vs Cena and Lesnar vs Strowman at No Mercy to matches like Roode vs Ziggler and Mahal vs Nakamura at Hell In A Cell. You get people excited for matches by making them feel important. You do that by featuring wrestlers that are perceived as being important in them and that perception is created based on wins and losses.<\/p>\n<p><b>(4) Bad TV Is Bad Heat<\/b><\/p>\n<p>Regular readers of my column will be aware that I don\u2019t watch every segment that WWE produces and that recently I\u2019ve begun to take a more cynical approach when it comes to the PPVs as well in terms of what I choose to watch and what I choose to ignore. Now it\u2019s a case of I\u2019m only watching something if I have a genuine interest going into it or if something gets good reviews and convinces me into watching it. Smackdown post Summerslam however has introduced a new variable into the equation; TV so bad that you have to see it.<\/p>\n<p>Yes those Jinder Mahal and Dolph Ziggler segments over the past few weeks sounded so awful that I just had to see them for myself. And yes, they really were awful. I\u2019m not at all surprised that those Ziggler segments drummed up a lot of views on YouTube though. They are at least something different and something that definitely got people talking. Generating a buzz in it of itself isn\u2019t necessarily a good thing though.<\/p>\n<p>My job is in marketing and a big challenge in that field is turning awareness into revenue. Generating traffic isn\u2019t all that hard. If I created an ad and put it onto YouTube and it got over a million views then I\u2019d be pretty damn happy with myself. I\u2019d take it to my boss with all these numbers in this pretty little spreadsheet with lots of colors and charts showing him how it\u2019s performed so well generating all this awareness of whatever the advert is promoting. You know the first thing that any boss in that scenario will ask me?<\/p>\n<p>How much money did it make me?<\/p>\n<p>Because that\u2019s what matters at the end of the day. YouTube views are great but they don\u2019t mean anything if they don\u2019t convert into something that generates revenue. And that\u2019s where we link it back to these awful segments that have been airing lately on Smackdown. How can they be converted into anything that will generate revenue for WWE?<\/p>\n<p>Does anyone know anyone more excited to see a Dolph Ziggler match now than they were before these segments aired? Sure, your wrestling buddy may text you saying have you been watching these Dolph Ziggler videos, but when it comes to Hell In A Cell, that same wrestling buddy won\u2019t be texting you again on Sunday afternoon asking are you excited for Dolph Ziggler vs. Bobby Roode (unless they\u2019re a big Bobby Roode fan excited to see him on the main roster but, that\u2019s excitement for Roode not Ziggler).<\/p>\n<p>Everything that airs on Raw and Smackdown is filmed with the intention of generating viewer interest in an upcoming match. That\u2019s the primary objective of the show and the measure of success for any segment. Did it make you more excited to see what\u2019s coming next? Sure, some viewers may have been excited to see what entrance Dolph Ziggler imitated the following week. That would be just fine if Dolph Ziggler was now the guy who imitates famous entrances and was no longer a wrestler. But he is still a wrestler and the goal is still to get people to care about his wrestling matches. Nobody did before and nobody does now.<\/p>\n<p>The other half of the terrific one-two punch has been Jinder Mahal\u2019s intentionally bad comedy segments. These have been just about as bad as it gets. The only thing worse than bad comedy is offensively bad comedy. I\u2019m sure WWE\u2019s rationalization for these segments will be that they\u2019re building heat on Mahal and hey look, everyone is hating him after them segments. Except that\u2019s not the type of heat that draws money.<\/p>\n<p>That\u2019s go-away heat. That\u2019s &#8220;I\u2019ve had enough of this I\u2019m tuning out heat.&#8221; And part of it is just the fact that Jinder and The Singh Brothers just aren\u2019t talented enough to pull the promos off. I\u2019m sure if you gave that type of segment to Kevin Owens and Chris Jericho this time last year it would still have been bad, but it might have been bad in a &#8220;so cute it\u2019s almost funny how funny those not funny guys think they are&#8221; way. They can\u2019t pull that off though and instead it\u2019s just bad TV that annoys people and makes them embarrassed to be watching.<\/p>\n<p>One rationalization for it that I could somewhat understand is that they were designed to get Nakamura over. You make the heel so annoying that you want to see someone shut them up and then, boom, Nakamura comes out and gives you exactly what you want which makes you like him more. Except they did two weeks of this and never once had Nakamura, or anyone for that matter come out and shut him up.<\/p>\n<p>Intentionally bad TV isn\u2019t some new age meta way of getting heels over. It doesn\u2019t get anyone over. It doesn\u2019t make you more excited for any upcoming matches or entice you to spend money on anything. It\u2019s just bad TV and bad TV causes people to tune out.<\/p>\n<p><b>(5) 205 Live Is Better Now<\/b><\/p>\n<p>I\u2019m not going to sit here and write a piece claiming that this current angle with Enzo is great or that it has much longevity. One thing that I will say about it however, it\u2019s definitely a better reason to watch 205 Live than what the show had going for it beforehand.<\/p>\n<p>The existing formula wasn\u2019t working. An extra ***-***1\/2 match featuring wrestlers that we\u2019re not invested about in matches that barely have any consequences isn\u2019t something that viewers need more of. WWE viewers get enough of them on Raw and Smackdown and there\u2019s no lack of choice when it comes to easy to access good wrestling either through the WWE Network or the many other streaming services now available to wrestling fans. It\u2019s not like the good wrestling supplied by 205 Live is all that unique either. Maybe if the in ring style had a unique selling point that differentiated it from a ***-***1\/2 match that you\u2019d find on a ROH or a New Japan show then it would be more appealing.<\/p>\n<p>Something new to fail with is always better than failing with something that\u2019s already failed. Will making a heel Enzo Amore the centrepiece of the Cruiserweight division turn 205 Live round from a sinking ship to a thriving show? Unlikely. Has it helped to reignite some lapsed interest in the division though? Absolutely. And that\u2019s the main problem that both the show and the division has had, there\u2019s just not a lot of interest. Nobody talks about what happens on 205 Live. Even websites and podcasts that cover pro wrestling in staggering detail barely devote any coverage to the show. Until Enzo showed up that is.<\/p>\n<p>Now the show is getting talked about more. And it\u2019s not in the way that the terrible Dolph Ziggler segments got talked about. These segments with Enzo aren\u2019t great but they\u2019re definitely good and most importantly of all, they\u2019re getting Enzo over as a heel. So now 205 Live at least has one more act who is genuinely over with the live crowds. Plus the good thing about the current direction with Enzo is by getting someone genuinely over as a heel, it makes it so much for easier for you to then also get a babyface over by pairing them up with a heel that people want to see get beat.<\/p>\n<p>Obviously, the downside with pushing Enzo in the Cruiserweight division is that the standard of wrestling isn\u2019t going to be good. Well, first of all it\u2019s not like the good wrestling on 205 Live is really drawing viewers in and secondly, it\u2019s not like the Cruiserweight matches on PPV beforehand have actually been all that good. Solid is the word that springs to mind, along with forgettable. Dead crowds is another term that would spring to mind when thinking about the Cruiserweight matches on PPV. Nothing is worse than wrestling in front of a dead crowd. It\u2019s bad for everyone there live having to sit on their hands and it makes the product look so unappealing to anyone watching on TV. So no, Enzo probably won\u2019t be putting on great matches but if he starts getting genuinely over as a heel like he\u2019s shown signs of doing so far, at least his matches show promise of getting over more than the majority of the Cruiserweight matches have done so far.<\/p>\n<p>Enzo might not be the hero that 205 Live wants but he\u2019s the hero that they need. The show needs eyeballs and the division needs viewers getting invested in what it\u2019s producing. It\u2019s been a year now since 205 Live debuted and it hasn\u2019t been able to do that at any point until recently with Enzo and his heel turn. He\u2019s making 205 Live newsworthy, relevant and giving it an actual unique selling point. The kind of match that you\u2019ll get from TJP vs Rich Swann are ten a penny but the type of content that you\u2019ll get from these Enzo promos are not only good viewing but they\u2019re also unique. That combination gets eyeballs on the Cruiserweight product and the only way that the more talented wrestlers such as Neville, Rich Swann, Cedric Alexander and so on are going to get over is with more eyeballs watching them in more than just a meaningless three minute match on Raw.<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p><strong>NOW CHECK OUT THE PREVIOUS COLUMN:<\/strong>\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.pwtorch.com\/site\/2017\/09\/16\/five-count-five-lessons-learned-wwes-mae-young-classic-including-binge-watch-format-backstories-lacking-early-match-formats-flawed\/\">FIVE COUNT: Five lessons to be learned from WWE\u2019s Mae Young Classic including binge watch format, backstories lacking, early match formats flawed<\/a><\/p>\n<div class=\"pwtor-end-article-groups pwtor-entity-placement\" id=\"pwtor-742678515\"><div id=\"pwtor-901055226\"><div align=\"center\" data-freestar-ad=\"__336x280\" id=\"pwtorchcom_medrec_3\">\r\n  <script data-cfasync=\"false\" type=\"text\/javascript\">\r\n    freestar.config.enabled_slots.push({ placementName: \"pwtorchcom_medrec_3\", slotId: \"pwtorchcom_medrec_3\" });\r\n  <\/script>\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\nTHANK YOU FOR VISITING<\/div><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<div class=\"mh-excerpt\"><p>Readers of this column might remember a couple of months back I did a piece after Smackdown\u2019s Battleground event diving into reasons why I was now being a lot more selective in what WWE content <a class=\"mh-excerpt-more\" href=\"https:\/\/www.pwtorch.com\/site\/2017\/10\/06\/five-count-five-lessons-learned-wwe-tv-since-summerslam-everything-meta-bad-tv-bad-heat\/\" title=\"FIVE COUNT: Five Lessons to be learned from WWE TV Since Summerslam &#8211; Everything is Too Meta, Bad TV is Bad Heat, more\">[&#8230;]<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":5695,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"episode_type":"","audio_file":"","podmotor_file_id":"","podmotor_episode_id":"","cover_image":"","cover_image_id":"","duration":"","filesize":"","filesize_raw":"","date_recorded":"","explicit":"","block":"","itunes_episode_number":"","itunes_title":"","itunes_season_number":"","itunes_episode_type":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[52,4366,27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-48998","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-opnionandanalysis","category-five-count","category-specialists"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.pwtorch.com\/site\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/CenaJohnWK_3x2_600.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.pwtorch.com\/site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48998","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.pwtorch.com\/site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.pwtorch.com\/site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.pwtorch.com\/site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.pwtorch.com\/site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=48998"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.pwtorch.com\/site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48998\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":49005,"href":"https:\/\/www.pwtorch.com\/site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48998\/revisions\/49005"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.pwtorch.com\/site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5695"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.pwtorch.com\/site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=48998"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.pwtorch.com\/site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=48998"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.pwtorch.com\/site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=48998"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}