![]()
SEScoops Mailbag for May 12th
(submit YOUR questions to [email protected])
Q: Kane used to wear a mask because he was a “Burn Victim”. But now that I see him without it, I see no signs of any burns on him. I do admit he isn’t the best looking guy, but he is not burned. WWE kept this “Burn Victim” thing going for a while and then scrapped the idea. So did WWE just think that fans would forget this? – Abbas Rezwi
A: It was made quite clear shortly after Kane lost his mask that he only THOUGHT he was burned all of those years. It was all psychological. It wasn’t an angle that was dropped. I do wonder though if the original plan was, in fact to use makeup for facial scars and they changed course when the mascara on his face rubbed off that night from the sweat when he lost his mask.
Q: Back when Triple H feuded with [Randy] Orton, when Orton [delivered an RKO to Stephanie], was HHH really pissed off or just acting for the cameras? – Keith
A: He was really pissed off…for the cameras.
Q: Has any WWE talent ever tried to sue the company for being a victim of backstage politics? If you were Christian, would you have sued after they screwed him over 5 days after he won the belt? Do you think it is to make a new storyline or is it just [a reflection of Vince’s opinion] of Christian? – Dean Hydra
A: Unless your name is Hulk Hogan and you’re smart enough to work a clause into your contract giving you 100% creative control over your character, you cannot sue over bad creative. If that were the case, then all of us could band together and file a class action lawsuit right now citing the last 10 years. You also would have no case if you feel you were wronged by “backstage politics” because it’s so difficult to define, unless you can prove it as a form of discrimination. Then you MIGHT have a case, but you’re still going to need a really good attorney.
Q: I was just reading the mailbag for last week when this question popped into my head. How does the WWE decide who becomes champion? I know the wrestlers don’t just go at it in the ring and see who comes out the champ, but was just wondering how they decided to put the titles on people, and not just the big ones either but even the Tag and Intercontinental titles? – John, Pennsylvania
A: The criteria for being a champion in 2011 is very different from what it would have been in even 1998. Typically, your champion is the person who will help draw you the most money. They are the person that will draw big quarter hours on TV, help sell tickets to house shows, help sell PPV buys and move merchandise. For example, nobody was better at this in the late-90’s than Steve Austin. When he wasn’t the champion, the money was in his pursuit of the title. These days, ideally, you want your champion to do the same, but the difference is now, they will put the title on a young guy and hope that, by doing so, that helps get them over. Of course, this is an ass backwards philosophy that rarely works (see case file: Swagger, Jack). When it’s on someone like John Cena or Randy Orton – basically 98.6% of the time – it’s because they feel they are the best person to sell tickets to house shows. As for the secondary titles, like the IC or US, it’s usually a way to get a mid-carder into a meaningful feud, or to help elevate someone from low to upper mid-card status. This worked wonders back in the day for guys like Honky Tonk Man and Mr. Perfect, but means absolutely nothing these days because they treat their champions like shit. As a matter of fact, on the recent draft show, they had both Sheamus (US champ at the time) and Wade Barrett (IC champ) lose singles matches cleanly for no good reason whatsoever. It doesn’t matter who holds those belts because we’ve been conditioned not to care.
Q: What your are thoughts on WWE not allowing Sable to take bumps and how other girls say they had to carry her? – Brandon
A: I’d say good for WWE trying to protect its investment. The problem is once they started putting Sable in the ring and put the Women’s title on her, I can totally understand where that resentment would come from. Sable did take some bumps, but it was never anything too crazy that she wasn’t comfortable doing. Now, on the flip side, she became the hottest female attraction in the company and both of her Playboys sold millions of copies, so she made the company a lot of money. How much money did Ivory or Tori make for WWE? I’m guessing not nearly as much. At the end of the day, it’s a business and you need to protect your golden goose.
Q: I can’t understand why certain young stars get squashed while others get pushed. For example, why are Mason Ryan and Ezekiel Jackson getting pushed while guys like David Hart Smith and the Usos remain in limbo? I’ve heard criticisms of lack of character/mic skills, but Jackson and Ryan cut some of the worst promos I’ve seen in long time. I find myself perplexed week after week, asking myself what do these two guys have to offer? Why are they getting precious television time when a guy like Seth Rollins (Tyler Black) remains in developmental hell? – Matt Isaia
A: Let’s see, what do Mason Ryan and Ezekiel Jackson have in common. Well, one is a white guy with a Welsh accent and the other is a black man who bears a striking resemblance to Suge Knight, so that can’t be it. Oh yes, they’re both big dudes who aren’t particularly good workers. The key word there, of course, is BIG. Vince McMahon has always had this infatuation with big, jacked up men and no matter how many times they tell you that they push plenty of smaller guys today (which may well be true), the fact remains that a big man will always have far more opportunities to succeed than will a smaller man. Great Khali is another example, and let us not forget Jackson Andrews, Tyson Kidd’s short-lived bodyguard who they couldn’t wait to rush onto TV before they realized how green he was and sent him back down to FCW.
Q: WWE has title matches at house shows, but the title never changes hands. I understand that title changes are good for TV ratings, but wouldn’t title changes on house shows make the product more realistic? – SCSAFan
A: Not only would it add a sense of realism and unpredictability to the house shows, but I would argue that it would lead to an increase in ticket sales. Granted, it would be a modest increase, nothing crazy, but if you give people a reason to believe that something big might happen at a live event, they would be more inclined to attend. To be honest, it doesn’t even have to involve titles. I don’t understand why WWE doesn’t film an angle every now and then (you can’t do it all the time or it kills its effectiveness) on a house show and air the footage on Raw or Smackdown. They’ve done before, like when Steve Austin was going to the turnbuckles to pose after a match and “collapsed” or when an angle involving Eddie Guerrero and JBL led to Eddie’s mother having a heart attack (they even solidified the Diesel heel turn in 1996 at an MSG house show when he cracked a steel chair across HBK’s back), and I would like to see more it.
Q: Was there a particular reason behind WWE announcing Limp Bizkit as their “favorite band in the whole world” at WrestleMania 19? – Ryan B.
A: Alcohol, I’m sure.
Keep those questions coming to [email protected] and remember to include your name!
