WWE Raw Discussion **SPOILERS**

[Mr.Showtime]

How did everyone take Raw last night? I think firing Kevin Nash obviously puts the show on a downer again - even if it's a set-up, which looks likely, teasing that they can get rid of Big Sexy so easily won't help. Trips also hinted at firing CM Punk whenever he wanted - I'm sure Punk's new contract must see to that.

 

In other news, Zack Ryder got a decent showing with a video package, a tag team win over the former tag team champions of the world, and then a John Cena confrontation. It looks cool to see another show being filmed as Raw is on air.

 

I enjoyed the main event elimination match and, for once, Cena domination was totally neccessary in this instance. Glad to see Drew McIntyre get about one sentence during the show too. The only way is up, Drew!

[Ron Simmons]

I hated the show. It feels like WWE has gone full circle since Punk's supposed 'ground-breaking' promo. The Nash reveal as the phantom texter was just weak, and the whole show was very 'going through the motions' in its execution. The Smackdown cameos already feel rather pointless, and it almost seems as though storylines have been dumped aside apart from Punk/Hunter and Cena/Del Rio.

 

They need to finish HOT at the PPV, have Hunter turn heel and reveal their was some kind of conspiracy after all to bring Triple H to power. They could reveal McMahon was screwed through bad advice from John Laurinitus (intentionally bad advice) and turn Triple H into some kind of super-heel.

 

They need to do something exciting, but I really don't know if that's what we'll end up with.

[Max Power]

This is the first Raw I've hated since the whole Punk thing began. What's the point of Nash texting himself? Why would he try to trick HHH into thinking that someone had sent a text from his phone? WHat would Nash get out of that? Unless I'm missing something extremely obvious.

 

The highlight of this show for me was the whole sunglasses inside line. That's it.

 

On a side note, I would love to know John Cena's win/loss record over the last 3 years.

 

EDIT: I've just read this back, and it sounds extremely smarky. I guess that I just didn't get this whole Nashhh thing as much as recent weeks.

[ThePhenom]

I'm fed up of moaning about the TV so I won't get into it too much. It was alright I guess, just not as exciting as previous weeks. I'm glad they gave Zack Ryder alot of air time as he deserves it, and I thought the Nash/Triple H/CM Punk Promo was decent enough. But Michael Cole's really getting on my nerves, he makes it hard for me to get into it when all he ever does is bully Jim Ross. It's just such a shame how he can't even get a word in edge ways.

[andrew "the ref" coyne]

Not seen the show but read the spoilers. The thing that seem to jump out as odd to me was this:

 

Previously on Smackdown, Triple H was able to force Christian to fight Orton in a NO DQ match at Summerslam, yet on this weeks RAW, CM Punk refused to accept the NO DQ stipulation unless Triple H put his COO job on the line.

 

How the hell does that make sense? Really irritates me. I just wish these sort of rules were more consistent, as it would force the writers / bookers to be more original.

 

I.e. This angle would of work better IF it was always the rule that you could never force a competitor into a NO DQ match, and that all parties had to agree to it. Theres something terribly unoriginal when (insert generic authority figure) announces that (insert generic wrestler 1) will face (insert generic wrestler 2) in a (insert generic stipulation match). If the writing team were force to come up with logical reason WHY wrestler 1 or 2 agrees to a stipulation match, I genuinely believe it would improve the show.

 

I mean take Michaels / Taker 2 match. Michaels was ONLY able to finally get the match after months of begging after Taker forced him to put his career on the line. Simple put really added a extra dimension. If it was simply a case of "I want a rematch with you Taker" and Taker simply said "ok" it would of been far far far far less dramatic.

 

What I feel they could of done with HHH / Punk was this: Triple H wants CM Punk in a really nasty street fight, but Punk simply refuses. He continues to piss off Triple H for weeks / months on end, until eventually Triple H desperately asks "what the hell do I have to do to get you in this ring with me?" THEN Punk can demand he put his job on the line.

 

Overall this is feeling dangerously rushed, but I hope it comes together in the end.

 

Just my two pennies.

[Doog]

Im beginning to think Nash and CM Punk are somehow in cahoots and Nash will screw HHH at Night Of Champions, meaning Triple H loses his COO role, allowing Vince to return too and we have Nash/Punk/Vince and Laurinitus together.

 

The only thing that wouldnt make sense is if they were in cahoots, why would Punk willingly let Nash cost him the WWE Title, but I suppose they could still get round that by having Punk say it was all part of the bigger plan, to get total control of the WWE etc.

 

Or Nash helps Triple H beat Punk, wish I suppose is more likely, Triple H 'fires' Punk, but then the GM reveals themselves as Vince or Stephanie even, and re hires Punk to go against Triple H and Nash, all culminating in a big Survivor Series match, maybe Triple H and Nash recruit Miz and Truth for their team.

 

Good storyline progression in the Punk/HHH/Nash thing tho, really well done, the text thing might seem weak and not make sense now, but if either of the above happen at NOC, it will all fall into place.

[Astro Hollywood]

Nash has been awful, sadly. He sounds like he's had a stroke. The timing that made his promos so great before is shot.

[Loki]

Harsh man. I just watched the firing angle on youtube, and he seemed fine. He has a lovely raspy voice and didn't slur or anything. His beard looks really over dyed though. Hopefully now he's finished filming this movie, he can ease back on the JustForMen.

 

I'm beginning to suspect they don't know where this angle is going. Clearly at one point it was going Nash v Punk, but now... Nash v HHH? Who's face? Who's heel? All a bit of a mess.

[Snitsky's back acne]

Due to a storm in my area my Sky box didnt record Raw.

[Duke]

Not seen the show but read the spoilers. The thing that seem to jump out as odd to me was this:

 

Previously on Smackdown, Triple H was able to force Christian to fight Orton in a NO DQ match at Summerslam, yet on this weeks RAW, CM Punk refused to accept the NO DQ stipulation unless Triple H put his COO job on the line.

 

How the hell does that make sense? Really irritates me. I just wish these sort of rules were more consistent, as it would force the writers / bookers to be more original.

 

I.e. This angle would of work better IF it was always the rule that you could never force a competitor into a NO DQ match, and that all parties had to agree to it. Theres something terribly unoriginal when (insert generic authority figure) announces that (insert generic wrestler 1) will face (insert generic wrestler 2) in a (insert generic stipulation match). If the writing team were force to come up with logical reason WHY wrestler 1 or 2 agrees to a stipulation match, I genuinely believe it would improve the show.

 

I mean take Michaels / Taker 2 match. Michaels was ONLY able to finally get the match after months of begging after Taker forced him to put his career on the line. Simple put really added a extra dimension. If it was simply a case of "I want a rematch with you Taker" and Taker simply said "ok" it would of been far far far far less dramatic.

 

What I feel they could of done with HHH / Punk was this: Triple H wants CM Punk in a really nasty street fight, but Punk simply refuses. He continues to piss off Triple H for weeks / months on end, until eventually Triple H desperately asks "what the hell do I have to do to get you in this ring with me?" THEN Punk can demand he put his job on the line.

 

Overall this is feeling dangerously rushed, but I hope it comes together in the end.

 

Just my two pennies.

Triple H could have forced Punk into just accepting the match, but he's a babyface and when Punk challenged him he accepted.

[C-Rock]

Kevin Nash to interfere at Night of Champions and cost Triple H the match, turns out Nash and CM Punk were working together the whole time, Nash becomes Punks bodyguard, a new COO announced and rehires Kevin Nash.

[FLips]

Nash has been awful, sadly. He sounds like he's had a stroke. The timing that made his promos so great before is shot.

 

Couldn't agree more. There was moments last night where he sounded like JR did after his second Bells Palsy attack.

[andrew "the ref" coyne]

Triple H could have forced Punk into just accepting the match, but he's a babyface and when Punk challenged him he accepted.

 

But why is it as a babyface he forced Christian to into a no holds barred match against a psychotic Orton? And why would agree to put his COO role on the line? Hes playing right into Punk's hands.

 

Hopefully when I watch it later it will make more sense, but right now my suspension of disbelief is being challenged.

[Duke]

But why is it as a babyface he forced Christian to into a no holds barred match against a psychotic Orton? And why would agree to put his COO role on the line? Hes playing right into Punk's hands.

 

Hopefully when I watch it later it will make more sense, but right now my suspension of disbelief is being challenged.

For the first question: because Christian is a whiny heel and was pissing Trips off. That's pretty standard. As for the second, because he's a babyface and he's sure he's going to win anyway.

[Scott Malbranque]

Nash's presence is the only thing saving these progressively stinking segments. I'm a big fan of all involved and for the first five or six weeks post Punk's "infamous" promo, they had me hooked, but now it's such a nonsensical clusterfuck, that I'm only watching to see Nash and hear the old Black & White music.

Nash is certainly not trash, as one sign rather immaturely put it last night. No sirree bob.