PWInsider - WWE News, Wrestling News, WWE



By Dave Scherer on 2016-12-28 10:00:00

You can send us questions for the Q and A at

Recently caught old ECW matches on youtube and one thing I learned to appreciate now more was the greater sense of realism and "anything can happen" Atlas Security brought to the show. From the small things of walking with the wrestlers to the ring to the bigger things of separating people while the wrestlers were fighting amongst the crowd.  They seemed like the real deal as opposed to security you saw at WWF & WCW shows.  Any insight as to how ECW/Atlas Security relationship formed?  And what was the scariest incident you witnessed live regarding rowdy fans and Atlas?

Second question first, I never saw any truly scary incidents due to rowdy fans because they knew better than to mess with the Atlas guys.  They were great at what they did and they watched out for us at the web position.  They are a great group of guys.  The only somewhat hairy stuff that happened occurred when Bubba Ray Dudley would challenge fans to come in the ring and fight him.  Those situations would have gotten scary if Atlas wasn’t there.  Paul Heyman or Bubba found them after they ran shows in Queens, NY and the security wasn’t good.  Atlas was based in the area and fixed that problem immediately.

Traditionally ,the ideal number of commentators at the table for a wrestling show is 2.  You have the play by play guy and the colour commentator.  3 is a crowd, so why has the commentary table on Smackdown grown to include 4 members?  When you have a great play by play guy like Mauro Ranallo, adding Tom Phillips to the table is very redundant.  Same with adding Otunga when you have JBL.  Not to take away anything from Phillips and Otunga, but they don't add much to the presentation when you put them alongside capable veterans like Ranallo and JBL.
I wish I had a good answer.  Maybe it’s to give Phillips exposure to the TV audience.  He is really good on NXT but yes, four is a crowd, for sure.

Regarding the ending at Roadblock, rather than attacking Owens, has it been addressed at all where Jericho could have come out and simply attacked Roman, getting Owens disqualified but resulting in him still keeping the title?

It was a WWE cliffhanger!  A surprise, if you will. See, he was mad at KO, so what would he do?  And they wanted you to tune into Raw to find out why he did what he did.  They only kind of explained it, but that is WWE creative.

Though I don't subscribe to the WWE Network, I understand the idea of using "pay per views" as a marketing incentive.  Because it's content that fans who just watch Raw and Smackdown don't see.  At least, that's the way it's supposed to work.  I say that because based upon results and what's seen on Raw and Smackdown, the shows aren't very special.  Sure you may get the extra good wrestling match, and Hell in a Cell is a different concept.  But it seems like many of those shows aren't "special" and have the same things taking place that one would see on Raw or Smackdown (IE: yet another faux breakup between Kevin Owens and Chris Jericho.)

Well, now that they are on the Network the events often have more of a “bridge to TV” feel to them, for sure.  But, you also get more uninterrupted wrestling as well.  The events are still different from the TV shows however.   

Enzo vs Rusev.  Why?  Why should I care about this?  The whole thing seems contrived and has been quite one-sided based upon outcome.  Is this a case of WWE "Creative" not being very creative?

It’s all about getting Cass involved.  Rusev picks on the little guy to get into it with the big guy.

You can send us questions for the Q and A at

If you enjoy you can check out the AD-FREE PWInsider Elite section, which features exclusive audio updates, news, our critically acclaimed podcasts, interviews and more, right now for THREE DAYS free by clicking here!