PWInsider - WWE News, Wrestling News, WWE



By Dave Scherer on 2019-07-07 10:53:00

You can send us questions for the Q and A at

This new "no wrestling during the ad breaks" edict from WWE has caused a lot of stir among fans of late and rightfully so, given the contrived silliness of "resetting" matches after two minutes and other nonsense with speedy two out of three falls matches. But what I don't understand is how is it they can give us 20 minutes of uninterrupted promos but not 20 minutes of uninterrupted wrestling? The precedent has been set that they can go so long without a break (the nature of the content is immaterial), so why is it so difficult to for WWE/USA Network/whoever to allot the time with parity and give us a whole decent length wrestling match? I know ad breaks are far more regular in the US than here in the UK so to fulfill their ad obligations, they could run a few short 4 or 5 minute promo/video segments with breaks in between and let the matches run uninterrupted? 

You can blame the fans.  What they have discovered over the years is that fans tune out during longer matches and they stay tuned in during the long, talking segments.  If the audience rose during long matches, we would get more long matches.

The crowd totally crapped on the Seth/Corbin match at Stomping Grounds, in particular the whole heel ref Lacey thing.  But this is the same exact formula that we regularly saw during the Attitude era, and the fans loved it then.  Those of us who lived through the height of the Attitude era look back at it fondly, and with good reason, but for all those who want to bring back the Attitude era, is this proof that a lot of what was done back then just doesn't work in today's landscape?

No, it doesn’t mean that to me.  What it means to me is that the company hasn’t created people that the fans care about.  If the same thing happened in a HHH vs. Rock match, people would have loved it.  But, people don’t feel the way about Baron Corbin that they did about those two.  I think if the fans cared about the talents, then angles like the one you mentioned would resonate more.  But the WWE creative process just hasn’t done the wrestlers justice.  I feel bad for them.  It’s not their fault.

In terms of television production, who will be playing the Vince McMahon/Kevin Dunn roles for AEW? Cody? Kenny? The Bucks? Or a combination of all of them?

Tony Khan is going to be Vince McMahon, which makes perfect sense.  I am not sure who will be the Dunn. The Kevin Dunn of AEW appears to be Keith Mitchell, who is in charge of production.  He worked for WCW and TNA, among other places over the years.

Is there any indication that AEW will be running house shows once their TNT program kicks off, or is it too early to tell?

As of right now, Tony Khan has stated that house shows are not a priority.  That can change down the road.

Did you also feel hell freeze over when the Undertaker—the freaking UNDERTAKER—said that Shane McMahon was the best in the world on live television?

I won’t lie, I threw up a little bit in my mouth when I heard that.  I hate the whole Sweato Mac angle.  He SHOULD get his but handed to him by someone.  Will he?  We shall see,

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!