Want more wrestling news, rumors, and results? Be sure to visit PWInsider.com and PWInsiderXtra.com.
You can send us questions for the PWInsider.com Q and A at pwinsider@gmail.com.
I get the Pat McAfee inclusion into the Cody vs Orton feud was to get people talking, which it has, and that it was a TKO call to increase corporate synergy between WWE and ESPN. But, as a Brit and for everyone else outside of the US, why should we care about an ex-American football player most of us wouldn't have even heard of before he joined WWE as an annoying commentator being shoehorned into the main event feud? Do they not care or have they forgotten WWE is a globally consumed product and ESPN isn't? It just makes the whole thing even more desperately short sighted than it already is.
I see your perspective, for sure, but here’s the thing: There is NO REASON for Americans to care about McAfee’s involvement so it has nothing to do with global consumption. It has everything to do with the top guy at TKO thinking he he knows what will make more money and showing how little he understands the wrestling business.
There is 20 years of history to explore between Cody Rhodes and Randy Orton, yet WWE forces Pat McAfee into this storyline? Why have McAfee rant about ratings and ticket sales? Why have McAfee tell the fans that the tickets, which cost more than most people’s mortgage payments, are to watch a subpar product? How does this build the Rhodes-Orton story and match?
None it makes a lick of sense, logically. Mike Eps and I made all of those same points on Saturday’s FMB.
In Janel Grant's latest court filing, why does she continue to make allegations against John Laurinaitis, after she agreed to remove his name from the lawsuit? I'm no lawyer, but hasn't she agreed to terms, in exchange for his cooperation, to not include him going forward in her lawsuit against Vince McMahon and WWE?
I am no lawyer but if he was there when alleged events happened, he would have to be mentioned as he has already been named in the past. A settlement would preclude him from being subject to damages.
After watching the WWE Rivals episode between WWE and WCW, it got me thinking. ECW was already done, but what if Turner had bought WWE then the AOL merger happened. Do you think that the decision to dump wrestling would have come out different? If not, what do you think the landscape would look like today?
It would all depend on when Turner bought them. If it was during the down time of the mid-90s, they would have probably just merged the WWE talent into WCW. Now, if they bought it at the height of The Attitude Era? I think that AOL would have sold WWE as it was making big money then or kept. It’s ironic to think about today, since AOL didn’t have the foresight to get into high speed internet when they were the industry leader in the dial up years, but there was a time when the company as all about making money, and WWE was doing it back then.
You can send us questions for the PWInsider.com Q and A at pwinsider@gmail.com.
If you enjoy PWInsider.com you can check out the AD-FREE PWInsider Elite section, which features exclusive audio updates, news, our critically acclaimed podcasts, interviews and more by clicking here!
Bang On Casino
