Mailbag Roundup!

OK, rather than a bunch of smaller posts, let’s hit a few topics in quick bursts here.

Hey Scott,

I have a couple of quickfire questions for you regarding the Undertaker.

1. How long, realistically, does the streak have left as a saleable gimmick? Is it really until it's broken, or do you think it's shorter than that?

2. Isn't just seeing Taker enough to put some butts in seats?

3. If Taker retired today would it affect the buyrate of Wrestlemania?

4. If Taker says that he wants to wrestle DBry, does that mean it'll most likely happen?

6. Does anyone really believe that Cena is the credible threat to the streak? Why would he possibly need it?

5. Finally, I've still never heard a very well thought out answer to why Cena vs. Taker would be the best thing since sliced bread/set in stone/etc. Don't we all hate Cena or something? (With the caveat of we all say that personally he's a great guy, but 10 years and blah blah blah.

1.  Until it’s broken. 

2.  Yes, but not as many butts.

3.  The Network is gonna have a bigger effect, I think.

4.  Nope.

5.  That’s what he does, rise above the Streak.

6.  Because it would be a good match that he haven’t already seen a million times and would feel like a legitimate Wrestlemania main event.

Every year it seems like you get surprise guest entrants -- either new hires or (more than ever these days) old veterans returning for one last shot. Who are the wrestlers you'd like to see make a surprise return... and who are those you don't want to see?

They pretty much have to bring out Jake this year.  I’d also really like to see JoMo back again because he’s a fresh face who they could push to the moon and would work as either a flashy babyface or a super-corporate heel like the Miz. 

Scott,

I was thinking the other night how for the first time in several years we have a wide selection of superstars who could conceivably main evetn Wrestlemania, not only from their position on the card at the moment and storylines but also with crowd reactions.

We could see any combination of five guys in Randy Orton, John Cena, Brock Lesnar, Batista & Daniel Bryan. We also have CM Punk whose battle with HHH/Authority could envelope the title, Undertaker returning and Sheamus also coming in shortly.

Bear in mind in previous years there's only been 2-3 decent guys at the top of the card, do you agree the main event scene is currently stronger than it has been for years?

No, because none of these guys are drawing money. 

2 quick questions Scott
So word is Batista's return Monday night was a huge ratings success. Question is, how long before the bloom fades and he is just another guy on the roster??
And do u see any scenario where the fans turn on him???

Like if he posts an obviously trolling tweet and then deletes it right away?   Who knows, though, fans are fickle beasts.  Probably it’s more likely he tears another tricep first anyway. 

Hi, Scott,

Here's one for the blog and for you.

I've been a supporter of TNA since the first weekly PPV. I've been there through the ups and downs, have argued for them, and given up on them on several occasions. After the stellar late-2011/early-2012 they had, I'd hoped they'd turned the corner. Unfortunately, since then they've just proven how out of touch they are, and I've finally given up on them for good -- it just doesn't seem that they're ever going to learn their lesson, and they've had long enough that I can no longer say "oh, but they're only X years old!". I actually have to force myself not to argue for them, simply because it's force of habit now.

So here's the question.

With longtime fans such as myself calling it quits (and I've got to assume I'm not the only one), is TNA salvageable any more? Or, is their name so damaged, so associated with stupidity and failure, that if they fix all of their idiotic booking decisions (they won't, but let's assume that they could) they still couldn't come out of the tailspin they currently appear to be in?

Their fate rests entirely on SpikeTV continuing to pay them TV rights fees for Impact.  If Spike is successful in getting WWE, TNA is dead and there’s no saving them.  If not, they’ll likely continue propping up Dixie forever. 

Just in case you had any shortage of WWE Network questions… Just wanted to get your thoughts on the Network’s potential impact on the current product’s continuity. With the average WWE fan able to access years of shows at their fingertips, do you think that creative will have to take that into account? It was one thing when just the internet nerds were calling them out for lazy storytelling, but now more casual fans may notice. “Hey, why is Punk now friends with Mysterio after I watched them have a blood feud a few years ago?” Or do you think I’m hoping against hope and that the Network won’t have any impact there?

The average casual fan is just gonna be watching the Network for the PPVs and maybe RAW.  It’s only us hardcore nerds that are gonna be going back and watching old PPVs with notebook and stopwatch in hand, so I wouldn’t think it’ll have any more effect than before.  Not to mention the current writers can’t even keep track of continuity from last week as it is anyway.