The Annals of Nepotism and Favoritism
Vol. III Ed. XLIII
Written by: Dr. Trevor Hunnicutt
July 6, 2004
Before WrestleMania, when I wrote the column “Push or Pull: Eddie Guerrero and Chris Benoit in 2004,” I ended the column in proclamatory fashion, saying that for WWE, “it’s do or die time.” And that “[i]f WWE can keep the quality of the product up past WrestleMania, then they’ll really have something to brag about besides how well they can cut costs. A commitment to the success of new stars including and beyond Eddie Guerrero is a good first step.” Earlier this year, when WWE seemingly made commitment to Chris Benoit (starting with his Royal Rumble win) and Eddie Guerrero (starting with his No Way Out victory over Brock Lesnar), it was dramatic in both situations, as their rise to the top, though worked, was marked by deeply genuine emotion (both for the wrestlers and fans) as it was the culmination of struggle and determination and heart said best by Jim Ross after Benoit’s win over Triple H and Shawn Michaels. “Chris Benoit, so many times has been so close—year after year, trial after trial, continent after continent—but Benoit never gave up, he never gave up, and Benoit has done it. Benoit is finally, finally, my god finally, Chris Benoit has become the Heavyweight Champion of this world.”
This column will document the sabotage of both pushes and title reigns.
In recent weeks, Guerrero, going into his defense against Bradshaw has been paired up in matches as if he were a mid-carder with no active feud. On June 24, Luther Reigns was put in his second match on Smackdown against Guerrero, against whom he was disqualified. A week prior, in the second match on the card, he defeated Doug Basham. On June 10, he took Bradshaw for a ride in his limo. The problem was that the angle came off more as comedy than a world title match and while fun, added no heat to the main event. And on June 3, in the first match on the show, Guerrero defeated Danny Basham. The obvious trend is a burial—so to speak—of Eddie Guerrero that is pretty much unparalleled.
While a poor card was the culprit working against good buyrates for Guerrero’s climatic No Way Out win over Brock Lesnar, as the main-eventer, the responsibility and blame landed on Guerrero. And while another poor card and heel challenger was the main cause of the Judgment Day buyrate, as the champion, the blame lands on his shoulders. Going into Great American Bash, there was more focus on the gimmick (bullrope) and Bradshaw being fired from CNBC than on the actual feud, which has little interest, putting Guerrero in an impossible situation. Then, despite a plan to make Guerrero a long-term champion for the brand, WWE went for a title switch in his match at the Great American Bash.
But it is neither the first time nor the last that WWE will sabotage a key push, and it seems as if the only people exempt from the train of ineptitude are people with a political hand in on company dealings, such as Triple H, who has not been subject to any of the booking mistakes made on Smackdown and with Guerrero in a longer period of time. Triple H has not even missed a beat since losing the title, as he had a rematch for the title in a triple-threat match at Backlash, and then main-evented with Michaels at Bad Blood because of the Hell in a Cell gimmick. Even the past weeks on RAW, the focus has been on his quest for the number 1 contendership and interaction with the Eugene character. In that case, Chris Benoit and his world title have taken the backseat. A slovenly misinterpretation is that Benoit is not getting over, but realistically, has he been given the chance?
Fortunately for Benoit, the problems with regard to his push and title reign have been less nagging, even though they were decisions that hurt him in the short- and long-term. Going into WrestleMania, his quest for the title was almost overshadowed completely by the fact that Michaels and Triple H had a longstanding rivalry. When he was dropped in the middle of their feud, fresh from Smackdown, it became inevitable in the following weeks that he would not be used as a strong, unstoppable challenger, more like a tough, persistent one who didn’t seem on the level of Triple H and Michaels. The success of Benoit as a challenger and champion was predicated on the fact that he had a great deal of support from the fans who overlooked his lack of skill and poise on the mic to realize that overall, he is a well-rounded total package. After his win at WrestleMania, the triple-threat feud was repeated with a strong feud but little more to sell the upcoming Backlash PPV than the promise of a great match, which was far from enough to sell the match or continue to sell Benoit as a strong champion with a hot feud. Since Benoit wasn’t as strong as he needed to be going into WrestleMania, the time directly after that was needed to put him in a hot feud to redeem him. Instead, he was given a part in the increasingly stale Michaels/HHH saga. After Triple H lost again at Backlash, it seemed as if he was taking a step back from the title, given a slightly new gimmick as a great wrestler that the fans could respect even though they didn’t like him. This was not the case, as an even more stale Michaels/HHH was given a Hell in a Cell gimmick and the main event at the next RAW PPV Bad Blood, while Benoit was given a mediocre feud with Kane.
For Guerrero the situation is worse, because SmackDown is treated as the “B” brand, Guerrero doesn’t have as many good challengers as are on RAW, and SmackDown is ailing while RAW is still an OK product. Besides the general quality of the SmackDown brand, the two main forces that have worked against Guerrero being pushed properly were the push of The Undertaker and John “Bradshaw” Layfield.
THE UNDERTAKER. Revisionist history aside, when the Undertaker retires, he will be remembered as one of the more entertaining and withstanding characters of the modern era. As the nature of WWE changed and he grew older, his character was changed and he became a plain-spoken badass. Inevitable nostalgia has always lingered, making rumors of Undertaker’s return to the dark side enticing. How and why was I opposed? The popular old-school Undertaker of early was a fixture of the so-called “dark years” in WWF history, and that Undertaker was never a successful one. The successful dark Undertaker of the late 90s ran his course, when a degree of realism became an overarching aspect of WWE storylines. I expected two things, that the character wouldn’t fit in, and that the character would lose credibility quickly because of overuse. The former turned out to be the case until Smackdown became gimmick-reliant with such characters as Mordecai, Kenzo Suzuki, and Rico. The latter was prevented skillfully with WWE’s consistent use of Undertaker on house shows but making his appearances on TV special and rare. The degree of care used to prevent the immediate failure of the Undertaker far outbalanced the intelligence being used with Guerrero as champion. Since WrestleMania, Undertaker has been portrayed significantly better and much more consistently than Guerrero ever has. At the Great American Bash, an imbecilically-conceived plot-line featuring Paul Heyman, the Dudleys, Paul Bearer, and the Undertaker was featured in the main event of the PPV, obviously considered a more important item than the championship match featuring Guerrero and Layfield.
JOHN “BRADSHAW” LAYFIELD. If you think about it, it’s ironic that Layfield has taken the forefront instead of Guerrero, because he was brought in as Guerrero’s challenger in a last-ditch effort to get someone in the role who WWE had some confidence in. With no build up and no warning, Bradshaw’s character was changed completely from a passive old face southerner who just sat back, reminisced, tossed back beers, and occasionally came in to kick some ass to a—as Layfield has described—mix between J.R. Ewing and Pat Buchanan. In a sense, much of the early spectacle of the Guerrero/Layfield feud was seeing Layfield developed into a character, rather than anticipation of the “impact” his character promised.
WWE could have (and can in the future) avoid this problem by moving mountains to bring an established star in (even in cases when it would normally seem desperate, although getting Sting in on a limited schedule wouldn’t have been as transparent as some other choices) or someone established from RAW, using the month or two granted by the move to build up Layfield or whoever else to challenge for the title, to make the change less abrupt. WWE can capitalize on this extra time (3 to 4 extra months) to build up someone from the mid-card ranks who wasn’t previously ready, like a John Cena or Booker T.
In this scenario, you could use a limited value/nostalgia character for two PPV matches (who could later, in fact as soon as they were done with the title feud, build up a mid-card worker by giving them the rub). Then, you could use a better-prepared Layfield for a PPV or two. Then you could use the mid-card wrestler that had been built up in the meantime. This would leave more creative room for repairing the credibility of the brand and putting together good PPV undercards. SmackDown would be ailing still, but at least they would have braced themselves better for problems, retained a less fatigued audience, and kept up a degree of quality and credibility in the midst of hard times. In order to save their PPV, TV, and live audiences (imagine that, the three main revenue streams) they should have used the time to use better workers (and recruit them), as good matches have always been dependable in times when storylines weren’t up to par or not enough stars were pushed. But going back to the main event feud, since Bradshaw wasn’t the most adept person that has ever challenged for the title, WWE had to use cheesy ploys to save the Judgment Day buyrate. The most notable of them, when Guerrero’s mother faked a heart attack at the hands of Layfield, was nothing short of disastrous, and hasn’t been mentioned in weeks. Gimmicks used to save the PPV got in the way of preserving the championship as an emblem of the organization’s credibility and hurting everyone involved in the process, especially Guerrero.
But if just for a second, I’d like to put aside WWE’s booking in order to respect the sacrifices that have been made over the years by Eddie Guerrero and Chris Benoit (18 and 16 years pro respectively) as well as countless other workers. Wrestling is a business, meaning that talent and artistic ability often gets thrown by the wayside, for better and for worse. So, let’s recognize both their determination and their natural ability and be thankful for the matches that they have given us for so many years. We appreciate it.
THunnicutt@aol.com
What do you think? Head over to The X-Forums to let your opinion be heard!
– E-mail feedback to THunnicutt@aol.com
– Read more of Figure Four Leglock!
