Speaker 1: Oh, this is WWE superstar Drew McIntyre and you're listening
Speaker 1: to the WWE podcast.
Speaker 2: The show, the one that everybody wants me.
Speaker 3: Stud for sixteen So God, just gruss your ass is
Speaker 3: my arm.
Speaker 1: You're gonna acknowledge me?
Speaker 2: All right, everybody, Well, there is no shortage of things
Speaker 2: to talk about tonight. Tonight We're gonna focus on two
Speaker 2: specific topics, and I've got Anthony Denmalco here with me
Speaker 2: as always every single Monday night, to talk about the
Speaker 2: current events of WWE, and we usually pick out a
Speaker 2: couple of stories that happened, and we're gonna get into
Speaker 2: that with Vince and brock Lezer's return. But welcome to
Speaker 2: the show, Anthony. How's everything going?
Speaker 4: Not bad?
Speaker 5: Men? A bit of a hectic week. I know that
Speaker 5: we had talked about it. The process of moving is
Speaker 5: maybe single handedly the worst thing one could experience in
Speaker 5: their life. Obviously I'm grossy exaggerating, but it's completed for
Speaker 5: the time being. I have to do it all over
Speaker 5: again in sixteen weeks or so, but for now I
Speaker 5: can sit back and relax a bit. And I'm sure
Speaker 5: you know that feeling I'm talking about.
Speaker 2: I do, and I thought that was like the worst exhaustion,
Speaker 2: and then you have kids and then you're like, oh,
Speaker 2: I didn't know there was a fourth level of hell,
Speaker 2: and then there is so yeah, but you know, I
Speaker 2: get it, and you know, definitely we'll get through this
Speaker 2: tonight and you know you can get back to get
Speaker 2: back to your insanity. And so let's talk about Vince
Speaker 2: McMahon because right now, I mean, he seems to be,
Speaker 2: at least for the moment, the most talked about thing
Speaker 2: in the world of wrestling, and we all know the story,
Speaker 2: at least what we can know at this point. There
Speaker 2: was an investigation, There is an ongoing investigation with Vince McMahon,
Speaker 2: and the board has put a committee together to essentially
Speaker 2: investigate a three million dollars settlement, an alleged three million
Speaker 2: dollars settlement from Vince McMahon to kind of a hush
Speaker 2: hush type of deal with former employees. I guess one
Speaker 2: of them or both of them, or I don't know.
Speaker 2: One of them at least was a paralegal in the
Speaker 2: organization that is no longer in the organization, and they're
Speaker 2: looking into alleged misconduct with that money, and if it's
Speaker 2: found that he's guilty. You know, we'll have to see.
Speaker 2: But right now, Vince McMahon, Vince McMahon has stepped aside,
Speaker 2: not stepped down. I guess that was a distinction as
Speaker 2: Stephanie steps in his introm ceo. Let me let me
Speaker 2: stop there. What do you make of this whole thing?
Speaker 5: Well, I mean, it's kind of crazy when it comes
Speaker 5: out in concrete info because we've seen the mister McMahon
Speaker 5: character play someone who has abused their power, has cheated
Speaker 5: on his wife, had affairs left, right and center, been
Speaker 5: obsessive over women, and you know, I guess you always
Speaker 5: kind of thought that that was a bit of how
Speaker 5: the person Vince McMahon was, but you always kind of
Speaker 5: like to think that it was just the character and
Speaker 5: mister McMahon. But then when a report like this comes out,
Speaker 5: it really kind of makes you think, like damn, like,
Speaker 5: was he almost trying to live you know, his real
Speaker 5: life on television in a way, And was mister McMahon
Speaker 5: always just like an amplified version of Vince McMahon, And like, look,
Speaker 5: I read as much as probably you did. But like,
Speaker 5: just just before I go any further, the report, the
Speaker 5: early reports is that they were consensual relationships correct.
Speaker 2: Yes, That they were consensual, yes.
Speaker 5: And that they are investigating the fact that he paid
Speaker 5: three million dollars to keep it hush hush of the
Speaker 5: company's money.
Speaker 2: Right, stockholders shareholder money.
Speaker 5: Yeah. And it's tough because, like it's just it's awful
Speaker 5: to hear about, especially when you consider that it happened
Speaker 5: in twenty nineteen, I believe, And you're just like, hey, god,
Speaker 5: you know this guy was probably like already in his
Speaker 5: early to mid seventies and he's still doing stuff like this,
Speaker 5: and it really kind of questions, like it makes you
Speaker 5: question the person. But at the same time, there's a
Speaker 5: part of me that says, like, my god, Like, I
Speaker 5: guess we always kind of knew this, and this's just
Speaker 5: kind of confirmed what we always knew that the Vince
Speaker 5: McMahon person wasn't completely far off from the mister McMahon character.
Speaker 5: And I guess all that I could kind of say,
Speaker 5: if to kind of find some kind of silver lining
Speaker 5: in this, is that at least they were consensual relationships.
Speaker 5: It doesn't and again, like they were consensual, but why
Speaker 5: are they completely consensual where there's their manipulation going on?
Speaker 4: Uh?
Speaker 5: You know, obviously he's a high rank one of the
Speaker 5: most powerful men in the country. You know, I can't
Speaker 5: imagine that did the age come out of the women.
Speaker 4: That No, I don't think so well either way.
Speaker 5: I can imagine that a still a working woman that
Speaker 5: you would have to assume is somewhere in the range
Speaker 5: of twenty to fifty years old, would be really you
Speaker 5: know excited to you know, start doing you know, sexual
Speaker 5: things with a guy in his early seventies. So, I mean,
Speaker 5: it just kind of really paints WWE in a bad way,
Speaker 5: and it kind of confirms what a lot of people
Speaker 5: have always speculated about Vince McMahon. What would you.
Speaker 2: Say, Well, yeah, it certainly lives up to the uh
Speaker 2: living your gimmick accusation. And maybe that's why it seemed
Speaker 2: to work so well on camera for Vince for so
Speaker 2: many years that you know, he seems so believable in
Speaker 2: what he was doing on camera, and he was one
Speaker 2: of the best heels the companies the organization's ever seen,
Speaker 2: which is maybe why it works so scarily well. But
Speaker 2: you know, look, I mean there's this is still an
Speaker 2: ongoing investigation. We can make our assumptions that this is
Speaker 2: all true and you know, again there is no conclusion
Speaker 2: on this yet. They are still doing their investigations. So
Speaker 2: I mean, I guess we'll go with the presumption that
Speaker 2: he's guilty of this. I mean, that's the only way
Speaker 2: to do this. Otherwise we have nothing to talk about.
Speaker 2: But if he's indeed guilty of this, I mean, the
Speaker 2: thing is, even if he used private funds like okay,
Speaker 2: say it was proven he did make this payment, but
Speaker 2: the payment was made from his own money, it was
Speaker 2: not from Stair stockholders shareholders money. I think that only
Speaker 2: makes it a little better from the perspective of the
Speaker 2: shareholders saying, Okay, he wasn't misusing appropriate appropriating our funds,
Speaker 2: but he's still kind of a scumbag that is cheating
Speaker 2: on his wife and paid the woman to be quiet
Speaker 2: about it. Now, he wouldn't be the first nor the
Speaker 2: last millionaire or billionaire to do this. It's probably way
Speaker 2: more common than people realize, especially in the world of sports,
Speaker 2: with things like this that we don't even know exist
Speaker 2: until they come up. So Vince would not be unique
Speaker 2: in that way. But it is given that Vince McMahon
Speaker 2: has you know, it's taken this long for something like
Speaker 2: this to happen, and you know, I'm gonna still say
Speaker 2: there's a small sliver that it's not true, but I'm
Speaker 2: gonna lean on the side of yet probably did happen.
Speaker 2: And if it comes out that he actually did this
Speaker 2: with funds from that were like publicly traded, which I
Speaker 2: think would be really bad. I mean that that would
Speaker 2: make this worse for him. But if that indeed is
Speaker 2: the case, then I think Vince McMahon may have no option,
Speaker 2: no alternative, but to permanently step down as CEO and
Speaker 2: maybe leave the company all together. That I mean, do
Speaker 2: you think that's even a possibility? A guy that once
Speaker 2: defeated God in a tag team match has an opportunity.
Speaker 2: I mean, do you think that's even possible. Say the
Speaker 2: worst case scenario for Vince comes comes to pass and
Speaker 2: it's found that he is guilty, do you think think
Speaker 2: that he'll actually leave the company?
Speaker 5: You know you often thought, or I'll just use myself
Speaker 5: as an example, that there would be nothing, aside from
Speaker 5: death that would be able to pry Vince McMahon away
Speaker 5: from WWE and full control both on the business side
Speaker 5: and the creative side. And he's managed to maintain control
Speaker 5: of the creative side even through this so far, and
Speaker 5: we'll get to his promo and appearance on SmackDown three
Speaker 5: nights ago. But I feel like when you're a publicly
Speaker 5: traded company and so many billions of dollars are at play,
Speaker 5: and there's so many people with their hands in the pot,
Speaker 5: and we're living in as such a fragile climate as
Speaker 5: we are today, where cancel culture is a real thing,
Speaker 5: and I'm not referring to that. This would be like
Speaker 5: a victim of cancel culture. If they do come out
Speaker 5: to be true these accusations, I think that they would
Speaker 5: be completely justified for people to be completely upset about them.
Speaker 5: But it feels as though, especially when you to account
Speaker 5: his daughter coming in as the interim CEO and chairwoman
Speaker 5: and how much of a philanthropist she tries to present
Speaker 5: herself as, I feel like this would be something that
Speaker 5: he would not be able to survive. And to be honest,
Speaker 5: I'm still very surprised that he was able to maintain
Speaker 5: creative control and allowed to appear on SmackDown like that
Speaker 5: for me, and I have no doubt in my mind
Speaker 5: that was completely a Vince McMahon call to try and
Speaker 5: act like, you know, I did nothing wrong, and you know,
Speaker 5: try and get out in front of it in a way.
Speaker 5: But I just the more and more they let Vince
Speaker 5: McMahon go here, it just seems to be tarnishing his legacy.
Speaker 5: And you know, we talked about his appearance at WrestleMania,
Speaker 5: how he botched the Stunner, how he looks now, the
Speaker 5: way he kind of acts awkwardly like. And this is
Speaker 5: aside from the real life stuff that's going on. From
Speaker 5: an on screen perspective, I can't speak for you, but
Speaker 5: I just feel like he's absolutely tarnishing his legacy as
Speaker 5: a great arguably greatest heel of all time as far
Speaker 5: as on screen characters go. But now you couple in
Speaker 5: what's going on behind the scenes and now is coming
Speaker 5: out publicly in real life matters, and how big of
Speaker 5: a company WWE is and how many big how much
Speaker 5: money is at play here, it seems like something that
Speaker 5: Vince McMahon will not be able to evade, especially when
Speaker 5: you consider that a guy like Nick con has gotten
Speaker 5: involved recently and it is a publicly traded company. I
Speaker 5: feel like this may be a storm that he can't
Speaker 5: avoid this time around.
Speaker 2: Even the powerful Vince McMahon may not be able to
Speaker 2: survive this. I mean, Vince McMahon is a guy that
Speaker 2: has survived the courts before, but in this case, I
Speaker 2: don't know if he could survive because of the back lessions,
Speaker 2: especially as you said, the culture that we're in right now,
Speaker 2: that is that is sensitive to these kinds of things,
Speaker 2: and for better or worse, We're not going to get
Speaker 2: into that, but it does exist and I think that
Speaker 2: it would be a big factor, especially from a PR perspective. Now.
Speaker 2: It's also interesting to note that Stephanie McMahon and I
Speaker 2: brought this up, and others have two as well. I'm
Speaker 2: not a genius that thought of this, but Stephanie McMahon
Speaker 2: stepped kind of aside from WWE a number of months ago,
Speaker 2: you know, just prior to that this news coming out,
Speaker 2: and before I mean since essentially the womb she was
Speaker 2: in WWE day to day, involved in the decisions, involved
Speaker 2: in whatever.
Speaker 4: I mean.
Speaker 2: She she actually was selling T shirts early early on
Speaker 2: in her childhood and made her way all the way
Speaker 2: all the way up to the chief brand officer whatever.
Speaker 2: And the thing is, it's is it a little bit
Speaker 2: suspicious that she maybe you know, kind of saw the
Speaker 2: writing on the wall. She knew it was coming down
Speaker 2: the line. She probably knew ahead of time that there
Speaker 2: was there's something going on with her dad, and she
Speaker 2: heard rumblings of this coming out, and she smartly decided
Speaker 2: a couple of months ago to step aside from WWE
Speaker 2: and do kind of her own thing and distance herself.
Speaker 2: And then all of a sudden, these allegations come out
Speaker 2: and she's like, oh, well, wow, this is this is shocking. Yeah,
Speaker 2: I didn't know any of this was going on. I mean,
Speaker 2: maybe from its kind of self preservation on her part,
Speaker 2: or it just could be dumb luck. I don't know
Speaker 2: which one it is, but it is just very suspicious
Speaker 2: timing where she decided the moment probably she found out
Speaker 2: to distance herself, and then when the news actually broke,
Speaker 2: she has some kind of soft landing to say, well,
Speaker 2: I mean I left a couple of months ago to
Speaker 2: do my own thing. I don't know what's going on here.
Speaker 2: I mean, you know, who knows. But do you think
Speaker 2: that Stephanie knew something ahead of time and kind of
Speaker 2: made the smart move to get away from the company
Speaker 2: and distance herself so that when the news broke she
Speaker 2: wasn't associated in any way with this.
Speaker 5: I mean, like logic would suggest that, right, Like it
Speaker 5: feels like way too coincidental that she took a leave
Speaker 5: of absence what in late May, and then less than
Speaker 5: a month later this all comes out. The only thing
Speaker 5: that would maybe suggest the opposite is that she was
Speaker 5: like placed in as the interim CEO and chairwoman. But again,
Speaker 5: you're right, like, I just think that it's too coincidental.
Speaker 5: Maybe it wasn't like solely because of this, but maybe
Speaker 5: it was like she wanted a few weeks away or
Speaker 5: she wanted some time away, and they then she found
Speaker 5: out that this was maybe coming down the pike and
Speaker 5: she said, Okay, well now maybe is no better time
Speaker 5: than now. And I mean, just for someone like Stephanie McMahon,
Speaker 5: who has been so gung ho about distancing herself from
Speaker 5: the wrestling aspect of the company, you know, a self
Speaker 5: proclaimed philanthropist, all these like how would you say relationships
Speaker 5: with these companies or these foundations like Connor's Cure and
Speaker 5: the Susan g. Coman Foundation, Like I just feel like
Speaker 5: this would be the where this is rather the worst
Speaker 5: possible scenario for someone like Stephanie McMahon. But I guess
Speaker 5: I'll just flip it into a question back to you.
Speaker 5: Do you think that her becoming chairwoman and CEO was
Speaker 5: something that she knew was gonna come at the end
Speaker 5: of the tunnel here? Or do you think that maybe
Speaker 5: the board of directors just picked her because they truly
Speaker 5: felt that she was the best person for the job.
Speaker 2: Well, I think that in every organization, especially one as
Speaker 2: large and as WWE is, they have a succession plan,
Speaker 2: like they knew. For example, if Vince McMahon were to
Speaker 2: die and you know he just you know, get hit
Speaker 2: by a bus, they know who's gonna step in, and
Speaker 2: that person is Stephanie. Now it also is smart from
Speaker 2: the perspective of creating the illusion or the reality that
Speaker 2: the company is stable with a McMahon in charge to
Speaker 2: the shareholders and stockholders. If it was somebody they never
Speaker 2: heard of that is suddenly the CEO of the organization,
Speaker 2: people are maybe scrambling, have some doubts, some concern earns
Speaker 2: and drop some of their stock. I think it's it
Speaker 2: is something that they thought of ahead of time. Even
Speaker 2: if this wasn't the case with a scandal, if Vince
Speaker 2: were to literally die in his sleep or something that
Speaker 2: they have to have a succession plan, and I think
Speaker 2: Stephanie was that succession plan and is that succession plan.
Speaker 2: And it is smart from the perspective of stability as
Speaker 2: a whole to the public eye. So you know, do
Speaker 2: I think this is going to be permanent? I mean,
Speaker 2: time will tell. Vince is still involved in the creative,
Speaker 2: which doesn't surprise me. He's stepping aside, but he's not
Speaker 2: really stepping away from his work, is what. It sounds like.
Speaker 2: He's still kind of the man even without the title
Speaker 2: of being CEO and him coming out on smack Down.
Speaker 2: I just want to say, like I really thought that
Speaker 2: was like I understand why he did it. I understand
Speaker 2: why he did it because it was to send a
Speaker 2: message to everybody watching that he isn't going anywhere, He's
Speaker 2: not shying away from this and emphasizing the word together
Speaker 2: as if we're supposed to just back him on everything.
Speaker 2: I think that's what the message was. And he'd didn't
Speaker 2: say much of anything, which really pissed me off because
Speaker 2: it was very to me, very kind of narcissistic on
Speaker 2: his part to just do that. I'm like, dude, you're
Speaker 2: you should just go back and take care of business.
Speaker 2: You don't need to come out here for your own
Speaker 2: ego to send a message like we know who you are,
Speaker 2: we know what kind of person you are. Go back
Speaker 2: and take care of business. You don't need to come
Speaker 2: out and do this public stunt. That is literally you've
Speaker 2: said nothing. People were just like, what the hell is that?
Speaker 2: I was sitting there, I'm like, that's it. He literally
Speaker 2: repeated the signature video package at the start of the show,
Speaker 2: like that's it. He repeated like four words. I did
Speaker 2: not like that at all. I understand why he did it,
Speaker 2: but I think it was left a lot of people like,
Speaker 2: what was the exact point of this? Evince? You took
Speaker 2: up a small amount of time to do what to
Speaker 2: to pop a rating because you knew that, Oh my god,
Speaker 2: he's there's a scandal going on, he's gonnappear on smack Down.
Speaker 2: What the hell is he gonna say? You know? And
Speaker 2: we got literally nothing.
Speaker 5: Yeah, for me, that reeked of him saying like, oh,
Speaker 5: I'm gonna show them that I'm actually innocent and i
Speaker 5: can do whatever I want and I'm not rattled by
Speaker 5: these reports and nothing's gonna stop me. But it's just
Speaker 5: like you literally came out just to tell us that
Speaker 5: you're still in charge, basically right like that, there's no
Speaker 5: other reasoning for him appearing. And I feel like the
Speaker 5: last few times that Vince has come out, save for
Speaker 5: what he did lately with Austin theory, but like when
Speaker 5: it's announced, like, oh, Vince McMahon is gonna be on SmackDown,
Speaker 5: he comes out and he says nothing. It's like when
Speaker 5: he he was meant to open the show, I believe
Speaker 5: on SmackDown when they first came back in front of audience,
Speaker 5: in front of people, and he just came out and
Speaker 5: he said, where the hell have you been? And then
Speaker 5: he left, and I'm just in my head, I'm just like,
Speaker 5: just go away, and look, this is not for me
Speaker 5: to make light of what all these accusations and what's
Speaker 5: going on in real life. But for a moment, let's
Speaker 5: talk about Vince McMahon on screen. Does anybody want to
Speaker 5: see Vince McMahon on screen anymore? For me, it's no,
Speaker 5: And it's been no probably since, to be quite honest
Speaker 5: with you, probably since he got involved with the Roman
Speaker 5: Reigns and Triple H program back in twenty fifteen, twenty sixteen.
Speaker 4: That's the last.
Speaker 5: Time that I could remember, and that's we're talking six
Speaker 5: years ago now or six and a half years ago now,
Speaker 5: that Vince McMahon resembled any kind of version of his
Speaker 5: past self. And you know, I'm not a huge fan
Speaker 5: of Stephanie McMahon on screen, but why not let Stephanie
Speaker 5: McMahon be that character. Why not let Triple H be
Speaker 5: that on screen character. Hell let Shane McMahon be the
Speaker 5: on screen character. But it's just so sad now, and
Speaker 5: there's no other way to put it. It's just sad
Speaker 5: to watch him try and be what he used to be.
Speaker 5: And I feel like, in a lot of ways, that's
Speaker 5: the way it is in real life too, that he
Speaker 5: still tries to be that genius, that creative genius, and
Speaker 5: this over the top powerful guy in real life, that
Speaker 5: he makes these bonehead decisions to like book himself, to
Speaker 5: open SmackDown, to quite literally say nothing and just come
Speaker 5: off as an egotistical narcissist. I don't know. It's sad because, again,
Speaker 5: take away the real life parts of it for a second.
Speaker 4: It's said that he's.
Speaker 5: Tarnishing his on screen character, his on screen legacy, and
Speaker 5: now we're seeing him tarnish his real life legacy.
Speaker 2: It's akin to when people go beyond the wrestling years,
Speaker 2: when you're just like, dude, it's time to hang up
Speaker 2: the boots. Can you please stop ruining your legacy. I
Speaker 2: mean a lot of criticism was hit. It sent undertakers away,
Speaker 2: and some of it legitimate, some of it not. You know,
Speaker 2: when it comes to n ring and when wrestlers just
Speaker 2: don't know when to let go. I think Vince also
Speaker 2: has that sickness, and I understand it, Like, even though
Speaker 2: I'm not I don't have the size of an ego
Speaker 2: the size of Vince mc mann, I do understand on
Speaker 2: some level, like when you love something so much and
Speaker 2: this is your baby and you've created it, and you
Speaker 2: have been successful in the past, as you and I said,
Speaker 2: arguably one of the best heals in the organ in
Speaker 2: the entire industry ever, and he wasn't even a real wrestler.
Speaker 2: So to let go of that and not appear on screen,
Speaker 2: I'm sure to him is hard to let go of.
Speaker 2: But I think also he recognizes. I do still think
Speaker 2: he has some self awareness to realize that he can't
Speaker 2: speak long form much more anymore because he mumbles, Like
Speaker 2: you really have to listen to what Vince is saying.
Speaker 2: He just kind of like mumbles a bunch of words together,
Speaker 2: and it's like Grandpa, like can you can you slow down?
Speaker 2: It feels like he just at this point should be
Speaker 2: kind of in a rocking chair playing with his grandchildren,
Speaker 2: like you know when I was your age, palll you know,
Speaker 2: I used to be you know, like that kind of stuff,
Speaker 2: Like you shouldn't be running an organization at this age.
Speaker 2: I mean, you just shouldn't be. That's all. It's time.
Speaker 2: We all need to move on. There needs to be
Speaker 2: a succession plan in place, and maybe he is forced
Speaker 2: out with this whole scenario. So do I think he's
Speaker 2: tarnishing his legacy? I mean, beyond the scandal, which you
Speaker 2: will hear about the results of that maybe in the
Speaker 2: coming weeks or months, you know, certainly, Yeah, I mean
Speaker 2: because for a long time now, especially with the Austin
Speaker 2: theory thing, which really put it over the top for me,
Speaker 2: of him just for whatever reason, sitting in an office
Speaker 2: talking about golden eggs, mumbling to Austin theory, em masculating
Speaker 2: a talent you're supposed to be elevating all that kind
Speaker 2: of stuff made no sense to me. And also he
Speaker 2: was not coherent. I cannot hear what you're saying, Vince.
Speaker 2: So yeah, I'm on top of the bone headed creative decisions.
Speaker 2: It's just his mental faculties are wearing, as we all
Speaker 2: will when we get to that age, and he just
Speaker 2: unless something forces him out like this and there's public
Speaker 2: outcry from stockholders and shareholders, I do not believe that
Speaker 2: he will leave the organization unless there is like almost unanimous,
Speaker 2: unanimous movement to get him out.
Speaker 4: So well, I heard that.
Speaker 5: Now, Stephanie McMahon, if she sticks in this role, I
Speaker 5: believe it's Wade Keller who reported it that if she
Speaker 5: ends up sticking in this role as the permanent CEO,
Speaker 5: she's going to lean a lot on Triple H. No
Speaker 5: surprise there, but Paul Hayman, and that Paul Hayman would
Speaker 5: get a massive role in Creative And let's just play,
Speaker 5: you know, for funzies, the hypothetical scenario that Vince McMahon
Speaker 5: is forced out. Do you think Stephanie McMahon becoming the
Speaker 5: CEO and chairwoman and delegating a lot of the creative
Speaker 5: decisions to Paul Hayman and presumably Triple H would be
Speaker 5: a good thing for the company.
Speaker 2: Well, I mean both of them are proven. Like I mean,
Speaker 2: Triple H built NXT from literally nothing. I mean they
Speaker 2: built it from the days of essentially Doubledare to an
Speaker 2: established brand that has credibility around the world. And then
Speaker 2: of course Paul Hayman an established, well documented creative mind.
Speaker 2: Now he's also getting up there in h two. Age
Speaker 2: is a factor here, guys, Like I hate to say it,
Speaker 2: I'm not saying Paul Hayman is completely out of his prime,
Speaker 2: but he's on the back nine. I mean, let's be honest,
Speaker 2: he's not a young guy. But at least in the
Speaker 2: next ten to fifteen years, could Paul Hammond be a
Speaker 2: guy that you could rely on. Absolutely, he's proven. He's
Speaker 2: one of the best promos on the ever in the industry,
Speaker 2: ever barn on any generation I put him up against.
Speaker 2: He's a guy that had built as ECW. He's a
Speaker 2: guy that actually created Stone Cold. Steve auser at least
Speaker 2: created the environment to help facilitate Stone Cold to become
Speaker 2: Stone Cold. You know. So yeah, I mean I think
Speaker 2: that would be fine. Why not? I mean, they're both proven.
Speaker 2: Why go with somebody that you don't know? Now, some
Speaker 2: people may say, well, it's even with Vince gone, it's
Speaker 2: kind of the same thing, like the apple doesn't fall
Speaker 2: far from the tree. Stephanie's a chip off the old block,
Speaker 2: whatever analogy you want to use. And there are some
Speaker 2: realities to that. I mean, just because Vince is gone,
Speaker 2: some people think that, you know, all will be well,
Speaker 2: it'll be a totally fresh new product. I even if
Speaker 2: that were the case where Paul Hammond and Triple h
Speaker 2: each run or smack down her both or whatever, and
Speaker 2: Stephanie's the CEO and Vince's gone and the evil Vince
Speaker 2: McMahon is sitting at home, I still don't think we're
Speaker 2: gonna see a massive change in WWE because you still
Speaker 2: have a McMahon in charge. You still have everybody that
Speaker 2: Vince McMahon hired in creative there, presumably everybody that is
Speaker 2: in the production team and in helping create the product
Speaker 2: that it is today. You still have all those people
Speaker 2: there that are all in the same positions. There are
Speaker 2: no new minds unless you literally clean house and start fresh,
Speaker 2: which they won't do because it's not a smart move.
Speaker 2: If you're a publicly traded company. There's a lot of
Speaker 2: restrictions and things you need to consider when you're a
Speaker 2: publicly traded organization. So I don't think with Vince gone
Speaker 2: that things are just gonna bam magically change. Now. You
Speaker 2: may see small things here and there, but I think
Speaker 2: largely it'll be run mostly the same that Vince has
Speaker 2: run it because Stephanie learned under Vince McMahon. She was
Speaker 2: his daughter, for God's sakes, and she is got Vince
Speaker 2: McMahon's blood literally running through her veins, so she's not
Speaker 2: a and copy events. But I think largely things won't change.
Speaker 2: And I hate to say that for people that want
Speaker 2: to see a massive change in WW.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I mean, I just wonder if Stephanie McMahon would
Speaker 5: delegate more because she so doesn't want to be a
Speaker 5: part of the actual wrestling aspect of it, right, But
Speaker 5: like I wonder if maybe that would be like a
Speaker 5: hidden positive, that because she doesn't want to be really
Speaker 5: directly involved with it, that she would delegate more to
Speaker 5: people with more wherewithal to be better served in that position.
Speaker 5: But then there's the other aspect about this, and the
Speaker 5: one guy who's kind of becoming the X factor in WWE?
Speaker 5: Is Nick Kahn, Like I know that Stephanie McMahon has
Speaker 5: assumed the role of chairwoman and CEO, And is it
Speaker 5: technically a higher position than Nick conn who he's the
Speaker 5: president if I'm not mistaken, And I'm just wondering here
Speaker 5: that since he joined WWE and replaced I believe her
Speaker 5: name was Michelle Wilson and George bah I think those
Speaker 5: were their names, he has kind of just been like
Speaker 5: taking like a machete to the complete organizational structure here.
Speaker 5: And I think that like in a weird way, like well,
Speaker 5: I don't think it's more I'm just like thinking out
Speaker 5: loud here, rather is like, is he kind of trying
Speaker 5: to clean up WWE and fix it for the way
Speaker 5: that maybe the shareholders and the border directors want to
Speaker 5: take this company into the future. Do you think that
Speaker 5: Nick Cohn is kind of a big X factor for
Speaker 5: the company moving forward?
Speaker 2: Oh, he's already been right, Like you said, he's already
Speaker 2: been a guy going around with MACHETI a sledgehammer, whatever
Speaker 2: blunt object do you want to use. I mean, the
Speaker 2: guy has had a massive impact, especially over the last
Speaker 2: couple of years of not just COVID. COVID didn't help,
Speaker 2: but the firings, the releases, the shocking releases that have
Speaker 2: taken place over the last two years. I mean, typically
Speaker 2: it's the week after WrestleMania. I think it's like they
Speaker 2: call it, like Black Thursday, Black Wednesday, whatever it is,
Speaker 2: is that week following WrestleMania, where there's typically layoffs. There
Speaker 2: were mass amounts of layoffs the last couple of years
Speaker 2: and throughout the year, not just one particular time, and
Speaker 2: not just wrestlers either, like production, travel staff for obvious reasons.
Speaker 2: You know. So the guys already had a massive impact
Speaker 2: on WWE from a personnel perspective, and I'm sure the
Speaker 2: organizational chart if you looked at it, with the few
Speaker 2: hundred people they have working there, looks much different now
Speaker 2: than it did a couple of years ago prior to
Speaker 2: nickcn coming in. So he's already had a massive impact.
Speaker 5: Now.
Speaker 2: I don't know what their plans are moving forward, Like
Speaker 2: you said, maybe Stephanie McMahon decides, hey, this would be
Speaker 2: really cool on the first woman chairwoman of WWE, you
Speaker 2: know that kind of thing, and you know she may
Speaker 2: use that for kind of like women's empowerment or whatever
Speaker 2: the hell she wants to do. I don't know, but
Speaker 2: if she doesn't, then perhaps she's just gonna get the
Speaker 2: organization ready for a sale. Now I know that this
Speaker 2: has been discussed for six to twelve months now of
Speaker 2: out they're gonna sell to Disney. Well, while they didn't,
Speaker 2: at least up until this point with Vince gone, maybe
Speaker 2: he was the one roadblock that Disney could not get
Speaker 2: to say yes, and they obviously need his blessing. Vince
Speaker 2: out of the way. Stephanie really doesn't want to run
Speaker 2: the place. She's more interested in doing her own business ventures.
Speaker 2: Why not make a few billion, sell the company to Disney,
Speaker 2: get it, or at least prepare it, sell it to Disney,
Speaker 2: and then be on her merry way and it let
Speaker 2: Disney run the organization. I mean, I'm not saying that's
Speaker 2: gonna happen. I'm not saying that I've heard that's gonna happen.
Speaker 2: But it's in terms of the information I have at
Speaker 2: this point, doesn't seem out of the relevant impossibility.
Speaker 5: No, not at all. And you like that's the way
Speaker 5: that these things sent seem to be trending, right, like
Speaker 5: it happened with the UFC. I believe it was Dana
Speaker 5: White and were they the Fertida brothers. I think that
Speaker 5: sold the UFC to a big corporation and they kept
Speaker 5: Dana White on as the president. And it just seems
Speaker 5: like that's the way that this thing is trending here,
Speaker 5: and the only thing maybe stopping it is Vince McMahon.
Speaker 5: And like, look, they've already sold the ww network to
Speaker 5: Peacock ak NBC Universal, so it would stand a reason
Speaker 5: that maybe they'll sell the entire company to a company
Speaker 5: like Disney. And you know how like because let's be
Speaker 5: honest here, like, do you think that Stephanie McMahon definitely
Speaker 5: not Shane McMahon. He hasn't been involved in any major
Speaker 5: way on the business side for about twelve years now,
Speaker 5: if not longer. It doesn't seem to me like Stephanie
Speaker 5: McMahon is chomping at the bit to you know, be
Speaker 5: her father's successor and carry on the McMahon legacy as
Speaker 5: you know wrestling promoters. Hell, her father won't even say
Speaker 5: the word wrestling. They invented the term sports entertainment out
Speaker 5: of thin air, and Stephanie McMahon has really taken that
Speaker 5: ball and completely run with it. So I would think
Speaker 5: that maybe that's where this is going to trend. And
Speaker 5: Nick conn kind of seems a guy who has kind
Speaker 5: of spearheaded that. You know, You've also heard some rumors
Speaker 5: that maybe The Rock would buy it because he has
Speaker 5: a long standing relationship with Nick Con that I don't
Speaker 5: think anyone knew until The Rock social media posed. But
Speaker 5: I mean, I guess before we move on to the
Speaker 5: Brock and Roman thing, the last question I would kind
Speaker 5: of ask you is that do you think that once
Speaker 5: Vince McMahon isn't in power anymore, whether that be that
Speaker 5: he survives this and eventually dies or he is forced
Speaker 5: out because of the scandal, do you think the McMahons
Speaker 5: will move forward as massive parts of WWE and by
Speaker 5: McMahon's I guess you could also say Triple H as well.
Speaker 2: I yeah, So do I think that WWE is gonna
Speaker 2: move on with a McMahon in charge? Was that your question?
Speaker 1: Like?
Speaker 5: Yeah, exactly?
Speaker 2: Yeah, Well, I mean again, assuming Disney doesn't purchase WWE,
Speaker 2: because at that point they could make whatever decisions they
Speaker 2: want from a management perspective, I do believe again, like
Speaker 2: you said with Shane Shane's a guy that I would
Speaker 2: love to know the inner workings of the like the
Speaker 2: relationship with Shane and Vince and the backstage stuff that's
Speaker 2: going on with Shane, because he seems to be in
Speaker 2: out and out. Things seem good. No they're bad. He's
Speaker 2: back to doing whatever, making shoes in China. I don't
Speaker 2: know his whatever he's doing. And so the Shane thing,
Speaker 2: like you said, that's out. Like Shane clearly isn't a
Speaker 2: good fit or doesn't want to be a part of WWE.
Speaker 2: From that perspective, Stephanie is a wild card. Maybe she
Speaker 2: is interested in doing this, and she does have a
Speaker 2: little bit of the evil geniusness inside of her that
Speaker 2: you know, her dad certainly instilled, and I think that
Speaker 2: there's a possibility that maybe she actually does want to
Speaker 2: and this is kind of just her evil plan being hatched,
Speaker 2: where not that she set up her dad, but maybe
Speaker 2: again distancing herself, setting herself up for that role so
Speaker 2: that knowing she's in that next line of defense, that
Speaker 2: next person in line of Vince Wertz's have to step
Speaker 2: aside like he just did, then she knew that if
Speaker 2: I'm involved, well I can't be involved with a scandal
Speaker 2: going on, how did I not know? So, let mean
Speaker 2: distance myself and in two months they're gonna call me
Speaker 2: to be introim CEO, and then they're gonna find that
Speaker 2: Vince is guilty and I'm the permanent CEO. I mean, like,
Speaker 2: it's possible she thought that far ahead. I wouldn't put
Speaker 2: it past her. She's a smart woman. I mean, you
Speaker 2: can't get to that level and do what she's done
Speaker 2: if she wasn't. So there's that possibility. So long answer,
Speaker 2: I think, Yeah, I think that there will be a
Speaker 2: McMahon in charge when the smoke settles from this this scandal.
Speaker 2: Even if Vince's found guilty, he's thrown out, people go crazy.
Speaker 2: The headlines below up Vince McMahon out of de w whatever,
Speaker 2: which will be a lot of fun to talk about.
Speaker 2: But I still, at the end of the day think
Speaker 2: the last name of the person running the company will
Speaker 2: be McMahon.
Speaker 5: Because you think that even if a company like Disney
Speaker 5: or let's say NBC whatever would buy WWE, they would
Speaker 5: keep a McMahon still in charge to oversee the operations.
Speaker 2: If they were willing. If Stephanie, here's the thing, if
Speaker 2: Stephanie's not willing, though, things change, Right, Like, if if
Speaker 2: Stephanie McMahon has no interest and she truly does just
Speaker 2: want to do her own thing, or you know, sell it,
Speaker 2: let Disney make whoever they want to make, CEO, president,
Speaker 2: you know, head of talent relations all that, then sure,
Speaker 2: then then things change. Stephanie McMahon, to me, though, is
Speaker 2: the last member of the McMahon family that I think
Speaker 2: could actually be the CEO. I don't think Shane has
Speaker 2: any interest based on just the last twenty years of
Speaker 2: his in and outs and the things we've heard. But
Speaker 2: if Stephanie's not interested, then then all bets are off.
Speaker 2: I think maybe Paulovec Triple H could be the guy
Speaker 2: to actually take it over at or hell, maybe Nick
Speaker 2: con I mean he could, I mean Nick conn or
Speaker 2: Triple H. I don't know who else could possibly step
Speaker 2: in if Stephanie's not interested.
Speaker 5: The Shane McMahon thing to me has always been so weird. Obviously,
Speaker 5: you can't judge a guy based off as his on
Speaker 5: screen character. But like everyone who's listened to me for
Speaker 5: a while, no now knows that I'm a big Shane
Speaker 5: McMahon fan, But I always felt that he resonated well
Speaker 5: with the crowd. I would argue that he was probably,
Speaker 5: of all the McMahon's, probably the best served to play
Speaker 5: the babyface role. I know Jim Cornett has said numerous
Speaker 5: times that he's the best McMahon or the nicest McMahon.
Speaker 5: It just really makes you wonder what the hell went
Speaker 5: on behind the scenes with Shane, especially considering the fact
Speaker 5: that he's the older of the two, I think relatively substantially.
Speaker 5: Between him and Stephane, I think he has like at
Speaker 5: least five years on her. It just really begs the question, like,
Speaker 5: what the hell went on with Shane for him to
Speaker 5: leave in two thousand and nine. Then even when he
Speaker 5: came back in twenty sixteen, it was largely only as
Speaker 5: an on screen guy.
Speaker 4: And I still think that he got over pretty well.
Speaker 5: Like when he was the commissioner of SmackDown, he had
Speaker 5: his programs with Kevin Owens and not Daniel Brown aj styles,
Speaker 5: he had the matter. Yeah, Like, I thought that he
Speaker 5: really resonated well with the and obviously what happened at
Speaker 5: this year's Royal Rumble when he was a producer really
Speaker 5: kind of killed that entire thing. In the cradle and
Speaker 5: he ultimately got ousted by the company. But I've just
Speaker 5: always wondered what the hell went on with Shane McMahon
Speaker 5: behind the scenes.
Speaker 2: I mean, yeah, I hope at some point before before that,
Speaker 2: you know, Shane heads to his grave, he doesn't take
Speaker 2: it to his grave. I would love to know the
Speaker 2: ins and out of that. I mean, because it's fascinating
Speaker 2: the things we don't know about the relationship between you know,
Speaker 2: the son and father and now the course that's a
Speaker 2: very private, intimate relationship. Maybe we will never know, and
Speaker 2: they both will take it to their graves and everyone
Speaker 2: just say that's none of our business, and I guess
Speaker 2: it isn't, but I think it is very interesting. It's
Speaker 2: fascinating of the relationship between Vince and Shane, because you're right,
Speaker 2: Shane is a very popular, if not the most popular
Speaker 2: from a crowd perspective. McMahon. Yeah, his punches and he
Speaker 2: doesn't wrestle the best, and you know, we've heard all
Speaker 2: the criticisms and I understand that to some degree, but
Speaker 2: Shane McMahon, you know, puts one hundred and ten percent
Speaker 2: in even if he doesn't wrestle the best quote unquote,
Speaker 2: I think that Shane could if he was interested, he
Speaker 2: could run the company, But I don't know if whoever's
Speaker 2: in charge at the very top would want him as
Speaker 2: the CEO. Again, a bridge will cross when we get there.
Speaker 2: But let's dive in to brock Lesner and his return. So, Anthony,
Speaker 2: were you surprised? And are you? Do you like this?
Speaker 4: Like?
Speaker 2: What do you think about all this?
Speaker 5: I'm torn because I truly do like brock Lesnar a lot.
Speaker 5: I know a lot of people hate him because he's
Speaker 5: a part time guy and he always just gets handed
Speaker 5: these main event type of matches and storylines and just
Speaker 5: his entire career has been a main event served to
Speaker 5: him on a silver platter because he is a massive draw.
Speaker 5: But I've just always really liked brock Lesner. I like
Speaker 5: that he brings like a legitimacy to WWE. I think
Speaker 5: he's a very underwrated worker. I'm not as big of
Speaker 5: a fan of Cowboy Brock as I am as classic Brock.
Speaker 5: I like classic brock way more, but I respect the
Speaker 5: hell that he's been able to provide another dimension and
Speaker 5: prove to people that if he wants to be, he
Speaker 5: can be a standalone character without Paul Hayman talking for him.
Speaker 5: He's not the best, but he's passable. I like that
Speaker 5: he's at least proved that he can be a different
Speaker 5: type of guy than just bouncing up and down and
Speaker 5: looking big and scary. But I'm with you. I prefer
Speaker 5: the classic Brock, So I always have time for Brock Lesner,
Speaker 5: and I do think that including Roman reigns aside from
Speaker 5: if the Rock comes back or when Austin comes back,
Speaker 5: or even John Cena, but I think maybe he's on
Speaker 5: the same level as Brock. Brock is like the biggest
Speaker 5: draw WWE has right now that really kind of transcends
Speaker 5: the business that everybody knows. Obviously, his UFC background helps,
Speaker 5: But this just isn't it. You know, my love for
Speaker 5: Brock Lesner isn't enough for me to get behind this
Speaker 5: number one. It's just because we're doing this again again.
Speaker 5: We're doing Brock and again, and it doesn't make sense
Speaker 5: this time around because the last two times that they
Speaker 5: competed one on one, Roman won. He beat him in
Speaker 5: Saudi Arabia last October, and he beat him at WrestleMania,
Speaker 5: And I believe at WrestleMania was clean.
Speaker 2: Was it not yep.
Speaker 4: So what grounds.
Speaker 5: Does brock Lesner have aside from the fact that he's
Speaker 5: brock Lesner to come back and jump the line. And
Speaker 5: the other part about this is is that And again
Speaker 5: maybe I'm backtracking a bit, but I just didn't wasn't.
Speaker 4: Ready for Brock yet, Like I thought Brock was.
Speaker 5: Gonna come back like post SummerSlam, because it kind of
Speaker 5: felt like we got like a Brock overload in a
Speaker 5: lot of ways. And I just think we got a
Speaker 5: Brock and Roman overload, And I just I don't know
Speaker 5: why we're seeing this again. I think that they're going
Speaker 5: back to the well with how they start programs with
Speaker 5: Roman way too much like that he beats someone, he's
Speaker 5: about to walk off, and then someone's music hits and
Speaker 5: just comes in gets in his face. You know, we
Speaker 5: saw that with what was it when he beat bray
Speaker 5: Masterio Edged? It that when he beat Edge, John Cena
Speaker 5: did that, when he beat John Cena, Brock did that.
Speaker 5: Now when he beat Riddle, brocked at it again. Like
Speaker 5: it's just like, do they have no other way to
Speaker 5: start or build a program involving Roman reigns? And obviously
Speaker 5: you have the whole thing with Roman reigns that you know,
Speaker 5: I know, absence makes the heart grow fonder. I get that,
Speaker 5: but the fact that he's occupying both world titles and
Speaker 5: he's only defended them on screen once since wrestling, to me,
Speaker 5: is inexcusable. Not like not even out a pay per view,
Speaker 5: it was just on a SmackDown, which we talked about
Speaker 5: last week, solidified that even though we didn't we wouldn't
Speaker 5: think that Riddle would have a shot even if it
Speaker 5: was at a pay per view, the fact that it
Speaker 5: was on SmackDown, we knew for a fact that it
Speaker 5: meant Riddle was not winning. And I just think everything
Speaker 5: together has just made this very underwhelming and it's just
Speaker 5: WWE going back to the well one too many times.
Speaker 5: I understood why they did it last year in Saudi
Speaker 5: Arabia because they wanted to get presented in a different
Speaker 5: way with Roman as the heel and Brock as the
Speaker 5: baby face. Okay, I was on board. I wasn't a
Speaker 5: huge fan of them doing it again at Wrestleman, but
Speaker 5: I understood that they were trying to make it feel
Speaker 5: like the biggest match of all time. Fine wasn't a fan.
Speaker 5: The match was terrible, but I understood it. This I
Speaker 5: don't even understand anymore.
Speaker 2: It really is puzzling. Like you said, I'm a fan
Speaker 2: of brock Lesner too. You know, how can you not be?
Speaker 2: You know, regardless of the program he's in, he's a
Speaker 2: he's a once in a lifetime athlete, and he is
Speaker 2: not the greatest on the mic, but that doesn't even matter.
Speaker 2: That's how big of a deal he is and how
Speaker 2: much he's accomplished and the presence he has all that,
Speaker 2: and yeah, what he can do in the ring too,
Speaker 2: And you know, I I, Hey, the guy wants to
Speaker 2: make millions for showing up part time. Are we gonna
Speaker 2: start crapping on Roman rags for that? We're gonna start
Speaker 2: crapping on John Cena for that or everybody else that's
Speaker 2: done that and made that path the rock. You're telling
Speaker 2: me we're gonna boo the rock if he comes back
Speaker 2: and say, oh, you're part time, get out of here.
Speaker 2: Like the fans, I understand get frustrated at a certain point.
Speaker 2: But the problem with Roman is he is He's champion.
Speaker 2: And the really iron ironic part of this whole thing
Speaker 2: is that wwe merge these belts together. So Roman has
Speaker 2: a whole new set of opponents to work with. He
Speaker 2: can work with the entire roster and show up on
Speaker 2: raw more and SmackDown. Yet he's done actually less of both.
Speaker 2: Like he's done. They've they've actually done the worst possible
Speaker 2: thing you could do with this this scenario, and take
Speaker 2: the guy that won the belts, take the belts and
Speaker 2: take everything and just put it into hibernation and it
Speaker 2: just goes away Like that's the Like, that's the worst
Speaker 2: possible scenario. No. I understand, he's working on states and
Speaker 2: Roman's getting paid a lot of money. Great for him,
Speaker 2: seriously happy for him. He's at the point in his
Speaker 2: career where he can work less and make the same
Speaker 2: good for him. That's what I would want to But
Speaker 2: the problem is now you are, you are sacrificing other
Speaker 2: opportunities for other people who could be holding one of
Speaker 2: those belts or both if they still want to keep
Speaker 2: it unified by what for? What to hold it for?
Speaker 2: For brock Lester and a challenge again that we know
Speaker 2: he's going to lose for the fourteenth time. You know,
Speaker 2: when they could have easily had a rematch with Riddle.
Speaker 2: Now I understand the stipulation was, oh, Riddle couldn't challenge
Speaker 2: Rome again. There's a billion ways around that, you know.
Speaker 2: I think that that would have been a much more
Speaker 2: fun match with Riddle only because they've they've gotten a
Speaker 2: lot of momentum behind him. People organically like Riddle, and
Speaker 2: they would have had I think a better quality match,
Speaker 2: especially what we saw on smack Down. They had really
Speaker 2: good match, a lot of really believable near falls, i e.
Speaker 2: The RKO that was or the spear that was reversed
Speaker 2: into an RKO, Like there was a moment I'm like,
Speaker 2: oh crap, like he could actually win it here and
Speaker 2: everyone else saw the same thing, you know, and Riddle
Speaker 2: is amazing in the ring. They could have built that
Speaker 2: into the main event of Money in the Bank at
Speaker 2: the MGM in Las Vegas. But the problem is, again
Speaker 2: I think this comes straight from Vince McMahon, is that
Speaker 2: he wants the biggest main event possible and he thinks
Speaker 2: that bringing Brock back is a big main event. Now,
Speaker 2: in one respect, it is, but at the same time,
Speaker 2: you've got this rising star and a star that's more
Speaker 2: believable to beat Roman than a guy that just got
Speaker 2: beat by Roman like eighteen times. To come back that
Speaker 2: you know, isn't gonna beat Brock or beat Roman. He
Speaker 2: has zero chance. Like I don't think Brock has any
Speaker 2: chance to beat Roman at Money in the Bank versus Riddle,
Speaker 2: who you can make an argument, Hey, he's an up
Speaker 2: becoming star. That's what you want to do with the
Speaker 2: person that beats Roman is have a guy that's on
Speaker 2: the rise, has a momentum behind him, he's young, check
Speaker 2: check check. Riddle has a okay chance that you can
Speaker 2: make an argument. Brock has zero chance of beating Roman,
Speaker 2: and so you take that element of surprise away from it.
Speaker 2: And I think he brought back Brock earlier than maybe
Speaker 2: he wanted, especially if Randy Orton truly is out for
Speaker 2: the next you know, I don't know how long, apparently
Speaker 2: till the end of the year. I've heard a lot
Speaker 2: of different things, but I don't know if this is
Speaker 2: going to be the end of it with Brock and Roman.
Speaker 2: I mean, they got SummerSlam next. What are they gonna do?
Speaker 2: Just have Brock lezer goal away and then I don't
Speaker 2: think so. I think I think we could see like
Speaker 2: part seven of this of this matchup with Brock and
Speaker 2: Roman at Summer Slam, Like I'm not saying it's gonna happen,
Speaker 2: but Brock isn't back just for this kind of b
Speaker 2: pay per view. I think he's back through Summer Slam,
Speaker 2: and it could be Roman reigns for both both times. Well,
Speaker 2: that's the.
Speaker 5: Thing I wanted to ask, like, is it for money
Speaker 5: in the bank, because I thought I saw something that
Speaker 5: said that he came back to challenge Roman for SummerSlam.
Speaker 5: H that they're just gonna skip over. I like, don't
Speaker 5: quote me on that, but and I'm pretty sure it's
Speaker 5: for a last man standing match.
Speaker 2: I saw that much.
Speaker 5: So like, I'm pretty sure, like you could double check
Speaker 5: this for me, that they booked this for Summer Slam,
Speaker 5: Oh my god, and they're just gonna leap frog money
Speaker 5: in the bank. And assuming that's accurate and I'm not
Speaker 5: completely messing this up, you're basically holding that title hostage
Speaker 5: or both titles hostage for two two months, yep. And
Speaker 5: we know that for two months, nobody's even going to
Speaker 5: get involved in the World Championship picture or the Undisputed
Speaker 5: Championship picture. Forget having a match for it, forget having
Speaker 5: you know, winning it. There's gonna be nobody even stepping
Speaker 5: up to Roman for the entire summer because they've already
Speaker 5: decided two months in advance. It's Roman versus Brock. For
Speaker 5: what reason, No other than Vince feels like that's the
Speaker 5: biggest match that he could put together. And that's why, Like,
Speaker 5: maybe I was overly negative with Roman from the onset
Speaker 5: when he won the two championships at WrestleMania, but I
Speaker 5: felt like, this is the way that it was going,
Speaker 5: that these championships were just going to go into hibernation.
Speaker 5: And look, again, maybe I'm talking about both sides out
Speaker 5: of my mouth, because when Brock was Universal Champion on
Speaker 5: Monday Night Raw back in twenty seventeen or whatever it was,
Speaker 5: I didn't mind it as much. But in part of
Speaker 5: that was because you had guys like aj Styles and
Speaker 5: Daniel Brian carrying the other World championship over on SmackDown,
Speaker 5: so it still felt kind of legitimate that there was
Speaker 5: at least one World championship in the mix. And to
Speaker 5: be honest, I feel like Brock back then competed more
Speaker 5: than Roman is now, and.
Speaker 4: That's crazy to say.
Speaker 5: Like you had Brock defending the Universal Championship at pay
Speaker 5: per views like great Balls of Fire and Battleground and
Speaker 5: stuff like that, and this you don't even have Roman
Speaker 5: competing at any pay per view, And for me, it's
Speaker 5: just the fact that you've brought back another part timer
Speaker 5: to go head to head with him for like the
Speaker 5: fifteenth time. It's like, it's absolutely crazy, and it's just like,
Speaker 5: how am I supposed to invest in this anymore? Like
Speaker 5: unless it is like this incredible long term booking that
Speaker 5: Seth is gonna win money in the bank and then
Speaker 5: cash in on Roman and Brock again, you know, akin
Speaker 5: to what happened seven years ago. But I mean, I'm
Speaker 5: not giving WWE that much credit, especially with the way
Speaker 5: that they've booked Seth in terms of wins and losses
Speaker 5: over the last twelve months. So I mean anything short
Speaker 5: of that, and assuming I don't know if you're able
Speaker 5: to double check it, but like assuming that this is
Speaker 5: just booked for SummerSlam and they're completely leapfrogging money in
Speaker 5: the bank and everything in between. You know, I just
Speaker 5: I'm not very high on this.
Speaker 2: No, I'd just read a few articles that did say that.
Speaker 2: I mean that apparently I did to see the Last
Speaker 2: Man Standing. I just didn't see the venue. I thought
Speaker 2: it was money in the bank. It does look like
Speaker 2: that is slated for SummerSlam, and if that, if that
Speaker 2: holds true, that is again, like you said, another sixty
Speaker 2: days tacked onto his six hundred and fifty, so he'll
Speaker 2: be at what like seven hundred and ten days as
Speaker 2: champion and at that point you're three quarters of the way.
Speaker 2: They are roughly two one thousand days. And I keep
Speaker 2: harping on that, but I can foresee them just doing that,
Speaker 2: and can just because they're like, well, guys, when are
Speaker 2: we gonna have this opportunity again to have a thousand days? Like,
Speaker 2: to me, that's such nick arrow minded booking. But yeah,
Speaker 2: but the only the only hope we have is exactly
Speaker 2: what you said, the money in the bank winner, whether
Speaker 2: it's Drew or Seth. Yeah, because I think those are
Speaker 2: really the only two that have a legitimate argument to
Speaker 2: win that match, which I probably think it'll actually be
Speaker 2: Drew because then he'll challenge Roman for Clash at the Castle,
Speaker 2: I'd imagine, unless he wins some other way to challenge Roman.
Speaker 2: But you already know at least through Clash at the
Speaker 2: Castle with Drew in September, like Roman's gonna hold a
Speaker 2: belt at least another three months to get to Roman,
Speaker 2: or to get to bra sorry, to get to Drew.
Speaker 2: There's there's there's like the same cast of characters here.
Speaker 2: To get from to Roman versus Drew at Clash in
Speaker 2: the Castle, you gotta go another three months. And it's
Speaker 2: just absurd that we already know the next quarter of
Speaker 2: a year there is no chance of anyone taking the
Speaker 2: belt from Roman, Like that's I think the biggest problem
Speaker 2: I've had with this run. And I've been a big
Speaker 2: opponent of this run. I have, and I've sat here
Speaker 2: and defended him more than most, and you know, for
Speaker 2: better or worse, that is what it is. It's very
Speaker 2: subjective here. But the biggest problem I've had over the
Speaker 2: two years almost that he's been champion and look out
Speaker 2: for them harping on that at SummerSlam. By the way,
Speaker 2: for two years he's been champion. The biggest complaint I've
Speaker 2: had is that every nearly every opponent he's had, you've
Speaker 2: never really believed that they could beat Roman like they
Speaker 2: they've Kevin Owens even it's you know, his four matches
Speaker 2: or whatever he had. There was maybe one of the
Speaker 2: matches You're like, maybe, but at the end of the day,
Speaker 2: You're you're never thinking, oh my god, they're probably gonna
Speaker 2: be the one to beat Roman, and then they don't.
Speaker 2: You're like, oh man, they had the chance. Nobody there's
Speaker 2: been nobody Cizarro, the Demon, Finn Baler, Kevin Owens, obviously
Speaker 2: brock Lesler. You know, anytime he challenges Roman has no chance.
Speaker 2: You know, he faced John Cena. You knew while there
Speaker 2: was some speculation he's a part time guy. Doesn't make sense, legend,
Speaker 2: doesn't need it, he doesn't make He's not gonna get it.
Speaker 2: You know, the rock he comes back. You know, it
Speaker 2: doesn't make sense. It's all just nostalgic matches, and just
Speaker 2: like video game matches that people are are thinking themselves, yeah,
Speaker 2: there's no chance, like this is it's cool that these
Speaker 2: matches are happening. But unfortunately, guys, we know the outcome,
Speaker 2: like we we already know Roman's retaining because it doesn't
Speaker 2: make sense for this person to win. That's the been
Speaker 2: the biggest complaint I've had with his entire run is
Speaker 2: that ninety percent of his opponents you just going, yeah,
Speaker 2: it's gonna be a fun match, but there's no way
Speaker 2: they're winning. That that's that's a terrible way to have
Speaker 2: a title run.
Speaker 5: I think the only time that I really thought that
Speaker 5: maybe he would lose was wrestled maybe A thirty seven
Speaker 5: in the triple threat match with Daniel Bryan Edge. That's
Speaker 5: and once he beat them, and I still picked Roman
Speaker 5: to retain. But that was the one time where I
Speaker 5: wasn't one hundred percent confident you're right, like Ray Masterio,
Speaker 5: no Edge the second time, and money in the bank,
Speaker 5: no Sina. I mean somewhat, I said, like maybe they'll
Speaker 5: give Sena his seventeenth world title to pass pass Flair
Speaker 5: and then he'll drop it back to Roman. But I
Speaker 5: mean the way that they booked him versus Sena was embarrassing.
Speaker 5: The Brock thing obviously, like him winning at WrestleMania was
Speaker 5: the most clear cut outcome we've ever seen, arguably hit
Speaker 5: at WrestleMania, and we knew that he was gonna beat
Speaker 5: Riddle on SmackDown, and like, I don't know if I'm
Speaker 5: missing anyone in there. Obviously Jay Us at the very beginning,
Speaker 5: we knew wasn't gonna have a hope in the hell
Speaker 5: of winning the championship. So like it is a shame
Speaker 5: it sucks that, like, even a guy like Seth Rawlins,
Speaker 5: like if that was a good match, I think the
Speaker 5: program had a lot more juice left in it, aside
Speaker 5: from the fact that it was heel versus heel. But
Speaker 5: we knew that Rawlins wasn't gonna win because they were
Speaker 5: in the midst of the Brock Angle and you had
Speaker 5: Seth as a raw guy. So even that we knew
Speaker 5: that Seth didn't have a hope in hall Att winning
Speaker 5: the Universal Championship at the Rumbles. So, I mean, it's
Speaker 5: very unfortunate that even though it has been an excellent
Speaker 5: run for the most part, I would say all the
Speaker 5: way up until this year's WrestleMania, I had no complaints
Speaker 5: with it. I would say that it is still a
Speaker 5: shame that for the first eighteen months when it was
Speaker 5: red hot, you never presented a formidable opponent for him
Speaker 5: to go up against.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's that. I mean again, I'm not going to
Speaker 2: pretend that I wasn't a fan of it. I was.
Speaker 2: I as a big fan of his run, and to
Speaker 2: some degree I still am. I can respect what's going on,
Speaker 2: but at this point, like fans are starting to lose
Speaker 2: their patience in a way that's not good. It's not
Speaker 2: good heat. It's like people don't want to watch anymore.
Speaker 2: And I will argue tooth and now that there is
Speaker 2: difference in that kind of heat where people just want
Speaker 2: to change the channel and they don't want to even
Speaker 2: invest anymore. Disengagement is not heel heat. I think that's
Speaker 2: the difference that people don't understand sometimes, and so I
Speaker 2: think that that people are at that point. People are
Speaker 2: at that point where they're just like disengaged and they're
Speaker 2: just like, well, Roman's gonna win. It's gonna be a
Speaker 2: good match, you know. So I'll watch for just like
Speaker 2: the wrestling perspective, but I'm kind of disinvested from the bloodline.
Speaker 2: It's the same thing. Roman wins, retains, he stands there
Speaker 2: till it tells people to acknowledge him, and then a
Speaker 2: new opponent comes out just as he's holding up the belts.
Speaker 2: It's like very formulae. It's the same thing, and I
Speaker 2: totally get it. I'm not crapping on that, and I'm
Speaker 2: starting to I'm starting to get on that bandwagon of
Speaker 2: like Okay, yeah, I'm kind of done with this. Can
Speaker 2: we just get the belts off? Roman so we can
Speaker 2: get Roman in matches that you actually don't know if
Speaker 2: he's gonna win or not. Like like, to me, you've
Speaker 2: made your point. Roman's a future Hall of Famer. He's
Speaker 2: had an epic run, a legendary run. We get all that,
Speaker 2: great heel turn, great success, great execution. For the most part,
Speaker 2: point made. Can we move on? You are strangle holding
Speaker 2: two championships unified into one that you're not even maximizing
Speaker 2: or utilizing at all, by the way, and you're also
Speaker 2: holding mac talent that could be taking these spots for
Speaker 2: pay per views that are that oftentimes don't even have
Speaker 2: a world title match because Roman's not there. I mean,
Speaker 2: so there's there's to me, the negatives finally outweigh the
Speaker 2: positives of Roman holding those belts. I just I'm there now.
Speaker 5: And it sucks because they had something amazing, but it's
Speaker 5: just they had to exaggerate, they had to push it,
Speaker 5: and by day I mean vince that, like you know,
Speaker 5: I could see it, just like oh you see, like
Speaker 5: now they're behind Roman. Now I'm gonna give them what
Speaker 5: they want. And it's just like no, like why can't
Speaker 5: he just be a top wrestler But like not above
Speaker 5: and beyond and head and shoulders above everyone else, like
Speaker 5: even Stone Cold. Steve Austin back in the day wasn't
Speaker 5: pushed like this, like you know, like even stone Cold
Speaker 5: when he was on top, at least you had that
Speaker 5: one guy in the Rock or to a bit lesser
Speaker 5: of extent, Triple H that like when they would go
Speaker 5: head to head with Austin, you would think, like damn,
Speaker 5: maybe they could beat him, and sometimes they did. Triple
Speaker 5: H beat him into three stages of hell match, one
Speaker 5: of the best of all time, by the way, I
Speaker 5: love that bad, yeah, exactly, like The Rock beat him
Speaker 5: at WrestleMania nineteen obviously a different context, but he.
Speaker 4: Still beat him. Like you when The Rock was.
Speaker 5: The world champion and Austin was out in two thousand,
Speaker 5: the Rock was the top guy, like Kurt Angle beat
Speaker 5: him at No Way Out in two thousand or no sorry,
Speaker 5: it was No Mercy two thousand.
Speaker 4: Like these are things sometimes that have to happen.
Speaker 5: And I could guarantee you that guys like The Rock,
Speaker 5: guys like Austin, even a guy like John Cena, and
Speaker 5: you know, he was pushed as Super Sena for a
Speaker 5: long time, but never to this extent that, like it
Speaker 5: pays sometimes to have them lose, and it pays sometimes
Speaker 5: for them to have that redemption story. Like I think
Speaker 5: one of the things that really helped Sena, and I
Speaker 5: don't know if you remember this, but like in the
Speaker 5: year twenty twelve when he lost to the Rock at
Speaker 5: WrestleMania twenty eight and then he was just a losing
Speaker 5: match after match after match after match, and twenty twelve,
Speaker 5: all Sena did was lose, and he had a failed
Speaker 5: cash in money in the bank briefcase. And then in
Speaker 5: twenty thirteen, he won the Rumble and he beat the
Speaker 5: Rock at the at resuming in twenty nine and even
Speaker 5: though it wasn't my favorite thing in the world, I
Speaker 5: think it got a lot more people behind John Cena
Speaker 5: again because they did have him face some form of
Speaker 5: adversity And could you imagine like Roman losing a match
Speaker 5: and coming out like a month later more vicious than
Speaker 5: ever because he did finally lose, Like they would have
Speaker 5: a brand new like can of worms to open and
Speaker 5: work with, and everyone would be so much more invested
Speaker 5: because we're just like, Okay, we had a vicious Roman before,
Speaker 5: but now that he's lost, let's see what levels he'll
Speaker 5: take it to to get that title back, and they
Speaker 5: just won't even go there.
Speaker 2: There's there's such a story to be told on the
Speaker 2: other end of this, like we have had, they've squeezed
Speaker 2: every last drop of juice, at least we think they
Speaker 2: have out of this current product for two years. They'd
Speaker 2: be doing the same thing with Roman, and there's a
Speaker 2: there's such another side of this. There's a potentially better
Speaker 2: side of this, or more interesting side of this on
Speaker 2: the other side where Okay, he lost, Now what the
Speaker 2: hell the hell is he gonna do when he comes out?
Speaker 2: What's he gonna Is he gonna like light the arena
Speaker 2: on fire?
Speaker 1: Like?
Speaker 2: What is he gonna do? Like the quiet anger? I
Speaker 2: think he could show on camera would be scary good
Speaker 2: and I would love to see it. They could even
Speaker 2: turn him baby face off of it. I mean, honestly,
Speaker 2: the fans are already cheering when he comes out. Some
Speaker 2: of them are He's got a great entrance music. You know. Again,
Speaker 2: I think that the fans have had time to hate him.
Speaker 2: The ones that have wanted to boo him have had
Speaker 2: time to boot him. We've We've had a lot of
Speaker 2: a lot of fans like myself pent up anger for
Speaker 2: him that I think is now released, and were ready
Speaker 2: to embrace him if they ever wanted to turn babyface,
Speaker 2: they could that we could get to the point where
Speaker 2: Vince wanted him to be six years ago winning the
Speaker 2: Rumble in fifteen in Philly, except actually be there now
Speaker 2: because they've gone through the time of hating him and
Speaker 2: now they can instantly turn him on a dime. I
Speaker 2: really believe that. So you're right, it's just time and
Speaker 2: and I think that fans are fed up, we're done
Speaker 2: with it, and you know, I just I don't want
Speaker 2: to go in circles. But any final thoughts on this, no.
Speaker 5: I just it's a shame that we know that the
Speaker 5: world titles aren't gonna be moving or have a developing
Speaker 5: storyline for two months during the summer. It's just sad
Speaker 5: and it's frustrating.
Speaker 2: It's rights. I honestly don't even know the next time
Speaker 2: they are there in question, I mean WrestleMania, But if
Speaker 2: the Rocks there challenging for the Belts got helpless, I
Speaker 2: didn't want to cross that bridge. I mean, we've got
Speaker 2: like eight months until we have to talk about that.
Speaker 2: I would just really hope if the Rock comes back
Speaker 2: is not for the belts. You and I have discussed that,
Speaker 2: but I really don't even know the next time. I
Speaker 2: would look at a Roman match even again all the
Speaker 2: way to WrestleMania and go, hmm, well it could be
Speaker 2: this person who beats him. Here, there's literally no one
Speaker 2: I can think of at this time that could come
Speaker 2: back and challenge Roman outside of some people in XT
Speaker 2: you have heard the names, but right now in the
Speaker 2: current roster, I look at it, I go, yeah, there's nobody.
Speaker 2: So just put it on Seth for God's sakes, Like,
Speaker 2: just have Seth win the money in the bank, cash
Speaker 2: it in that night. Let's get it over with. Seth
Speaker 2: is now the unified champion, Like, let's move on. That's
Speaker 2: what I would do. But all right, well, Anthony, thank
Speaker 2: you for coming on tonight. Of course, you guys can
Speaker 2: check out Anthony on his retro show. And this past
Speaker 2: week was from the vault version. But this week, hopefully
Speaker 2: we'll get a fresh, a fresh, new episode. And did
Speaker 2: you have anything in mind, Anthony or you're waiting for
Speaker 2: the universe to inspire you over the next few days.
Speaker 5: No, No, I actually have one in mind. It was
Speaker 5: supposed to be last week, but it's just with the
Speaker 5: whole moving stuff, I knew that I would have had
Speaker 5: to record a half assed version, So just figured give
Speaker 5: us a brand new episode this week, and it will
Speaker 5: be the Rocks run from twenty eleven to twenty thirteen,
Speaker 5: as we will dive into his return and his semi
Speaker 5: full time run that when he came back in early
Speaker 5: twenty thirteen all the way up until WrestleMania in late March,
Speaker 5: were for just about two or three months or so,
Speaker 5: it felt like the Rock was kind of on a
Speaker 5: full time schedule. Maybe not from an in ring perspective,
Speaker 5: but he was appearing on Raw, he was appearing on
Speaker 5: SmackDown almost each and every week when he held the
Speaker 5: WWE Championship in early twenty thirteen. I don't think people
Speaker 5: remember how often he came back during that period, so
Speaker 5: I'm excited to dive into that.
Speaker 2: I actually I'm glad you're doing that because I actually
Speaker 2: don't remember him there much. But maybe it is foggy
Speaker 2: memory because you look at these legacy stars and you're like, yeah,
Speaker 2: but they weren't there that much. But I think you're
Speaker 2: right that he was there way more than we realize
Speaker 2: and you know that that's important. I think he wanted
Speaker 2: to put some respect on the belts and not just
Speaker 2: be this absentee champion. So good stuff. I'll be looking
Speaker 2: forward to it. And you have a social media you
Speaker 2: want to share as well?
Speaker 5: Yeah, as always, you can get me at a to
Speaker 5: Marco twenty five on Twitter.
Speaker 2: Awesome. Well, looking forward to the episode and we will
Speaker 2: be talking next.
Speaker 5: Week, all right, man, take it easy, take care.
Speaker 3: Thanks for listening to the WWE podcast. Don't forget to
Speaker 3: subscribe on your favorite podcast app so you don't miss
Speaker 3: a show, or head to wwepodcast dot com and for
Speaker 3: all of these shows add free head over to Patreon
Speaker 3: dot com slash WWE podcast. Until then, we'll see you
Speaker 3: next time.