Is Randy Orton legitimately injured or did he fail another WWE Wellness Test?
Randy Orton is suffering from a legitimate back injury. I'm still unclear if it's something that happened on Tuesday night or if he realized it was going to be something that he could no longer work through so the stuff done Tuesday was used to write him off television. However, I have heard nothing about a Wellness test failure and can assure you that WWE makes names public when a worker tests positive. I know of two situations where names have not been announced, one including Orton but WWE did have a reason for not announcing it. With that being said the full duration of how long he will be out is unknown at this point.
I agree with most fans in that Michael Cole's play-by-play is terrible and annoying but I think he is still very valuable because he is so over as a heel. So why not use him in another role as a manger or General Manager?
Vince McMahon loves Michael Cole's work as the Raw play-by-play man. He does exactly what he is told and McMahon likes the heel/babyface setup on commentary. While a lot of fans cannot stand Michael Cole's work as an announcer, McMahon legitimately sees him as the "voice of WWE."
With Raw's viewership decreasing each week why doesn't WWE consider moving the show back an hour so the show doesn't end so late?
This week's Raw Supershow actually reversed the trend as the show actually gained audience from hour one to hour two (rating available here). It's also worth noting that when there is a three-hour edition of Raw, the first hour is always the least-watched and drags the final number down. This is obviously due to the fact that the normal viewership of the show is programmed to tune in during the 9-11 PM EST timeslot. While I obviously can't give a concrete answer as to why the show has lost viewership in recent weeks, I can tell you there are people in WWE trying to analyze the segments and figure it out.
I always wondered why they have title matches at house shows. I can't remember the last time a title changed hands during one of these. I know its a ploy to get the bang for your buck, but can't it come up as false advertising?
In addition to giving the shows headline matches to advertise, WWE has the titles defended at house shows to give the impression anything can happen; while rare, there are occasions where a belt will change hands. I'm against titles not being defended because it devalues them as props. Just because a worker is champion doesn't always mean they are always going over as there are ways to book a dirty or DQ finish to keep up the excitement. The only way it's false advertising is if they promote the title being defended and it's not.
To submit your question for our next installment of Ask WNW, click here.
Remember questions with proper spelling and grammar receive top priority and stand the best chance of getting answered. The next installment of Ask WNW will run on Friday, December 30, 2011.
Check out the Ask WNW archive at this link.
Submit questions to: AskWNW@wrestlingnewsworld.com!