I watch SmackDown every week, and Im starting to feel like Bill Murray in Groundhog Day, except that Im not learning any life lessons, its not entertaining, and Brie Bella is no Andie MacDowell! The reason for this comparison is that it seems its always Roman Reigns or Dean Ambrose or Roman and Dean vs. a crappy tag team in the main event, and the Shield brothers always win. So, I decided to investigate the show over the past year. The results were shocking and unsettling. Over the last 52 editions of SmackDowns main events, only eight of those matches did not feature either Ambrose or Roman. And only 10 of the past 52 episodes of SmackDown have the heels won the main event (five of those victories belong to Seth Rollins). So heels have gone 10-39-3. Another frustrating fact is that Roman is 24-1-2 during these matches. Thats beyond John Cena win/loss territory. SmackDown bores me. There's things to like about it, such as Mauro Ranallo, and Jerry Lawlers PG heel shtick. The fact that it's two hours instead of three is also pretty nice. But WWE needs to take the Cena approach with the show, and let Dean and Roman take a break from it. Would the ratings really go down if someone else was given a shot in the main event? At this point, Roman has become the Needlenose Ned to my Phil Connors, and I dont want anything that hes selling.
As Rust Cohle from True Detective said "Life's barely long enough to get good at one thing. So be careful what you're good at."
Sadly, I can't solve a murder like Rust...or change a tire, or even tie a tie. But I do know all the lyrics to Hulk Hogan's "Real American" theme song and can easily name every Natural Born Thriller from the dying days of WCW. I was once ranked 21st in the United States in Tetris...on the Playstation 3 version...for about a week.
Follow along @AndrewSoucek and check out my podcast at wrestlingwithfriends.com
