WWE News: The Miz Reportedly Being Blamed and Punished by the Company

According to The Wrestling Observer Newsletter —via WrestlingInc.com—The Miz is in the proverbial doghouse for Survivor Series 2011's disappointing buy rate.

The event, headlined by The Miz and R-Truth against John Cena and The Rock, tallied an underwhelming 260,000 buys worldwide. In comparison to last year's edition, "The Never Before, Never Again" marketing theme garnered only 16,000 more purchases.

With it being The Rock's first match in eight years, the WWE expected Survivor Series to be a business bonanza. Not only was that not the case, but "The Great One" was excused for the show's failure to attract a handsome number of consumers.

Curiously, John Cena and R-Truth were also absolved of the abysmal buy rate, leaving "The Awesome One" as the sole person at fault.

The blame, which has manifested as punishment, is the purported reason for why The Miz hasn't won a televised singles match since The December 5 episode of Monday Night Raw.

Ultimately, this news item begs the question: How did the WWE arrive at The Miz being the prime reason for Survivor Series' pratfall?

Why can't the haphazard and uninspired buildup for the pay-per-view's 25th anniversary be blamed instead? What incentive is there to watch a tag team contest when one team comes across as entirely non-threatening? Specifically, the WWE's presentation of "Awesome Truth" left much to be desired in the way of credibility against the iconic tandem of The Rock and John Cena.

Furthermore, the team of The Rock and John Cena seemed exceedingly contrived. How could fans get invested in watching them join forces when they had been firing barbs at one another? Not to mention, The Rock's reasoning for tagging with Cena in the storyline—because the audience had been "asking" for it—was an insult to everyone's intelligence.

Also, because it was The Rock's first bout in years—and because "Awesome Truth" posed little resistance—the headline attraction had "foregone conclusion" written all over it. Why would any fan shell out between $44.95-54.95 to watch an outcome removed of any doubt?

Suffice it to say, given the sufficient evidence that puts the creative team at fault, it is a conundrum why The Miz was scapegoated for the show being a financial flop.

However, assuming the WWE had to blame an individual, the only logical justification would be the fact that there is historical precedent for The Miz being box-office poison.

Not counting WrestleMania 27, the 2011 Over the Limit pay-per-view—which was headlined by The Miz in his first viable outing as a lead attraction against John Cena—attracted an eye-popping 73,000 fewer buys than the 2010 version.

On the other hand, Capitol Punishment 2011, which similarly featured R-Truth in his first-ever singles main event—also against Cena—gained 18,000 more buys compared to the previous year.

Empirically, the only difference at the top of the card between Over the Limit and Capitol Punishment—which presumably ran as experiments to test the drawing power of the rising players—is the fact that one featured The Miz and one did not.

Taking into account that The Rock and John Cena are proven commodities, deductive reasoning leaves only The Miz or R-Truth as the ones to hold responsible for Survivor Series' under-performing buy rate.

And since we've already established that The Miz is, historically, a much worse draw than R-Truth, the WWE's logic to single out "The Awesome One" is not as perplexing as first thought.

Whether or not it's the right thing for the company to do, though, is another matter altogether.

Follow me on Twitter @ImaanJK