WWE Anonymous RAW General Manager Was Best Kept Anonymous
Modern WWE is known for storylines that never go anywhere.
There was the Nexus in 2010, the conspiracy angle in 2011 and across both years there was the infamous Anonymous RAW General Manager.
Although there was once a time when fans were itching to know who was behind the e-mails, no one has really cared for over a year now.
The right moment to reveal the Anonymous RAW General Manager was back in 2011.
Despite fans moving on and accepting that the storyline had died last year, the WWE saw a need to reveal the mysterious manager this week on RAW.
Perhaps they didn’t want such a plot hole in RAW’s history heading into the 1,000th episode.
Whatever the reason, last night’s RAW saw Santino uncovering Hornswoggle as the culprit.
In some regards, it does actually make sense.
Hornswoggle was unable to talk when the anonymous manager was in power, so he could only communicate via e-mail.
Secondly, Hornswoggle would be easily intimidated by wrestlers in-person.
Remember that the whole reason for the anonymity was due to a fear of what the Nexus had done to the previous general manager, Bret Hart.
Hornswoggle fits to a degree, but at the same time, the ship has sailed on anyone caring.
Was revealing Hornswoggle as the Anonymous RAW General Manager the right thing to do?
Seeing as the WWE bothered ending this storyline all this time later, you would have expected something much more significant.
The identity of the mysterious general manager could have been used as a catalyst for the expected big summer angle of 2012.
Instead, we cringed as Santino deduced the general manager must be under the ring, and we were disappointed when it was eventually confirmed as Hornswoggle.
Not only was it irrelevant to today, but it also doesn’t make complete sense.
Hornswoggle is a babyface.
The Michael Cole-loving and heel-favoring general manager drew significant heat considering he was just a computer.
Did Hornswoggle just make a heel turn on RAW then?
No one knows and no one really cares.
Apparently, we're just supposed to laugh it all off as the works of a mischievous leprechaun.
Whatever happened on RAW yesterday was a mess, and keeping the anonymous general manager as, well, anonymous would have been just fine.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?