Now, there are a thousand other videos I could've used for Kaval. Any of his matches as Low-Ki or Senshi would be better than this match. And using a clip where Kaval loses isn't the best compliment to a "Why did you fire Senshi, you swamp-waddling inbreeds?" slide.
But I wanted to use this clip to prove a point:
Brandon Silvestry is so good, he can take a green rookie with only 18 months of experience in a wrestling ring, and put on a 5-star match, lose in that match, and make the other guy look like an eight-year veteran in the process.
The problem here is exactly what CM Punk said to Vince McMahon not too long ago:
"Why did they deserve to be fired? Because you don't know what these people want? Because you don't know what makes a superstar in 2011, Vince?"
"They" were Colt Cabana and Luke Gallows, but Kaval should be included.
The WWE has this superiority complex that they are quickly losing the right to have.
This idea that only they know what makes a superstar. And that guys like Kaval and Bryan Danielson aren't superstars in their opinion.
In their minds, they were already nice to us fans when they brought Daniel Bryan back, because we weren't buying that lame excuse for why they fired him. They thought they could get away with it, until fans started chanting his name on live TV.
But the WWE will be damned (can I say that in an article?) if they let the fans force two of these little indie punks on their roster. Especially after Kaval went taboo and mentioned TNA on NXT.
"So, you think you're some kind of super-slick ninja-wrestler, 'Low-Ki'? We're going to force Lay-Cool on you.
So, you think that because those internet 'dweebs' voted you the winner or NXT, that we're going to support you?
No. You lose in your debut.
You lose in your title shot match you won on NXT.
You team up with MVP and you lose with him.
He quit? Okay. Back to singles wrestling and—guess what?—you're going to lose again."
"Music to our ears."
And the WWE wonders why TNA Impact! is catching up to SmackDown in the ratings?
Here's a clue, WWE, they aren't rising up to you. You're falling down to them.
And if you think that the little bump you're getting from these "Supershows" is going to help, when you keep crapping on guys the fans like, but don't fit your idea of what a superstar should be?
You're going to be sadly mistaken.
Ten years ago, you averaged in the mid 4.0s in the ratings on SmackDown.
Now you're at 2.0.
Do the math.
In 10 years, Smackdown won't even be around.
"Well, at least we'll have Raw, punk."
10 years ago, Raw's average rating was 4.6.
Now it's in the low 3.0s.
10 years from now, Raw will be in the low 1.0's.
Do we need to take a look at your stock, too?
"Um... no... we're fine, thanks."
You sure? Because I would hate to point out that five years ago it was doing $17 a share, and now it's at $9. I would hate to point out that it was doing $14 a share during the peak of the financial crisis. But now it's at $9 a share.
"We said we we're fine."
Oh, alright... if you say so. Cause I'm just saying your stock was almost 60 percent more valuable immediately after the Benoi—
Okay, okay, my bad, my bad... sorry, geez...
(By the way, TWNP News has all of the past rating information on their info site, and Google Finance has the history of the stock prices. Just so you don't think I'm pulling numbers out of my head.)