Five Post-Wrestlemania Questions WWE Needs to Answer

After shutting off last Sunday's Wrestlemania 25, I didn't feel a washing over of emotions or excitement. I wasn't ecstatic or even joyous at what I had witnessed.

Rather, I was disappointed that the world's largest wrestling...errr...sports entertainment...errr...entertainment company had failed to deliver the goods in their Super Bowl—the one event that truly matters to the mainstream audience the WWE so desperately wants to attract.

There are five questions stuck in my mind from Wrestlemania 25, ranging from how the company failed their biggest star to how they can begin preparing for next year.

1. Why was the company's biggest star—John Cena—involved in such a bland and non-main event angle?

Like him or not, John Cena is the biggest star in WWE. There's a reason why he is the one that sells the most merchandise, gets to display his acting acumen in movies (insert joke here) and why he is continually in a main program on the flagship show.

So with Wrestlemania as the biggest show of the year, wouldn't you want your biggest star in the biggest match?

Like Hulk Hogan, Steve Austin and the Rock before him, the card at WM has to flow down from the top and this year, the WWE failed completely in doing that with Cena.

Granted he won the World title back—relatively meaningless in this horrendous angle with Edge and Big Show—but it wasn't the last match to close the show and honestly, did anyone care?

Long-term planning helps prevent things like this. To not have THE main angle involving Cena is a mistake. He's your biggest mainstream draw, so not using him is foolish.

The Edge/Show/Vickie angle was weak and it made no sense to have Cena involved other than the pursuit of the title, which was a complete afterthought when it was all said and done.

HHH is not the company's top star and hasn't been for quite some time. You want to give Trips the hottest angle? That's fine, as long as you don't shortchange Cena in the process, which is exactly what happened.

2. Why was the only mainstream star—Mickey Rourke—such an afterthought?

Remember when Rourke coming in was intriguing at one point and actually meant something? Doesn't that seem like a lifetime ago?

For a company that has near-perfected the celebrity draw at WM, they really fell flat with Rourke, a freaking Academy Award nominee for a movie in which he played a pro wrestler. If there was ever a combination that made sense, it was this one. So what happened?

I get the feeling a lot of the problems were the behind-closed-doors variety and I want to think that Vince McMahon tried his hardest to get this done earlier than later. But when Rourke said he was going to confront Chris Jericho and then verbally backed out (even though we all knew differently), the steam began to dissipate.

He made no appearances on RAW, adding no fodder to the Jericho/Legends fire. So what if he was going to be at Mania? What was his motivation and why were we supposed to care?

I understand he couldn't wrestle because of Iron Man 2, but offer to pay him $1 million for four appearances (three RAW, WM). Could Rourke even turn that down? That's just over 18k buys, by the way. Think he'd be worth it if done right?

Questions 3-5 after the jump...

3. Why doesn't the WWE start building these angles months in advance?

A major complaint among the vocal and somewhat disrespected Internet Wrestling Community (the good ol' IWC) is that the writers simply don't plan far enough in advance like they used to.

Usually with any good "episodic" series (apparently what WWE wants to be known as), the writers have an end game in mind and a general consensus about what will happen in a given season.

Not WWE though. For some reason, their long-term planning seems to be non-existent. Why not plot out six months to a year in advance? It worked well in the past, so why not now? Sure, injuries and drug suspensions change things, but c'mon now.

You're telling me they can't use crowd reaction, strong character development and a little faith in building stars organically to actually make people care about the product? They overthink things a lot, and it's unfortunate for us as wrestling fans.

Case in point: Randy Orton. The guy was white-hot a month ago and it ended the minute he had to sell grandmother-weak punches from Shane McMahon.

4. Whatever happened to giving the people their PPV money's worth?

I have the same issues with the UFC at times, but I think that too many promoters take putting on monthly PPVs for granted. The idea used to be to drive interest using promotional vehicles like TV/ads/web to get people to buy your product.

Then once you have them, it's up to the promoter to give the people the best possible product they can so they next time they ask for PPV dollars, you'll be inclined to fork it over.

But too often, WWE PPVs are nothing more than glorified RAWs with no commercials and longer matches. Things should happen on PPV that should make you upset you didn't get it.

And if you're asking for $50+ for a product you control the outcome of, you better damn sure do your best to put the best possible show out there.

I think with the build and execution of this year's Wrestlemania, the WWE failed their talent, their sponsors, and their fans with not doing all they could to make the best possible event.

There is no way a McMahon could say today, "That was the best job we could possibly do."

And if they can, the business is doomed.

5. Should fans expect a better Wrestlemania next year?

Sadly, I don't think so, but I do have faith. But it has to start next Monday (this week's RAW was maddening at how toothless it was) with the Draft and the front office has to undergo a major philosophy change.

If Shawn Michaels is to retire, you have one year to build a compelling storyline and someone to deliver the final nail in the coffin.

You have one year to rebuild what Cena is supposed to mean to the organization and build potential challengers to put him down. You have one year to make WM 26 in Phoenix one of the best events ever. How?

It's safe to say that HHH is going to want Michaels' last match, so you can essentially pencil this in. You have two World belts that are meaningless, as there really only needs to be one. So what do you do?

Build a one-year program in which the end result is the unification of the titles at WM 26 with Cena vs. Randy Orton. Just push the sh*t out of them as best you can, so people actually will want to see these guys get it on in '10. One belt vs. the other for the ultimate honor at the biggest show of the year.

Then again, January 2010 is far enough away that WWE doesn't have to worry about it. I'm sure they can start planning then, just like they did this year.

Cena/Big Show/Edge II anyone?

Josh Nason - josh [at] ropesringandcage [dot com] - has published MMA, wrestling and boxing blog Ropes, Ring and Cage.com since 2007. He joined up with Bleacher Report in 2008 and achieved Columnist status in 2009.