Why?: Wondering If WWE Writers Are Ever Asked This Question

I felt like an annoying, yet curious, four year old last night while watching Raw. All I wanted to do the entire night is ask “Why?” over and over again.

Just as Steve Austin has conditioned the WWE fans to shout “What?” at every quiet moment during a promo, I found myself wanting to scream “WHY?” at my television repeatedly.

In some cases, it’s because I wholeheartedly disagree with a segment or the direction of a character. Other times, it’s just a simple curiosity that could be remedied by an equally simple answer; any answer would suffice in some cases.

For example: Why does Alex Riley carry a briefcase?

When Riley stuck around following his elimination on NXT, it made sense for him to carry The Miz’s Money in the Bank briefcase. He was his lackey and having him tote around Miz’s prized possession and ticket to the top of the card was logical. I’ll even give it a pass that in the subsequent weeks since Miz cashed in MITB against Randy Orton, Riley continued to carry the briefcase as a memento of Miz’s success, as a reminder to all what the MITB briefcase means. It has been beaten and worn, used as a weapon on a number of occasions and added something to their presence.

Last night, though, Riley walked around with a new, clean, unmarked silver briefcase with no definition. He just had it to have it without explanation. If it were something that he carried to the ring with the belt inside, only to have Miz open it and show it to the audience, then it would have purpose.

If it became a signature weapon of choice, much like the sledgehammer is for HHH or the pipe seems to be for Sheamus, I could see a reason for him carrying it.

It’s stuff like this that makes me wonder what type of conversation is had backstage. A producer walks over to Riley and says, “Here is your briefcase, carry this with you during segments,” and Riley just nods? Does he ask the question “Why?” What about the writing staff? Somebody told that producer that Riley needed to carry the briefcase. Did anybody on the writing staff ask the question, “Why does he have a briefcase again?”

So much thought goes into so many parts of the show that it amazes me how such obvious details are ignored.

A great piece of “Why?” storytelling that has be more flummoxed than Riley’s briefcase is the entire presence of Tyson Kidd. I was legitimately excited when Kidd and his bodyguard Jackson Andrews interrupted Daniel Bryan backstage. Two young, technical wrestlers feuding over the midcard strap is makes mid-20s wrestling dorks like me giddy.

Instead, Kidd was sent to the ring and unceremoniously buried by the guy whose presence on the roster is solely based on his ability to put people over: Mark Henry. It wouldn’t even have to make Henry look bad. Kidd dodges a running shoulder block, tosses Henry outside the ring and distracts the ref as Andrews hits a big running boot to the face. He rolls him into the ring, Kidd hits some move and pin Henry.

Instead, Henry not only pins Kidd in the middle of the ring cleanly with his finisher, but he then does the same thing to the giant bodyguard that has only been on the show for a month.

Why? Why spend a backstage segment to build to a guy getting buried by a guy that has zero upward mobility? Why? Why are we protecting Mark Henry of all people?

Then, later in the show, Daniel Bryan had a match against Zach Ryder. Neither got an entrance; we didn’t even see the start of the match. Bryan wins cleanly and quickly, as he should. There is no mention of Tyson Kidd whatsoever.

Then, Miz comes out, attacks Lawler and Bryan disappears.

Was there nobody on the writing team that questioned the purpose of having a backstage segment—and a good one at that—only to bury two of them and then completely ignore the other later in the show?

Backstage segments are supposed to increase interest in matches and we barely got one decent match out of the two combined. Backstage segments are supposed to drive storylines and develop characters, but instead we didn’t get any evident story and it appears the two characters most in need of definition are dead in the water.

Why dedicated 10 minutes of airtime to such directionless nonsense?

What about Morrison challenging for the belt next week? Why?

Unless this ends in some screwy finish where the Anonymous GM decrees that Morrison receive a rematch at The Rumble, what was the point of having a balls-to-the-wall, supposedly star-making No. 1 contender ladder match at TLC, if the new next in line for the title shot is going to blow off his match—one that has obvious and easily written story all over it—on an episode of Raw?

This should be an opportunity for the Miz and Morrison to have a high-impact 15-minute match on a PPV that ultimately leads to Miz going over clean to prove he deserves to be champion, while Morrison doesn’t look weak or stupid, allowing him to hit some big spots in the Elimination Chamber the next month and be a frontrunner for the MITB at Wrestlemania.

No matter how much sense all of that makes, the writing staff seems to see it another way.

If I could just sit in the conference room where they discuss these ideas, I’d just want my job to occasionally stop the conversation and ask “Why?”

Is there a reason for doing what is done? Is their any long-term (or even short-term) thinking applied to these decisions? If there is a logic and reason that can be applied, I’d sit back and accept it, but since none has been evident, especially on many parts of this episode of Raw, I question whether or not anybody ever asks the writing staff why they do some things that they do.