WWE Re-Runs: A Few Things WWE Should Start Cutting Back On

Hello Bleachers!

Now, if you've been watching WWE television for the past, oh I don't know...2 years...you've noticed that the product isn't exactly as good as it should be. I'm not saying everything they do is a flop (they are actually pretty great from time to time), but they always do a few things that really grind my gears.

Lately, one of their major problems have been their lack of direction. You know, they never seem to be moving forward. It seems like each week RAW and (especially) Smackdown seem to be on repeat. Just look back at the past few Smackdowns: Edge vs Ziggler, Drew vs Trent Barretta, Jack Swagger vs Kofi, Alberto Del Rio coming out and talking about the same thing every week.

Last week, Smackdown switched it up a little, but we'll probably see the same thing happening every week again (the last few weeks have featured Big Zeke body slamming Big Show. Will we see another one tomorrow? Probably).

So, I have come up with a list of some things that WWE really needs to cutback on if they want to keep the attention of their audience.

Nexus/Corre Beatdowns

If you asked anyone why the Nexus/Corre seem to be growing stale, they would probably say "they are like a broken record." Well, I have to agree. You see, ever since their inception, Nexus have pretty much accomplished nothing except beating down random people (mainly John Cena) every week. Unlike stables of the past (whose purpose were to help get people over) it seems that the Nexus' purpose is to put over the leader of the stable (previously Wade Barrett, but now CM Punk, who is already way over).

I believe the last time that we witnessed a RAW without a Nexus beatdown was the RAW after TLC. And before that? Well, I couldn't' tell you.

The point of a stable is to get the members of the group over and to skyrocket their careers. The steps of a stable seem to follow like this (or at least in my mind):

1. Have a big impact during your debut.

2. Dominate the roster through group beatings/matches.

3. Start creating names for individual members through singles competition.

4. Win a big title or accomplish a big accolade.

5. Break up.

So far, the Nexus has been repeating step 2 over and over, while failing every time they attempt step 3 (except, like I said, for the leaders). Maybe its time for the Nexus to move forward and try their hand in singles competition, so the stable won't grow even more stale.

The Corre, so far, is doing a lot better in terms of following this path I laid out. The Corre made a big impact when they debuted, attacking the Big Show and introducing Ezekiel Jackson to their ranks. They've already begun dominating the Smackdown roster and have proven themselves in singles competition (though Heath Slater hasn't quite made it there yet, but there's always a member of each group who falls a little behind).

However, the Corre needs to cut down on the beatdowns. True, they haven't done it as much as the Nexus, but considering how much the Nexus does it, having the Corre do it makes them seem far too similar to the Nexus, which doesn't seem to be WWE's goal.

Over-The-Top Rope Challenges/Unnecessary Mark Henry Dominance

How many times have you seen this situation play out in the past few months:

A cocky, young upstart comes out, complaining about not being respected. He claims that he can beat anybody in the back and to prove it, he challenges anybody from the locker room to come out and face him right there and now.

What happens next?

"WHOA!"

Mark Henry comes out, with a big smile on his face, ready to put the cocky newbie in his place. The match starts, goes on for a minute, and before you know it, Mark Henry has systematically buried his opposition.

Sometimes, we change it up and instead of a match, its an over-the-top rope challenge AKA "predictable as s***." How is anybody of the young newbie's size supposed to throw a giant man like Mark Henry over the rope? Well, to put it simply, they're not. For some reason, a lot of WWE's brightest young stars are being fed to Mark Henry (no fat jokes intended) to bury, making himself look more dominant.

The only question I have is: Why? Why the sudden push for Mark Henry, who is up there in age and nearing the end of his career? Why bury the young talent that may very well carry the company when the current crop of veterans are long gone?

Mark Henry is basically the Big Show of RAW, except Henry is far less unbeatable. In fact, Henry gets beaten plenty. By established stars. But what about young rookies? Nope. Complete annihilation.

Putting Jerry Lawler in Matches

Here's a man who I can't help but feel like is being pushed down our throats.

Back in November, Jerry Lawler re-entered the WWE for the first time in months (the previous time being against the Nexus in a 7 on 7 match before Summerslam and before that, well I don't even know).

He faced the new WWE Champion The Miz in a TLC match with the WWE title on the line. After a surprisingly entertaining bout, The Miz ultimately came out on top after some interference by Michael Cole and Alex Riley.

It was actually pretty special seeing Lawler getting a WWE title shot. Lawler had never held the WWE title, so having a match like that seemed a little overdue. The RAW GM just gave the match to Jerry due to a dispute between Lawler and Miz. Quick note here: Why was Lawler dissing the Miz for cashing in his MITB contract on a weakened opponent, when he's witnessed others do the exact same thing, but never interrupted their gloating?

Anyway, a couple of weeks later, Lawler was put into action again. He faced Alex Riley and the Miz with Randy Orton as his partner. At the last second, it seemed the Miz was going to win the match for his team. That is, of course, until Randy Orton jumped in and RKO-ed the Miz, allowing Lawler to get the win.

I didn't have a problem with that match. Sure, the Miz was pinned by a 61 year old man, but that 61 year old man still needed help from Orton. No harm no foul.

Well, they had the exact same match a few weeks later and guess what? Lawler pinned Riley with almost no problem. Hmmm...

Well, last week, the RAW GM decided to have a "RAW Rumble" (quick note, say "RAW Rumble" out loud right now. It sounds like a really retarded way of saying Royal Rumble. Just saying). The winner would face the Miz at Elimination Chamber for the title, while the 6 remaining competitors would square off in a #1 contender's Elimination Chamber match. The participants were John Morrison, R-Truth, Randy Orton, Sheamus, CM Punk, John Cena, and Jerry Lawler. This situation automatically brings the value of the Elimination Chamber PPV down.

First of all, if Lawler loses, he'll be in the Elimination Chamber match. With one of these men obviously being R-Truth (because why would he face Miz for the title?), this makes it 5 potentially good (or great) in-ring competitors (John Cena, John Morrison, Randy Orton, Sheamus, CM Punk), 1 flashy, yet slightly incompetent performer (R-Truth), and a 61 year old man who doesn't seem as I originally thought, now that I've seen him compete in about 4 matches since November (who do you think this is?). So, we'd have 4 good competitors, R-Truth, and Jerry Lawler. Somehow, that doesn't sound good to me at all.

The only other alternative is to have Lawler win the RAW Rumble. But how could a 61 year old man believably beat the best that RAW has to offer (other than R-Truth)? Well, with a little help of course! John Cena helps Jerry Lawler eliminate Sheamus (for no reason) and now we have to pay to see Lawler vs Miz II.

You know, what bothers me the most about this is the fact that I honestly don't know who will win. I originally thought, "Well Miz is going to Wrestlemania." But now, it seems that WWE could pull a fast one, give the title to Lawler and then have him drop it the next night or week.

But why bother? Doesn't it make the Miz seem like a joke if he can lose the title to Jerry Lawler? Won't it bring down the importance of the Wrestlemania match if Miz loses beforehand? Why have Jerry Lawler competing in matches every freaking week, when you have an entire roster full of great talent that doesn't get to show their stuff (that 10 minutes you give to Jerry Lawler would do better with Daniel Bryan...just saying).

Putting Vickie Guerrero On TV So Much

Before you even start with the "But she's a great heel!" or "No one gets the kind of heat she does!" comments, let me just say this: I get it. She is a total heat magnet and putting her on a young, talented individual like Dolph Ziggler can do wonders for his career and can allow him to come out of his shell. Mission accomplished.

However, having said that, let me explain a few things:

1. She doesn't need to appear on both RAW and Smackdown EVERY FREAKING WEEK!

2. She takes up too much TV time on both shows by having her scream "EXCUSE ME!" for 2 minutes straight. That TV time could be used a lot better and more creatively.

3. She doesn't get the right kind of heat. Whereas people like CM Punk, The Miz, and Wade Barrett get respectful heat (the crowd waits for them to speak, then reacts accordingly), the crowd is just in a constant state of jeering as soon as she comes out. They never shut up, not even to hear what she has to say, because they don't want to hear what she has to say. They want her to go away. Hence, she gets "go away" heat.

The sad thing is: WWE officials believe that she is the top heel of Smackdown. You know what's sadder than that? I can't argue with that. THAT is pathetic. Quit giving Vickie so much TV time. An appearance every now and then is okay, but to spend so much time focusing on Vickie.

Every time I see her, I think "This is another reason I wish Eddie Guerrero hadn't died. She would've never been introduced to WWE programming if he hadn't of passed away."

Letting Michael Cole and Jerry Lawler Argue So Much

I know, I know. I already had an entire article-length slide on Jerry Lawler. But that was about putting him in matches. In fact, this is more towards Michael Cole than anything.

In WWE's mind, Michael Cole is their best commentator. Well, they're wrong. Plain and simple. I would probably give that award to Josh Mathews (or CM Punk if he was still eligible).

Every Monday night (and certain Sunday's of the month), Jerry Lawler and Michael Cole are constantly at each others throats. Michael Cole acts like the douchebag that he is, talking up people like The Miz, while Jerry Lawler makes fun of him for it. They call each other names, they ignore the match at hand, and they simultaneously piss me off.

The worst part is that they both just come off sounding stupid. Neither of them calls each other on their bullcrap. I remember there was a point where Josh Mathews joined Michael Cole (because Lawler was in a match ::vomit::) and Cole said something about how great the Miz is and how Miz beat Orton at Royal Rumble and Mathews said "Well, Miz won after CM Punk and the new Nexus interfered on his behalf." You know what Jerry Lawler would've said about that? "Shut up, Cole." Stupid.

It takes away from the match too. Instead of being able to focus on the match, you have to try to drown out Michael Cole and Jerry Lawler bickering like an old married couple. The commentator's are doing such a bad job that even Tazz on TNA seems competent by comparison (and we all know Tazz is in his own little world every Thursday night).

Hornswoggle

Looking at this picture will make you feel the same way about Hornswoggle as I do (if you don't already).

What is there to say?

Hasn't it already been argued that he's a mute, annoying parasite who is only on TV for the amusement of children?

Hasn't it already been mentioned that having any young superstar involved in a segment with him makes them look like a joke (Tyson Kidd anyone)?

Can't it be proven that Vince is pretty much pushing him down our throats every time he appears on TV?

What sucks is that Hornswoggle was originally brought in as a manager for Finlay (a talented individual mind you) and now Finlay's gone?

Shouldn't Hornswoggle have followed suit? Why did they keep him? If WWE are going to keep managers who are tailor made for certain superstars (after that superstar has come and gone), why can't they bring back one of my favorite managers of the last few years, Armando Alejandro Estrada?

God, I don't care what they do, just take him off TV. I know, its PG and most of the audience members are children, but you have Rey Mysterio, John Cena, and Big Show pandering to children. We don't need to poke fun at little people every week with this very talentless actor originally known as Little Bastard.

But what do you guys think? Do you agree with me that these moments are getting stale? Do you like seeing some of these? What would you add to this list?

Leave comments below and if you liked it, press "LIKE!"