WWE Future: 12 More Changes the WWE Should Make in 2012

If you're not moving forward, then you're just moving backward.

Well, maybe you're simply staying in the same spot. Either way, the WWE can't afford to do that in 2012.

When we get a new year from the WWE in a couple of weeks, we also want some New Year's resolutions to go along with it.

The company actually had a very good year in 2011, but there are still things the WWE could do in order to better what we see on TV each and every week.

I've already come up with 12 Changes the WWE Should Make in 2012, but here are 12 more I'd like to see. 

12. More Managers

Managers used to be a critical part of professional wrestling, but now, they're pretty rare, especially in the WWE.

We'll see someone like Ranjin Singh paired with The Great Khali every now and again, but the only legitimate manager in 2011 has been Vickie Guerrero, who has worked with both Jack Swagger and Dolph Ziggler.

Though Ziggler keeps climbing up the card largely because of what he himself has done, I'd argue that Vickie is the one who helped him start getting over as a heel in the first place.

Vickie generates heat like no other, and I'm not sure why WWE officials refuse to give other heels a manager, especially heels who struggle on the mic.

Having a mouthpiece would do wonders for young up-and-comers, like Tyson Kidd, with no sense of direction, and the WWE has a ton of options available already under contract--someone like Matt Striker or even Michael Cole--who could step into a managerial role without any trouble.

11. More Face vs. Face Feuds

The basis of pro wrestling is essentially good vs. evil, so 90 percent of the time, you're going to see a heel feud with a baby face.

Heel vs. heel feuds usually flop terribly, but I'm a big fan of rivalries between two baby faces.

Just look back at this year alone, and you'll recall that the top two feuds of the year—Christian vs. Randy Orton and John Cena vs. CM Punk—were face vs. face feuds at some point or another.

Christian vs. Orton started off as a rivalry between two faces and led to a heel turn for Christian, which was one of the best of 2011. Meanwhile, Punk started off as a tweener/heel, but judging by the reactions he was getting, he was basically a full-blown baby face at Money in the Bank and SummerSlam. 

Plus, you had Triple H vs. The Undertaker at WrestleMania 28, which was yet another rivalry between two main event level baby faces.

And guess what? All these rivalries featured great story telling and even better matches.

10. Keep Announcers out of Storylines

This one is pretty simple.

News reporters and journalists are taught to report the news, not be a part of it. It should be exactly the same way for WWE announcers.

They're there purely to call the action and give commentary, but for some reason, WWE officials feel like it's necessary to thrust them into storylines on a regular basis. 

Just this year alone, we have seen Michael Cole vs. Jerry Lawler at WrestleMania 27, Cole feuding with Jim Ross and Booker T getting in the ring for a feud with Cody Rhodes.

I won't complain about Booker T too much because he's trained to wrestle and isn't in his 60s, but the rest is absolutely ridiculous. We do not want to see pointless segments involving Cole and J.R., and we definitely don't want to see Lawler competing against The Miz for the WWE Championship.

Keep the announcers where they belong: At the announce table. 

9. Fewer Cowardly Heels

Aside from someone like Mark Henry, most of the WWE's heels are booked like complete cowards.

Alberto Del Rio is the best example of this because he needed help to win just about every high-profile match he participated in. But guys like The Miz and Christian were just as guilty of this throughout the year.

Obviously, it's in a heel's nature for him to be cowardly—that's part of what makes him a heel--but it should not totally define his character.

In many ways, cowardice defined ADR and Christian this year, and though it worked at times, it made them look like pansies more often than not.

I'm not saying that every heel has to be booked like an unstoppable monster. I'm just saying that the creative team has to differentiate between the WWE's top heels rather than simply making them all cheating cowards.

8. Differentiate Between Baby Face Divas

Can someone please explain what differentiates Kelly Kelly from Eve or Alicia Fox?

It can't be just me who thinks that the only difference between those three, and all baby face Divas for that matter, is the way they look.

Other than that, they all do the same thing. They walk to the ring with a huge smile, they hardly talk and they show virtually no personality whatsoever.

I mean, could you imagine if every baby face male wrestler was the exact same? Man, that would be awful.

I know the Divas clearly don't get as much TV time as the men, but it would still be nice for them to show some personality, actually develop some gimmicks and just be different from each other for a change.

7. Stop Ignoring Title Rules

Air Boom (Kofi Kingston and Evan Bourne) have not defended the WWE Tag Team Championship since Oct. 23 at Vengeance, Dolph Ziggler hasn't put his United States Championship on the line since then either and Cody Rhodes hasn't defended the Intercontinental Championship since Hell in a Cell way back on Oct. 2.

OK, so—and correct me if I'm wrong here—aren't WWE titleholders supposed to defend their titles at least once every 30 days? Whatever happened to that rule?

I guess in the cases of Ziggler and Rhodes, the WWE can get away with it by saying that they've defended the titles at house shows. But that's a big load of B.S. if I've ever heard one.

If the WWE creative team can't book a simple title match once a month, then it has a serious problem. 

It needs to stop ignoring title rules just because they're inconvenient. If a wrestler hasn't defended his title in the last 30 days, then either make him defend it or strip him of it.

6. Open TV Shows with Matches Instead of Promos More Often

At least nine out of every 10 WWE TV shows start with a promo, one that is often ridiculously long and used simply to set up something that's going to happen later in the night anyway.

Well, how about starting Raw or SmackDown with a match every once in a while?

If WWE officials are worried about losing viewers as the show goes on, then a good way to prevent that from happening might be to start the show with a good match that sucks the viewers in.

Pay-per-views almost always open up with an exciting match that is meant to pump up the crowd and set the tone for the rest of the show.

It should be the exact same for TV shows.

The WWE doesn't have to crazy and start off every Raw and every SmackDown with a match, but it doing it once a month or so is much better than only doing it five times a year.

5. Turn Randy Orton Heel

I may get some heat for this, especially because of how well Randy Orton has performed in his baby face role in 2011.

But I think Orton should turn heel again.

According to a report by the Wrestling Observer Newsletter (via WrestleNewz.com), there is concern about the lack of a top heel on Raw:

"

It’s said that Alberto Del Rio’s stock isn’t as high as it was a few months ago within WWE. There’s a feeling that RAW is lacking a top heel and while The Miz is good, he’s not seen as someone who can be the brand-carrying heel. Del Rio was supposed to be that heel but the feeling is that he’s not quite at that level either.

"

I'm a much bigger fan of Miz than Del Rio, but I tend to agree with this as well, and I would even say that I don't see Mark Henry's heel run being anything more than a temporary thing, either.

As good as Miz, ADR and Henry have been at times, I don't think any of them can be the WWE's No. 1 heel for the long-term.

But Orton has already proven that he can be, and given that the WWE's other top three full-time stars—Sheamus, CM Punk and John Cena—are baby faces as well, Orton should be the guy to turn heel next.

I doubt Cena will, and both Sheamus and Punk just turned baby face not too long ago.

4. Use More Long-Term Planning

Triple H vs. CM Punk should have been one of the best feuds of 2011, but the WWE rushed the living hell out of it.

Punk vs. John Cena should have lasted way longer than it did, but once again, the WWE rushed the living hell out of it.

Why? Because the creative team generally lacks any long-term planning, and it books Raw and SmackDown on the fly way more often than it should.

I'm sure you've read reports about all the re-writes the WWE does leading up to Monday Night Raw each week, and things like that can all be traced back to a lack of long-term planning.

If you can't plan for an episode of Raw that is happening that night, then how the hell can you plan for feuds that are going to take place until three months down the road?

That's a shame, though, because feuds with long-term planning—like Dolph Ziggler vs. Zack Ryder or Christian vs. Randy Orton—almost always wind up being better than feuds that are booked by the day. 

3. A New Pay-Per-View Philosophy

The WWE's current pay-per-view philosophy just doesn't work.

There are too many PPVs, those PPVs cost too much and there generally isn't much effort put into a number of B-level shows.

The company needs to come up with a completely new PPV model, and there are a number of rumors about there about what that might be when the WWE Network launches in 2012.

If I had any say-so in the WWE's decision, I would keep the "Big Four" pay-per-views on PPV, and then move the rest of the shows to either the WWE Network, another channel or some combination of both, and then book them as "Live Specials."

I know it won't be easy for the WWE to find a Sunday night spot on another network, but just like UFC has done on Fox, it could work if the WWE hosts "Live Specials" on Sundays on a network like NBC or USA.

After all, you don't want to alienate WWE fans who either don't want to pay for the WWE Network or don't have it available in their area by putting all PPVs on the network.

All that being said, it's pretty obvious that 13 pay-per-views a year at 50 bucks a pop is simply too much to ask from WWE fans, so something needs to be done about that.

2. Make the WWE Draft Matter More

The WWE Draft means next to nothing.

The new "Raw Supershow" format basically renders the brand split pointless, and as you can see by some of the top feuds going on at the moment, WWE officials could really care less about the draft.

I mean, Kane was "injured" back in July while a SmackDown superstar, yet it appears as if he's returning on Raw. Meanwhile, The Big Show has been feuding with Mark Henry for the World Heavyweight Championship for months now despite technically being a Raw superstar.

That makes no sense.

I'm a fan of the brand extension and don't think it should go away anytime soon, but if it is going to exist, it has to actually matter. 

Keep Raw stars on Raw, keep SmackDown stars on SmackDown and once WrestleMania is over, reshuffle the brands through the WWE Draft like you always do. 

1. No More Automatic Rematches

The automatic rematch clause has to go bye bye.

This really didn't start bothering me until recently, but it's incredibly aggravating that any champion in the WWE gets an automatic rematch once he or she loses the title.

That might be one of the dumbest rules in professional wrestling.

I know it's used to extend feuds so that they don't just end after one pay-per-view, but giving a guy another shot at the WWE Championship just because he lost it would be like giving last year's Super Bowl winner another shot at the Vince Lombardi Trophy against this year's Super Bowl winner.

There is no legitimate sport in which you get an automatic rematch. You lose your title or trophy or whatever the hell it is, and then you have to earn your way to another one.

You don't simply get another shot handed to you.