Or how about when I was rambling about the handful of Emmy highlights, and mentioned the night's

And hey, even Letterman echoed (almost exactly) another one of my Emmy Sentiments during HIS show on Monday night.

So, see, people? I know what I'm talking about. So quit bitching about my "Lost" comments, and just accept the fact that it's the TV version of a silly Summer Popcorn Movie. Not really creative or interesting, but it looks good and has lots of bells and whistles to divert your attention, and if you're bored, you can watch it, enjoy it, and then 10 minutes later you forget about it. There's a reason why nobody was handing out Oscars to "Spider-man 2" last spring, people. And it's the same reason why it's unfathomable to me how fluffery like "Lost" can be held up as the Single Best Hour of TV Every Week. I'm not telling you you can't enjoy it if you've got more free time on your hands than I do... if you want to invest your time on the Pringles of television, that's fine. Cuz Pringles? Them's tasty. But they also aren't even real potatoes, and they're not very good for you if you eat too many. The most I would say would be to try to enjoy mediocre fluffery like this In Moderation, and maybe periodically look into other ways to spend your time. Books, music, hobbies, sports, intelligent discourse with other actual human beings, and so forth... I mean, if you're here, I already know you waste your time on wrestling; and there should really only be so many hours in a given week for TV-watching, which means WWE Whores like us need to be EVEN PICKIER than other people in what other shows we invest our time in. We're on thin enough ice as it is. 

That's about as close to a mea culpa as you're going to get out of me on this issue... so please stop bugging me about it. I never said "Lost" was the worst show ever. I just said it's also nowhere near the best show on television, and was a bit stunned that it would be honored as such. And then I tied it all into my theory about how too many people are embracing mediocrity, be it in their TV shows or in their wrestling. It wasn't a major thing: just kind of something I tossed out there as a pre-ramble point, which I could then cleverly weave into the Thesis Of My Column. So: Truce, compulsive TV Viewers? Good.

And now, even if you still have your issues with my green non-wrestling-flavored Kool-Aid (despite the ample evidence that I know what I'm talking about), you're all here because you LOVE my tasty red wrestling-flavored beverage. So, here: Drink my Kool-Aid.... 

• Speaking of TV equivalents of "popcorn movies," that's exactly what I thought Monday's RAW was. Thus: an enjoyable enough way to spend 2 hours, but also without any real substance.
   
  Or, to get this out of Hollywood terms and into rasslin' slang, I think my theory about Monday's show feeling kind of like a Televised House Show holds some water. You had your underneath stuff that wasn't really thrilling, but hey, Hurricane has to earn his check SOMEhow, so you put him out there, and let him do his thing... and then your top stuff tended towards a bit of crowd pleasing silliness that you can't usually do on TV, but which makes for great house show content and post-taping Dark Match fluff.
   
  The feel-good four-man dogpile pin on Edge to end the show was the epitome of playing fast and loose with the normal "rules" of Good Wrestling, all in the name of putting smiles on a few faces.
   
  But at the same time that I was able to sit here, mostly with a grin on my face, for the duration of the show, I also recognize that it was not the kind of episode that's gonna make new fans, or bring back lapsed fans, or even be remembered a week from now by us fans who are still watching.
   
  WWE's built-in excuse seems to be that they don't care about putting on really top-shelf shows until they get to the USA Network on October 3, which I think is silly. But, as always, my opinion doesn't really count for jack-shit when it comes to the "should'ves" of WWE's creative efforts. So I'll just be grateful for 2 hours that left me essentially placated, instead of incredibly frustrated. That was a nice change of pace.
   
  The two highlights of Monday were obviously the two anchor matches... both Carlito vs. Ric Flair and the 8-man main event were more entertaining than anything on the preceding night's Unforgiven PPV (save for the excellent Hardy/Edge cage match, of course). That, of course, is as much a testament to how shitty the PPV was than anything, and how that shittiness becomes DOUBLY shitty when you realize that Sunday came with a price tag, where as Monday was free for all. There really is a whole involved Calculus of Satisfaction when it comes to free TV vs. PPV, which I won't get into here, but which I think all us like-minded fans probably understand at an unspoken, instinctual level.... suffice to say that for everything the PPV lacked, RAW's two big matches almost exactly hit the Sweet Spot in terms of what WWE should be giving away for free.
   
  I'm curious to see what they do with the IC Title situation. Because there's a whole bunch of stuff that might happen with Flair when HHH comes back; Flair made it clear at the PPV that he's still in cahoots with HHH, which could threaten to make Flair a quasi-heel. But there's also the conventional wisdom that says that WWE intends to do a Flair/HHH feud; but would HHH going for the IC Title really be something they'd do? Assuming that Flair stays babyface in all this and HHH doesn't slum it by going for the IC belt, then we have situations brewing with both Carlito and Chris F. Masters. The thought of Masters going for the IC title mortifies me, and after last night's backstage angle, I'm going to reassert my notion that what needs to happen is for Masters to become Carlito's Dumb Muscle. A lackey. Carlito, then, handles most of the talking and wrestling, utilizing Masters as an enforcer and periodic tag partner.
   
  Not only does this -- in my opinion -- vastly improve RAW's chances of being entertaining each and every week by taking a Vortex of Suck out of heavy rotation.... but in all seriousness, I also think it is best for Chris F. Masters. Maybe there really is something to the guy. I don't necessarily see it, but he's also clearly been put on TV about 5 years too soon, so maybe he'll get there some day. Since my vote (sending him down to OVW to do his improving/learning off my TV screen, because there's no excuse, given WWE's resources and infrastructure, why somebody who isn't 100% ready should get called up to the big leagues) won't happen, the next best thing for Masters is to get out of the spotlight and do his learning there. Where he'll stop boring the shit out of everybody, and be more of a punctuation mark than RAW's longest, ugliest, most incomprehensible run-on sentence. Remember: by the end, even *I* was liking The Lovely Miss Tomko in his role as Christian's hired goon. And it's at least in part because he was asked to do little, and eventually got good at those things. I could see myself tolerating Masters as Carlito's lackey. At least, more than I'm tolerating him today.
   
  As an interesting tangent: as I was pondering this on Monday night, I realized something.... how many of WWE's genuinely top-level singles stars of the past 10-15 years came into the company as a solo star and never had to be part of a group/team? Not many. Austin and the Undertaker are the only ones who leap to mind. Everybody else? Before they "made it," they had to be subservient to somebody else.... HHH was understudy to Shawn Michaels in DX (and Michaels himself was begat from a tag team). The Rock was a gigantic flop until he became Faarooq's #2 in the Nation. More recently, Batista (and to a lesser extent, Orton) became headliners because of their involvement in Evolution. Going back in time: Kevin "Diesel" Nash only broke out as a star because of being Shawn Michaels' bodyguard. Benoit and Eddie were Radicalz; JBL was an APA member; and so on and so forth. It's not necessarily a pre-requisite for stardom, but doesn't it seem like the Proven Method for making a star is letting him break out from a supporting role once he finds his niche and once the fans take a shine to him? It's a lot more organic than just taking a guy, arbitrarily deciding "He shall be the next major superstar," and pushing him to the moon without regard for what the fans think, anyway.
   
  Like I said, there are exceptions. Guys like Austin can make themselves a star by sheer force of will (and even then, it takes a bit of kismet and until 9 months after King of the Ring 1996 before the company will elevate him from the midcard, which is KIND OF the same thing as toiling as an understudy in a group)... and guys like Undertaker just really have an aura that doesn't require the same sort of Building Up Process (in more recent times, the only guy I can think of who matched that was Brock Lesnar). But otherwise? It seems like the way the biggest stars are made is by apprenticing/partnering with somebody more entertaining until such time as some of that rubs off. Unless you really just have some sort of "It" Factor (which Masters doesn't have), it's just a no-brainer to start off small and only get bigger as the FANS decide it's time for you to get bigger.
   
  So I think WWE might be well served to realize that if Chris Masters is somebody they honestly project as a future star, then they need to quit letting him expose his weaknesses each week, and start letting him build-up goodwill as an second-tier hired goon, like Diesel before him. I think Carlito would be a good fit for him. And knowing how WWE thinks, I have this vision of a New Evolution, and in such a group, I guess Masters could bide his time as the third stringer (like Batista did at first) with good results. Just a thought.
   
  Oh, and before anybody tries to throw John Cena in my face as another top level star who was never anybody's lackey: Sorry, but I still don't think that we can say that John Cena has proven himself across-the-board bankable enough to put him in that category. In fact, I remain steadfast that Cena would also benefit from a reduced profile and somebody trying to tweak his character/persona until it finds the right balance; whether that means dropping the title and spending a bit of time on the mid card, or whether that could actually entail taking on a mentor or partner or something who would reduce Cena's wigger-tendencies and frequent brattiness, I don't know. But I think that it's telling that Cena's another guy who never did his apprenticeship, and who is now having issues getting 100% support from the audience....
   
  Anyway, that concludes my "most big stars should start out as littler stars and only be pushed once the fans start responding to them" tangent. I think I might be on to something, here....
   
  As for the rest of RAW? Well, I actually think the rest of the show besides the two good matches was pretty weak filler material. Even the opening promo with Vince, for as much as it was "fun," kind of left me cold just because I see no good reason for there to be a John Cena vs. Eric Bischoff WWE Title match on the horizon. I think a Cena/Bischoff match would have been a fine novelty item, but only if Angle had won the WWE Title the night before. Argghh. There's a time and place for silliness, and when you WWE Title is involved is NOT that time and place.
   
  So instead of going on and on at length about the non-fun parts of RAW, I'll just direct you to yesterday's OO RAW Recap, which I assure you FULLY details the entire show, and makes even the boring parts of the show fun to read about. 
   
  My favorite part of the recap? The part where my power went out during RAW, and so I missed 10 minutes, and then ended up recapping the Torch's shitty recap of those 10 minutes. I swear: spending more time on the number and quality of TNA and UFC ads than on the show itself? That's a recap? And I had NO IDEA that there was a name for the people booing Cena; and without knowing how long Keller's been noticing them/naming them, I think he's even ripping me off by noticing that they are clearly MALE boos. If he ever gets around to naming the obnoxious fricking CHEERS that Cena gets (all so girly and squeal-y), then I'll KNOW he's ripping me off. Cuz I see, to be alone so far on that one. Am I the only person who realizes that Cena getting that type of response actually hamstrings his chance for being genuinely, 100% super-popular with wrestling's mostly-male audience?
   
  I digress: my recap of that recap is only about 10% of the recap, but I had fun doing it. The other 90% of MY recap is as high quality as ever. So just go read it, already, if you're jonsing for more information/thoughts about Monday's show.
   
  
• RAW did a 3.6 cable rating on Monday. That is a nominal gain of one-third of a point from the week before, but it's still almost a half-point below where RAW was performing over the late spring and early summer.
   
  For those looking for excuses (other than the excuse: "Well, RAW's not as good lately, so fewer people are watching it"), you might point to the fact that there were TWO Monday Night Football games going on between 9pm and 11pm (eastern). Due to Hurricane Katrina-related issues, a Giants/Saints game had to be played on Monday, and at 9pm it was being broadcast on ESPN, while the regularly scheduled game began on ABC.
   
  I'm mostly convinced that such excuses are horseshit, and have more than ample evidence that WWE is simply losing even its most loyal viewers because they aren't interested in the product. To think, 2 or 3 years ago, I was reminiscing about the "good old days" when wrestling was so huge that RAW and Nitro combined for 10.0 ratings on Mondays and every PPV was a party attended by a dozen folks... to think that today, I'm nostalgic for 2 or 3 years ago, when at least I could still muster a small handful of friends/housemates to watch wrestling with on Mondays and we had enough interest to make buying the PPVs ourselves seem worthwhile....
   
  And now to think that I'm about to become nostalgic for a few months ago, when my own "employees" at OO still at least WATCHED wrestling so they could discuss it and write columns for you folks. It's getting that bad, folks. I mention it only because I believe Jeb Lund will be making a rare appearance this week... and his topic? Taking a look at why some people (even the most loyal fans who have plenty of reason to stick with the product) are walking away from wrestling... and then taking an even closer look at what's wrong with the people who can't. Should be interesting.... 
   
  
• It's official: the Dudley Boyz have signed with TNA. The one-year contract was announced on TNA's website, and refers to the team as "the tag team formerly known as the Dudley Boyz." So for now, there's still no resolution as to what names/gimmicks they'll use once on TV.
   
  As outlined here before, they can't use the Dudley name, nor any of the associated trademarks. D-Von can still call himself Devon, cuz that's his name. Bubba's screwed, though, since his real name is Mark. So they'll have to address his individual name along with coming up with the new overall Team Identity.
  
  So now, we play the waiting game. It's possible that the Dudleys won't start with the company till after October's PPV (for scheduling reasons), but even if they show up in a week on the debut episode of Impact, it'll still take some time to determine how valuable the Duds will really be without their previous identities. To the truly hardcore fans, it probalby doesn't matter at all.... but to 90% of typical wrestling fans, it'll be important to determining whether they'll ever be as over as they were in ECW/WWE.
   
  But I guess even if they aren't as marketable, they should still be able to have the kind of matches that will kick some ass and help make stars out of TNA's roster of nameless/faceless workers. A few TLC type matches, and suddenly wrestling fans might care enough to know which one is Storm and which one is Harris, for instance. TNA probably can't lose on that front...
   
  And dammit, this becomes an easy no-brainer for "Dumbest Business Move of the Year" by WWE. Given the state of their tag teams, and given how focused they are on quashing TNA's Spike TV show (even if they won't admit publicly that they are wanting to quash it), it just makes no sense to have served the Dudleys up on a silver platter to the competition. None at all. From the sounds of things, the fault for this lays mostly on one man's shoulders. A man who, from what I can tell, seems to be responsible for a few of WWE's other major problems and whom more than a few wrestlers would like to see relieved of his duties. Johnny Ace, the bell tolls for thee.
   
  
• The guest list for the Oct. 3 "homecoming" RAW has gotten even bigger. In addition to the already-known Major Names (Austin, Hogan, Foley, HHH), WWE has also announced a slew of another dozen or so lesser-knowns.
   
  Well, Roddy Piper heads the list, and in a lot of ways, he might as well be included in the same breath with the other four.... but after him, it's more like Hacksaw Duggans and Iron Sheiks and Greg Valentines. Greg Valentine? Wasn't he long gone from the WWF before RAW was created? Actually, there's a few other OOld-tymey names on the list who I know for certain never contributed one iota to an episode of RAW...
   
  But I guess the idea is that it's not necessarily just a "RAW Homecoming to its old network," it's more just a night when any old star can come home for a night. Obviously, a few of the old timers are genuinely among my favorites and it'd be fun to see them involved in something other than just sitting at ringside looking bored. But it's still also only a 3-hour show, so I'm not sure what form that would take.
   
  Sadly, why am I envisioning Moolah and Mae Young being among the only ones to contribute to any skits/angles? Ugh. Vince McMahon's shitty sense of humor: it WILL strike again.
   
  
  
• To people who've been mailing in: yes, it is my understanding that Sean Waltman is safe and sound and fine, despite his rather mysterious no-show of the TNA PPV.
   
  As to the rest of the story that said he had been missing for nearly a whole week, and turned up just before his family was about to file a missing person report? I honestly don't know. That's kind of in the realm of the more-personal crap that OO tends to stay away from.... I just know that from the wrestling side of things, his absence from the TNA PPV is still not explained. And from TNA's side, is also an inexcused absence, which probably means you won't be seeing Waltman on the debut episode of "Impact" (although TNA has tended to have a short-term memory about such things, and might bring him back after a cooling off period; who knows? and if there is something more nefarious about Waltman's no-show that led to him being missing for a week? who even knows if he's got wrestling on his mind at this point, anyway?).
   
  
• This weekend marks the end of WWE's B-shows, Heat and Velocity. From my understanding, WWE won't exactly be trumpeting this fact (and did nothing special to mark the occassions at TV tapings).
   
  WWE's syndicated "C-shows" (which air in mostly-crappy timeslots and have not been worthwhile in years) also go away this weekend. And contrary to what I'd heard was the original plan, they are not being replaced (at least, not immediately) by a new syndication package that would feature the content that used to be on Heat and Velocity.
   
  This, understandably, has a few people on edge, since if there's fewer spots for guys getting on TV, they think WWE might cut payroll by eliminating some of the b-level talents. 
   
  I think SOME of this might happen, but I don't think it'll quite be the purging that happened earlier this year. The simple fact is that WWE still needs to run house shows, and to run full cards, you need some of those guys to stick around. They might only show up on RAW/SD! once or twice a month, but they're necessary to keep the house show cards stocked.
   
  The alternative would be to end the brand split, and re-combine the rosters. Then you'd have one roster, and four hours every week to feature it. But this ain't happening... although, for the first time since the split, I'm really beginning to think that maybe it should. 
   
  Anyway, I'm sure a lot on internet jackoffs are fearing the loss of the b-shows and the possible loss of jobs for some of their beloved cruiserweights and what-not. But for me personally? (a) I'm not so sure it'll be that major a purge, and (b) the only way I'd get personally pissed off is if Tajiri gets axed (pretty much any other guy, and my feeling is that there's a reason he's stuck on b-shows; but Tajiri? is massively underutilized).
   
  
• Expanding on a notion that I mentioned in the RAW Recap... although I'm sure it'll be the popular consensus among conspiracy-addicted internet jack-offs, I really wouldn't punch Matt Hardy's ticket for SmackDown! just yet, OK? For one, your favorite son is NOT being held down or purposely sabotaged, no matter what you think... and for two, there are really good reasons for sending Edge over.
   
  One: the match stipulation in 2 weeks is the Loser Leaves RAW. It is NOT "Loser and His Girlfriend Leave RAW." Which opens up opportunities for drama if Edge loses, but Lita has to stay. In fact, given that signs seem to be pointing to a Matt/Lita reconciliation, it'd be a perfect way to remove Edge from the equation and start exploring that direction.
   
  Two: doesn't it seem like WWE's standard operating procedure is to job a guy out before he switches brands? It happened a LOT this year during the draft lottery, anyway, that a guy would do a ton of jobs on his old brand, and then get a fresh start on his new one. Edge lost the cage match at the PPV, and then was pretty-much-humiliated by the silly (but crowd pleasing) finish to Monday's RAW match. Seems like he might be the one on the way out?
   
  Three: SD! could use a top level heel. I don't think JBL will sniff main events ever again, which leaves SD! in a bit of a quandry. They've got Eddie doing great work, and one of these days, something will click in Randy Orton's dim little head and he'll be at the top of the card. So with a dearth of heels and with Christian being criminally misused, Edge could really carve out a nice niche for himself, balancing the face-heavy roster (where you have Batista, Taker, Benoit, Rey all as legit top level guys, but only really Eddie and MAYBE Orton balancing them at this point). I'd pay to see Edge/Benoit matches for the soon-to-be-rehabbed US Title... and Edge on SD! COULD result in a reunion with his "brother" Christian, which could result in coolness. Or at least, with Christian being on TV more than 3 minutes every two weeks.
   
  Four: the counter-point to #3, which is that there are alternatives for Edge on SD!, but he's kind of shut out of doing anything interesting on RAW. There are already enough heels balancing things on RAW, which would make it tough for him to get a real push when Kurt Angle and Triple H are far and away ahead of him on the depth chart. And plus: Allah willing, Muhammad Hassan should be coming back to RAW, too, and has certainly established himself as a massively effective heel. Why dick around on RAW, fighting for a spot, when you can go to SD! and practically have the #2 Heel Slot handed to you?
   
  The only thing that doesn't really fit? For Edge to lose and go to SD! means that Matt Hardy will suddenly be in possession of a WWE Title shot. And as much as I like the guy's matches when he's on, I just don't really see too many people clammoring for World Champ Hardy, or buying into him as a legit contender. At best, the "Money in the Bank" gimmick could be a plot point (as you could have Slutty Lita suddenly take a shine to her old boyfriend now that HE is going to be getting a title shot some day soon)... 
   
  Anyway, just something for everybody out there to consider before you go storming off, convinced that Matt Hardy's about to be jobbed out and sent to the "minor leagues."
   
  
• Speaking of "minor leagues," SmackDown! proved itself to be that yet again this week. In its second week on Friday, the show scored a 2.3 final broadcast rating, which is about the predicted drop from the overnight rating we talked about on Monday. Again, this revised rating comes about because of all the preemptions by UPN affiliates in major markets, and how that factors into the various initial/final ratings.
   
  The 2.3 is still better than the previous week, but it's a full point off of SD!'s last round of consistantly high ratings. In the low-to-mid 2's, SD! will no longer even be UPN's top rated program. We'll have to see where ratings settle in once all the preemptions for baseball have passed, but hopefully things'll rebound a bit.
   
  For whatever it's worth, UPN is putting a positive spin on SD!'s ratings, hyping the fact that SD!'s numbers are a huge improvement for the network's Friday night ratings (as last year, "Star Trek" and some other show would usually average in the mid-1's for the two hour slot), instead of mentioning that SD!'s ratings are down from what they used to do on Thursday nights.
   
  And methinks that when UPN's shitty new Thursday night shows debut tomorrow night, they won't be issuing any press releases noting that Thursday night ratings are down 50% from last year at this time, either.... 
  
  
• And if constant reference to shitty TV shows is my running theme today, I figure I'll finish up with one last soul-crushing newsbite about one of the shittiest of TV concepts: "Reality" TV.
   
  Because Maven is coming back to television! Except he's doing it on VH-1's "Surreal Life." If you aren't up to speed on the show, first, pat yourself on the back for not being a TV Whore who'll watch anything. But then second, let me explain to you the deal, which is that "The Surreal Life" puts a half dozen marginal D-level celebrities in a house together, and then films them "Real World" style. Chyna was on a previous edition of the program, too.
   
  Now Maven is slated to become the second wrestler to reduce himself to this garbage. Would it be mean to say that even by "Surreal Life" standards, Maven is a sub-par celebrity? And why do I suddenly have visions of the dim-witted TNA braintrust hearing about this and instantly locking TV Superstar Maven to an exclusive contract, so that he can face Fellow Reality TV semi-star Jonny Fairplay in a top-shelf feud?
   
  Oh man alive, do I ever hope I'm just joking about that last part....
   
  Joining Maven on his edition of the show will be Sherman Hemsley (a/k/a George Jefferson) and Florence Henderson (a/k/a Mrs. Brady). And then there's three other people I've already forgotten even though it was only a few hours ago when I got the message about this, which is about par for the course for me and how much I care about Reality TV.
   
  I am not aware of how VH-1 schedules these things are how long "seasons" are for "The Surreal Life," so I don't know exactly when to tell you to look for Maven on the show (if you must insist on being THAT desperate for entertainment). It'll either be later this year, or right after the new year; I think Maven's season and the new "Hogan Knows Best" are expected to be packaged together on that Sunday Night Block of Crap that VH-1 does, if that helps you at all.
   
  
• That's about all I got for you people today. Don't know for sure when I'll see you again. If there's news, it'll definitely be Friday. But if pickings are slim, I might take the day off and let you enjoy Jeb's piece, instead.
   
  So until next you bask in my brilliance, enjoy however many days and evenings and be well, kids.