I had a pretty funny idea for a PreRamble today. It was going to be about how, every night for MONTHS now, I can be watching Baseball Tonight or the Daily Show proximate to the midnight hour, and the local ad breaks ALWAYS include a mind-numbingly nonsensical back-to-back pairing of the commercial for the Gay Chat Line and then the commercial for the SI Swimsuit Issue On Demand channel.
 

I mean, if anything screams "We have no fucking idea who is watching this channel right now," it's this random and counterproductive combo, right?

Plus, I'd have had a blast dissecting the Gay Chat Line commercial. If nothing else, it does my heart good to know that gay men are apparently no smarter or more discriminating than most of

Plus, I found it humorous that -- since the Gay Chat Line advertises on ESPN -- they apparently decided not to offend any of the Normals by making sure that all the men featured were flamboyantly stereotypical. Worry not, Totally Straight ESPN Viewers! There's no chance that a regular guy you might meet on the street and begin discussing football with might secretly be thinking about your cock! The Gay Chat Line Commercial proves that all the evil queers are racial minorities (the lispy black guy, the lispy hispanic guy, the lispy Eastern European guy) who dress funny and dance around like, well, like gay guys! Proves it! 

And if your sexuality was at all threatened by watching the International Pansy Brigade mincing around telling you you're just their type, well, never you mind: cuz here's Heidi Klum to invite all you hot, hung studs to turn to channel 1128 and watch HER mince around, instead. Also in a funny accent, come to think of it. 

Which is great for us noted lovers of the boobies. But you realize that this odd combination of commercials just made hundreds of gay men throw up a little bit in their mouths at the sight of an smoking-hot, mostly-naked female. And just when they were TOTALLY hitting it off with "Sven" on 1-900-Sissyboy. Awwww, poor guys.

But why would I waste your time on that Hilarious PreRamble? Clearly, I wouldn't. Not when I have fairly amusing wrestling news to cover today. Well, "amusing" if you share my incredibly low opinions of Randy Orton and Nick Hogan, anyway.

We ride:

• The biggest news of the day (and of the past couple months) is that WWE decided to suspend AT LEAST 10 performers following a final series of meetings yesterday (Thursday).
   
  WWE has confirmed the number is at 10 for now, but left the door open to add 2-3 more suspensions to the list after they were able to contact the performers and finalize their internal investigation. I'm sort of lollygagging on finishing up this column, in hopes that we might find out about those additional names by the close of business today...
   
  Although by "names," I don't mean "names." WWE has not released the names of the talents suspended, and has no plans to do so. They've not publicized any suspension in the past 18 months since their Wellness Program went into effect, and anybody suspended up till now is "safe" in terms of public confirmation of their wrong-doing.
   
  However, at the same time WWE confirmed 10 Unnamed Suspendees, they also announced a pending change to the Wellness Policy. Effective November 1, 2007, any wrestler suspended WILL have his/her name released publicly. In essence: "You have 2 months to clean up your act, or else you won't be able to make up shitty excuses to placate your tittering, gullible adolescent fanbases, anymore. Cuz we'll be telling everybody what you really did. Randy Orton and the Hardys, we're talking to you!"
   
  But this wouldn't really be all that big a story if we didn't know the 10 names, right? Of course not.... which is why it's a good thing that we've got a fairly reliable grasp on who's been affected by this latest expose.
   
  Yesterday, when the news broke, ESPN, the NY Daily News, and Sports Illustrated all fell over themselves trying to "break" the right 10 names. Problem is, among them, they "broke" about 15-17 names. 
   
  What happened was that those media outlets were getting information leaked to them from a NY District Attorney's office that was involved in the multi-agency sting of illicit "wellness purveyors" last February. After six months of sorting through the data, there are TONS of athletes (including 2-3 dozen current and former wrestlers and countless others from baseball, boxing, and other sports) who have been found to be one-time clients of at least one of the drug suppliers.
   
  Other media sources may have access to the larger lists of names, and just started trying to pick off the bigger stars to publicize. However, as far as WWE's Wellness Policy is enforceable, it can only suspend performers for wrong-doings AFTER February 2006. Which is why you may read about 15 or more names being clients of Signature Pharmacy, but not all of them will be suspended by WWE, if they ceased patronizing Signature before Feb. 2006.
   
  Earlier today, SI released an updated version of their story, and appeared to have done the appropriate levels of fact checking and background work to arrive at 10 names of current WWE performers who are listed as clients of Signature Pharmacy AFTER Feb. 2006. These, logically, are the 10 stars who stand to be punished by WWE under the Wellness Policy.
   
  Some of the names might surprise you (because they were either outspoken about being clean, or they just don't seem like the types who'd be on performance enhancing drugs.). And it should be noted that in all cases, steroids or growth hormone were distributed and NOT (contrary to some claims) "just painkillers." The Feds, at this point, are only interested in the PED element to the story, and each of the 10 men below received one or more performance enhancing drugs after Feb. 2006, according to Signature's files:
   
    -  Randy Orton (last received a package in Feb. 2007, 
             which means he was a client up until the very
             moment the pharmacy was busted)
    -  Edge (Feb. 2007)
    -  Ken Kennedy (Feb. 2007)
    -  John "Johnny Nitro" Morrison (Feb. 2007)
    -  Shane Helms (Feb. 2007)
    -  Charlie Haas (Jan. 2007)
    -  Umaga (Dec. 2006)
    -  William Regal (Nov. 2006)
    -  Chavo Guerrero (May 2006, or six months after
            Eddie's death)
    -  Funaki (March 2006)
   
  SI also notes that Chris Benoit, Eddie Guerrero, and the recently-deceased Bryan "Crush" Adams were all clients, as well. Eddie was an active client until his death in Nov. 2005. Benoit actually ceased using Signature in Feb. 2006 (when the Wellness Program started). And Crush's last package was received in December 2006.
   
  Not listed by SI, but still of possible interest to fans: Sylvain Grenier (who was released by WWE earlier this month) last patronized Signature in July 2006. And Johnny "the Bull" Stamboli (originally expected to sign a new WWE contract this week) was also a client up until the bust.
   
  The additional handful of names released by the media yesterday (who may be the ones undergoing a final investigation by WWE to determine whether their illicit procurement of drugs came before or after the Wellness Policy) are: Chris Masters, Batista, Booker T, Santino Marella, Mike "Simon Dean" Bucci, and Rey Mysterio.
   
  A few key notes about these names and these (possible) suspensions:
   
  (1) WWE did not "catch" any of these men through their own testing. None of them failed a drug test in the last few months (although there are two men among these 16 who have failed past drug tests). These men were found to be clients of a suspect company during a criminal investigation, and the DA's office shared this info with WWE earlier this month. Under the Wellness Policy, WWE doesn't need to catch you red-handed: it's enough if the authorities do it for them (this is how RVD was sanctioned last year when he was arrested for speeding while smoking a joint, despite clean drug tests).
   
  (2) Related to #1: this development does NOT come as part of any "crackdown" by WWE. It's merely the by-product of the on-going federal investigation of the shady internet wellness purveyors. Already, the press is acting like this is a move by WWE to clean itself up after the Benoit mess. In reality: the Feds and WWE would have had this meeting to exchange information even if Benoit never did what he did. And more than likely, WWE would have been compelled to act in roughly the same manner, even if just for PR reasons. What's more interesting, to me, is how other sports bodies react when DAs meet with THEM to reveal client names. Put Benoit aside for just one damned minute, and contemplate the example WWE is setting by going public with these suspensions... it puts the heat on MLB and other governing bodies once the names of THEIR athletes get out.
   
  (3) WWE's written policy is a 30 day suspension for a first drug offense, a 60 day suspension for the second, and you get fired after the third. Why is this note-worthy? Because, Randy Orton has already been suspended three times since the inception of the wellness policy. One of them was known to be for a drug-related offense. One was his lite-beer-fueled hotel hissy fit. One was for undisclosed reasons. So Orton is now facing either his 2nd or 3rd drug-related suspension following these revelations. If it's his third time? And with Congress breathing down WWE's neck to check out all documentation about testing and suspensions since Feb. 2006? Well: I don't have to tell you what that would mean. I also don't have to tell you that it couldn't be happening to a nicer guy. At the very least: 60 days for Young Randall the Mantard, though, making this the second consecutive year in which his suspensions total 90 days. What a douche. [Of every other guy listed, only Chris Masters would be a second-offender, and that's only if he's moved from the "maybe" list onto the "definitely suspended" list. Everybody else: first time they've been sanctioned.]
   
  (5) Under the "Orton Clause" written into the Wellness Policy late last year, WWE can suspend performers, but still ask them to work TV tapings (withOUT pay), so as not to interrupt storylines. This clause has been used inconsistently since its inception, as sometimes WWE pulls a guy off TV and ditches his push as part of the punishment, and sometimes they get to stay on TV and not lose their "spot." Considering that the list of Suspendees includes the ECW Champ, the IC Champ, the RAW General Manager, and two of RAW's four top heels, WWE might go "Orton Clause" with some of the guys. Either that: or they'll have to rotate the suspensions so all the guys don't go missing at the same time. [DAYDREAM: Wouldn't the ironing be delicious if the only one who CAN'T benefit from the Orton Clause is Orton himself? Because he gets his dumb ass FIRED for this? BWHHHAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA!] 
   
  And with that, I think that's everything I can think of to pass along about the developments of the past two days, as well as the vast majority of my thoughts/analysis on the subject. Probably the only other thing I could say is that I'm genuinely surprised to see Kennedy and Edge on this list. Kennedy because he's been one of the most vocal guys on the roster in the past 3 months about how There's No Steroid Problem In Wrestling, and how I Totally Got Clean Because Of The Wellness Policy. Ummm, taking a mulligan on those, Kenneth? And Edge? Well, he's been upfront and matter-of-fact about past usage, and it's human nature to want to believe such a witty, talented sumbitch as him (the same way it is human nature to cackle in glee every time a skidmark like Orton fucks up). Oh well... in both cases, the guys seem too fucking smart to think they'd really get away with spinning false yarns after their pharmacy of choice got busted in February: but it appears that's precisely what they thought.
   
  Anyway, this is still a story that is taking shape. I'll keep you up to date as we find out about the final list of suspendees and how WWE intends to handle the suspensions for TV purposes. This could get very interesting, to say the least....
   
  
• And as if having yet another new and exciting reason to marvel at and take pleasure in Randy Orton's cosmic worthlessness wasn't enough, our Schadenfreude gets a booster shot thanks to some news out of Florida.
   
  Last weekend, Hulk Hogan's younger daughter, Nick, was involved in a "spectacular" car wreck. Cops had to shut down a one-mile stretch of the main drag through Clearwater, FL, to investigate the crash and evacuate Nick and his passenger to the hospital via helicopter.
   
  At present, Nick is fine and was released from the hospital after one night of observation. His passenger, John Graziano (22 years old), remains in the hospital, but finally seems to be stabilizing and emerging from a coma. The severity of John's injuries are the only part of this story that should make you feel guilty about giggling at Nick Hogan, the 17-year-old princess, getting his comeuppance. And luckily, if John pulls through just fine, we can enjoy our Schadenfreude with a 100% clear conscience.
   
  The backstory: Nick Hogan has been racing cars on the junior circuit since he was 14. His dad has sunk hundreds of thousands of dollars into Nick's hobby, even though Nick is demonstrably untalented at it (wrecking almost every vehicle he's come in contact with). Then again, this is par for the course, as the Hulkster has sunk a similar amount of money into his elder daughter's hobby (singing) despite her similar lack of skill. Christ, I fucking swear: if *I* had been born to Hulk Hogan, I'd already own a distillery in Scotland, while Brutus Beefcake and Brian Knobbs tried to, betwixt them, grow me a new healthy liver if they want to keep getting welfare checks from their Sugar Daddy.
   
  Anyways: since turning 16 and being "street legal," Nick has compiled four speeding tickets (one of which he still hasn't even been to court for, yet), including two instances of being clocked over 100mph in one of his dad's many sports cars. As such, he was driving on a Restricted License when he wrecked on Sunday night. I've been assured that Nick would have had his license suspended entirely in two weeks (and that Nick knew this) at his next court date, as his latest ticket came while speeding (85mph in a 45mph) in a construction zone, and the courts tend to hammer you hard for that kind of shit.
   
  In the next issue of "Fucking Dimwits With Money And Raging Insecurities About Their Manhood That Are Best Expressed Through Expensive Cars Magazine" (not the real title, but I already forgot the real title), Nick Hogan is interviewed about his love for racing sports cars, and comes off like a prick who would benefit greatly from some severe cranial trauma (which makes it all the sadder that it's his passenger who took the palm tree to the head at 90mph, instead). In addition to acknowledging his speeding tickets, Nick boasts of countless other times when his "celebrity" (HA!) got him out of tickets, and how his yellow car totally gets him laid, but his green car totally makes dudes jealous. Umm, Nicki? Your dad has the celebrity and the cars. You just have an addiction to metrosexual hair care products and a pitiably misplaced sense of entitlement. 
   
  You are also, thankfully, getting karmic retribution, as this interview will hit newsstands at almost that same time that you nearly kill a friend of yours by acting like a dipshit. Good luck using that yellow car to drop the ladies' panties now that it's wrapped around a tree, and now that even the dimmest bimbos on the comically underlit tree of South Florida's array of shallow chicks will realize you're pretty much a creep.
   
  BUT WAIT! The story gets better. Well "allegedly" better, since I don't want to get sued, here.
   
  So on Sunday night, Nick was driving too fast, and as he always does, was unable to keep a vehicle on the actual road. The cops initially reported that there were no signs of law breakage or suspicious activity, and the car simply swerved out of control in a freak accident.
   
  This story was amended later in the night when countless witnesses said the yellow Supra was seen speeding at over 80mph in the 40mph zone. But, the cops assured us, Nick was not racing anybody, and was simply speeding of his free will.
   
  This story has been called into question in later days, as countless witnesses insist that Nick's yellow Supra was drag racing a silver Viper between traffic lights. Cops now admit that they'd like to track down the driver of this silver Viper for questioning.
   
  On Thursday, it emerged that Hulk Hogan owns a silver Viper, and that in that very same interview I mentioned above, Nick bragged about how much fun it is to drag race his family members in their wide array of fast cars. The cops positively INSIST that they've cleared the Hulkster's name from any wrong-doing, and that he was not driving the silver Viper.
   
  Given the cops' (possibly willful) fucktardery so far in this case, I'm not entirely sure what to believe. Local celebrities tend to catch a lot of breaks, and unless Nick himself rolled over on his dad (or his sister?!?!??) and told the cops he knew who he was racing, there may be no choice but to file the Silver Viper in the same cabinet with "Who Drove the Hummer?"....
   
  The possibilities of serious criminal charges against Nick (or possibly even his dad, depending on how that turns out) are diminishing with each day that John Graziano's recovery goes well. However, lesser charges and a potentially expensive civil lawsuit by Graziano or his family remain. Thus, it should come as a surprise to none that the Hogans have retained the services of a locally-well-known sleazeball lawyer whose specialty is defending drunk drivers in court.
   
  This story will bear watching mostly just to see to what extent the Hulkster himself might get caught up in it... if he honestly is cleared, though, and all that remains is mopping up a few last details of his younger daughter's legal troubles, my guess is you may never hear me mention it again. We'll see how that goes....
   
  
• WWE recently cancelled and entire swing of house shows in late September. The reason I'm hearing is that this is because WWE may have been informed of Congressional Hearings Into Steroid Use In Wrestling, and anticipates having several key performers/officials in Washington to testify around this time.
   
  If it's true that hearings have been scheduled, my understanding is that they are going to be pretty thorough, possibly lasting days, and will include entities other than WWE being called. TNA has already been brought into Congress' investigations, and other independent contractors or past employees of WWE and/or TNA might be Persons Of Interest to Congress, as well.
   
  
• Some ratings....
   
  Last week's Thursday Impact did a 1.2 rating, a little boost back up from the 1.0s and 1.1s that have been common over the summer, and matching TNA's best-ever rating. Ironically enough: this comes amidst an Internet Wanker Backlash againt TNA for perceived "over-Russo-fication" of the product. Ummm, Wankers: for one, I've been telling you for a year that a lot of the crap you don't like about TNA DOESN"T FUCKING COME FROM RUSSO! It comes from Jarrett's own personal Johnny Ace, Dutch Mantell. And for two, somebody will have to explain to me the logic of picking NOW to start acting like you're noticing creative problems in TNA's product.
   
  Last week's SD!, by contrast, did a year-to-date worst rating of 2.2. I do believe that pre-emptions for preseason football and stretch-run baseball have kicked in, in earnest, so that could be a contributing fact. But so could the fact that Khali fucking sucks.
   
  Monday's RAW did a 3.2 rating for it's live airing on the Sci-Fi Network. This is a number that we can't really analyze meaningfully, other than to say the drop-off is less than what it was last year when RAW got bumped to Sci-Fi by tennis. But that's only because RAW's ratings on USA were stronger at the time, and they had more room to drop. A late night replay of RAW on USA did a 1.0 rating. Conceivably, one could argue that you add those up, and RAW did a 4.2 rating on Monday, but I think that this is wrong once you factor in west coast feeds and things of that nature; I don't think the numbers are additive.
   
  Tuesday's ECW on Sci-Fi did a horrible 1.3 rating, very nearly its worst rating ever (and after a one week "stunt casting" bump from an appearance by Vince McMahon, when the show did a 1.7 rating). What's this mean? One tick in the wrong direction, and TNA becomes the third-most-watched wrestling brand on TV...
   
  No rating, as yet, for last night's Impact, but if it's not between a 1.0 and 1.2, I'll eat a bug.
   
  
• TNA officials told certain members of their roster, at the last set of TV tapings, that it's a done deal that Impact will be expanding to 2 hours in October. Though unspoken, the understanding is that this will be a 2 hour timeslot on SpikeTV.
   
  
• Talk about precognition: last week, when talking about Brock Lesnar and how it plays into Spike's hand in terms of their hard-on for UFC/TNA synergy, I made an off-hand joke about Lesnar's negotiations with TNA being little more than a sidebar to his desire to get into UFC.
   
  This week: it appears as though Lesnar will be headed to UFC after the new year. Lesnar met with UFC officials last weekend at their PPV event, and in subsequent interviews, UFC's owner says that nothing's final, but he expects Lesnar to start competing in 2008. Presumably, this means that due diligence has been done, and it's known that Brock can pursue an MMA career without violating whatever remaining no-compete clause(s) are in effect from his WWE days.
   
  
• WWE has confirmed that they'll be doing a multi-branded tour of Iraq again this holiday season, and that the resulting special will air on Christmas Eve (Monday, December 24). I can't believe it, but I think this is the fifth one of these.... it's a great gesture and all by WWE, but I think if you'd told me after the first Christmas in Iraq that we'd be stuck doing a fifth annual one, I might have died a little bit inside.
   
  
• Last thing for today is to quickly address some feedback about last week's popular (and in some circles, controversial) John Cena Title Dominance Feature.
   
  To clear up one misconception: it was *not* intended as (nor was it in execution) any kind of Triple H Apologist Feature. Though I did, at times, put a positive spin on past HHH accomplishments, his stats and his title reigns were in there not so they could be praised, but so that they could provide the context to what's going on with John Cena. They were there to underscore a difference between Cena and HHH (and how the more accurate comparison is between Cena and Hogan).
   
  I'm sorry if you couldn't get past the perception that I was somehow a HHHugger, and grasp onto the basic concepts I was putting forth about Cena's dominance as champion.
   
  Secondly, probably the one area where I got the most feedback was related to my treatment of HHH's stats. Nothing quite as accusatory as the HHHaters misreading things, but more a genuine debate over how and why I arrived at the "breakpoints" for HHH's Domination Phases. For instance, why did I extend Phase 1 all the way to May 2001, when HHH hadn't held the title for six months at that point? And why did I abruptly end Phase 2 when HHH last the title at WM21, instead of extending it till the point when he dropped out of main events and stopped contending for the belt? Some even suggested that HHH was never the same after WM20, so I should have ended Phase 2 there to get the most damning stats.
   
  I have no real answer to that other than to once again use the word "context." The breakpoints I picked "felt" right; for instance, even if HHH didn't hold the title late in Phase 1, he was still the central character and top heel for most of that time, and it "felt" like he was in contention to hold the title again at any time up until his quad injury. And I picked the end to Phase 2 because I honestly felt like that's when HHH went from "me, me, me" mode, and demonstrably shifted into a 3 month phase where his goal was to "make" Batista (going so far as to job to him cleanly on PPV after Batista had already gone over to SD!); between WM21 and right now, there really wasn't any time when I thought it "felt" like HHH was a genuine option as champ, and thus, I ended Phase 2 where I ended it.
   
  And that leads to a topic that only came up 2 or 3 times, but which is related, and which was a great catch by You Fine Readers: Cena's stats look horrifyingly one-sided now. But how much hindsight will I need before I mentally make the "breakpoint" for the end of Cena's domination? Will I be a jerkface and just end it the next time Cena loses the title so that his numbers look as bad as possible? Or will I give him the "HHH Buffer" of six months (or more) to soften the stats? And if I do, how will I know how long to wait before the Cena Domination Phase should contextually be deemed "over."
   
  Damned excellent questions, and at first, I responded in deadly seriousness to one reader, trying to be all profound and statisticky and shit. But to a second reader, I made an offhand joke that, as soon as I sent it, suddenly seemed like an EXCELLENT metric.
   
  How will we know that the Cena Domination is over? How will WWE signal to us that we're done (for at least a while) with having the same flaccid amalgamation of random affectations headlining every show for 28 months straight? Simple: I'll feel like the Cena Era is over when the stupid fucking Spinner Belt is gone. 
   
  I said it as a joke, but dammit, I thought about it, and that's the truth.
   
  Edge held the belt twice. But as long as it was the Bling Belt, you knew the only man who'd beat him for it was Homey the Clown. Even changing the spinner to a "Rated R" logo didn't remove the stink of inevitability from the situation. As long as that's the belt, I'll never believe that Cena's isnt' the next man to hold it.
   
  I think that's a fair heuristic to apply, though I'm open to any other ideas about how WWE can best handle entering a true "rest phase" for Cena.
   
  Finally, there were some folks who seemed to misunderstand the purpose of my including the TV ratings for each man as champ. If I had a nickel for every mail I got that said "You fucking HHH lover, Cena's ratings are better than HHH's during his second phase, so clearly he's the better champion," I'd... well, I'd have at least a buck and a half.
   
  BUT THAT WASN'T THE POINT, DUMDUMS! At no point did I suggest a meaningful relationship between the ratings of the different phases. Never. Because there really isn't one. At some level, the ratings for a show are dependent on more things than just the champion/headliner.... but when you expand things and look at bigger sweeping changes over the course of 8 years (instead of trends over the course of 2 years), you're really not going to be able to trace *anything* back to the champ. Those trends are indicators of the business as a whole. 
   
  But in smaller chunks, I think the fluctuations WITHIN EACH PHASE are meaningful, per our investigation of Championship Popularity. In his two phases, HHH was the most watched champion. In his phase, Cena is the least-watched. Comparing one phase another is meaningless, but comparing Cena's ratings as champ to Edge's? I think there's lessons to be learned there, and that (and only that) is why I included those numbers for you to digest.
   
  Also: the numbers gave me an excuse to prove that Randy Orton was ratings death not only as champ, but also during his #1 Contender phase on SD! in 2006. That's always a pleasant bonus.
   
  That oughta get to MOST of the concerns voiced in e-mails (and possibly ones the more timid among you kept to yourself)... with Cena still reigning as champ (in this case, thankfully so, given the sheer awfulness of the alternative at SummerSlam), my guess is that this will be a topic to be reprised over time, so please do speak up if you have any additional thoughts on the issue, of if any new ideas occur to you moving forward.
   
  
• I'm done for today. It's a 3-day weekend for most folks, so I hope you enjoy it, and do so safely. I'll catch up with you again next week.