Wade Keller's Six Pack from 9/3

[Big Red Machine]

(Keller's full report on this week's Raw plus added analysis with more thoughts and select key quotes was posted exclusively on the PWTorch VIP website and VIP mobile site on Monday night. Subscribe here to go VIP: PWTorch.com/GoVIP)

By Wade Keller, PWTorch editor

- Overall Top Angle of McMahons vs. The Roster: This angle is making wrestlers look so bad. Imagine a friend putting their job in front of defending you from a beat down by a gang of thugs? Or even worse, punching you while your arms are held behind your back just so he can keep his job? It's ridiculous and made Big Show look awful - broke or not, family to support or not. They did everything they could to draw sympathy to Show, which might be enough to keep this from ruining his character, but it's still not enough to make it seem like he had no choice.

- The McMahons: Who would support a company where there's no authority figure above Triple H, Stephanie, and Vince McMahon who can step in and stop their abuse of power. Why would anyone support a company when the money is directly going into the pockets of the no. 1 heels? It's a potential fatal flaw no matter what else they do well with this entire scenario.

- Big Show's "contract:" Michael Cole said if Big Show were to interfere, his Iron Clad Contract could be rescinded. Well, there's a new definition of "Iron Clad," huh? They were better off not bringing it up at all if their explanation was going to be that lame. Instead, all they had to say is Show has an iron clad contract, but if he betrayed Hunter's orders, Show could find himself wrestling opening matches the rest of his career with no chance at title shots.

- Cody Rhodes vs. Randy Orton: Very good match. The crowd was totally into Cody as an underdog with a lot at stake. It's an example of why putting something at stake that feels important and credible really helps get a crowd into a match. It sounds so obvious, but over the years some bookers have given up on wrestling matches being a compelling way to tell a story. When you have a good back story and something is at stake that the crowd buys into it, it really adds a level of drama to the match.

- Doink the Clown: Triple H said the fans loved him in the 1990s, but he was never WWE champion because it would have been bad for business. I thought it was because Doink wasn't good enough in the ring to beat Yokozuna or Bret Hart? I mean, that's what WWE ostensibly exists for, right?

- The Shield: Is there ever going to be a good explanation from The Shield on why they sold out and joined Triple H's side rather than being rebels who wouldn't even walk through the stage entrance to go to the ring?

(Keller's full report on this week's Raw plus added analysis with more thoughts and select key quotes was posted exclusively on the PWTorch VIP website and VIP mobile site on Monday night. Subscribe here to go VIP: PWTorch.com/GoVIP)

[Big Red Machine]

- The McMahons: Who would support a company where there's no authority figure above Triple H, Stephanie, and Vince McMahon who can step in and stop their abuse of power. Why would anyone support a company when the money is directly going into the pockets of the no. 1 heels? It's a potential fatal flaw no matter what else they do well with this entire scenario.

1) People who want to watch the exciting product that said heels are putting on.
2) Yes, the money does go directly into the pockets of the heels... but is then distributed out to all of the wrestlers and employees (incluidng the babyfaces) in the form of a SALARY! Triple H has made certain to point out business being good means that all of the wrestlers make more money more than once.
3) This is an area where, if no other explanation works for you, suspension of disbelief certainly applies (and keep in mind that this is ME saying this. That's how far off the mark Keller is).

- Doink the Clown: Triple H said the fans loved him in the 1990s, but he was never WWE champion because it would have been bad for business. I thought it was because Doink wasn't good enough in the ring to beat Yokozuna or Bret Hart? I mean, that's what WWE ostensibly exists for, right?

Yes, but I don't think that Doink was ever given any title shots either because of the off-chance that he could somehow beat the champ (possibly through heel Doink shenanigans).

He does have some good points in here, too, but the first thing really annoyed me so I decided to pick on the second one, too.