|
|
Anyway, here are my proposed changes to the WWE's commentary teams:
RAW: Jim Ross and Jerry Lawler
As much as I hate to admit it, these guys are iconic of Monday Night RAW. They won't be around forever, but with their newly earned Hall of Fame status, they could run for another year or two. There is a change I would make, however: Jerry Lawler must turn heel. The whole reason the JR/King commentary team worked in the first place was because of exchanges like this:
Jim Ross: I don't like this, it's not right, and it upsets me to see such a talented kid stooping to such levels...
Jerry Lawler: Whoa! Hold on, JR. I've been in the ring before, and I know what it's like; you do whatever you can to win. This kid has a mind for the business.
Now it's like:
Jim Ross: This is awful...
Jerry Lawler: I agree, this is awful.
It's just anti-climatic commentary. Lawler is just there to second JR, there's no balance, and there's no dynamic.
As a heel, King doesn't need to be completely unlikeable. When he returned after the Invasion, and replaced Paul Heyman, I marked out like a little bitch. In hindsight, I can't remember what I was thinking. Lawler was just savvy, had empathy for the bad guys, understanding why they were cheating, while JR just bitched about it. You got the send that JR and King had respect for each other, though. This was highlighted during the Tazz vs. Lawler feud.
Heat: Josh Mathews and Jack Portopello
What can I say? I liked these two together. Jack actually seems like a likeable colour commentator. He seems like a wrestling nerd that knows the heights, weights, finishing moves, styles and what-not of a certain wrestler. As the play-by-play calls the action, he can just sit outside waiting to chime in with relevent information on the wrestler.
Josh Mathews is also a play-by-play commentator with edge. Having stepped into the ring before, Mathews could be referred to as a colour guy, which he can do as well, but he uses his wrestling past to call the moves by their correct names, and keep up with the breakneck action. With Jack being unknown, it makes it hard to accept his opinion as a colour analyst, which is where Mathews' wrestling background and personality shine through to compensate. It's almost as if both guys dip into both fields a little bit, and are kind of a Venn diagram of commentating:
-Josh primarily calls the action.
-Jack provides information on the wrestler's life and background.
-Josh has wrestling experience.
-Josh provides the "outrageousness" of the team.
Jotting that down, it looks like Josh has more to offer than Jack, but Jack plays the straight guy playing off Mathews. He seems to be the guy who sets the pace of the team, as well. He throws away to Josh's wrestling background when it is needed.
Both Josh and Jack seem quite versatile in their roles in the booth, so I can seem them really helping each other perfect themselves.
SmackDown!: Joey Styles and John Bradshaw Layfield
I want to see this team, dammit! The best play-by-play guy in professional wrestling, and the best colour analyst in the same industry. This could be a problem if they seemed to blend together too easily, but I think Styles and JBL would have a great dynamic. Styles seems like the democratic, open-minded, feels passionately about his sport; JBL seems like the republican, ECW-hating, company loving redneck. I think it would be sheer awesomeness.
Styles can also call more wrestling matches, as SmackDown! has the best wrestling on WWE TV. Plus, he is taped on SmackDown!, so they don't have to worry about him breaking loose. I think these two would just be brilliant together. I don't really have much to add.
ECW: Michael Cole and Tazz
Remember when these two guys hosted Byte This!? That is the commentary duo they should be in ECW. For a little while, these two guys were the gem of professional wrestling commentary, and they could be again. ECW still goes on live, doesn't it? That can be a test for how Cole does in that environment. Tazz can be Tazz, and he doesn't need to feel bad about ripping into Michael Cole like he might Joey Styles. Anything goes with Cole on the receiving end.
Mixed Brand Teams: Jim Ross, Joey Styles and JBL; Jerry Lawler, Michael Cole and Tazz
Hear me out: on shows where they need to have commentators from separate brands call the action, I'm thinking on more minor PPVs, like the upcoming Backlash, teams like these would be handy.
Jim Ross, Joey Styles and JBL would be the A-team. JR is the face redneck, JBL is the heel redneck; Joey Styles is caught in the middle. Their style would feature Styles being the more impartial one, trying to moderate the arguments between JR and JBL. He would be the one most for ECW, whereas JR shows RAW some pride, and JBL shows his loyalty to "The A-Show", SmackDown!. Styles is also pro-SmackDown!, but seems a little anti-RAW, perhaps due to his dislike for his time as their head play-by-play guy in JR's absence.
Jerry Lawler, Michael Cole and Tazz seem like an odd pick, but with Jerry Lawler as an angry legend being forced to sit with the C-showers, this could be great. Lawler is more the fish out of water in this scenario. Michael Cole and Tazz tend to agree on things, sharing love for SmackDown! and ECW, whereas Jerry Lawler is the long-time RAW broadcaster. Cole occasionally reaches out to King, reminding them of their stint together on SmackDown!, and Lawler can say that is why he quit in the first place. As time goes on, I can see this trio really starting to work together fantastically.
Classic Matches: Josh Mathews and Jim Ross
I don't know why I'm bringing this up, but if the WWE ever decides to go back and have "hindsight commentary" on some of their older mtches, I think this would be the team to provide it. Josh Mathews is young, and as previously mentioned, can bridge the cap between play-by-play and colour commentary. Jim Ross is Good Ol' JR. He's a Hall of Famer, and legendary commentator. His style is pretty colourful, too. I can see them working well together, with JR being the traditionalist, and Mathews being a little more cynical, without being disrespectful, providing more "this is what it led to" information, whereas JR deals mainly with the "at that time" information.
|