Super SmackDown was uninspired and dull. Cena squashed Wade Barrett, Daniel Bryan lost again, a sort of heel turn for Sin Cara, maybe? The Orton/Christian cage match was the only saving grace, followed by Mark Henry's beat down.
Even CM Punk and Triple H fell pretty flat during their contract signing, spending too much time in the ring talking around each other like characters in a Raymond Carver story--talking, but never listening. The core point to each argument is that both of them are seeking what's best for the WWE and it's fans. Despite being in opposition, both men are representing themselves as agents of change, but for the time being personal conflict is standing in the way and the two will have to settle things in the ring. But what about this concept these two are fighting for?
Change is the word of the moment right now, and the words and actions of both Triple H and CM Punk have fought to seek it. Since his takeover Triple H has taken several measures to promote a change in the product, last night's programming, the stage for this conversation, being one of many examples. A change in the product means that there was and is something wrong with the product: a fact that CM Punk opened the floodgates on in May.
Punk returned to the message he gave when he came back, that he was here to "make things fun again." His methodology for being the catalyst to that change is being viewed as reprehensible in the eyes of the executives, but interestingly enough, Punk also faces scorn from the conservative audience. Wichita was decisively anti-Punk, or at least pro-Triple H. While Punk argued that he's seeking change that 100% of the fans can get behind, Triple H received more praise saying that at least some of the people are satisfied--arguing for the status quo. H's declaration that Punk was a self-made martyr, seeking change only at his own benefit was the statement the crowd got behind, not Punk's message that he was trying to make things better for everyone. Punk identified as a fan at heart, seeking what's best for the fans, and yet he wasn't getting much from the crowd and I'm slightly perplexed by that. I think it comes down to tattoos.
The two floundered a bit though, Punk missed an opportunity in calling out Triple H for not seeking the 100% as things got personal. But Kevin Nash came out and not only did he knock Punk around, but he shoved Triple H down to the mat. Nash said nothing in the ring, refused to comment backstage and while his motivation Monday night was clearly to step in on behalf of his friend, what brought him to the ring last night?
When Nash returned to WWE, it was a field day for CM Punk, accusing Triple H of hiring his buddy, quelling change and bringing back the Kliq. But we're still not sure about the actualities of Nash's return. No answer to why he attacked Punk, Triple H said he had nothing to do with it. But what has been clear is that the relationship between Triple H and Kevin Nash hasn't been as stable as the relationship between Kevin Nash and John Laurenaitis who welcomed Nash back and signed him.
While Punk and Triple H have been championing the same cause, they've refused to listen to each other and they've made things personal. Night of Champions they'll have a match that we've all been looking forward to. But is it the battle that they should be fighting? Because I'm starting to think that their enemy is shared. That the forces protecting the structure CM Punk has fought against are also working to undermine Triple H. Somewhere, someone is very happy watching these two fight each other.