A Roster Is Only As Deep As It's Utilized

Did we really need to see this match as much as we saw it? Photo Credit: WWE.com

What do Justin Gabriel, Curt Hawkins, Hunico, The Usos, Michael McGillicutty, David Otunga, Yoshi Tatsu, and Ted DiBiase, Jr. have in common? Yes, they're employed by WWE, but I'm not sure you would know it unless you happened to be watching the episode of WWE's televised programming they'd happen to be on, if at all. They're also pretty decent at what they do, if I say so myself. So why aren't they being featured, even as interactive punching bags for the guys they want to push and protect? With those guys being inert, there have to be enough guys being featured regularly that we get a semblance of freshness every week on WWE TV, right? Well, not exactly. When we have feuds that never end despite having the same matches being portrayed every week, then yeah, we're working at a diminished capacity.

With the guys on the main roster plus the ever-expanding coffers in NXT, I've heard more than a few times that this is the deepest roster in WWE history. Having been a fan during the '90s, I can attest to the quality of the guys under contract. It used to be that guys like Great Khali were the rule. Now, he's an exception. It's great to have that kind of talent in the ring in any given match, and I feel like it has made WWE match quality at an unprecedentedly high level.

However, what good is seeing a great match if it'll get replayed over the next month like a bad movie on old-school, pirated pay-per-view? Antonio Cesaro vs. Ryback was a unique match when it first happened. Then, four of the next five times they wrestled, they recycled the finish to their first match, and each time, the emotional impact of each finish was reduced exponentially. Having prolonged free-TV feuds is fine, but you need finesse to keep them going for a month. Having Ryback/Cesaro going and going and going and going isn't the way to go.

I don't know the specifics how to improve that particular feud, or any feud that has gone on way too long with the same match over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over, but I don't think that having spot matches between Cesaro and, say, Ted DiBiase, Jr., or Ryback and, I don't know, Curt Hawkins, would have hurt. Variety is the spice of life, people. That's as true in professional wrestling as it is in a restaurant.

There's always this hysteria over people getting released. A lot of the excitement, at least from where I sit, seems to come from the fact that these wrestlers are getting released into the ecosystem and actually having matches we want to see. That could happen in WWE at a financial advantage for the guys performing. It's just WWE doesn't really know how or care to get these guys circulated in quality appearances. This isn't a plea to help "get guys over." Not everyone on the roster is going to be a future superstar. Then again, if they do connect with the crowd and become popular, then it's a happy accident. Still, the roster needs hands who can wrestle in good matches to help enhance the guys who are over, and to help keep things fresh.

A passable show has moments here and there and is anchored by the top stars and bombastic personalities. A good or great show though is dynamic. Having the same matches week in and week out isn't dynamic. What's the use of having a deep roster if you don't use it?