5 Necessary changes that should happen in WWE commentary team
Nowadays when I impose myself comfortably on my couch to tune into an episode of Monday Night Raw, I cannot help but feel a tinge of distaste as Michael Cole’s voice welcomes the viewers to whatever arena in whatever state, often followed by a proclamation of the number in attendance who are inevitably “on their feet.”
Is it just me or has the commentary in the WWE descended into repetitive periphery? Sure, JBL is capable of providing the occasional wise-crack. Apart from that, however, it’s hard to think of an instance where the commentary has complimented the in-ring action, in the recent past, and accentuated its impact to the millions of viewers who tune in through television.
Let’s face it. The WWE is direly feeling the loss of its voice for Jim Ross did not merely describe the moment that was transpiring; he instead shared in our experience of it like a fan who was watching it unfold for the first time. It is exactly that connection that is conspicuously missing in today’s presentation.
The role played by commentary directly shapes the way the WWE Universe reciprocates to the product which makes it worthwhile to run through a few tweaks that could be administered to the Raw commentary team. After all, we only truly realize the magnitude of what we miss after it’s gone.
Disclaimer: As tempting as it was to call for all the advertising and incessant twitter hashtag plugs on Raw to stop, it has irrevocably become part and parcel of the WWE marketing strategy that we just have to bear with a patient shrug. Shouldn’t be inordinately difficult after the PG Era.
1. 2-man commentary teams
When a potentially classic moment is afoot, instead of solidifying its impetus, JBL and Michael Cole end up mouthing off two different words at the exactly same time.
They even manage to do it at the exact same instant sometimes, almost with metronomic coincidence. Once this happens, you’re already thrown off as a viewer, and what could have been an iconic moment gets recycled into a non-event by the time they make eye contact and sort out their feet regarding who is supposed to say something.
That’s generally Michael Cole, the play-by-play commentator.
But I digress. Regardless of who jumps the gun, a three man commentary team is clearly a case of too many cooks spoiling the broth. Maybe the WWE product just requires a more compact and less disruptive presentation scheme that two men with conversational chemistry are well capable of providing.
2. Balance of personas
This point borrows from the previous one in that a two piece commentary team would be better balanced in terms of there being one babyface point of view and one of a heel.
Every “heelish” jibe issued by JBL is met with two other face commentators shooting him down, and while this increases JBL’s exclusivity, sometimes he just gets drowned out by Booker T’s croaky exclamations and Michael Cole’s overpowering verbiage.
Perhaps, it would be more conducive if the WWE reverted back to 2-man commentary teams in obtaining greater balance and chemistry in the babyface vs heel dynamic they want to portray. With all of his slip-ups and mistimed quips, the last thing JBL needs is two voices instead of one to argue with.