The Commentary: Who is David and Who is Goliath?

Image courtesy WWE.com.

There was some quality wrestling on Sunday night’s Survivor Series pay-per-view, but one major logic hole proved clearer than the light of day by night’s end.

WWE has absolutely zero distinction about who is heel and who is face regarding The Authority. And it is setting the fans up for a ridiculously confusing next few months.

Let’s begin with something I have unfortunately had to refer to many a times over the past few months, Wrestling 101. This rigorous, brutal and time-consuming course (one that could probably be taught at the WWE Performance Center) tells us that professional wrestling is centered around the concept of good versus bad. Babyfaces vs. heels. David vs. Goliath.

Occasionally, there are tweeners who play both roles before definitively making a decision as to what side of the fence they sit on. They are rarely portrayed in large masses, though.

From the moment that Triple H kicked Daniel Bryan in the gut at SummerSlam, he was established as an emphatic bad guy. Bryan was among the top, if not the top, faces headed into the event, and was thwarted in his attempt at glory by a guy turning bad and aiding someone else (Randy Orton) in doing so at the same time.

Over the next couple of months, Hunter supports the guy he helped win the title in a dastardly manner, while simultaneously saying the babyface couldn’t cut it. Her verbally abuses the other faces in the company, gets hired goons to beat down the “Yes!” man, and forces a jolly big giant to perform tasks against his will.

Then, out of nowhere, he alongside his cronies show doubt in their hand-picked champion and brings in the top babyface to stare him down.

Deep breath.

HOW DOES THIS MAKE ANY SENSE?

Rarely do I question the upper brass in WWE. No matter how hectic creative can get, no matter how erratic booking becomes, I usually see things through either to be pleasantly surprised or immensely disappointed. And I do understand the usual Autumn letdown that comes during the WWE season (hell, this part may as well be the offseason).

But I can’t sit back and give this one a pass. WWE is breaking the cardinal sin of professional wrestling, and I see no reasoning for it.

Jim Ross, perhaps the greatest wrestling mind of all-time, himself criticized the poor distinction between good and bad on his blog last week.

“BTW is JBL really a villain,” he said. “Or am I? Or does being a villain or a fan favorite matter any more in the world of TV rasslin? Is Randy Orton a fan favorite or a villain? One can’t be both, as a rule….but, of course, I’m out of touch with today’s product. I think that I may have missed the class on the invisible line between good and evil. In real life that may be true but last I looked pro wrestling on TV isn’t real life.”

So let’s try to process the ending of Survivor Series. Prior to the main event, The Authority (bad guys) are seen discussing something with John Cena (ultimate good guy). As the ultimate bad guy (Randy Orton) walks in, babyface Cena leaves the room.

In the main event, the snake squares off against the jolly giant. He’s struggling to beat him on his own, so The Authority heads to ringside to provide a heelish distraction to Big Show, allowing for the antagonist in the match to win and subsequently perform a mega-heel action in punting Show. Once again, the bad guys are aligned on one page, and all is right.

But then Cena hits the ring, followed by a symbolic parting of the ways by the just-established evil force of The Authority, allowing him a clear path to their previously chosen champion, and the two have a stare-down.

My point of writing this all out is to prove just how ridiculous and stream of consciousness-like this sounds. Because while this is no Catcher in the Rye, it’s certainly how it has come off.

One of the goals of a good writing staff for a weekly television show, regardless of if it is for wrestling or for a comedy or for a drama is to leave the viewer wanting more in the next installment. To leave them questioning what they had seen and trying to figure out what is next. Sometimes, swerves are beneficial.

But the questions they should be asking should be about what is ahead, not if what they had just seen made any degree of sense. Why would a group of super villains suddenly support the top babyface? Why would the good guy suddenly feel comfortable trusting the bad ones? Are they trying to flip the top face and top heel senselessly? What benefit is there in doing so with the No. 2 title on David?

Ultimately, this appears it will be about the two top titles, which will bring a breath of fresh air. However, who is the audience supposed to support with no clear backing on who the big guns do themselves? Why are the lines blurred when literally just over a month ago things were clear and distinct?

I myself don’t know the answer to this. And moreover, I don’t know the answer to Wrestling 101’s final quiz question.

Who is good and who is bad?

I’d say wait until Monday night, but next week’s product may be drastically different. How many more days until New Orleans, again?

Follow Jon Alba on Twitter!