The WWE are due to announce subscriber figures for the WWE Network again at the end of this month, so you might have thought that this show would have some sort of priority for them.  By all appearances from the card, it doesn’t – to the extent they have a direction going for the main event, it seems to be looking past this show to the next one.

The latest tactic to try and boost Network subscriber numbers is to roll it out internationally.  Intriguingly, it has yet to be made available in the UK (leaving aside the obvious methods that can be used to avoid regional limitations – and a potential nightmare scenario for the company is that it turns out that a large chunk of the potential international audience are already using them, so that the potential for further growth is much less than thought).  The WWE only recently signed a renewed multi-year deal with Sky, so it would be surprising if they hadn’t allowed for the proposed Network launch in its terms.  Another possibility is that they’re trying to launch it in the UK as an actual broadcast channel, something which has worked unexpectedly well in Canada.

At any rate, this month we have the annual Hell in a Cell pay-per-view, named after the glorified cage match that used to be a really big draw until they destroyed its aura of special-ness by, um, making it an annual C-list pay-per-view.  On top of that, we are (unusually) missing a WWE Title match.  Brock Lesnar retained the title against John Cena last month (after getting DQ’d, which doesn’t trigger a title change).  That would normally prompt a rematch, but Lesnar is on a very limited dates contract, so the approach has simply been to not use him and largely gloss over that fact.

What does that leave?

1.  No 1 Contender for WWE World Heavyweight Title – Hell in a Cell: John Cena v Randy Orton.  Oh, this again.  The booking here is very strange.  For one thing, since he actually won the last match by disqualification, Cena ought to be getting his rematch automatically.  For another, Cena ended up in this match after losing a match against Dean Ambrose for the right to face Seth Rollins (who had been feuding with both guys – the idea being to position Ambrose as the antihero who won’t co-operate with the child-friendly babyface star).  So… Cena winds up in a number 1 contender match by losing a qualifying match.  That doesn’t make very much sense, does it?

Rollins and Orton are both allied with the Authority, but they’ve been doing a slow build to friction between the two of them.  In a frankly weird move, this week’s Raw had Rollins actually turn on Orton at the end – thus building up an Orton/Rollins match, which, obviously, is not on this card.

Cena/Orton has been done to death – to the point where they did a “last match ever, honest” deal a couple of years ago, to no discernible long-term effect.  Doubling back to this match yet again, even on a C-show like Hell in a Cell, suggests the company is still locked in panic at the thought of doing the sensible thing as pairing them up with new opponents who could then be elevated to join the much-thinned ranks of the main eventers.  The match will be fine, but it will also be very familiar.

Lesnar’s contract is reportedly on such favourable terms that the winner of this match won’t actually get his title shot until January.  They could do Cena/Lesnar again but, again, that’s been done twice, and Orton/Lesnar does seem like the more interesting match, particularly as Orton seems to be turning babyface anyway.  On the other hand, Orton is plainly headed towards a feud with Rollins – but with Lesnar as an absentee champion, there’s time to deal with that first, or (since Rollins has yet to cash in his Money in the Bank title shot) simultaneously.  Rollins has made it pretty clear that he wants Orton to win this match, since he thinks either Orton will get killed, or he’ll be a soft target for a MITB cash-in – so interference by Rollins in this match wouldn’t make a huge amount of sense, even if there wasn’t the bloody great cage ostensibly there to keep people out.  Personally I’d go with Orton winning, but I won’t be at all surprised to wind up with Cena… again.

2.  Hell in a Cell: Dean Ambrose v Seth Rollins.  This has actually got some build behind it.  Ambrose and Rollins were both members of the Shield; Rollins turned on the group; Ambrose has been after his revenge ever since.  They were booked on a show a couple of months ago, but didn’t actually do the match.

As at least the semi-main event, this ought to be seriously good.  Ambrose and Rollins are both usually excellent, and Ambrose’s anti-hero loose cannon persona seems to be working well.  This actually does look like a match that might be worth paying for – except of course that I said that last time, and they didn’t deliver it.

Since Rollins has his aforementioned Money in the Bank title shot and is firmly ensconced in a feud with Randy Orton, he doesn’t really need the win here.  If they’re serious about pushing Ambrose as one of their top babyfaces – as well they should be, given his talent and the frankly limited options – he ought to win here.

Another point of interest is the running order, and which of the two Hell in a Cell matches goes on last.  A conservative case can be made for Orton/Cena, since they’re the bigger stars and they’re fighting for a title shot.  But the WWE is long, long overdue to start establishing a new generation of main eventers, and part of that process has to be putting new matches in the main event slot in order to send a message.  Plus, I’d say Ambrose/Rollins is the more heated match, even if on paper they’re the lesser stars.  Again, WWE Kremlinologists will be watching this decision closely, to see how much weight the company is really prepared to throw behind its newer stars.

3.  WWE Tag Team Titles: Goldust & Stardust © v Jey Uso & Jimmy Uso.  Generic build, here.  Goldust and Stardust won the titles at Night of Champions last month.  The Usos won the obligatory re-match on free TV, but by disqualification, so the titles didn’t change hands.  And that’s pretty much that; they’ve otherwise been trading wins in six-mans and so forth.  The Usos have generally come out ahead there.

Common sense says the Dust Brothers retain, since otherwise we’re just trading back to the Usos, and that’s not particularly gripping.  Admittedly, it’s not obvious what babyface team they move on to next, but forward planning has never been the WWE’s forte.  Probably a good match.

4.  WWE Intercontinental Title – Best of 3 Falls: Dolph Ziggler © v Cesaro.  More win-trading here.  Ziggler already successfully defended his title on TV, but (presumably in light of the number of times Cesaro had previously beaten him) accepted the challenge for this rematch, like a good fighting babyface.  On paper, this ought to be an excellent match, at least if it’s given enough time.  The reality is that both guys are under-utilised and are stuck floating around the mid card fighting over a secondary title that nobody particularly cares about, and to that extent it doesn’t greatly matter who wins here.  In theory a win for Cesaro could start building him towards the upper mid card if not the main event, but in practice the company shows so little interest in doing anything with its minor title holders that anyone with serious ambitions to be pushed up the card is actually better off losing here.

5.  WWE United States Title: Sheamus © v The Miz.  Considering how much the WWE could use major stars, it’s striking that we have two former world champions now firmly relegated to the mid card and fighting over another of the belts nobody cares about.  Sheamus, despite being a jovial Oirish stereotype, has consistently good matches and could certainly be rehabilitated into a main eventer with a bit of effort.  As for Miz, he was once in the main event at Wrestlemania – but that was the year that they were relying on a guest appearance by the Rock as the real draw, and I don’t think anyone’s seriously crying out for him to be back in the title picture.

He does have a solid mid card comedy act at the moment, though, in a gimmick that amounts to a ceremonial burial of the WWE’s movies division.  On the strength of his appearance in one of the company’s direct-to-video action movies, Miz is convinced that he is a major movie star.  In practice, this manifests in (1) an entrance video which has removed all footage of him actually wrestling in favour of showing him doing publicity appearances (and opens with a trailer graphic and a “quiet on the set” announcement), and (2) him being accompanied everywhere by his “stunt double”, Damien Sandow.  Sandow, who had bumping along in comedy segments at the bottom of the card for months, is singularly unqualified for the task of impersonating the wholly dissimilar Miz, but gamely attempts to fulfil his job description by dressing identically to him, and standing next to him copying everything he does (slightly behind).  Occasionally he wrestles in Miz’s place.  Otherwise, he stands outside practising his art by enthusiastically copying everything Miz does.  The sight of Sandow gamely wrestling an invisible opponent outside the ring turns out to be perversely entertaining, and may actually be dragging him back up the card again by force of audience reaction.

It’ll be a comedy match, and WWE comedy is rarely funny, but Miz and Sandow often are (if more by fluke than design).  Personally, I’d have them win, which frees up Sheamus for something more important and leaves the US title in the hands of an act that’s doing fairly well.  But there’s a case for Sheamus retaining, which I’ll come to.

6.  WWE Divas Title: AJ Lee © v Paige.  A feud that seemingly will not die.  AJ and Paige have been trading the women’s title back and forth since the spring, the angle having broadly evolved from “they unconvincingly claim to be friends” to “they screw one another over repeatedly”.  AJ is notionally the babyface here, though she doesn’t really act it, having seemingly managed to blithely alienate every other woman on the roster.  The matches have been okay by the standards of the WWE’s women’s division, but not really up to the standard you might have expected from these two.  It’ll be fine; but it has a distinct risk of being put in the death spot on the card to give the crowd a breather between the two main events, since there’s no other obvious candidate (the other women’s match has a bigger storyline behind it).

The main reason why we’re getting two women’s matches on the shows these days is that the company has apparently decided that, on the one hand, it wants to promote its reality show Total Divas by giving prominent storylines to the women who are appearing in the show, but on the other hand, it doesn’t want any of those women to hold the title, because… well, nobody seems entirely sure of the thinking, but it seems to be something to do with a concern about synching up with the long-since-taped reality show

At any rate, Paige is joining the case of Total Divas in the next series, so if the WWE is sticking with this policy – and it’s not like the company doesn’t have a reputation for changing its mind on a whim – it seems unlikely that this feud ends with her getting the title back.  My guess would be that AJ wins here and we finally move on to something else.

7.  Rusev v Big Show.  This month’s match for the as-yet-undefeated Russian (who’s actually Bulgarian, but whatever).  He already had a TV match with Big Show that was reportedly okay.  The result here is entirely predictable – Rusev will win, because there’s no point doing this much build of an undefeated streak and then having him lose to somebody like the Big Show who is surely approaching the twilight of his career.  When Rusev loses, it has to matter, and it will not matter here.  Nobody seriously thinks otherwise.

The bigger question is precisely why Rusev wins; he can either win clean, or Big Show can lose thanks to Mark Henry turning on him as part of a feud that’s been fairly obviously set up on TV.  That will lead to the uninspiring prospect of a Show/Henry super heavyweight match, but we’re evidently going there whether we like it or not.

8.  Loser must be the winner’s personal assistant for 30 days: Brie Bella v Nikki Bella.  Continuing an excruciatingly protracted feud between the twins from Total Divas.  This is a very old school stipulation and an entirely unpromising one, since it guarantees a month of skits that, to judge from the feud to date, will vary in quality from unwatchable to nearly unwatchable.  It also renders the result entirely predictable, since justified babyface vengeance can’t be dragged out for that long; the only purpose of doing this stip is to have the heel (Nikki) win in order to put more heat on the feud for the rematch in a month’s time.  I don’t want to see it now and I don’t expect I’ll want to see it any more in November.

Worth getting?  As is increasingly common with WWE cards, the matches look solid enough on paper, but the booking is fairly uninspiring.  Most of these matches at least have a vaguely coherent set-up, which is an improvement on some months, but I don’t think they’ve done anything that’s really going to prove a big draw.  Ambrose/Rollins is the strongest match here, but is it really enough to get people to buy an otherwise underheated card?