Welcome to the Wednesday One Shot. Each week, we will present a quick "one shot" thought from each staff member about the previous week in each of the following areas: WWE, TNA and Other (MMA, Indies, etc).

WWE

Will Pruett (Twitter - @itswilltime): Do long expository promos need to exist in longer, more complicated story lines? I tend to over think most wrestling angles and figure things out before the exposition is offered, but do most fans? I felt like the promo work from Triple H and Chris Jericho on Raw offered too much exposition. This took away some of the mystery in their angles and lead to some mildly uninteresting promo work. WWE should assume intelligence in their audience instead of spoon feeding them every detail.

Jake Barnett (Twitter - @barnettjake): Chris Jericho and CM Punk began their feud on Monday, as well as the continuation of Triple H and The Undertaker's road to a rematch. Both feuds suffered a little bit from diarrhea of the mouth, as a lot of exposition was given up front, and I left Raw thinking less could have been more. I think both programs will be fine and there were quite a few good moments on Monday, but I think both Triple H and Chris Jericho could have economized their words a little better.

Ryan Kester (Twitter - @TheRyanKester): I've had no qualms admitting my enthusiasm for Chris Jericho's return and the story he seemed to be setting up. A lot of that evaporated with his promo on Raw. While I like where the character is going, I feel like he explained too much too soon and now it feels like there's little difference between his current character and the one he played up until Randy Orton punted him in the head.

Chris Shore (Twitter - @TheShoreSlant): As much as I defended Chris Jericho's return and trolling efforts, I have to say I'm incredibly disappointed with this week's part of the storyline. Jericho looked like the fool, which bores me to tears. I had hoped for something new and fresh, not the comedic heel Jericho has been in the past. I don't think he was trying to be comedic either, and that's what makes it exceptionally bad.

TNA

Will Pruett: There are certain promises that one must keep and a "Star Wars" edition of Impact Wrestling is one of them. What will we see on this show? Will there be a Jar Jar Binks run-in and heel turn? Will Darth Vader take off his mask and hit James Storm with it? Will the Knockouts attempt to rock tacky and tasteless slave Leia outfits? How will TNA tie in their episode with the 3D release of Episode 1? Only time will tell and I'm actually looking forward to seeing it.

Jake Barnett: I think the London tapings really improved the overall Impact experience. If TNA could take their show out on the road more often, it would really improve the overall feel and perception of their product. Often time the Impact crowds are dead and other times they are chanting loudly at moments that leave you wondering about their sanity. If the money is there to spend on the arenas and production, this could be a real benefit for TNA.

Ryan Kester: What a difference a change of venue makes for TNA. The lack of video wall and the presence of so many screaming fans really made last week's Impact stand out as something special. I hope TNA can retain some of that momentum going forward, but I fear when they eventually return to the Impact Zone that the same old problems that location has will just highlight how desperately they need to stay away from there.

Chris Shore: TNA has made great strides over the past few weeks, but I have to admit it: I haven't watched Impact from last week yet. The stories are getting better all the time, but I don't feel compelled to watch yet. I will watch it tonight, because it's my job, and I hope that the movement from "compelling me to turn it off" to "decent" continues onto "wanting to watch."

Other (MMA, Indies, Etc)

Will Pruett (UFC): I took part in the UFC in 3D experience at a local movie theater and it could be a pretty cool experience with some minor tweaks. The night really suffered from the "movie theater" feel. There was a lack of the rowdiness that usually marks watching a fight. The 3D portion did not add to the experience as much as simply watching on the giant screen in super high definition. I would think of going again for a major fight card, but the price prevents me from wanting to go just to go again.

Jake Barnett (UFC): The Diaz vs. Condit decision was controversial, and I agree with Nate Diaz that he got robbed. I had him winning rounds one, two and five, and I am flabbergasted at how several judges scored the fight 49-46 for Condit. The rematch is already in the works, and I don't see the strategy changing for Condit. We'll have to see if Diaz can develop a strategy to counter.

Ryan Kester (UFC): The tumultuous relationship Nick Diaz has with the UFC continues. After announcing his retirement after his controversial loss to Carlos Condit at UFC 143, Diaz has since been announced for a fight and then turned right around to withdraw from it. At the time of this writing, the full story hasn't

RECOMMEND THIS ARTICLE: