So at Payback, May 1, in Chicago this year, Ryback came out and did a mock C.M. Punk thing before walking down the ramp. He knelt down on one knee, then stood up and checked his invisible watch, just like Punk used to do. He got major heat from the crowd for that. I assumed it was Ryback mocking Punk, but shortly after Payback, a day or two, it turned out Ryback asked to be sent home and to be taken off of TV until him and Vince McMahon can agree to terms on a new contract.

Here is Ryback’s blog post concerning his current status with the WWE and his thoughts on their pay rate. One thing he says is, ‘Wrestling is pre determined, we as performers know before we go out to that ring or perform a backstage scene who is winning and losing etc or have a general idea of what we are going to say. It blows my mind how in a sport which is pre determined from a company standpoint winners are paid so much more than the losers.’

‘Every single performer for WWE sacrifices the same amount of time from home and their families and every single man or women goes out and does what they are told. Looking at this formula though losers turn into what fans like to call jobbers and their value decreases in the companies eyes and before you know it they get released. For what? For doing exactly as they are told!’

What I took away from this, is that the winner of one match is generally paid more than the loser of that same match. IE: Zack Ryder won the IC title match at Wrestlemania; Thus he was paid more than the other guys, who lost, in the IC title match, correct? That’s what I thought he meant. Maybe Zack Ryder is the exception to the rule, I don’t know. But generally, it doesn’t seem surprising that the winners get paid more than the losers.

WWE Diva Cameron (who was released on May 6) tweeted her agreement with Ryback, with an ‘Amen brother.’ Rumors suggest behind the scenes, many people agree with Ryback, but the only other person to publicly agree with him would be Lucha Underground performer Brian Cage.

Jim Ross replied with this, in which he says, ‘I read Ryback’s take on the matter and his thoughts on how WWE talents should be paid. While I support and encourage Ryback expressing himself if that is something that he absolutely feels is necessary to do but I do not concur with paying every one equally and on a salary, in essence. Talents have different skill sets and they all bring something unique to the team and some of those contributions are simply worth more money than the contributions of others. In the NFL, Quarterbacks are paid more than centers, for example, and we can all agree that it would be hard for QB’s to function without a good center but they step up to different pay windows as they should.

Tom Brady isn’t going to work for what his center’s earning.’

I don’t think Jim Ross understands what Ryback is essentially getting at, here. I don’t think Ryback is suggesting every single worker for the WWE to be paid the exact same as everybody else. When, on earth would Santino (also recently released) or Spike Dudley get paid the same as Triple H or Brock Lesnar? When would a cameraman get paid the same as Vince McMahon? Never. Or even with the wrestlers. Lana is not the same as Sasha Banks, so Lana shouldn’t be paid as much as Sasha, which I don’t think is what Ryback was suggesting. What Ryback was saying, I think, is that if Lana actually beat Sasha Banks at a Wrestlemania, I think Lana would get paid more than Sasha. And that seems wrong.

Maybe neither is right. What I was thinking about, walking home from work the other day, would be to combine a percentage of every pay check into a handful of different parts. Say, each pay check would be divided into fourths, and one fourth would be directly dependent upon crowd reaction / interaction. The New Day would top this pay, every week. Guys like Damien Mizdow (also released) and Daniel Bryan would get paid nicely. Guys like Randy Orton and Shaemus may not. Oh well. PPV buys / TV ratings may play a part. And I would rank, each night, have the entire roster rank, in their own opinion, the top 10 matches / promos of the night. Going down the list, from 10 to 1, each person involved in said match or promo would get a slight bonus to their night’s pay. I think something like this could only be the most fair.

Or just post a poll on WWE.com every night, asking the fans to rank the wrestlers who appeared on that show, and rank them from best to worst, who they think should get paid the most. Zack Ryder and Lana would probably always get paid the most, while Rusev and Sheamus get paid the worst. Hmph. Maybe we’ll never have it 100% accurate.