After watching the season premiere of WWE Tough Enough it seems as if I have more concerns with the format of the show than I do with the actual show itself- that is to say the contestants and judges. For one thing, WWE was never really clear with the voting and- to me- it just doesn't make any sense for there to be a "bottom three" and then the one with the least amount of votes has to go. I think this is how other shows like "American Idol" work, but I would much rather be voting for the person I want to see get kicked off than the person I want to see stay because that just makes more sense and goes more with the thought process of what the judges do.
Is it also of any concern to anyone out there that the women and men are both able to be picked and put into the "bottom three" with no regard or care for the fact that this competition is going to produce one winner from each gender? In some ways, the men and women are competing against each other but when you look at it in the grand scheme of things... they're really not. For that, someone like Daria shouldn't be pitted against Tanner in a "bottom three" because at the end of the show they could both have contracts. It makes no sense to me.
I'm also really bothered by the fact that this show is both taped and live. It might just be something that takes getting used to, but it feels silly sitting there, watching what has already happened, and then hearing the contestants talking about it. Is this "Blind Date"? Is that show even on still? I'm just torn on the idea right now of the mix back and forth and would much rather have it all taped, with the "bottom three" being picked during the tapings (Though that needs to change as well) and then have a live elimination special but, yeah yeah, that's asking too much from WWE right now I'd say.
What really bothered me most about this first episode of "Tough Enough" though was that after Hank was eliminated (And why not, someone has to be eliminated) he went on to do an interview in which he said he wasn't going to stop trying to become a professional wrestler and he gave examples of former "Tough Enough" contestants such as Ryback who were on the show and didn't win it. And when you think about everyone who was on "Tough Enough" and didn't win it, there are quite a few out there in wrestling still, but where have the winners gone? John Morrison is the only guy I can think of right now still in wrestling and forget Maven and Daniel Puder for a moment (because everyone else has) but where is the guy who won the last "Tough Enough" a few years back? I think his name was Andy or something...
Admittedly, I was mostly bothered by this show jumping between live and taped television, but then I also found it strange how the eliminations work and, really, have we learned enough about any of these contestants yet for one of them to have been eliminated in the first place? It all just seems so circumstantial. And then Hank went and did that interview, reminded me of the past and I thought, you know what, it doesn't really matter. None of this matters. Because even if you like a competitor on this show and they get voted off, they might still make it to WWE one day. I'd actually say that someone who doesn't win this is more likely to have a WWE run than the actual winner. So if you really like someone on this show, vote them off because the winner might just end up disappearing.