Cole v. Lawler

Dear Scott,While reading your review of last year's Wrestlemania, I was reminded of an idea I had that seemed like it was just RIPE for the picking to use in the Jerry Lawler vs. Michael Cole match. Why didn't anyone just lift a carbon copy of Jerry Lawler vs. Andy Kaufman for that bout? It seems like it would have fit perfectly. Cole runs like a pansy for the first five minutes, Lawler finally says enough of that crap and allows him a freebie, suplex, piledriver, pinfall, everyone goes home happy. Total match time about 5-7 minutes.
Think such an idea would have gone over well with the fans? 

You misremember the original match, though.  It wasn't suplex, piledriver, pinfall, everyone goes home happy.  It was suplex, piledriver, ref calls for the DQ, everyone goes home pissed off and they do rematches for months afterwards.  That was the irony of the whole thing, because Kaufman literally did nothing and Lawler cost himself the match.  Plus Kaufman never pretended to be a tough guy character, he fought women and played up his Hollywood softness.  Michael Cole (the character) imagines himself to be a fighter and would attempt to get some offense in.  The basic plot of the match was fine:  Lawler beats him up, Cole only gains the advantage with the help of Swagger, Lawler makes the comeback and wins but the decision is reversed by the corrupt GM due to a technicality.  The only major problem was that it was WAY too long and killed the match.  However, they should have gone with the Lawler v. Bret template from Summerslam 93, where the decision is reversed because Lawler beats Cole into a pulp after his win, and he's so pissed off and fired up that the referee has to disqualify him.  That makes Cole look like an even bigger pussy by claiming victory that way when clearly he was beaten senseless, plus fans get the satisfaction of watching Cole getting beaten into a pulp.