The Official TNA Discussion Thread

[Slagaholic]

I guess I'm the only guy watching Destination X, but Gen Me and MCMG tore the house down, which is good since the Ladder match was pretty meh.

And they follow it up with Nash/EY v Hall/Waltman.

Sigh..

[Linsolv]

I usually watch Pay Per Views after a few days. Procrastinators unite and all.

[Slagaholic]

WOLFPAC THEME!!! My favorite themesong ever

Unsurprising match, could have been a complete farce but it wasn't except for a terribly missed spot.

[haloed]

I'm watching, enjoyed the ladder match and Ultimate X was great!! Jeremy is amazing! Could of done without the obvious Nash/Young vs Band match ending.

[Slagaholic]

I'm loving heel Matt Morgan.

[Slagaholic]

I know alotta people hate him, but Angle's feud with Anderson has been the best 1 on 1 feud TNA has had in ages.

[Linsolv]

For the record, isn't that always the reaction everyone has to heel Morgan?

[haloed]

I know alotta people hate him, but Angle's feud with Anderson has been the best 1 on 1 feud TNA has had in ages.

I agree with this mostly, it has been a good feud. Probably the only consisent feud they've had since Hogan and Bischoff took over. Pretty good match and the feud looks far from over.

[Stennick]

HAHAHAHAHAHA what a finish.......wooooow

[Slagaholic]

And that was the definition of Sports Entertainment Finish lol

[haloed]

HAHAHAHAHAHA what a finish.......wooooow


Yea, that was an absolutely horrible way to end the show. Not a very strong PPV at all imo. Kinda regretting ordering it, could of picked it up on DVD later for less than I payed tonight and enjoyed the Ulimate X match more than once.

[PeterHilton]

WTF?????

hahahahaha...from the recap on 411mania.com

Flair to the apron, and PEPPER SPRAY TO THE REF. LOW BLOW by AJ, Flair tosses him the belt, and he nails Abyss with the title. AJ celebrates as the crowd chants for Hogan, and here he is. He brings out Earl Hebner to be the new ref. Hogan kicks Chelsea to the back and starts to wheel Flair to the back. They sing "Hey hey goodbye" for Flair. AJ gets the springboard 450 for 2! Abyss ABYSS'S UP! Chop by AJ, rights follow, YOU! Rights by Abyss, off the ropes, big boot and CHOKESLAM and AJ goes THROUGH the mat! Hebner rings the bell.

Hogan is out and hands Abyss the TNA Title, but Hebner takes it away. Flair wheels out to the ring, and Abyss GOOZLES him! He drags him in the ring, and Abyss falls into the hole in the ring. Nice. Hogan pepper sprays Flair. Desmond Wolfe hits the ring, Hogan and Abyss beat him down. Pepper spray (it didn't spray) to Wolfe. He falls into the hole. Flair falls into the hole.

The week before Wrestlemania...coming off the debacle that is the new "Monday night War" ...and THIS is the PPV they deliver???

Holy **** I remember the end of 2009 how strong TNA looked and how they'd finally FINALLY begun booking solid feuds and had wrapped up the MEM feud...Angle/Wolfe was stealing the show ans AJ was being given the match-based run as a champ he needed..and now?

The nWo reforming? Abyss as a new Hulk Hogan-esque character? The Morgan turn would be fine if he hadn't just turned a few motnhs back (maybe new viewers won't care).

And of course..that ending. :(

[jesterx7769]

haven't scene but by reading the recaps this was some of the worst crap on a PPV in a long time.

I think we all knew the Wolfpac thing was coming but were pleading it not to.

Then WTF is with this hole? Is it a metaphor for Impacts booking?

Remember when the destination X match was cool? Remember when people said this PPV was mainly going to focus on high action and the X division?

Needless to say I wont even bother DVR'ing Impact tomorrow, I'll catch the replay if I'm bored, sick of trying to figure this crap out.

[TommyDreamerFan]

well... uh....

...yeah, I could of supported it until it said Abyss fell in the hole. And the pepper spray.

Draw via shennegans? Okay so long as the match was good (I didn't order it, only due to my lack of cash or I would've loved too). But those botches killed it.

Did Hall actually look inshape in his tights? Ah who cares, just have him hang around if he must.

HOW THE HELL DO YOU NOT USE ROB VAN DAM ON THE SHOW? NOT EVEN AN INTERVIEW! A RUN-IN IN THE MAINEVENT! AN IMPROMPTU MATCH! YOU SHOULD BE USING HIM EVERY SINGLE DAMN SHOW YOU FOOLS!

Why would you book a Ladder match AND an ultimate X match? That's like booking a cage match then Hell In A Cell!

Hopefully this blunder will make TNA fight harder to improve.

[TommyDreamerFan]

haven't scene but by reading the recaps this was some of the worst crap on a PPV in a long time.

I think we all knew the Wolfpac thing was coming but were pleading it not to.

Then WTF is with this hole? Is it a metaphor for Impacts booking?

Remember when the destination X match was cool? Remember when people said this PPV was mainly going to focus on high action and the X division?

Needless to say I wont even bother DVR'ing Impact tomorrow, I'll catch the replay if I'm bored, sick of trying to figure this crap out.

You mean Elevation X? Are scaffold matches ever really good?

[jesterx7769]

No, I meant Destination X when the matches were good like this

http://vsplanet.net/multimedia/graphic/posters/destinationx2006.jpg

thought the same thing about the ladder match but was trying to keep my critiquing to a minimum.

[ECW 2.0]

lovein the fact that the wolfpac is back they never get old i think the ppv in a whole was probly a 6.5/10

[Linsolv]

Wow. That's kinda funny, that everyone's ragging on the PPV, and then someone else comes in and not only does he disagree, he doesn't argue or anything. Just comes out and says it clear as day.

[Tag01]

Yea, the whole show was about the X-Division. Except for most of the show. Horrible PPV. Decent here and there, competent bordering on good. Then nWo return ruined it for me. Then main event beyond ruined it for me. How do they think this is a good idea? When is someone going to file a missing person report on Samoa Joe? Ugh.

[SaySo]

I'm surprised that Hornswoggle and the Little People didn't come out of the hole.

[Sons of Kohral]

I'm surprised that Hornswoggle and the Little People didn't come out of the hole.

That's for next week.

I didn't see it, but from the write up, it sounded utterly ridiculous. Honestly, right now, I'm going to take a break from watching professional wrestling for a while.

[Self]

Loved the Flair promo. Loved the MCMG promo. Liked that Magnus and Williams got to talk. Love that my fellow Welshman is still Global Champ. Liked the Ladder match. Thought it was a decent enough opener. Loved the Ultimate X match (especially the superkick-flurry spot) I mark for both teams.

I just turned it off half-way through the Beer Money vs Hernandez & Morgan match. I love Beer Money, but they're clearly props here for a story I don't care about. Judging by the reception, the rest of the show holds no more charm for me. Time to visit spoiler town.

They gave me quite a few things I liked, so I won't bury TNA for this show.

[Blackman]

How the hell can they at the same time employ Flair, and have the NWO return at the same time, while he clairly hates the nWo.

This is SO bad booking-wise, it makes me wanna laugh.

Wait... that's a good thing, really :)

[justtxyank]

How the hell can they at the same time employ Flair, and have the NWO return at the same time, while he clairly hates the nWo.

This is SO bad booking-wise, it makes me wanna laugh.

Wait... that's a good thing, really :)

Yeah really! At least in the WWE they don't employ people that Vince "clearly" hates on screen, mirite?

The reforming of the nWo is stupid, but not because they also employ Flair who "hates" the nWo.

[PeterHilton]

Wow. That's kinda funny, that everyone's ragging on the PPV, and then someone else comes in and not only does he disagree, he doesn't argue or anything. Just comes out and says it clear as day.

Right. to be fair though this guy...

lovein the fact that the wolfpac is back they never get old i think the ppv in a whole was probly a 6.5/10

is the same as this guy..

lol some of you act like u really know wrestling its really funny to read things that people who have only watched wrestling and play tew say tna needs to do im sure eb knows what hes doing and trust me TNA is 10000000X more entertaining than wwe but really all of you smarks get a life i mean try getting friends or get out a little bit theres more to life than what you watch on wrestling and im glad eb dont listen to any of you nerds about "what he needs to do"

so yeah...

[Slagaholic]

I enjoyed the show, but then again it's starting to look more and more like their product is catering entirely to me and no one else.

Which I don't mind at all.

I must be the only guy in the world that enjoyed that ending.

[Linsolv]

For the record, when someone says "Smark." I am aware that it's a contraction of "smart mark," but there seem to be two types: The ROH type, who seem to think that if you're not genuinely hurting yourself you're not trying that hard; and then there's people with brains, who know it's fake but watch anyways.

Which one's right?

[Slagaholic]

So the rumor that's flying around now is Tommy Dreamer and Paul Heyman be brought in and Team 3D+Dreamer v The Wolfpac

I'd mark out like a surprise birthday party if this was to happen. Plus it'd mean no more Nasty Boys! I hope...

[justtxyank]

So the rumor that's flying around now is Tommy Dreamer and Paul Heyman be brought in and Team 3D+Dreamer v The Wolfpac

I'd mark out like a surprise birthday party if this was to happen. Plus it'd mean no more Nasty Boys! I hope...

Where do you see that rumor?

[Self]

For the record, when someone says "Smark." I am aware that it's a contraction of "smart mark," but there seem to be two types: The ROH type, who seem to think that if you're not genuinely hurting yourself you're not trying that hard; and then there's people with brains, who know it's fake but watch anyways.

Which one's right?

I'm not saying this is 'right', but this is how I make the distinction. "Smarks" watch wrestling matches and critique 'workrate' and 'push'. Marks don't. Both groups know its fake, but Marks watch wrestling on a more emotional and less analytical level. 99% of the folks on this site are what I'd call Smarks, because TEW is a deeply smarky game.

I mean no offense in the use of either of these words. Both Smarks and Marks are awesome. Different, but both great in equal measure.

[lazorbeak]

I'm not saying this is 'right', but this is how I make the distinction. "Smarks" watch wrestling matches and critique 'workrate' and 'push'. Marks don't. Both groups know its fake, but Marks watch wrestling on a more emotional and less analytical level. 99% of the folks on this site are what I'd call Smarks, because TEW is a deeply smarky game.

I mean no offense in the use of either of these words. Both Smarks and Marks are awesome. Different, but both great in equal measure.

I would agree except with the idea that marks know wrestling is fake. Pretty much by definition a mark thinks that some if not all of a product is really happening. On the other hand smarks have a bad habit of thinking nothing is real and making assumptions about the business. A recent example was the 'no unprotected chairshot' rule, where smarks complained that a "rule" is dumb to have for workers since apparently every action they do is scripted.

Mark can also be used for people who blindly cheer for an inferior product, but that's not really what a mark is in the traditional sense.

[PeterHilton]

I'm not saying this is 'right', but this is how I make the distinction. "Smarks" watch wrestling matches and critique 'workrate' and 'push'. Marks don't. Both groups know its fake, but Marks watch wrestling on a more emotional and less analytical level. 99% of the folks on this site are what I'd call Smarks, because TEW is a deeply smarky game.

I mean no offense in the use of either of these words. Both Smarks and Marks are awesome. Different, but both great in equal measure.

Mostly agree. i do think it's possible to watch analytically and not be a workrate snob

As a for instance: I absolutley understand the justification behind most of what the WWE does even when I don't enjoy it. So i'm not being a 'mark', but I'm also not going to hammer them for appealing to the vast majority of their audience.

[PeterHilton]

So the rumor that's flying around now is Tommy Dreamer and Paul Heyman be brought in and Team 3D+Dreamer v The Wolfpac

I'd mark out like a surprise birthday party if this was to happen. Plus it'd mean no more Nasty Boys! I hope...

Where do you see that rumor?

Yea, I'm not seeing that anywhere. You sure that's not some TNA fantasy booking?

[spikedave]

I enjoyed the show, but then again it's starting to look more and more like their product is catering entirely to me and no one else.

Which I don't mind at all.

I must be the only guy in the world that enjoyed that ending.
I have same feeling every week when i watch impact!

[Linsolv]

Quote of the day: "What did viewers do to piss of TNA bookers?"

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/The_Specialists_34/article_40010.shtml

[shawn michaels 82]

Quote of the day: "What did viewers do to piss of TNA bookers?"

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/The_Specialists_34/article_40010.shtml

Indeed! Now that is a good review. I think that TNA bookers have truly lost their minds... Wich means that nothing will change, the WWE will not have credible competition and it will remain stale...Dear God...HELP US! :eek:

[Tag01]

I thought Samoa Joe joining MEM was the low point. Looking like I'm wrong...

[sabataged]

Possible spoiler for impact...

I just read on 411 that Eric Bischoff is going to run a career vs career match and the rumor is that it will be Foley vs Jarrett

End spoiler

[Hyde Hill]

For the record, when someone says "Smark." I am aware that it's a contraction of "smart mark," but there seem to be two types: The ROH type, who seem to think that if you're not genuinely hurting yourself you're not trying that hard; and then there's people with brains, who know it's fake but watch anyways.

Which one's right?

They are all smarks only different form. you also missed out the IWC I know its fake so I will critizise everything smarks which are the most numurus on the scene. I generally differantiate them between blind smarks and educated smarks. ROH smarks are a rare breed imho.

Liked des x as usual good and bad stuff from TNA so a 6.5 would be fair. Finish was very very bad as was the sloppiness in the Band match but won't bomb a whole ppv just for that.

[Hyde Hill]

Indeed! Now that is a good review. I think that TNA bookers have truly lost their minds... Wich means that nothing will change, the WWE will not have credible competition and it will remain stale...Dear God...HELP US! :eek:

Yeah and the torch isn't some rag on the level of TMZ that is anti TNA? right? lolz.

[The Final Countdown]

I can't decide what was worse: that terrible ending, or the fact that Jeff Hardy, RVD and Sting were all MIA. Seriously, how are none of those guys on the show?

[Linsolv]

Is there some better source? I almost got a subscription to PWI but then I figured out that it would be smarter to just read a blog. But I only found PWTorch.

Is there one that's considerably better?

[Linsolv]

I can't decide what was worse: that terrible ending, or the fact that Jeff Hardy, RVD and Sting were all MIA. Seriously, how are none of those guys on the show?

Because, Bryan Danielson. Wolfpac and the Nastys are expensive, and we can't afford to pay everyone d***it.

PS. This was a joke.

[TommyDreamerFan]

lovein the fact that the wolfpac is back they never get old i think the ppv in a whole was probly a 6.5/10

I'd knock it down to 5 for the botched finish. Not a terrible PPV by any means, but they can't afford to be doing this kind of **** right now. TNA needs hit after hit after hit to slowly gain that fanbase.

I understand wrestler's make mistakes. Sure Undertaker got lit on fire PPV, but way to go Abyss! Way to screw up your biggest push you ever got. Total Ultimo Dragon moment.

[TommyDreamerFan]

Because, Bryan Danielson. Wolfpac and the Nastys are expensive, and we can't afford to pay everyone d***it.

Good question. Anyone know how much The Nasty's are getting payed? Maybe they're working cheap out of favor to Hogan?

[The Swanton825]

I understand wrestler's make mistakes. Sure Undertaker got lit on fire PPV, but way to go Abyss! Way to screw up your biggest push you ever got. Total Ultimo Dragon moment.
Huh? I'm sorry, maybe I just don't remember the time Ultimo Dragon was lifted up by one of WWE's top faces and then proceeded to screw up the push soon after. I only remember the part where Vince only hired him to brag about his ability to sign anyone, even going as far as to edit out Dragon's cheers when he got tired of him.

[Tag01]

Man this beer money heel turn sucks. They went from getting a huge pop to just confused silence.

[Linsolv]

Watching iMPACT. Ric Flair just came out with AJ a minute ago, doing his usual head-bobbing thing. Except that with him in a wheelchair, it looked like he had Huntington's Disease or something. Someone should tell him.

[Slagaholic]

Oh for christ sakes the stupid X signal. Godammit.

[GDE71]

That was a sweet Main Event...........

[Slagaholic]

I have to say, tonight was definitely an improvement. Other than working the Hernandez broken neck that's already getting about as old as Kurt's, it was a solid show.

Great TV Main Event, and two of the thirty Bischoff storylines are now over...or at least will be done by Lockdown.

Then again...I'm probably still in the minority.

[TracyBrooksFan]

Impact was very well done and good tonight

[Linsolv]

Where is the angle with Foley going?

It's probably obvious, but I figure he's not really gone, so I wonder where his story's going from here.

[Stennick]

Tonight is the second week in a row TNA has done a good job and tonight I'd say their show was better than Vinces.

I didn't see the pay per view but why wasn't Angle on the show? Angle was the top guy in the company before this transition and now I barely hear from him. Is that his choice, theirs?

Also where was "the band" and why are RVD and Hardy being thrown against everybody in TNA? What happened to Sting vs. RVD? He viciously beat him down two weeks ago, RVD beat him down a week ago and now its over and done with? Where was Desmond Wolfe?

I liked the show but its very clear their roster and even storylines are too many for two hours of television. Where was the MCMG? Where was Team 3D? Mr. Anderson? The X Division?

Good show but they have got to get better time managment down. IMO they coudl have cut out the second RVD/Hardy promo and the Beer Money promo. The match was made in the ring, challenge accepted, now have the announcers shill it and use that time devoted to something else.

None the less I enjoyed TNA more than WWE for the first time in a long time last night. I'm going to Lockdown so I'm glad their picking up the pace now.

[Slagaholic]

Angle is on a reduced schedule. I can't imagine he'd be doing much 24 hours after a PPV.

See, I don't think TNA needs to cover every storyline every week. I'm OK with not doing every storyline every week, it give others more time to develop. Video packages to remind the fans about whats happened should be fine if there's no in ring or backstage action one week.

At least that's what I do in TEW...my digital fans don't seem to mind :P

Plus, TNA really HAS to have a ton of storylines since they have to fill 3 Hours on PPV every month, and nowadays every match has to have a story attached. It's hard to do 6-8 storylines a week for 4 weeks.

WWE has what 8 hours of TV time a week? Of course every match at the PPV will have a storyline for it. I think it's best for TNA to not fill each week up with stories and to give some stories a week off. Can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't expect people to buy PPVs where half the matches have a storyline attached, and you can't complain that some storylines were forgotten during their only 2 hours of TV each week. I doubt I'm the only one who thinks that since TNA stopped trying to fit almost every single storyline into one show, it's been getting better.

[Linsolv]

Come to think of it, the past 2 months reminds me of when I play TEW.

I spend like, a month just giving random people title shots, making feuds that last 1 show, and all around running around like a drunken retard.

Then, after a while, I suddenly figure out that I'm supposed to have foresight and everything picks up from there.

[Stennick]

I'm not upset by the fact that their not doing it I just think there is still time wasted in their show.

Its getting better and I found it more enjoyable than the E this week.

I would have liked to see some X Division action as well as a continuation of the Wolfpac story beyond Eric Young naming two guys that had nothing to do with his storyline as his tag team partners.

I can appreciate a slow build and wait as some of these storylines give way into getting the X Division guys as well as others back in big storylines however it doesn't mean I don't want to see them on the show.

I think Alex Shelly had huge star written all over him when he was paling around with Nash a few years back and hooking up into the tag team with Sabin has really seen them do less as a team as they did as singles stars. In 2003 Sabin was the hottest X Division star they had now he's an every once in a while tag team guy.

[TommyDreamerFan]

No complaints about TNA at all this week. None. This was a solid show and this is what they need to be doing every week.

Now lets lay back and see if they at least do another .8 this week.

Huh? I'm sorry, maybe I just don't remember the time Ultimo Dragon was lifted up by one of WWE's top faces and then proceeded to screw up the push soon after. I only remember the part where Vince only hired him to brag about his ability to sign anyone, even going as far as to edit out Dragon's cheers when he got tired of him.

His Wrestlemania XX slip on the entrance way.

[Remianen]

Angle is on a reduced schedule. I can't imagine he'd be doing much 24 hours after a PPV.

See, I don't think TNA needs to cover every storyline every week. I'm OK with not doing every storyline every week, it give others more time to develop. Video packages to remind the fans about whats happened should be fine if there's no in ring or backstage action one week.

At least that's what I do in TEW...my digital fans don't seem to mind :P

Plus, TNA really HAS to have a ton of storylines since they have to fill 3 Hours on PPV every month, and nowadays every match has to have a story attached. It's hard to do 6-8 storylines a week for 4 weeks.

WWE has what 8 hours of TV time a week? Of course every match at the PPV will have a storyline for it. I think it's best for TNA to not fill each week up with stories and to give some stories a week off. Can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't expect people to buy PPVs where half the matches have a storyline attached, and you can't complain that some storylines were forgotten during their only 2 hours of TV each week. I doubt I'm the only one who thinks that since TNA stopped trying to fit almost every single storyline into one show, it's been getting better.

I think this strategy has a place...with a certain fanbase. However, you must remember that, as typically depicted, the mainstream fan is very much a 'short attention span' type of viewer. You book yourself into a corner when you go with alternating storyline presences. What happens when the feud that didn't make it onto this week's Impact doesn't make it onto next week's because someone has some 'awesome idea' that MUST appear? This week, RVD vs Sting wasn't focused on and next week, RVD is in a match to advance a totally unrelated (up to this point) storyline. So, how do you remind fans that RVD is in a program with Sting? Do you have him attack RVD (and thus, impact the match that's supposed to advance the storyline you are focusing on)? Do you have him run-in (and thus, follow your typical booking pattern oddly reminiscent of a past promotion)? A simple video isn't going to put over the fact that these two men are at odds. You can't really give Sting a promo since he did what he intended to do (beat RVD senseless) so what's his dog in this fight?

I just don't understand the logic that goes into TNA's booking. The Beer Money turn, the Morgan/Hernandez split, the whole kerfuffle surrounding the (apparently worthless) World title, Rob Terry, the X-Division, Samoa "Where Are They Now" Joe, and what they hope to gain by giving TV time to Hall, Waltman, Knobbs, and Saggs. I also don't know what's going on with the men's titles. As much as Hyde might want to think that the Torch article is totally off base, you have to wonder what the heck is going on when the world title "doesn't matter", the tag titles are basically props (in their portrayal), the Global title is held by someone the fans don't know and appear ambivalent about, and the X title is....well, the X title.

[TommyDreamerFan]

When I was running threw Bischoff's book as a bathroom read, in it he says the only useful thing he got out of Turner Market research is that most fans like wrestling the best when it's unpredictable. Because of this he doesn't believe in advertising in advance what'll be on next weeks show, he wants to put on the best show possible so that you'd want to watch it just to see what happens.

Who said Sting is in a program with RVD? Sting beat him down, RVD beat him in revenge. It seems more like Sting is in a program with Hogan and trying to keep Sting as much a mystery as possible.

Plus I agree with what someone else said. I'd rather have a solid show where not every feud is touched upon every week then clusterscrew like we had on the first impact. Tonights iMPACT! was very well paced out and I very much enjoyed that. Every angle felt important tonight.

I like seeing the seeds being sowed for the Hogan/Bischoff feud.

EDIT: I find a wheel chair bound Ric Flair INCREDIBLY amusing. I'd keep him that way if I was booking, if only because it's incredibly amusing to see whacky Flair bobbing his head in the chair yelling "HOE-GAIN!"

[GDE71]

I'd love for TNA to get a 1-hour show on Thursdays that focused on the Knockouts and the X-Division.

[liontamer]

My prediction is that we'll see Sting interfere and Abyss make the save and then we have the 4v4 set up for Lockdown and since it's technically Hogan's team and Flair's team which is captained by Sting it advances the Hogan/Sting feud too.

I'm also predicting a Hogan/Bischoff Feud before the yr is over. EB, Beer Money, and the Band vs Hogan, Hardy, Abyss, RVD and maybe even the Nasties.

And I can't put my finger on why, but I actually found this week less entertaining than most even though there were some things I thought improved (i.e. better build towards the main event, although I'm not sure how many nonTNA fans regard Hernandez and Morgan as big enough names for that slot). Curious to see what the Jarrett/Foley segment pulls in. And flipping back and forth there wasn't much on Raw that kept me from going back to TNA. Not really sure what to rate this, maybe a .95

[jesterx7769]

DVR'd it last night since theres no replay and watched it this morning since I had to get up early for the puppy.

Compared to what they have been doing Impact was good, there are still holes which I think are stopping them from brining in more fans. B/C lets face it,

I agree with Remi about time management, their time management is awful. They dont have to do every storyline every week, but fans dont have to watch everyweek either. This may be all well and good if they had an actually good sized fanbase but they dont. Their fanbase is the people that have liked TNA and stick by them no matter what.

A big example on this is the JJ/Foley match. Why? No seriously, why? TNA fans might like it but if this match wasnt on, the TNA fans would still like it. Does this match really draw in anyone watching RAW? Or people who used to like TNA that dont anymore? Those people hated Jarrett they ran him off TV when Christian finally beat him. Foley? Come on. These guys are not big draws and they got ALOT of TV Time tonight. B/c as I mentioned earlier, its fine if people that watched the show liked this segment, but there is other stuff they like to on the show that made them watch.

Angle/Anderson: They couldnt have Anderson give a 30 second promo on how Angle used his dog tag thing? I am 100% sure they will touch on this next week (at tonights taping) but what about any potential new viewers who may have been getting into it due to Angle or Anderson being WWE guys? These are the type of people TNA hasnt been able to keep (just look at the ratings for the past 2 years) We talk about how if they just get some WWE guys people will watch, well here they are, now put them on TV. And the limited schedule is a joke, they are both in town b/c of the PPV Sunday and the taping tonight, just pull one aside and have them cut a quick promo.

X Division: They do a show that focused alot on it then the only metion of it is Moore standing in the background. What? Not even really a mention of how great the match was? Not huge but once again this is one of the things that make them different than WWE for peole that looking for differences and its not there.

Tag Titles: Beer Money lose but keep getting pushed by Bishoff but lose. Hern/Morgan keep the titles but then Hern. gets his neck broken, meaning those titles wont be defended any time soon. MCMG put on a good PPV match to be #1 contenders then arent on the show. It looks like it will be a 2 on 1 match for the tag titles. Wouldt a Beer Money/MCMG feud and a Morgan/Homicide feud make more sense? Especially considering it looks like thats where their going anyone just in a much more confusing way.

While the show itself was good for what it was and TNA fans could enjoy it I just really do not see what the companies long term goal is and wonder if they are going to be in the same situation in a year. I don't see how they are doing anything to differentiate themselves from WWE enough to get viewers since the only viewers they have are the same ones they have had for a long time. If people like The Band, Nastyz, Foley, Hogan, Bischoff on your tv thats fine, I'm not getting into what you like, but do you or anyone really think people are going to stop watching RAW to tune in to see them? Or that people that have been away from wrestling are going to come back to see the same people that were on TV 10 years ago? They haven't really built anyone in their three months. Styles looks like the most piss poor champion ever, Pope's had so little TV after his first two weeks, Abyss looks like a fool, who have then pushed? Once again, if people like it then good for you for being able to enjoy it, but if you are watching RAW and flip on this TNA thing to check it out and see Abyss intimidating Hogan and Styles coming out dressed like Flair are you really going to tune in? Its not different at all! People have already seen this.

On a plus side the womens tag match was good since i thought it was going to be a mess when they first started, and right now that division is the only difference between TNA and WWE. Being unpredictable doesnt make you different, it makes you unpredictable (if thats what they are) having a bunch of workers that used to work for you competition just means you haven't grown your own in two and half years of being on primetime TV. Being the only other wrestling show on major cable doesnt make you a different product, it just means your the only other wrestling show on calbe TV. I'm just really worried its going to be the exact same in a year with the TNA loyalists still enjoying as they have for two and a half years but no one else caring.

[liontamer]

DVR'd it last night since theres no replay and watched it this morning since I had to get up early for the puppy.

Compared to what they have been doing Impact was good, there are still holes which I think are stopping them from brining in more fans. B/C lets face it,

I agree with Remi about time management, their time management is awful. They dont have to do every storyline every week, but fans dont have to watch everyweek either. This may be all well and good if they had an actually good sized fanbase but they dont. Their fanbase is the people that have liked TNA and stick by them no matter what.

A big example on this is the JJ/Foley match. Why? No seriously, why? TNA fans might like it but if this match wasnt on, the TNA fans would still like it. Does this match really draw in anyone watching RAW? Or people who used to like TNA that dont anymore? Those people hated Jarrett they ran him off TV when Christian finally beat him. Foley? Come on. These guys are not big draws and they got ALOT of TV Time tonight. B/c as I mentioned earlier, its fine if people that watched the show liked this segment, but there is other stuff they like to on the show that made them watch.

Angle/Anderson: They couldnt have Anderson give a 30 second promo on how Angle used his dog tag thing? I am 100% sure they will touch on this next week (at tonights taping) but what about any potential new viewers who may have been getting into it due to Angle or Anderson being WWE guys? These are the type of people TNA hasnt been able to keep (just look at the ratings for the past 2 years) We talk about how if they just get some WWE guys people will watch, well here they are, now put them on TV. And the limited schedule is a joke, they are both in town b/c of the PPV Sunday and the taping tonight, just pull one aside and have them cut a quick promo.

X Division: They do a show that focused alot on it then the only metion of it is Moore standing in the background. What? Not even really a mention of how great the match was? Not huge but once again this is one of the things that make them different than WWE for peole that looking for differences and its not there.

Tag Titles: Beer Money lose but keep getting pushed by Bishoff but lose. Hern/Morgan keep the titles but then Hern. gets his neck broken, meaning those titles wont be defended any time soon. MCMG put on a good PPV match to be #1 contenders then arent on the show. It looks like it will be a 2 on 1 match for the tag titles.

While the show itself was good for what it was and TNA fans could enjoy it I just really do not see what the companies long term goal is and wonder if they are going to be in the same situation in a year. I don't see how they are doing anything to differentiate themselves from WWE enough to get viewers since the only viewers they have are the same ones they have had for a long time. If people like The Band, Nastyz, Foley, Hogan, Bischoff on your tv thats fine, I'm not getting into what you like, but do you or anyone really think people are going to stop watching RAW to tune in to see them? Or that people that have been away from wrestling are going to come back to see the same people that were on TV 10 years ago? They haven't really built anyone in their three months. Styles looks like the most piss poor champion ever, Pope's had so little TV after his first two weeks, Abyss looks like a fool, who have then pushed? Once again, if people like it then good for you for being able to enjoy it, but if you are watching RAW and flip on this TNA thing to check it out and see Abyss intimidating Hogan and Styles coming out dressed like Flair are you really going to tune in? Its not different at all! People have already seen this.

On a plus side the womens tag match was good since i thought it was going to be a mess when they first started, and right now that division is the only difference between TNA and WWE. Being unpredictable doesnt make you different, it makes you unpredictable (if thats what they are) having a bunch of workers that used to work for you competition just means you haven't grown your own in two and half years of being on primetime TV. Being the only other wrestling show on major cable doesnt make you a different product, it just means your the only other wrestling show on calbe TV. I'm just really worried its going to be the exact same in a year with the TNA loyalists still enjoying as they have for two and a half years but no one else caring.

I would argue that Foley is still a draw because he makes a lot of appearances and has his books. People who don't like wrestling still recognize him, where as they'd have no clue who JJ is. And I agree, there was no build to the match and it was somewhat pointless as are both of their programs with EB.

Also, while I know kind of what you're saying I find your argument a little ironic/contradicting.

You gripe that they try to squeeze all of the feuds into one show and then go on to grip about all of the feuds and storylines left off of the show? Which is it, do you want to see all of the feuds or not? Or is your gripe more about which feuds made the show?

[jesterx7769]

Where did I say the try squeeze them all on the show? I said time management. JJ/Foley/ Bichoff had a whole crap load of time. Bischoff/JJ at the beginning including commericals was close to 20 minutes after it was all said and done. Then we had the match later. Shorten segments/storylines for other segments, time management, they arent using their two hours properly. This why I criticize people like Foley, yeah people recognize and he might be cool to see every now and then but they're on TV SO much time, cant they shorten stuff down?

[shawn michaels 82]

Come to think of it, the past 2 months reminds me of when I play TEW.

I spend like, a month just giving random people title shots, making feuds that last 1 show, and all around running around like a drunken retard.

Then, after a while, I suddenly figure out that I'm supposed to have foresight and everything picks up from there.


You and me. :D

[Self]

Man this beer money heel turn sucks. They went from getting a huge pop to just confused silence.

I find TNA's entire concept of 'heel' to be a bit suspect. It seems like Hogan & Bisch came in and just arbitrarily decided who should be heels, without listening to the fans or indeed common sense.

Beer Money were a solid heel tandem, who became so entertaining they got over as babyfaces. They were hot. The TNA crowd really dug them. Then one day we're expected to boo them, for no reason other than "they're heels now"? I'm pretty sure Motor City Machine Guns are supposed to be heels too. It's like folks in charge thought "brash + young = heel" without noticing that the TNA crowd LOVE THEM. Luckily, MCMG either don't want, or don't know how, to play heel, so nobody's seemed to notice their turn. AJ Styles. TNA's homegrown hero. I can sort of understand a 'turncoat' villain, but did they realise how much of an uphill struggle it would be to turn AJ? He's pure babyface, TNA fans love him, and doesn't have the promo skills to master a proper turn. It's like trying to turn Rey Mysterio. Technically doable, but the rewards don't nearly make up for the effort involved. How much money is heel AJ capable of drawing, compared to babyface AJ? Sting is similar. TNA fans love him. What's the point of the heel turn? Where's the benefit?

When WWE turn top guys, it almost always works out right. Batista was stale, he needed to turn, he had a definite turning point, and he's since become AWESOME. It paid off. CM Punk was the same. Stale - Turning Point - Awesome. Chris Jericho, Stale - Turn - Awesome. With TNA... they take guys with plenty of gas left in the babyface tank, put in a weak or non-existant turning point, and get... shades of confusing gray. Granted the audience are difference. WWE fans are more casual, willing to follow trends and storylines as they're 'supposed to', while TNA fans largely cheer for whoever they want. More 'difficult'. Still, the attitude to turning folks heel in TNA boggles my mind.

Monday Night is awful for me schedule wise, so I haven't watched Impact, but from the spoilers it sounded okay. I'll track down the Main Event for sure.

[jesterx7769]

I agree with everything you said Self and it kinda goes with what I was saying about long term. Right now they are throwing lots of stuff together or as Remi (I think) as described a few time, throwing crap on the wall to see what sticks trying to hit their own gold or something.

Eventually they are going to have to settle down since people with ADD is good for throwing stuff around, but at the same having ADD means people can get sick of it just as fast as well.

Was Impact a lot better than what they've been doing? Yes. But can they really just keep throwing workers and storylines together that dont really make sense or flow forever and expect to hit that 1.5 ratings mark?

Whoever mentioned the TEW comparision I couldnt agree more. What do we do with Hardy and RVD since they're so hott off debuting? I dont know, lets put them in tag matches because that will get a good match rating (which it did). We turned Sting heel now what? I dont, but he's over so we have to use him, lets just have him keep mysteriously feuding with Hogan since they're our only A overness guys. Ran out of time, crap, well I still have 40 minutes of dark time so lets put the entire X division including our champ whos been on Impact 5 minutes in the past month on the preshow along with Desmond Wolfe since we dont need him, he fell in a hole remember? besides his valet is now Flairs valet and more over anyway. Angle and Anderson are our hottest storyline and is actually making sense? Vacation day! wait wait, we have to shorten something so our Global champion can have a two minute match adn bill him as the next #1 contender, hmm I really hate to only give Bischoff and Hogan 78% of the show instead of 80% but I guess we can cut two minutes off them dangit.

The sad thing I dont even view that paragraph as being critical. As I said Impact got a good "show grade" but what are they doing to get people to tune in each week long term to start getting ratings beyond the people that long term fans that watch each week?

To clarify earlier about time management, i will ingore how much time Bisch/JJ/Foley got on the show and use an easier example. Take out the Beer Money promo of them hyping their match that was just created 5 minutes ago getting hyped and throw Ken Anderson in their slot. Time management doesn't have to be squeezing stuff together its just taking time away from people that already get a lot of time on a show for those not getting any.

[Tag01]

The Beer Money turn was awful. Pointless and really killed two of the few "over" guys they have.

The Sting turn, however, was good. But I felt like they took their foot off the pedal since then. Sting needs to keep acting like an ass.

And MCMG are heels? I ask that seriously. I never picked up on that, once.

[Linsolv]

MCMG come off kind of heelish, but not really.

I was thinking this morning; Above, someone mentioned EB's strategy is to "be unpredictable." There's a fundamental flaw in that strategy, though, because BEING LOGICAL, and doing things that MAKE SENSE means being predictable. Funny thing, that.

[Slagaholic]

I think this strategy has a place...with a certain fanbase. However, you must remember that, as typically depicted, the mainstream fan is very much a 'short attention span' type of viewer. You book yourself into a corner when you go with alternating storyline presences. What happens when the feud that didn't make it onto this week's Impact doesn't make it onto next week's because someone has some 'awesome idea' that MUST appear? This week, RVD vs Sting wasn't focused on and next week, RVD is in a match to advance a totally unrelated (up to this point) storyline. So, how do you remind fans that RVD is in a program with Sting? Do you have him attack RVD (and thus, impact the match that's supposed to advance the storyline you are focusing on)? Do you have him run-in (and thus, follow your typical booking pattern oddly reminiscent of a past promotion)? A simple video isn't going to put over the fact that these two men are at odds. You can't really give Sting a promo since he did what he intended to do (beat RVD senseless) so what's his dog in this fight?

What pertaining RVD and Sting really needs resolution? RVD exacted revenge, Sting turned heel. It wasn't forgotten, they just aren't in a 1 on 1 program, and really they never were.

I just don't understand the logic that goes into TNA's booking. The Beer Money turn, the Morgan/Hernandez split, the whole kerfuffle surrounding the (apparently worthless) World title, Rob Terry, the X-Division, Samoa "Where Are They Now" Joe, and what they hope to gain by giving TV time to Hall, Waltman, Knobbs, and Saggs. I also don't know what's going on with the men's titles. As much as Hyde might want to think that the Torch article is totally off base, you have to wonder what the heck is going on when the world title "doesn't matter", the tag titles are basically props (in their portrayal), the Global title is held by someone the fans don't know and appear ambivalent about, and the X title is....well, the X title.
Beer Money's turn into Bischoff's goons hasn't been that bad, at least they're on TV. Morgan/Hernandez split HAD to happen eventually. Rob Terry is looking like a long term investment, he's gotten about 5 mins every 2 weeks on TV, is that really something to complain about?

Well in Sports Entertainment the stories always supercede the titles, but I don't get why you feel the World title doesn't matter.

[Bigpapa42]

What pertaining RVD and Sting really needs resolution? RVD exacted revenge, Sting turned heel. It wasn't forgotten, they just aren't in a 1 on 1 program, and really they never were.

Which makes the entire debut a waste then. To have RVD steal a cheap win and Sting respond with a 10-minute beatdown with a baseball bat... To not do anything with it is ridiculous.

[PeterHilton]

Which makes the entire debut a waste then. To have RVD steal a cheap win and Sting respond with a 10-minute beatdown with a baseball bat... To not do anything with it is ridiculous.

Which makes it par for the course for TNA and its diehard fans.

[shawn michaels 82]

What pertaining RVD and Sting really needs resolution? RVD exacted revenge, Sting turned heel. It wasn't forgotten, they just aren't in a 1 on 1 program, and really they never were.

And there lies the problem!

[Slagaholic]

Which makes the entire debut a waste then. To have RVD steal a cheap win and Sting respond with a 10-minute beatdown with a baseball bat... To not do anything with it is ridiculous.

Saying RVD's debut was a waste is a bit much. RVD did to Sting what Sting did to RVD. I doubt Sting is going to be on TV every week, and RVD is so over that the beatdown didn't hurt him at all. And they did do something with it, you just weren't satisfied with it I suppose. Sting beat RVD's ass for 10-minutes, RVD beat Sting's ass for 10-minutes.

From the start the storyline was Sting vs TNA, not Sting vs RVD.

I just don't think that every single attack has to create a long-term feud. Sting didn't show up and attack RVD, he showed up and attacked Hogan/Abyss. He had a match with RVD because he pissed off Dixie Carter, lost quickly, and beat the crap out of him to get back at TNA/Hogan. The next week RVD beat the crap out of Sting as retribution.

So now RVD HAS to be in a program with Sting otherwise his entire run in TNA is going to be a waste when it just started? C'MON!

[The Swanton825]

His Wrestlemania XX slip on the entrance way.
Oh right, duh!

[PeterHilton]

What pertaining RVD and Sting really needs resolution? RVD exacted revenge, Sting turned heel.

See...I don't get this at all. Sting has never ever worked as a heel, he's been put over as the defender of TNA for his entire run there, and really the only reason he's a "heel" is because hes' going after Hogan...a character that quite a few people in the audience are rooting against.

Sting returning to feud with Flair and AJ because he felt betrayed that AJ turned heel after Sting "passed the torch" would've made far more sense.

Beer Money's turn into Bischoff's goons hasn't been that bad, at least they're on TV. Morgan/Hernandez split HAD to happen eventually.

Again..why? Or more to the point...why throw them together in the beginning?

It's a feud to move two guys up the card when the only reason they were in the team was because no one had any idea what to do with them in the first place.

Rob Terry is looking like a long term investment, he's gotten about 5 mins every 2 weeks on TV, is that really something to complain about?



Yes. Because he's awful. This is a case where the booking makes sense, but pushing a no-talent roided up freak with limited charisma seems like a move that would be better in the 80s. Especially becaus I have no desire to see him move up the card by going over someone like Desmond Wolfe.

[PeterHilton]

So now RVD HAS to be in a program with Sting otherwise his entire run in TNA is going to be a waste when it just started? C'MON!

It's Booking 101.

The two exchange attacks, which leads to promos and confrontations in order to lead up to a big blow off match.

The confrontations and attacks take place on TV. These create interest.

The fact that a feud is happening between two HUGE names that have never worked against each other (a rarity these days) generates viewers and possibly helps ratings.

Weeks of build-up make people want to PAY MONEY to watch the final match on PPV.

It's a waste of opportunity.It's illogical and stupid booking. And, as someone else noted, the fact that it's "unpredictable" does not in fact make it good.

[Slagaholic]

See...I don't get this at all. Sting has never ever worked as a heel, he's been put over as the defender of TNA for his entire run there, and really the only reason he's a "heel" is because hes' going after Hogan...a character that quite a few people in the audience are rooting against.
He wasn't a heel in the Main Event Mafia?

Sting returning to feud with Flair and AJ because he felt betrayed that AJ turned heel after Sting "passed the torch" would've made far more sense.
I agree.

Again..why? Or more to the point...why throw them together in the beginning?
Is this about Beer Money or Morgan/Hernandez?

It's a feud to move two guys up the card when the only reason they were in the team was because no one had any idea what to do with them in the first place.
That's true.


Yes. Because he's awful. This is a case where the booking makes sense, but pushing a no-talent roided up freak with limited charisma seems like a move that would be better in the 80s. Especially becaus I have no desire to see him move up the card by going over someone like Desmond Wolfe.
Well...I think he's hot so I can't hate his push. When did Rob Terry go over Desmond Wolfe?

[Slagaholic]

It's Booking 101.

The two exchange attacks, which leads to promos and confrontations in order to lead up to a big blow off match.

The confrontations and attacks take place on TV. These create interest.

The fact that a feud is happening between two HUGE names that have never worked against each other (a rarity these days) generates viewers and possibly helps ratings.

Weeks of build-up make people want to PAY MONEY to watch the final match on PPV.

It's a waste of opportunity.It's illogical and stupid booking. And, as someone else noted, the fact that it's "unpredictable" does not in fact make it good.

Except the feud was NEVER exclusively RVD vs Sting. And for all we know they're still planning on doing an RVD vs Sting program. There was one week of no RVD v Sting confrontation and it's just become assumed that the whole idea was dropped.

[shawn michaels 82]

What pertaining RVD and Sting really needs resolution? RVD exacted revenge, Sting turned heel.

Again...there lies the problem. There is absolutely no point in it.

[smurphy1014]

Is this about Beer Money or Morgan/Hernandez?

I agree with PeterHilton on this one. Why put them (Morgan/Hernandez) together to have them split shortly there after? Furthermore, why split up LAX so you can "push" Hernandez only to have him team with Morgan?

[PeterHilton]

He wasn't a heel in the Main Event Mafia?

Worked as in "he's never been effective"

No..I don't think he was effective in the MEM.


Well...I think he's hot so I can't hate his push. When did Rob Terry go over Desmond Wolfe?

I meant Wolfe as an example. If you push Terry that piece of crap is going to have to go over some fairly talented midcard heels.

And I don't care about his looks. He sucks.

[PeterHilton]

Except the feud was NEVER exclusively RVD vs Sting. And for all we know they're still planning on doing an RVD vs Sting program. There was one week of no RVD v Sting confrontation and it's just become assumed that the whole idea was dropped.

It's being assumed because we're used to TNA's shoddy booking.

[Bigpapa42]

Saying RVD's debut was a waste is a bit much. RVD did to Sting what Sting did to RVD. I doubt Sting is going to be on TV every week, and RVD is so over that the beatdown didn't hurt him at all. And they did do something with it, you just weren't satisfied with it I suppose. Sting beat RVD's ass for 10-minutes, RVD beat Sting's ass for 10-minutes.

From the start the storyline was Sting vs TNA, not Sting vs RVD.

I just don't think that every single attack has to create a long-term feud. Sting didn't show up and attack RVD, he showed up and attacked Hogan/Abyss. He had a match with RVD because he pissed off Dixie Carter, lost quickly, and beat the crap out of him to get back at TNA/Hogan. The next week RVD beat the crap out of Sting as retribution.

So now RVD HAS to be in a program with Sting otherwise his entire run in TNA is going to be a waste when it just started? C'MON!

It was a waste, in my opinion. The way it was done was a waste. It would have been a well-worked debut if they were going to feud. If they aren't going to feud, then what's the point? Not every beatdown needs retribution. But a 10-minute beatdown with a bat certainly does. And where did Sting get beatdown by RVD for 10 minutes? I missed that part

Where did I say that RVD's run in TNA would be a waste? I think his debut was wasted. They brought him out in a way that gave him momentum, and then basically killed that momentum with the post-match beatdown. If Sting gets in a couple of shots and then leaves off, or maybe gets fought off by RVD. But no, he just destroys RVD until Hogan shows up. As a viewer, I saw the entire segment as reasserting that Hogan and his feud are more important than RVD.

[shawn michaels 82]

It was a waste, in my opinion. The way it was done was a waste. It would have been a well-worked debut if they were going to feud. If they aren't going to feud, then what's the point? Not every beatdown needs retribution. But a 10-minute beatdown with a bat certainly does. And where did Sting get beatdown by RVD for 10 minutes? I missed that part

Where did I say that RVD's run in TNA would be a waste? I think his debut was wasted. They brought him out in a way that gave him momentum, and then basically killed that momentum with the post-match beatdown. If Sting gets in a couple of shots and then leaves off, or maybe gets fought off by RVD. But no, he just destroys RVD until Hogan shows up. As a viewer, I saw the entire segment as reasserting that Hogan and his feud are more important than RVD.


Don't doubt it. We're talking about the guy that still thinks nowadays that he is still the most over worker in the whole world. So, yeah...pretty much he thinks he is more important then anyone, although he is like...1024 years old. :D

[Slagaholic]

It's being assumed because we're used to TNA's shoddy booking.

http://www.wrongtees.com/images/dynamic/bee_positive_design_black.png

It was a waste, in my opinion. The way it was done was a waste. It would have been a well-worked debut if they were going to feud. If they aren't going to feud, then what's the point? Not every beatdown needs retribution. But a 10-minute beatdown with a bat certainly does. And where did Sting get beatdown by RVD for 10 minutes? I missed that part

The following week. It wasn't 10 minutes, but Hogan also didn't miss his cue either which extended the original beatdown.

Where did I say that RVD's run in TNA would be a waste? I think his debut was wasted. They brought him out in a way that gave him momentum, and then basically killed that momentum with the post-match beatdown. If Sting gets in a couple of shots and then leaves off, or maybe gets fought off by RVD. But no, he just destroys RVD until Hogan shows up. As a viewer, I saw the entire segment as reasserting that Hogan and his feud are more important than RVD.

At the time it looked like they killed RVD's momentum. But last night he got the biggest pop of the night anyway. His momentum transcends crap booking...at least for now.

[jesterx7769]

The big problem issue is that they aren't in a 1 vs 1 feud. BARELY ANYONE IS The only people in a 1 vs 1 are Angle and Anderson. This why things seem like a cluster bunch, because... it is. All the faces hate all the heels consistently leading to big all out brawls which is the new regimes bread and butter.

Sting vs. RVD (since were on that) had (has) major potential. RVD has HUGE momentum, Sting is Sting, having those two go back and forth leading to a big PPV match would be aweseom and it if (hopefully the would and do) RVD wins, it gives a solid established babyface to go after the title which right now the only major face they have is Angle. It seems nearly everyone is feuding with Hogan or Bischoff in one way or another, instead of Sting vs. Hogan/Abyss/RVD/Hardy/Pope why not just give us a solid Sting vs. RVD feud that would even work in WWE? Because right now both Sting and RVD are floating and thats why people are dissapointed. When RVD got beaten down people criticized it, but the people that defended it said dont worry we will probably get an awesome Sting vs. RVD feud, and we haven't gotten that yet. Sting and RVD are bigger than Team Hogan or Team Flair

[PeterHilton]

http://www.wrongtees.com/images/dynamic/bee_positive_design_black.png



I'm sorry. But that's a naive response. Because TNA has been doing this for too long to get the benefit of the doubt.

It was actually a good episode of Impact last night, but coming off that PPV, it's hard to believe this company will ever figure out that less is more.

[Slagaholic]

I'm sorry. But that's a naive response. Because TNA has been doing this for too long to get the benefit of the doubt.
Do I have to jam my tongue all the way through my cheek next time?

It was actually a good episode of Impact last night, but coming off that PPV, it's hard to believe this company will ever figure out that less is more.
Well I hope so.

[Slagaholic]

The big problem issue is that they aren't in a 1 vs 1 feud. BARELY ANYONE IS The only people in a 1 vs 1 are Angle and Anderson. This why things seem like a cluster bunch, because... it is. All the faces hate all the heels consistently leading to big all out brawls which is the new regimes bread and butter.

Sting vs. RVD (since were on that) had (has) major potential. RVD has HUGE momentum, Sting is Sting, having those two go back and forth leading to a big PPV match would be aweseom and it if (hopefully the would and do) RVD wins, it gives a solid established babyface to go after the title which right now the only major face they have is Angle. It seems nearly everyone is feuding with Hogan or Bischoff in one way or another, instead of Sting vs. Hogan/Abyss/RVD/Hardy/Pope why not just give us a solid Sting vs. RVD feud that would even work in WWE? Because right now both Sting and RVD are floating and thats why people are dissapointed. When RVD got beaten down people criticized it, but the people that defended it said dont worry we will probably get an awesome Sting vs. RVD feud, and we haven't gotten that yet. Sting and RVD are bigger than Team Hogan or Team Flair

Again it's just being assumed that the whole thing's been forgotten and that TNA wasted the opportunity. I know TNA has a history of bad booking, but bashing them for a booking decision before it's even been made/not made is ridiculous.

[Linsolv]

Okay, for fun, let's try to recap all the feuds we're looking at right now...

1) EB vs JJ/Foley
2) Matt Morgan vs Hernandez (?)
3) Angle vs Anderson
4) Wolfpac (?)
5) Pope vs Styles (Sorta...)
6) Sting vs Everyone (?)
7) LOL ABYSS

That's all I can remember. I'm sure I missed a bunch.

[shawn michaels 82]

Again it's just being assumed that the whole thing's been forgotten and that TNA wasted the opportunity. I know TNA has a history of bad booking, but bashing them for a booking decision before it's even been made/not made is ridiculous.

We don't hate TNA, so we are not biased, we just don't like their product now, or at least the majority of it. On the other hand...you clearly mark for them...whatever they do...and that makes you biased. Analyse what's been going on, think about it and then you'll see that we're saying sinteresting and valid points.

[PeterHilton]

Well I hope so.

I do to. Sincerely. That's the frustration with TNA. I've said it before: there's more actual in-ring talent on that roster.

If they booked a straigh forward wrestling show they could put on a card that would be incredibly entertaining.

Again it's just being assumed that the whole thing's been forgotten and that TNA wasted the opportunity. I know TNA has a history of bad booking, but bashing them for a booking decision before it's even been made/not made is ridiculous.

Happens all the time in all forms of media. You put oput a bunch of crappy CDs, people stop buying and you lose your record deal. Your movies all die at the box office, pretty soon you're only getting offers for direct to video releases.

Consumer confidence is a commodity. Nobody owes that to TNA. They've had seven plus years to earn it. That's their failure not ours.

[jesterx7769]

1) EB vs JJ/Foley
2) Matt Morgan vs Hernandez (?)
3) Angle vs Anderson
4) Wolfpac (?)
5) Pope vs Styles (Sorta...)
6) Sting vs Everyone (?)
7) LOL ABYSS
8) Love vs Beautiful People
9) tara vs. Daffney (and BP?)
10) Terry vs. Magnus (formerly known as Brutus)
11) X-Division vs. X-Division
12) Beer Money vs. JJ and anyone Bischoff doesnt like
13) Hogan vs. Everyone
14) Hardy and RVD vs. People that dont want to have fun?

While the teams at Lockdown will hopefully provide excitment, (Sting & Wolfe seem to be a given vs. Abyss/RVD/Hardy I'm also strongly assuming its them) it just seems to go along the same stuff of putting everyone together just for the heck of it.

[Self]

And MCMG are heels? I ask that seriously. I never picked up on that, once.

They seem to be positioned as heels. In a recent 6-man, they were paired with Brian Kendrick, while the Young Bucks were with Kazarian/Red (I forget which). In their promo at Destination X Shelley said something to the effect of "I know people are saying we have an attitude lately" which sort of implied they're heel-esque. However, as I said, they either don't want to work heel, or they don't know how. They just do their regular moves regardless. Creative don't book them strong enough for it to matter, and the spot-acular X-Division doesn't lend itself to a typical babyface-heel divide anyway. I could be wrong on this, but I've sensed on several occasions that they're supposed to be heel.

If they treated them as real babyfaces they could be money. If Beer Money or British Invasion or some other heel team screwed them out of the titles, maybe knocked them around a bit (although MCMG would need to learn to sell a bit :) ) folks would want to see them get their revenge with their double-team moves.

[Slagaholic]

I do to. Sincerely. That's the frustration with TNA. I've said it before: there's more actual in-ring talent on that roster.

If they booked a straigh forward wrestling show they could put on a card that would be incredibly entertaining.

I agree with you, but I enjoy the awful mishmash as well.

Happens all the time in all forms of media. You put oput a bunch of crappy CDs, people stop buying and you lose your record deal. Your movies all die at the box office, pretty soon you're only getting offers for direct to video releases.

Consumer confidence is a commodity. Nobody owes that to TNA. They've had seven plus years to earn it. That's their failure not ours.

The average consumer is irrational, doesn't mean I have to be. I was speaking from my personal point of view.

[PeterHilton]

The average consumer is irrational, doesn't mean I have to be. I was speaking from my personal point of view.

I would say it's totally rational to make a decision based on a company's track record.

Blind loyalty is by far the more irrational approach to anything imo

[Slagaholic]

I would say it's totally rational to make a decision based on a company's track record.

Blind loyalty is by far the more irrational approach to anything imo

I'm not showing blind loyalty. Blind loyalty would be saying TNA is good when I know it isn't. I don't care if TNA is good or not as long as it entertains me. TNA entertains me, therefore I'll defend it.

[shawn michaels 82]

I'm not showing blind loyalty. Blind loyalty would be saying TNA is good when I know it isn't. I don't care if TNA is good or not as long as it entertains me. TNA entertains me, therefore I'll defend it.

That concept of yours surely looks like blind loyalty.

[PeterHilton]

I'm not showing blind loyalty. Blind loyalty would be saying TNA is good when I know it isn't. I don't care if TNA is good or not as long as it entertains me. TNA entertains me, therefore I'll defend it.

I would say "defending it" is blind loyalty. You admit they make mistakes.

Why stand up for TNA when really all your agrument boils down to is : "hey i know it's a mess but I like it."

(which btw is perfectly fair and far more respectable than "TNA is GREAT>WWE EB IS E AGENYUS. everything is perfect!100000X betterr " etc)

[Bigpapa42]

The following week. It wasn't 10 minutes, but Hogan also didn't miss his cue either which extended the original beatdown.

At the time it looked like they killed RVD's momentum. But last night he got the biggest pop of the night anyway. His momentum transcends crap booking...at least for now.

Had to look it up. Remembered it slightly when I read the recap. Completely blocked that week from my memory.

The problem is that momentum doesn't transcend booking for long. Look at Wolffe - came in with tons of momentum because of his initial feud with Angle and the match quality. Now? Gone and done. Sting had tons of momentum and popularity leading into Starrcade '97... crap booking killed it. Same with Goldberg when they ended the streak. No degree of popularity will sustain a worker forever through crap booking.

[Slagaholic]

I would say "defending it" is blind loyalty. You admit they make mistakes.

Why stand up for TNA when really all your agrument boils down to is : "hey i know it's a mess but I like it."

(which btw is perfectly fair and far more respectable than "TNA is GREAT>WWE EB IS E AGENYUS. everything is perfect!100000X betterr " etc)

Because it's fun to do.

[sebsplex]

I find TNA's entire concept of 'heel' to be a bit suspect. It seems like Hogan & Bisch came in and just arbitrarily decided who should be heels, without listening to the fans or indeed common sense.

Yeah, there's been a good dose of that. I think the brief Sean Morley vs Daniels 'feud' highlighted that best. Seriously, why would you expect a pro-TNA crowd to root against one of their signature stars and cheer for an aged rehash of Val Venis? It's like; "It's the new Monday Night Wars! Cheer guys that were released from the company we don't want you watch as they go over guys you've been watching for years."

I understand 'wiping the slate' for a fresh start, but some wrestlers were pulled out of solid pushes, storylines, characters, etc to be slotted into weaker or in-consequencial positions.

They seem to be positioned as heels. In a recent 6-man, they were paired with Brian Kendrick, while the Young Bucks were with Kazarian/Red (I forget which). In their promo at Destination X Shelley said something to the effect of "I know people are saying we have an attitude lately" which sort of implied they're heel-esque. However, as I said, they either don't want to work heel, or they don't know how. They just do their regular moves regardless. Creative don't book them strong enough for it to matter, and the spot-acular X-Division doesn't lend itself to a typical babyface-heel divide anyway. I could be wrong on this, but I've sensed on several occasions that they're supposed to be heel.

I've always kinda dug MCMG's allignment, it kinda makes them unique to me. They lean more towards the heel end of the scale, but in a somewhat subtle way. They like to be cheered and when everything's going well, they bath in the crowd adulation and 'try' to reign in their more heelish tendancies, I get the sense they're 'playing' the babyface role rather than actually assuming it. When the chips are down or things aren't going their way, they can be selfish, cynical, cowardly and whiney yet entertaining jerks. They're often the first to bail from a post match mele that doesn't involve them and the last to run to the aid of others (like abandoning the Front Line during the MEM feud because it wasn't really 'doing anything for them'). Despite how over they are with the crowd, their act doesn't really change a great deal. Shelley's mannerisms in the ring remain c0cky and calculated, etc.

Whether this is all deliberate or down to the fact that they can't really play effective roles beyond their usual schtick is open to argument of course.

He wasn't a heel in the Main Event Mafia?

Not as such. Sting was more heel by association rather than an out and out heel as the key part of his involvement in the creation of the MEM was his desire for respect. The main crux of his beef with Angle (beyond Angle wanting control of the group), was the fact that he soon became disillusioned with the Mafia's methods of gaining respect via brutal beatdowns, stealing victories, etc. Before being kicked out of the group, he was clear in his desire to push the group back in the 'right' direction and achieving respect the 'right' way, appealing to Nash to prevent the group becoming a vehicle for Angle's ego and an advantage in his quest to secure the World Title. So he always seemed to be portrayed almost as a face who'd fallen in with the wrong crowd.

See...I don't get this at all. Sting has never ever worked as a heel, he's been put over as the defender of TNA for his entire run there, and really the only reason he's a "heel" is because hes' going after Hogan...a character that quite a few people in the audience are rooting against.

Sting returning to feud with Flair and AJ because he felt betrayed that AJ turned heel after Sting "passed the torch" would've made far more sense.

I don't have a problem with Sting feuding with Hogan, and although I agree that (and wouldn't mind seeing) feuding with Flair and AJ would have also worked really well given the type of champ AJ has developed into since Sting 'passed the torch'. Still, I really like the idea of Hogan/Sting given the background of both men. I kinda assumed Sting's attack on Hogan was intended as 'defending' TNA when it happened. Heck, the last time Sting and Flair were actually in the ring together I believe was the final episode of Nitro, so it would be kinda symbolic as a starting point to stop Hogan 'killing' TNA, blaming him as being the biggest of the many causes behind WCW's demise... something along those lines. Both men have their supporters of course (including a fairly split crowd), but in general neither man is really the true heel or face, it just depend which cause you support - Hogan's new era or Sting's defense of the 'real' TNA. The following feud spirals out of control, too many others get involved, again taking Sting's cause and contorting it into something else. Sting buries the hatchet with Hogan, dispelling any heels who are profitting from the conflict, fighting for themselves rather than the cause, yadda, yadda, eventually to genuinely establish Hogan in the role he's supposed to have in TNA.

Instead though, Sting had to manhandle Dixie Carter to try to force his heelness and beat up RVD with a bat, then Hogan... basically trying to hammer home that "YOU SHOULD BE BOOING STING!" when really the jury is still out, both in character and probably in real life for many, as to where Hogan's true agenda lies. I'm happy to give TNA more time to tell the story, but their return to the erratic booking behaviour that they seemed to have got well away from prior to Hogan's arrival, is making it difficult as I'm not sure whether much of this will matter in 2 weeks time.

On the flipside though, I'm enjoying the Bischoff/Jarrett feud despite there being a couple of portions to it that we could have done without. I appreciate that it's taking up more time than it should be, but as a concept, it's perfect. Bischoff's in power and lauding it over the deposed Jarrett at every opportunity. It feels so true to his character, literally revelling in driving him out of the company he built and playing further on JJ's sympathy pops and general popularity in the Impact! Zone. I also think it's contributing to an interesting divide between Hogan and Bischoff's priorities, making it more of a shame their more subtle segments and interactions are being completely buried by the fact that both men seem to have their hand in virtually every other feud or storyline on the show and shift up and down the heel/face meter by the minute.

[shawn michaels 82]

I swear that EB is looking more and more like a smark that still hasn't learned how to play TEW.

And by smark i mean the right defenition,not those i've seen in this forum. A smark is a guy that thinks he his a guru on wrestling, that thinks he knows everything about the business,including backstage knowledge. But when you have a conversation with him, you see that he is no more then a mark wiht only a couple more of things learned. And by God...EB should quickly learn how to play TEW. I think he's not paying attention at the dirt sheet atm. And Hogan? Well, he's still asking who are the other 11 guys that Vince is sharing is money with...pathetic...

[Slagaholic]

Someone's conceited...

[Slagaholic]

Last night's Impact did a .86

[jesterx7769]

Last night's Impact did a .86

Yay I like you for posting the real number and not .9 like I thought people would do! Up from a .84.

RAW's rating is down quite a bit which people are making a big deal about but I imagine its b/c this is a weak RAW, people say how its so important as the last RAW before WM but nothing really happens the week before WM.

[Bigpapa42]

Was last night a live Impact? If next week is taped, that could hurt...

[jesterx7769]

yeah last night was live, spoilers of tonights taping are ongoing.

[Bigpapa42]

yeah last night was live, spoilers of tonights taping are ongoing.

That's probably not going to help the ratings next week. I can't imagine Spike is too pleased with ratings that low at this point.

[Linsolv]

Declaring no-replay is a bad idea, IMO. The replays have been getting great ratings.

[jesterx7769]

yeah but they are trying to get people to watch on Monday, if they show replays every Thursday then the move to Monday doesn't really matter.

[Linsolv]

Come to think of it, the ratings being up at all is good. Because of their incredibly bad PPV just 24 hours ago.

[TommyDreamerFan]

Come to think of it, the ratings being up at all is good. Because of their incredibly bad PPV just 24 hours ago.

Doubt it, I still don't think TNA built up much of a new fanbase to order the PPVs and the only people that would are folks like me who have a history with it.

~~~~~~~~~~

I think we all agree this weeks impact was good, wasn't great, but it was good. Certainly it was a step in the right direction.

An .86 rating. Okay, not bad. Hopefully they went down as low as they could and from here it'll begin slowly creeping back to a 1.whatever. Like I said a low rated wrestling show really isn't that bad so long as it's higher then anything Spike could put in that time slot, and I'm fairly certain that even a .8 is fairly high for Spike. Plus Spike is getting this programing at a steal no?

Okay so we don't have to worry about the Network saying "F this noise!", I believe anyway, and so long as Panda Energy has money to burn (and I haven't heard any reports that say otherwise) we don't have to worry about their financial backer saying "F this noise!"

As long as TNA continues to head in this direction, like they did last monday, I have nothing but faith and hope in them.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I really am ticked you guys coming down on the push of Rob Terry. So long as he's committed to improving his in-ring skills, you'd be retarded if you run a Entertainment/angle based promotion and not push him as a midcard act if not uppermidcard. HE'S HUGE! In TEW Terms his Looks/Star Quality thing would be like a A*!

In that same breath, sure they could be pushing Christopher Daniels but... Good god his look nowadays is bland as all hell. Plus it doesn't help that the tights he wears, I swear, it looks like he's wearing an adult diaper in the ring. He should just full on return to The Fallen Angel gimmick, it's hardly stale anymore.

[shawn michaels 82]

Someone's conceited...

Yes?

Edit: Why the hell am i stuck at 95 posts? that was my post count yesterday...

[PeterHilton]

Plus Spike is getting this programing at a steal no?

No. But TNA does have a three year deal, so realistically there wasn't a chance of Spike ever dropping Impact unless there was a catastrophic drop in ratings.

I really am ticked you guys coming down on the push of Rob Terry. So long as he's committed to improving his in-ring skills, you'd be retarded if you run a Entertainment/angle based promotion and not push him as a midcard act if not uppermidcard. HE'S HUGE! In TEW Terms his Looks/Star Quality thing would be like a A*!

He's f'n awful in the ring, he has almost zero charisma, and TNA actually has several guys under contract that look just as impressive and are ten times as talented. He's a waste of time. Total garbage.

[PeterHilton]

Yes?

Edit: Why the hell am i stuck at 95 posts? that was my post count yesterday...

Post in the Dog Pound don't count as they aren't considered an addition to the community.

[shawn michaels 82]

Post in the Dog Pound don't count as they aren't considered an addition to the community.


I was just curious,but thanks for the info.

[shawn michaels 82]

Yay I like you for posting the real number and not .9 like I thought people would do! Up from a .84.

RAW's rating is down quite a bit which people are making a big deal about but I imagine its b/c this is a weak RAW, people say how its so important as the last RAW before WM but nothing really happens the week before WM.

I agree on this one. But still, and getting back to TNA, .86 is still very low. If they booked well they could be much better.

[nucleardonkey]

I agree on this one. But still, and getting back to TNA, .86 is still very low. If they booked well they could be much better.

Even if the put on the best show ever and everyone agreed 100% that it was an amazing show it still wouldn't do much better than the show before it.

It takes a string of good shows to raise ratings. So far TNA put on two good shows in a row and I believe last week was the beginning where it began at a .84 and now another good show later they are at a .86. If they keep the pattern of good shows then next week could possibly be .88 or something along those lines and then so on.

Yes on Thursdays they were pulling 1.0 but that was a different era and now that the adjustment period is over the new era is starting it's climb.

Sadly however we may never see the end of Bubba on TNA. The only bleak point of the show is when his fat face is seen on TV.

[liontamer]

Just a response to the Rob Terry comment. I like the push, however it's too quick IMO (like with Eric young). It wasn't all that long ago he got squashed - in under a minute if I recall correctly- by Hernandez, and also lost a 3v1 match with Hernandez, and now he's got a title and a winning streak. Just seems to sudden.

They built up the storyline good for his break from the BI, I just wish he could have actually won some matches before claiming a title.

But yeah, the guy looks like a freak of nature, as long is he isn't on roids, I'd push the rap out of him. If he is on roids, and with that look it wouldn't be surprising, then that's a risk TNA needs to decide if they are willing to take given the PR backlash that may come down the line.

[jesterx7769]

I think next week will be a better truth as far as ratings. This is planned on being the first week without a replay so maybe some people will tune in Thursday and not see Impact and make more of an attempt to watch Monday so we'll see if they can get back to the 1.0 mark.

With the last two ratings being so low (the old Saturday 11 PM slot averaged .7) there's of course no way they are getting pulled/cancelled but like I said before if I'm in the upper ranks of the company and after paying big money to Hogan/Flair/Bischoff and making the move to Monday and by December they arent pulling a 1.5 (or close to it regularly) I couldn't help but ask what was the point?

To touch on Terry, I think he is just so bland and stereotypical. I dont really think he's awful in the ring as much as people say he is, his matches are only one minute long what do you want him to do? But he's just a big roided (before everyone says he's clean I'm guessing this was a big reason he was released from WWE in 08 as thats when they starting crack down more on those guys and a dev. guy isn't worth having issues over) dude going "Grrr I'm a big wrestler!" seems so overdone and blah especially with how hes been booked as the Global champion. Do I hate him? No. Do I like him? No. I just see him as a very bland typical big bodyguardesque old school stereotyped wrestler. I think a big part of his push is him being Welsh and them trying to stay strong in the UK and I would actually like to see Morgan getting his type of dominating push instead while keeping the British Invasion as a solid Midcard stable as they seemed good.

[liontamer]

Here's the breakdown I found at http://www.tnastars.com/2010/03/23/tna-impact-ratings-322-full-breakdown/

iMPACT! Ratings (3/22): Full Breakdown
Added on Tuesday, March 23rd, 2010 at 6:48 pm to Latest News by Joe

Partial Source: Pro Wrestling Torch

Last night’s live edition of TNA Impact did a 0.9 cable rating which was rounded up from a 0.86 with 1,200,00 viewers. While still under what the series was doing taped on Thursday nights, the number is up from last week’s abysmal 0.84 cable rating.

The quarter-hour ratings for last night’s TNA Impact fluctuated throughout the show before peaking in Q6 and steadily dropping for the final two quarter-hours and over-run.

The show opened with a 0.79 quarter-hour rating with Eric Bischoff and Jeff Jarrett, which was the next-to-lowest quarter-hour rating on the show.

The show built to a 0.93 quarter-hour in Q3 with the Lockdown announcement featuring Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair, Sting, and A.J. Styles.

The audience level then dropped 18.3 percent to a show-low 0.76 quarter-hour rating in Q4 featuring Rob Terry vs. Tomko.

After the show bottomed out, the audience rebuilt to a 0.97 quarter-hour rating in Q6 with the end of Jarrett-Foley, RVD and Jeff Hardy in-ring, and Bischoff and Hulk Hogan backstage.

After the show peaked in Q6, the audience steadily declined to an average 0.85 quarter-hour for Q8 and a 0.81 over-run rating for the end of Beer Money vs. RVD & Jeff Hardy.

--------
Kind of surprised the main event lost viewers given the overness of RVD and to a lesser extent Hardy, not to mention that Beer Money are pretty over.


Also here's a comparative link I found with a Raw/Impact Comparison (http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2816244/monday_night_wars_march_22_2010.html)(haven't found a raw ratings brekdown anywhere theough. Will update if I do)

[brashleyholland]

If he is on roids, and with that look it wouldn't be surprising, then that's a risk TNA needs to decide if they are willing to take given the PR backlash that may come down the line.

Just a quick note. Roids does not equal muscles. You can have a body like Rob's without 'roids'. You can't have a body like Stiener's without 'roids'. Also, when people say 'roids', alot of the time they're getting it confused with HGH (human growth hormone). Steriods are used for a variety of things; repairing internal tissue damage, for example. In some cases they can help you *lose* weight.

The three guys below were all on steroids at the time...no Big Rob look-a-likes here :-p

http://www.mmatko.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/sakaruba-gracie.jpg

(Royce)

http://www.cdn.sherdog.com/_images/news/2006_12/6380.jpg

http://www.fcfighter.com/PICTURES/UFC36/barnett-belt.jpg

[Linsolv]

Well, at least I'd worry that he's take an excessive amount of creatine. And odds are, that's gonna lead to an injury (back when I played tennis a lot, there was a lot of debate about the +/- of creatine -- tends to lead to ligament injury, because the tendons don't grow as fast as the muscle), and that's bad. So either way.

EDIT: Also, those UFC fighters have a very strong incentive to keep their weight down.

[shawn michaels 82]

Here's the breakdown I found at http://www.tnastars.com/2010/03/23/tna-impact-ratings-322-full-breakdown/

iMPACT! Ratings (3/22): Full Breakdown
Added on Tuesday, March 23rd, 2010 at 6:48 pm to Latest News by Joe

Partial Source: Pro Wrestling Torch

Last night’s live edition of TNA Impact did a 0.9 cable rating which was rounded up from a 0.86 with 1,200,00 viewers. While still under what the series was doing taped on Thursday nights, the number is up from last week’s abysmal 0.84 cable rating.

The quarter-hour ratings for last night’s TNA Impact fluctuated throughout the show before peaking in Q6 and steadily dropping for the final two quarter-hours and over-run.

The show opened with a 0.79 quarter-hour rating with Eric Bischoff and Jeff Jarrett, which was the next-to-lowest quarter-hour rating on the show.

The show built to a 0.93 quarter-hour in Q3 with the Lockdown announcement featuring Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair, Sting, and A.J. Styles.

The audience level then dropped 18.3 percent to a show-low 0.76 quarter-hour rating in Q4 featuring Rob Terry vs. Tomko.

After the show bottomed out, the audience rebuilt to a 0.97 quarter-hour rating in Q6 with the end of Jarrett-Foley, RVD and Jeff Hardy in-ring, and Bischoff and Hulk Hogan backstage.

After the show peaked in Q6, the audience steadily declined to an average 0.85 quarter-hour for Q8 and a 0.81 over-run rating for the end of Beer Money vs. RVD & Jeff Hardy.

--------
Kind of surprised the main event lost viewers given the overness of RVD and to a lesser extent Hardy, not to mention that Beer Money are pretty over.


Also here's a comparative link I found with a Raw/Impact Comparison (http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2816244/monday_night_wars_march_22_2010.html)(haven't found a raw ratings brekdown anywhere theough. Will update if I do)

At this point i would say that this is what it looks like: Some people are just zapping TNA on and off for most of the show,to see if it's worth watching,but most of them gets bored, or confused, or dislikes what they see and they get sick of it before the end, hence the low main events, especially this week's ME, as it had 4 works who are pretty over.

[TommyDreamerFan]

No. But TNA does have a three year deal, so realistically there wasn't a chance of Spike ever dropping Impact unless there was a catastrophic drop in ratings.



He's f'n awful in the ring, he has almost zero charisma, and TNA actually has several guys under contract that look just as impressive and are ten times as talented. He's a waste of time. Total garbage.

Hernandez and Morgan are the only two guys I can think of on the TNA roster that share the same look, and they're currently being pushed as well. He's not a terrible wrestler, not great or good by any means, but used in his purpose...

Well hell, Pete, Ultimate Warriors and Goldbergs CAN have a place on a very talented roster. And the way they're are pushing him is very freaking intelligently. The reason I disagree with you is because he's young. He can learn, they can pare him with a manager. His look alone makes him full of potential.

[PeterHilton]

But yeah, the guy looks like a freak of nature, as long is he isn't on roids, I'd push the rap out of him. If he is on roids, and with that look it wouldn't be surprising, then that's a risk TNA needs to decide if they are willing to take given the PR backlash that may come down the line.

TNA has like zero drug policy and has been willing to deal with both Angle and Hardy even during their drug related issues.

Seriously doubt they care one way or the other.

[TommyDreamerFan]

TNA has like zero drug policy and has been willing to deal with both Angle and Hardy even during their drug related issues.

Seriously doubt they care one way or the other.

PR backlash? That's rubbish. Something like that wouldn't hurt TNA at all.

[liontamer]

Just a quick note. Roids does not equal muscles. You can have a body like Rob's without 'roids'. You can't have a body like Stiener's without 'roids'. Also, when people say 'roids', alot of the time they're getting it confused with HGH (human growth hormone). Steriods are used for a variety of things; repairing internal tissue damage, for example. In some cases they can help you *lose* weight.

The three guys below were all on steroids at the time...no Big Rob look-a-likes here :-p

http://www.mmatko.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/sakaruba-gracie.jpg

(Royce)

http://www.cdn.sherdog.com/_images/news/2006_12/6380.jpg

http://www.fcfighter.com/PICTURES/UFC36/barnett-belt.jpg


I didn't by any means state he is deffinately using them, just that I wouldn't be surprised. He is freakishly huge and there has been a history of use in the industry in general.

Also confused on why you state you can have a body like his without using , but not like Steiner's. The few times they've been in the ring together, Terry's looked bigger and more impressive to me (and like Master's - who did get busted for roids).

As for the pics, I'd be more interested in a before/after look as that would show the effects better. Part of the differences as well could be in what else they used with the roids and how long they were on them.

Several decades ago when bodybuilders used lots of roids, they started developing breasts and even lactating because the excess testosterone was converted into estrogen (and just to avoid a post response on it, no I'm suggesting those guys in the pics have this particular issue). With estrogen blockers that doesn't happen, and there are likely other chemicals that can affect things, not to mention the role of genetics

Also the tissue repair you noted is part of how roids -> muscle. You repair faster so you can train harder and you have increased testosterone which aides in muscle growth. And I agree, HGH and a number of other drugs could cause slimilar effects.


And since you mentioned it, how are they used for weight loss. Haven't heard of that one before, although I can see where extra testostrone may benefit.

[shawn michaels 82]

TNA has like zero drug policy and has been willing to deal with both Angle and Hardy even during their drug related issues.

Seriously doubt they care one way or the other.

I seriously doubt that they think they can afford caring about it.

[brashleyholland]

I didn't by any means state he is deffinately using them, just that I wouldn't be surprised.

I never said you did, I was just saying. A lot of people see a cut guy and assume OMGZ ROOOOIIIIIDDDZZZ!!!!

Also confused on why you state you can have a body like his without using , but not like Steiner's. The few times they've been in the ring together, Terry's looked bigger and more impressive to me (and like Master's - who did get busted for roids).

Because there is a big difference between this...

http://quizilla.teennick.com/user_images/X/XX/XXX/XXXSTORYCHICKXXX/1241806157_3975_full.jpeg

...on a 6'4 frame and this...

http://thumbnail.image.rakuten.co.jp/@0_mall/b-drop/cabinet/photo/pphoto-sste.jpg

...on a guy of 6 feet tall. Stiener's wiki has him at 6'1, but that's my height and I was taller than him when I met him years back. His body is totaly out of proportion for his height. There's nothing natural about that man :-p

As for the pics, I'd be more interested in a before/after look as that would show the effects better. Part of the differences as well could be in what else they used with the roids and how long they were on them.

There's not a noticable difference with any of them really. Barnett has drifted between that pic, slightly pudgyer and fairly sloppy over the years...but he's been done for 'roids' in all three conditions. Royce has never looked bigger or smaller, outside of him naturally getting a little thicker with age. Plus, with athletes who take roids for reasons other than looking like Stiener, it's tough to know when they are not using and when they are just not getting caught using. I personally know a number of high-level MMA and K-1 fighters (competing in the UFC, WEC, K-1, It's Showtime and Strikeforce) who use banned substances and pass pee tests with alarming regularity :-p


And since you mentioned it, how are they used for weight loss. Haven't heard of that one before, although I can see where extra testostrone may benefit.

It's a long and convoluted process that involves adding a minimum of muscle mass in order to increase your performance in work-outs to hit a peak amount of calories burned and shred off every bit of excess non-muscle weight that you can. It's not healthy and is very much down to getting the science right and the individual's reactions :-p Now I remember it, thats what Tim Sylvia was doing when he got busted...he was doing it wrong :-p

[Linsolv]

Brashley, no offense, but they seem to have the same proportions to me.

[brashleyholland]

Brashley, no offense, but they seem to have the same proportions to me.

Those biceps look the same to you? :-p

[Linsolv]

For the record, Poppa Pump's only ability seems to be flexing; Big Rob's not flexing at all. But I will poke a hole in my argument by looking at Steiner's hilariously huge forearms.

[brashleyholland]

For the record, Poppa Pump's only ability seems to be flexing; Big Rob's not flexing at all. But I will poke a hole in my argument by looking at Steiner's hilariously huge forearms.

Lol, maybe it's all these steroids I've been taking skewing my judgement :-D

[brashleyholland]

Anyway speaking of Big, Natural Rob :p, I get the awful feeling that we're going to be seeing an awful lot of squash matches in the comming weeks as they attempt to make something of him.

Seems strange that they haven't kept him closer to the British Invasion - both those guys can wrestle rings around him, would have thought it'd make sense for them to have a few bouts together to make him look good (or better).

Unless, shock horror, they're actually going to make something of Doug Williams as X-Division champ...

[liontamer]

reading the results from the tapings and some small spoilers below without sharing too much.


Somehow Young gets a pop that is said to be bigger than RVD or Hardy during a segment with the band

The pope gets his first ho

Orlando Jordan gets a 'that was creepy' chant from the crowd.

[Hyde Hill]

Is there some better source? I almost got a subscription to PWI but then I figured out that it would be smarter to just read a blog. But I only found PWTorch.

Is there one that's considerably better?

PWI is the only good one imho. And if you want a discussion board then this is the place to be imho.

[Hyde Hill]

I have to say, tonight was definitely an improvement. Other than working the Hernandez broken neck that's already getting about as old as Kurt's, it was a solid show.
.

Ehm they mentioned it when he came back and when Young piledrived him on the stage months and months back. That isn't exactly over working it. They made the work injury look really real imho.

[Hyde Hill]

Angle is on a reduced schedule. I can't imagine he'd be doing much 24 hours after a PPV.

See, I don't think TNA needs to cover every storyline every week. I'm OK with not doing every storyline every week, it give others more time to develop. Video packages to remind the fans about whats happened should be fine if there's no in ring or backstage action one week.

At least that's what I do in TEW...my digital fans don't seem to mind :P

Plus, TNA really HAS to have a ton of storylines since they have to fill 3 Hours on PPV every month, and nowadays every match has to have a story attached. It's hard to do 6-8 storylines a week for 4 weeks.

WWE has what 8 hours of TV time a week? Of course every match at the PPV will have a storyline for it. I think it's best for TNA to not fill each week up with stories and to give some stories a week off. Can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't expect people to buy PPVs where half the matches have a storyline attached, and you can't complain that some storylines were forgotten during their only 2 hours of TV each week. I doubt I'm the only one who thinks that since TNA stopped trying to fit almost every single storyline into one show, it's been getting better.

Yep they can't put all storylines in one show and some storylines are interwoven. SO what that RVD and Sting didn't have a one on one confrontation doesn't mean its done. They will probably meet in Lethal Lockdown.

When all the storylines are put in one show you get the too much going on problem and I thought the pacing of this Impact was excellent. A 2 hour show in 2 hours. Instead of the Rob Terry squash (, why push this guy imho? Muscles yes, rest no.) and the length of the Jarret Bisch confrontation, I would have put either an Angle/Anderson package or an X-Division angle or match.

[Hyde Hill]

MCMG come off kind of heelish, but not really.

I was thinking this morning; Above, someone mentioned EB's strategy is to "be unpredictable." There's a fundamental flaw in that strategy, though, because BEING LOGICAL, and doing things that MAKE SENSE means being predictable. Funny thing, that.

Guns have been on the heel side of things for a long long time now ever since "turning" on the frontline. So its not just EB and co that want them as heels. They have never been full on heels though.

I think that a true mark of a good booker is being able to be unpredictable but still logical and make sense. Only it won't always be clear from the get go.

[Hyde Hill]

It's being assumed because we're used to TNA's shoddy booking.

Benefit of the doubt people. Lethal lockdown they will be in opposite teams and then a one on one the ppv after? And so far Sting is being really heelish which he never was in the MEM.

[Hyde Hill]

I would say "defending it" is blind loyalty. You admit they make mistakes.

Why stand up for TNA when really all your agrument boils down to is : "hey i know it's a mess but I like it."

(which btw is perfectly fair and far more respectable than "TNA is GREAT>WWE EB IS E AGENYUS. everything is perfect!100000X betterr " etc)

Hmmm I like the TNA product and have been defending it but moreso because the whole IWC seems to always want to point out the negatives in anything. Sorta playing the "Angels advocate" but when they do something bad in my eyes I am very critical of the product at the same time. That is not blind loyalty its plain loyalty at best and there is a big difference.

I see things that I like plenty of times on TNA and things I really dislike and try to look at things from the marks and managements perspective and not the smark one.

[cappyboy]

I think we all agree this weeks impact was good, wasn't great, but it was good. Certainly it was a step in the right direction.



Actually no, we can't. I found it to be a mixed bag. The first hour we can pretty much agree on. But the second hour was so bad I couldn't be bothered to stay put for it.

You start with Terry vs Tomko. Dull vs duller. Then you throw on a match that realistically ought to be a main event in Foley vs Jarrett. Even though the stip made it totally uninteresting because the match seemed to be screaming for a double countout finish and neither guy actually losing. You give little to no indication that's not going to be the main event until the match actually happens and promote nothing that's going to potentially be in between the two. And that's somehow TV in the same ballpark as the last couple months of Impact?

Even with the warts the last couple months have had, I think not. That's pretty garbage programming to my mind. I expect thinking like that out of WWE. Heck, by what the E's been doing the last year or two, this week's Impact would have been an awesome Smackdown. I can't remember the last time WWE managed to keep me interested for a full hour at a time. But for Impact, that was hideous. I think it's the first time I've been willingly driven away from Impact since our cable company brought Spike TV back down off the digital hill and returned it to us lowly rabble. Because of that half a show issue, I'd say this was the worst Impact I've ever seen. Even the ones y'all might try to convince me were worse had enough to them to feel worth seeing through.

[The Shape]

Don't doubt it. We're talking about the guy that still thinks nowadays that he is still the most over worker in the whole world. So, yeah...pretty much he thinks he is more important then anyone, although he is like...1024 years old. :D

This raises an interesting point in TEW terms lol...cause i'd say he is still the best known worker in the world, perhaps with the exception of The Rock. That's more crossover based though, in wrestling itself, he's waned quite a bit.

[PeterHilton]

Benefit of the doubt people.

Went over this already..

TNA giving us crappy booking for 7 years = they don't deserve the benefit of the doubt.

[PeterHilton]

Hmmm I like the TNA product and have been defending it but moreso because the whole IWC seems to always want to point out the negatives in anything. Sorta playing the "Angels advocate" but when they do something bad in my eyes I am very critical of the product at the same time. That is not blind loyalty its plain loyalty at best and there is a big difference.



The 'blind loyalty' remark was to Slagaholic and his idea that it was irrational for people to make decisions based on a company's past.

This 'benefit of the doubt' concept seems to be a running theme amongst TNA supporters.

In any other line of entertainment I can imagine, if I were to make a critical comment about a company's future prospects of delivering a good product based on the failures of the past ("Why would I buy the next Madden? EA only ever updates the roster..") it would make perfect sense.

In wrestling, that's being 'overly negative' and I'm supposed to believe the better approach is 'c'mon guys..LET'S GIVE IT A CHANCE!'

:rolleyes:

[shawn michaels 82]

This raises an interesting point in TEW terms lol...cause i'd say he is still the best known worker in the world, perhaps with the exception of The Rock. That's more crossover based though, in wrestling itself, he's waned quite a bit.

He might still be the most know worker in the world for his achievements in the past, but he is definitely not the most over guy nowadays. He isn't a major top draw anymore. it's time for him to face it. And he still had the nerve to ask Vince a few years ago (3 years ago,IIRC) who were the other 11 guys getting HIS money when VInce told hem he was not the only top dog anymore (because now there were at least 11 other guys)? Please...the guy is a leech. A leech that actually thinks he can still try and do...leeching... :D But getting back to the point: Beeing known is not the same thing that beeing over.

[lazorbeak]

He might still be the most know worker in the world for his achievements in the past, but he is definitely not the most over guy nowadays. He isn't a major top draw anymore. it's time for him to face it. And he still had the nerve to ask Vince a few years ago (3 years ago,IIRC) who were the other 11 guys getting HIS money when VInce told hem he was not the only top dog anymore (because now there were at least 11 other guys)? Please...the guy is a leech. A leech that actually thinks he can still try and do...leeching... :D But getting back to the point: Beeing know is not the same thing that beeing over.

Yeah I've had this argument with others who seem to think non-wrestling fans picking Hulk Hogan out of a lineup means he is A* over in TEW terms. But overness isn't based on how many non-fans know who someone is: it's more a measure of what percentage of wrestling fans are willing to pay to see the guy. More non-fans know who Jake Roberts is than Randy Orton, but in the wrestling word Orton is significantly more over.

If thousands of fans are willing to pay to see you wrestle, you're pretty over. Hogan could make that argument 16 years ago. Not so much today.

[shawn michaels 82]

Yeah I've had this argument with others who seem to think non-wrestling fans picking Hulk Hogan out of a lineup means he is A* over in TEW terms. But overness isn't based on how many non-fans know who someone is: it's more a measure of what percentage of wrestling fans are willing to pay to see the guy. More non-fans know who Jake Roberts is than Randy Orton, but in the wrestling word Orton is significantly more over.

If thousands of fans are willing to pay to see you wrestle, you're pretty over. Hogan could make that argument 16 years ago. Not so much today.

Indeed! I rest my case. :)

[jesterx7769]

While I am usually the one of the more critical of Impact I have to disagree with you Cappy. I thought this Impact was alot matter because we actually got some solid matches.

The KO 6 way match was alot better than I thought it would be and is better than the ambush matches they've been doing,

while I wasn't a big fan of the storyline Foley vs JJ was much better that what we have been getting. I agree that it should have been at Lockdown instead so they could build it but it was a good match and not just an angle like I expected

the ME was also one of the best under the new regime, dont know how people didnt like it. wasnt much from a heat/storyline but it was still good action.

I also disagree w/the crap booking for 7 years comment. If they were really that bad no one would be watching all this time and since they've been on Spike (in any time slot) their ratings have stayed pretty close. They used to have good stuff going on just didnt have any big names or stars, their tag division used to be awesome, the X division used to be awesome, and they had some good characters.

[Hyde Hill]

Went over this already..

TNA giving us crappy booking for 7 years = they don't deserve the benefit of the doubt.

Sorry missed that when I first posted it. Don't agree though as this is a new regime.

[PeterHilton]

I also disagree w/the crap booking for 7 years comment. If they were really that bad no one would be watching all this time and since they've been on Spike (in any time slot) their ratings have stayed pretty close. They used to have good stuff going on just didnt have any big names or stars, their tag division used to be awesome, the X division used to be awesome, and they had some good characters.

If we were to go back over the history of TNA - especially during the Planet Jarrett Era - and actually go over the storylines and how the played out, I would say that the majority of the time what you would see is A LOT of crap booking.

I'll use the classic anti-WWE argument: "just because people watch doesn't mean it was good."

TNA fans are notoriously loyal, there's always been a segment that watch specifically because it's not the E, and the viewers for both the weekly PPV shows and the stuff on FSN were both incredibly bad.

TNA has failed upwards.

Seven years of crappy booking highlighted by brief flashes of brilliance.

[Hyde Hill]

The 'blind loyalty' remark was to Slagaholic and his idea that it was irrational for people to make decisions based on a company's past.

This 'benefit of the doubt' concept seems to be a running theme amongst TNA supporters.

In any other line of entertainment I can imagine, if I were to make a critical comment about a company's future prospects of delivering a good product based on the failures of the past ("Why would I buy the next Madden? EA only ever updates the roster..") it would make perfect sense.

In wrestling, that's being 'overly negative' and I'm supposed to believe the better approach is 'c'mon guys..LET'S GIVE IT A CHANCE!'

:rolleyes:

No that is not being overly negative and I meant it more in general on the IWC then specifically between you and Shaga. It is also more the tone of things and the way things are talked about that factor in. Sorry I didn't make that clearer in the first post.


Edit: Just to make it clear I don't just follow TNA because they are not WWE, I used to just watch the E, then found out about TNA and watched both for a long while, TNA excited me more despite its flaws and now just watch WWE ppv's to see if they are doing anything exciting, and have been following the wrestlemania build. Like I posted before out of ten segments/storylines/matches whatever with the E you get 1 good 8 mediocre 1 bad and with TNA you get 2 good 5 mediocre 3 bad. I enjoy good stuff more then I hate bad stuff and don't really like mediocre so TNA is for me. The frustrating and interesting thing with TNA is that a whole lot of their bad stuff could be so relatively easily solved.

[Self]

I watched the Impact Main Event. It was a solid tag team match. The ring looked really small though. During the heat it looked like Jeff could get to RVD at any point with nothing but a gentle hop. Heel Beer Money also bummed me out. They're boring. Roode's always been a little dull, and Storm is just as bad without his drunken cowboy wackiness. I like both guys. Really good tag team. Just a little dull after dropping their old shtick, and that saddens me.

[PeterHilton]

Sorry missed that when I first posted it. Don't agree though as this is a new regime.

Fair enough. But then that brings up the history of this new regime and whether - based on that - they deserve any benefit of the doubt.

No that is not being overly negative and I meant it more in general on the IWC then specifically between you and Shaga. It is also more the tone of things and the way things are talked about that factor in. Sorry I didn't make that clearer in the first post.

Again..fair enough.

[Linsolv]

Now, on one hand, I'm new to this whole wrasslin' thing. Secretly, I've only been watching for about 2 years (And strangely, it started with TNA, in the middle of this whole MEM business...)

But after watching a year or so of the E's wrestling, I am gonna say that if there is one thing I have to give TNA credit for, it's making me care about **** that I wish they'd leave off of RAW.

Women's wrestling? Hell, I even like TNA's eye candy better, never mind thinking that occasionally there might be some decent talent of the female persuasion (Hamada, I'm looking at you. You get a gold star.)

Tag matches? More fun. Instead of seeing wrestlers who are really singles wrestlers working tag events, you see singles wrestlers doing singles wrestling, and tag wrestlers doing tag wrestling. Which is why Alex Shelley, my personal favorite regardless of what his turn is, will never get the singles push I irrationally believe he deserves.

...

But yeah, their storylines can get confusing and convoluted, and really quite stagnant, as well.

[TommyDreamerFan]

If we were to go back over the history of TNA - especially during the Planet Jarrett Era - and actually go over the storylines and how the played out, I would say that the majority of the time what you would see is A LOT of crap booking.

I'll use the classic anti-WWE argument: "just because people watch doesn't mean it was good."

TNA fans are notoriously loyal, there's always been a segment that watch specifically because it's not the E, and the viewers for both the weekly PPV shows and the stuff on FSN were both incredibly bad.

TNA has failed upwards.

Seven years of crappy booking highlighted by brief flashes of brilliance.

Okay, name something in 2004 that was crappy that was the fault of TNA? The only two things I remember was DDP refusing to job to Monty Brown and the idea of using Macho Man... at all. *shudder*

The only thing wrong with TNA back then is that they didn't have any storyline then JJ is the champ, TNA is his world. Here comes someone from WCW/WWE! They nearly win the title but Double J narrowily escapes defeat. And I should state, I'm a fan of Jarrett, I've been a fan of him since his match against Monty Brown where he made Monty look like a complete badass. Maybe he used politics to stay on top or not, I don't know, I do know is I can't think of anyone on the roster in 2004 that should of had the belt EXCEPT maybe Raven. Which really, they were about equally talented back then so no bid deal.

[cappyboy]

While I am usually the one of the more critical of Impact I have to disagree with you Cappy. I thought this Impact was alot matter because we actually got some solid matches.

Vanilla and chocolate I guess. But if Monday's going to an indication of how they treat the second hour, those solid matches are going to be second-hand info to these eyeballs.

the ME was also one of the best under the new regime, dont know how people didnt like it. wasnt much from a heat/storyline but it was still good action.

Well, that's nice but I can't speak to that. Because of the haphazard way they promoted the second hour, I couldn't tell you what that main event even was. With what they made known was going to happen, I had no reason to stick around once it became clear that Terry was facing Tomko. With it sounding like Jarrett vs Foley was the main event, no reason to believe either man was actually going to lose, and them failing to emphasize this main event whatever it was, what reason was there for me to believe the second hour was going to be watchable? I couldn't find any and that's why I'm playing contrarian here.

You could have had a thirty minute classic Styles v Wolfe title defense. But if you hide that light under a bushel like they did with this main event, that's bad programming. Especially if the lead-ins are as unappealing as Terry vs Tomko and Jarrett v Foley appeared to be. The best main event in the world won't help you if you can't keep people watching long enough to enjoy it.

[jesterx7769]

I won't argue with you and I agree and understand how you couldnt get to the good parts since the first part of the show wasn't anything special then a Terry/Tomko match is understandably a turn off and like you said they never announced the main event until there were 20 minutes or so left in the show. This is actually why I DVR Impact (and RAW) so things don't seem so drawn out and I don't have time to get upset during commercials as the only one I watched Live in awile was there first Live Monday Impact and I felt it was brutal sitting through without able to speed things up :p

[jesterx7769]

http://pwinsider.com/article/46189/potential-timeslot-change-for-tna-impact.html?p=1

The 4/5 Impact is listed as being from 8-10, as the article says there is no TNA confirmation if this is a one week thing or permanent but I think alot of people here have said they think going 8-10 would be beter, all the hype of competition but going on an hour earlier.

[Slagaholic]

Should have been done from the start.

[Linsolv]

Main event was a tag match between Hardy/RVD and Beer Money (I think? Can't remember if it was Beer Money or not). Good match. Incidentally, you called the Foley/Jarett match wrong, too, but I was thinking they would do that too.

Instead, Jarrett won.

[Hyde Hill]

Yep it was BEER! .... MONEY! man your memory Sorry About Your Damn Luck! lol It Pays To Be Roode.

[Linsolv]

Can't stand Storm. Well. I can, he's not Santino, but I like Roode a lot better and I really don't know why he's been stuck in tag wrestling for like, 2-3 years. Stuck fighting for a midcard belt, at least. Maybe if tag belts were important...

[Hyde Hill]

Before Beer Money they where both doing pretty well in singles. I like both of them personally but I like a strong tag scene as well. My idea was always to bring in Harris and make them a new age freebirds so a duo could do the tag scene and the other one could go singles and they would rotate that.

And how can you not like Storm, just this theme alone makes him awesome:

James Storm Singles Tron (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73EQfpwwwQs)

I am not a big country fan but that song rocks. And yes I know its a rip of electric rodeo but so what.

[PeterHilton]

Okay, name something in 2004 that was crappy that was the fault of TNA? The only two things I remember was DDP refusing to job to Monty Brown and the idea of using Macho Man... at all. *shudder*

The only thing wrong with TNA back then is that they didn't have any storyline then JJ is the champ, TNA is his world. Here comes someone from WCW/WWE! They nearly win the title but Double J narrowily escapes defeat. And I should state, I'm a fan of Jarrett, I've been a fan of him since his match against Monty Brown where he made Monty look like a complete badass. Maybe he used politics to stay on top or not, I don't know, I do know is I can't think of anyone on the roster in 2004 that should of had the belt EXCEPT maybe Raven. Which really, they were about equally talented back then so no bid deal.

You just asked me to name something wrong with TNA in 2004 then named about 5 different instances where they screwed up. :confused:

Raven NOT winning the belt back then after the feud they had and how over he was with the crowd was one of their biggest mistakes.

Seriously.."Maybe he used politics to stay on top or not.." ? Does anyone honestly have any doubts about that still?

And that "Jarrett was the only one worth giving the belt" excuse is a pile of crap and it always has been. you can't KNOW he was the only one worth giving the belt to because nobody else ever got a push. Sort of a circular logic isn't it...

As Remi pointed out earlier, maybe if TNA had pushed their talent back then they'd have have become BIGGER NAMES NOW.

Daniels, Abyss, AJ Styles, Monty Brown, Jeff hardy..they were all on the roster. Maybe if you push them in 2004 and don't use a glorified midcard nobody like Jarreett as a crutch, then you don't have to constantly bring in washed up names and competition cast-offs in 2010.

I'm sorry..but you are awful to have a conversation with on this because you have total blinders on. You're even a Jarrett fan...there's no way for you to have any kind of objective opinion about what this company is doing.

EDIT: that last sentence probably sounds like more of a personal attack then I meant..but dammit how do I talk to someone who even defends the Planet Jarrett Era?

[jesterx7769]

As Remi pointed out earlier, maybe if TNA had pushed their talent back then they'd have have become BIGGER NAMES NOW.



This. While I liked more of their product than I do I def. agree with Jarrett which TNA FINALLY fixed with Christian (who got his huge pop for it) but maybe if TNA had put the belt on Monty Brown or Abyss or Rhyno or Hoyt or Killings and giving them a serious run they would be more over now, even if they would have pushed Roode straight to the main event after Team Canada (maybe have him buy his way to a title shot since he was all about money with Tracy as a manager) instead any of those people that got some success (or the belt) lost it to people Like Jarrett who's Dad founded the company.

[Hyde Hill]

Having Jarrett in the main event that time. Not a problem. Having Jarret be the only main eventer at that time by a mile = big problem.

[Blackman]

Not pushing their main talent was indeed the biggest mistake. But they had to bring in some 'big names' to draw the crowd. Their problem was that those 'big names' took up all screen time, leaving little to none for the X-division stars to ply their trade.

[CQI13]

EDIT: that last sentence probably sounds like more of a personal attack then I meant..but dammit how do I talk to someone who even defends the Planet Jarrett Era?

I actually enjoyed what I saw of it (only through PPV DVDs). I still remember when he fought Rhyno (not sure if it was when he won the belt or not), Jarrett is set up to be hit by the gore. The crowd is going nuts, and at the last minute, Jarrett busts out the guitar and breaks it over Rhyno's head. Crowd totally deflated, lots of booing. And what does Jarrett do? He starts mocking them! I found that to be hilarious.

[PeterHilton]

Not pushing their main talent was indeed the biggest mistake. But they had to bring in some 'big names' to draw the crowd. Their problem was that those 'big names' took up all screen time, leaving little to none for the X-division stars to ply their trade.

Looking back on it now though, those big names didn't draw a crowd. So it was all pointless.

I actually enjoyed what I saw of it (only through PPV DVDs). I still remember when he fought Rhyno (not sure if it was when he won the belt or not), Jarrett is set up to be hit by the gore. The crowd is going nuts, and at the last minute, Jarrett busts out the guitar and breaks it over Rhyno's head. Crowd totally deflated, lots of booing. And what does Jarrett do? He starts mocking them! I found that to be hilarious.

Jarrett could be a fun heel in portions. It was the fact he dominated the storylines for years and years even after the crowd had turned on him...

I'd even argue that after Christian signed, he still played the "I'm the bigger name" card. Because a lot of those episodes of Impact after Christian's title win were still focused on Jarrett and the feud with Sting.

By the end, he'd completely worn out his welcome and he was getting a lot of bad heat from the crowd.

[justtxyank]

Looking back on it now though, those big names didn't draw a crowd. So it was all pointless.



Jarrett could be a fun heel in portions. It was the fact he dominated the storylines for years and years even after the crowd had turned on him...

I'd even argue that after Christian signed, he still played the "I'm the bigger name" card. Because a lot of those episodes of Impact after Christian's title win were still focused on Jarrett and the feud with Sting.

By the end, he'd completely worn out his welcome and he was getting a lot of bad heat from the crowd.


Jeff Jarrett was always a good midcard-upper midcard heel. He just wasn't big enough or talented enough or unique enough for me to buy as a true superstar main eventer. He's solid in the ring and really his matches are never bad, but they are never awesome either. (At least because of him) If you think of a great match with him in it you are thinking of a match with a superior worker.

[CQI13]

Same could be said about Hardy or any number of other workers. But given where they were at (TNA), he was big enough there. Should he headline WM? No. Should he headline Bound For Glory? Absolutely.

[PeterHilton]

Same could be said about Hardy or any number of other workers. But given where they were at (TNA), he was big enough there. Should he headline WM? No. Should he headline Bound For Glory? Absolutely.

Hyde said it best...

Having Jarrett in the main event that time. Not a problem. Having Jarret be the only main eventer at that time by a mile = big problem.

Jarett as an established heel was fine. When he completely dominated the company for years, even after no one gave a rat's ass what he did any more? That was moronic.

[justtxyank]

Same could be said about Hardy or any number of other workers. But given where they were at (TNA), he was big enough there. Should he headline WM? No. Should he headline Bound For Glory? Absolutely.

I disagree. How many other big time main eventers are almost never the most over OR most talented in their main event matches?

Usually when this happens it is because the guy is being bumped to the main event from the upper midcard to freshen things up. This is where Jarrett has always been best. It was when he was the established top dog, or KING OF THE MOUNTAIN as he likes to say that it becomes a problem.

[CQI13]

For all different tastes, I guess. I've always enjoyed Jarrett (from his time with Owen in WWE) to WCW, to TNA. I despise Hardy, and don't see his appeal. And over/talented is obviously subjective. Bryan Danielson can't be put in a main event match at a big PPV right now for WWE (no matter how talented he is). Send him to TNA or ROH, andhe could certainly main event.

[TommyDreamerFan]

[QUOTE=PeterHilton;917823]You just asked me to name something wrong with TNA in 2004 then named about 5 different instances where they screwed up. :confused:

Raven NOT winning the belt back then after the feud they had and how over he was with the crowd was one of their biggest mistakes.

He won it when they had too during that bleak time when they had no TV and still needed fans. It's always smarter booking to have a heel champ then a face champ.

Seriously.."Maybe he used politics to stay on top or not.." ? Does anyone honestly have any doubts about that still?

And that "Jarrett was the only one worth giving the belt" excuse is a pile of crap and it always has been. you can't KNOW he was the only one worth giving the belt to because nobody else ever got a push. Sort of a circular logic isn't it...

Your right. Guys that bitched about being held down, Joe E. Legend and Chris Harris where held back in TNA and went on to do great things in the WWE. Oh... wait <.<

Aj Styles? Daniels? No, they sir, are stronger in the X-Division. AJ at the time was even stating he'd rather be in the X-Division the heavyweight scene. So bassically you had Double J, Jeff Hardy, Kevin Nash, DDP, Raven, Monty Brown, and with some finessing Abyss. Who could you give that belt to long term, who is reliable? It comes down to Double J and Raven, and I would side with Double J because Jarrett can earn more against those guys being faces then Raven could going against them as heels.

As Remi pointed out earlier, maybe if TNA had pushed their talent back then they'd have have become BIGGER NAMES NOW.

Daniels, Abyss, AJ Styles, Monty Brown, Jeff hardy..they were all on the roster. Maybe if you push them in 2004 and don't use a glorified midcard nobody like Jarreett as a crutch, then you don't have to constantly bring in washed up names and competition cast-offs in 2010.

Monty would of left for family issues, just like he left the E, it was by accident but it's a good thing TNA didn't throw their money behind him or his leaving the business would of hurt them.

Jeff Hardy was about as reliable lighting a match in a hurricane back then. Then did the best with as they could, booking him in hardcore matches.

AJ always was the star of the promotion and the go to guy. He would be the guy I'd put the belt on but homeboy wanted to return to the X-Division.

Daniels had just seperated from Elix and didn't have an identity yet. They didn't drop the ball on daniels in 2004, that would come later on, but he became his own man in 2004.

Abyss... Very truthful but TNA doesn't ever seem to know what they want to do with him and so he panders back and forth beteewn being their Foley and their Kane. Only now, under Hogan is he really breaking away from both sterotypes and kinda becoming his own. Abyss has always been a great brawler, if Hogan can teach him to better connect with the crowd this will be his paradigm year much like Daniels was in 2004.


I'm sorry..but you are awful to have a conversation with on this because you have total blinders on. You're even a Jarrett fan...there's no way for you to have any kind of objective opinion about what this company is doing.

EDIT: that last sentence probably sounds like more of a personal attack then I meant..but dammit how do I talk to someone who even defends the Planet Jarrett Era?


Oh relax, we're debating like two star wars geeks, not feuding like Cornette and Russo. :)

First off I think Double J is pretty talented, and I love to hate the guy. I'd love watching the mainevent, cheer on the face and then see what wormy way Jarrett would go about escaping death. Not to mention during that time with Jarrett on top, TNA had a very fine structure too it. Double J was champ, claim TNA was his world, in would come some big star who would nearly beat Jarrett only for Double J to escape by the skin of his teeth.

To be honest, sir, I'm very lax on what I would consider good talent. In my mind if I'm the least bit entertained by the worker in the ring, they're doing something right. Many now a day would say like... JBL wasn't a good champ in 2004 either, and I would disagree. He's no Kurt Angle, he can't have a good match with anyone, but in his brawling element against the people he can have good matches with he's a tremendous worker. Not to mention he came in with a great Rich Texan/Republican gimmick that think would of been very difficult to pull off with anybody else. I don't know if I would of had his reign as long as he did (because Eddie Guerrero is way more talented, and was white hot at the time) but part of the reason why Eddie got the belt taken off him is that the pressure was starting to get to him and in the long run?

Well in the long run, it was the unintentionally smarter decision Eddie didn't have the belt because as bad as Eddie's death was for the company can you imagine how horrible it would of been for a PR stand point if the guy holding the belt died? What could you do then? How could anyone else pick up that same strap and be champion if a beloved former champ died? They would have to retire the belt!

Yeah I know I've gone off on a tangent oh well. It just seems TNA was doing fine, though it was a tad boring until Vince Russo came along. Then we got some interesting things like the Judas Mesias being Abyss' brother storyline, that was pretty cool, but then we also got gimmick matches galore and it was such a mess. I very much so agree with Lance Storm, Russo is a tremendously good idea man but he's a horrible booker! He needs someone to be his filter.

[TommyDreamerFan]

Looking back on it now though, those big names didn't draw a crowd. So it was all pointless.



Jarrett could be a fun heel in portions. It was the fact he dominated the storylines for years and years even after the crowd had turned on him...

I'd even argue that after Christian signed, he still played the "I'm the bigger name" card. Because a lot of those episodes of Impact after Christian's title win were still focused on Jarrett and the feud with Sting.

By the end, he'd completely worn out his welcome and he was getting a lot of bad heat from the crowd.

well it certainly didn't help he was infront of the same crowd week in and week out. And I feel it was a waste his reign ended at the King Of The Moutain match that Raven won. Raven should of won the belt clean, imo.

[Hyde Hill]

Vince in the acorn online on wrestlemania and TNA:

http://www.acorn-online.com/joomla15/arts/features/53533-after-26-years-wrestlemania-is-still-special-to-wwe-owner.html

excerpt on TNA:

The wrestling landscape itself has also changed in the last six months. For years WWE battled rival World Championship Wrestling (WCW) in what fans remember as the “Monday Night Wars” because both companies had programs going head to head Monday night. WWE decisively won the war in 2001 with the end of WCW, but this month Total Nonstop Action (TNA) moved its wrestling program to Monday nights directly against WWE’s flagship program RAW.

WWE isn’t sweating it though and the ratings have so far backed that confidence up, with millions more preferring WWE programming. Mr. McMahon even goes as far at to say TNA is “not competition.”

“We’re in different businesses,” Mr. McMahon said. “We’re in the entertainment business and they’re in the ‘pro wrasslin’ business. It’s different markets. When they moved to Monday nights they threw the kitchen sink at us and only did a fraction of our audience. It doesn’t speak well for the type of product they’re trying to present with the tawdry, blood-soaked action. I don’t think that’s what the culture wants these days.”

I think that is what a lot of the culture wants today and is the type of culture that was prevalent when wrestling was at its biggest. Anyways thanks for the press Acorn and Vince if you want wrestling go to TNA lolz.

[PeterHilton]

“We’re in different businesses,” Mr. McMahon said. “We’re in the entertainment business and they’re in the ‘pro wrasslin’ business. It’s different markets. When they moved to Monday nights they threw the kitchen sink at us and only did a fraction of our audience. It doesn’t speak well for the type of product they’re trying to present with the tawdry, blood-soaked action. I don’t think that’s what the culture wants these days.”


Hilarious.

[BHK1978]

Vince in the acorn online on wrestlemania and TNA:

http://www.acorn-online.com/joomla15/arts/features/53533-after-26-years-wrestlemania-is-still-special-to-wwe-owner.html

excerpt on TNA:

The wrestling landscape itself has also changed in the last six months. For years WWE battled rival World Championship Wrestling (WCW) in what fans remember as the “Monday Night Wars” because both companies had programs going head to head Monday night. WWE decisively won the war in 2001 with the end of WCW, but this month Total Nonstop Action (TNA) moved its wrestling program to Monday nights directly against WWE’s flagship program RAW.

WWE isn’t sweating it though and the ratings have so far backed that confidence up, with millions more preferring WWE programming. Mr. McMahon even goes as far at to say TNA is “not competition.”

“We’re in different businesses,” Mr. McMahon said. “We’re in the entertainment business and they’re in the ‘pro wrasslin’ business. It’s different markets. When they moved to Monday nights they threw the kitchen sink at us and only did a fraction of our audience. It doesn’t speak well for the type of product they’re trying to present with the tawdry, blood-soaked action. I don’t think that’s what the culture wants these days.”

I think that is what a lot of the culture wants today and is the type of culture that was prevalent when wrestling was at its biggest. Anyways thanks for the press Acorn and Vince if you want wrestling go to TNA lolz.

Now I don't think that Vince is worried about TNA, he has no reason to be, but for him to pretty much say that he does not care about them is a lie. I read (And you can all say the tired line of, Do you believe everything you read, because I believe it to be true.) that he and people watching TNA and reporting to him what was going on when they went head-to-head. So he is very much aware of what is going on, even if he wants to play it off as if he doesn't care.

For all different tastes, I guess. I've always enjoyed Jarrett (from his time with Owen in WWE) to WCW, to TNA. I despise Hardy, and don't see his appeal. And over/talented is obviously subjective. Bryan Danielson can't be put in a main event match at a big PPV right now for WWE (no matter how talented he is). Send him to TNA or ROH, andhe could certainly main event.

I have always enjoyed JJ as well but I agree he should never be THE main heel of the company. He just does not have that it factor.

I agree with you on Hardy, I never got his appeal. To me he is nothing more than a bland (personality wise, not wrestling wise) tag team wrestler.

[brashleyholland]

"I don’t think that’s what the culture wants these days.”

I think that is what a lot of the culture wants today and is the type of culture that was prevalent when wrestling was at its biggest. Anyways thanks for the press Acorn and Vince if you want wrestling go to TNA lolz.

Clearly Vince is right, and proven so when you look at his company's balance sheet and ratings compared to TNA. 'The People' don't want 'pro wrasslin' anymore...the YouTube generation want things loud, fast and new.

There are so many options for entertainment these days between TV, games, internet, fresh air (LOL, just kidding!!)...if you don't keep peoples atention they just turn to something else. WWE provides short matches, quick transitions, flashy presentation etc. Sure, it's not pro-wrestling as we'd like to to be...but it's 'what the culture wants' these days.

[shawn michaels 82]

Now I don't think that Vince is worried about TNA, he has no reason to be, but for him to pretty much say that he does not care about them is a lie. I read (And you can all say the tired line of, Do you believe everything you read, because I believe it to be true.) that he and people watching TNA and reporting to him what was going on when they went head-to-head. So he is very much aware of what is going on, even if he wants to play it off as if he doesn't care..

Vince is paying attention to them, he's careful. He didn't got where he did by sitting and relaxing without paying attention. But he is doing what he's suposed to by saing he doesn't care. It would be ridiculous for him to admit he's got his eyes on them, especially with the current rating. His current strategy shows inteligence.


I agree with you on Hardy, I never got his appeal. To me he is nothing more than a bland (personality wise, not wrestling wise) tag team wrestler.

I know why some people like him, he atracts the emo type of people (wich i truly dispize,but that's a personal opinion of mine. people like whatever they like,period) as well as a bunch of other trend groups. I have to say i like high flyers (not only high flyers, but i like them) and i have to admit that there's something about hardy that i dispize...oh i wonder what? Wait...i think i already said what it is... :D

[BHK1978]

I know why some people like him, he atracts the emo type of people (wich i truly dispize,but that's a personal opinion of mine. people like whatever they like,period) as well as a bunch of other trend groups. I have to say i like high flyers (not only high flyers, but i like them) and i have to admit that there's something about hardy that i dispize...oh i wonder what? Wait...i think i already said what it is... :D

Was it me or did it look like he wasn't feeling it at the end of last Monday's show? I mean Eric Young and RVD looked like they were happy to be out there. However, Jeff looked like he was thinking whatever.

[shawn michaels 82]

Was it me or did it look like he wasn't feeling it at the end of last Monday's show? I mean Eric Young and RVD looked like they were happy to be out there. However, Jeff looked like he was thinking whatever.

I believe it was something more like this: "God i have to enjoy this while it lasts because i'm going to jail!" However, his jail thoughts got the better and that's why he looked that way. :D

[jesterx7769]

he was grabbing his head wasn't he? I'm not 100% sure on that just going off memory but i thought when Young was talking he was grabbing the back of his head kinda grimmacing thinking things were over/just about over since he already celebrated then young lifted up their arms and RVD looked happy when Jeff clearly did not play to the camera or crowd like he usually does so he might have hit his head funny on the Swanton

[PeterHilton]

Clearly Vince is right, and proven so when you look at his company's balance sheet and ratings compared to TNA. 'The People' don't want 'pro wrasslin' anymore...the YouTube generation want things loud, fast and new.

There are so many options for entertainment these days between TV, games, internet, fresh air (LOL, just kidding!!)...if you don't keep peoples atention they just turn to something else. WWE provides short matches, quick transitions, flashy presentation etc. Sure, it's not pro-wrestling as we'd like to to be...but it's 'what the culture wants' these days.

Kinda sorta agree...except that if what they really wanted was short games, transitions, and a product directed towards short attention spans then TNA is IT.

It's seventeen things jammed into every quarter hour segment.

I think a simplified product and straight forward storytelling is where the WWE excels.

You can tune out for a few weeks, come back, and you know exactly where you left off. It's brain candy. TNA demands that you tune in ..and I don't know if you have that large a dedicated audience any more.

[crownsy]

Kinda sorta agree...except that if what they really wanted was short games, transitions, and a product directed towards short attention spans then TNA is IT.

It's seventeen things jammed into every quarter hour segment.

I think a simplified product and straight forward storytelling is where the WWE excels.

You can tune out for a few weeks, come back, and you know exactly where you left off. It's brain candy. TNA demands that you tune in ..and I don't know if you have that large a dedicated audience any more.

I agree, but i will say, i think there is something to be said for logical, well paced storylines.

One thing i hate is the swerve for the sake of the swerve. I think TNA suffers from that immensely.

Example: CM punk heel turn was evident from the first promo he gave after cashing in MITB on hardy. We all knew he was turning heel. it was a predictable, well paced storyline that followed a logical progression.

It was also great, and led to punk being on of the best heels in the company.

Now, the way i read the IWC, some would argue that's bad storytelling, because in the abstract, it suffers from every thing they propose to hate about the WWE.

- Predictable
- saw it coming a mile away
- no "shock" moment, really.

Now compare that with TNA's heel turn on sting, for example. Is it sudden? sure. has it had "shock" moments? you bet.

It also suffers from the fact that i flat out don't care about it. TNA's booking staff has given me no reason to. Sting just showed up, kicked RVD's rear end, and now does the same every once in awhile.

Now, i know the IWC response "it will be explained later, right now it's a cliffhanger"

Bull, it's bad booking.

Have you ever read a story where it threw the climax in your face and then promised to explain it in due time? those storys better be told in phenominal style, or they are disjointed and jarring.

I just don't think TNA really understands how to involve people in there story lines long term. use, WWE is quite often predictable, but when you do a storyline as tight as they generally do, so what?

MAss effect 2, to go completely random for a comparison, is predictable as all hell. That game didn't suprise me once.

But, it told the story well, involved me in it, and made me care about the characters.

No one randomly turned on me for no reason. everything that happened was well told and made sense. that's good storytelling.

Just booking a random swerve or turn, to me, is not "exciting" or edgey it's silly. I wouldn't do it in TEW, i don't enjoy it in the real world.



TNA has alot of high end talent, but they need to learn how to book it, quickly. Otherwise they will stay as that "other" promotion forever.

those are my random musings, anyway.

[Bigpapa42]

crownsy, if I could rep you right now, I would.

[Wrestling Century]

crownsy, if I could rep you right now, I would.

What does "rep" mean? :confused:

[PeterHilton]

crownsy, if I could rep you right now, I would.

Yup.

[Bigpapa42]

What does "rep" mean? :confused:

Its forum-speak for "add to reputation". Some forums give users the ability to give positive (and sometimes negative) reputation to people based on agreeing or disagreeing with their posts.

[Wrestling Century]

Its forum-speak for "add to reputation". Some forums give users the ability to give positive (and sometimes negative) reputation to people based on agreeing or disagreeing with their posts.

Ahhh. Good to know. :)

[shawn michaels 82]

I agree, but i will say, i think there is something to be said for logical, well paced storylines.

One thing i hate is the swerve for the sake of the swerve. I think TNA suffers from that immensely.

Example: CM punk heel turn was evident from the first promo he gave after cashing in MITB on hardy. We all knew he was turning heel. it was a predictable, well paced storyline that followed a logical progression.

It was also great, and led to punk being on of the best heels in the company.

Now, the way i read the IWC, some would argue that's bad storytelling, because in the abstract, it suffers from every thing they propose to hate about the WWE.

- Predictable
- saw it coming a mile away
- no "shock" moment, really.

Now compare that with TNA's heel turn on sting, for example. Is it sudden? sure. has it had "shock" moments? you bet.

It also suffers from the fact that i flat out don't care about it. TNA's booking staff has given me no reason to. Sting just showed up, kicked RVD's rear end, and now does the same every once in awhile.

Now, i know the IWC response "it will be explained later, right now it's a cliffhanger"

Bull, it's bad booking.

Have you ever read a story where it threw the climax in your face and then promised to explain it in due time? those storys better be told in phenominal style, or they are disjointed and jarring.

I just don't think TNA really understands how to involve people in there story lines long term. use, WWE is quite often predictable, but when you do a storyline as tight as they generally do, so what?

MAss effect 2, to go completely random for a comparison, is predictable as all hell. That game didn't suprise me once.

But, it told the story well, involved me in it, and made me care about the characters.

No one randomly turned on me for no reason. everything that happened was well told and made sense. that's good storytelling.

Just booking a random swerve or turn, to me, is not "exciting" or edgey it's silly. I wouldn't do it in TEW, i don't enjoy it in the real world.



TNA has alot of high end talent, but they need to learn how to book it, quickly. Otherwise they will stay as that "other" promotion forever.

those are my random musings, anyway.

I'm sorry, but i will have to ask this...are you serious? Especially in some parts where you talk about the IWC?

[Wrestling Century]

Is Spike showing a replay of Impact today?

[jesterx7769]

No.

[crownsy]

I'm sorry, but i will have to ask this...are you serious? Especially in some parts where you talk about the IRC?

what parts do you think are unreasonable or im "not serious" on?

in my experience, the main points the internet community hammers the WWE on is that they are:

-predictable
- no shock moments to story lines
- story-lines are simple, not complex enough

in addition of course, to the whole PG thing


my only point was that those three things are not dispositive of horrible storytelling in and of themselves. Alot of great movies/books/ whatever entertainment you want to name is predictable as sin.

TNA's booking crew, to me, is far, far, far to fond of the "oh snap!!!" booking moment, with little or no storytelling to explain the workers motivation.

They also, as i said, tend to tell the story backwards to forwards. they do the swerve, looking to shock the audience, then pretend it's good storytelling to spend the next parts of the story hinting as to why on god's green earth the worker would do what they did.

To me, that type of storytelling, while valid, requires exceptional storytelling talent. I don't think TNA's booking crew is capable of that level of storytelling.

So, to me, as someone who WANTS tna to do well, thats an issue they need to address.

MAke me care about a storyline, involve me in it as a viewer. don't just go...

"OH SNAP RVD!!! .... and now STING hits him with a bat, completely out of nowhere!! why? who knows, but it's good booking because we surprised you!!"

tune in next week, were mabey if your lucky we will tell you what the hell we are doing with this worker and why he would betray every face value we set him up with over the last few years! or mabey we'll just put this story on the back burner for 2 weeks! That's the kind of great action we bring you here on impact"

and expect me to give a damn about your show on a weekly basis.

[PeterHilton]

I think the thing s m 82 is pointing out is that the IWC actually spends a lot of time hammering TNA for its storylines.

I mean..you're making great points overall, but i don't see the IWC leaping to defend TNA's stories in the way you've maybe implied.

[crownsy]

Well, i mean, the IWC in general is never happy. Everyone's a great booker in their own mind (thats why we all like TEW hehe)

I was simply responding to the post about storylines in the WWE being watered down and predictable, not implying that the IWC doesn't hate on TNA as well.

The IWC hates every product to a degree, because it's never as good as they could have done ;)

[PeterHilton]

Well, i mean, the IWC in general is never happy. Everyone's a great booker in their own mind (thats why we all like TEW hehe)

I was simply responding to the post about storylines in the WWE being watered down and predictable, not implying that the IWC doesn't hate on TNA as well.

The IWC hates every product to a degree, because it's never as good as they could have done ;)

Fair enough. Although I wasn't trying to say the simplified storylines was abad thing. The WWE is doing straightforward and predictable...but they're doing it well and it's working.

[jesterx7769]

I actually think you hit the nail on the head. The whole "care" part. Would it really have been that much trouble to have Sting grab a mic and say "I hate you Hogan for always being a sellout!" or w/e you want him to say, pick your poison. They've had four shows to do this on (including the PPV) and they dont have to explain everything but to explain nothing?

Exactly like you said their whole theory is "Tune in next week so maybe we'll clue you in on X" instead of making you care and wanting to tune in for the worker or storyline or wrestling, its more trickery trying to get you tune in to get something explained to end your frustration, which yes, sometimes can be good, for example "Who kidnapped Samoa Joe?" that made me want to tune in. But when they use that tactic for what seems like everything every week and nothing gets explained, why watch when you know things aren't getting explained.

Yes we on the board are overally crtical/positive but if loyalists (as I imagine we all for watching week in and week out although i may stop watching like when Kurt Angle did speed dating, that was the last episode I watched before the new year and that was largely in part to getting DVR) get upset, what do you think the casual fan thinks? I'm betting confused just like the rest of us.

[Linsolv]

Clearly Vince is right, and proven so when you look at his company's balance sheet and ratings compared to TNA. 'The People' don't want 'pro wrasslin' anymore...the YouTube generation want things loud, fast and new.

There are so many options for entertainment these days between TV, games, internet, fresh air (LOL, just kidding!!)...if you don't keep peoples atention they just turn to something else. WWE provides short matches, quick transitions, flashy presentation etc. Sure, it's not pro-wrestling as we'd like to to be...but it's 'what the culture wants' these days.

As someone who does his share of gaming, I have to disagree.

Final Fantasy's one of the most successful game franchises in history. So's Metal Gear Solid. So's The Elder Scrolls.

What do these have in common? They're long. In fact, TES games really don't have an ending in the traditional sense.

---

What "culture" wants varies widely, but TNA's problem isn't that there's no community that wants wrestling. Look at ROH, whose out-of-the-ring storytelling is almost amateurish!

The problem with TNA is that they want to have their cake and eat it too. They want to claim to be more serious, but they want to have people who aren't serious watching too. They want to be good, but they don't want to log the hours to get the talent, they want "sure things" like Waltman and Hall -- who as we all know are about as sure as the Titanic.


As to predictability, it's okay if it's done well. When I (going back to the video game metaphor) play Modern Warfare, I'm not shocked by anything going on; it's pretty standard stuff. But the gameplay's fun, and that's enough for me. On the other hand, if you want to rely on massive surprises -- well, that wouldn't really work in video games cause spoilers are so prevalent -- you need to think it through. You can't book by the seat of your pants if you want your TOTALLY SURPRISING Sting heel turn to go over well. Bischoff and Russo seem to be allergic to too much planning.

EDIT: To bring that last thought full circle, the reason the Punk turn went so well is because Punk's a solid heel. Nothing surprising happened, but that's okay because when everyone saw it coming, they all thought "That's totally gonna work out well."

[shawn michaels 82]

Now compare that with TNA's heel turn on sting, for example. Is it sudden? sure. has it had "shock" moments? you bet.

It also suffers from the fact that i flat out don't care about it. TNA's booking staff has given me no reason to. Sting just showed up, kicked RVD's rear end, and now does the same every once in awhile.

Now, i know the IWC response "it will be explained later, right now it's a cliffhanger"

Bull, it's bad booking.

Have you ever read a story where it threw the climax in your face and then promised to explain it in due time? those storys better be told in phenominal style, or they are disjointed and jarring.




I would love to truly talk about this post, but i'm a bit busy now putting HBK and Bryan Danielson over everything that moves on my roster (lolz) , so here's goes a quick one: Where have you hear anyone here (just to give an example) defend the way in wich TNA turned sting (or the turn itself) or try to justify it by saying it's a cliffhanger? I may be wrong, but the majority here "pounded TNA until they were knocked out in the mat" because of the whole Sting situation. Hell, most of us here are always agreeing in the fact that although WWE is stale, it doesn't mean it is necessarily bad, and make's a lot more sense then TNA.

[crownsy]

I agree jester, it's just a carrot and stick way of booking.

It can be done well, but i dont think TNA really does. Don't try to trick me into tuning in. make me WANT to tune in.

Random side note:

has the FBI been notified about joe at this point? how many shows has it been since we've seen ANYTHING about that storyline?

I actually forgot it until you mentioned it lol.

[crownsy]

I would love to truly talk about this post, but i'm a bit busy now putting HBK and Bryan Danielson over everything that moves on my roster (lolz) , so here's goes a quick one: Where have you hear anyone here (just to give an example) defend the way in wich TNA turned sting (or the turn itself) or try to justify it by saying it's a cliffhanger? I may be wrong, but the majority here "pounded TNA until they were knocked out in the mat" because of the whole Sting situation. Hell, most of us here are always agreeing in the fact that although WWE is stale, it doesn't mean it is necessarily bad, and make's a lot more sense then TNA.


I think were talking at cross points. I was discussing why i think predictable storyline s are not in and of themselves bad, not trying to say that people don't criticize TNA. Both companies take heat, because everyone is a great booker in thier own mind :D

[Linsolv]

I'm a bad booker in my mind. But I think that I could be a worthy addition to TNA's team right now. "Hey, Lin, is this idea crazy?" "Yes, Eric." "Okay, I'll be back in a minute."

[shawn michaels 82]

I think were talking at cross points. I was discussing why i think predictable storyline s are not in and of themselves bad, not trying to say that people don't criticize TNA. Both companies take heat, because everyone is a great booker in thier own mind :D

Well, it just seemed to me that you were implying something like that, but maybe i misunderstood.

[jesterx7769]

BTW did you guys see the "reason" TNA is going 8-10 on April 5th? They are saying it is because of the NCAA final, which I think is a total bull reason. Are they really that worried about losing an hour of television for ONE night? No. I believe its b/c they are dissapointed with the Monday ratings (come on, did anyone really think the ratings would go from 1.2 to .86?) and the NCAA game gives them an excuse to experiment with the 8 PM start (which hopefully works)

[shawn michaels 82]

I'm a bad booker in my mind. But I think that I could be a worthy addition to TNA's team right now. "Hey, Lin, is this idea crazy?" "Yes, Eric." "Okay, I'll be back in a minute."

I vote this post for: POST of The Year! :D

[Remianen]

AJ at the time was even stating he'd rather be in the X-Division the heavyweight scene.

AJ always was the star of the promotion and the go to guy. He would be the guy I'd put the belt on but homeboy wanted to return to the X-Division.

I have a question. In 2004, which was the hotter and more popular part of the product, the "heavyweight scene" or the X-Division? You're trying to down AJ for choosing the NFL over the freakin' CFL.

Many now a day would say like... JBL wasn't a good champ in 2004 either, and I would disagree. He's no Kurt Angle, he can't have a good match with anyone, but in his brawling element against the people he can have good matches with he's a tremendous worker.

I can barely fathom how utterly crazy this sounds. Lemme see if I can illustrate how preposterous this assertion is.

Wet tissue paper can't stop bullets. But if you put a block of steel behind it, it's a tremendous bullet stopper.

Water can't fuel a car engine. But if you put pure gasoline with it, it's a tremendous fuel!

Put simply, ANY worker can look "tremendous" if put in the ring with far superior workers. That doesn't make the worker tremendous though. No more than catching a pass from Peyton Manning makes you a first ballot Hall of Fame receiver.

Look, the core of any and every successful team is built around homegrown talent. It's the same in wrestling as it is in other sports. The Yankees have Jeter, Cano, Posada, Rivera, all talent they developed internally. In fact, they didn't start to become successful until those workers were "ready". WWE's main event is packed with stars they developed (Cena, Orton, Batista, etc). TNA has.....AJ (and even that's debatable).

But I'll have to take Peter's advice (Planet Jarrett was the best period EVAR! :rolleyes: ). It's pointless.

[jwt13]

BTW did you guys see the "reason" TNA is going 8-10 on April 5th? They are saying it is because of the NCAA final, which I think is a total bull reason. Are they really that worried about losing an hour of television for ONE night? No. I believe its b/c they are dissapointed with the Monday ratings (come on, did anyone really think the ratings would go from 1.2 to .86?) and the NCAA game gives them an excuse to experiment with the 8 PM start (which hopefully works)

I would have to disagree the NCAA would take most of the veiwers thats why but I would be surprised if they moved there full time even if ratings were better. And the reason ratings are so low for TNA right now is its wrestlemania time. You'll be seeing 1.0-1.3 in a few weeks afte WM imo. The NCAA Championship will probly do a 10.5-13.0 which take away alot of wrestling veiwers also

[jesterx7769]

Assumptions and excuses. You are assuming enough people that watch TNA (with the massive .86 ratings) are going to watch the NCAA game, which yes draws big numbers (most watched program in history) but I dont see RAW rescheduling? Heck they get bumped every year for the dog show. is TNA number going to drop to a .7/.6? oOo big drop for just one night. Plus the game comes on at 9, so best situation they get some people for the first hour (those who actually realize the time has been changed) then they lose them to the game since they were going to lose them anyway (once again assuming of course they turn on the game and not the start of RAW)

You are also assuming all is perfect and their ratings are going up (oh but they are, a .02!), where is the evidence? You are blaming it on WM? What happens if ratings don't go up then? Blame it on Baseball season starting? If RAW and WM are the problem then why do they draw the same rating on Thursday where there is no RAW to promote Wrestlemania?

I said it before and the WM and all excuses are bull. There will always be excuses, and what, is TNA just going to take a .4 hit every Feb/March for the WM build? Wow thats stable.

Wrestlemania->Now NCAA ->Baseball Starting->NBA/NHL Playoffs->Outside in Summer->Monday Night Football-> Holidays.

I've heard all the same excuses before (mainly when people would talk about WWE) and they go year round. Either put up or shut up which they haven't done. Excuses are worthless, book well, promote well, and people will watch if they like you. I'm not even saying I can fix TNA or be a master of all I just feel the one night move is ridiculous just to move up an hour for that one night when you are trying to get your fanbase accustomed to a new time (would make more sense to just show a replay which hopefully they do that week) and while Spike of course isn't going to cancel Impact they can't be happy with the drop (yes they need time but who likes less?) and now there are articles about WWE and USA beating Impact and Spike (which isn't fun to read how your wrestlng program draws a third less than the other network you want to compete with) the tournament just seems like the perfect cover for an experiment.

[Moe Hunter]

As to predictability, it's okay if it's done well. When I (going back to the video game metaphor) play Modern Warfare, I'm not shocked by anything going on; it's pretty standard stuff.

I'm sorry but when (Spoilers)

The American soldier you play as gets caught up in a Nuclear explosion, and you have to *play* his last minutes on this earth, gasping for air, limbs not working, vision blurred, blood and fallen bretheren everywhere...

That was pretty F'n shocking storytelling. And it was AWESOME. And I'd say it adds to the example of "shocks that are told well", as opposed to TNA's "shocks every week, and then we'll just forget to mention it next week. Tune in to *every* show to find out if we ever resolve this!".

[Linsolv]

I'm sorry but when (Spoilers)

[spoiler removed]

That was pretty F'n shocking storytelling. And it was AWESOME. And I'd say it adds to the example of "shocks that are told well", as opposed to TNA's "shocks every week, and then we'll just forget to mention it next week. Tune in to *every* show to find out if we ever resolve this!".

It's my girlfriend's PS3, and I'm not good enough to get very far in the limited time I've had to play. But I liked what I had so far, and it wasn't anything different from what I expected from what I saw.

[Tag01]

I'm sorry but when (Spoilers)

That was pretty F'n shocking storytelling. And it was AWESOME. And I'd say it adds to the example of "shocks that are told well", as opposed to TNA's "shocks every week, and then we'll just forget to mention it next week. Tune in to *every* show to find out if we ever resolve this!".

Awesome game. Awesome storytelling. Better than a lot of movies I've seen.

[TommyDreamerFan]

Vince doesn't know jack about Culture. He didn't even know what the Blair Witch project was, and he fired Kevin Thorne.

If you claim to know what the culture wants you would of jumped on the vampire band wagon you silly scalawag!

[TommyDreamerFan]

[QUOTE=Remianen;920027]I have a question. In 2004, which was the hotter and more popular part of the product, the "heavyweight scene" or the X-Division? You're trying to down AJ for choosing the NFL over the freakin' CFL.


No I didn't say that at all. AJ didn't want to be used in the heavyweight division, he wanted to be used in the X-Division. And it was because of AJ, mind you, daniels got as over as he is.


I can barely fathom how utterly crazy this sounds. Lemme see if I can illustrate how preposterous this assertion is.

Wet tissue paper can't stop bullets. But if you put a block of steel behind it, it's a tremendous bullet stopper.

Water can't fuel a car engine. But if you put pure gasoline with it, it's a tremendous fuel!

Put simply, ANY worker can look "tremendous" if put in the ring with far superior workers. That doesn't make the worker tremendous though. No more than catching a pass from Peyton Manning makes you a first ballot Hall of Fame receiver.

Look, the core of any and every successful team is built around homegrown talent. It's the same in wrestling as it is in other sports. The Yankees have Jeter, Cano, Posada, Rivera, all talent they developed internally. In fact, they didn't start to become successful until those workers were "ready". WWE's main event is packed with stars they developed (Cena, Orton, Batista, etc). TNA has.....AJ (and even that's debatable).

But I'll have to take Peter's advice (Planet Jarrett was the best period EVAR! :rolleyes: ). It's pointless.

PUT JBL in the ring with guys like Sandman, New Jack or any other guy that knows how to brawl and what you'll get with is a great wild brawl. Put him in there with a guy like Batista, who needs someone to make him look good, and of course the match is going to suck. It's going to suck even more if you don't play to his strengths (brawling) booking 101 sir.

If JBL is a knife, I'm not going to bring him to a gun fight. I'm going to bring him to a knife fight, why? Because he's a pretty sharp fn' knife! Your example is lame, sir.

[Moe Hunter]

Vince doesn't know jack about Culture. He didn't even know what the Blair Witch project was, and he fired Kevin Thorne.

If you claim to know what the culture wants you would of jumped on the vampire band wagon you silly scalawag!

Blair Witch Project release date: July 1999
Kevin Thorn character debuted: July 2006
Kevin Thorn's last televised match: December 2007
Kevin Thorn fired: January 2009

I'm not sure I follow your logic. Also, I haven't seen the BWP, but I don't recall it being about Vampires...

[Self]

Blair Witch Project has nothing to do with Kevin Thorne, but everything to do with Vince being out-of-touch with pop culture. He didn't even know about the Pirates movies until after Burchill had the gimmick for a while.

In terms of pop culture, Kevin Thorne was a wasted opportunity. He got in just before this latest Twilight-led vampire craze. Wrestling and Twilight have vastly different audiences, but if WWE could have used him (or a 'prettier' guy like John Morrison) to siphon off just a fraction of the Bella-brigade it could have been money. Turn him babyface, have him be mopey about how dangerous he is, toss in a romantic subplot and you'd be laughing all the way to the bank. The money bank.

[Nedew]

PUT JBL in the ring with guys like Sandman, New Jack or any other guy that knows how to brawl and what you'll get with is a great wild brawl.

Oh man, I would kill to see JBL-New Jack. I ****ing love New Jack, and that would be a brawl to end all brawls (not a Brawl For All, mind). Stifftastic!

[Daffanka]

In terms of pop culture, Kevin Thorne was a wasted opportunity. He got in just before this latest Twilight-led vampire craze. Wrestling and Twilight have vastly different audiences, but if WWE could have used him (or a 'prettier' guy like John Morrison) to siphon off just a fraction of the Bella-brigade it could have been money. Turn him babyface, have him be mopey about how dangerous he is, toss in a romantic subplot and you'd be laughing all the way to the bank. The money bank.

So they're pulling the Rocky Maiva heel turn is what you're saying?

[Self]

So they're pulling the Rocky Maiva heel turn is what you're saying?

I don't think that's what I'm saying. Did you quote the wrong post?

[Daffanka]

I don't think that's what I'm saying. Did you quote the wrong post?

I can't see that gimmick as anything but getting booed like crazy.

[Self]

I can't see that gimmick as anything but getting booed like crazy.

Oh I see. Sure. You're probably right about that. I haven't put too much thought into it. The character would need tweaking. Less whiny. More bad-ass. Hell, it could work just as well as a heel. The fact that vampires in stories are hated by the large majority is probably an element of why awkward teenage girls like them. "All those wrestling fans may hate you, but they just don't understand you. Not like I do." So while the 'vampire' annoys and infuriates the male audience by reciting poems about cutting himself, and no showing matches because 'his soul hurts' (or he's 'lost his smile') a small but powerful female audience thinks he's sensitive and hot and misunderstood and seek to cheer him up by buying his t-shirts. Lots and lots of t-shirts. ;)

... but you're probably right. I'm just thinking out loud, and I watched New Moon the other day (and didn't hate it) so this is fresh in my mind.

Back on a more TNA-ish topic... Isn't the next World X Cup due soon? Is it every 2 years or 4? I rewatched the last one recently and it was ace.

[Eisen-verse]

I just finally watched Impact and was throughly entertained the entire way through. In no way am I a TNA'lifer or anything; however, that show was ten times better than any WWE product i've seen lately. Great stuff!

The Main Event itself was pretty sweet. I'm not a jeff hardy fan but I found myself a big fan of his work tonight. Plus, there was an air of ambiguity as you didn't know how everything would turn out. Sure, it's RVD and Hardy so you expect that they would win; however, they also could have gone another way and showed "Beer Money" to be a better cohesive team and that's how they won. So, needless to say, my hat is off to TNA.

Side note: Do they pump in crowd noise now in the Impact zone? If not then I'm not sure what they did but they completely changed the old 'dead-zone' feeling that it use to have. It's surreal now.

[Hyde Hill]

BTW did you guys see the "reason" TNA is going 8-10 on April 5th? They are saying it is because of the NCAA final, which I think is a total bull reason. Are they really that worried about losing an hour of television for ONE night? No. I believe its b/c they are dissapointed with the Monday ratings (come on, did anyone really think the ratings would go from 1.2 to .86?) and the NCAA game gives them an excuse to experiment with the 8 PM start (which hopefully works)

Prolly not THE reason but a reason. So you can test how an 8-10 run does and duck competition like the NCAA final at the same time. Smart move.

[Hyde Hill]

I just finally watched Impact and was throughly entertained the entire way through. In no way am I a TNA'lifer or anything; however, that show was ten times better than any WWE product i've seen lately. Great stuff!

The Main Event itself was pretty sweet. I'm not a jeff hardy fan but I found myself a big fan of his work tonight. Plus, there was an air of ambiguity as you didn't know how everything would turn out. Sure, it's RVD and Hardy so you expect that they would win; however, they also could have gone another way and showed "Beer Money" to be a better cohesive team and that's how they won. So, needless to say, my hat is off to TNA.

Side note: Do they pump in crowd noise now in the Impact zone? If not then I'm not sure what they did but they completely changed the old 'dead-zone' feeling that it use to have. It's surreal now.

They had a pretty hot crowd on the night.

[Hyde Hill]

Oh I see. Sure. You're probably right about that. I haven't put too much thought into it. The character would need tweaking. Less whiny. More bad-ass. Hell, it could work just as well as a heel. The fact that vampires in stories are hated by the large majority is probably an element of why awkward teenage girls like them. "All those wrestling fans may hate you, but they just don't understand you. Not like I do." So while the 'vampire' annoys and infuriates the male audience by reciting poems about cutting himself, and no showing matches because 'his soul hurts' (or he's 'lost his smile') a small but powerful female audience thinks he's sensitive and hot and misunderstood and seek to cheer him up by buying his t-shirts. Lots and lots of t-shirts. ;)

... but you're probably right. I'm just thinking out loud, and I watched New Moon the other day (and didn't hate it) so this is fresh in my mind.

Back on a more TNA-ish topic... Isn't the next World X Cup due soon? Is it every 2 years or 4? I rewatched the last one recently and it was ace.

Yeah X-Cup should be this year. But with all the stuff going on atm I don't expect it till the end of the year if at all.

[PeterHilton]

PUT JBL in the ring with guys like Sandman, New Jack or any other guy that knows how to brawl and what you'll get with is a great wild brawl. Put him in there with a guy like Batista, who needs someone to make him look good, and of course the match is going to suck. It's going to suck even more if you don't play to his strengths (brawling) booking 101 sir.

If JBL is a knife, I'm not going to bring him to a gun fight. I'm going to bring him to a knife fight, why? Because he's a pretty sharp fn' knife! Your example is lame, sir.


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA...WTF?????

[Remianen]

[QUOTE]

No I didn't say that at all. AJ didn't want to be used in the heavyweight division, he wanted to be used in the X-Division. And it was because of AJ, mind you, daniels got as over as he is.




PUT JBL in the ring with guys like Sandman, New Jack or any other guy that knows how to brawl and what you'll get with is a great wild brawl. Put him in there with a guy like Batista, who needs someone to make him look good, and of course the match is going to suck. It's going to suck even more if you don't play to his strengths (brawling) booking 101 sir.

If JBL is a knife, I'm not going to bring him to a gun fight. I'm going to bring him to a knife fight, why? Because he's a pretty sharp fn' knife! Your example is lame, sir.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA...WTF?????

Peter, let it go, man. It's just not worth the effort. It's like showing Stevie Wonder a rainbow. In explaining how a worker who needs to be carried can be best utilized, he cites two workers who need to be carried EVEN MORE (and who aren't even 'decent' outside of hardcore environments).

Let it go.

[TommyDreamerFan]

The blair witch comment was in reference to the aborted Blonde Bitch Project. REMEMBER YOUR HISTORY FOLKS!

[QUOTE=TommyDreamerFan;920634]



Peter, let it go, man. It's just not worth the effort. It's like showing Stevie Wonder a rainbow. In explaining how a worker who needs to be carried can be best utilized, he cites two workers who need to be carried EVEN MORE (and who aren't even 'decent' outside of hardcore environments).

Let it go.

Thats why I'm saying to use them in their hardcore environments!!!!!!!!!!! What do you think? I send JBL and New Jack out there and say ALL RIGHT! ROH PURE RULES GUYS! FILL 20 MINUTES!

[Stennick]

I just read a report that said since January TNA has ballooned to SEVENTY wrestlers. That has to be close to what the WWE has on its active roster with three brands, three television shows and multiple house shows a night.

This includes high priced guys like Flair, RVD, Hardy, Kennedy, etc.

Plus they got the expensive of going live every night as well as apparently running ads during Monday Night RAW and doing advertising in Times Square.

With all of these expenses ratings are the lowest they have been in four years and there has been barely a noticeable bump in house show and merchandise sales.

Even if TNA is heading in the right direction creatively these are some valid points there is no way TNA should have an active roster of 70 workers.

[PeterHilton]

Thats why I'm saying to use them in their hardcore environments!!!!!!!!!!! What do you think? I send JBL and New Jack out there and say ALL RIGHT! ROH PURE RULES GUYS! FILL 20 MINUTES!


You missed the point: hardcore environment aside, you just said that JBL could get carried to a good match by two guys who were even worse workers than he was and had to be carried by wither their opponent or -more often - the type of match they wee in.

Jack and Sandman could really ONLY put on good matches in overbooked hardcore spotfests. (Which had their appeal at the time, don't get me wrong)

It sort of completely defeats your argument.

And it goes back to the point that it's hard to take your assessmentof TNA seriously. Because we just don't see the same things when we watch a wrestling match.

[PeterHilton]

I just read a report that said since January TNA has ballooned to SEVENTY wrestlers. That has to be close to what the WWE has on its active roster with three brands, three television shows and multiple house shows a night.

This includes high priced guys like Flair, RVD, Hardy, Kennedy, etc.

Plus they got the expensive of going live every night as well as apparently running ads during Monday Night RAW and doing advertising in Times Square.

With all of these expenses ratings are the lowest they have been in four years and there has been barely a noticeable bump in house show and merchandise sales.

Even if TNA is heading in the right direction creatively these are some valid points there is no way TNA should have an active roster of 70 workers.


I've saidthis before: they need to cut the roster. Maybe in half.

It's great to have all that talent, but TNA literally has too many guys for them to really focus on anybody for an extended length of time. They 're trying to pay attention to so much, that the booking of the whole roster suffers.

And yes..I know that if you cut 30 people or so you'd be releasing some very good, very talented individuals. But the storytelling would become more concise and the product would improve tenfold.

[Linsolv]

I think it would be a fun project to make a list of who we would cut. Since we're all smarky.

The List Now:

Men:

Abyss
AJ Styles
Alex Shelley
Amazing Red
Brian Kendrick
Brutus Magnus
Bubba
Chris Sabin
Consequences Creed
D'Angelo Dinero
Daniels
Desmond Wolfe
Don West
Doug Williams
Dr. Stevie
Eric Bischoff
Eric Young
Generation Me (for some reason, listed as one person on the Roster page)
Hernandez
Homicide
Hulk Hogan
James Storm
Jay Lethal
Jeff Hardy
Jeff Jarett
Jeremy Borash
Jesse Neal
Jimmy Hart
Kazarian
Kevin Nash
Kiyoshi
Kurt Angle
Matt Morgan
Mr. Anderson
Nasty Boys (Again, listed as one person)
Orlando Jones
Raven
Rhino
Rick Flair
Rob Terry
Rob Van Dam
Robert Roode
Samoa Joe
Scott Hall
Sean Waltman
Shannon Moore
Shark Boy
Sting
Suicide
Team 3D (Weird. Wonder why Sabin and Shelley got separate pages, then...)
Tomko

Women:

Angelina Love
Christy Hemme
Daffney
Hamada
Lacey von Erich
Madison Rayne
ODB
Sarita
So Cal Val
Tara
Taylor Wilde
Velvet Sky

(I left off announcers, but kept on-screen personalities. And Don West, because he is in those stupid damn commercials.)

I also think it's interesting that the Women's roster is SO much shorter, and yet very nearly every woman has a reasonably large fanbase. As opposed to the men's side, where a lot of people are getting lost in the shuffle.

[Tha Black Phenom]

I don't think you could decide to cut 30 people on a whim. Or even 20. They've backed themselves into a corner with that roster. You cut all the jobbers/irrelevant talent and all the old farts/main-eventers will be left running the asylum. You cut a bit of both and that's gonna create some **** to go down as well, at least on the old farts end. All they can do is wait 'till those guys leave on their own accord or something.

It's clear they've only ballooned to get the most talent away from WWE as possible. It's like that fat kid who's jealous of his skinny friend eating all the cake, he takes more and more away from him even though he feels he's gonna explode.

[Hyde Hill]

I just read a report that said since January TNA has ballooned to SEVENTY wrestlers. That has to be close to what the WWE has on its active roster with three brands, three television shows and multiple house shows a night.

This includes high priced guys like Flair, RVD, Hardy, Kennedy, etc.

Plus they got the expensive of going live every night as well as apparently running ads during Monday Night RAW and doing advertising in Times Square.

With all of these expenses ratings are the lowest they have been in four years and there has been barely a noticeable bump in house show and merchandise sales.

Even if TNA is heading in the right direction creatively these are some valid points there is no way TNA should have an active roster of 70 workers.

I counted 52 a while back still way too big though. Whoever did that can't do math. And I have made my ideal roster quite clear. Let me recount based on the list above. Ok that makes 58 if you count the tag teams as separate and don't include Hogan and Flair. That is still 10 off and way way too big.

[Stennick]

The list was from Meltzer so maybe there are guys on the payroll not on the "active" roster. IDK either way 60 guys for two hours a week is way way too many.

[Hyde Hill]

With some added info:

Main Event:

Angle H
Styles F
Joe H
Daniels H
Hardy F
RVD F

Upper Midcard:

Morgan H
Hernandez F
Abyss F
Wolfe H
Dinero F
Anderson H

Midcard:

Young F
Homicide H
Rhino H
Kaz F
Red F
Tomko H

Undercard:

Moore H
Shark Boy F

Tag Teams:

Hooliganz (Kendrick + (London)) Also X + Midcard H
Motor City Machine Guns Also X + Midcard F
Beer Money Inc. Also Upper Midcard H
British Invasion (Magnus + Williams) Midcard and Williams = X H
Generation Me Also X + Undercard F
Lethal Consequences Also X + Lethal = Midcard, Creed = Undercard. F

Women:

(Del Ray) H
Tara F
Hamada F
ODB F
Wilde F
Sarita F
Daffney H
Love H
Rayne H
Skye H

Occasional Wrestlers/Personalities:

Foley F
Jarrett F
Flair H
Hogan F
Sting F
Raven H

Backstage Interviewers:

Borash F
Hemme F

Announce crew:

Tenay F
Tazz F

Other:

Bischoff H
So Cal Val F
Penzer.
The referees.


Still very big but much more manageable.

That means gone/phase out:

Nasties go
OJ go
Neal go
Terry short phase out
Hart go
Bubba go
Von Erich short phase out
Suicide 3 go (that Jap guy they have on loan from NJPW)
Kiyoshi go
Nash phase out
Hall phase out
Waltman phase out
3D phase out
Richards go


If you keep the tag teams mainly dedicated tag teams and keep the occasionals and personalities in a supporting role instead of a dominant one and use the two undercarders as sympathy jobbers this would be a manageable roster.

Edit this is where and how I would like to see them and using the Smackdown 6 rule kinda. As in you can have 6 guys be your go to guys.

[Hyde Hill]

The list was from Meltzer so maybe there are guys on the payroll not on the "active" roster. IDK either way 60 guys for two hours a week is way way too many.

Well if you start including those guys you can start including road agents and if you start including those you can start including production truck guys and camera men etc etc. Off screen without a debut (Suicide 3) or a cameo (Spike Dudley) or not actively wrestling (Hogan, Flair, Cute Kip) doesn't count as a wrestler imho.

[Stennick]

Is Spike just a cameo? IDK all I know is they got 60 "fulltime" guys and thats roughly the same amount WWE has with 6 hours of television a week compared to TNA's 2.

Remember when WCW had 100 plus guys on their roster? The problem they have is they can't stop themselves from snatching up anybody the WWE lets go. I'm hearing Ken Doane had a tryout that went well with them. They can't stop themselves. I think they should have one guy in charge or roster management or atleast the bringing in of new talent. You want somebody you run it through him.

Kind of like in football they have cap management specialists.

[Hyde Hill]

Some perspective:

RAW: 36 including swaggle and bellas and mendes

Smackdown: 35 including Serena as we know she will wrestle.

Unassigned from ECW: Vance Archer, Tyler Reks Unassigned: Lance Cade

[Stennick]

So yeah their sitting in the 70's with triple the programming time that TNA has and atleast double the house shows.

[Hyde Hill]

Is Spike just a cameo? IDK all I know is they got 60 "fulltime" guys and thats roughly the same amount WWE has with 6 hours of television a week compared to TNA's 2.

Remember when WCW had 100 plus guys on their roster? The problem they have is they can't stop themselves from snatching up anybody the WWE lets go. I'm hearing Ken Doane had a tryout that went well with them. They can't stop themselves. I think they should have one guy in charge or roster management or atleast the bringing in of new talent. You want somebody you run it through him.

Kind of like in football they have cap management specialists.

That's Terry Taylor's role but he can off course be overruled by Hogan, EB and Dixie. Same as John Laurinaitis who can be overruled by Vince and Stephanie.

edit: Also a try out =not signed just ask Colt Cabana.

So yeah their sitting in the 70's with triple the programming time that TNA has and atleast double the house shows.

Didn't count the nxt guys (8) so its not triple but two and a half. But by the same token with the E you see the same guys too much lolz. Not arguing mate TNA's roster is way to big but I think the one I outlined is manageable.

current situation:

TNA: 58/2 = 29 per hour per week lolz.
WWE: 79/6 = 13 1/6 per hour per week. Not including Archer, Reks and Cade.

My TNA:

42/2 = 21 per hour. Still hard but doable especially if you keep the tag teams dedicated.

[Self]

Wow. Not many folks on that list that I'd definitely cut. First pass for me would take out Jesse Neal, Kiyoshi, Suicide, Tomko, Shark Boy, Dr. Stevie, Raven, Rhino and The Nasty Boys. Second pass, filled with hard choices, would lose Brian Kendrick, Consequences Creed, Eric Young, Scott Hall, Sean Waltman, Shannon Moore and Kazarian.

No thought about balance. Just guys I'd cut for various reasons. If I had the book (or the patience for real world TEW mods) I'd pick 10 guys throughout the card and build the show around them. AJ. Pope. Machine Guns. Angle. Anderson. RVD. Jeff. Beer Money. Those would be my stars. If I can't use someone to make any of those guys look good, I'd cut them.

[Hyde Hill]

Wait you are keeping Rob Terry, OJ and LVE? lolz

[Self]

Wait you are keeping Rob Terry, OJ and LVE? lolz

Rob Terry is Welsh, so yes. He's also a new face, and I'd want to focus on promoting relatively new faces.

Orlando Jordan... The bisexual gimmick intrigues me. A lot of wrestling fans are turning up their noses at it, but I think there's potential. Benefit of the doubt.

Lacey Von Erich... You know what, I might cut her. I'm a big fan of the Beautiful People but she doesn't bring much to the table except height. I think Velvet's hotter and Madison's got a more interesting look. She's a generic tall blonde. Cut her.