TNA- WCW all over again

Fozzy

oneofakind32 wrote: »

I think internet fans expect more from TNA then they would from WWE due to the pool of talent TNA has at its disposel

I think they just expect a show that makes sense and one that you can invest some emotional interest in

TNA would lead you to believe that their fans are the internet fans anyway

EdK

kofi kingston is coming to ECW soon he is good from what i've seen of him, no doubt he will get some jamaican voodoo witchcraft gimmick and bury him i suppose

rossie1977

Fozzy wrote: »

TNA got their regular 1.1, ECW did a 0.6. All that you can really read into it is that either most of ECW's usual viewers didn't bother tuning in on a different day or all of them picked Impact over ECW. Probably a mixture

ultimate fighter directly on after tna did a 0.5, its pretty clear people are just not willing to watch this sort of stuff on a thursday night

Fozzy

The Ultimate Fighter did higher than TNA when it first aired on Wednesday though, the replay was always going to be lower whether it was on a Thursday or not

oneofakind32

rossie1977 wrote: »

ultimate fighter directly on after tna did a 0.5, its pretty clear people are just not willing to watch this sort of stuff on a thursday night

its pretty clear that TNA owns WWE/UFC

Mr.Nice Guy

I wouldn't read much into the ECW rating. It was bound to go down with it being on a different day. No doubt the TNA hierarchy will trumpet this as a massive victory for them.

Gerard.C

I've stopped watching TNA myself now. It's a pity really, they have an incredible roster, but the booking and logic of TNA is just ****ing ridiculous. I refuse to watch it again until they start to make sense or have a complete changeover in their booking department.


So, who wants to join me? C'mon, you all know you don't want to watch this ****!!

Gerard.C

Here we are now...

http://rajah.com/base/node/10240

He speaks the truth!

Fozzy

Gerard.C wrote: »

Here we are now...

http://rajah.com/base/node/10240

He speaks the truth!

And that guy's a fan. I never really thought about it before, but if I had ever actually paid to see one of these TNA PPVs, I would be so pissed off at them, especially because I'm a stingy bastard

I'm predicting something big to happen TNA next year. Big in a bad way. Whether it's top guys leaving to work the indys or fans not showing up to events, I honestly think it's going to happen

Actually, now that I've mentioned it, I remember reading that WWE recently held a house show in an arena that TNA is doing a PPV in early next year. The arena holds something like 12,000 and WWE only drew 2,000 or thereabouts. When you factor in that TNA charge more for their PPV tickets than WWE does for house show tickets and that TNA has much less exposure, we could be seeing a relatively empty house on PPV soon enough

Bubs101

Fozzy wrote: »

Actually, now that I've mentioned it, I remember reading that WWE recently held a house show in an arena that TNA is doing a PPV in early next year. The arena holds something like 12,000 and WWE only drew 2,000 or thereabouts. When you factor in that TNA charge more for their PPV tickets than WWE does for house show tickets and that TNA has much less exposure, we could be seeing a relatively empty house on PPV soon enough

I really doubt that will happen. One of the good things about doing a show for free at a theme park is you would get a wide demographic from all over, really increasing your exposure and Impact has only been ****e for a couple of months now so there still should be a decent few fans eveywhere.

Also, TNA do have a really big draw in Booker T. Lord knows King Booker was not popular (with everyone bar you Fozzy ) . I also get the impression that with TNA there would easily be 2,000 die hard fans willing to go down

Fozzy

I checked it out, it's an arena in South Carolina and WWE only managed 1,500 while the arena holds over 12,000. TNA won't be there for another couple of months, for Against All Odds. I'm not sure about the wide demographic of TNA fans at Impact, it seems to be the same people who go to it every week from what I know. Obviously there'll be some changes but it's not like there's a new set of fans every week either. It won't look good if the arena is only filled to one sixth of its capacity. Don't forget that TNA have cancelled two international tours recently because they weren't able to sell enough tickets

And I'm sure there were a few other King Booker fans here!

Gerard.C

King Booker was a great character. Booker T had been very very boring, the King gimmick was a great change for him.


Anyway, back on topic........ TNA is utter balls.

KrazeeEyezKilla

[quote= Anyway, back on topic........ TNA is utter balls.[/quote]


What points in TNA history has it been that good. It was allright in 2004 but I got bored with it and missed the whole of 2005. I started watching again in early 2006 and it was decent, even if most of Impact consisted of Jarrett running around shouting "Sting's a quitter!". But that fued seemed to dominate the whole year and everybody said it was only a matter of time before Joe was champ. It never happened and I've barely watched it since it moved to Bravo. Were their any periods when TNA got it right?

Fozzy

I liked it for most of last year. There were guys who they were building up as stars, like Joe, LAX, Abyss and Rhino. It all went horrible at the start of this year then, those guys were just made to look like everyone else on the roster. There were usually good X-Division and tag team matches back then too

Gerard.C

Not really, but before it was just dull. Now it doesn't make any sense.

I was actually thinking about that Joe thing myself earlier - He was their hottest wrestler last year, he definatly should have won the title. But then Sting wins it at back-to-back BFG's, only to loose it again straight away each time. They really should have built up Joe for a BFG main event where he'd win the belt. But of course, that would be the smart thing to do. And we all know TNA just cannot do that.

Double C

Before Christmas last year. TNA was ruling the roost. I remember a thread at the time detailing what TNA were doing right compared to what WWE were doing wrong. TNA had great angles and were pushing the younger guys like Joe and LAX. Then Angle joined and Russo got back on the booking committee. I don't think it's a coincidence that things went down the sh*tter after they joined. I enjoy Angle as much as the next guy, but his involvement hasn't made me want to tune in each week. In fact, its probably had the opposite effect.

Gerard.C

Angle didn't get off to a great start in fairness. Like, why did he beat Joe? Angle should have put Joe over, and given him that final push to win the world title. But instead, Angle, who was fired weeks earlier because WWE feared he would die, beat Joe clean, and ended his year undefeated streak, or however long it was. More bull**** by TNA.

Like Double C said, LAX were brilliant at one stage. I actually used to tune in just to see LAX every week, especially during their fued with AJ/Daniels. But of course, they were also **** on by TNA.

ec18

Gerard.C wrote: »

Not really, but before it was just dull. Now it doesn't make any sense.

I was actually thinking about that Joe thing myself earlier - He was their hottest wrestler last year, he definatly should have won the title. But then Sting wins it at back-to-back BFG's, only to loose it again straight away each time. They really should have built up Joe for a BFG main event where he'd win the belt. But of course, that would be the smart thing to do. And we all know TNA just cannot do that.

bfg?

Gerard.C

Bound For Glory.

EdK

ec18 wrote: »

bfg?

Big friendly giant

Gerard.C

Bunch of ****ing Gimps.

KrazeeEyezKilla

I completely forgot about LAX. That was a great storyline, but of course TNA had to turn it to s*** in 2007. It's not that TNA was bad last year it's just that it wasn't that great and it could have been much better. When Russo first took over I thought things improved a bit at first. I liked the December PPV but things went to hell quickly afterwards.

oneofakind32

Gerard.C wrote: »

Not really, but before it was just dull. Now it doesn't make any sense.

I was actually thinking about that Joe thing myself earlier - He was their hottest wrestler last year, he definatly should have won the title. But then Sting wins it at back-to-back BFG's, only to loose it again straight away each time. They really should have built up Joe for a BFG main event where he'd win the belt. But of course, that would be the smart thing to do. And we all know TNA just cannot do that.

Like it or not Sting and Angle are TNAs biggest draws and TNA, so its obvious for a company that wants to sell more PPVs to put there 2 biggest stars in the mainevent. Aswell as that The Joe, Angle thing went on for months before bound for glory people were getting sick of it

Fozzy

oneofakind32 wrote: »

Like it or not Sting and Angle are TNAs biggest draws and TNA, so its obvious for a company that wants to sell more PPVs to put there 2 biggest stars in the mainevent. Aswell as that The Joe, Angle thing went on for months before bound for glory people were getting sick of it

I don't mind Sting being put in some main events, but they completely wasted him. If he's had his last match now, what good did he do TNA? He got them a big rating for a while, but that died down. He had a really long feud with Abyss that ended up making Abyss look like less of a force by the end of it in my eyes. Did he help make anyone into a star? I can't think of anyone

When Sting and Angle came in first, TNA did sell more PPVs. But it returned to normal after a while because TNA made people stop caring about the two of them. If they wanted to sell more PPVs then they wouldn't have given the first Angle vs Sting match away on free tv for three minutes. If you're putting your two biggest stars against each other then you've got to make it seem special. Think of any time the two top guys in WWE have fought, it's always built up bigger than any other feud they've had. I can't remember what Angle and Sting got up to, was it just Karen possibly divorcing Kurt every week?

I think Gerard.C was talking about Joe winning the belt at last year's BFG, before he'd ever fought Angle. Back then Joe looked like a star. Now he's just another guy

Gerard.C

oneofakind32 wrote: »

Like it or not Sting and Angle are TNAs biggest draws and TNA, so its obvious for a company that wants to sell more PPVs to put there 2 biggest stars in the mainevent. Aswell as that The Joe, Angle thing went on for months before bound for glory people were getting sick of it

TNA have big draws?

Then why does nobody buy their PPV's???

And I highly doubt Sting is their biggest draw these days. I mean, does anyone give a **** about him anymore? There's no reason to.

Also, the Joe-Angle thing was just ridiculous. Granted, they had a good match. But they gave away a potentially huge match straight away, without much build, and gave Joes streak to a veteran who didn't need it.

Stupid, stupid TNA.

Vince135792003

Gerard.C wrote: »

Also, the Joe-Angle thing was just ridiculous. Granted, they had a good match. But they gave away a potentially huge match straight away, without much build, and gave Joes streak to a veteran who didn't need it.

Stupid, stupid TNA.

They did do a good number with Joe/Angle 1. In hindsight, the mistake was having them re-match in 2 ppv's in succession after that.

The initial confrontation between Angle and Joe on Impact was one of the last things TNA really hit a home run with.

Gerard.C

Yeah, it was good, but it just kinda..... happened. Then Joe lost, and nobody really gave a **** anymore. And it was for nothing, Joes streak I guess, but then he lost that straight away. God, even at its "best", TNA was god awful.

Vince135792003

Gerard.C wrote: »

Yeah, it was good, but it just kinda..... happened. .

I don't get your point.

In hindsight to me, there was nothing wrong with their first match. And if they had kept them apart and built up a re-match between the two over a greater length of time, it would have added more interest to the feud.

Instead, having them fight in 3 ppv's in a row diluted the feud as it progressed.

Gerard.C

Vince135792003 wrote: »

I don't get your point.

I mean Angle showed up, and straight away, he didn't like Joe for whatever reason. A big fued like that should have had months of build.

Vince135792003

Gerard.C wrote: »

I mean Angle showed up, and straight away, he didn't like Joe for whatever reason. A big fued like that should have had months of build.

It worked for about 2 weeks though because it was simple. Both guys thought they were the best so they fought. It can be that simple.

The mistake was giving it way 2 more times on ppv and diluting the feud with really storylines.

Gerard.C

Yeah, but did they really have to give Joes streak to Angle??? I mean, wasn't he nearly dead at the time!

All I'm saying is that even at their best, TNA are completely retarded. Nobody watch it.

Bubs101

Gerard.C wrote: »

Yeah, but did they really have to give Joes streak to Angle??? I mean, wasn't he nearly dead at the time!

If anyone was to take your streak, Angle is one of the best to do it. You know the match will make you look impressive in defeat no matter what. Also, seeing as it's TNA they probably would have finished it to Nash in order to get a parallel with Goldberg

Bubs101

Gerard.C wrote: »

I mean Angle showed up, and straight away, he didn't like Joe for whatever reason. A big fued like that should have had months of build.

I automatically assumed that he didn't like him because Joe was their guy and Angle felt that he would wltz right in and be the "main event". In a way I agree with you about the story line. Personally I would have got Christian involved from the get go to make the promo's brilliant and in the first 1v1v1 have a sham ending to put all of them over and then have Angle Joe

Fozzy

Good analysis of TNA by Lance Storm again: http://www.stormwrestling.com/121107.html

Gerard.C

Bubs101 wrote: »

If anyone was to take your streak, Angle is one of the best to do it. You know the match will make you look impressive in defeat no matter what. Also, seeing as it's TNA they probably would have finished it to Nash in order to get a parallel with Goldberg

So you're saying that the veteran, who was immediatly one of the top guys in TNA, needed to take Joes streak? What could Angle possibly have gained from that?

Double C

Who better than Kurt Angle to take his undefeated streak? I thought TNA's handling of the Joe Angle thing initially was grand, the headbutt thing was probably a wrestling highlight of 2006 for me, but their first match was awful. Why they didn't just have a 25-30 minute match is beyond me. Also, something that pissed me off about their series was the constant ankle lock/choke reversals. It got very boring very quickly and completely ruined the second match for me.

Angle and Christian should have feuded after the first Angle/Joe match, and Joe should have feuded with another top guy, like Abyss, to reclaim his spot as a major star in the company, slowly building up to him beating Angle for the title down the line. But instead, they blew their load early and f*cked it all up. Now Angle is champ but made to look like a chump (lame play on words, I know), Joe and Christian are nobodies caught in the mix of has beens like Nash and Booker (Booker still has a lot to offer, but he's just an ex WWE guy who will eventually end up in the same quagmire as Christian) and they have gammy gimmick wrestlers like Rellik and Messias to waste valuable tv time. Sting has been wasted big time too. James Storm needs a push big style.

Fozzy

Double C wrote: »

Who better than Kurt Angle to take his undefeated streak? I thought TNA's handling of the Joe Angle thing initially was grand, the headbutt thing was probably a wrestling highlight of 2006 for me, but their first match was awful. Why they didn't just have a 25-30 minute match is beyond me.

I think I was under the impression at the time that Kurt was coming back early from the three injuries that he'd suffered in his last WWE match. He pulled his groin, an abdominal muscle and a hamstring I think. He did have about three months to recover though

Mr.Nice Guy

I didn't have a problem with Angle ending Joe's streak but my problem was that he ended it in the first encounter. I felt Joe should have got the first win, ideally by cheating.

Bubs101

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I didn't have a problem with Angle ending Joe's streak but my problem was that he ended it in the first encounter. I felt Joe should have got the first win, ideally by cheating.

I think TNA might have feared that the TNA die hards wouldn't have treated Joe like a heal but the T.V. crowd who came in to check out Kurt would have and mightn't have wanted that

Mr.Nice Guy

Bubs101 wrote: »

I think TNA might have feared that the TNA die hards wouldn't have treated Joe like a heal but the T.V. crowd who came in to check out Kurt would have and mightn't have wanted that

They did treat him like a heel for the first match though. There was no way Angle would have been rejected by the TNA audience in his first match.

If Joe had won the first match by illegal means then two things happen. Firstly, new viewers regard Joe as being on the same level of Angle. And secondly, by Joe cheating to win there would have been a reason for the follow-up match. Angle could have won that match and then the third match between them would have been the rubber match.

I don't get the logic in having your top 'homegrown' star losing clean to a new outside star. One thing Vince McMahon consistently did in WWE was have outside talent - Dusty Rhodes, the numerous WCW guys etc. look inferior to his talent.

rizzla

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I don't get the logic in having your top 'homegrown' star losing clean to a new outside star. One thing Vince McMahon consistently did in WWE was have outside talent - Dusty Rhodes, the numerous WCW guys etc. look inferior to his talent.

And completly bury them in the process. Goldberg anyone? Angle and Joe are still considered main event stars by TNA fans, neither is the weaker wrestler so it all worked out ok for them in the end.

I think having Joe cheat to win would have completly undermined his near 2 year undefeated streak and harmed him more so than the way it actually played out.

Mr.Nice Guy

rizzla wrote: »

And completly bury them in the process. Goldberg anyone?

Yeah they completely buried him by putting the World Title on him! How dastardly the WWE are!

rizzla wrote:

Angle and Joe are still considered main event stars by TNA fans, neither is the weaker wrestler so it all worked out ok for them in the end.

In what possible way did it work out well for Joe?

rizzla wrote:

I think having Joe cheat to win would have completly undermined his near 2 year undefeated streak and harmed him more so than the way it actually played out.

You think Joe RETAINING his streak through cheating to win would have harmed him more than Joe LOSING his streak clean? What kind of logic is that? You don't write for TNA by any chance do you?

Vince135792003

I don't think that the biggest mistake was in the finish of the first match.

I think having them wrestle 2 more times on ppv, in the space of 2 months was the critical error. They overexposed the feud. Plus there was alot of nonsense thrown in (Samoa Joe's girlfriend for example).

Just to go slightly off topic, it's pretty clear that Vince has often made talent that he has not "created" to look inferior/stupid at times. Look at the Invasion angle. He owned everything and in order to make lots of money he had to make the feud competitive and thus WWE look vulnerable and WCW strong.

I think he managed to do that for about 1 Raw show in a 6 month feud.

Bubs101

Yeah, but with the invasion thing he was always going to make money. There was literally no way he could have lost out so I think it became a bit of an ego trip for him. Also, he didn't have WCW's biggest names. The big ones he did had had been there for a while