Photos of the new TNA set

ec18 · 28-10-2008 2:48pm

looks very similar to the old one

CMpunked · 28-10-2008 3:08pm

ec18 wrote: »

looks very similar to the old one

In what way/s?

callaway92 · 28-10-2008 3:31pm

The Setup

rovert · 28-10-2008 3:36pm

It only has one entrance/ramp way.

ShawnRaven · 28-10-2008 4:48pm

rovert wrote: »

It only has one entrance/ramp way.

Look closely at that second photo dude. It only has one ramp, but there's definitely two entrances there.

Machismo Fan · 28-10-2008 5:08pm

It looks like a modern version of their old Nashville stage.

rovert · 28-10-2008 5:18pm

ShawnRaven wrote: »

Look closely at that second photo dude. It only has one ramp, but there's definitely two entrances there.

I hate you

ShawnRaven · 28-10-2008 5:21pm

rovert wrote: »

I hate you

Someone is going blind! Too much of a good thing perhaps?

28-10-2008 7:08pm

Why do they want two seperate entrance areas?

ShawnRaven · 28-10-2008 7:15pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Why do they want two seperate entrance areas?

Not much of a TNA watcher? They have two seperate entrance areas, one for the face to come out, the other for the heel to come out.

Nothing WWE didn't do already with it's Invasion PPV.

rovert · 28-10-2008 7:18pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Why do they want two seperate entrance areas?

Symmetry

ShawnRaven · 28-10-2008 7:21pm

rovert wrote: »

Symmetry

And the fact that it's something different. Something WWE hasn't known the meaning of for years!

28-10-2008 7:24pm

I remember them doing it at invasion, but that made sense to me, because it was supposed to be Promotion VS Promotion.

Although I notice if you're making your entrance, you walk 'down' the tunnel on the left, and 'up' the tunnel on the right.

I bet a commentator will mention how its like "heaven and hell" for the faces and heels :rolleyes:

rovert · 28-10-2008 7:28pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I bet a commentator will mention how its like "heaven and hell" for the faces and heels :rolleyes:

Please dont take this as a cheap shot but a KANE fan of all people rolling their eyes at a reference to "heaven and hell" give me a break here, seriously.

28-10-2008 7:33pm

rovert wrote: »

Please dont take this as a cheap shot but a KANE fan of all people rolling their eyes at a reference to "heaven and hell" give me a break here, seriously.

Kane has a great back story to his character.

TNA commentators will just be cheesy about it and ruin it.

"We can now see ____ ascending to the stage. Look at him. Its almost like he's walking from hell"

"My god look at (woman's name). She is so angelic. Its almost like she's walking down from heaven itself"

And they'll say it over and over.

rovert · 28-10-2008 7:35pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Kane has a great back story to his character.

TNA commentators will just be cheesy about it and ruin it.

Pot Kettle Black in fairness.

ShawnRaven · 28-10-2008 7:37pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I remember them doing it at invasion, but that made sense to me, because it was supposed to be Promotion VS Promotion.

Still didn't particularly require two seperate entrances because they already had two seperate locker rooms.

I bet a commentator will mention how its like "heaven and hell" for the faces and heels :rolleyes:

No offence, but trust you of all people to come up with a remark like that.

28-10-2008 7:39pm

... I won't even bother.

ShawnRaven · 28-10-2008 7:39pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Kane has a great back story to his character.

Pft, yeah right! First he was burnt and he has to wear a mask, only to find that he's unmasked and no scars because the scars are psychological.

Riviting stuff, i'll bet that sell a gazillion books!

"We can now see ____ ascending to the stage. Look at him. Its almost like he's walking from hell"

And they'll say it over and over.

Jim Ross and his Hellfire and Toothpas... i mean Brimstone, anyone?
Quit being so god damn biased, especially when you're extra critical of a product you barely watch!

ShawnRaven · 28-10-2008 7:40pm

Deleted User wrote: »

... I won't even bother.

Great! Do us all a favour.

28-10-2008 7:45pm

VR-overt:

What i don't get is...

If im happy to accept you two aren't Kane fans... why do you to drag it out?

In a few posts, if this argument continues, i'll be told to stop taking topics off topic. Yet.. (as usual) im not the one who mentioned Kane at all...

I think you two are bigger Kane'n'ites than you're willing to admit, to be honest. Always bringing him up. Can't help but talk about him.

ShawnRaven · 28-10-2008 7:48pm

Deleted User wrote: »

If im happy to accept you two aren't Kane fans... why do you to drag it out?

We don't, Shane. You're the one who continues to respond.

In a few posts, if this argument continues, i'll be told to stop taking topics off topic. Yet.. (as usual) im not the one who mentioned Kane at all...

Neither did I, until you mentioned Kane. So please don't tar me with the same brush.

I think you two are bigger Kane'n'ites than you're willing to admit, to be honest. Always bringing him up. Can't help but talk about him.

No, we just can't get over how silly you tend to be about the whole issue, and how you act like a spoilt 2 year old who throws his rattle out of the pram whenever people point out facts over the made up bullcrap you tend to spew.

CMpunked · 28-10-2008 7:48pm

The stage screen looks like its angled, alá Raw?

ShawnRaven · 28-10-2008 7:49pm

Comic-Book-Guy wrote: »

The stage screen looks like its angled, alá Raw?

I couldn't tell. The photo was taken from an angle too.

28-10-2008 7:53pm

ShawnRaven wrote: »

We don't, Shane. You're the one who continues to respond.

I shouldn't have anything to respond to in the first place.

until you mentioned Kane.

Rovert mentioned Kane.

No, we just can't get over how silly you tend to be about the whole issue, and how you act like a spoilt 2 year old who throws his rattle out of the pram whenever people point out facts over the made up bullcrap you tend to spew.

every thread i post in lately turns into a Kane-hate thread. Yet, i haven't brought Kane up in any of them. Its a bit weird that isn't it? Its almost like your above 'baby' description was a 100% spot on description.

But its not me you described.

I wish Fozzy would put a ban on discussing Kane in threads where he isn't necessary to discuss. Then we'd see who's still arguing with people over silly things.

ShawnRaven · 28-10-2008 7:58pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I shouldn't have anything to respond to in the first place.

No you shouldn't, as it's only an internet discussion forum. But you still find something!

Rovert mentioned Kane.

Great! Then keep my name out of it. I've tried my best to rest, but for as long as you keep poking me with the sharp stick Shane, i will make noise.

every thread i post in lately turns into a Kane-hate thread. Yet, i haven't brought Kane up in any of them. Its a bit weird that isn't it? Its almost like your above 'baby' description was a 100% spot on description.

Like i said, if you and rovert have issues, settle them, but don't keep dragging me back into them. However if you're gonna do it, be factual about it as well.

But its not me you described.

Be serious! You've gone off on one the second Kane gets mentioned lately. is he your boyfriend or something? Because it seems to be an uber-sensitive subject for you. He's a FICTIONAL CHARACTER! Get it?

I wish Fozzy would put a ban on discussing Kane in threads where he isn't necessary to discuss. Then we'd see who's still arguing with people over silly things.

Careful what you wish for Shane, he'd have you banned within a day.

28-10-2008 8:05pm

ShawnRaven wrote: »

No you shouldn't, as it's only an internet discussion forum. But you still find something!

.... BECAUSE ITS ALWAYS BROUGHT UP! OF COURSE IM GOING TO REPLY TO IT!

Why did you get involved in this? because i mentioned your name. because it related to you. If someone posts negatively about Kane on a message board, as a fan, i will defend him. Thats what happened here many months ago when i first joined up. Why is it STILL happening?

Great! Then keep my name out of it. I've tried my best to rest

You've been equally trying to argue with me, in my eyes.

Like i said, if you and rovert have issues, settle them

Rovert obviously has some problem with me. I dont have any problem with him or anyone on the internet.

Be serious! You've gone off on one the second Kane gets mentioned lately. is he your boyfriend or something? Because it seems to be an uber-sensitive subject for you. He's a FICTIONAL CHARACTER! Get it?

Because whenever Kane is mentioned, i usually am, too. And a gay joke? my boyfriend?

You'll love this video:

http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=CsNn2oFhxTA

Careful what you wish for Shane, he'd have you banned within a day.

I wouldnt, because no one would be able to bring him up.

Machismo Fan · 28-10-2008 8:13pm

Deleted User wrote: »

TNA commentators will just be cheesy about it and ruin it.

"We can now see ____ ascending to the stage. Look at him. Its almost like he's walking from hell"

"My god look at (woman's name). She is so angelic. Its almost like she's walking down from heaven itself"

And they'll say it over and over.

You do realise that in both the iMPACT! Zone and Asylum TNA have had two entrances and Tenay and West have never made such comments.

callaway92 · 28-10-2008 8:17pm

Machismo Fan wrote: »

You do realise that in both the iMPACT! Zone and Asylum TNA have had two entrances and Tenay and West have never made such comments.

KKV doesnt actually watch TNA..He still thinks that he can comment on it and criticise it etc though

rovert · 28-10-2008 8:20pm

Deleted User wrote: »

VR-overt:

This get gets a huge belly laugh if you think I and ShawnRaven are a twosome check your boards history mate.

Deleted User wrote: »

Rovert mentioned Kane.

So? It was a fair point and I told you NOT to take it as a cheapshot.

Deleted User wrote: »

every thread i post in lately turns into a Kane-hate thread.

KANE HATE! :eek:

Deleted User wrote: »

I wish Fozzy would put a ban on discussing Kane in threads where he isn't necessary to discuss. Then we'd see who's still arguing with people over silly things.

Why are you throwing your rattle out of the pram over one reasonably made comment?

Deleted User wrote: »

.... BECAUSE ITS ALWAYS BROUGHT UP! OF COURSE IM GOING TO REPLY TO IT!

This is a change of tact of from yesterday and the advice you gave others.

Deleted User wrote: »

If someone posts negatively about Kane on a message board, as a fan, i will defend him.

In other words you are a zealot, no wonder you’ve a problem with facts about him. I find the extent of you fandom troubling. I can discuss the pros and cons of my favourite wrestlers and from my experience others here can too except pretty much you.

Deleted User wrote: »

Rovert obviously has some problem with me. I don’t have any problem with him or anyone on the internet.

I don’t have a problem with you personally just how you come across on a message board. But you clearly do with your totally over reactions to my posts about one pro wrestler.

Deleted User wrote: »

... I won't even bother.

What happened to this?

callaway92 · 28-10-2008 8:21pm

KKV = hypocrit

28-10-2008 8:28pm

callaway92 wrote: »

KKV doesnt actually watch TNA..He still thinks that he can comment on it and criticise it etc though

I used to watch it. Found it very hard to follow and git fed up with the constant gimmick matches.

Rovert:

Kane isn't the best in ring wreslter i've ever seen. Benoit gets that. Rock, Hogan, Santino, etc. are all better on the mic.

I can acknowledge Kane's weaknesses. I just dont want to have to do so every single day of the week.

callaway92 wrote: »

KKV = hypocrit

Callaway92 = Spammer

CMpunked · 28-10-2008 8:30pm

callaway92 wrote: »

KKV doesnt actually watch TNA..He still thinks that he can comment on it and criticise it etc though

No one criticised TNA at all callaway....

rovert · 28-10-2008 8:32pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I used to watch it. Found it very hard to follow and git fed up with the constant gimmick matches.

Rovert:

Kane isn't the best in ring wreslter i've ever seen. Benoit gets that. Rock, Hogan, Santino, etc. are all better on the mic.

I can acknowledge Kane's weaknesses. I just dont want to have to do so every single day of the week.

Yet you still criticise my use of facts on the subject of Kane.

On the issue of Kane's GREAT back story I remember the author of the See No Evil novel said that the hardest part of his job was making sense of Kane's back story. It could hardly be called great if that was the case.

rovert · 28-10-2008 8:33pm

Comic-Book-Guy wrote: »

No one criticised TNA at all callaway....

Yeah KKV did if you actually read/are not trolling.

ShawnRaven · 28-10-2008 8:33pm

rovert wrote: »

This get gets a huge belly laugh if you think I and ShawnRaven are a twosome check your boards history mate.

Lol, What are we? Good Cop-Bad Cop?

rovert · 28-10-2008 8:37pm

ShawnRaven wrote: »

Lol, What are we? Good Cop-Bad Cop?

I wont argue who is what :pac:

Bubs101 · 28-10-2008 8:42pm

callaway92 wrote: »

KKV = hypocrit

Callaway92=Poor man's old school Rovert

rovert · 28-10-2008 8:44pm

Bubs101 wrote: »

Callaway92=Poor man's old school Rovert

Nu School rovert agrees with callaway92. Read post #31 I make a strong case.

ShawnRaven · 28-10-2008 8:47pm

rovert wrote: »

I wont argue who is what :pac:

Flip a coin?

Bubs101 · 28-10-2008 9:37pm

rovert wrote: »

Nu School rovert agrees with callaway92. Read post #31 I make a strong case.

Haven't got a clue what the argument was about, more reffering to his new snappy posting style. Some are very easily influenced

callaway92 · 28-10-2008 9:43pm

Bubs101 wrote: »

Haven't got a clue what the argument was about, more reffering to his new snappy posting style. Some are very easily influenced

I always had a slight sarcastic side to me...It just annoyed me the way KKV even said himself he doesnt watch TNA anymore and yet was criticising it etc

rovert · 28-10-2008 9:47pm

callaway92 wrote: »

I always had a slight sarcastic side to me...It just annoyed me the way KKV even said himself he doesnt watch TNA anymore and yet was criticising it etc

Well he didnt go to the AWR tour yet he had more posts than most in that thread....

CMpunked · 28-10-2008 9:53pm

callaway92 wrote: »

I always had a slight sarcastic side to me...It just annoyed me the way KKV even said himself he doesnt watch TNA anymore and yet was criticising it etc

rovert wrote: »

Well he didnt go to the AWR tour yet he had more posts than most in that thread....

Im sorry, i cant hold my tongue....

For one, please quote where KKV criticised TNA?

i started this thread and have been following it and no one criticised it.

Does anyone need to have gone to a show, or anything like that to post in the thread?

to quote austin:

EH EHH!

callaway92 · 28-10-2008 9:56pm

Deleted User wrote: »

TNA commentators will just be cheesy about it and ruin it.

"We can now see ____ ascending to the stage. Look at him. Its almost like he's walking from hell"

"My god look at (woman's name). She is so angelic. Its almost like she's walking down from heaven itself"

And they'll say it over and over.

KKV wrote these

And this :

I bet a commentator will mention how its like "heaven and hell" for the faces and heels:rolleyes:

rovert · 28-10-2008 9:59pm

I still stand by my reply to it and thats the end of the matter.

Id try to turn this thread back on topic but Ive no idea what to talk about. It is only a set lads

CMpunked · 28-10-2008 9:59pm

And how is that criticism?

He said that tna commentators could make reference to the two ramps etc etc.

callaway92 · 28-10-2008 10:02pm

Comic-Book-Guy wrote: »

And how is that criticism?

He said that tna commentators could make reference to the two ramps etc etc.

you do realise you are being hypocritical of people dragging this off topic when you are asking stuff like this yourself...Answering your question..He was slagging the commentary etc

Machismo Fan · 28-10-2008 10:02pm

rovert wrote: »

It is only a set lads

It is quite a nice set though. Is that a screen in the middle of the iMPACT Zone (picture 1), I can't quite tell.

rovert · 28-10-2008 10:03pm

Comic-Book-Guy wrote: »

And how is that criticism?

He said that tna commentators could make reference to the two ramps etc etc.

He said in particular:

TNA commentators will just be cheesy about it and ruin it.

And they'll say it over and over.

I know this phrase has been heavily devalued in the last 24 hours but regardless of your stance here please move on.

Photos of the new TNA set

Comments