The offical TNA thread - News, Spoilers and the rest...

Vince135792003

Machismo Fan wrote: »

Most definitely, Heyman is only out for himself. But as he said, if he owns a % of the company he'd have a large incentive to do everything in his power to succeed. Do TNA really have much to lose? If Heyman fails he just ends up stuck with 10% of a failure and as I said, if he succeeds everybody succeeds. I'd let him give it a go.

Do you go into business with someone you don't trust though?

Machismo Fan

Vince135792003 wrote: »

Do you go into business with someone you don't trust though?

Depends on whether you truly believe he can get the job done. It's not like Hogan, Bischoff and Russo are that trustworthy themselves.

Vince135792003

Machismo Fan wrote: »

Depends on whether you truly believe he can get the job done. It's not like Hogan, Bischoff and Russo are that trustworthy themselves.

You're not giving them 10% though.

We've seen in football that if owners aren't in tune with 1 another it leads to alot of problems.

Machismo Fan

Vince135792003 wrote: »

You're not giving them 10% though.

We've seen in football that if owners aren't in tune with 1 another it leads to alot of problems.

But what's 10% if TNA continues to be unsuccessful and Heyman would only be a minority owner with no more power than Jarrett.

Vince135792003

Machismo Fan wrote: »

But what's 10% if TNA continues to be unsuccessful.

Oh I agree.

All I am saying is that given Heymans volatile personality, I would rather have him working for me in a senior position than as a business partner.

jaykhunter

Machismo Fan wrote: »

Everything you listed there is a creative problem. The only other major problem as a company is a complete inability to advertise, promote, market or hype anything.

LOL! Those are massive problems! Yeah, went into a creative rant there! I meant that it's not the storylines as such that are the problem, more the pacing and build. I'd bill that as a company philosophy (let's sandbag PPVs and hotshot free TV every week) than creative, although they're intertwined. The philosophy of "ex-WWE > Homegrown" can certainly be changed creatively, if the company will allow creative to change it. In addition to the great points you mentioned, having a bloated roster, crooked pay structure (most of the females getting paid under $100,000), overlooking important things like proper entrance themes (hey, Jay Lethal!) and letting things sink in, giving due time to everything is more of a editing/direction problem.

Machismo Fan

Vince135792003 wrote: »

All I am saying is that given Heymans volatile personality, I would rather have him working for me in a senior position than as a business partner.

True, but it's not like TNA has much of a choice with him. I still question whether he's capable of turning it around though. Yeah he'd bring stability and logic to the product but would he be able to capture some of the market?

Machismo Fan

jaykhunter wrote: »

LOL! Those are massive problems! Yeah, went into a creative rant there! I meant that it's not the storylines as such that are the problem, more the pacing and build. I'd bill that as a company philosophy (let's sandbag PPVs and hotshot free TV every week) than creative, although they're intertwined. The philosophy of "ex-WWE > Homegrown" can certainly be changed creatively, if the company will allow creative to change it. In addition to the great points you mentioned, having a bloated roster, crooked pay structure (most of the females getting paid under $100,000), overlooking important things like proper entrance themes (hey, Jay Lethal!) and letting things sink in, giving due time to everything is more of a editing/direction problem.

But that all comes from creative (bar the roster and entrance music bit).It's creative that writes the TV, books the PPV main event matches on TV and rushes all storylines. Admittedly management should veto it a lot more often but all those problems come from creatives inability to create stars and interesting TV so they resort to desperation. The creative team pack iMPACT! leaving very little room for the editing team to work with. TNA has two main problems - a dreadfully inconsistent and rushed product and an inability to advertise anything.

savemejebus

Not to rain on the Heyman love-in here, but apart from the roll he was on with ECW until WCW & WWE poached all his talent - and let's not forget that that was more than a decade ago, what do ye actually think he could do for the company?

Machismo Fan

savemejebus wrote: »

Not to rain on the Heyman love-in here, but apart from the roll he was on with ECW until WCW & WWE poached all his talent - and let's not forget that that was more than a decade ago, what do ye actually think he could do for the company?

Heyman was responsible for the Smackdown 6 period of Smackdown in 2002 which was some awesome TV and I'd argue that TNA has a talented enough roster to deliver that standard of TV again.

jaykhunter

His 'fame' comes from his ability to book awful wrestlers amazingly, creating & accentuating their strengths and hiding their flaws - it's why Balls Mahoney can still get bookings today, Sandman too! He made/elevated a ton of new stars, who reached much bigger heights in WCW and WWF. He really helped Brock Lesnar, lending him huge credibility quickly in his early days and wrote the best SmackDown shows (~2002-2004) consistently in it's ten year run so far. He also heavily wrote 2005's One Night Stand, which was/is the IWC's wet dream.

Vince135792003

jaykhunter wrote: »

accentuating

Paul Heyman taught me that word!

savemejebus

His fame wasn't really what i was asking about, i referenced ECW only because that was when he was in sole creative control (and i'm not even sure about that as Mick Foley and Raven have both inferred that they had huge input into their storylines along with Tommy Dreamer talking about co-booking). In WWE he always had Vince or another Macmahon over him acting like a filter for his ideas (much like Russo during the attitude era).

So, I guess what I was asking, was what do you think he can do for TNA if they give him control. At first glance it looks like a dream template when you see all the talent they have but look closer and the roster is pretty big. People will have to be cut. Also apart from the ex-big leaguers that they already know about, how can Heyman make people care about TNA without trying to make it an ECW clone?

Machismo Fan

savemejebus wrote: »

His fame wasn't really what i was asking about, i referenced ECW only because that was when he was in sole creative control (and i'm not even sure about that as Mick Foley and Raven have both inferred that they had huge input into their storylines along with Tommy Dreamer talking about co-booking). In WWE he always had Vince or another Macmahon over him acting like a filter for his ideas (much like Russo during the attitude era).

So, I guess what I was asking, was what do you think he can do for TNA if they give him control. At first glance it looks like a dream template when you see all the talent they have but look closer and the roster is pretty big. People will have to be cut. Also apart from the ex-big leaguers that they already know about, how can Heyman make people care about TNA without trying to make it an ECW clone?

Heyman was the man who wrote the shows and I doubt McMahon insisted he put awesome wrestling on the show every week. Also I don't get this big roster thing. TNA have an active roster of about 50 people - not all of whom you can push but you still need the others. The people you're pushing need somebody to beat and you need enough people to avoid giving away big matches on TV.

jaykhunter

Our hope is that Heyman's influence can fix the problems Machismo Fan & I listed out. Proper pacing and hype being the biggest culprits, and turning not-great talent into big stars. Business sense means to trim the fat from the roster. (Having wrestlers on that paid-per-appearance-but-still-on-the-books contract is pretty great)

The other thing is that no-one else (apart from Vince) has a positive track record like Heyman, so he's really the only choice left. I suppose Gabe and Cornette might do well but Heyman has the most clout with the wrestling business, being a great on-air personality as well.

As an aside, i'm still all for giving Bischoff and Hulk more time. Things have gotten better, but not where they should be. I dunno if heyman can actually do that, but it wouldn't take much to do a better job.

Machismo Fan

jaykhunter wrote: »

turning not-great talent into big stars.

Never mind turning poor talent into big stars, the current regime is failing miserably at turning fantastic talent into stars.

jaykhunter

Machismo Fan wrote: »

Heyman was the man who wrote the shows and I doubt McMahon insisted he put awesome wrestling on the show every week. Also I don't get this big roster thing. TNA have an active roster of about 50 people - not all of whom you can push but you still need the others. The people you're pushing need somebody to beat and you need enough people to avoid giving away big matches on TV.

I don't wanna have to count on RAW but i'd imagine they have about 20 regulars? 25? I think the problem with such a large roster is the propensity for creative to fast-forward storylines to move onto the next feud. With Russo it felt that he was so impatient waiting for TV to catch up with what he had already booked.

jaykhunter

Machismo Fan wrote: »

Never mind turning poor talent into big stars, the current regime is failing miserably at turning fantastic talent into stars.

LOL i thought you were gonna say "turning big stars into not great talent" :pac::pac: Ya, agreed. Like I enjoy Jeff Hardy and RVD each week, but their appearance isn't anything special anymore. Which is a shame, really. That said we can't discount the great job TNA/Hogan/Bischoff have done with (letting) Pope and Anderson do great things.

Machismo Fan

jaykhunter wrote: »

I don't wanna have to count on RAW but i'd imagine they have about 20 regulars? 25?

But the Raw roster is tiny and dreadfully ill-equipped. The Raw under-card is just horrible.

jaykhunter

Machismo Fan wrote: »

But the Raw roster is tiny and dreadfully ill-equipped. The Raw under-card is just horrible.

Totally. But even at their peak i'd imagine that one WWE show would only have 25 regulars. I think having too many on the roster is why Joe keeps getting kidnapped and TNA keep running the 'mysteriously attacked in the back' and injury angles.

Machismo Fan

jaykhunter wrote: »

Totally. But even at their peak i'd imagine that one WWE show would only have 25 regulars. I think having too many on the roster is why Joe keeps getting kidnapped and TNA keep running the 'mysteriously attacked in the back' and injury angles.

I'd put it more down to Hogan, Bischoff and Flair taking up too much TV time without being in any way productive.

Bounty Hunter

Vince135792003 wrote: »

Long interview with Paul Heyman from UFC 116. About half way through he talks about TNA:

To me, Heyman senses how desperate TNA is and is chancing his arm by asking for a percentage in the company.

quoting this so that anyone who missed it first time can see it now, damn that guy talks sense. We sums up TNA, The wrestling industry etc so well

Furious-Red

Ha

Source: The Wrestling Observer Newsletter

The latest thing that has been banned in WWE by Vince McMahon is chops (Ric Flair style chest chops) not being allowed. This does not include the straight down chops performed by The Great Khali or the hand print chops by The Big Show.

The general feeling is that McMahon doesn't want people doing the chops as the reaction live among wrestling fans is to do the Ric Flair "Wooooo!" and it reminds people of Flair, something they obviously don't want given he is working for the opposition at the moment.

Butch Cassidy

Banning chops? That can't be real . Christ, Vince McMahon's in a fairy world.

flahavaj

Butch Cassidy wrote: »

Banning chops? That can't be real . Christ, Vince McMahon's in a fairy world.

I wish hed banned them when HBK was still around. :pac:

jaykhunter

Vince has neglected to take into account that Flair does not draw any money for TNA. That ship said after two horrendous matches on May 8th. He might be worried that all of 5 people might start watching TNA the next time they hear "Woooo!".......despite the majority of WWE fans not knowing/caring to know about TNA.

Butch Cassidy

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

quoting this so that anyone who missed it first time can see it now, damn that guy talks sense. We sums up TNA, The wrestling industry etc so well

Is Heyman saying there that he isn't going to get out of bed and work/leave his children unless he's getting $25-30million?

flahavaj

LOL at Heyman busting Bryan's balls over his radio intro voice.:pac:

ayatollah

from pwi

On the "Right After Wrestling
" program, Arda Ocal and Jimmy Korderas cleared up the news circulating about the WWE banning the knife edge chop. Korderas explained that the move has actually been banned for years, back to when Ric Flair was still with the company. Only Flair and Shawn Michaels were allowed to use a knife edged chop - in fact at many events they would post "no chops!" signs at the gorilla position.

jaykhunter

Butch Cassidy wrote: »

Is Heyman saying there that he isn't going to get out of bed and work/leave his children unless he's getting $25-30million?

I think he's just trying to get the best deal possible, he knows TNA are desperate, so if he tells them he wants X, Y and Z, and ends up getting X & Y, it's better than just getting the X that he would've done the job for.

I imagine Hogan and Bischoff both have financial stakes in the company (which is so stupidly dangerous - i'd've said produce results and you get a part of the company) and have incurred massive debts since January, so I dunno how much TNA is willing to spend on Heyman.......they have to fix their budget first aka "get their sh1t together"