|
Post by BuckDenaro7: Elite Trader on Jan 11, 2011 12:44:04 GMT -5
It was just sad last year. Hogan and Flair debuted making tna worse than ever before. Brets return was huge.
|
|
|
Post by jfinnomore on Jan 11, 2011 12:49:22 GMT -5
Both brands are equally miserable consistently. I have never understood this either. If TNA succeeds, ultimately their product will be better and so will WWE's. I don't see how anyone who is a wrestling fan could want either company to fail. Jericho was pretty much hitting the nail on the head when he was talking about it at Ringside Fest. People will just always hate the competition when they are rabid WWE fans. Why do you think the Invasion was as poorly booked as it was? Because WWE knew that they had "won the war" and that mentality trickles down to their fans. WCW was nothing more than "the enemy" at the time, just like TNA is "the enemy" now. Either way, nobody should fault TNA for having a crappy show when WWE's show is just as crappy See I used to believe that too, saying that anybody rooting against TNA was rooting against wrestling. But honestly going on nine years of existence TNA is such a ed up brand that has no clue or plan from month to month, let alone year to year. At this point I would rather see them shut their doors and have another company, one without all of TNA's many hindrances, swoop in and grab the talent that they waste. Also ROH > WWE/TNA, all you jerks should support that.this man speaks the truth!
|
|
|
Post by The Immortal Antichrist on Jan 11, 2011 13:33:31 GMT -5
Its certainly isnt the fans fault TNA has no idea what their doing from month to month , hell from week to week. Maybe thats the reason the fans cant really get behind TNA.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 15, 2024 7:54:07 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2011 13:51:52 GMT -5
I don't know if I like the idea of TNA dying as a brand because I can't see another company getting the level of exposure they currently have for a long time. I can definitely get behind the ROH> WWE/TNA cause, though. I like ROH and I'm an even bigger DGUSA fan so any day of the week if either of those were easily accessible to me I would watch them over WWE and TNA. I just don't think I will ever understand the product bashing when comparing WWE and TNA. In my eyes both products are bad, just in different ways. Just on that same level, both have their good aspects in different ways as well. Oh well I guess what frustrates me about TNA more than WWE is that TNA could do whatever they want and instead they choose to be WWE Junior. For better or worse WWE is a public company and a giant corporation and they're basically always going to be what they are. TNA could focus on wrestling or they could focus on having interesting storylines that aren't half-baked or filled with gaping logic holes but instead they churn out the same WCW Thunder in 1999 type of programming each week. And their inability to create stars is so far beyond ridiculous. WWE is developing a crop of excellent superstars in Sheamus, Alberto Del Rio, Wade Barrett, Cody Rhodes, Jack Swagger, Dolph Ziggler, John Morrison, Kofi Kingston and others, all of whom have or will main event in the future. And so what does TNA do? Consistently job out your best homegrown talent (Styles, Joe, Lethal), yo-yo push talent that has legitimately gotten over in TNA (Pope, Wolfe, Morgan), and always and forever put over former stars from wrestling's past (Hardys, Van Dam, Mr. Kennedy, Jarrett, Angle, Sting, Nash). Pope, Wolfe and Morgan have "legimitately" got over in TNA, yet ANDERSON, HARDY and ANGLE are "wrestling's past"? just wow
|
|
|
Post by Jimmy on Jan 11, 2011 13:59:42 GMT -5
I guess what frustrates me about TNA more than WWE is that TNA could do whatever they want and instead they choose to be WWE Junior. For better or worse WWE is a public company and a giant corporation and they're basically always going to be what they are. TNA could focus on wrestling or they could focus on having interesting storylines that aren't half-baked or filled with gaping logic holes but instead they churn out the same WCW Thunder in 1999 type of programming each week. And their inability to create stars is so far beyond ridiculous. WWE is developing a crop of excellent superstars in Sheamus, Alberto Del Rio, Wade Barrett, Cody Rhodes, Jack Swagger, Dolph Ziggler, John Morrison, Kofi Kingston and others, all of whom have or will main event in the future. And so what does TNA do? Consistently job out your best homegrown talent (Styles, Joe, Lethal), yo-yo push talent that has legitimately gotten over in TNA (Pope, Wolfe, Morgan), and always and forever put over former stars from wrestling's past (Hardys, Van Dam, Mr. Kennedy, Jarrett, Angle, Sting, Nash). Pope, Wolfe and Morgan have "legimitately" got over in TNA, yet ANDERSON, HARDY and ANGLE are "wrestling's past"? just wow In case you didn't understand, my point was that guys like Pope, Wolfe, and Morgan didn't have the WWE machine behind them and have gotten over on their own merits in TNA. Anderson, Hardy, and Angle are WWE guys. but hey it's jsyn so let's have an obnoxious eye-rolling party
|
|
|
Post by joker123 on Jan 11, 2011 14:03:54 GMT -5
I like The Big Bang Theory
|
|
|
Post by Jord on Jan 11, 2011 14:41:52 GMT -5
TNA has every opportunity to make a name for themselves, they have an amazing roster and a prime time slot on television but they continually themselves over. I couldn't have put it any better myself.
|
|
|
Post by Wato Stan Account on Jan 11, 2011 14:51:29 GMT -5
Just because a lot of people watch a show, that doesn't automatically make it good. Two and a Half Men is living proof of this. I know it's on hiatus due to Sheen's fun breakdown, but it's a much worse show. Also what war? TNA as a challenger? That show sucked last year and continued to suck since. I don't get why people are letting TNA survive. WCW in 2000 was better than what they're doing. I would know I went to Nitro in 2000. At least they had talent and pushed them. Who gives Lance Storm a bunch of titles, WCW in 2000. TNA wouldn't even be that cool.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 15, 2024 7:54:07 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2011 15:07:38 GMT -5
No, I just find it funny how you say Anderson is "wrestling's past", when he came out of the same time-frame that Elijah Burke did. Kevin Nash, Sting, Jarrett, Flair, Hogan... none of those guys have main evented a TNA PPV since Bischoff and Hogan took over. Yet in WWE, we have Jerry Lawler, and Bret Hart main eventing and winning titles, and nobody says a thing. Maybe people should pay more attention and stop making false accusations is all I'm saying.
|
|
|
Post by Wato Stan Account on Jan 11, 2011 15:34:44 GMT -5
No, I just find it funny how you say Anderson is "wrestling's past", when he came out of the same time-frame that Elijah Burke did. Kevin Nash, Sting, Jarrett, Flair, Hogan... none of those guys have main evented a TNA PPV since Bischoff and Hogan took over. Yet in WWE, we have Jerry Lawler, and Bret Hart main eventing and winning titles, and nobody says a thing. Maybe people should pay more attention and stop making false accusations is all I'm saying. Maybe it's because those 5 guys have been pushed in people's face ever since they began. Lawler has been only recently been getting attention on TV and frankly they're making it work for him. Bret Hart was gone for how long? No one thought he would really ever appear in WWE again, let alone to the extent he did. Where is he now? Oh yeah, not around anymore. Big deal. Hogan, despite not being active on TV, is still having his name thrown around to keep his presence known. Jarrett has been in the spotlight since TNA began, even when he had the stuff with his wife people wondered when he would return. Sting has been TNA's go to legend since what, 2004 and hasn't drawn anything since his first few appearances. Flair, I guess works for managing, but why was he drinking Smirnoff Ice on TV. Did he get ice'd by a fraternity? Sure it has nothing to do with him wrestling, but what's the use of it? Nash is done? I don't know. It seemed like Bischoff came in and Nash faded away almost by choice. Which is whatever, Nash I think even knows he isn't a main eventer these days. But most of the old guys in TNA can easily step aside, it's really not like they're helping anything.
|
|
|
Post by Jimmy on Jan 11, 2011 15:41:37 GMT -5
Kevin Nash, Sting, Jarrett, Flair, Hogan... none of those guys have main evented a TNA PPV since Bischoff and Hogan took over.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 15, 2024 7:54:07 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2011 16:04:07 GMT -5
Kevin Nash, Sting, Jarrett, Flair, Hogan... none of those guys have main evented a TNA PPV since Bischoff and Hogan took over. Touche on Sting, but Hogan and Flair in Lethal Lockdown is no different than Bret Hart in the Summerslam Main Event. Face it, TNA have been using present talent in the main event. Don't act like WWE is all high and mighty when they're using Jerry Lawler against their WWE Champion. You don't find that hypocritcal, no? Oh, and Jarrett, Angle, RVD... those guys are in their 40's. Do I really need to bring up Triple H, The Undertaker, Kane, Chris Jericho...?
|
|
|
Post by sean™ on Jan 11, 2011 16:10:38 GMT -5
Why didn't I push the New Monday Night War? Because one is a sub-par product that has had more ups and downs in quality than a roller coaster (both in the ring and out) and still isn't at the level to even think of going against WWE.
TNA may be on the rise to some, but they aren't ready to go head to head, and weren't at that time. Why support something that's so one sided?
|
|
|
Post by J12 on Jan 11, 2011 16:15:04 GMT -5
In the weeks leading up to the shows, I was blown away by the response from this board. It was one of the few times where I truly felt people were so blindly following WWE that they no longer cared about the quality of the product, but only that it had their logo on it.
It was nearly impossible to make people see that if TNA succeeded, it was great for both companies. I wasn't even a huge fan of the TNA product at the time, but i understand that with competition comes great product, and that was something we had been lacking for so long, especially coming off a pretty horrible year.
I supported TNA and their effort right up until that actual night, when I realized that they had no business even competing with WWE. Their product, at the time, was downright awful. It was embarrassing to watch. They took everything that was right with the company at the time and abandoned it that night in favor of hokey violence, over the top promos and senseless angles. They've hardly recovered since.
I'm all for competition, and I pray TNA will someday bring it, but not with their current outlook on things.
|
|
|
Post by RSCTom on Jan 12, 2011 12:56:13 GMT -5
Kevin Nash, Sting, Jarrett, Flair, Hogan... none of those guys have main evented a TNA PPV since Bischoff and Hogan took over. Both of those pay per views were better than the sub par Summerslam last year. Including the main events with those guys in them. That doesn't mean they were the best I've ever seen, but they certainly weren't bad.
|
|
RedwineRaider
Superstar
Joined on: Dec 15, 2005 23:43:15 GMT -5
Posts: 931
|
Post by RedwineRaider on Jan 12, 2011 15:23:28 GMT -5
I was pushing for it. I wanted TNA to be successful. The fact is they simply cannot compete with the WWE at this time. They are not that big.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 15, 2024 7:54:07 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2011 15:28:13 GMT -5
Nothing can save TNA as far as ratings go, they have Hulk Hogan, Kurt Angle, and Jeff Hardy. Their 3 biggest names in the company and still can't get a rating past like, 1.3? I wish they could compete but they look minor league in that crappy Orlando location
|
|
|
Post by No Brokeback on Jan 12, 2011 15:35:07 GMT -5
Just because a lot of people watch a show, that doesn't automatically make it good. Two and a Half Men is living proof of this. I know it's on hiatus due to Sheen's fun breakdown, but it's a much worse show. Also what war? TNA as a challenger? That show sucked last year and continued to suck since. I don't get why people are letting TNA survive. WCW in 2000 was better than what they're doing. I would know I went to Nitro in 2000. At least they had talent and pushed them. Who gives Lance Storm a bunch of titles, WCW in 2000. TNA wouldn't even be that cool. If you think WCW in 2000 or 2001 was better than TNA, then you obviously didn't watch WCW in 2000.
|
|
|
Post by TheNinthCloud on Jan 12, 2011 15:37:10 GMT -5
Also ROH > WWE/TNA, all you jerks should support that. This man speaks the truth. Also ROH > WWE/TNA, all you jerks should support that. this man speaks the truth! Whoah, I didn't even read the second page. 0_o
|
|
Burger Lad
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jun 30, 2009 8:41:44 GMT -5
Posts: 1,542
|
Post by Burger Lad on Jan 12, 2011 17:17:09 GMT -5
I used to like TNA until Hogan and Bischoff turned up...
|
|