Deleted
Joined on: May 19, 2024 15:34:19 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2013 15:38:19 GMT -5
I don't understand those who say the WWE is better than TNA. Seriously think about it. With WWE you have stupid idiotic pg jokes, horrible talent, see Big E Langston and many more. With TNA at least they have talent, there aren't many guys I dislike in TNA. TNA just needs to work on there storylines then I see them becoming the top promotion. WWE is so boring I swear it puts me to sleep, I hate how RAW is a 3 hour show but only about 20 minutes of it is worth watching. With TNA at least I see decent wrestling, even though the segments are usually pretty bad.
|
|
|
Post by JC Motors on Sept 12, 2013 18:47:31 GMT -5
1. fire Dixie Carer 2. give TNA back to the Jarrett's 3. fire. Hogan
|
|
Jorge
Superstar
Back in
Joined on: Nov 6, 2010 9:15:58 GMT -5
Posts: 727
|
Post by Jorge on Sept 16, 2013 7:17:48 GMT -5
1. Sign new talent from the indys like Kevin Steen, Johnny Gargano, Adam Cole, Colt Cabana, Michael Elgin, Jimmy Jacobs, The Briscoes, AR Fox, Chuck Taylor, Ricochet, Drake Younger, Tim Donst before WWE does.
2. Bring back the things that made TNA stand out like the six sided ring, king of the mountain etc.
3. Put new ppl in the creative team.
|
|
|
Post by ~ Cymru ~ on Sept 29, 2013 20:44:11 GMT -5
1) get rid of Hogan and Bush 2) return the 6 sided ring 3) get someone who knows wrestling and the business on creative ( no one who played a part in the death of Wcw )
|
|
|
Post by ~ Cymru ~ on Sept 29, 2013 20:48:32 GMT -5
With so many wanting a six-sided ring, I have to ask, did TNA really do anything with it? I'm saying this as someone that has watched the company for its' entirety. It always seemed to be different for the sake of being different - they didn't utilize it for anything they couldn't do with a standard square ring. Has anything been lost since the switch? Did they gain anything when they initially changed to a six-sided ring? Nope. Has anything been lost? No not really just any individuality and originality the company had not that that matters much who wants to watch TNA when you can watch "WWE-WCW after dark" featuring everyone either too old, too banged up, too drugged up or to egotistical to work under Vince McMahon
|
|
|
Post by Punk on Sept 29, 2013 21:36:14 GMT -5
'get rid of Hogan!'
> Hogan is leaving.
'Get rid of Dixie!'
Oh, you!
Also, lots of people don't seem to understand. How can you only say 'What to take away.' (Firering guys because you want Mattel figures of them.) Without Replacing or doing anything constructive?
How about... 'Take Away Hogan and replace him with Paul Heyman.' 'Take away Dixie Carter and replace her with Paul Heyman.' (etc.etc)
On topic.
I'd bring back Low-Ki and push him to the moon. Finish the un-finished story-lines, (Joeseph Park.) Push the KnockOuts Division again. Things were so good, and can be so good again. We've already lost the T.V. Title and the Tags, so how about a little bit more effort?
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Oct 2, 2013 13:46:05 GMT -5
With so many wanting a six-sided ring, I have to ask, did TNA really do anything with it? I'm saying this as someone that has watched the company for its' entirety. It always seemed to be different for the sake of being different - they didn't utilize it for anything they couldn't do with a standard square ring. Has anything been lost since the switch? Did they gain anything when they initially changed to a six-sided ring? Nope. Has anything been lost? No not really just any individuality and originality the company had not that that matters much who wants to watch TNA when you can watch "WWE-WCW after dark" featuring everyone either too old, too banged up, too drugged up or to egotistical to work under Vince McMahon ...if the ring is the only thing that set TNA apart from the competition, they have problems. The six-sided ring sucked, and was only there to check off a "We're not WWE" bullet point. Differentiate in the product and use a ring 99% of wrestlers are more familiar with. Not rocket science.
|
|
|
Post by sean™ on Oct 2, 2013 16:56:09 GMT -5
1. Factions - It seems like the second one faction is eliminated, another one pops up. Sometimes it feels like everyone on the roster is in a faction to a certain extent. I imagine what's so interesting about the AJ Styles angle for the last good while, is that he's one of the few loners in TNA it seems.
2. Taping almost everything in advance - I understand this is a money saving tactic, but if they set their sights on smaller venues, then perhaps they could do more live IMPACTS and "mini PPVs". The reason I tune into Monday Night Raw and DVR Smackdown, is because RAW is live. Simple as that.
3. Backstage Promos - I'm sure people will disagree with me, but of the episodes I've watched in the last few months, it feels like TNA has FAR more promos and segments backstage now days. For a company that's "all about wrestling", it seems like all they do is talk about it. And on the topic of backstage segments, we know the camera is there. They know the camera is there. We don't NEED someone to mention or point out that there's a camera or camera man.
And if all that fails, just play a non-stop loop of any of the Kevin Nash w/ Alex Shelley vs the X-Division stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Yeeter on Oct 3, 2013 1:29:09 GMT -5
And if all that fails, just play a non-stop loop of any of the Kevin Nash w/ Alex Shelley vs the X-Division stuff. That's probably the best option. That's the only thing TNA have ever done that's been worth watching. I'd probably fire almost all of the remaining roster, keep a few and turn it into a reality show. Maybe have the contestants as AJ, Roode, Kazarian, Daniels, Aries, Magnus, Spud, Storm. Keep Hogan and Sting as presenters/coaches. Keep Velvet Sky and Christy Hemme as eye candy. Winner of the contest gets a WWE (developmental) contract.
|
|
|
Post by Thick Justice on Oct 3, 2013 19:21:35 GMT -5
Jeff Jarrett as owner
Paul Heyman and Scott D'amore become in charge of creative
Fire Hogan and Bischoff
|
|