Bob Sapp
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jun 22, 2008 13:35:03 GMT -5
Posts: 3,059
|
Post by Bob Sapp on Nov 3, 2009 22:28:10 GMT -5
Source: Wrestling-Radio.com
"Oh, this whole thing reminds me of why I hate corporate wrestling. I must admit there are bright spots, like imagining Vince McMahon's face and blood pressure when he heard the news, or hearing Hogan bitchslap Vince Russo by saying they'd be OK if "he stays in his place." Can TNA make their minds up, LAST month everybody had to be "100% behind Russo's creative direction" and THIS month they hire a guy who once SUED him for his lousy booking? They have reunited the same team that helped WCW lose more money than any wrestling promotion in history.In all seriousness, of course Hogan's presence will boost ratings, at least in the short term, and one or two PPV appearances over six months or a year will do buys far beyond anything TNA's ever done on PPV. He can get publicity like no one else associated with TNA. Bischoff has proven he can get television deals done, just possibly not GOOD television shows MADE. But to me there are still issues. Vince Russo and Ed Ferrara are still writing the show. If a lot more people are looking at a turd, does it smell better? This is not a company-making move unless the extra viewers see a product they can get hooked on when Hogan isn't there or gone. It doesn't speak well for the policy of the youth movement and pushing new faces and making new stars. Talk about a Bush-Clinton dynasty, how long has it been since someone not named McMahon, Bischoff, Hogan and Russo has been in charge of wrestling in this country, and the business is a lot less popular in the US than it was 10 years ago.
Will Hogan do anything to make even one young talent like Lashley, or Morgan, or Desmond, a star, or just drop the leg in each appearance to make the "fans happy"? A lot of questions about whether this is a good move for TNA will be answered by what both Bischoff and Hogan do for TNA instead of themselves. But the very nature of this move indicates the company does not intend to present any alternative to "sports entertainment", and no one will ever beat Vince McMahon at that. Long-term, I believe the only way for TNA to succeed with this move is to hook the extra fans they get, and have a young roster of new stars in positions ready to take over for Hogan and the rest of their veteran roster within the next year. I don't see Vince Russo as the architect of that and I don't see the style of athletically based, competitive wrestling that COULD hook these new or excommunicated fans being one that Russo knows how to present, that TNA wants to present, or that Hogan's style lends itself to presenting."
|
|
|
|
Post by SodaGuy on Nov 3, 2009 22:31:28 GMT -5
 Source: Wrestling-Radio.com "Oh, this whole thing reminds me of why I hate corporate wrestling. I must admit there are bright spots, like imagining Vince McMahon's face and blood pressure when he heard the news, or hearing Hogan bitchslap Vince Russo by saying they'd be OK if "he stays in his place." Can TNA make their minds up, LAST month everybody had to be "100% behind Russo's creative direction" and THIS month they hire a guy who once SUED him for his lousy booking? They have reunited the same team that helped WCW lose more money than any wrestling promotion in history.In all seriousness, of course Hogan's presence will boost ratings, at least in the short term, and one or two PPV appearances over six months or a year will do buys far beyond anything TNA's ever done on PPV. He can get publicity like no one else associated with TNA. Bischoff has proven he can get television deals done, just possibly not GOOD television shows MADE. But to me there are still issues. Vince Russo and Ed Ferrara are still writing the show. If a lot more people are looking at a turd, does it smell better? This is not a company-making move unless the extra viewers see a product they can get hooked on when Hogan isn't there or gone. It doesn't speak well for the policy of the youth movement and pushing new faces and making new stars. Talk about a Bush-Clinton dynasty, how long has it been since someone not named McMahon, Bischoff, Hogan and Russo has been in charge of wrestling in this country, and the business is a lot less popular in the US than it was 10 years ago.
Will Hogan do anything to make even one young talent like Lashley or Morgan, or Desmond, a star, or just drop the leg in each appearance to make the "fans happy"? A lot of questions about whether this is a good move for TNA will be answered by what both Bischoff and Hogan do for TNA instead of themselves. But the very nature of this move indicates the company does not intend to present any alternative to "sports entertainment", and no one will ever beat Vince McMahon at that. Long-term, I believe the only way for TNA to succeed with this move is to hook the extra fans they get, and have a young roster of new stars in positions ready to take over for Hogan and the rest of their veteran roster within the next year. I don't see Vince Russo as the architect of that and I don't see the style of athletically based, competitive wrestling that COULD hook these new or excommunicated fans being one that Russo knows how to present, that TNA wants to present, or that Hogan's style lends itself to presenting."
lolwut?
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hammers on Nov 3, 2009 22:34:31 GMT -5
He's only 33, he's still got another 10 years in him.
|
|
|
|
Post by SodaGuy on Nov 3, 2009 22:37:44 GMT -5
He's only 33, he's still got another 10 years in him. But to compare him to Wolfe as far as making a star? Weird choice tbh. I just reliazed I didn't bold the whole part. I meant to bold: "young talent like Lashley, or Morgan, or Desmond, a star" Lashley already is a star. |
|
|
|
Post by Wato Stan Account on Nov 3, 2009 22:44:56 GMT -5
Lashley already is a star. Stars draw people in. I'll be honest, I forgot Lashley worked for TNA. |
|
Bob Sapp
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jun 22, 2008 13:35:03 GMT -5
Posts: 3,059
|
Post by Bob Sapp on Nov 3, 2009 23:20:03 GMT -5
Lashley isn't a star by any means.
|
|
|
|
Post by Joey Cush on Nov 3, 2009 23:25:47 GMT -5
"If a lot more people are looking at a turd, does it smell better?"
That was great.
|
|
|
|
Post by flashback12345678 on Nov 4, 2009 18:22:51 GMT -5
And one reason hogan is there is to help the young talent understand the enitre wrestling part.I don't think hes going to take the spot light I think hes going to help get young talent over.And if TNA sees a problem with money or ratings all they have to do is fire hogan or who ever else is causing the problem.But for now its worth a chance.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 29, 2024 19:33:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2009 21:48:21 GMT -5
And one reason hogan is there is to help the young talent understand the enitre wrestling part.I don't think hes going to take the spot light I think hes going to help get young talent over.And if TNA sees a problem with money or ratings all they have to do is fire hogan or who ever else is causing the problem.But for now its worth a chance. Hogan's more of a showman and a character, than a wrestler per se`.... |
|
|
|
Post by flashback12345678 on Nov 4, 2009 22:28:40 GMT -5
And one reason hogan is there is to help the young talent understand the enitre wrestling part.I don't think hes going to take the spot light I think hes going to help get young talent over.And if TNA sees a problem with money or ratings all they have to do is fire hogan or who ever else is causing the problem.But for now its worth a chance. Hogan's more of a showman and a character, than a wrestler per se`.... Yeah thats true theses days but back then he was the wrestler instead of the showman.But maybe thats what TNA needs right now is a showman for the first couple of monthes. |
|
Bob Sapp
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jun 22, 2008 13:35:03 GMT -5
Posts: 3,059
|
Post by Bob Sapp on Nov 4, 2009 22:30:24 GMT -5
TNA needs to get rid of the old guys, but they continue to hire the old guys who can't hack it anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by deskjet on Nov 4, 2009 22:36:35 GMT -5
Source: Wrestling-Radio.com "Oh, this whole thing reminds me of why I hate corporate wrestling. I must admit there are bright spots, like imagining Vince McMahon's face and blood pressure when he heard the news, or hearing Hogan bitchslap Vince Russo by saying they'd be OK if "he stays in his place." Can TNA make their minds up, LAST month everybody had to be "100% behind Russo's creative direction" and THIS month they hire a guy who once SUED him for his lousy booking? They have reunited the same team that helped WCW lose more money than any wrestling promotion in history.In all seriousness, of course Hogan's presence will boost ratings, at least in the short term, and one or two PPV appearances over six months or a year will do buys far beyond anything TNA's ever done on PPV. He can get publicity like no one else associated with TNA. Bischoff has proven he can get television deals done, just possibly not GOOD television shows MADE. But to me there are still issues. Vince Russo and Ed Ferrara are still writing the show. If a lot more people are looking at a turd, does it smell better? This is not a company-making move unless the extra viewers see a product they can get hooked on when Hogan isn't there or gone. It doesn't speak well for the policy of the youth movement and pushing new faces and making new stars. Talk about a Bush-Clinton dynasty, how long has it been since someone not named McMahon, Bischoff, Hogan and Russo has been in charge of wrestling in this country, and the business is a lot less popular in the US than it was 10 years ago.
Will Hogan do anything to make even one young talent like Lashley, or Morgan, or Desmond, a star, or just drop the leg in each appearance to make the "fans happy"? A lot of questions about whether this is a good move for TNA will be answered by what both Bischoff and Hogan do for TNA instead of themselves. But the very nature of this move indicates the company does not intend to present any alternative to "sports entertainment", and no one will ever beat Vince McMahon at that. Long-term, I believe the only way for TNA to succeed with this move is to hook the extra fans they get, and have a young roster of new stars in positions ready to take over for Hogan and the rest of their veteran roster within the next year. I don't see Vince Russo as the architect of that and I don't see the style of athletically based, competitive wrestling that COULD hook these new or excommunicated fans being one that Russo knows how to present, that TNA wants to present, or that Hogan's style lends itself to presenting."
|
|
|
|
Post by SodaGuy on Nov 4, 2009 22:37:20 GMT -5
TNA needs to get rid of the old guys, but they continue to hire the old guys who can't hack it anymore. Just wondering, what age is "old" to you in wrestling? I'm just wondering. |
|
BIGticket5
Main Eventer
add me: www.myspace/rostafer_23
Joined on: Jan 26, 2002 20:01:11 GMT -5
Posts: 1,745
|
Post by BIGticket5 on Nov 5, 2009 3:02:39 GMT -5
TNA needs to get rid of the old guys, but they continue to hire the old guys who can't hack it anymore. Just wondering, what age is "old" to you in wrestling? I'm just wondering. 40 |
|
|
|
Post by SodaGuy on Nov 5, 2009 4:07:31 GMT -5
Just wondering, what age is "old" to you in wrestling? I'm just wondering. 40 That's intresting. I guess that means in two yeas TNA will have to drop Daniels, three years they'll have to drop Doug Williams,  |
|
Bob Sapp
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jun 22, 2008 13:35:03 GMT -5
Posts: 3,059
|
Post by Bob Sapp on Nov 5, 2009 4:27:12 GMT -5
TNA needs to get rid of the old guys, but they continue to hire the old guys who can't hack it anymore. Just wondering, what age is "old" to you in wrestling? I'm just wondering. Well, let's see here, there's Nash that's 50 years old, Hogan now that's 56, Scott Steiner who is nearing 50, Kurt Angle, who still has decent matches here and there, but is way past his prime at 40, you HAD Booker T reaching his mid-40s, and Sting who is 50. I think you get the idea here. |
|
|
|
Post by xshawnxwilliamsx on Nov 5, 2009 6:17:51 GMT -5
Hogan's more of a showman and a character, than a wrestler per se`.... Yeah thats true theses days but back then he was the wrestler instead of the showman.But maybe thats what TNA needs right now is a showman for the first couple of monthes. Wait, what did you just say? |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 29, 2024 19:33:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2009 10:26:42 GMT -5
Jim Cornette is one of the smartest guys in wrestling, whenever I hear him talk about the product and what's wrong with it and what's right it's borderline amazing how dead-on he can be. He does seem to long for the days of wrestling that will probably never return so he can be a bit influenced by that, but he's dead on about TNA putting all this emphasis on the three people that were at or near the helm when WCW sank like a lead weight.
|
|
Adam3s - V1
Main Eventer
Joined on: Mar 12, 2006 8:41:51 GMT -5
Posts: 1,794
|
Post by Adam3s - V1 on Nov 5, 2009 10:32:40 GMT -5
Just wondering, what age is "old" to you in wrestling? I'm just wondering. Well, let's see here, there's Nash that's 50 years old, Hogan now that's 56, Scott Steiner who is nearing 50, Kurt Angle, who still has decent matches here and there, but is way past his prime at 40, you HAD Booker T reaching his mid-40s, and Sting who is 50. I think you get the idea here. Angle's great but his just trained to the WWE style and when his on a roster filled with people that have their own styles it doesn't blend as well. He could have a great matches against AJ, Daniels, Joe, Lashley, Morgan, Lethal and many others. He just doesn't have the power anymore to get a great match out of the Abyss, Nash, Stiener, Sting etc. Still agree with the rest except Booker who was never that great and just cashes in too much now. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 29, 2024 19:33:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2009 16:25:29 GMT -5
Yeah thats true theses days but back then he was the wrestler instead of the showman.But maybe thats what TNA needs right now is a showman for the first couple of monthes. Wait, what did you just say? Yeah, sorry, what did you say? He's always been a showman. |
|
