|
|
Post by THE *Legendary* STINGER on Aug 26, 2007 16:29:56 GMT -5
This is spam.
|
|
|
|
Post by comebackkid on Aug 26, 2007 16:34:24 GMT -5
Episode 2 is Christ
PERIOD!
|
|
W¡LDCARD
POSSIBLE BAD TRADER
Sell me your TNA figures!
Joined on: Mar 23, 2005 3:32:51 GMT -5
Posts: 3,444
|
Post by W¡LDCARD on Aug 26, 2007 16:45:39 GMT -5
Nothing will ever beat those end credits of episode 2.
|
|
|
|
Post by comebackkid on Aug 26, 2007 16:47:24 GMT -5
It makes me laugh when every week TNA gets a 1.1 makes me think of that Vid and Laugh
|
|
|
|
Post by Ultimate Figure Collector on Aug 26, 2007 17:20:18 GMT -5
The difference is WWE is making millions of money and has been around for forever. If TNA don't start shaping things up they won't be around for much longer. And again, why do TNA marks need to always compare things to WWE? TNA claims they are the alternative when it sure doesn't look like it. Anyway, I only watched the first one so far and it was funny. Russo talking about no one wants to see lucha libre and what not exactly explains why there's been no X-Division since BFG. do you freakin realize that video was shot in like 2003...maybe sooner in Russo's first stint in TNA? TNA marks compare it to WWE because usually the same people that tlak bad about TNA dont say anything bad as much about WWE, when both companies have their ups and downs Yes I know that was shot in 2003. My point was simply that Russo mentions that no one wants to see lucha libre which is kinda like the X-Division and that people in America want the booking they see now from TNA. Russo is a joke and as long as he sticks around TNA will never improve. As far as talking bad about WWE I've seen a few people in this post alone that talk bad about both TNA and WWE when they don't agree with something. |
|
Master Lewpac
POSSIBLE BAD TRADER
Detroit plays dirty.
Joined on: Apr 12, 2007 1:47:12 GMT -5
Posts: 1,890
|
Post by Master Lewpac on Aug 26, 2007 18:38:13 GMT -5
It's easier to do it with TNA because their is more negatives. or is it that it's becasue it's already been done and not tried with WWE? believe me, you can find just as many negatives in their product. You could actually find more. A midget as cruiserweight champion, King Booker vs Jerry Lawler, Khali as world champion, Carlito Kennedy and Cena's little "comedy" sketch. Vince Mcmahon "Dying" then coming back not even a month later. Vince has a bastard son.. The list goes on and on. I admit, the Bubba thing was kinda funny, but most of the crapis stupid. There are more things wrong in the WWE than TNA, but the haters wont exploit their precious WWE. |
|
|
|
Post by deskjet on Aug 26, 2007 19:15:33 GMT -5
or is it that it's becasue it's already been done and not tried with WWE? believe me, you can find just as many negatives in their product. You could actually find more. A midget as cruiserweight champion, King Booker vs Jerry Lawler, Khali as world champion, Carlito Kennedy and Cena's little "comedy" sketch. Vince Mcmahon "Dying" then coming back not even a month later. Vince has a bastard son.. The list goes on and on. I admit, the Bubba thing was kinda funny, but most of the **** is stupid. There are more things wrong in the WWE than TNA, but the haters wont exploit their precious WWE. That's all I'm saying. So many people come on here and bash TNA, when the other product on tv is just as bad or worse. It just ticks me off that that's all some people do...bash , bash, bash. I'm not saying dont say stuff bad about the product if its bad but damn dont just come outta no where one day and jump on the bandwagon then keep your mouth shut when their are actually good points to the product. No one can claim I'm a mark becasue i've ripped tna and praised them, I've ripped WWE and praised them. It's the people that do nothing but rip a company or a person that does nothing but praise a company that is a mark. So again I ask what is the point of the thread, to make fun of tna? what's the purpose...because its the cool thing to do? tey to glean something positve from the product is all I'm challenging people to do... maybe if people dont go into it with such a negative perspective, they could see some positive. |
|
|
|
Post by Eyce on Aug 27, 2007 1:04:33 GMT -5
What's the positives we'd see that you mentioned, Deskjet? What, totally bury all Home-Grown Talent in favour of just pulling out Ex-WWE Wrestlers and sticking them immediately into the upper card? Is the Positive there the awesomeness of Nostalgia?
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Aug 27, 2007 1:54:19 GMT -5
You can compare WWE's negatives because they are Entertainment therefore they are shunned from hypocricy unlike TNA
|
|
|
|
Post by taker1 on Aug 27, 2007 5:24:36 GMT -5
You can compare WWE's negatives because they are Entertainment therefore they are shunned from hypocricy unlike TNA Exactly. You don't see WWE proclaiming " OMG WE'RE WRESTLING REINVENTED!" Not to mention WWE has been around for over half a century, and have turned an incredible profit in that span. TNA's been around for five years, and hasn't profited ****. Their product sucks, and all they could do is take cheap shots at WWE. |
|
|
|
Post by thevileone on Aug 29, 2007 0:20:33 GMT -5
The amount of WWE's negatives have really nothing to do with TNA.
WWE's amount of negatives don't make TNA's suck any less despite what the blind TNA apologists say. That's the biggest defense that TNA apologists have right now, that WWE is much worse or crap like that.
What's funny about "even less like Impact" is because it's true.
|
|
