|
|
Post by Mr. Orange on Oct 6, 2007 13:06:11 GMT -5
I thought it was a very good show. But like other people said, its not going to go fron a 1.0 to a 3.0 overnight.
|
|
|
|
Post by Flyrfn144 on Oct 6, 2007 13:32:13 GMT -5
Wrong! 2nd two hour show. The primetime special was two hours Sodaguy... please...do us all a favor and delete yourself again for the 37th time...and dont come back. 1.1 sucks no matter how you cut it. They put on a sub par show. They needed something to stand out...and they could have done so much more. What did you want them to do, go from .91 to 3.0's in one  ing show?! Buddy, it doesn't happen just like that. I mean, sure, they need to raise their ratings, but one show, whether amazing, or piss poor, will change that. What TNA should look at here is that the ratings went up back over a 1.0 from last week, and try to keep building that up. |
|
|
|
Post by burgess9 on Oct 6, 2007 14:31:46 GMT -5
Sodaguy... please...do us all a favor and delete yourself again for the 37th time...and dont come back. 1.1 sucks no matter how you cut it. They put on a sub par show. They needed something to stand out...and they could have done so much more. What did you want them to do, go from .91 to 3.0's in one ing show?! Buddy, it doesn't happen just like that. I mean, sure, they need to raise their ratings, but one show, whether amazing, or piss poor, will change that. What TNA should look at here is that the ratings went up back over a 1.0 from last week, and try to keep building that up. I guess I really didnt make it clear what I meant. Like, I know they arent going to get ratings that go through the roof on the get go. But its just they didnt put on a quality show. Why in gods name did they start off with Black Reign? Hopefully they'll get better with the two hour formant...which Im sure they will...hopefully. |
|
|
|
Post by j2dacversion3 on Oct 6, 2007 14:46:36 GMT -5
Sodaguy... please...do us all a favor and delete yourself again for the 37th time...and dont come back. 1.1 sucks no matter how you cut it. They put on a sub par show. They needed something to stand out...and they could have done so much more. And you are....? He seems to be a guy with good common sense. |
|
|
|
Post by Heresy on Oct 6, 2007 19:01:27 GMT -5
What TNA should look at here is that the ratings went up back over a 1.0 from last week, and try to keep building that up. Yeah, a few more people tuned in to see if TNA would deliver a great show. They'll be back to .9's and 1.0's in no time... |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 24, 2024 16:01:31 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2007 22:29:07 GMT -5
That was one of the worst wrestling shows I've ever seen on TV. So you don't get USA, Sci-Fi and The CW Network? It was worse than any Raw or ECW show. I haven't watched Smackdown in 2 years though. |
|
|
|
Post by THE *Legendary* STINGER on Oct 6, 2007 23:26:00 GMT -5
So you don't get USA, Sci-Fi and The CW Network? It was worse than any Raw or ECW show. I haven't watched Smackdown in 2 years though. you people... I swear, this generation is rediculous. WWE died a long time ago and people are doing this "ive been a WWF fan since the 80's bla bla bla I cant just tune out"...why the hell not? WWE hasnt produced anything like they did back in the day and they think they can have bad shows and pull one over on the fans..right when he did that limo stunt I stopped watching it. TNA tries their BEST to keep us watching, the bookings might not be the best at times but the wrestlers in the match still give it their all, the main, the gauntlet, the womens match and the dudleys match all had me entertained. How do you not look at TNA as a breath of fresh air. woah..I started to rant sorry dude, I just cant stand how people are bashing TNA when they had a pretty damn good show. its wrestling...wrestling is WRESTLING...why does everyone make it seem like storylines are more important than watching the wrestlers do what they do best. |
|
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 Oct 7, 2007 1:19:21 GMT -5
Wrong! 2nd two hour show. The primetime special was two hours Sodaguy... please...do us all a favor and delete yourself again for the 37th time...and dont come back. 1.1 sucks no matter how you cut it. They put on a sub par show. They needed something to stand out...and they could have done so much more. Well, seeing as how you have 2 posts... Why dont YOU delete yourself, and or get banned for more than likely ripping some one off, and never come back? |
|
|
|
Post by rkolegendkilla on Oct 7, 2007 1:27:45 GMT -5
Sodaguy... please...do us all a favor and delete yourself again for the 37th time...and dont come back. 1.1 sucks no matter how you cut it. They put on a sub par show. They needed something to stand out...and they could have done so much more. Well, seeing as how you have 2 posts... Why dont YOU delete yourself, and or get banned for more than likely ripping some one off, and never come back? I would pay good money to see you piss off. |
|
|
|
Post by Mr. PerpetuaLynch Motion on Oct 7, 2007 1:45:32 GMT -5
It was worse than any Raw or ECW show. I haven't watched Smackdown in 2 years though. you people... I swear, this generation is rediculous. WWE died a long time ago and people are doing this "ive been a WWF fan since the 80's bla bla bla I cant just tune out"...why the hell not? WWE hasnt produced anything like they did back in the day and they think they can have bad shows and pull one over on the fans..right when he did that limo stunt I stopped watching it. TNA tries their BEST to keep us watching, the bookings might not be the best at times but the wrestlers in the match still give it their all, the main, the gauntlet, the womens match and the dudleys match all had me entertained. How do you not look at TNA as a breath of fresh air. woah..I started to rant sorry dude, I just cant stand how people are bashing TNA when they had a pretty damn good show. its wrestling...wrestling is WRESTLING...why does everyone make it seem like storylines are more important than watching the wrestlers do what they do best. I can respect that... but The Dudleys, Pacman, Ron Killings, Goldust aren't what I consider the best wrestlers... Storylines are a crucial component to pro wrestling. I mean without it it doesn't give anyone in the matches a reason to be fighting eachother... Storylines help further the wrestling component. You can't have a good storyline without a good wrestling match and you can't have a good wrestling match without a good storyline... |
|
KRAYZIE BONE
Main Eventer
WF 10 Year Member
Visual.Avenues
Joined on: Jul 20, 2003 22:29:25 GMT -5
Posts: 1,608
|
Post by KRAYZIE BONE on Oct 7, 2007 2:38:56 GMT -5
wwe > tna
you mad?
|
|
Too Sweet
Main Eventer
R.I.P MJ
Joined on: Sept 20, 2006 23:28:07 GMT -5
Posts: 3,611
|
Post by Too Sweet on Oct 7, 2007 3:07:52 GMT -5
It was worse than any Raw or ECW show. I haven't watched Smackdown in 2 years though. you people... I swear, this generation is rediculous. WWE died a long time ago and people are doing this "ive been a WWF fan since the 80's bla bla bla I cant just tune out"...why the hell not? WWE hasnt produced anything like they did back in the day and they think they can have bad shows and pull one over on the fans..right when he did that limo stunt I stopped watching it. TNA tries their BEST to keep us watching, the bookings might not be the best at times but the wrestlers in the match still give it their all, the main, the gauntlet, the womens match and the dudleys match all had me entertained. How do you not look at TNA as a breath of fresh air. woah..I started to rant sorry dude, I just cant stand how people are bashing TNA when they had a pretty damn good show. its wrestling...wrestling is WRESTLING...why does everyone make it seem like storylines are more important than watching the wrestlers do what they do best. I wouldn't really say TNA is putting out their Best, Neither is the WWE aswell, TNA needs guys who can use their Talent properly and Vice Versa for the WWE, BUT the WWE doesn't really need to try anymore, In my opinion they are in Cruise Control like they were around 93-96 Until WCW came and kicked their ass then WWE decided to do something about it. WWE doesn't have Solid Competition, sure you DO have TNA but at the Moment its still growing and Is no way near the Level WWE is on right now, and While the WWE feeds Wrestling Fans more crap than what TNA does WWE knows that they will still rake in more and more money because Viewers can't stop watching it, and While most of the Casual Audience has ditched the WWE there are still People out there who Enjoy it. |
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Oct 7, 2007 12:57:35 GMT -5
TNA tries their BEST to keep us watching, the bookings might not be the best at times but the wrestlers in the match still give it their all, the main, the gauntlet, the womens match and the dudleys match all had me entertained. How do you not look at TNA as a breath of fresh air. No, in 2005, TNA tried their best. I'll give you a prime example. I'm assuming you saw AJ/Joe at Turning Point 2005 for the X-division title. Was that not one of the greatest matches TNA has ever put out? Two years later, at Sacrifice, AJ/Joe happens again. After watching what they did at Turning Point two years ago, that Sacrifice match was nowhere near as great. They preach themselves as the 'new face' of pro wrestling, yet why is the BFG main event feature two guys that I've seen already? By the way Sting is my favorite wrestler of all time, so I wouldn't detect any bias here. How about one of the tag matches, Steiners/Dudleyz? Nope, no new faces there either. Not to mention I can just consider Ron Killings the tag title holder. Why? Because his partner has yet to even attempt a wrestling manuever, and sorry to say it, but throwing a football at someone doesn't count. The Steiners/Dudleyz match is getting more build-up than the freakin tag title match at BFG. .....*cools down* sorry dude, I just cant stand how people are bashing TNA when they had a pretty damn good show. its wrestling...wrestling is WRESTLING...why does everyone make it seem like storylines are more important than watching the wrestlers do what they do best. Yeah, the show wasn't terrible in my eyes. But 1.1 is nothing to cheer about. They've been at that level already. Expanding the show to two hours will not just easily make the ratings better, they need to start booking more intelligently before that happens. |
|
|
|
Post by Heresy on Oct 7, 2007 13:05:47 GMT -5
TNA tries their BEST to keep us watching, the bookings might not be the best at times but the wrestlers in the match still give it their all, the main, the gauntlet, the womens match and the dudleys match all had me entertained. How do you not look at TNA as a breath of fresh air. A breath of fresh air? LMAO. TNA's main storylines are centered around second-hand talent and an NFL cornerback. The one or two midcard feuds TNA has are nothing ground-breaking either. I'm not about to give TNA credit for throwing some amazing (ROH) wrestlers in pointless matches every now and then... get back to me when they start utilizing those guys in storylines, and 80% of a TNA show doesn't feature watered-down WWE-level wrestling. |
|
|
|
Post by mvpisballin on Oct 7, 2007 15:36:43 GMT -5
TNA tries their BEST to keep us watching, the bookings might not be the best at times but the wrestlers in the match still give it their all, the main, the gauntlet, the womens match and the dudleys match all had me entertained. How do you not look at TNA as a breath of fresh air. No, in 2005, TNA tried their best. I'll give you a prime example. I'm assuming you saw AJ/Joe at Turning Point 2005 for the X-division title. Was that not one of the greatest matches TNA has ever put out? Two years later, at Sacrifice, AJ/Joe happens again. After watching what they did at Turning Point two years ago, that Sacrifice match was nowhere near as great. They preach themselves as the 'new face' of pro wrestling, yet why is the BFG main event feature two guys that I've seen already? By the way Sting is my favorite wrestler of all time, so I wouldn't detect any bias here. How about one of the tag matches, Steiners/Dudleyz? Nope, no new faces there either. Not to mention I can just consider Ron Killings the tag title holder. Why? Because his partner has yet to even attempt a wrestling manuever, and sorry to say it, but throwing a football at someone doesn't count. The Steiners/Dudleyz match is getting more build-up than the freakin tag title match at BFG. .....*cools down* sorry dude, I just cant stand how people are bashing TNA when they had a pretty damn good show. its wrestling...wrestling is WRESTLING...why does everyone make it seem like storylines are more important than watching the wrestlers do what they do best. Yeah, the show wasn't terrible in my eyes. But 1.1 is nothing to cheer about. They've been at that level already. Expanding the show to two hours will not just easily make the ratings better, they need to start booking more intelligently before that happens. Wait, your joking, right?Sting vs Kurt is one rivalry and TNA usually dosn't repeat matches like WWE. In WWE, we get to view Cena vs. Orton #1, #2, and would have #3 if Cena didn't get injured. That list goes on and on with Cena, with the likes of Umaga and Khali. |
|
|
|
Post by thezodiac on Oct 7, 2007 15:38:44 GMT -5
He seems to be a guy with good common sense. lol. |
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Oct 7, 2007 19:36:16 GMT -5
Wait, your joking, right?Sting vs Kurt is one rivalry and TNA usually dosn't repeat matches like WWE. In WWE, we get to view Cena vs. Orton #1, #2, and would have #3 if Cena didn't get injured. That list goes on and on with Cena, with the likes of Umaga and Khali. I wasn't referring to the match, nor the rivalry. I'm talking about the guys in the match. Maybe some newer faces, that would make it a breath of fresh air. Maybe that one guy that for the last two years everyone said will win the title at BFG yet it hasn't happened yet.... |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 24, 2024 16:01:31 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2007 22:51:16 GMT -5
You people forget that WWE is not about wrestling. Read the Title it says World Wrestling ENTER INGTAINMENT. If it was wrestling then they would have named it something else. Vince Mcmahon doesn't care about wrestling, if he did the company's name would not have entertainment in it. So stop bitching about WWE and go home. |
|
|
|
Post by KMIS™ on Oct 7, 2007 23:03:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Oct 7, 2007 23:08:11 GMT -5
You people forget that WWE is not about wrestling. Read the Title it says World Wrestling ENTER INGTAINMENT. If it was wrestling then they would have named it something else. Vince Mcmahon doesn't care about wrestling, if he did the company's name would not have entertainment in it. So stop bitching about WWE and go home.  |
|
