|
Post by mcmahonfan85 on Dec 26, 2007 23:42:46 GMT -5
Secondly, what Alvarez needs to properly understand is that WRESTLING (must be typed in all caps) is smurfing fake. Nobody is unaware of that, and no amount of "suspension of disbelief" is going to fool anybody into thinking it's real. you have to "suspend disbelief" or else you are a retard for watching it. "These two don't really hate each other, they aren't really fighting each other, and that belt doesn't really mean anything", so why keep watching? no one is asking you to think thats its real, they are asking you to forget for a second that the two people in the ring aren't (in a sense) acting and TNN's wonderful advertising campaign had loads to do with people knowing ECW was on their network and thus tunning in. (if i may steal from Sinister1)
|
|
Ace Diamond
Patti Mayonnaise
Believes in Adrian Veidt, as Should We All.
mmm...flavor text
Posts: 36,043
|
Post by Ace Diamond on Dec 26, 2007 23:45:21 GMT -5
...but it's all marred by occasional talent misuse... occasional? I was trying to be polite
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Dec 26, 2007 23:51:22 GMT -5
The point of a pro wrestling show is to get you to buy their PPVs. When 98% of TNA's audience is not buying their PPVs, there's something wrong. To the TNA fans replying in this thread, how many of you are actually buying their PPVs. As opposed to the 90-95% than don't buy the WWE ones? Plus, some of us don't have cash to spend on PPVs every month with other stuff. I couldn't get the last two PPVs for that same reason.
|
|
Ace Diamond
Patti Mayonnaise
Believes in Adrian Veidt, as Should We All.
mmm...flavor text
Posts: 36,043
|
Post by Ace Diamond on Dec 26, 2007 23:52:51 GMT -5
The point of a pro wrestling show is to get you to buy their PPVs. When 98% of TNA's audience is not buying their PPVs, there's something wrong. To the TNA fans replying in this thread, how many of you are actually buying their PPVs. As opposed to the 90-95% than don't buy the WWE ones? Plus, some of us don't have cash to spend on PPVs every month with other stuff. I couldn't get the last two PPVs for that same reason. 5% of WWE's Audience > 5% of TNA's audience. Hence WWE's PPVs are still doing well buy-wise, compared to TNA.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Dec 27, 2007 0:02:15 GMT -5
The whole thing gets screwed up because there is this already embedded idea that TNA sucks. No matter what happens, no matter what goes on, bad or good, there's always this thing in people's heads going "TNA SUCKS! TNA SUCKS! TNA SUCKS!". Anything bad they do makes it go louder and anything good they go gets drowned out with remembrance of the bad things they do.
Bryan is yelling about this because he already has that view, he has that idea already in place and he can't let it go. You're not gonna enjoy jack if all your doing is looking at it and go "They suck! They suck! They suck! ooh! look at this! It's normal, but it's crap cause TNA sucks! They suck! They suck! They suck!".
and the worst part: It's not gonna change. TNA isn't gonna be this pro wrestling show that people want it to be or thought it was gonna be(Even though they have the tagline "We Are Wrestling", whichthey got cause they have Kurt Angle on the roster and wanted to advertise it and that's smurfing it!) and people are not going to accept it.
|
|
|
Post by Aaron E. Dangerously on Dec 27, 2007 0:13:08 GMT -5
I agree with Alvarez on this, though he does focus a LOT of hate on TNA.
After reading the script myself, it's clear that there isn't a whole lot of direction on the show. It's somewhat surprising, as if TNA writers KNOW the garbage they're writing.
|
|
|
Post by dh03grad on Dec 27, 2007 0:16:15 GMT -5
It boils down to this. No one alive knows more about making money in Professional Wrestling than Vince McMahon. At the last stockholders meeting, he said that for TNA to be successful, they cant do what WWE does. They do not have the resources to do so and its setting them up to fail. Bryan Alvarez, myself and many others agree with that viewpoint. TNA must accentuate what makes them different from WWE. Dont do the same "funny" storylines and skits, dont highlight former WWE wrestlers that are way past their prime. When they do what WWE does with former WWE talent, it comes across as complete second rate garbage. TNA should focus on the one thing they can be first rate in. Wrestling. None of us harbor real ill will towards TNA. None of us want them to go out of business. We want a good wrestling product.
|
|
|
Post by laotioncommotion on Dec 27, 2007 0:17:52 GMT -5
Secondly, what Alvarez needs to properly understand is that WRESTLING (must be typed in all caps) is smurfing fake. Nobody is unaware of that, and no amount of "suspension of disbelief" is going to fool anybody into thinking it's real. you have to "suspend disbelief" or else you are a retard for watching it. "These two don't really hate each other, they aren't really fighting each other, and that belt doesn't really mean anything", so why keep watching? no one is asking you to think thats its real, they are asking you to forget for a second that the two people in the ring aren't (in a sense) acting and TNN's wonderful advertising campaign had loads to do with people knowing ECW was on their network and thus tunning in. (if i may steal from Sinister1) I, and basically any other wrestling fan growing up in the 90's knew about ECW. It was around at the hottest time in the world for professional wresting. I didn't even like WWF, but I still flipped to RAW during commercials on Nitro, and watched Smackdown because that was the way wrestling was. It was the hot thing to do. So why didn't people watch ECW? Because it was designed for a very specific audience. People just need to remember that ECW was a niche, and that niche proved to be not big enough to sustain them on TV. I hear you on the suspension of disbelief argument, but if you could, try and hear me. "Smart" fans such as us tend to view things through a strange sort of wrestling "rulebook" that demands that certain things happen and certain things don't. Title belts have "prestige" that must be maintained, and characters and stories must not veer too far out of this wresting reality, lest they be slammed for being "unrealistic" or "confusing" or whatever else. But the end of it is, to everybody out there who doesn't watch wrestling, it's fake and dumb. Booking it like an MMA show isn't going to get anybody to change their minds. Finding characters people are interested in and stories people want to watch will. I'm not saying TNA has done that, but if they want to, they're going in the right direction for that.
|
|
|
Post by dh03grad on Dec 27, 2007 0:24:23 GMT -5
You know, the whole "They just want to see it succeed" thing gets old when everyone says this doesn't work or that doesn't work, and it doesn't affect them at all. It doesn't seem like they care as much as they just don't like what they see and that's it. Plus, I don't get what TNA is suppose to do to "impress people". I don't get what qualifications it needs to be considered "acceptable" by people. I do know that it's probably something that is different from the direction they had. TNA always seemed to have that type of stuff on, and I don't see why they have to go to this whole different gameplan cause of some assumption people have of it. Obviously, what TNA needs to do to be "acceptable" and "impress people" is book entirely towards smarks by showing wrestling and wrestling. No humor allowed! Humor is for WWE! They can do it because they can afford to! Wrestling! No crazy gimmicks! Just wrestlers! Feuds based only on wrestling! Only wrestling! Between wrestlers! I am screaming alot! Does that convey the sarcasm I'm using?! I don't...oh. Sorry Lex. ... WRESTLING! In your sarcasm, you have the right idea. There was a time where TNA was more or less just that. They had higher PPV buys as well. Another thing I seriously dont get in TNA is bringing in every guy with "name value". The number of guys active that can come close single handedly making a difference on TNA's ratings or buyrate can be counted on one hand and all work for Vince McMahon. Having acts like the New Age Outlaws,Dudley Boys,Nash,Booker T,Rhyno....if any of these guys vanished tomorrow would TNA Impact be any worse off? I understand bringing in Angle who is the biggest name that TNA could possibly ever acquire. I understand Christian who was up and coming with potential at the time. The rest of these guys are bringing down the product.
|
|
|
Post by CM Crünk is teh 'CRAP! on Dec 27, 2007 0:25:43 GMT -5
When I first started to view TNA in 2002 when it first started I was amazed by it. Seeing guys like Amazing Red, AJ Styles, Abyss, and other X wresters i was memorized because i saw nothing like it. Then time when on I found out about Ring of Honor that was the best promotion I have ever watched then TNA 2007 what should I say about it? I rather not on this thread. I can go on and on about how horrible TNA is to watch.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Dec 27, 2007 0:26:23 GMT -5
It boils down to this. No one alive knows more about making money in Professional Wrestling than Vince McMahon. At the last stockholders meeting, he said that for TNA to be successful, they cant do what WWE does. They do not have the resources to do so and its setting them up to fail. Bryan Alvarez, myself and many others agree with that viewpoint. TNA must accentuate what makes them different from WWE. Dont do the same "funny" storylines and skits, dont highlight former WWE wrestlers that are way past their prime. When they do what WWE does with former WWE talent, it comes across as complete second rate garbage. TNA should focus on the one thing they can be first rate in. Wrestling. None of us harbor real ill will towards TNA. None of us want them to go out of business. We want a good wrestling product. Well, there's this whole thing on "Comedy in Indy vs. Comedy in Big Promotions" argument that van be made, but I'll go with the simpler "humor is subjective" and what you think is dumb is funny as hell to me. Also, what WWE guys are getting pushed? You got Tomko, Gail, Angle, Christian, and Booker as guys getting pushes, with Angle and possibly Booker possibly being past their prime. Black Reign has turned into this lower card guy, and Rellik mostly loses(although that's a travesty now), Team 3D are on the losing end of a feud with the MCMG, VKM are breaking up, Nash is now filling the Bob Backlund role of non-wrestler personality who does a little wrestling if needed, and a bunch of other guys with some type of connection aren't holding anyone down. The problem is that WWE IS pro wrestling, and are the formula of success, and any deviation runs the risk of not working or not fitting in one area.
|
|
|
Post by dh03grad on Dec 27, 2007 0:34:32 GMT -5
It boils down to this. No one alive knows more about making money in Professional Wrestling than Vince McMahon. At the last stockholders meeting, he said that for TNA to be successful, they cant do what WWE does. They do not have the resources to do so and its setting them up to fail. Bryan Alvarez, myself and many others agree with that viewpoint. TNA must accentuate what makes them different from WWE. Dont do the same "funny" storylines and skits, dont highlight former WWE wrestlers that are way past their prime. When they do what WWE does with former WWE talent, it comes across as complete second rate garbage. TNA should focus on the one thing they can be first rate in. Wrestling. None of us harbor real ill will towards TNA. None of us want them to go out of business. We want a good wrestling product. Well, there's this whole thing on "Comedy in Indy vs. Comedy in Big Promotions" argument that van be made, but I'll go with the simpler "humor is subjective" and what you think is dumb is funny as hell to me. Also, what WWE guys are getting pushed? You got Tomko, Gail, Angle, Christian, and Booker as guys getting pushes, with Angle and possibly Booker possibly being past their prime. Black Reign has turned into this lower card guy, and Rellik mostly loses(although that's a travesty now), Team 3D are on the losing end of a feud with the MCMG, VKM are breaking up, Nash is now filling the Bob Backlund role of non-wrestler personality who does a little wrestling if needed, and a bunch of other guys with some type of connection aren't holding anyone down. The problem is that WWE IS pro wrestling, and are the formula of success, and any deviation runs the risk of not working or not fitting in one area. If you open a restaurant across the street from mcdonalds, would you have a different menu and offer different items to try and grab a market share...or would you serve cheaper,nastier versions of the same food?
|
|
|
Post by TRUTH TELLER on Dec 27, 2007 0:34:39 GMT -5
Plus, some of us don't have cash to spend on PPVs every month with other stuff. I couldn't get the last two PPVs for that same reason. Then they aren't doing their jobs properly. A company that's doing a great job promoting should make you feel like a fool for missing their show. It should feel like YOU have to see it. I HAD to see Hogan vs. Andre and Hogan vs. Warrior. I even HAD to see Bret vs. HBK. To me, if a promotion is making things captivating, I'm going to feel, and have felt, compelled to find someway, somehow to buy that f***ing show, because I don't want to be left out and miss it. I want to live in that moment and mark out. I think that's the real issue here with Alvarez's critique. Nowhere does it say that he thinks it should be like ROH or booked towards smarks. The fact of the matter is IT ALREADY IS BOOKED TOWARDS SMARKS, and that's why it's status quo forever with zero growth. The criticism here isn't that TNA should be eliminated or that "WWE rules!" it's that they're not learning from their mistakes and are doing things incompetently. TNA is like a classroom full of brilliant students with TONS of potential… who just happen to have the world's worst and most retarded teacher. They all get dragged down by the terrible curve. I don't understand how people are taking anything from that paragraph other than "TNA is making stupid decisions that are failing". Don't let blind loyalty to something you love cloud your better sense. TNA has so much potential but it's being neglected. To me, what Bryan is saying is simple. 1) TNA overcomplicates things by creating terrible, tedious word for word scripting. His example of WWE's RAW XV script in comparison was perfect. TNA is not leaving any room for anyone on the roster to have any unique discernable identity or character. If everyone is cookie-cutter and talks the exact same way, no one stands out. Imagine a movie where every single character delivered the same badly written lines in the same badly directed way. TNA writing is like George Lucas' writing. 2) Whether people want to realize it or not, the purpose of promos are to sell pay-per-views (or house shows). That's it. Wrestling TV is basically by design one big 2 hour Movie trailer meant to get our asses out to the theater and pay for the "movie" or PPV in this case. TNA is not doing this well, if TNA's own fanbase admittedly doesn't even order the shows. If you're not paying TNA your money in some shape or form, sorry to say, but you're worthless as a fan. A real fan buys the product. 3) There are no stars. No one stands out as a top talent because everyone is seemingly interchangeable. I love Christian, but this is at least the 2nd time in a year and a half that he's been plugged into this same exact role after flip-flopping a bunch of times. TNA's booking is designed in such a way that nothing on top is memorable, and anyone can be instantly plugged in like a manufacturing line into a main event slot. They had a chance with Samoa Joe, but they procrastinated too much, and now it seems like they'll be turning him heel. Seriously. There's certain times when you HAVE to pull a trigger on someone. Joe unlike Warrior in '90, Goldberg in '98, and Cena in 2005 didn't get that luxury. They just pussyfooted around so much where one month he's wrestling for the World Title, the next he's feuding with Robert Roode (?!) then the next he's right back in the main event nonsensically teaming with Kevin Nash. This show is Bi-Polar. In my opinion, it's being held together by two (maybe three if you count some occasional funny moments with Nash) things: The very solid Wrestling that is different than WWE's. And the blind loyalty of a certain percentage of their paying fanbase. TNA fans for some reason, like to identify themselves as part of the company as if they're right in there "stickin' it to WWE". It's noble, and it's no different than ECW’s original fans. But even they weren't enough to save ECW. And when you take into consideration that TNA's booking is like latter day WCW, it doesn't bode well. In closing, critiquing TNA and not accepting a terrible status quo doesn't make you a traitor to your TNA fandom. It just makes you passionate about them hopefully pulling out of their funk. Articles like that try and point out the fact that this style of booking is a dead end. Just remember, in 2000, there were a lot of WCW fans like many in this thread saying “Well, we better get used to it. This is just the way things are!” Bullshit. If enough people make a stink, maybe they’ll get the picture. Nothing ever changed in this world through apathy and just accepting the status quo. Only quitters and apologists turn a blind eye to things that are broken.
|
|
|
Post by Timmy8271 on Dec 27, 2007 0:41:56 GMT -5
You know, the whole "They just want to see it succeed" thing gets old when everyone says this doesn't work or that doesn't work, and it doesn't affect them at all. It doesn't seem like they care as much as they just don't like what they see and that's it. Plus, I don't get what TNA is suppose to do to "impress people". I don't get what qualifications it needs to be considered "acceptable" by people. I do know that it's probably something that is different from the direction they had. TNA always seemed to have that type of stuff on, and I don't see why they have to go to this whole different gameplan cause of some assumption people have of it. Go on Monday nights. If they really want to impress people, Have a show on Monday night 8-10.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Dec 27, 2007 0:42:13 GMT -5
Well, there's this whole thing on "Comedy in Indy vs. Comedy in Big Promotions" argument that van be made, but I'll go with the simpler "humor is subjective" and what you think is dumb is funny as hell to me. Also, what WWE guys are getting pushed? You got Tomko, Gail, Angle, Christian, and Booker as guys getting pushes, with Angle and possibly Booker possibly being past their prime. Black Reign has turned into this lower card guy, and Rellik mostly loses(although that's a travesty now), Team 3D are on the losing end of a feud with the MCMG, VKM are breaking up, Nash is now filling the Bob Backlund role of non-wrestler personality who does a little wrestling if needed, and a bunch of other guys with some type of connection aren't holding anyone down. The problem is that WWE IS pro wrestling, and are the formula of success, and any deviation runs the risk of not working or not fitting in one area. If you open a restaurant across the street from mcdonalds, would you have a different menu and offer different items to try and grab a market share...or would you serve cheaper,nastier versions of the same food? Well, looking at WWE Armageddon and TNA Turning Point, there are a lot of differences. -WWE doesn't have a feast or fired match -TNA didn't have a giant wrestle a midget(unless you count that Nash vs. Mr. X match a year or two ago, but that doesn't really count for this PPV) -TNA's women's match lasted twice as long, and there were 2 matches instead of 1. -TNA's main was a 6 Man Tag match, and WWE has a Triple Threat match. -WWE's PPV had mostly singles, TNA has mostly tag. -TNA had more gimmick matches on the card than WWE. They both had 8 matches, though, and that's about it. Not really the same.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Dec 27, 2007 0:49:28 GMT -5
Plus, some of us don't have cash to spend on PPVs every month with other stuff. I couldn't get the last two PPVs for that same reason. Then they aren't doing their jobs properly. A company that's doing a great job promoting should make you feel like a fool for missing their show. It should feel like YOU have to see it. I HAD to see Hogan vs. Andre and Hogan vs. Warrior. I even HAD to see Bret vs. HBK. To me, if a promotion is making things captivating, I'm going to feel, and have felt, compelled to find someway, somehow to buy that smurfing show, because I don't want to be left out and miss it. I want to live in that moment and mark out. I think that's the real issue here with Alvarez's critique. Nowhere does it say that he thinks it should be like ROH or booked towards smarks. The fact of the matter is IT ALREADY IS BOOKED TOWARDS SMARKS, and that's why it's status quo forever with zero growth. The criticism here isn't that TNA should be eliminated or that "WWE rules!" it's that they're not learning from their mistakes and are doing things incompetently. TNA is like a classroom full of brilliant students with TONS of potential… who just happen to have the world's worst and most retarded teacher. They all get dragged down by the terrible curve. I don't understand how people are taking anything from that paragraph other than "TNA is making stupid decisions that are failing". Don't let blind loyalty to something you love cloud your better sense. TNA has so much potential but it's being neglected. To me, what Bryan is saying is simple. 1) TNA overcomplicates things by creating terrible, tedious word for word scripting. His example of WWE's RAW XV script in comparison was perfect. TNA is not leaving any room for anyone on the roster to have any unique discernable identity or character. If everyone is cookie-cutter and talks the exact same way, no one stands out. Imagine a movie where every single character delivered the same badly written lines in the same badly directed way. TNA writing is like George Lucas' writing. 2) Whether people want to realize it or not, the purpose of promos are to sell pay-per-views (or house shows). That's it. Wrestling TV is basically by design one big 2 hour Movie trailer meant to get our asses out to the theater and pay for the "movie" or PPV in this case. TNA is not doing this well, if TNA's own fanbase admittedly doesn't even order the shows. If you're not paying TNA your money in some shape or form, sorry to say, but you're worthless as a fan. A real fan buys the product. 3) There are no stars. No one stands out as a top talent because everyone is seemingly interchangeable. I love Christian, but this is at least the 2nd time in a year and a half that he's been plugged into this same exact role after flip-flopping a bunch of times. TNA's booking is designed in such a way that nothing on top is memorable, and anyone can be instantly plugged in like a manufacturing line into a main event slot. They had a chance with Samoa Joe, but they procrastinated too much, and now it seems like they'll be turning him heel. Seriously. There's certain times when you HAVE to pull a trigger on someone. Joe unlike Warrior in '90, Goldberg in '98, and Cena in 2005 didn't get that luxury. They just pussyfooted around so much where one month he's wrestling for the World Title, the next he's feuding with Robert Roode (?!) then the next he's right back in the main event nonsensically teaming with Kevin Nash. This show is Bi-Polar. In my opinion, it's being held together by two (maybe three if you count some occasional funny moments with Nash) things: The very solid Wrestling that is different than WWE's. And the blind loyalty of a certain percentage of their paying fanbase. TNA fans for some reason, like to identify themselves as part of the company as if they're right in there "stickin' it to WWE". It's noble, and it's no different than ECW’s original fans. But even they weren't enough to save ECW. And when you take into consideration that TNA's booking is like latter day WCW, it doesn't bode well. In closing, critiquing TNA and not accepting a terrible status quo doesn't make you a traitor to your TNA fandom. It just makes you passionate about them hopefully pulling out of their funk. Articles like that try and point out the fact that this style of booking is a dead end. Just remember, in 2000, there were a lot of WCW fans like many in this thread saying “Well, we better get used to it. This is just the way things are!” Bullreindeer droppings. If enough people make a stink, maybe they’ll get the picture. Nothing ever changed in this world through apathy and just accepting the status quo. Only quitters and apologists turn a blind eye to things that are broken. Of course, the problem doesn't all have to be the company,but the fans pretty much not knowing and not willing to know what is going on. Seriously, I do wonder if fans are getting more and more stupid. Things that seem so clear to me are met with dumbfounded looks by other people. I doubt it's cause i'm smart, but I do it I'm the only one allowing myself to think instead of wanting everything in this bite sized nugget so I don't choke. And I disagree with the cookie cutter comment. Not everyone talks the same way and not everyone gives a promo the same way. Just cause the line is written down doesn't mean it's gonna be crap. Explain how movies do well if that was true. and BTW, I did regret not seeing the last two shows, and was hoping to get them on DVD.
|
|
|
Post by TRUTH TELLER on Dec 27, 2007 1:05:17 GMT -5
Of course, the problem doesn't all have to be the company,but the fans pretty much not knowing and not willing to know what is going on. Seriously, I do wonder if fans are getting more and more stupid. Things that seem so clear to me are met with dumbfounded looks by other people. I doubt it's cause i'm smart, but I do it I'm the only one allowing myself to think instead of wanting everything in this bite sized nugget so I don't choke. And I disagree with the cookie cutter comment. Not everyone talks the same way and not everyone gives a promo the same way. Just cause the line is written down doesn't mean it's gonna be crap. Explain how movies do well if that was true. and BTW, I did regret not seeing the last two shows, and was hoping to get them on DVD. There are a lot of people who are very talented, and make it work in spite of how terrible the writing is. Not everyone could pull off the Eric Young character. And no one could say the things that Nash does and have it come off as hilariously glib. That said, just imagine how much better people would be if they had input into their characters and were given more free-range for ad-libbing like the classic days of wrestling. This leaked script proves that this is not the case. And as for the movies thing, I think a lot of stuff sells because an entire generation of people coming up have been brain washed into thinking that mediocrity is excellence. If all you're getting is garbage, eventually people are going to start thinking that its actually really good because there's no frame of reference. But luckily for us, in movies as it is with wrestling, there's always exceptions to the rule.
|
|
|
Post by Cry Me a Wiggle on Dec 27, 2007 1:07:06 GMT -5
I have noticed a small trend going on with TNA fans, myself included, versus those who have a problem it week in and week out. Many TNA viewers were WCW fans, while the people who think it's horrid are either WWE loyalists or indy purists.
A lot of WCW fans left the wrestling community after the company died and the invasion fizzled. Our brand of wrestling was dead. McMahon's product, save for the Attitude era, never interested me, and I just can't get off on the stuff Alvarez or Lance Storm do. I myself left for a few years until the initial ECW revival piqued my interest, then I discovered TNA.
TNA is striking a chord with me. It doesn't annoy me like McMahon's and it doesn't bore me like "pure wrestling" does. It's a return to the style of show I grew up with and thought I'd never see again. No, it's not perfect, but this is professional wrestling. It's inherently stupid to begin with. I choose to enjoy it despite... nay, because of that stupidity. TNA's brand of stupid is MY brand of stupid.
Unfortunately, I feel that a lot of the people that would be attracted to this product have already left wrestling behind. TNA needs to find a way to reach an audience that isn't paying attention. They need a shocking, ground-breaking story to make waves, like the nWo did for WCW. No, they don't need to listen to Alvarez or the countless Internet critics, because this product isn't for them. Sorry, but the world doesn't work like EWR. There is no set smark recipe for success in a wrestling promotion.
Yes, TNA is different from the WWE. It doesn't have to be a bland, white-bread "pure" fake fighting show to accomplish that, no matter how much Alvarez or Storm want to delude themselves into thinking that's the case.
|
|
|
Post by laotioncommotion on Dec 27, 2007 1:14:58 GMT -5
I have noticed a small trend going on with TNA fans, myself included, versus those who have a problem it week in and week out. Many TNA viewers were WCW fans, while the people who think it's horrid are either WWE loyalists or indy purists. A lot of WCW fans left the wrestling community after the company died and the invasion fizzled. Our brand of wrestling was dead. McMahon's product, save for the Attitude era, never interested me, and I just can't get off on the stuff Alvarez or Lance Storm do. I myself left for a few years until the initial ECW revival piqued my interest, then I discovered TNA. TNA is striking a chord with me. It doesn't annoy me like McMahon's and it doesn't bore me like "pure wrestling" does. It's a return to the style of show I grew up with and thought I'd never see again. No, it's not perfect, but this is professional wrestling. It's inherently stupid to begin with. I choose to enjoy it despite... nay, because of that stupidity. TNA's brand of stupid is MY brand of stupid. Unfortunately, I feel that a lot of the people that would be attracted to this product have already left wrestling behind. TNA needs to find a way to reach an audience that isn't paying attention. They need a shocking, ground-breaking story to make waves, like the nWo did for WCW. No, they don't need to listen to Alvarez or the countless Internet critics, because this product isn't for them. Sorry, but the world doesn't work like EWR. There is no set smark recipe for success in a wrestling promotion. Yes, TNA is different from the WWE. It doesn't have to be a bland, white-bread "pure" fake fighting show to accomplish that, no matter how much Alvarez or Storm want to delude themselves into thinking that's the case. Well, that says pretty much everything that could possibly be said on the matter. And I'm an example of a former WCW fan who stopped watching until they discovered TNA as well. I definitely can sense the WWE loyalty in people who constantly scream "TNA IS LIKE WCW!!!" They've been conditioned to believe WCW and anything similar is automatically bad. I think that because the IWC is made up of those WWE and Indy fans, we'll never get a reasonable assessment of either WCW or TNA.
|
|
|
Post by Brandon Walsh is Insane. on Dec 27, 2007 1:19:56 GMT -5
not "real" as in the sense that they don't have a gimmick, "real" as in the sense that the two sound like they actually hate each other Well, it's real, though. Kinda like the Michigan and Ohio hate, or maybe an Army versus Navy heat or something else. Could be this rivalry, and it could be matched in wrestling if it's a good one. Still falls short in noteriaty, though. Plus, they usually have something to win more than wrestling. Wrestlers are only getting a paycheck, and maybe a belt to carry around and probably a bonus. Boxers get the belt, which is much more prestigious and honored, and a cash purse. And i think people care more when you're actually getting your ass kicked by someone. Um, the hype surrounding boxing isn't real, man. Hate to break it to you.
|
|