Post by azz0r on Mar 7, 2010 15:36:54 GMT -5
pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/font_color_770000_CALDWELL_S_TAKE_font_12/article_39618.shtml
Awesome read. 100% Agreed with.
For years and years, we have tried to answer the unanswerable question - What is TNA?
Heading into their next-biggest-night-ever on March 8, the question has risen to the surface following two of what I believe to be the worst back-to-back episodes of TNA Impact programming in company history.
(There were some bad episodes on FSN with Dusty Rhodes hanging out in the back of the pick-up truck, but you could usually breathe a sigh of relief with a great X Division match with two men competing in the ring.)
Ratings have slid back to that same ol' mid-1.0 rating level, including an eye-popping quarter-hour-to-quarter-hour decline in viewership for Thursday night's episode of Impact.
TNA even has a new marketing slogan...again. Yet, the slogan doesn't answer the question. A 10-minute hype video with wrestlers moving around and doing stuff and saying stuff didn't give us an answer.
"We have a great product. We stand out against the competition. Our product offers something for everyone."
Great. Thanks. But, what does any of that mean?
I'm not trying to be facetious here when I ask "What is TNA?" I don't know what TNA stands for. I don't know what their characters stand for. I don't know what the goals of any characters are.
Meanwhile, the ultimate prize, the goal, the focus - title belts - have been deemed virtually meaningless.
-- A.J. Styles and the TNA World Title have taken a back-seat to Hulk Hogan's WWE Hall of Fame ring.
-- The Global Title was created by Booker T and now rests with Rob Terry, who can barely execute a move.
-- The X Division Title has been rendered below the value of a New Jersey Nets ticket, which Shane McKinley excellently pointed out.
-- Who's the Knockouts champion? ODB and Tara have played hot potato with hardly any focus on the title lately.
-- The Knockouts tag titles are held by Kong, who may or may not be with the company anymore.
So, if titles mean nothing, what is the goal of winning a match? Why do these characters exist? Why do they show up in Orlando, Fla. for a wrestling show? If they're not chasing a title or a prize because there is no value associated with a title, then what's the point? Just show up and be content with a role on TV?
Also, the top characters are so unlikable and presented in such a dark light that no one can root for a character or TNA itself. Here's what we can conclude lately.
-- Hulk Hogan is crippled, old, slow, and a "mark" for himself.
-- Abyss is a gimmick, a clown, a pathetic child, and a hack.
-- A.J. Styles is short and a Ric Flair knock-off.
-- Ric Flair is a crazy old man who just yells a lot (and not in a marketable way).
-- The Pope is uneducated and not major leagues.
-- Jeff Jarrett is washed up with no value to the show.
-- Mick Foley is a castrated, washed-up former star.
-- Kurt Angle is injury-prone and broken-down.
-- Matt Morgan is a jerk and talks annoyingly.
-- Hernandez isn't too bright.
-- Eric Bischoff is a prick, but he's the face of TNA's "underdog movement" against WWE.
At the end of the day, TNA has a lack of goals and a lack of likable characters. Essentially, they feature a collection of characters doing stuff - without meaning - with no discernible value to the in-ring product because TNA has turned the wrestling content into a sidebar to take a breather from the out-of-the-ring segments.
TNA can do one of two things. One is to completely remove themselves from any type of wrestling ring setting, film a two-hour sitcom where recognizable stars argue and call each other names and piss and moan and complain and argue and yell at each other some more, and try to draw TV ratings that way. We'll label it Vince Russo's dream wrestling show.
The other option is to cut the crap, focus on the in-ring product, establish quests for titles, prestige, and championship accomplishments, center the promotion around wrestlers who can actually work a match, and keep only the recognizable stars who can work a match.
At least then, TNA would have an identity one of two ways - Vince Russo's dream or Vince Russo's nightmare.
TNA trying to throw everything against the wall and hoping something would stick prior to January 4 only got them so far. TNA continuing to throw everything against the wall and hoping something would stick in the Bischoff/Hogan era has not pushed TNA any further.
Trying to offer a little bit of everything and not standing for anything doesn't translate into a giant catch-all net reaching for casual and non-wrestling fans.
The current product mix has the potential to alienate wrestling fans and turn off non-wrestling fans who think it's all a poorly-acted, low-brow, low-IQ, laughable form of entertainment anyways.
At the end of the day, no one can clearly identity what TNA is. It's something for everyone, but not anything at all. It's a bunch of stuff and TNA management is only fooling themselves thinking the product mix will work in the long-term.
We've already seen the evidence. Big interest in January 4, re-create the Montreal Screwjob for another short-term pop, and then right back to the same TV ratings level TNA has always fallen back on.
I thought surely Eric Bischoff and Hulk Hogan would walk into TNA with an innovative, never-before-seen idea to help grow the company. Oh wait, I'm getting that confused with WWE's "heck if we know what we're doing" NXT concept.
I thought surely Eric Bischoff and Hulk Hogan would have a great new idea for how to present pro wrestling on TV in 2010 with an innovative presentation or new way to market good vs. evil, conflict, drama, and a quest for championships and prestige.
They have yet to show progression toward a goal - any goal. But, if they want to start somewhere, they can try to answer the decade-old question: What is TNA? Following that: Why should I care? TNA hasn't answered either one and, unless March 8 blows the last two weeks of TV completely out of the water - I don't see them coming close anytime soon.
Heading into their next-biggest-night-ever on March 8, the question has risen to the surface following two of what I believe to be the worst back-to-back episodes of TNA Impact programming in company history.
(There were some bad episodes on FSN with Dusty Rhodes hanging out in the back of the pick-up truck, but you could usually breathe a sigh of relief with a great X Division match with two men competing in the ring.)
Ratings have slid back to that same ol' mid-1.0 rating level, including an eye-popping quarter-hour-to-quarter-hour decline in viewership for Thursday night's episode of Impact.
TNA even has a new marketing slogan...again. Yet, the slogan doesn't answer the question. A 10-minute hype video with wrestlers moving around and doing stuff and saying stuff didn't give us an answer.
"We have a great product. We stand out against the competition. Our product offers something for everyone."
Great. Thanks. But, what does any of that mean?
I'm not trying to be facetious here when I ask "What is TNA?" I don't know what TNA stands for. I don't know what their characters stand for. I don't know what the goals of any characters are.
Meanwhile, the ultimate prize, the goal, the focus - title belts - have been deemed virtually meaningless.
-- A.J. Styles and the TNA World Title have taken a back-seat to Hulk Hogan's WWE Hall of Fame ring.
-- The Global Title was created by Booker T and now rests with Rob Terry, who can barely execute a move.
-- The X Division Title has been rendered below the value of a New Jersey Nets ticket, which Shane McKinley excellently pointed out.
-- Who's the Knockouts champion? ODB and Tara have played hot potato with hardly any focus on the title lately.
-- The Knockouts tag titles are held by Kong, who may or may not be with the company anymore.
So, if titles mean nothing, what is the goal of winning a match? Why do these characters exist? Why do they show up in Orlando, Fla. for a wrestling show? If they're not chasing a title or a prize because there is no value associated with a title, then what's the point? Just show up and be content with a role on TV?
Also, the top characters are so unlikable and presented in such a dark light that no one can root for a character or TNA itself. Here's what we can conclude lately.
-- Hulk Hogan is crippled, old, slow, and a "mark" for himself.
-- Abyss is a gimmick, a clown, a pathetic child, and a hack.
-- A.J. Styles is short and a Ric Flair knock-off.
-- Ric Flair is a crazy old man who just yells a lot (and not in a marketable way).
-- The Pope is uneducated and not major leagues.
-- Jeff Jarrett is washed up with no value to the show.
-- Mick Foley is a castrated, washed-up former star.
-- Kurt Angle is injury-prone and broken-down.
-- Matt Morgan is a jerk and talks annoyingly.
-- Hernandez isn't too bright.
-- Eric Bischoff is a prick, but he's the face of TNA's "underdog movement" against WWE.
At the end of the day, TNA has a lack of goals and a lack of likable characters. Essentially, they feature a collection of characters doing stuff - without meaning - with no discernible value to the in-ring product because TNA has turned the wrestling content into a sidebar to take a breather from the out-of-the-ring segments.
TNA can do one of two things. One is to completely remove themselves from any type of wrestling ring setting, film a two-hour sitcom where recognizable stars argue and call each other names and piss and moan and complain and argue and yell at each other some more, and try to draw TV ratings that way. We'll label it Vince Russo's dream wrestling show.
The other option is to cut the crap, focus on the in-ring product, establish quests for titles, prestige, and championship accomplishments, center the promotion around wrestlers who can actually work a match, and keep only the recognizable stars who can work a match.
At least then, TNA would have an identity one of two ways - Vince Russo's dream or Vince Russo's nightmare.
TNA trying to throw everything against the wall and hoping something would stick prior to January 4 only got them so far. TNA continuing to throw everything against the wall and hoping something would stick in the Bischoff/Hogan era has not pushed TNA any further.
Trying to offer a little bit of everything and not standing for anything doesn't translate into a giant catch-all net reaching for casual and non-wrestling fans.
The current product mix has the potential to alienate wrestling fans and turn off non-wrestling fans who think it's all a poorly-acted, low-brow, low-IQ, laughable form of entertainment anyways.
At the end of the day, no one can clearly identity what TNA is. It's something for everyone, but not anything at all. It's a bunch of stuff and TNA management is only fooling themselves thinking the product mix will work in the long-term.
We've already seen the evidence. Big interest in January 4, re-create the Montreal Screwjob for another short-term pop, and then right back to the same TV ratings level TNA has always fallen back on.
I thought surely Eric Bischoff and Hulk Hogan would walk into TNA with an innovative, never-before-seen idea to help grow the company. Oh wait, I'm getting that confused with WWE's "heck if we know what we're doing" NXT concept.
I thought surely Eric Bischoff and Hulk Hogan would have a great new idea for how to present pro wrestling on TV in 2010 with an innovative presentation or new way to market good vs. evil, conflict, drama, and a quest for championships and prestige.
They have yet to show progression toward a goal - any goal. But, if they want to start somewhere, they can try to answer the decade-old question: What is TNA? Following that: Why should I care? TNA hasn't answered either one and, unless March 8 blows the last two weeks of TV completely out of the water - I don't see them coming close anytime soon.
Awesome read. 100% Agreed with.
