|
Post by Tiger Millionaire on Jun 25, 2013 15:51:32 GMT -5
I don't think the right way to go was, The stuff you liked about TNA, sucked, and we'll tell you what your gonna like.
|
|
SOR
Unicron
Posts: 2,611
|
Post by SOR on Jun 25, 2013 19:47:26 GMT -5
Yeah... I started rereading the thread as soon as the sow stated TNA gave people things to complain about... And the first match was a cage match that you couldn't see through that ended in disqualification. officialfan.proboards.com/thread/301107/1-10-impact-thread-war?page=4If you care to start... Warning it is over 100 pages long. Also even if raw was rather unmemorable that night (save for Bret of course) it was just another episode of raw, 1/4/2010 was being hyped (and rightfully so) as the most important night in TNA history... and they produced one of the worst episodes if a wrestling program I've ever seen... Especially for new viewers who they were trying to attract. To be fair, if you read the thread you posted from page 118 onwards most people are being rather positive about the show with some saying they were excited about the Monday Night Wars again. A few people disliked it but in general the consensus was TNA put on a fantastic show.
|
|
cherry coloured funk
ALF
discontinue the trout
I know that when I wear Ban-Lon, there does appear to be some jiggling...
Posts: 1,210
|
Post by cherry coloured funk on Jun 25, 2013 19:59:59 GMT -5
The funniest thing was them waiting for Hogan to arrive to the arena and then in his promo he says he was there all day. No the funniest thing was when Daniels' interviews kept on being interrupted by the interviewer going after people like the Nasty Boys. Kind of an allegory for the whole night. I will credit TNA, though, this was the night that brought me back to wrestling. I hadn't watched regularly since 2003 but got wind of the hype of a "new Monday Night War". Of course, I was under the assumption that TNA was offering more competition to the WWE at the time. When WWE countered with Bret Hart returning... I watched both shows, and have consistently watched (or kept track of) Raw ever since.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2013 20:31:20 GMT -5
I remember thinking that TNA would have a hard time pulling themselves out of hole they started to dig with this episode. They murdered a lot of the good will they started to build in 08-09. Fired people like Hamada who helped put on one of the few good matches that evening and basically showed the 2 million (or whatever) people who tuned in that TNA wasn't worth watching since Impact spent the rest of 2010 in a ratings war with NXT (not literally, but they were WWE's closest program in terms of ratings) and losing to them on several occasions. Word of mouth didn't do them any favors clearly.
While they've slowed down digging that hole, they haven't even begun to start climbing out.
Now they're starting to get back to where they were at in 2008. People claim merch sales is up and that compensates, but I haven't seen any figures (since TNA is privately held company) to compare and contrast to previous years.
For me, this set the tone for Impact for the next few years. As someone who really enjoyed TNA in 2008 and 2009, I was extremely crestfallen at what happened with this show and thereafter. I went from defending TNA to apathy to outright laughter at how bad it got.
In short - they lost a fan who bought shirts and ppvs as well as talked them up social media.
That was the final ... Ahem... Impact of the Jan 4th show for myself and I'm sure more than a few other wrestling fans.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2013 21:23:16 GMT -5
Forget anything else that happened on the show or was on Raw or whatever, once the Nasty Boys showed up it became a complete farce. They were irrelevant in like '95, what were they doing on TV in 2010? There's no defending that.
|
|
mrbananagrabber
King Koopa
Paul Heyman's unofficial joke writer
Posts: 11,805
|
Post by mrbananagrabber on Jun 26, 2013 15:49:03 GMT -5
Can anyone give me an example of Hogan and Bischoff burying the company? I don't watch TNA but I'm curious as to what was said.
|
|
|
Post by Magic knows Black Lives Matter on Jun 26, 2013 16:15:59 GMT -5
Can anyone give me an example of Hogan and Bischoff burying the company? I don't watch TNA but I'm curious as to what was said. "You had six sides brother but it only got you so far!" -Hogan defending the decision to switch to four sides which was met by many boos from the crowd.
|
|
zeez
Patti Mayonnaise
Yeah. That's right.
Posts: 32,702
|
Post by zeez on Jun 26, 2013 21:26:12 GMT -5
I don't know if TNA could have done anything to keep those viewers. A lot of those people may have just tuned in out of curiosity and then once they saw the show, they were like "Well, all right then" and then tuned back out. It probably didn't help for the show to focus so much on older wrestlers (ones with a track record for contributing in the demise of at least one wrestling company) with little emphasis on homegrown guys or anything else that would give the impression that TNA wants to stand out as its own company and that there is more reason to watch than just to stick it to the McMahons.
|
|
agent817
Fry's dog Seymour
Doesn't Know Whose Ring It Is
Posts: 21,235
|
Post by agent817 on Jul 2, 2013 20:46:13 GMT -5
I watched the first third of Impact that night, but I mostly tuned into Raw that night, because I knew that I had to see Bret return.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2013 21:02:58 GMT -5
I remember really enjoying this Impact and the general direction of the company after this show, but as I think of the Jan. 4, 2010 episode I really can't remember anything I liked about it aside from the main event. The show should have been a celebration of youth and a highlight of a true alternative to WWE but it really was just a nostalgia show. The only plus I can remember is having Ric Flair basically come to TNA to watch AJ vs. Angle, but even then they had a complete, shot for shot remake of the Montreal Screwjob the next week, for what reason? Because Bret Hart returned the week before? You think you're gonna take fans' attention off of Bret Hart by doing a low rent ripoff of the Screwjob? So weird.
Though I'll say two things, A: I think Bischoff/Hogan brought along some great strides in production and show pacing that they never would have made without them. B: I think their "Reaction" cameras are a truly original way to present professional wrestling storylines, a cool way to keep storylines going backstage without the glaring issue of "do they even know there's a camera back there?". C: Kurt Angle vs. Ken Anderson is the best feud TNA's ever had.
There's been a bunch of blunders in TNA since Bisch/Hogan came in but if anything's consistent with them it's that TNA's a blunderous company, but I think they had their highest highs creatively since then, than they've had before.
|
|
percymania
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Percymania will live forever! Oh yeah!
Posts: 17,296
|
Post by percymania on Jul 3, 2013 21:12:04 GMT -5
I remember watching this episode of Impact with tepid excitement. It was great seeing a lot of old faces again, but overall this show was a huge letdown. Raw was 100x better that night with Bret Hart's return. This was a night TNA swung and missed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2013 0:13:44 GMT -5
I think they tried to do too much in one episode and it ended up making things fall flat that didn't need to.
Also, the Nasty Boys.
|
|
|
Post by kamero00 on Jul 8, 2013 0:38:27 GMT -5
The Nasty Boys and Val Venus were on that show. So yeah, that show was pretty bad.
|
|
|
Post by Chuckie Finster on Jul 8, 2013 4:06:09 GMT -5
In many ways, this was the show that changed the thought process of many fans. The dumb things were there before, but in a way TNA was like the old uncle who couldn't help himself, but was still loveable and invited to family reunions. Afterward, TNA's antics became old and the charm as gone. They became the old uncle who you creeped you out and was no longer invited to family get-togethers.
Another point. For years, TNA defenders, myself included, said "if they get wrestler x, they'll get to the next level." Well, in a span of three months, they got Hogan, Flair, RVD, Jeff Hardy and many more, yet they were still TNA. Now, it's hard to find a rational fan who will say if TNA gets a certain wrestler, they will take off, mainly because TNA had most of those wrestlers and did little or nothing with them.
|
|
Reflecto
Hank Scorpio
The Sorceress' Knight
Posts: 6,847
|
Post by Reflecto on Jul 8, 2013 5:08:06 GMT -5
This is the big reason the 1/4/10 show had a problem. It's the biggest rating TNA did, but it was representative of the bigger problem TNA's always had- the booking style of TNA has always been "just throw [new WWE castoff X] out there- THEY'RE the missing piece of the puzzle!". Unfortunately, they don't try to get the current TNA wrestlers over by booking them better or continuing to promote them as stars- which makes the new free agent signings look bad when they inevitably have to lose to someone- and by the time the next WWE signing comes up- that old signing's just another TNA wrestler and seen as worthless.
|
|
|
Post by thegame415 on Jul 11, 2013 12:57:44 GMT -5
Here's how I think TNA could've made a noise:
A. Brock Lesnar shows up. B. A current top WWE star (Cena, Orton) shows up. C. The Rock shows up and puts over TNA.
Any one of those, although highly unlikely, would've given TNA an advantage.
|
|
The Ichi
Patti Mayonnaise
AGGRESSIVE Executive Janitor of the Third Floor Manager's Bathroom
Posts: 37,295
|
Post by The Ichi on Jul 11, 2013 13:17:25 GMT -5
Here's how I think TNA could've made a noise: A. Brock Lesnar shows up. B. A current top WWE star (Cena, Orton) shows up. C. The Rock shows up and puts over TNA. Any one of those, although highly unlikely, would've given TNA an advantage. {Spoiler}1.1
|
|
Madagascar Fred
El Dandy
TAFKA roidzilla and SUFFERIN' SUCCOTASH SON!
Posts: 8,784
|
Post by Madagascar Fred on Jul 11, 2013 14:02:31 GMT -5
Because you can't build a sustainable audience on nostalgia. Never mind growing one. As many predicted, any bump from Hogan wouldn't last because he didn't bring anything new to the table. Same gimmick that people can YouTube from his prime years. TNA misfired when they didn't have the rights to WCW from 96-98 to play on a loop for the Hogan fans tuning in. Hogan got that one time bump (followed by 3 years of 1.1s or lower) because of older fans wanting some fuzzy memories, not actively looking to get back into wrestling. IF growth can be made for TNA its in a new audience, not trying to recapture the old one. winner winner chicken dinner!
|
|
Sam Punk
Hank Scorpio
Own Nothing, Be Happy
Posts: 6,304
|
Post by Sam Punk on Jul 11, 2013 17:25:51 GMT -5
Here's how I think TNA could've made a noise: A. Brock Lesnar shows up. B. A current top WWE star (Cena, Orton) shows up. C. The Rock shows up and puts over TNA. Any one of those, although highly unlikely, would've given TNA an advantage. TNA should have taken whatever they were paying Bischoff/Hogan+friends and thrown it at Lesnar.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 11, 2013 18:11:57 GMT -5
Definitely think they over-estimateed how many late 90s wrestling fans would still have any interest. It's not like all 10 million people watching Raw/Nitro back then have been chomping at the bit, just waiting for that moment to get back into it. It was a huge fad at the time, people moved on.
|
|