|
Post by KB Klash is nWo 4 Life on Jun 18, 2007 8:11:32 GMT -5
Whatever. Same thing.
|
|
|
Post by kingoftheindies on Jun 18, 2007 9:49:07 GMT -5
seeing as how I thought the ppv was a week away (when i'm going to Italy) I caught the ppv at a friend's house.
I enjoyed the ppv, but wasn't blown away so I'd say 3 stars.
Just an observation (not just from this board), most people who hated the ppv seemed to either be A)pro WWE fans or B)ROHbots.
Not saying that's the case, but saying the ppv was horrible is a little bit of a stretch.
|
|
Swarm
Don Corleone
SWARM = RATINGS
Posts: 1,347
|
Post by Swarm on Jun 18, 2007 11:48:40 GMT -5
No I watched it at a friends house. And yes I watch TNA I don't know why. I don't know what to tell you, guy. TNA does an entire PPV with no run-ins, and all clean finishes and you STILL rate it 0 out of 5? You must just hate the roster or something. If you read my posts on TNA you know there are guys in TNA I like otherwise why would I watch it. I mean...the fed should have been built around Daniels, Styles and Joe...and what did those three do last night? Neither Joe or Styles even qualified to win their match and Daniels was squashed... Yet Frank Wycheck (who I beat up in real life 7 years ago and I'm not even a bad ass maybe you read that post I don't know) goes over another TNA original. That's earns 0 stars in my book dawg. If you like it that's cool but my brain just doesn't work that way.
|
|
hollywood
King Koopa
the bullet dodger
The Green Arrow has approved this post.
Posts: 11,122
|
Post by hollywood on Jun 18, 2007 11:56:49 GMT -5
I haven't watched TNA in months, so I really can't comment on any of their shows with any confidence--other than what I read.
If Joe, Styles or Daniels ever become World Champion, though, I'll start watching again.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew is Good on Jun 18, 2007 12:03:15 GMT -5
It would have been 5 stars, had the booking not been off. Daniels should have beat Sting, not just because he's a young talent that should go over an established, older star, but also storyline wise, Sting just gave the angle a conclusion.
|
|
|
Post by Arturo Classico on Jun 18, 2007 12:05:07 GMT -5
Wow! TNA puts on a PPV that was great and was well worth 30 bucks and people still complain. I mean I was one that was leading the charge that TNA was garbage and had no clue what the f*** they were doing, but they finally put on a card that was awesome in my opinion and had the best PPV they ever put on and people still bitch. You know what people are idiots for saying that Styles or Joe should have won this match, they had no build to get a world title this soon, and Daniels? He dominated Sting through most of the match and Sting reversed a Last Rites into the Scorpion Death Drop. How was he squashed and Daniels gave a great promo that finally gave him sort of personality. Also Tomko vs. Abyss was amazing! Spotty yes but still remarkable! Lastly this event had on of the best X-Division title matches I've seen in a long time and the Backlund match created intreasting dynmaics between Lethal and nash. Also the KOTM match made harris look like a star and give him a potential feud with Cage that will springboard Harris to being a true world champion contender. Really anyone bashing TNA for this event is an idiot.
|
|
Swarm
Don Corleone
SWARM = RATINGS
Posts: 1,347
|
Post by Swarm on Jun 18, 2007 12:12:04 GMT -5
How the F can any show in 2007 with Rick Steiner and Animal in a Tag Team Title match earn 5 stars?
I seriously think TNA has just gotten so bad and been made fun of so much for so long that the expectations of this joke of a company have fallen so far that any show where the smurfing building doesn't almost burn down earns a 4 or 5 star rating from the TNA fans...
if any of you giving this show anything better than 2 stars doesn't watch WWE or ROH you need to stop the revolution and watch again because this is total sh*t compared to what you are missing.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew is Good on Jun 18, 2007 12:12:25 GMT -5
I also feel I should say this.
While I disagreed with the ending of the Backlund/Shelly match, I will say that I was amazed to see Bob Backlund looking that good for his age. I think Backlund would be a beneficial part of the TNA roster as an older vetern wrestling, and he could wrestle sometimes, but I also feel that Shelly should have went over there, and they could talk about how crazy old Bob doesn't have it anymore, and maybe in a tag match in the future, Jerry Lynn and Bob Backlund team up against the Machines Guns and Backlund gets a win over Shelly or something.
It's important for older talent to help younger talent get over, but Raven said it best. If everyone goes over, nobody gets over.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew is Good on Jun 18, 2007 12:16:08 GMT -5
How the F can any show in 2007 with Rick Steiner and Animal in a Tag Team Title match earn 5 stars? I seriously think TNA has just gotten so bad and been made fun of so much for so long that the expectations of this joke of a company have fallen so far that any show where the smurfing building doesn't almost burn down earns a 4 or 5 star rating from the TNA fans... if any of you giving this show anything better than 2 stars doesn't watch WWE or ROH you need to stop the revolution and watch again because this is total sh*t compared to what you are missing. So it wasn't that good of a match, I still popped huge to see Road Warrior Animal. And I'm one of the biggest WWE marks on the board, and love ROH. It's not all about wrestling. No, Road Warrior Animal and Rick Steiner aren't going to put on classic 5 star matches. But, they still no how to put on entertaining matches, they know how to get the crowd involved, and they are big stars who are just fun to watch anyway. I loved that tag team match and the dynamic in it that two of the biggest tag team wrestlers were facing Team 3D for the TNA Tag Team Titles.
|
|
Swarm
Don Corleone
SWARM = RATINGS
Posts: 1,347
|
Post by Swarm on Jun 18, 2007 12:28:04 GMT -5
How the F can any show in 2007 with Rick Steiner and Animal in a Tag Team Title match earn 5 stars? I seriously think TNA has just gotten so bad and been made fun of so much for so long that the expectations of this joke of a company have fallen so far that any show where the smurfing building doesn't almost burn down earns a 4 or 5 star rating from the TNA fans... if any of you giving this show anything better than 2 stars doesn't watch WWE or ROH you need to stop the revolution and watch again because this is total sh*t compared to what you are missing. So it wasn't that good of a match, I still popped huge to see Road Warrior Animal. And I'm one of the biggest WWE marks on the board, and love ROH. It's not all about wrestling. No, Road Warrior Animal and Rick Steiner aren't going to put on classic 5 star matches. But, they still no how to put on entertaining matches, they know how to get the crowd involved, and they are big stars who are just fun to watch anyway. I loved that tag team match and the dynamic in it that two of the biggest tag team wrestlers were facing Team 3D for the TNA Tag Team Titles. I agree with everything you say here except getting wet over the dynamics of the match...nice to see him as Animal and not lame gay biker he last was in WWE but that doesn't mean the show earns 5 stars just cause he and Rick Steiner were on it and had a 1 star match.
|
|
|
Post by thesmallerkhali on Jun 18, 2007 12:44:19 GMT -5
Goodish wrestling, but the shittish booking ever so 2 stars and you're lucky for that.
|
|
|
Post by thestinger on Jun 18, 2007 12:53:17 GMT -5
How the F can any show in 2007 with Rick Steiner and Animal in a Tag Team Title match earn 5 stars? I didn't give it five stars. I said it was a good night of wrestling and well worth the money. And since you started the comparisons, I'm just going to ask: How can a PPV that has a senior citizen NON-WRESTLER defending a world title for a company that is supposed to be 'hardcore' get any stars? That's not even wrestling. I reiterate my promise that if Dixie Carter ever holds the TNA world title, I will admit that TNA is as bad as WWE. By the way I'm SICK of these threads always degenerating into pissing contests between wrestling fans and WWE fans but since it's already happened I'm just going to go with it. if any of you giving this show anything better than 2 stars doesn't watch WWE or ROH you need to stop the revolution and watch again because this is total sh*t compared to what you are missing. Well you're half right about that. ROH is cool but, I don't watch prime time soaps. But I do like TNA. It's the only professional wrestling show on television.
|
|
|
Post by slasher911 on Jun 18, 2007 13:34:16 GMT -5
How the F can any show in 2007 with Rick Steiner and Animal in a Tag Team Title match earn 5 stars? And since you started the comparisons, I'm just going to ask: How can a PPV that has a senior citizen NON-WRESTLER defending a world title for a company that is supposed to be 'hardcore' get any stars? That's not even wrestling. I reiterate my promise that if Dixie Carter ever holds the TNA world title, I will admit that TNA is as bad as WWE. Um, Vince has been off-and-on wrestling for the past 10 or so years, specifically in hardcore matches. He was in a feud that literally sparked the biggest growth wrestling has ever seen. Bobby Lashley is now one of the most over young guys in the company because of it. Frank Wycheck has never stepped in a ring before, and he went over someone coming off a great feud... And seriously, how can you judge something after admitting you don't even watch it? Seems kinda' ignorant, considering the WWE has been getting serious praise for their PPVs this year. Right. 3-minute spotfests and no clean finishes are way better than the 55-minute classics and great 15-20 minute tag team matches we've been getting for months now. Then you obviously haven't been paying much attention lately. I can't find 1 PPV since January that hasn't had atleast 3 praised matches on the card. And this isn't a shot at TNA, because they've ALWAYS been known for having solid PPVs over the WWE.
|
|
hollywood
King Koopa
the bullet dodger
The Green Arrow has approved this post.
Posts: 11,122
|
Post by hollywood on Jun 18, 2007 13:35:02 GMT -5
How can a PPV that has a senior citizen NON-WRESTLER defending a world title for a company that is supposed to be 'hardcore' get any stars? That's not even wrestling. I reiterate my promise that if Dixie Carter ever holds the TNA world title, I will admit that TNA is as bad as WWE. Well, actually, that senior-citizen non-wrestler hasn't been champ for a month. And, the fact is, Vince is every bit as entertaining in a wrestling ring as Rick Steiner and Animal (and he's definitely more over with mainstream audiences). It's a bit of a mundane argument trying to insist that only "real" wrestlers should be in the ring for a fixed sport. I'd certainly prefer having someone like Chris Benoit or Kennedy rather than Vince, but there's no denying he's a legimate draw with audiences these days. And as for the WWE/TNA comparisons, they aren't going away. TNA and TNA fans constantly insist they're so much better than WWE. They do it on a weekly basis. (bi-weekly if you count Xplosion--can't remember if that's the right title--and probably a dozen times a week if you include their website...nevermind the endless "shooters")
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Jun 18, 2007 13:43:27 GMT -5
Here's how I see it.
The people who are calling this a bad PPV are mostly the ones who have been hating TNA for months now or are know to hate on them. Like it or not, that is NEVER changing.
Call it bad if you want, but don't start questioning people's intelligence or blaming it on drugs/liquor/mental problems if they like something you don't.
|
|
pegasuswarrior
El Dandy
Three Time FAN Idol Champion
@PulpPictionary
Posts: 8,748
|
Post by pegasuswarrior on Jun 18, 2007 13:47:52 GMT -5
I don't get how this show could garner a one or two star rating. But then again, I don't get how WWE fans'/"sports entertainment" proponents' minds operate either. I think TNA has a lot of problems with announce team, booking decisions, and Impact in general, but if this PPV gets a one or two star rating, then the viewers of WWE PPVs should get 5 star ratings for simply watching those events from beginning to end. I can usually find no more than 1 decent "WRESTLING" match on a given WWE PPV these days. TNA always (always) has multiple wrestling matches at the good or better level on their PPVs. TNA marks are so pathetic. Always looking for a cheap shot. TNA IS sports entertainment DEAL WITH IT. Stop pretending that TNA is real wrestling. All pro wrestling is fake. WWE puts out alot of "decent" matches if you weren't such a mark you would realize that. Defensive much? The point, plain and simple, is this. Every time after a WWE PPV, I read how great it was in several people's eyes on the boards, or if not, how great one particular match was. Now I know people complain about some of the quality and pick it apart, but in the end, these are still the rally troopers that support it to the end and constantly call out anyone consistently opposed to it as a "TNA mark" or "ROHbot." Then, I see this particular TNA PPV and witness at least 3 matches that WWE doesn't even try to come close to in terms of wrestling because they're too busy trying to keep the "casual sports entertainment fan" happy. In case you missed it, the name of the game is "wrestling," which is primarily the thing I look for with any brand. If you read my comment about TNA (which is the only TNA-exclusive post I've made since I can remember) I pointed out three major flaws in TNA, but I suppose that's what "TNA marks" do. If you actually decided not to jump to conclusions and assume that everyone who despises decisions in WWE is Kent Jones, then you'd know that there ARE actually people out there who prefer wrestling in ANY brand over McMahonism or Bob Backlund filling the ring with his garbage. I probably shouldn't even dignify this stuff with a reply, but it's just always so frustrating for people to flee from a logical argument/discussion about wrestling with a comment such "it's all sports entertainment" and "it's fake"--"Oh my God, you hate WWE; you are such a mark." An analogy that I consider is cinema verite' versus Hollywood blockbusters. It's so funny that WWE fanboys defend their product to the death and insist on bashing anyone who's not down with their mass marketing "sports entertainment" crap, since they win the financial and fan base pissing contest. Puroesu (at its purest level), ROH (for the most part), and some of other indy scenes are the only places I find to get that cinema verite' feel, which is a far cry from the impossibility of suspended disbelief that comes from circus shows that mainstream creative teams offer. Simply put: give me wrestling matches that exemplify the sport and art that wrestling is. And in terms of this topic--giving Kurt Angle the title (not the decision I would have made), pushing Bob Backland onto fans, and still forcing obnoxious commentary on the audience (among other things) are still not bad enough to make me prefer this particular PPVs exhibition of wrestling performance over wasted in-ring talent that WWE fans drool over entirely too much. Maybe in the midst of TNA fanboys across the internet, I could see how the original comment may have stung a little, but be rest assured that TNA is far from my #1 choice in wrestling entertainment. Just because the actual wrestling on TNA PPVs is consistently better as a whole (and I stand by that) than WWE doesn't make anyone who can see that a mark. Whenever someone posts an opinion about wrestling and the frustration they have in trying to figure out why a lot of WWE fans are so scared of liking the sport and the athleticism involved, it's no more of an alarm for a flaming reply than when well over 3/4 of a page of WWE threads are about angles, divas' looks, and Vince McMahon. In other words, quit acting like there's no place for logical dissension in the "big, bad world" of WWE domination. When the WWE thread bandwagon gets going, you don't always see me and several others trying to derail your party. Why is it so necessary for a dissenting opinion in a non-WWE section of the Wrestlecrap message boards to be flamed by a display of insecurity? I originally said I don't get how WWE proponents' minds work and this incident only further justifies that.
|
|
pegasuswarrior
El Dandy
Three Time FAN Idol Champion
@PulpPictionary
Posts: 8,748
|
Post by pegasuswarrior on Jun 18, 2007 13:58:23 GMT -5
By the way, I didn't clarify the WWE bash about "decent matches" on their PPV cards. I do watch the WWE PPVs, and I simply mean that, comparitively, I find no more than 1 memorable wrestling match in terms of psychology, consistent spots, workrate, and overall engagement in the suspension of disbelief from card to card. There are occasionally good moments where a move is sold, but from starting bell to three-count, I simply find TNAs PPV quality consistently better in terms of wrestling.
Let me attempt to "man up" a little bit and acknowledge that "decent" was probably not the right operative word in that case. I'm not sure people like Benoit can do anything at the "decent" or below level. My argument still stands in terms of overall subpar wrestling quality on a much more consistent basis, but sorry if I implied that no one in WWE is capable or has ever put on a "better-than-decent" match.
|
|
|
Post by thestinger on Jun 18, 2007 16:11:55 GMT -5
Well, actually, that senior-citizen non-wrestler hasn't been champ for a month. That doesn't change the fact that on a WWE PPV a senior citizen non-wrestler defended a world title for a show that is supposed to be 'hardcore.' And, the fact is, Vince is every bit as entertaining in a wrestling ring as Rick Steiner and Animal (and he's definitely more over with mainstream audiences). That might have something to do with him making himself the focus of his show for the past ten years since Montreal. And from the people I talk to WWE fans are sick to death of him. It's a bit of a mundane argument trying to insist that only "real" wrestlers should be in the ring for a fixed sport. Nevertheless, it's still my position and I've been consistent about it. That is why I have said repeatedly that if Dixie Carter becomes TNA champ I will admit TNA is no better than WWE. I never praise TNA when they occasionally has baseball and football players wrestle. Slasher tries to argue that Vince is a wrestler because he's been in several matches. Well then I guess Dennis Rodman is a wrestler too. Mean Gene Oakerland has been in a few matches. Maybe he's a wrestler? WWE could put the ECW belt on him. He then criticizes me for speaking on WWE when I don't watch it, and later calls X Division matches "3-minute spotfests and no clean finishes." Which hasn't been the case for many months. For the fifth time, last night I saw a PPV with no run-ins, all clean finishes and the only gimmick match was the main event. I'd certainly prefer having someone like Chris Benoit or Kennedy rather than Vince, but there's no denying he's a legimate draw with audiences these days. I was just about to mention Benoit. People whine endlessly that Samoa Joe who (along with AJ Styles) is the most deserving and talented TNA wrestler, but isn't the champion. Is Benoit the champion in WWE? I've been told Cena and Batista are horrible by everyone I know who has seen them wrestle. So why aren't folks who HATE TNA for not putting the belt on Joe demanding that Benoit beat Cena? TNA and TNA fans constantly insist they're so much better than WWE. They say it, and I think they prove it as well. I'm just getting tired of the "TNA sux!1" "No WWE sux111!" Of course, maybe I'm a hypocrite for saying they aren't the same thing and shouldn't be compared, and then not backing down when WWE fans do it because "he started it." Eventually I'll learn. ;D
|
|
|
Post by thestinger on Jun 18, 2007 16:15:51 GMT -5
[Um, Vince has been off-and-on wrestling for the past 10 or so years, specifically in hardcore matches. He was in a feud that literally sparked the biggest growth wrestling has ever seen. That's just silly. The nWo sparked the biggest growth wrestling has ever seen. The character of Stone Cold saved Vince from bankruptcy a year and a half later.
|
|
JD Turk
Team Rocket
The freshest man on Wrestlecrap!
Posts: 997
|
Post by JD Turk on Jun 18, 2007 16:16:50 GMT -5
I give it a four, great in-ring performances, you can argue about who shoulda won what, but overall (barring anything ever involoving the worst of the 2 VKM's) they put on a good ppv, they still gotta learn to not be as predictable as a rerun of of a basketball game, other than that, it was a pretty good ppv.
|
|