|
|
Post by thestinger on Sept 10, 2007 17:27:36 GMT -5
My vote isn't on the poll, but it is that Russo is responsible for the questionable booking. It has been becoming more and more apparent lately that Russo doesn't have nearly as much control over the storylines and booking as popular belief states. Yes he is there, but so are several other bookers. Russo is not booking every angle. It is painfully easy to tell which storylines have his fingerprints on them because above all -- Russo likes to repeat himself. You can tell he was involved in VKM because those guys got in the ring and talked about how great it was when they 'invaded' WCW years ago. You can tell he in involved in "Black Reign" because that angle started with Dustin talking about how great he was as Goldust, a character Russo bragged about coming up with repeatedly. Abyss/Sting was very close to Vampiro/Sting. You can easily identify which angles Russo comes up with because they are rehashes of the stuff he writes for every company. |
|
erisi236
Fry's dog Seymour
... enjoys the rich, smooth taste of Camels.
Not good! Not good! Not good!
Posts: 21,904
|
Post by erisi236 on Sept 10, 2007 17:31:16 GMT -5
They only hire WWEWCW Guys, you know like Ricky Banderas and Jimmy Rave.
All the matches end in run-ins.
Every match is a gimmick match.
They only have 3 minutes of wrestling per show.
They'll be bankrupt within days.
|
|
metylerca
King Koopa
Loves Him Some Backstreet Boys.
Don't be alarmed.
Posts: 12,480
|
Post by metylerca on Sept 10, 2007 18:06:51 GMT -5
All the matches end in run-ins. Every match is a gimmick match. They only have 3 minutes of wrestling per show. They'll be bankrupt within days. he did want misconceptions... you do know that right?  |
|
|
|
Post by thestinger on Sept 10, 2007 18:29:00 GMT -5
I think erisi236 found a good misconception.
Slammiversary 2007 had all clean finishes with no run-ins.
Last night's No Surrender had clean finishes for the all three title matches and I don't think there were any run-ins.
I don't think there were any gimmick matches either (I refuse to count Rhino/James Storm No DQ as a 'gimmick' match -- "No DQ" stopped being special ten years ago.)
|
|
|
|
Post by sexualvanilla on Sept 10, 2007 19:05:11 GMT -5
"We are wrestling"
|
|
Dragonfly
Unicron
...is no Barry Windham.
Posts: 2,503 
|
Post by Dragonfly on Sept 10, 2007 19:08:08 GMT -5
Misconceptions?
1) TNA is just one hot star (Chris Jericho, RVD, Brock Lesnar, Bryan Danielson, Booker T) away from competing with Vince McMahon.
2) TNA couldn't book themselves out of a bag. And I'm not just talking about now, either. Anyone who ever tried to book TNA has been called a hack by the IWC.
3) Jeff Jarrett is a Triple H-style manipulator. I know that he plays the politics, but let's face it: he isn't the Kilq.
4) Vince Russo sets out to ruin gimmicks and careers.
5) The six-sided ring is distracting and confuses non-fans.
6) If [Insert Star Here] doesn't win the world title right now, his career in TNA is over.
|
|
|
|
Post by scottyno on Sept 10, 2007 19:11:01 GMT -5
that going to 2 hour impacts will change the way they book
|
|
|
|
Post by thestinger on Sept 10, 2007 19:20:38 GMT -5
that going to 2 hour impacts will change the way they book Well, we're going to find out soon, aren't we? A lot of people made their opinions known about this, sometimes secure in the belief that they weren't going to be proven wrong any time soon. In a few months you'll either be saying, "I told you so" or be proven wrong. |
|
wwerules60
El Dandy
"Bring what? a vomit bag? a fig newton?"
Posts: 8,999
|
Post by wwerules60 on Sept 10, 2007 19:26:29 GMT -5
I think the Jarett rumors get a bit ridiculous. People seem to hate any one who appears on TV and has power.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Cynical Gentleman on Sept 10, 2007 22:37:26 GMT -5
That it's better than WWE.
|
|
Chainsaw
T
A very BAD man.
It is what it is
Posts: 90,480
|
Post by Chainsaw on Sept 10, 2007 22:42:44 GMT -5
TNA is constantly on the brink of collapse. Like, every show apparently.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew is Good on Sept 10, 2007 22:57:32 GMT -5
That Russo is a major problem with TNA, though the extent of his power hasn't been all that known.
The biggest change in TNA since Russo joined has been character development, in that the wrestlers aren't generic anymore. Since Russo hit the scene, many X-Division wrestlers have finally gotten characters, and were featured on television for awhile.
However, I feel that Russo isn't in charge of booking the matches. I feel that the AJ Styles character we see now is a result of Vince Russo. AJ Styles as a babyface wasn't all that good. The worst moment of his career as a babyface was his comeback against Konnan berading him. Konnan said he and Daniels were overrated. AJ responded with, "SHUT UP!". I feel the AJ Styles character has been amazing. The problem is, he's being booked as Christian Cage's lackey. And I feel that that's where the Russo booking ends. I remember hearing that Russo was a big fan of AJ, and I think if it was up to Russo, AJ would be on his own main eventing.
You can also tell when feuds aren't booked by Russo. Take Sting vs Christopher Daniels. I feel if Russo was booking that feud, Daniels would have won their first match. He may not have won in the feud altogether, but Daniels would have been pushed harder. Russo has always been one to push newer stars, or stars not given that much of a chance. Vince Russo was responsible for pushing Bret Hart in 1999, as he felt he was a legit main event star he wasn't given that chance in WCW. He also said that guys in the locker room were looking to get on Russo's good side, because he knew he would push newer talent.
On the flip side, I personally believe the Pacman Jones getting a belt has Russo's hands on it, because it's a celebrity and trying to get outside attention and get ratings, which goes with what Russo said his job was in the past. To increase ratings and get some attention.
I'm not too familliar with Dutch Mantell's work. I think like, he may've been a booker in a mid south area for Memphis, or with the Fuller's in Continental, but I'm not too sure about his general booking style, and any patterns he might have that show that he's booking a product.
|
|
|
|
Post by machinegun on Sept 10, 2007 22:57:56 GMT -5
That Panda gives TNA all its damn money
|
|
|
|
Post by eDemento2099 on Sept 10, 2007 23:26:38 GMT -5
Ok, what do you think is most common false rumor circulating about TNA? And please spare me the, "That it's any good!" responses. If you just want to bash the company, please start your own thread. But citing "it isn't any good" as a misconception would be a good thing, as you're pointing out that the notion that 'TNA isn't any good' is false. Anyway, I'm sure there are still some people who think that the only thing that TNA has going for them are ex-WWE wrestlers. And although TNA is putting a priority on those wrestlers in terms of booking, TNA has lots of incredible homegrown talent like Samoa Joe, Abyss, AJ Styles, Senshi, Christopher Daniels, etc. So, the notion that TNA doesn't have any good wrestlers aren't former WWE stars is false; the problem is simply that TNA isn't promoting its original stars (some, such as AJ Styles, have gone from being the star that put TNA on the map to someone who's barely acknowledged in the lower midcard). |
|
|
|
Post by CMPunkyBrewster on Sept 11, 2007 0:12:31 GMT -5
i think the most common misconception about tna is that the show is entertaining.
|
|
|
|
Post by eDemento2099 on Sept 11, 2007 0:31:58 GMT -5
i think the most common misconception about tna is that the show is entertaining. Thanks for contributing absolutely nothing to this thread, troll. |
|
Limey
Unicron
It's been awhile.
Posts: 3,062
|
Post by Limey on Sept 11, 2007 1:13:11 GMT -5
i think the most common misconception about tna is that the show is entertaining. Fascinating. Just what exactly do you mean that the show isn't entertaining? Are you making a statement of any aspect of TNA in particular? Where's your documentation to back up this claim? I also think it's highly suspect that you would state that many misconceive that the show is entertaining when it seems to me that many, many, many smarks worldwide constantly bash TNA and all of their angles. Would it not then be common knowledge and not a misconception? I would believe that most would assume that the TNA stars are unhappy than that the show is entertaining judging by the negative reactions that I see around here and other places to TNA's plans. So, simply put, I disagree with your statement. Also, if you were trying to be funny, you're too late, it's already been done like six times in this thread alone. I thought this was supposed to be a chance for us smarks to throw our hands up and admit that we're being closed-minded, not another chance to bash TNA, which frankly I feel is getting old. If you want to bash TNA, just explain why and put it in the right thread, please. |
|
|
|
Post by machinegun on Sept 11, 2007 1:15:50 GMT -5
You guys sure are harsh. He was just making a joke
|
|
|
|
Post by Super Nimieboo on Sept 11, 2007 1:24:42 GMT -5
Cool "In-Crowd" Response : That it's worth watching, or that 2 hours will make it better. Real Answer : That they only exist to steal your favorite ROH stars away. Or that all your favorite ROH stars should never loose and get pushed to the moon. I think the biggest misconception is not wheter or not wrestlers are leaving but more to do with who's in control of the books at TNA: it is not one person's fault (Russo) there's really just too many people with feet in the creative pool. |
|
|
|
Post by TripleMerc on Sept 11, 2007 1:28:25 GMT -5
Wow, I guess we're not allowed to even have opinions anymore, I'll keep that in mind.
|
|
