TNA is better then WWE

[metylerca]

sinister1 said:

aodpilot said:

At least Hornswaggle had wrestling training and could get in the ring without a lawsuit occuring.

But at least someone won the belt from Pacman(even though not directly) instead of having the belt vacated and basically forgotten about.

That was something a long time coming as the cruiserweight division had been an afterthought in the WWE since 2004. TNA, on the other hand is a company that is in the now, with many, many wrestlers more deserving than a football player to wear the gold.

[Cry Me a Wiggle]

Pacman also got Ron Killings back on TV, which is the precise moment I stopped complaining about it.

[razzle98]

metylerca (cult of one) ha u such a wwe mark none of that stuff is even memorable wwe has shitty match types all the time, none of that stuff is even memorable

[razzle98]

u really tryin find stuff and if that all u can come up with

[metylerca]

razzle98 said:

metylerca (cult of one) ha u such a wwe mark none of that stuff is even memorable wwe has crapty match types all the time, none of that stuff is even memorable

abiding by the board rules, all I really have ask of you is to tell me what you consider memorable.

I, for one, am anxious to know.

[razzle98]

u seem desperate to find anything bad about tna, so u say small things that never even lasted long, trademarc he was hardly in tna and the mascot was only seen a few times, compare that to no talents like khali holding a world belt and hornswoggle winnin the cruiserweight title as well as kfed pinning the champ, wwe has several pacman jones level crap this year tna has had pacman jones and angle holding all the titles, no company is perfect

[metylerca]

razzle98 said:

u seem desperate to find anything bad about tna, so u say small things that never even lasted long, trademarc he was hardly in tna and the mascot was only seen a few times, compare that to no talents like khali holding a world belt and hornswoggle winnin the cruiserweight title as well as kfed pinning the champ, wwe has several pacman jones level crap this year tna has had pacman jones and angle holding all the titles, no company is perfect

You could have just as easily put it that way, but I digress.

Hornswaggle winning the title happened, and yes, he also turned out to be the bastard son, but I do not recall defending it...
Kfed pinning the champ happened on one night of RAW, and he hasn't been back since. Khali winning the title didn't suck as bad as most people thought it would, and while its assured he will never wrestle a ***** match (QFT?), he did a decent job in the 'unbeatable monster' persona that they wanted him in as the champ.

The truth is that Pacman lasted longer than alot of the WWE crap angles. But also, you will hardly find a person who will say Vince as ECW champ was good in any way whatsoever.

And yes, no company is perfect.

[Near Fantastica]

In terms of tv matches, TNA is more enthralling than WWE. I find myself taping RAW and skipping through most of the matches. I don't watch a lot of TNA but I do find myself able to watch every match even though I have no idea who most of the guys are.

[Deleted]

breakfastinbed said:

In terms of tv matches, TNA is more enthralling than WWE. I find myself taping RAW and skipping through most of the matches. I don't watch a lot of TNA but I do find myself able to watch every match even though I have no idea who most of the guys are.

It's the same thing with me, simply because TNA has to fit all of their talent onto one, two-hour show. Sometimes, it makes for a better product (not when most of that particular show is based around one man and his wife, though.)

However, WWE have three shows totaling five hours a week (not including PPVs), so the 'tight' roster no longer exists. Of course, WWE could've had amazing rosters on all three shows and promote them as completely different products, but instead, everything worth watching and important is put on Raw, and the rest is spread out across ECW and SmackDown - which isn't much.

[Double Chickenwing w/ Bridge]

kiddobradley said:

caroudabush said:

And Coach vs Foley isn't?

I saw that match. Decent comedy segment. Your point?

Coach SHOULDN'T be in the ring in the first place. And it was mediocre at best. It's absolutely ridiculous to be there. If they want to book a comedy match, I can think of a certain someone down in OVW that would fit the bill...

[Timmy8271]

caroudabush said:

kiddobradley said:

I saw that match. Decent comedy segment. Your point?

Coach SHOULDN'T be in the ring in the first place. And it was mediocre at best. It's absolutely ridiculous to be there. If they want to book a comedy match, I can think of a certain someone down in OVW that would fit the bill...

Coach/Foley wasn't Rosie/Trump level bad. It was better than Oily Guy/Hemme.

[ChibiDiablo]

No, No it isn't

[Double Chickenwing w/ Bridge]

timmy8271 said:

Coach/Foley wasn't Rosie/Trump level bad. It was better than Oily Guy/Hemme.

I'll give you that, but that's not saying much.

[razzle98]

noone knows if pacman could wrestle, he was never allowed to

[Ben Wyatt]

razzle98 said:

noone knows if pacman could wrestle, he was never allowed to

Which sure made bringing him in a smart move

[metylerca]

theslickness said:

razzle98 said:

noone knows if pacman could wrestle, he was never allowed to

Which sure made bringing him in a smart move

Which is my point exactly, they don't utilize arguably the best roster out there, instead they'll bring in a football player; and more recently Scott Hall. And if all is correct, they'll bring in another ex-WWE guy....

[razzle98]

tnas 5 years old they make mistakes though i see why they bring in established stars, ppl dont know who samoa joe or aj styles are so bringing in known names helps ppl watch its smart to do..

[Ben Wyatt]

razzle98 said:

tnas 5 years old they make mistakes though i see why they bring in established stars, ppl dont know who samoa joe or aj styles are so bringing in known names helps ppl watch its smart to do..

Except for the part where brining in all the big names has done almost nothing for the ratings

[Michael Coello]

theslickness said:

razzle98 said:

tnas 5 years old they make mistakes though i see why they bring in established stars, ppl dont know who samoa joe or aj styles are so bringing in known names helps ppl watch its smart to do..

Except for the part where brining in all the big names has done almost nothing for the ratings

but it has got them out of weekly PPVs, no guarante midday FSN timeslots, and online shows.

[metylerca]

theslickness said:

razzle98 said:

tnas 5 years old they make mistakes though i see why they bring in established stars, ppl dont know who samoa joe or aj styles are so bringing in known names helps ppl watch its smart to do..

Except for the part where brining in all the big names has done almost nothing for the ratings

I don't know how much truth there is to this, but more internet wrestling fans watch TNA... I forget where I saw that somewhere, but if it's true, then they're dumb for trying to cater to casual fans; they need a bigger fanbase before reaching out. WWE brought in K-Fed for a cup of coffee as well as Jackass for a night, but this was to garner mainstream attention. TNA doesn't even have the casual attention, especially when they're constantly pulling 1.0 and 1.1's. They need to focus on being different than WWE, not taking what WWE doesn't want. This isn't 1995, wrestling's changed, and no amount of Booker-T's and Scott Hall's are going to get TNA to the point where they're even competing with ECW, let alone Raw and Smackdown.