new gimmick match for TnA

[metylerca]

sinister1 said:

chuckymac314 said:

Yeah, but nobody has ever booked poles more consistently than Russo. During the Russo era in WCW, you'd see at least a half dozen "on a pole" matches a month. It's pretty much his signature, aside from "the big "surprising" super swerve".

and how many has he done since coming to TNA? 2 since coming back? a few more if you count the weekly PPVs?

You always defend TNA don't you? I wonder how you'd react if on the same PPV they had a match that used to be on Raw all the time 4 years ag-.... oh wait.

[Michael Coello]

metylerca said:

sinister1 said:

and how many has he done since coming to TNA? 2 since coming back? a few more if you count the weekly PPVs?

You always defend TNA don't you? I wonder how you'd react if on the same PPV they had a match that used to be on Raw all the time 4 years ag-.... oh wait.

I don't get it.

[ddt]

ghettooverlord said:

I will push to have the moderators permaban anyone who insinuates, implies, or states that they like this idea.

See my post on this, and do your worst.

[metylerca]

sinister1 said:

metylerca said:

You always defend TNA don't you? I wonder how you'd react if on the same PPV they had a match that used to be on Raw all the time 4 years ag-.... oh wait.

I don't get it.

I just notice that whenever there's a 'TNA is TEH SUCKZ' thread, or something real, like 'Another TNA gimmick match featuring polez n briefcases' you're the second or first to defend it. I mean, I won't go as far as to call you a TNA fanboy, there's plenty of those who are way worse, but it just comes off as funny to myself that nothing TNA does will ever be seen in a bad light from you.

[Dragonfly]

TNA, it seems, uses the following formula when trying to break someone wide open:

1) ????
2) Announce match with an established star.
3) The emerging talent and the established star have a match in which the emerging talent comes out smelling like a million bucks.
4) New star.

TNA knows darn well that step three (and by association, step two) is nearly foolproof. It's step one that they seem to have a problem with. For every one traditional feud/starter they throw out (MCMG vs. 3D), there are four that come off as either convoluted (Abyss/Sting), a last-minute booking decision (Kaz), a "panic maneuver" match to help finish off a feud (Jeff Jarrett/Bobby Roode), or simply lazy booking.This reeks of the latter to me. The match should be fun, but seriously... why do this stuff? Why not just have Kaz or Johnny Devine come out and demand a title shot? It's one promo... it shouldn't be that hard.

[Michael Coello]

metylerca said:

sinister1 said:

I don't get it.

I just notice that whenever there's a 'TNA is TEH SUCKZ' thread, or something real, like 'Another TNA gimmick match featuring polez n briefcases' you're the second or first to defend it. I mean, I won't go as far as to call you a TNA fanboy, there's plenty of those who are way worse, but it just comes off as funny to myself that nothing TNA does will ever be seen in a bad light from you.

I was actually asking about the RAW thing, cause I had no idea what you were talking about with that.

On that topic, I do have my own problems with it (production values, Anything VKM does other than BG talking, not using guys like Petey Williams or Raven more often, other stuff). However, I do enjoy it most of the time, and cause I like it, I end up defending it from people who, in my opinion, make quick and harsh judgements.

[ghettooverlord]

sinister1 said:

ghettooverlord said:

I will push to have the moderators permaban anyone who insinuates, implies, or states that they like this idea.

How about permabanning those who hate it even though no one has any idea what it means?

If I had a nickel for every gimmick match that sounded stupid on paper and were ok/good in execution, I'd have a lot of nickels.

Did any of them involve items on a pole?

[metylerca]

sinister1 said:

metylerca said:

I just notice that whenever there's a 'TNA is TEH SUCKZ' thread, or something real, like 'Another TNA gimmick match featuring polez n briefcases' you're the second or first to defend it. I mean, I won't go as far as to call you a TNA fanboy, there's plenty of those who are way worse, but it just comes off as funny to myself that nothing TNA does will ever be seen in a bad light from you.

I was actually asking about the RAW thing, cause I had no idea what you were talking about with that.

On that topic, I do have my own problems with it (production values, Anything VKM does other than BG talking, not using guys like Petey Williams or Raven more often, other stuff). However, I do enjoy it most of the time, and cause I like it, I end up defending it from people who, in my opinion, make quick and harsh judgements.

The RAW thing is self explanatory; Booker/Christian has been done before, can't TNA let both of them do something we haven't seen in another promotion?

Also, I only give TNA harsh words when there really is a reason to bash them. Most of the 'WWE guys rule in TNA' shit is really lighthearted compared to a month or so ago.

[Johnny]

If booked right this could be great. Sure that briefcase in someones hand could have a title shot but it could get him fired. Do you open it? Do you throw it back and let someone else open it? And it gives someone time off for injuries or whatever.

[ghettooverlord]

johnnysb said:

If booked right this could be great. Sure that briefcase in someones hand could have a title shot but it could get him fired. Do you open it? Do you throw it back and let someone else open it? And it gives someone time off for injuries or whatever.

Deal or No Deal is by-far the worst game show in the history of television.

Figure out what I'm implying by saying that.

[ddt]

ghettooverlord said:

johnnysb said:

If booked right this could be great. Sure that briefcase in someones hand could have a title shot but it could get him fired. Do you open it? Do you throw it back and let someone else open it? And it gives someone time off for injuries or whatever.

Deal or No Deal is by-far the worst game show in the history of television.

Figure out what I'm implying by saying that.

The Deal or No Deal line was just a joke. The match could still be interesting if booked correctly (and not over-booked). Of course, no one would be able to open the cases until all four have been grabbed -- after all, if three were opened and they were all title shots, who'd want to fight for the last one?

[ghettooverlord]

ddt said:

ghettooverlord said:

Deal or No Deal is by-far the worst game show in the history of television.

Figure out what I'm implying by saying that.

The Deal or No Deal line was just a joke. The match could still be interesting if booked correctly (and not over-booked). Of course, no one would be able to open the cases until all four have been grabbed -- after all, if three were opened and they were all title shots, who'd want to fight for the last one?

Troof.

[ddt]

ghettooverlord said:

ddt said:

The Deal or No Deal line was just a joke. The match could still be interesting if booked correctly (and not over-booked). Of course, no one would be able to open the cases until all four have been grabbed -- after all, if three were opened and they were all title shots, who'd want to fight for the last one?

Troof.

"Troof" What is that?

[wwerules60]

What is with TNA and having like all their title shots in one match. This one is a bit different but they have done it so many times.

[hollywood]

I think the only way I'd enjoy this match is if the participants took all four suitcases backstages without opening them and beat the ever lovin' s*** out of Vince Russo.

I might be alone on that one, though.

[Joker]

ghettooverlord said:

I will push to have the moderators permaban anyone who insinuates, implies, or states that they like this idea.

Sounds like a fun gimmick match, I will be watching with a high rate of enthusiasm (and I don't even know the contenders yet! lol)

[Cry Me a Wiggle]

Okay, I give up.

I don't see what's wrong with this idea. It's different. It adds an element of suspense to the finish. There's a 1/4 chance that you'll lose your job instead of getting a title shot. Will you go for a briefcase knowing it will lead to unemployment? What's more, it opens up possibilities for future storylines.

Of course, it's not mat-based wrestling, TNA is doing it, Ring of Honor's never done it, Vince Russo is involved in the promotion, Tenay and West will be kind of annoying when they announce it, this is the same promotion that employed Pacman Jones and had Test on the payroll for two weeks, and Samoa Joe still isn't champion.

Why, it's the worst idea ever!

[Lance Uppercut]

I don't understand how it will be a battle royale that involves 4 people getting briefcases, and one of those four people getting fired for "winning"

[Cry Me a Wiggle]

It sounds essentially like a Money In The Bank match, only with the gamble being you don't know what you're going to get.

[Reverend BTY]

If it doesn't have poles, this is false.