Rick Mad
Grimlock
Rick Mad Champion
Posts: 14,613
|
Post by Rick Mad on Dec 6, 2007 21:48:43 GMT -5
Whenever you hear about the early days of TNA, you hear about the great Jarrett vs Raven feud. Raven talked about how it was his destiny to win the NWA World Title and everything, though he never did beat Jarrett...
Then, a few years later, (I forget the PPV) there was supposed to be a King of the Mountain match involving Jarrett and some others for the World Title. To be honest I forget who was Champ though I could swear it was Jarrett. Well anyway, reportedly, Jarrett wasnt going to win, so he got pissed and wouldn't participate in the match. They had Raven replace him and finally Raven fulfilled his destiny and won the NWA Title.
Most of you probably know the story after that. TNA is set to debut on Spike TV, so right before that at the house show in Canada they have Jarrett vs Raven where AMW turn heel and Jarrett wins the belt back.
Fast forward to Bound For Glory 05. The main event is set to be Nash vs Jarrett... until Nash can't compete for whatever dumb reason he came up with. They went with Rhino winning a battle royal and then beating Jarrett in the main event.
I REALLY wish they'd had put Raven into that spot. It would've been a perfect conclusion to such a longstanding feud (although Jarrett would just end up taking the Title back anyway, at least Raven would have his victory over him). On the downside, Raven would never really be the same after this anyway and the Title might've been wasted on him, and I do believe it helped elevate Rhino to the upper midcard level he's at now. At the same time, it was probably one of the most pointless Title reigns in TNA history and I don't think Rhino ever deserved to hold the belt.
I don't know, doesn't really matter in the long run but I just think Raven defeating Jarrett at the "big" PPV would've been quite a moment.
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,933
|
Post by Mozenrath on Dec 6, 2007 21:57:02 GMT -5
I completely agree.
Raven has never had trouble getting over when he's got a company backing him, and Rhino, while I like the guy, did nothing with it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2007 22:00:23 GMT -5
See, what you were doing here is using logic to create a long running storyline that would have an actual payoff to it. TNA writers aren't in your league when it comes to coming up with storylines, sadly enough.
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,933
|
Post by Mozenrath on Dec 6, 2007 22:03:23 GMT -5
See, what you were doing here is using logic to create a long running storyline that would have an actual payoff to it. TNA writers aren't in your league when it comes to coming up with storylines, sadly enough. Not doing the whole "lol TNA sucks" thing at all when I say that's true. They really don't book long term. |
|
messiah
Don Corleone
Wobbly.
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by messiah on Dec 6, 2007 22:08:45 GMT -5
See, what you were doing here is using logic to create a long running storyline that would have an actual payoff to it. TNA writers aren't in your league when it comes to coming up with storylines, sadly enough. Not doing the whole "lol TNA sucks" thing at all when I say that's true. They really don't book long term. I agree this would have been a guy idea, but as for the long term booking thing, I disagree. I think TNA books a lot longer term than the WWE. In fact, it's one of the things that I really enjoy about them. You get feuds that last several months, as opposed to a few weeks. |
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,933
|
Post by Mozenrath on Dec 6, 2007 22:16:01 GMT -5
Not doing the whole "lol TNA sucks" thing at all when I say that's true. They really don't book long term. I agree this would have been a guy idea, but as for the long term booking thing, I disagree. I think TNA books a lot longer term than the WWE. In fact, it's one of the things that I really enjoy about them. You get feuds that last several months, as opposed to a few weeks. Depends. Sometimes TNA will have a long burning storyline, like Harris' inevitable complete heel turn, with the complaining storyline. Or we end up with them having a gimmick match out of nowhere, between two guys who have no real motivation to feud, or heel turns that are scrapped after a week or two. |
|
|
|
Post by Voldemar H. "Brak" Guerta on Dec 7, 2007 0:39:05 GMT -5
I loved it when Raven & Rhino won the NWA Heavyweight Title, and I cursed profusely when I found out they both got jobbed out shortly after, for an un-televised match, no less. I really hope TNA never pulls this bull**** ever again. I even wrote them a civil, albeit angry e-mail after they put the title back on Jarrett for the Spike debut.
|
|
|
|
Post by robferatu on Dec 7, 2007 0:54:45 GMT -5
Not doing the whole "lol TNA sucks" thing at all when I say that's true. They really don't book long term. I agree this would have been a guy idea, but as for the long term booking thing, I disagree. I think TNA books a lot longer term than the WWE. In fact, it's one of the things that I really enjoy about them. You get feuds that last several months, as opposed to a few weeks. Agreed, but TNA tends to book fueds that last too long, one example is the Robert Roode/Eric Young fued which seemed last 8-9 months. |
|
messiah
Don Corleone
Wobbly.
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by messiah on Dec 7, 2007 0:55:21 GMT -5
I agree this would have been a guy idea, but as for the long term booking thing, I disagree. I think TNA books a lot longer term than the WWE. In fact, it's one of the things that I really enjoy about them. You get feuds that last several months, as opposed to a few weeks. Depends. Sometimes TNA will have a long burning storyline, like Harris' inevitable complete heel turn, with the complaining storyline. Or we end up with them having a gimmick match out of nowhere, between two guys who have no real motivation to feud, or heel turns that are scrapped after a week or two. Those have happened, but I find people tend to really go over board with the exagurations when it comes to TNA. Their past few months of shows have been incredibly solid. Turning Point was a bit of a let down, but in fairness, that was a bit out of their hands, what with Hall and Rhino. |
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,933
|
Post by Mozenrath on Dec 7, 2007 3:05:58 GMT -5
Depends. Sometimes TNA will have a long burning storyline, like Harris' inevitable complete heel turn, with the complaining storyline. Or we end up with them having a gimmick match out of nowhere, between two guys who have no real motivation to feud, or heel turns that are scrapped after a week or two. Those have happened, but I find people tend to really go over board with the exagurations when it comes to TNA. Their past few months of shows have been incredibly solid. Turning Point was a bit of a let down, but in fairness, that was a bit out of their hands, what with Hall and Rhino. Don't get me wrong, they've been good lately, but given that WWE has been steadily improving, it's not as big a gap as many act like at times. |
|
messiah
Don Corleone
Wobbly.
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by messiah on Dec 7, 2007 5:22:02 GMT -5
Those have happened, but I find people tend to really go over board with the exagurations when it comes to TNA. Their past few months of shows have been incredibly solid. Turning Point was a bit of a let down, but in fairness, that was a bit out of their hands, what with Hall and Rhino. Don't get me wrong, they've been good lately, but given that WWE has been steadily improving, it's not as big a gap as many act like at times. True, I think it would be fair to say both brands have been improving as of late. I, personally, tend to prefer TNA just because I gave up on the WWE years ago but on the few occasions when I'll tune in for a bit, I'll tend to agree that they're better than they were a while back. Though I do maintain that there is a bigger knee jerk anti-TNA bias than with the WWE. You see it every month, when the Impact spoilers come out -- the same group of people, with the same comments. "Oh God, this looks terrible..." "Why the hell would so and so do this..." "Russo's at it again!..." And then, by and large, that same group of people come back the next week when the show has aired, when they see the finished product and by and large admit to what a great show it was. At least, as of late. Mind you, I have no inherent love for TNA as company--they're just a company, and I'm certainly not a guy to have any sort "brand loyalty." But, for what it's worth, I do think it's the better wrestling product, IMO. They deserve their fair share of crap, I just think often it's misdirected crap is all. |
|
