NOwave
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,735
|
Post by NOwave on Dec 21, 2007 17:13:59 GMT -5
Here's my take:
TNA is still searching for an identity. Their individual pieces are actually stronger than WWE, but the composite is weaker.
The Tag Teams are better than those in WWE, the women's division is better, (forget the goofy Santa's workshop match last night) the X divison has no counterpart in WWE because Vince has never really believed in the cruiserweights. Overall, TNA just has more talent on the roster right now than WWE.
So why don't they get higher ratings/compete more effectively? I think it's due to their lack of identity. What is TNA and how is it different(better) than WWE as a whole?
They suffer from the perception that they are hiring WWE rejects, which is partly true. The best home-grown star is Samoa Joe, and his character is in transition right now. The other home-grown talents like AJ Styles, Abyss and the X-division guys just haven't broken out of the pack to establish themselves.
The booking/writing of Vince Russo is starting to show-and its not good. As creative as he is, he gets bogged down in goofy crap like female pornstar gimmicks (Angelina Love and Velvet Sky) and turning AJ Styles from a master technician to a goofy stooge.
I've always been a fan of Jim Cornett's old-school approach. I still think if they pushed that style, with an emphasis on in-ring performance and fewer goofy skits, they'd break out of the 1.0 ratings gutter.
Basically, I think they are one break-out character/feud away from really turning up the competitive heat on WWE, which would be a good thing for wrestling fans.
My nomination for break-out character: Samoa Joe, in his fight with management. Classic wrestling story-one guy pissed off at another guy(s) representing management, and they settle it by beating each other up in the ring. Management keeps buying new hitmen to try to take Joe down-sometimes getting the advantage, other times being one-upped by Joe. Finally, Joe demands and gets a new, high-dollar contract. Management later decides (kayfabe) that they can't afford it (a la Bret Hart/WWF in 1997) and brings in a bad-ass heel(with good wrestling skills) to bring Joe down. Maybe they even try to bring in Bret Hart as an "advisor" to Joe.
Joe and his opponent have a series of outstanding, back and forth matches leading up to a mid-late 2008 PPV to settle the score once and for all.
Anybody have other thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by mcmahonfan85 on Dec 21, 2007 17:33:57 GMT -5
The booking/writing of Vince Russo is starting to show-and its not good. As creative as he is, he gets bogged down in goofy crap like female pornstar gimmicks (Angelina Love and Velvet Sky) and turning AJ Styles from a master technician to a goofy stooge. we seem to be overlooking the contributes of Dutch Mantel (the real Vince Russo of TNA) here one feud isn't going to do it. the simple fact is most people don't give a s*** about wrestling. and the casual WWE fans (emphasis on “casual”) can probably only watch so much wrestling a week and would rather watch something else on Thursday i think the "evil management" angle has been done to death. WWE has been doing it for ten years, WCW did it, ECW did it, ROH did it, TNA has done it. also, there is a snowballs chance of Bret Hart coming in to TNA to wrestle. and they should stop the whiny Joe before it goes any further. it went from Joe being about the younger hungry wrestlers to making it all about him with "I'm not getting paid enough"
|
|
Rube
Hank Scorpio
Sammich Bogart
It's always the same and it's always different.
Posts: 5,619
|
Post by Rube on Dec 21, 2007 17:37:50 GMT -5
I think it's great. The wrestling is top notch(mostly) and the storylines are great(mostly). Plus the comedy is actually funny.
Why aren't they getting higher ratings than the WWE? Because they're not the WWE.
|
|
Joekishi
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,490
|
Post by Joekishi on Dec 21, 2007 17:45:07 GMT -5
i'm of the opinion that all the characters are actually written well it's just their use in terms of the whole picture that sucks.
AJ Styles is one of the guys who sticks out in TNA thanks to his goofy persona, a lot of guys have hints of humor in their characters. I think that's a positive.
The negative is those guys are then mixed in with guys who are ANGRY all the time like Rhino, Joe, and Robert Roode...
|
|
|
Post by thestinger on Dec 21, 2007 17:49:59 GMT -5
I agree. One company is 70 years old and the other is five years old.
When I first came here I read a poster who wrote: "It's been five years, and TNA is still a distant second so I consider them a failure. Why even bother putting on a wrestling show if it's not close to WWE numbers."
I responded that I was going to walk up to my friend who opened a resturant last year and say, "Hey pal, I know you're running this resturant, but McDonalds makes billions of dollars and has thousands of stores in 120 countries around the world. I'll give you another four years but if you aren't doing the same then your business is a failure."
|
|
Ass Dan
King Koopa
Curious about extra lines
Have you seen me?
Posts: 12,259
|
Post by Ass Dan on Dec 21, 2007 18:00:18 GMT -5
I agree. One company is 70 years old and the other is five years old. WWE is 45. Not even the NWA is 70 (they are 59).
|
|
Reverend BTY
Hank Scorpio
Christian Troy: God's Gift
Posts: 7,206
|
Post by Reverend BTY on Dec 21, 2007 18:10:53 GMT -5
For me, they're just not "Must See" TV, to steal a line from NBC. RAW has a "I gotta watch this week" feel that TNA doesn't have. God bless'em cause they try but it just isn't something I await every week.
|
|
|
Post by mcmahonfan85 on Dec 21, 2007 18:15:09 GMT -5
RAW has a "I gotta watch this week" feel that TNA doesn't have well having a repeat doesn't exactly help the "I can't miss tonight's episode" feeling with TNA
|
|
ICBM
King Koopa
Didn't know we did status updates here now
Posts: 12,288
|
Post by ICBM on Dec 21, 2007 18:57:56 GMT -5
I do get the "I can't miss an episode of TNA" feeling. I don't really watch WWE anymore. Lately I have but WWE lost me and my intrest last year w/Cena is lifetime champion until he gets hurt. I came back after RKO took the strap but it hasn't floored me yet. I watch TNA because if (a strong IF) they close the gap w/WWE I want to be able to watch that rise and I think that is what is happening. TNA was in the top 10 yahoo and google searched items several months this year. They sell plenty of t-shirts. They wouldn't put on PPV's if they didn't draw. They are on the road. They get DVR ratings twice a week with sponsors on a major cable station with a demographic that advertisiers want after. Looks like they are doing pretty good to me
|
|
|
Post by Andrew is Good on Dec 21, 2007 20:03:58 GMT -5
I definitely feel the need to defend Angelina Love and Velvet Skye. So they have a porn star gimmick? Ok, what's wrong with that. At least they are female wrestlers with characters. In WWE, women fall under two categories. Happy go lucky and psycho. That's it. There's rarely an in between and there's rarely character development. Obviously, there will be some exceptions (Trish, Lita), but overall, the babyfaces are happy go lucky, and the heels are somewhat crazy. Mickie James had the potential to develop into a 3 dimensional character (even as a babyface), but she just became a happy go-lucky character. Jazz, Victoria, Mickie, Beth, and to a small extent, Melina, have all played the crazy heel. Where as Torrie Wilson, Mickie as a babyface, Kelly, Maria, and Michelle are all happy go lucky.
It bothers me a lot that they are pushing Kelly the way they are, because she's not an fighting type of female wrestler, but they are pushing her as that. I want them to use the sympathy card with her, and have Balls Mahoney help her get a mean streak (they could also bring up his past in ECW and the crazy stuff he did). But yeah, that's one thing I like about the women's division, and one thing Russo is good with. He's good with characters. That's his biggest positive. Every woman in TNA has some sort of character and different persona. We have the two arrogant porn stars, the voodoo lady, the redneck, the monster, the strong babyface, and I know that doesn't seem like much, but it's a lot different then the WWE's.
Lance Storm put it best in his commentary the other day that they do need that conflict. WWE is good at building conflict based on wrestling (even the Dominic angle with Guerrero and Mysterio in 2005 was in reality, based on wrestling because Guerrero played that card because he couldn't beat Mysterio). Their biggest angles are mostly (I do say mostly, it's certainly not completely the case) based on conflict, and draw because of that. I posted a 3 month angle the other day in a different post about how they could have that work/shoot/whateverthehellitwas, and I could take that and make a 3 month angle out of it. If I was an experienced booker, I could probably make a 6 month angle on it, but I'm merely a poster on the wrestlecrap fourms. I'm not Michael Hayes.
With AJ as well, he was a good talent, but he wasn't interesting at all. His promo ability was just awful, it was Bobby Lashley awful. But when he became a heel, it was just a 180. I don't like how he was a lackey, but I like the direction his character went. If he wasn't a lackey, it would be better. And like, you could be the best wrestler in the world, if you don't have charisma and you can't talk, you will only reach a certain level.
If I was to have TNA be run, I would have Russo to put input on writing the show, but he would be the one in charge of character development, because while Russo has a number of pitfalls, he is really good with character development I feel. I would also have matches be made important, instead of throwing ladder matches and cage matches out of the blue. That's just bad booking anyway. I watched a shoot interview, and Raven talked about wanting to be in a cage match. The booker of the territory at the time (I think it was Portland or Florida or somewhere) said why? So he would build a 4 week angle. Then what happens after that? So he would go further. Then what happens after that? Etc. etc.
I really wish they would have Raven, Cornette and Nash do some of the booking as well (while keeping Raven and Nash as wrestlers, because from what I understand, Raven would rather wrestle, so why not have him do both if he would want to do both anyway).
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Dec 21, 2007 20:20:34 GMT -5
I really wish they would have Raven, Cornette and Nash do some of the booking as well (while keeping Raven and Nash as wrestlers, because from what I understand, Raven would rather wrestle, so why not have him do both if he would want to do both anyway). Isn't there this big thing about not having people who book the shows as on-air talent cause they would book themselves as the center attraction?
|
|
|
Post by mcmahonfan85 on Dec 21, 2007 20:24:24 GMT -5
I really wish they would have Raven, Cornette and Nash do some of the booking as well (while keeping Raven and Nash as wrestlers, because from what I understand, Raven would rather wrestle, so why not have him do both if he would want to do both anyway). Isn't there this big thing about not having people who book the shows as on-air talent cause they would book themselves as the center attraction? is Raven still an on-air talent?
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Dec 21, 2007 20:38:00 GMT -5
Honestly, TNA's pretty entertaining to me right now, but, in my mind, I feel the problem is that wrestling simply peaked awhile back, and it isn't likely to get big again very soon. Not that I believe in the "the business is cyclical!" argument, but there are simply some time factors that can't be avoided. Many hardcore fans have retreated to the indies (and I don't blame them), and most casuals aren't into it enough to order PPV's from two companies.
Besides, TNA doesn't truly have an identity yet, and that will only come with time.
TNA could definitely be doing better, though, be it through better advertising or not "jumping the gun" on stuff so much (i.e. giving away too many potentially big matches, not just dropping guys into new feuds without a reason, etc.).
|
|
|
Post by Thank You Shawn on Dec 21, 2007 20:38:02 GMT -5
Florida.
|
|
|
Post by maxx420 on Dec 21, 2007 20:43:41 GMT -5
Niiiiiiiice
|
|
|
Post by i.Sarita.com on Dec 21, 2007 20:48:35 GMT -5
"...AJ Styles from a master technician to a goofy stooge."
Now, I'm a HUGE fan of AJ but I certainly wouldn't call his style of wrestling technical. Therefor he really isnt and never was a master technician...maybe a master ariel artist...but not technician...
Chris Benoit was a master technician, Kurt Angle is a master technician, Bryan Danielson is a master....well, you get the idea...
|
|
|
Post by mcmahonfan85 on Dec 21, 2007 20:48:56 GMT -5
(i.e. giving away too many potentially big matches, not just dropping guys into new feuds without a reason, etc.). they don't give away potentially big matches, and (if you remember) that was one of their problems about a year ago. they'd go through an entire iMPACT! hyping the main event as a "pay-per-view caliber match", but it would go all of three minuted before someone did a run in and ruined it.
|
|
Joekishi
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,490
|
Post by Joekishi on Dec 21, 2007 21:51:33 GMT -5
"...AJ Styles from a master technician to a goofy stooge." Now, I'm a HUGE fan of AJ but I certainly wouldn't call his style of wrestling technical. Therefor he really isnt and never was a master technician...maybe a master ariel artist...but not technician... He's more along the lines of a Rey Mysterio, Jr than anybody else in pro wrestling. Really gifted high flyer
|
|
messiah
Don Corleone
Wobbly.
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by messiah on Dec 21, 2007 23:11:08 GMT -5
On the point about ratings. People need to snap back into reality. Two things: one, the ratings that we saw during the Monday Night Wars are done. RAW is not going to be pulling 6s and 7s anytime soon. The ratings that the E gets, which are usually between 3.5-4.5 (at least for Raw, as the other two shows tend to be lower) are themselves inflated. Why? Because the majority of those people watching are not watching the product the way the internet crowd watch it. They watch it the same way any 14 year old male watches chicks in tight pants and simulated violence. Because it initially seems really cool.
The WWE is synonymous with wrestling, and it's difficult for the majority of the public who are familiar with wrestling to get behind any other product. The reason why WCW was able to compete was a) they had a good idea with Nitro but b) and more importantly they had a built in audience. They had the people who had grown up on the NWA, not the WWE. Now a days, WWE is a global company -- everybody knows it, and nobody knows the competition.
The reality, to me at least, is that TNA is stuck in the 1.0 + area of ratings for the foreseeable future. If people are expecting them to compete with McMahon, it's not going to happen. And I say that as someone who despises Vince. This is the simple reality of wrestling economics, as it were.
The realistic focus on TNA is simply "are we profitable?" If they are, they'll stick around even if they're "only" drawing 1s or 1.5s (which is a pretty good number of a wrestling show, in all honestly--very cheaply produced entertainment so Spike loves it). If they're not profitable, they'll go down sooner or later. That simple.
WWE benefits from having momentum and name recognition, the same with Microsoft. They're not the best product, but they're the most well known, and most monopolistic one. Welcome to the depressing world of capitalism, IWC.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2007 23:23:36 GMT -5
^Agreed.
Just like with WCW. TNAs problems are 80% business, economics, marketing etc and have very little to do with the actual on screen product.
|
|