Fade
Patti Mayonnaise
Posts: 38,299
|
Post by Fade on Jan 5, 2010 2:37:40 GMT -5
Competition is good for EVERYONE. Bottom line. Bam. Right there. I'm fine with people nit-picking iMPACT, RAW, praising RAW, iMPACT, whatever, but that's got to be undisputed at this point. I've been thinking about these two shows for a while. I've been excited. And it seems universal. Look at the wrestling sites, rumor after rumor, a sense of unpredictability and wonder in terms of both shows. I buy that before this Vince was kind of un-phased, and yeah, they're probably going to feel more than rest-assured when the Ratings come in, but in terms of certain things, people, that showed up tonight..I will be damn surprised if Vince doesn't kick things up a notch. I don't felt he did that tonight. Hopefully, leading up to WrestleMania, he will. |
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on Jan 5, 2010 2:40:15 GMT -5
Btw, I've noticed something (esp in the past month or so) I love how you and so many internet fans throw around the word "old" in regards to TNA. Ummm...how about you take a look at the menial age of the WWE roster? Take a look at Taker, HBK, HHH, f'n Finlay, Kane, etc. And it goes on and on. Miz, Shaemus, Kofi, Orton, Carlito, MVP, Evan Bourne, Jack Swagger featured prominently on Raw this week. Taker, Finlay and Kane didn't. Hall, Bischoff, Waltman, Hogan, Foley and the Nasty boys dominated the show. Ehhh....I am hoping (I might be wrong, but like I said....HOPE) that this was a one off "nostalgia" bump for guys like The Nasties and Hall. If they feature this big next week, I'll say you're right, and the promotion went the wrong way. |
|
|
|
Post by hajimenoippo on Jan 5, 2010 2:42:20 GMT -5
Well they set up:
*Nasty Boys vs. Team 3-D
*The Band getting back together
*Ric Flair
*Jeff, Shannon, and their teenage groupies.
*Who attacked everybody
*Masked Man
I'm also wondering where the hell the World Elite were besides that crap cage match.
I wonder where Scott Steiner resides in this nWo reunion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave the Dave on Jan 5, 2010 2:42:23 GMT -5
The Nasty Boys and the like are the reason I dreaded this.
I don't think it'll kill TNA, it will probably help it, just I probably won't be one of the people watching. I loved and hated tonight all at once.
At least I wasn't given much hope, everyone I didn't want to show up did in one night, so Hulk didn't hold back.
I'll only be interested if Hogan has to combat his evil friends now, then I will like it. He realizes the NWO and Nasty Boys are wrong, so gets them out.
I really just don't want to see Team 3D fight the Nasties.
|
|
|
|
Post by Time Lord Soundwave on Jan 5, 2010 2:46:24 GMT -5
Well, I was watching Raw tonight and flipping over to Impact during commercials, so I probably can't judge. That said, what I did see looked pretty awful, main event aside, and judging from the reviews I've read so far, it was a pretty terrible show overall, again, main event not withstanding.
If this is supposed to be the new era of TNA, why does it look an awful like like the old era?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on Jan 5, 2010 2:48:04 GMT -5
The Nasty Boys and the like are the reason I dreaded this. I don't think it'll kill TNA, it will probably help it, just I probably won't be one of the people watching. I loved and hated tonight all at once. At least I wasn't given much hope, everyone I didn't want to show up did in one night, so Hulk didn't hold back. I'll only be interested if Hogan has to combat his evil friends now, then I will like it. He realizes the NWO and Nasty Boys are wrong, so gets them out. I really just don't want to see Team 3D fight the Nasties. Me either, and that was my first thought when Knobbs sprayed the picture of D-Von. Make it one garbage brawl and kick the Nasties to the curb. When we said we wanted change, this is NOT what we meant, TNA! I still have this inkling that Bischoff's failed "New Blood" program back in WCW is coming back from the dead, and will be enacted on TNA in the near future. The old guys come in, and lay claim to the top spots/main event, and thus it is up to the young guys and maybe one or two veterans like Foley and Jarrett to clean house of the likes of Brutus, Hogan, Nasties and the Wolfpac. |
|
comahan
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 17,899 
|
Post by comahan on Jan 5, 2010 2:49:04 GMT -5
Btw, I've noticed something (esp in the past month or so) I love how you and so many internet fans throw around the word "old" in regards to TNA. Ummm...how about you take a look at the menial age of the WWE roster? Take a look at Taker, HBK, HHH, f'n Finlay, Kane, etc. And it goes on and on. Miz, Shaemus, Kofi, Orton, Carlito, MVP, Evan Bourne, Jack Swagger featured prominently on Raw this week. Taker, Finlay and Kane didn't. Hall, Bischoff, Waltman, Hogan, Foley and the Nasty boys dominated the show. Why is everyone saying The Nasty Boys dominated the show? Their segments added up to a total of about 90 seconds. I hate getting into Young vs. Old arguments, as I feel age is the most overrated thing in wrestling, and the way people harp on it constantly annoys me greatly. But; You know who had more airtime than everyone on that list but Hogan and Bisch? Wolfe, Pope, Joe, Abyss, AJ, Kong, Hamada, Sarita, and Taylor. |
|
defdave
AC Slater
Llllllllet's get ready to rumblllllllle!
Posts: 196
|
Post by defdave on Jan 5, 2010 2:51:03 GMT -5
over the hill stars, a pay per view match thrown away for free, no real young talent portrayed and surprises and swerves and pointless segments a-go-go. In short your typical Russo booked episode of Nitro. I will grant you that there was certainly an element of Russo-style "Crash-tv" booking ala late 90's attitude era WWF and 99-2001 WCW. But when it comes to you focusing just on the as you say "over the hill stars", I don't get that argument you and many others keep making. What about the x-division match? What about Samoa Joe? What about Abyss? What about AJ Styles? What about (even though I don't care for them personally) the knockouts? You're only focusing on the "over-the-hill" guys, which was the real star-power tonight. I'm sorry, but casual fans still love these "over-the-hill" guys and will tune in just to see them. That is what TNA needs. TNA needs hooks like that to get people to care. If all TNA had were small x-division guys who no casual fan had ever heard of, they never EVER grow. I promise you that. Any company NEEDS star power to truly grow to compete with a juggernaut like WWE. |
|
|
|
Post by canadianheel on Jan 5, 2010 2:53:53 GMT -5
Maybe I'm wrong and I'll be sad and eat my hat if I am but I'll make a call right now. Hall/X-Pac/The nasties are all gone in under 6 months. I just feel TNA was going for that balance of Attitude era plugging, Classic era plugging, and of course pushing the homegrown talent with a huge relevant current guy like Hardy. Hardy has the chance of being a long term guy, but I think this NWO thing is just a swerve that will be resolved with Hogan choosing TNA over them at one PPV, and then them getting defeated and thrown out at the next.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on Jan 5, 2010 2:55:39 GMT -5
I think people are assuming that the Nasties et all are going to be getting main event level pushes, and that, as I said earlier, remains to be seen.
Like I said, I was hugely impressed by the show tonight. Every match, outside of the first cage match with that buggered ending was ok to decent, with the Knockout Tag Titles and the AJ/Angle match blowing away ANY of the matches on RAW tonight...heck even many of the matches we've gotten from RAW in the last month!
What'd we get from RAW that even felt CLOSE to being as unpredictable as the TNA matches? I think for my money, only Sheamus/Bourne had that feel to it. The rest was, sadly, same old same old. Maryse wins out, MVP is back chasing the goddamn US belt again, instead of being elevated as a potential new challenger for Sheamus...and of course HHH and his midget get a marquee 20 minute snoozer to send Chris Jericho packing. Not to mention Kofi getting beaten by Orton yet AGAIN.
So yeah, a lot of TNA's stuff seemed fresher and more exciting to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by donners on Jan 5, 2010 2:55:55 GMT -5
Competition is good for everyone...until a company overreaches, and compromises their fanbase and/or survival.
|
|
defdave
AC Slater
Llllllllet's get ready to rumblllllllle!
Posts: 196
|
Post by defdave on Jan 5, 2010 3:00:07 GMT -5
Miz, Shaemus, Kofi, Orton, Carlito, MVP, Evan Bourne, Jack Swagger featured prominently on Raw this week. Taker, Finlay and Kane didn't. Hall, Bischoff, Waltman, Hogan, Foley and the Nasty boys dominated the show. Why is everyone saying The Nasty Boys dominated the show? Their segments added up to a total of about 90 seconds. I hate getting into Young vs. Old arguments, as I feel age is the most overrated thing in wrestling, and the way people harp on it constantly annoys me greatly. But; You know who had more airtime than everyone on that list but Hogan and Bisch? Wolfe, Pope, Joe, Abyss, AJ, Kong, Hamada, Sarita, and Taylor. EXACTLY!!!! THANK YOU!!! Seriously, what in the hell is with people on the internet always bitching about young vs old? Good Lord it's a stupid argument. Let's get RID of ALL the OLD guys in wrestling! Hmmm... okay. Fire McMahon and let some young inexperienced person like oh let's say....Soap opera Smackdown Stephanie take over! Great idea! And fire Shawn Michaels. He's too old. And HHH....he should be gone. And Undertaker...oh my God.....he's ancient. I don't know WHY 99% of the crowds keep cheering for him!!! He's SO damn old!!!! Fire his ass!!! Replace Undertaker with The Miz RIGHT NOW! I could go on and on. Finlay for example? I'm sorry, but the age argument is dumb. How can we allow an elderly man like Undertaker to remain undefeated at WrestleMania?!?! How can they let old dudes like that dominate the biggest ppv of the year. Who cares how old someone is as long as they can still go in the ring and keep people entertained? I mean, I understand if ALL you want is carbon-copy Rey Mysterio Jr.'s, but to me that's a really one-sided view of pro wrestling that will only help to eventually kill the industry. Once again, like I said before...most people aren't being HONEST. They are just letting their biases show. That's not what I wanted. Oh well though. I expected too much I guess. |
|
|
|
Post by Clarence "Showstealer" Mason on Jan 5, 2010 3:01:59 GMT -5
over the hill stars, a pay per view match thrown away for free, no real young talent portrayed and surprises and swerves and pointless segments a-go-go. In short your typical Russo booked episode of Nitro. I will grant you that there was certainly an element of Russo-style "Crash-tv" booking ala late 90's attitude era WWF and 99-2001 WCW. But when it comes to you focusing just on the as you say "over the hill stars", I don't get that argument you and many others keep making. What about the x-division match? What about Samoa Joe? What about Abyss? What about AJ Styles? What about (even though I don't care for them personally) the knockouts? You're only focusing on the "over-the-hill" guys, which was the real star-power tonight. I'm sorry, but casual fans still love these "over-the-hill" guys and will tune in just to see them. That is what TNA needs. TNA needs hooks like that to get people to care. If all TNA had were small x-division guys who no casual fan had ever heard of, they never EVER grow. I promise you that. Any company NEEDS star power to truly grow to compete with a juggernaut like WWE. Well AJ is eliminated from argument cause I said besides the main event there was nothing that stood out to me. The X-Division match was a symbol of everything wrong with the Russo Era in my mind. I mean seriously a NO CONTEST in a CAGE MATCH? The focus wasn't on the talent, it was used as a SHOCKING SETUP for the debut of Jeff Hardy. Samoa Joe and Abyss? Well the match was okay, but again in my mind the focus is more on the angle than the talent. IE: Rhino getting beat up and removed from it. The knockouts? I love Kong and Hamada, but Sarita and Taylor aren't ready to go ten minutes and most fans wouldn't want to watch it anyway. But in the end at least from my perspective it just comes off as wrong. This was the chance for TNA to stand up, put their flag in the ground and say "This is who we are". And if I were an old wrestling fan watching tonight for the first time after giving up when WCW died the impression I would've got was "Lame WCW ripoff". In my eyes that's not a victory, that's a failure |
|
|
|
Post by celticjobber on Jan 5, 2010 3:02:00 GMT -5
TNA felt like an episode of WCW Monday Nitro to me, which isn't really something that makes me want to watch their shows again. And this was the first full episode of Impact I've watched in about 2 years.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cry Me a Wiggle on Jan 5, 2010 3:06:06 GMT -5
I think the ageist mentality stems back from the WCW days when guys couldn't break through the glass ceiling, and there was a clear stranglehold at the top of the card by guys over 40.
That was ten years ago and the armchair bookers have never let it go, and I too am tired of the idea that once you hit 35 you should retire and sell real estate or whatever ex-wrestlers do. So long as younger talent is being cultivated, moved up the card, and slotted into the main event, then there's always room for veterans in the business.
|
|
Randy Barber 4-Life
Hank Scorpio
I have received an email from RAW's anonymous General Manager. And I quote: "No play for Mr. Gray!"
Posts: 5,001
|
Post by Randy Barber 4-Life on Jan 5, 2010 3:09:59 GMT -5
I notice one of the big complaints for tonight's show is too little wrestling, too much skits and talking. The one thing I'll say about that is that tonight wasn't going to be a typical show. Tonight's show was to set the table for the weeks and months to come. They probably have more table setting to do, but I'd expect over the next few weeks they would settle into more and more actual wrestling as they get story/character elements established.
I'm not telling anybody what to like or dislike, and if I'm wrong and several months from now we've got a show that has very little actual wrestling, I'll probably be tuning out with you. I just hope that if this was your biggest complaint you won't dismiss them completely before they've had a chance to settle everything in.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on Jan 5, 2010 3:10:28 GMT -5
TNA felt like an episode of WCW Monday Nitro to me, which isn't really something that makes me want to watch their shows again. And this was the first full episode of Impact I've watched in about 2 years. Nitro, in it's infancy was way better than RAW. And if tonight's iMPACT hearkened back to ANY Nitro era, it was that one. Curiously, WWE has been looking more and more like latter-day Nitro of late, what with all of it's guest hosts and comedy skits and the same old guys dominating the young up and comers.... and ten minutes of NOTHING F*****G HAPPENING while your audience changes the channel. And before you go after my balls for the age comment, let it be known that *I* am talking of TV age, not "real" age. There is a difference, and if you've read EITHER of RD's books, you'll know what I mean. In TV years, HHH/Shawn/Hornswoggle are beyond George Burns ancient. So is Cena, but by the same token he's their anchor so I'll let that one go. |
|
defdave
AC Slater
Llllllllet's get ready to rumblllllllle!
Posts: 196
|
Post by defdave on Jan 5, 2010 3:13:11 GMT -5
I will grant you that there was certainly an element of Russo-style "Crash-tv" booking ala late 90's attitude era WWF and 99-2001 WCW. But when it comes to you focusing just on the as you say "over the hill stars", I don't get that argument you and many others keep making. What about the x-division match? What about Samoa Joe? What about Abyss? What about AJ Styles? What about (even though I don't care for them personally) the knockouts? You're only focusing on the "over-the-hill" guys, which was the real star-power tonight. I'm sorry, but casual fans still love these "over-the-hill" guys and will tune in just to see them. That is what TNA needs. TNA needs hooks like that to get people to care. If all TNA had were small x-division guys who no casual fan had ever heard of, they never EVER grow. I promise you that. Any company NEEDS star power to truly grow to compete with a juggernaut like WWE. Well AJ is eliminated from argument cause I said besides the main event there was nothing that stood out to me. The X-Division match was a symbol of everything wrong with the Russo Era in my mind. I mean seriously a NO CONTEST in a CAGE MATCH? The focus wasn't on the talent, it was used as a SHOCKING SETUP for the debut of Jeff Hardy. Samoa Joe and Abyss? Well the match was okay, but again in my mind the focus is more on the angle than the talent. IE: Rhino getting beat up and removed from it. The knockouts? I love Kong and Hamada, but Sarita and Taylor aren't ready to go ten minutes and most fans wouldn't want to watch it anyway. But in the end at least from my perspective it just comes off as wrong. This was the chance for TNA to stand up, put their flag in the ground and say "This is who we are". And if I were an old wrestling fan watching tonight for the first time after giving up when WCW died the impression I would've got was "Lame WCW ripoff". In my eyes that's not a victory, that's a failure Well....I guess it's all about perspective. Maybe it's only me and a FEW other people on THIS board, but iMPACT! entertained the hell out of me. But it really all comes down to what exactly you're looking for in a wrestling product. I really think so many of us have sooo many differing opinions on what a pro wrestling show SHOULD be. To me, TNA tonight was faaaar from what I REALLY want in a wrestling show, but still...it was better than Raw and it actually entertained me, which is more than I can say for WWE for the past few years. Any further argument about TNA seems to me to be really just erroneous. The question is: Are you, as a wrestling fan more entertained by what we saw tonight on iMPACT! with Hogan, Flair, and Hardy's debut and Angle vs. AJ....
OR.....are YOU as a wrestling fan more entertained by what we saw on Raw with Bret's return and DX squashing Jerishow.It all comes down to wrestling preferences. What do you REALLY want to see when you watch a wrestling show? Let's be honest, guys! I know I keep saying that, but I don't think the point has been made yet. As for me, I wasn't sure before, but now I'm DEFINITELY sure. Count me as a TNA fan from here on out. After tonight, I'm all about TNA and I can't wait to see the next episode of iMPACT!. |
|
|
|
Post by Clarence "Showstealer" Mason on Jan 5, 2010 3:18:19 GMT -5
Well AJ is eliminated from argument cause I said besides the main event there was nothing that stood out to me. The X-Division match was a symbol of everything wrong with the Russo Era in my mind. I mean seriously a NO CONTEST in a CAGE MATCH? The focus wasn't on the talent, it was used as a SHOCKING SETUP for the debut of Jeff Hardy. Samoa Joe and Abyss? Well the match was okay, but again in my mind the focus is more on the angle than the talent. IE: Rhino getting beat up and removed from it. The knockouts? I love Kong and Hamada, but Sarita and Taylor aren't ready to go ten minutes and most fans wouldn't want to watch it anyway. But in the end at least from my perspective it just comes off as wrong. This was the chance for TNA to stand up, put their flag in the ground and say "This is who we are". And if I were an old wrestling fan watching tonight for the first time after giving up when WCW died the impression I would've got was "Lame WCW ripoff". In my eyes that's not a victory, that's a failure Well....I guess it's all about perspective. Maybe it's only me and a FEW other people on THIS board, but iMPACT! entertained the hell out of me. But it really all comes down to what exactly you're looking for in a wrestling product. I really think so many of us have sooo many differing opinions on what a pro wrestling show SHOULD be. To me, TNA tonight was faaaar from what I REALLY want in a wrestling show, but still...it was better than Raw and it actually entertained me, which is more than I can say for WWE for the past few years. Any further argument about TNA seems to me to be really just erroneous. The question is: Are you, as a wrestling fan more entertained by what we saw tonight on iMPACT! with Hogan, Flair, and Hardy's debut and Angle vs. AJ....
OR.....are YOU as a wrestling fan more entertained by what we saw on Raw with Bret's return and DX squashing Jerishow.It all comes down to wrestling preferences. What do you REALLY want to see when you watch a wrestling show? Let's be honest, guys! I know I keep saying that, but I don't think the point has been made yet. As for me, I wasn't sure before, but now I'm DEFINITELY sure. Count me as a TNA fan from here on out. After tonight, I'm all about TNA and I can't wait to see the next episode of iMPACT!. We may disagree on the show tonight defdave but I give you credit where credit is due, this post sums it all up perfectly. As for me? I'm going to wait and see, I'll watch Impact again next thursday. but there's a lot of ground they need to cover to keep my intrest |
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on Jan 5, 2010 3:21:40 GMT -5
Defdave: I fail to see how ANYONE in this thread has been DISHONEST with you. You keep screaming about honesty, but all I'm seeing....is someone who's not being told what he WANTS to hear.
I know that I and many others HAVE honestly answered your question that you put in bold in your last post. Several times in fact.
But I'll do it one more time: I was hugely entertained by TNA tonight, despite the less than perfect show, and despite the bits with the older guys that I didn't really care for. I feel that tonight's iMPACT was way better than what we got on RAW. At least, it seemed more fresh, more exuberant and more energized than the "going through the motions" we got on RAW.
Exactly two things entertained me on RAW that had nothing to do with Bret: The Miz, and the Bourne/Sheamus match.
|
|
