Greer
Unicron
Points. Don't. Matter.
Posts: 3,199
|
Post by Greer on Mar 16, 2010 18:48:19 GMT -5
I am not biased toward either company or show but let's keep it real. You cannot criticize the WWE in any single way about having older performers on the show when TNA's air time was taken up by Flair, Hogan, The Nasty Boys with Jimmy Hart, Kevin Nash, Scott Hall, X Pac and Mick Foley. I will repeat: Ric Flair - Age 61 Hulk Hogan - Age 56 The Nasty Boys - Ages 45 each Jimmy Hart - Who cares? Kevin Nash - Age 50 Scott Hall - Age 51 X Pac - Age 37 Mick Foley Age 44 Wanna know the other difference? Austin did not wrestle on the show, nor did Bret or Vince. They are having one special attraction match at WM. That's all. Everyone on that list above, STILL WRESTLES on TNA programming. Hogan and Flair falls under the same bit of "special attraction". They had a one off match for a big show. It doesnt look like theyll be doing it again. Hall and Waltman too (unless you count the 1 min match Waltman had against EY). And Jimmy Hart was only for that one match as well, and he never did anything til the end. I see it as just as much of an overhyped, overcriticized bit as the people who bitch about Vince vs Bret. My opinion has always been... who gives a s*** about age? If they can do a good bit of storytelling, I dont care how old you are. To me, all of the older guys in WWE can still do that. And all of the guys on that list for TNA sans the Nasty Boys can do that as well imo. So... I dont care. I never got the big fuss about age in wrestling. Ric Flair and Hogan will wrestle again. It will happen. Hogan can't even lift his legs. He can barely move. Kevin Nash can barely walk. Scott Hall can't even throw a punch properly. Bret Hart, a former stroke victim throws a better punch than Hall. Not trying to be funny. It's a fact. Waltman can still go. The Nasties are awful. Foley in the ring has not been a pleasant sight. He is overweight and can't move. They were old 10 years ago. These guys cannot work a match. Nobody wants to see them in the ring. I want to see Beer Money, and Daniels, and Angle. The men on that list are way past their prime. WAY past it. Step aside please. The problem IS their age because it means they have been hogging tv time for most of their careers. It's over guys. I don't want to watch Ric Flair falling all over the place, Hogan limping with every step and Scott Hall in an old sweat shirt and jeans, throwing knife edge chops in a street fight. I want to see Hernandez, Beer Money and Pope tear the house down, like you know they can. The only man on that list that can remotely go in the ring is Waltman, and that still doesn't mean I wanna see him in the ring. These guys have deone everything they have needed to do in wrestling. Their act is old. I understand it can be hard to give it up, but seriously, think about the guys who can bring it in that ring. Think about the guys who might not have a lot of time left to show off what they can do. The future of your company is not with guys from the past. I'm not bashing old people, or older wrestlers. I know they still have a passion for it, but jeez guys, your bodies just cant do it. Look at WCW. The radicalz left, Jericho left and a number of other stars because the older guys were hogging it all. I don't want TNA going down that road. It is frustrating because they have the guys there, but they take a back seat to Sting,Hogan, Flair and the gang. |
|
Hanzo
Dennis Stamp
"You want Cena to go to ECW?!"
Posts: 4,666
|
Post by Hanzo on Mar 16, 2010 18:48:21 GMT -5
I think the main problem with TNA is that hardly anyone knows it exists. (I hope.)
I'm gonna be honest here, I actually forgot Impact was on last night. And when I remembered, I changed over to it and saw Hogan pointing to a "Vince Who?" sign. Wonderful.
Now, if I would have flipped over and saw a good womens match, I doubt I would have flipped back. That's one thing I have to give TNA credit for: they have an awesome womens division. Those girls rock.
|
|
|
|
Post by Finish Uncle Muffin’s Story on Mar 16, 2010 18:49:05 GMT -5
Here's the problem - TNA says they're in for the long haul, but Spike TV might have different plans.
I've been listening to a lot of Wade Keller's stuff lately, and while he's harsh on TNA, he's pretty spot-on about everything.
They're disjointed, nothing flows logically, the talent they have is being utilized in absolutely horrid fashion and the complete lack of promotion for certain matches and angles on follow-up shows is utterly mind boggling. It's almost as if they want the shows to have this quality where they can be viewed independent of each other, as very little builds towards pay-per-view, or even the next television program.
We'll see what they bring this coming week. Honestly, step one is very simple, and the fans have been chanting it for years now: "Fire Russo."
|
|
|
|
Post by Seth Drakin of Monster Crap on Mar 16, 2010 18:51:10 GMT -5
Guys....just.....just stop with these silly excuses. You failed. This experiment is a failure. No matter what, Austin (who isnt wrestling by the way) should not have that effect on the opposing product. There is no.....NO excuse to have lower ratings with the roster you have than NXT (who has a bunch of tv rookies). Go back to the timeslot you had and wait for yourself to have a better showing before competing with the flagship show. Jesus, Austin is the biggest star in the last 15 years and arguably ever, showing up during the WWE's hottest time period against a taped show. That is plenty of reason to have a lower rating. Never mind SpikeTV being happy with TNA, Dixie and crew saying they are in this for the long haul, they might as well close down the entire operation since this 1 week dip means they will never be able to grow. Then you fail for starting during WWE's hottest period. WCW at least knew that starting Monday Nitro on WWE's best time was foolish, and yet TNA is expecting to "dominate" as Tazz would say. The only reason TNA did this was so they could have excuses when they failed. Keep continuing with the excuses and in no time, you will fail. You have to accept failure before its too late. |
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Mar 16, 2010 18:54:12 GMT -5
Jesus, Austin is the biggest star in the last 15 years and arguably ever, showing up during the WWE's hottest time period against a taped show. That is plenty of reason to have a lower rating. Never mind SpikeTV being happy with TNA, Dixie and crew saying they are in this for the long haul, they might as well close down the entire operation since this 1 week dip means they will never be able to grow. Then you fail for starting during WWE's hottest period. WCW at least knew that starting Monday Nitro on WWE's best time was foolish, and yet TNA is expecting to "dominate" as Tazz would say. The only reason TNA did this was so they could have excuses when they failed. Keep continuing with the excuses and in no time, you will fail. You have to accept failure before its too late. Who is to say they are failing though? Spike says they are happy and Dixie doesn't seem mad. The only people crapping on this are a vocal few on the net. |
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Mar 16, 2010 18:57:45 GMT -5
A lot of people just jumping to call it a failure.
I'd hate to see these guys when WCW Nitro was doing better than RAW for weeks and weeks. Second or third week, and there'd be calls to move to a different night before the WWF died.
|
|
|
|
Post by perucho1990 on Mar 16, 2010 18:59:00 GMT -5
Here's the problem - TNA says they're in for the long haul, but Spike TV might have different plans. I've been listening to a lot of Wade Keller's stuff lately, and while he's harsh on TNA, he's pretty spot-on about everything. They're disjointed, nothing flows logically, the talent they have is being utilized in absolutely horrid fashion and the complete lack of promotion for certain matches and angles on follow-up shows is utterly mind boggling. It's almost as if they want the shows to have this quality where they can be viewed independent of each other, as very little builds towards pay-per-view, or even the next television program. We'll see what they bring this coming week. Honestly, step one is very simple, and the fans have been chanting it for years now: "Fire Russo." And why not chant "Fire Gerwicks" the head writer of Raw and responsible for Hornswaggle, Katie Vick etc?? And you want Kevin Sullivan as head writer again? Hogan said he will bring him to TNA if Russo leaves. |
|
|
|
Post by wrestlecrapcrap on Mar 16, 2010 19:03:04 GMT -5
Don't think TNA being taped makes a difference. The amount of people that read spoilers is a real small proportion of their actual potential audience.
When people call TNA non-sensical, I think it comes from the fact that everything happens so quick and so often that any event just loses all meaning. People call Raw stale, or paint by numbers, but it's delibrately like that. You don't have to think so much, and any event has as much significance as it should have. Raw is constantly telling stories, but in a subtle way that isn't as in your face as TNA. For instance, Austin simply walking out of the ring without a fuss to let Cena speak is a subtle story in itself, Austin acknowledging who the man in the company currently is. If that was TNA, they would have had some faux argument break out and you'd be unsure of who to cheer for, and all the while the focus could have been on something else.
Anything in TNA can be explained if you try hard enough, but for me personally I just don't feel I need to watch because nothing matters. I love Pope and Anderson, and Jeff Hardy was one of my favourites on Smackdown where he tore the house down all Summer, but nothing just seems to matter in TNA. They try to make everything seem so significant and it ends up not meaning as much at all. Like when people moaned that the ECW announcers downplayed Christian's return. That was delibrate too. Yeah he's a good guy to have on the roster, but there's no need to try and make it out like he's one of the biggest stars ever when he's coming to do a job on the C-brand. It makes everything else seem less great if you make even the smaller things supposedly big. Add to the fact that so much happens in TNA in a short space of time, it's just hard to want to follow.
They've lost almost half their audience from the Jan 4th show. That's great going. That's at least another .7 of people that know TNA exists, but would either rather watch Raw or do something else. I don't think TNA are clearly putting on a better product than Raw at all, it's a matter of opinion but Raw has been firing but the last few months with this Mania build in my opinion, and they aren't doing much wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orange on Mar 16, 2010 19:04:29 GMT -5
That's not bad, it's not a huge rating but it's not a big drop off either. People need to give this time, anybody expecting TNA to jump into the 3's or 4's right now are only going to be dissapointed because we're not going to see those numbers for a while. TNA will grow slow, it doesn't seem like Spike or Dixie are ready to hit the panic button yet, so let's just let this ride out and be happy that we once again have a choice on Mondays.
|
|
Greer
Unicron
Points. Don't. Matter.
Posts: 3,199
|
Post by Greer on Mar 16, 2010 19:05:49 GMT -5
Don't think TNA being taped makes a difference. The amount of people that read spoilers is a real small proportion of their actual potential audience. When people call TNA non-sensical, I think it comes from the fact that everything happens so quick and so often that any event just loses all meaning. People call Raw stale, or paint by numbers, but it's delibrately like that. You don't have to think so much, and any event has as much significance as it should have. Raw is constantly telling stories, but in a subtle way that isn't as in your face as TNA. For instance, Austin simply walking out of the ring without a fuss to let Cena speak is a subtle story in itself, Austin acknowledging who the man in the company currently is. If that was TNA, they would have had some faux argument break out and you'd be unsure of who to cheer for, and all the while the focus could have been on something else. Anything in TNA can be explained if you try hard enough, but for me personally I just don't feel I need to watch because nothing matters. I love Pope and Anderson, and Jeff Hardy was one of my favourites on Smackdown where he tore the house down all Summer, but nothing just seems to matter in TNA. They try to make everything seem so significant and it ends up not meaning as much at all. Like when people moaned that the ECW announcers downplayed Christian's return. That was delibrate too. Yeah he's a good guy to have on the roster, but there's no need to try and make it out like he's one of the biggest stars ever when he's coming to do a job on the C-brand. It makes everything else seem less great if you make even the smaller things supposedly big. Add to the fact that so much happens in TNA in a short space of time, it's just hard to want to follow. They've lost almost half their audience from the Jan 4th show. That's great going. That's at least another .7 of people that know TNA exists, but would either rather watch Raw or do something else. I don't think TNA are clearly putting on a better product than Raw at all, it's a matter of opinion but Raw has been firing but the last few months with this Mania build in my opinion, and they aren't doing much wrong. You sir, are correct. |
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Mar 16, 2010 19:07:40 GMT -5
I think the problem is that people take that "TNA Dominates Monday Nights" as something other than hype for the company.
|
|
|
|
Post by Finish Uncle Muffin’s Story on Mar 16, 2010 19:08:32 GMT -5
Here's the problem - TNA says they're in for the long haul, but Spike TV might have different plans. I've been listening to a lot of Wade Keller's stuff lately, and while he's harsh on TNA, he's pretty spot-on about everything. They're disjointed, nothing flows logically, the talent they have is being utilized in absolutely horrid fashion and the complete lack of promotion for certain matches and angles on follow-up shows is utterly mind boggling. It's almost as if they want the shows to have this quality where they can be viewed independent of each other, as very little builds towards pay-per-view, or even the next television program. We'll see what they bring this coming week. Honestly, step one is very simple, and the fans have been chanting it for years now: "Fire Russo." And why not chant "Fire Gerwicks" the head writer of Raw and responsible for Hornswaggle, Katie Vick etc?? And you want Kevin Sullivan as head writer again? Hogan said he will bring him to TNA if Russo leaves. Because we're not talking about the flaws involving a minor character on WWE programming, we're talking about the many flaws on a TNA program. WWE, like them or not, almost always has a means to an end. You know the program has direction, and it's always leading to something. What is TNA building towards? They've done a horrific job over the last few months of building towards pay-per-views. Fine, they don't make money off them. But then they don't even build towards Impact, either. Jeff Hardy vs AJ Styles should have been announced well in advance. That simple. I want to watch WrestleMania after the build they've given it. TNA has never, ever had a match nearly as important as anything WWE has put on, and a lot of it has to do with the venue they're stuck in and the fact that even when they have run shows or had matches where you felt there was some progress, something happened within the next week to take it all away. |
|
|
|
Post by donners on Mar 16, 2010 19:10:15 GMT -5
I think the main problem with TNA is that hardly anyone knows it exists. (I hope.) They hit a peak of 1.88 on the 4 January show. Evidently there is a substantial audience out there aware of the company, and with some knowledge of what they are doing. The fact that less than half those people are bothering to tune in a couple of months later is an indictment on the product that has been produced in that time. |
|
|
|
Post by Arturo Classico on Mar 16, 2010 19:10:24 GMT -5
Didn't watch. Was very dissapointed by the last Impact show and by discriptions I read it seemed much worse, pretty much given up on Impact until they realize they are not set up to be WWE.
Which is a shame since I use to like them when they had good wrestling and entertaing storylines ie-before going to Spike. Really stop with Nash, Hall, Hogan, Waltman, Hardy, and Foley and try using dudes who have some upside like Wolfe, Styles, Joe, Pope, Hernendez, Abyss and Williams and MCMG and Generation Me and have them do entertaining stuff and come up with new ideas because rehashing a Four Horsemen or nWo stable has not succeeded at all for TNA aside from SEX and with Abyss and Styles let them be themselves and not the new Ric Flair and Hulk Hogan. Seriously TNA did what you did well and thats having a mix of realistic storylines, fast paced indy wrestling and sometimes have great hardcore matches.
TNA will never beat WWE but at least if they weren't trying to be WWE they'd have better rating and gain a fanbase a .8 is embarrasing with all the talent TNA has.
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Mar 16, 2010 19:11:13 GMT -5
Hogan and Flair falls under the same bit of "special attraction". They had a one off match for a big show. It doesnt look like theyll be doing it again. Hall and Waltman too (unless you count the 1 min match Waltman had against EY). And Jimmy Hart was only for that one match as well, and he never did anything til the end. I see it as just as much of an overhyped, overcriticized bit as the people who bitch about Vince vs Bret. My opinion has always been... who gives a s*** about age? If they can do a good bit of storytelling, I dont care how old you are. To me, all of the older guys in WWE can still do that. And all of the guys on that list for TNA sans the Nasty Boys can do that as well imo. So... I dont care. I never got the big fuss about age in wrestling. Ric Flair and Hogan will wrestle again. It will happen. Hogan can't even lift his legs. He can barely move. Kevin Nash can barely walk. Scott Hall can't even throw a punch properly. Bret Hart, a former stroke victim throws a better punch than Hall. Not trying to be funny. It's a fact. Waltman can still go. The Nasties are awful. Foley in the ring has not been a pleasant sight. He is overweight and can't move. They were old 10 years ago. These guys cannot work a match. Nobody wants to see them in the ring. I want to see Beer Money, and Daniels, and Angle. The men on that list are way past their prime. WAY past it. Step aside please. The problem IS their age because it means they have been hogging tv time for most of their careers. It's over guys. I don't want to watch Ric Flair falling all over the place, Hogan limping with every step and Scott Hall in an old sweat shirt and jeans, throwing knife edge chops in a street fight. I want to see Hernandez, Beer Money and Pope tear the house down, like you know they can. The only man on that list that can remotely go in the ring is Waltman, and that still doesn't mean I wanna see him in the ring. These guys have deone everything they have needed to do in wrestling. Their act is old. I understand it can be hard to give it up, but seriously, think about the guys who can bring it in that ring. Think about the guys who might not have a lot of time left to show off what they can do. The future of your company is not with guys from the past. I'm not bashing old people, or older wrestlers. I know they still have a passion for it, but jeez guys, your bodies just cant do it. Look at WCW. The radicalz left, Jericho left and a number of other stars because the older guys were hogging it all. I don't want TNA going down that road. It is frustrating because they have the guys there, but they take a back seat to Sting,Hogan, Flair and the gang. Which older guys are dominating, though? Hogan and Flair are more in non-wrestler roles. Hall and Waltman barely wrestle, and are just involved in their feud with Nash and Young. Nasties are the same,except it's with Team 3D. Who are the people getting buried? All of the titles and big moments in the company focus around the young guys, or guys who can go in the ring. It seems like people just like to pick a few bad parts of teh show and attribute it to everything. |
|
|
|
Post by Back to being Cenanuff on Mar 16, 2010 19:15:01 GMT -5
They're doing a live show and taping a show after it, so last night's show had last week's ideas driving it. I'm going to wait a couple more cycles to see if they respond to the ratings drop by changing something...anything...before I say they failed.
|
|
|
|
Post by forgottensinpwf on Mar 16, 2010 19:15:57 GMT -5
skimmed through it today, and other than Ric busting himself open I didn't care for the show. That said, I think TNA needs to kill the taped shows.
|
|
Greer
Unicron
Points. Don't. Matter.
Posts: 3,199
|
Post by Greer on Mar 16, 2010 19:16:09 GMT -5
Ric Flair and Hogan will wrestle again. It will happen. Hogan can't even lift his legs. He can barely move. Kevin Nash can barely walk. Scott Hall can't even throw a punch properly. Bret Hart, a former stroke victim throws a better punch than Hall. Not trying to be funny. It's a fact. Waltman can still go. The Nasties are awful. Foley in the ring has not been a pleasant sight. He is overweight and can't move. They were old 10 years ago. These guys cannot work a match. Nobody wants to see them in the ring. I want to see Beer Money, and Daniels, and Angle. The men on that list are way past their prime. WAY past it. Step aside please. The problem IS their age because it means they have been hogging tv time for most of their careers. It's over guys. I don't want to watch Ric Flair falling all over the place, Hogan limping with every step and Scott Hall in an old sweat shirt and jeans, throwing knife edge chops in a street fight. I want to see Hernandez, Beer Money and Pope tear the house down, like you know they can. The only man on that list that can remotely go in the ring is Waltman, and that still doesn't mean I wanna see him in the ring. These guys have deone everything they have needed to do in wrestling. Their act is old. I understand it can be hard to give it up, but seriously, think about the guys who can bring it in that ring. Think about the guys who might not have a lot of time left to show off what they can do. The future of your company is not with guys from the past. I'm not bashing old people, or older wrestlers. I know they still have a passion for it, but jeez guys, your bodies just cant do it. Look at WCW. The radicalz left, Jericho left and a number of other stars because the older guys were hogging it all. I don't want TNA going down that road. It is frustrating because they have the guys there, but they take a back seat to Sting,Hogan, Flair and the gang. Which older guys are dominating, though? Hogan and Flair are more in non-wrestler roles. Hall and Waltman barely wrestle, and are just involved in their feud with Nash and Young. Nasties are the same,except it's with Team 3D. Who are the people getting buried? All of the titles and big moments in the company focus around the young guys, or guys who can go in the ring. It seems like people just like to pick a few bad parts of teh show and attribute it to everything. What storylines have been dominating the show? Hogan/Bischoff vs Sting (w/ RVD on the side) The Nasty Boys vs 3D Jeff Jarret and Bischoff Foley and Bischoff The Band turmoil (w/ Eric Young on the side) Why is Shannon Moore getting a title shot over the other X division guys who have been there forever? AJ is the champ, but at this point you would think Flair is the champion since he does everything while AJ nods in approval. Where are the Motor City Machine Guns by the way? Do they exist? Are they gonna come out next week and turn heel like Beer Money because they werent getting tv time either? Are the young guys getting buried? Technically yes, because they barely get TV time over the older guys. |
|
|
|
Post by Seth Drakin of Monster Crap on Mar 16, 2010 19:17:08 GMT -5
Then you fail for starting during WWE's hottest period. WCW at least knew that starting Monday Nitro on WWE's best time was foolish, and yet TNA is expecting to "dominate" as Tazz would say. The only reason TNA did this was so they could have excuses when they failed. Keep continuing with the excuses and in no time, you will fail. You have to accept failure before its too late. Who is to say they are failing though? Spike says they are happy and Dixie doesn't seem mad. The only people crapping on this are a vocal few on the net. Reality says they are failing. And to be honest, that support from Spike is going to wane in time. Spike is a TV business and if you are not putting eyes to their station during that time. If this is what keeps you happy, then I would hate to see what makes you miserable. |
|
|
|
Post by donners on Mar 16, 2010 19:17:38 GMT -5
When people call TNA non-sensical, I think it comes from the fact that everything happens so quick and so often that any event just loses all meaning. People call Raw stale, or paint by numbers, but it's delibrately like that. You don't have to think so much, and any event has as much significance as it should have. Raw is constantly telling stories, but in a subtle way that isn't as in your face as TNA. For instance, Austin simply walking out of the ring without a fuss to let Cena speak is a subtle story in itself, Austin acknowledging who the man in the company currently is. If that was TNA, they would have had some faux argument break out and you'd be unsure of who to cheer for, and all the while the focus could have been on something else. Precisely. Everything is being thrown against the wall now to see if it sticks. It doesn't feel like there is time for the effects to sink in or be given any sort of weight. It's just a whole bunch of things that happen, and you're thrown straight into the next moment with no time to absorb it. Matches seem utterly random, or are simply there for a post-match beatdown. Angles are either undersold or outright ignored by the commentators and others (prime example: Joe). I still remember vividly moments in the Frontline v MEM story where 3D turned on MEM, Steiner returned, the audience hanging on every word of a promo from Angle... Impact certainly had its flaws then, but it was still compelling to me. That is no longer the case. |
|
