|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Mar 16, 2010 20:33:25 GMT -5
Bullcrap. It's all about the new guys with the ESTABLISHED PEOPLE!. That's the problem. If NXT was just new guys, it'd be just them wrestling, doing their own little feuds and PPV matches instead of using guys from the other shows to help them. EDIT: and considering their ratings have dropped 3 weeks since, maybe they should quit, since they're FAILURES and all.....  Another of the strawman arguments I hate. If NXT was doing what TNA is now, they wouldn't be just pairing Daniel Bryan with Miz, they'd be trying to make Daniel Bryan INTO Miz, like TNA is trying to do with AJ. Doing a character you don't originate and don't have an organic connection with is never a good idea. How many people honestly thought "gee, this guy is sort of like Flair" when they looked at AJ? Let AJ get over as AJ, not "that guy who tries to act like Flair but he's not as cool" (which most fans will likely think of him as when they try to watch him). And if this is as good as they can get with RVD, Flair, Anderson, Angle, Hogan AND Jeff Hardy (the 2nd hottest babyface in North America last year)...they should probably start rethinking the "value" that their expensive acquisitions produce. Who said this would be as good as they got? It always seems like that TNA can't expand any more than they can just cause someone here thinks so. People want to point out how it's all a failure when nothing's been settled yet, before any actual progress or such can be seen anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by Orange on Mar 16, 2010 20:33:26 GMT -5
But I'm not the one thats going to fix them, so why should I spend all of my time disliking something and dissecting whats wrong with everything instead of enjoying what I can about it? Thats pretty much how I look at it. Im sure most people who watch it enjoy SOMETHING about it, or else why watch it? It's such a sinking feeling after watching a show that I enjoyed to get online to talk about it, and only encounter constant negativity about 99% of the stuff I liked. (I realize someone will just throw the "Its the internet, it comes with the territory! You dont have to read the forums!" argument at me, and Id gladly take your advice and stop... If I knew anyone else that liked wrestling that I could have a conversation with without wanting to repeatedly stab myself) Its just like, there are some people who have been on this board for over 3 years doing nothing but crapping on the product and saying what SHOULD be going on. Whats the point? Sooner or later, youd think theyd realize that its never going to be what they want it to be, and that sometimes, something just isnt your cup of tea. There are several other products out there that I'm sure would save their heads from repeated slams against the table. Uhg, apologies for the rant. Just frustrated and annoyed by the overwhelmingly grim outlook towards things by a lot of people. Their is a grim outlook because there will be grim results if they don't fix their problems. I'm not a booker and obviously I cant fix TNA, but if I see things that in my opinion suck, I'm gonna say it and say why. I'm not gonna just stop watching it completely because they have some guys I wanna see, but when those guys are thrown into crap, and the show isnt very good, then I'm gonna mention it. Ok I've seen you post in here a lot and I feel it necessary to ask where did your sig come from? Is it a real picture of Jericho that people have photoshopped? |
|
Greer
Unicron
Points. Don't. Matter.
Posts: 3,199
|
Post by Greer on Mar 16, 2010 20:34:51 GMT -5
The number one angle in the company is Hulk Hogan vs Sting. The number one storyline is Hulk Hogan vs Sting which will lead to a Hogan/Sting match. That's your primary angle. Why? Why does that need to be the primary angle of the show and the company? There are other angles, but they are not very interesting. Angle/Anderson and this medal thing is just silly and repetitive. Beer Money turning heel is inexplicable and without good reason. Jeff Jarret as the "poor soul fighting for his job" is not interesting or new. Pope and Wolfe have 5 minute matches every week. Foley and Bischoff is pointless and if it leads to Foley/Jarret vs Beer Money...so what? I dont wanna see Jarret or Foley in the ring. By the way, your explanation of one show having a primary focus each week is exactly whats wrong with TNA. There is no focus. One week they wanna have the MCMG on the show, the next week they are nowhere to be found. One week they focus on the X Division, the next week they wont have one single X Division match. It's too inconsistent. Right now the focus of the company is on Sting/Hogan. No excuse for that The real problem here is that, you keep saying it's all about the old guys, yet when I point out it isn't, you just say it doesn't matter to you. All you seem to focus on is Sting vs. Hogan, which just happened last week. And all you can point is how things CAN happen. Hogan CAN get back in the ring, and Hogan CAN do this and that to annoy you. It's pretty much just going by just hate for the person rather than what is actually happening on the screen. Hulk Hogan was my hero growing up. Always loved the guy and always will. He was my superman honestly. I don't hate Hogan, but honestly we know he will wrestle again. When he first came to TNA, did you honestly think he would not have a match? I'm literally asking you that. Please answer. When did I say "it doesn't matter" to me? I said the focus of the show is on Bischoff/Foley, Sting/Hogan, Bischoff/Jarret. The focus, meaning the main things they are putting over right now. Of course there are other angles, but they are taking a backseat to those 3 primary angle it seems, and those other angles which I explained are not interesting. |
|
Greer
Unicron
Points. Don't. Matter.
Posts: 3,199
|
Post by Greer on Mar 16, 2010 20:37:52 GMT -5
Their is a grim outlook because there will be grim results if they don't fix their problems. I'm not a booker and obviously I cant fix TNA, but if I see things that in my opinion suck, I'm gonna say it and say why. I'm not gonna just stop watching it completely because they have some guys I wanna see, but when those guys are thrown into crap, and the show isnt very good, then I'm gonna mention it. Ok I've seen you post in here a lot and I feel it necessary to ask where did your sig come from? Is it a real picture of Jericho that people have photoshopped? To my knowledge it is a real photo of Jericho which I obtained from the internetzzzzz some time back. The sign he is holding however, is sadly a fake. |
|
AriadosMan
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Your friendly neighborhood superhero
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by AriadosMan on Mar 16, 2010 20:39:02 GMT -5
Another of the strawman arguments I hate. If NXT was doing what TNA is now, they wouldn't be just pairing Daniel Bryan with Miz, they'd be trying to make Daniel Bryan INTO Miz, like TNA is trying to do with AJ. Doing a character you don't originate and don't have an organic connection with is never a good idea. How many people honestly thought "gee, this guy is sort of like Flair" when they looked at AJ? Let AJ get over as AJ, not "that guy who tries to act like Flair but he's not as cool" (which most fans will likely think of him as when they try to watch him). And if this is as good as they can get with RVD, Flair, Anderson, Angle, Hogan AND Jeff Hardy (the 2nd hottest babyface in North America last year)...they should probably start rethinking the "value" that their expensive acquisitions produce. Who said this would be as good as they got? It always seems like that TNA can't expand any more than they can just cause someone here thinks so. People want to point out how it's all a failure when nothing's been settled yet, before any actual progress or such can be seen anyway. Ultimately, they will need better ratings BEFORE, rather than after, they start an expansion. I don't think most people were seriously demanding a TNA expansion, most of the people who watch wrestling only know (or care about) WWE. This is not a "1996" situation where a channel was supported by hordes of screaming wrestling fans (the old Turner stations), TNA is a nice product at best. I honestly think ECW circa 1996 had more "buzz" from the wrestling demos than TNA does now. Also, the quarter breakdowns will be interesting. If TNA lost viewers over the show again, it will be a sign that it is not keeping its audience very well. And WWE was the one that was supposed to have PO'ed its fanbase. |
|
|
|
Post by Orange on Mar 16, 2010 20:40:26 GMT -5
I have something else to say regarding this post apocalyptic TNA vision some people have.
TNA has never had amazing ratings, that's just a fact. On Saturdays and some Thursdays they were always under 1, with 0.6, 0.7 it goes on and on. Some people are acting like TNA had 4.5 on Thursdays and now these 1.0's and 0.8's are brand new and a reason to panic. Look how much TNA has grown since it's creation, without the stellar ratings being there they've done pretty well for themselves. From the Asylum and FSN to the iMPACT! Zone and Spike TV, from Saturdays to Thursdays, from 1 hour to 2, from Jim Cornette to Hogan, and from Thursdays to Mondays everyone has wanted to hit the panic switch and declare TNA dead in the water.
If it's one thing we can learn from TNA is that it's a slow growing company, and if some of these wrestlers thought TNA had no future like some of the IWC does, then fresh young workers like Anderson, Wolfe (who very easily could've chose WWE over TNA), Burke, all these guys would have never come in, and the homegrown guys would have jumped ship long ago. Obviously TNA is doing well enough for Spike TV to constantly back it, and give it opportunity after opportunity to keep on growing. The only time I'll believe that TNA is dead is when I read "TNA ceases operations", and until then I guess I'll be in the minority that believes TNA is doing okay for themselves right now.
EDIT - To Greer thank you, I'd like to believe that the sign said "other bands are hypocrites and maggots, buy Fozzy disks!" ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by donners on Mar 16, 2010 20:41:50 GMT -5
Also, the quarter breakdowns will be interesting. If TNA lost viewers over the show again, it will be a sign that it is not keeping its audience very well. And WWE was the one that was supposed to have PO'ed its fanbase. They're a few pages back. They lost 15%. |
|
AriadosMan
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Your friendly neighborhood superhero
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by AriadosMan on Mar 16, 2010 20:43:46 GMT -5
Also, the quarter breakdowns will be interesting. If TNA lost viewers over the show again, it will be a sign that it is not keeping its audience very well. And WWE was the one that was supposed to have PO'ed its fanbase. They're a few pages back. They lost 15%. Off to go see how much the E lost then on the other board. Maybe it was a slack night for wrestling, but I heard Austin wasn't even in many segs... EDIT: WWE's rating actually went up. Maybe TNA should do 8-10 if they really want to continue this "war"? |
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Mar 16, 2010 20:49:00 GMT -5
Spike and Dixie being happy with the rating means absolutely nothing. I commend Spike TV for having TNA's back presumably for the long haul but they are enablers and as long as there are eyes on Spike's channel and the rating is better than what would usually be there than they are content and it's not like they have so much better original programming to put on in it's spot. The amount of money, time, hype and promotion put into making Hogan coming to TNA seem like the best thing since sliced bread and vaginas makes it a clear FAILURE. They were getting 0.8 ratings in 2005 with less stars, worst time slots and without 2 hours. They have come full circle. No one is expecting them to get 3s or 4s and it is possible that their rating will grow in time (which people have been saying forever) but the numbers put everything in black and white and make it clear for everyone to see that Hogan and the gang have been virtually meaningless and a waste of time, money and effort. People know TNA exists, TNA has no problem getting people to watch but they have a hard time keeping them. This would tell some people that the product itself is the problem but TNA never thinks that and always has a scapegoat handy so they don't have to own up to anything. Saying that a run is a failure for one bad moment is almost as shortsighted as calling a company horrible for one bad angle. That's the issue. People don't wait for the outcomes to be developed. the show can drop more or go higher, but people will keep saying how much it's a failure every step of the way instead of waiting to see how it develops later on. |
|
|
|
Post by Seth Drakin of Monster Crap on Mar 16, 2010 20:49:18 GMT -5
I think the big thing now will be the NXT rating and if the NXT rating gets higher than TNA Impact on the "night for wrestling", TNA may just be the USFL to WWE's NFL.
|
|
Dub H
Crow T. Robot
Captain Pixel: the Game Master
I ❤ Aniki
Posts: 48,530
|
Post by Dub H on Mar 16, 2010 20:50:18 GMT -5
I think the big thing now will be the NXT rating and if the NXT rating gets higher than TNA Impact on the "night for wrestling", TNA may just be the USFL to WWE's NFL. [This is not fair You are comparing TNA to the best wrestling show on television! |
|
|
|
Post by donners on Mar 16, 2010 20:50:19 GMT -5
I have something else to say regarding this post apocalyptic TNA vision some people have. TNA has never had amazing ratings, that's just a fact. On Saturdays and some Thursdays they were always under 1, with 0.6, 0.7 it goes on and on. Some people are acting like TNA had 4.5 on Thursdays and now these 1.0's and 0.8's are brand new and a reason to panic. Look how much TNA has grown since it's creation, without the stellar ratings being there they've done pretty well for themselves. From the Asylum and FSN to the iMPACT! Zone and Spike TV, from Saturdays to Thursdays, from 1 hour to 2, from Jim Cornette to Hogan, and from Thursdays to Mondays everyone has wanted to hit the panic switch and declare TNA dead in the water. If it's one thing we can learn from TNA is that it's a slow growing company, and if some of these wrestlers thought TNA had no future like some of the IWC does, then fresh young workers like Anderson, Wolfe (who very easily could've chose WWE over TNA), Burke, all these guys would have never come in, and the homegrown guys would have jumped ship long ago. Obviously TNA is doing well enough for Spike TV to constantly back it, and give it opportunity after opportunity to keep on growing. The only time I'll believe that TNA is dead is when I read "TNA ceases operations", and until then I guess I'll be in the minority that believes TNA is doing okay for themselves right now. This is the lowest rating since 2006 (excluding the four-hour New Year's show). That is not progress. It is going backwards. It's not just the competition either - they had fallen back to 1.1 with the last two Thursday shows. TNA has gone through a lot of transitions, but now they have everything they wanted - prime time, stars, advertising, 2-hour show, international exposure... The excuses have dried up. If they can't make good on all that they have been given, then that will be the end. A couple of ratings do not mean that is inevitable, but it is a move down a very bad path. |
|
Dub H
Crow T. Robot
Captain Pixel: the Game Master
I ❤ Aniki
Posts: 48,530
|
Post by Dub H on Mar 16, 2010 20:52:49 GMT -5
I have something else to say regarding this post apocalyptic TNA vision some people have. TNA has never had amazing ratings, that's just a fact. On Saturdays and some Thursdays they were always under 1, with 0.6, 0.7 it goes on and on. Some people are acting like TNA had 4.5 on Thursdays and now these 1.0's and 0.8's are brand new and a reason to panic. Look how much TNA has grown since it's creation, without the stellar ratings being there they've done pretty well for themselves. From the Asylum and FSN to the iMPACT! Zone and Spike TV, from Saturdays to Thursdays, from 1 hour to 2, from Jim Cornette to Hogan, and from Thursdays to Mondays everyone has wanted to hit the panic switch and declare TNA dead in the water. If it's one thing we can learn from TNA is that it's a slow growing company, and if some of these wrestlers thought TNA had no future like some of the IWC does, then fresh young workers like Anderson, Wolfe (who very easily could've chose WWE over TNA), Burke, all these guys would have never come in, and the homegrown guys would have jumped ship long ago. Obviously TNA is doing well enough for Spike TV to constantly back it, and give it opportunity after opportunity to keep on growing. The only time I'll believe that TNA is dead is when I read "TNA ceases operations", and until then I guess I'll be in the minority that believes TNA is doing okay for themselves right now. This is the lowest rating since 2006 (excluding the four-hour New Year's show). That is not progress. It is going backwards. It's not just the competition either - they had fallen back to 1.1 with the last two Thursday shows. TNA has gone through a lot of transitions, but now they have everything they wanted - prime time, stars, advertising, 2-hour show, international exposure... The excuses have dried up. If they can't make good on all that they have been given, then that will be the end. A couple of ratings do not mean that is inevitable, but it is a move down a very bad path. they have the right things But they are using the wrong ones,or on a wrong way |
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Mar 16, 2010 20:53:41 GMT -5
I have something else to say regarding this post apocalyptic TNA vision some people have. TNA has never had amazing ratings, that's just a fact. On Saturdays and some Thursdays they were always under 1, with 0.6, 0.7 it goes on and on. Some people are acting like TNA had 4.5 on Thursdays and now these 1.0's and 0.8's are brand new and a reason to panic. Look how much TNA has grown since it's creation, without the stellar ratings being there they've done pretty well for themselves. From the Asylum and FSN to the iMPACT! Zone and Spike TV, from Saturdays to Thursdays, from 1 hour to 2, from Jim Cornette to Hogan, and from Thursdays to Mondays everyone has wanted to hit the panic switch and declare TNA dead in the water. If it's one thing we can learn from TNA is that it's a slow growing company, and if some of these wrestlers thought TNA had no future like some of the IWC does, then fresh young workers like Anderson, Wolfe (who very easily could've chose WWE over TNA), Burke, all these guys would have never come in, and the homegrown guys would have jumped ship long ago. Obviously TNA is doing well enough for Spike TV to constantly back it, and give it opportunity after opportunity to keep on growing. The only time I'll believe that TNA is dead is when I read "TNA ceases operations", and until then I guess I'll be in the minority that believes TNA is doing okay for themselves right now. This is the lowest rating since 2006 (excluding the four-hour New Year's show). That is not progress. It is going backwards. It's not just the competition either - they had fallen back to 1.1 with the last two Thursday shows. TNA has gone through a lot of transitions, but now they have everything they wanted - prime time, stars, advertising, 2-hour show, international exposure... The excuses have dried up. If they can't make good on all that they have been given, then that will be the end. A couple of ratings do not mean that is inevitable, but it is a move down a very bad path. TNA has fallen down to levels like this before, and not just in 2006. A lot of similar problems like this happened recently, and people were calling for panic until the next show when it went back to normal. It's not a panic situation until it stays in that range,and we don't know if it will stay or drop until the next week rolls around, and the next, and the next, and the next. |
|
AriadosMan
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Your friendly neighborhood superhero
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by AriadosMan on Mar 16, 2010 20:54:01 GMT -5
I don't think "stars" are even worth that much in terms of TV views. They might be in terms of selling tickets to live shows, but most of TNA's stuff is still shot at the IMPACT Zone. The WWE name is worth more than any star...even Cena.
And Jeff SHOULD be a tremendous revenue engine and ratings draw...ugh.
|
|
|
|
Post by Seth Drakin of Monster Crap on Mar 16, 2010 20:55:27 GMT -5
I think the big thing now will be the NXT rating and if the NXT rating gets higher than TNA Impact on the "night for wrestling", TNA may just be the USFL to WWE's NFL. [This is not fair You are comparing TNA to the best wrestling show on television! No it is absolutely fair because ratings wise, NXT is WWE's C Show. If you cant even compete with the show, you should just get out of Monday Night so you can hope to save any type of paying fanbase. Sure Spike may have a thick skin on this, but you know who doesnt.....sponsors. |
|
Dub H
Crow T. Robot
Captain Pixel: the Game Master
I ❤ Aniki
Posts: 48,530
|
Post by Dub H on Mar 16, 2010 20:56:55 GMT -5
[This is not fair You are comparing TNA to the best wrestling show on television! No it is absolutely fair because ratings wise, NXT is WWE's C Show. If you cant even compete with the show, you should just get out of Monday Night so you can hope to save any type of paying fanbase. Sure Spike may have a thick skin on this, but you know who doesnt.....sponsors. That was a joke about how NXT is better than RAW,TNA and SD! But your points are valid |
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Mar 16, 2010 20:57:26 GMT -5
[This is not fair You are comparing TNA to the best wrestling show on television! No it is absolutely fair because ratings wise, NXT is WWE's C Show. If you cant even compete with the show, you should just get out of Monday Night so you can hope to save any type of paying fanbase. Sure Spike may have a thick skin on this, but you know who doesnt.....sponsors. That would be true if the show dropped from a 5.0 to a 0.8. iMPACT,though, has mostly hovered in that range of audience. |
|
|
|
Post by Seth Drakin of Monster Crap on Mar 16, 2010 20:58:05 GMT -5
No it is absolutely fair because ratings wise, NXT is WWE's C Show. If you cant even compete with the show, you should just get out of Monday Night so you can hope to save any type of paying fanbase. Sure Spike may have a thick skin on this, but you know who doesnt.....sponsors. That was a joke about how NXT is better than RAW,TNA and SD! But your points are valid And since from what I hear, John Cena will be appearing on NXT, WWE smells blood. |
|
|
|
Post by Clarence "Showstealer" Mason on Mar 16, 2010 20:59:30 GMT -5
I'm personally more intrested in the D show: Superstars and what they get in comparison. They did an 0.81 last week
|
|
