|
Post by Ryushinku on Jul 14, 2010 4:58:02 GMT -5
You know, even for Abyss, that last segment was a DUMB move. What the hell was he thinking? Well he wasn't thinking, obviously...did Hogan's "John Cena" praise go to his head and he thought he could beat up several guys at once?
Sounds like they did say ECW by name a few times. That, they may be able to get away with. It'll be a lot more interesting if they actually get the ECW name down in print or promotion to sell the PPV.
|
|
|
Post by slickster on Jul 14, 2010 5:33:16 GMT -5
Will WWE send out C+D letters today or wait until after it airs to really nail them?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2010 6:10:13 GMT -5
So are the Dudleys "them" or what?
|
|
pacino
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,504
|
Post by pacino on Jul 14, 2010 6:36:12 GMT -5
There is nothing to cease and desist.
|
|
josh
Bubba Ho-Tep
Posts: 604
|
Post by josh on Jul 14, 2010 7:06:09 GMT -5
That was hardly a WWE dig, it was actually a reference to how their main event scene repeats matches, including matches we've gotten on free TV. I never said it was a bad thing, so quit trying to spin my words around. I disagree with your statement that if they threw it on a PPV even a few months down the line it'd hurt the build as long as the build was good. The build to a PPV is what matters, I don't care if I saw the match two weeks ago(Angle/AJ on the Jan 4th show and again at Genesis and those weren't even their first two encounters) is the perfect example of this. I've never once in my entire existence claimed TNA was perfect, if you'll go over my posts I even acknowledge their obvious criticism targets but I say this isn't one of them. So don't twist my words or ignore certain things I say to try to help your point out. Bringing up the stale-WWE main event scene in a TNA thread to boost one's argument is pretty much a dig, no matter how it's spun. I'm not trying to be personal, and I guess it's hard to detect emotion through the internet, but I do agree with you to an extent. However, it does seem that you've taken a lot of the TNA criticism lately as a personal offense, which is nowhere near people are going with their complaints. If Hardy/Joe was to happen in a few months, they can go back to this match as a spawn point for it. Thing is, imagine if they had a PPV time-limit draw. It'd be that much more important than a random throwaway Impact match. One other thing you state is how you wouldn't care if you'd already seen the match before, it wouldn't matter. That's fine and dandy, but I'd liken it to you already having made up your mind on watching TNA PPV's regardless. TNA's buyrates (or fictional buyrates) are so low right now, and this is probably one of the big reasons. Nothing seems important. And I'm sure the ones who support TNA all the way will order the shows no matter what's on them. WWE has the same fans, that's how they never get below 100,000 buys. But what TNA should shoot for, further than just their die-hard audience, is the rest of the wrestling fans out there. While someone who is following TNA every week and accepting it for what it is, there's seemingly twice as many people who can be swayed or pushed away based on how the television plays out. So throwing out PPV-calibur matches on Impact serves as a catch 22 of sorts. It's true that their TV show can build the reputation of putting out the best matches, and that's good to a point. But then it makes the PPV's seem essentially worthless, moreso, because they're not treated as important as their TV show. I'm well aware of WHY things are like this with TNA, but I'm positive that the writers are smart enough to realize that they can maximize their PPV potential if they save the big matches for the big shows. That would make PPV's seem important, and if they build up matches on television coherently, then Impact would also serve it's purpose to get you to buy the PPV. Something they havent' really done. It would be a dig if I had said it was a bad thing...but I didn't. Some of the biggest matches in wrestling history were repeats but nobody cared because they were booked properly. Rock/Austin at WM XV(NOT their first meeting), XVII and XIX are PERFECT examples. Never once did I slam them or "dig" at them, so I don't know where you're getting that at. As far as everything else I really disagree that this is hurting PPV buys at all. The problem with PPVs is lack of promotion and usually interesting storylines flowing into it.
|
|
|
Post by renzino on Jul 14, 2010 7:09:50 GMT -5
I should have known that they were going to give Madison the KO title back. So what was the point of the title change at Victory Road? I guess just so Angelina Love can say she's a 4 time KO champion.
You know I really have no more expections when it comes to storylines and angles for the KOs anymore, but I hope that if Velvet does turn face she is allowed to get some payback on Madison.
I wonder if Daffney will get involved in this angle? Because she needs something to do.
As for the mystery biker if it is Tara it sill makes no sense for her to help Madison at all.
|
|
josh
Bubba Ho-Tep
Posts: 604
|
Post by josh on Jul 14, 2010 7:13:22 GMT -5
I should have known that they were going to give Madison the KO title back. So what was the point of the title change at Victory Road? I guess just so Angelina Love can say she's a 4 time KO champion. You know I really have no more expections when it comes to storylines and angles for the KOs anymore, but I hope that if Velvet does turn face she is allowed to get some payback on Madison. I wonder if Daffney will get involved in this angle? Because she needs something to do. As for the mystery biker if it is Tara it sill makes no sense for her to help Madison at all. I doubt Angelina's latest "reign" will be recognized as a real title run and it'll be treated like the decision was reversed or Madison retained or whatever. We'll see about Madison/Tara, hope they'll have a good reason for it.
|
|
|
Post by Can you afford to pay me, Gah on Jul 14, 2010 7:16:57 GMT -5
I should have known that they were going to give Madison the KO title back. So what was the point of the title change at Victory Road? I guess just so Angelina Love can say she's a 4 time KO champion. You know I really have no more expections when it comes to storylines and angles for the KOs anymore, but I hope that if Velvet does turn face she is allowed to get some payback on Madison. I wonder if Daffney will get involved in this angle? Because she needs something to do. As for the mystery biker if it is Tara it sill makes no sense for her to help Madison at all. I doubt Angelina's latest "reign" will be recognized as a real title run and it'll be treated like the decision was reversed or Madison retained or whatever. We'll see about Madison/Tara, hope they'll have a good reason for it. Giving the PPV match no point what so ever as well.
|
|
josh
Bubba Ho-Tep
Posts: 604
|
Post by josh on Jul 14, 2010 7:19:52 GMT -5
I doubt Angelina's latest "reign" will be recognized as a real title run and it'll be treated like the decision was reversed or Madison retained or whatever. We'll see about Madison/Tara, hope they'll have a good reason for it. Giving the PPV match no point what so ever as well. NO, it gave us a good wrestling match. Oh, wait... Um, it gave us the awesome debut of biker chick! Oh, wait... Um...we got to see their entrances I guess?
|
|
|
Post by nerdinitupagain on Jul 14, 2010 7:20:54 GMT -5
I believe mentioning another person's trademark is fine especially when using in a historical sense. If they talk about what happened in ECW or to ECW, I don't think there's any treading on the trademark. Now, start calling something the "ECW Stable" on air or use ECW to promote anything... then yeah.. then you get a little more dicye on that.
|
|
|
Post by Can you afford to pay me, Gah on Jul 14, 2010 7:38:59 GMT -5
The Eddie Guerrero tribute show matches did not count for a vast majority of the fans, like how nobody can recall the matches on Tribute to the Troops shows. It's a lot easier to sell a match on 'first time ever' speculation ("What will happen? How will their contrasting styles work? Who is the bigger star in TNA?") than on having to spend a month writing decent angles for it on TV. 'First time ever' booking is pretty much foolproof: don't have them make extended contact and have your announcers/video production guys put the two over as awesome. It's just that when TNA did mainly squash and jobber matches people complained, when they up it to big matches(which I prefer), they complain. People didn't blast WWE for giving us Jericho/Danielson, did they? Danielson/Batista? I'd be willing to bet that pretty soon we would have gotten Danielson/Cena and not on PPV. TNA is in the kind of situation where they can do no right. It kinda different with though examples. Daniel Bryan as his name was doesn't have the same effect. If a fan just reads Daniel Bryan on paper there not going to know who it is right away. Plus Bryan Danielson was not booked as a major player. He was booked as a rookie who goes winless. Trust me the WWE got plenty of blasting on how they used him. Everytime he lost people complained. It also different because the WWE isn't suffering on making money. When you have reports of less then 10,000 PPV buys when TNA used to get close to 40,000. You need those first time matches to boast the PPVs where you make money on. It doesn't matter the level of star power here. MEer is a MEer and when you have two of them going at it for the first time. You sell it. The WWE does that. Daniel Bryan was not booked as a MEer or Major player. Look at history. These big matches first time was on PPV. Hart vs. Austin. Austin vs. Taker. HBK vs. Taker, HHH vs. Taker, Cena vs. Edge, Orton vs. HHH, HHH vs. Batista, Warrior vs. Savage, Bret vs. Owen, Angle vs. Jericho, Angle vs. Rock, Angle vs. Taker, Angle vs. HHH, and the list goes on and on. TNA hardly has had dream matches PPV first. Then Impact. RVD vs. Styles, Joe vs. RVD, Joe vs. Hardy (These are dream matches in TNA that happened this year on Impact.) One of which the rematch went on PPV which I'm beating didn't draw as well as it couple of been as a first timer. Bringing up the stale-WWE main event scene in a TNA thread to boost one's argument is pretty much a dig, no matter how it's spun. I'm not trying to be personal, and I guess it's hard to detect emotion through the internet, but I do agree with you to an extent. However, it does seem that you've taken a lot of the TNA criticism lately as a personal offense, which is nowhere near people are going with their complaints. If Hardy/Joe was to happen in a few months, they can go back to this match as a spawn point for it. Thing is, imagine if they had a PPV time-limit draw. It'd be that much more important than a random throwaway Impact match. One other thing you state is how you wouldn't care if you'd already seen the match before, it wouldn't matter. That's fine and dandy, but I'd liken it to you already having made up your mind on watching TNA PPV's regardless. TNA's buyrates (or fictional buyrates) are so low right now, and this is probably one of the big reasons. Nothing seems important. And I'm sure the ones who support TNA all the way will order the shows no matter what's on them. WWE has the same fans, that's how they never get below 100,000 buys. But what TNA should shoot for, further than just their die-hard audience, is the rest of the wrestling fans out there. While someone who is following TNA every week and accepting it for what it is, there's seemingly twice as many people who can be swayed or pushed away based on how the television plays out. So throwing out PPV-calibur matches on Impact serves as a catch 22 of sorts. It's true that their TV show can build the reputation of putting out the best matches, and that's good to a point. But then it makes the PPV's seem essentially worthless, moreso, because they're not treated as important as their TV show. I'm well aware of WHY things are like this with TNA, but I'm positive that the writers are smart enough to realize that they can maximize their PPV potential if they save the big matches for the big shows. That would make PPV's seem important, and if they build up matches on television coherently, then Impact would also serve it's purpose to get you to buy the PPV. Something they havent' really done. It would be a dig if I had said it was a bad thing...but I didn't. Some of the biggest matches in wrestling history were repeats but nobody cared because they were booked properly. Rock/Austin at WM XV(NOT their first meeting), XVII and XIX are PERFECT examples. Never once did I slam them or "dig" at them, so I don't know where you're getting that at. As far as everything else I really disagree that this is hurting PPV buys at all. The problem with PPVs is lack of promotion and usually interesting storylines flowing into it. To be far though. There first meeting was on PPV. But it was different because it was like a year and a half between them and both man became huge stars in that time. Rock and Austin was booked great and didn't have random matches going into them against each other.
|
|
|
Post by Perpetual Nirvana on Jul 14, 2010 8:14:17 GMT -5
I wonder if Daffney will get involved in this angle? Because she needs something to do. This is that point I was concerned with. With Sarita turning and the Mystery Women, she's what, fifth, sixth top heel now? I doubt they care enough to put the time and energy into turning her face. That TNA seemingly don't give a damn about a women who literally busted herself up for them pisses me off.
|
|
|
Post by renzino on Jul 14, 2010 8:54:46 GMT -5
^ I think a Daffney face turn could work if TNA pulled the trigger on it. The crowd was really behind her in the match she had against Angelina last week.
Speaking of Angelina is it me or does she still come off more like a heel than a face. The only difference I have seen in her personality is that she hates TBP now.
If they go through with it I feel Velvet could pull off a face turn better than Angelina. Because it seems for the longest that the crowd wants to cheer for her.
|
|
|
Post by cabbageboy on Jul 14, 2010 9:34:59 GMT -5
Angelina Love is a dreadful babyface. She just doesn't LOOK like a babyface, simply looking too scuzzy and skanky for the role. I still don't understand why she is on the outs with the BP to begin with. She had visa problems...so what? Sky and Rayne turned on her over that? The best face of the lot is probably Lacey, but she's a hideous wrestler.
It's time to just blow up the Knockouts division. I read some other thread that said Dreamer wanted TNA to bring back Alisa Flash, sign Sara Del Rey, and so on. Who is booking this division anyway? It seems like once they did the whole Lockbox Challenge on Impact that led to Love winning the belt by opening a box, the entire division has jumped the shark.
|
|
Jimmy
Grimlock
Posts: 13,317
|
Post by Jimmy on Jul 14, 2010 12:06:22 GMT -5
I remember saying months and months ago that no matter how bad TNA's booking has got at times, it was never at that WCW 1999/2000 point of no return.
They are rapidly approaching that territory.
|
|
|
Post by Perpetual Nirvana on Jul 14, 2010 13:16:15 GMT -5
^ I think a Daffney face turn could work if TNA pulled the trigger on it. The crowd was really behind her in the match she had against Angelina last week. She'd still be behind whatever version of the BP they push as the faces but at least she'd be doing something for a while. But I doubt it'd work. It's the problem I see with Angelina, I doubt they'd know how to book her as a face after she's played a heel for so long. I remember saying months and months ago that no matter how bad TNA's booking has got at times, it was never at that WCW 1999/2000 point of no return. They are rapidly approaching that territory. It's not THAT bad. I mean I doubt they're losing $60 million a year.
|
|
|
Post by Error on Jul 14, 2010 14:12:44 GMT -5
There is nothing to cease and desist. You'd be surprised what WWE will do. Borash and Hardcore Homecoming got several over everything from calling the Arena "the ECW Arena" to fans chanting ECW during the show.
|
|
|
Post by dh03grad on Jul 14, 2010 14:14:21 GMT -5
I believe mentioning another person's trademark is fine especially when using in a historical sense. If they talk about what happened in ECW or to ECW, I don't think there's any treading on the trademark. Now, start calling something the "ECW Stable" on air or use ECW to promote anything... then yeah.. then you get a little more dicye on that. Hall and Nash never actually said 'WWF' or that they were sent from there. Vince still sued and they had to specifically state on the GAB that they didnt work for the WWF. TNA is using WWE's trademark to specifically push a storyline and a pay per view.
|
|
|
Post by Perpetual Nirvana on Jul 14, 2010 14:23:59 GMT -5
I believe mentioning another person's trademark is fine especially when using in a historical sense. If they talk about what happened in ECW or to ECW, I don't think there's any treading on the trademark. Now, start calling something the "ECW Stable" on air or use ECW to promote anything... then yeah.. then you get a little more dicye on that. Hall and Nash never actually said 'WWF' or that they were sent from there. Vince still sued and they had to specifically state on the GAB that they didnt work for the WWF. TNA is using WWE's trademark to specifically push a storyline and a pay per view. Honestly, Vince sued over the Outsiders because WCW started to kick his rearend and he was clutching at whatever he could get. This was around the time the "Billionare Ted" skits started airing if I recall. Bischoff did the same thing when the roles were reversed, suing over the DX "invasion". Also WCW did this first. They sued the WWF when Flair showed up in '91. I don't think he was ever called the WCW Champion, just the "real world's champion".
|
|
|
Post by slickster on Jul 14, 2010 14:30:10 GMT -5
Hall and Nash never actually said 'WWF' or that they were sent from there. Vince still sued and they had to specifically state on the GAB that they didnt work for the WWF. TNA is using WWE's trademark to specifically push a storyline and a pay per view. Honestly, Vince sued over the Outsiders because WCW started to kick his rearend and he was clutching at whatever he could get. This was around the time the "Billionare Ted" skits started airing if I recall. Bischoff did the same thing when the roles were reversed. Um, WWE WON the court case re: the Outsiders. They won, not because the judge took pity on them but because WCW was indeed unfairly implying a direct connection to WWE and they were able to prove it in court. Don't make it sound like WWE's Evil Lawyers bribed a judge.
|
|