Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2013 10:08:16 GMT -5
Dolph Ziggler vs Daniel Bryan at Bragging Rights 2010 says hello. I don't follow WWE so I have 0.0 idea of what you are talking about. Well it was basically a great match with zero build or storyline behind it. Crowd ate it up.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2013 10:11:47 GMT -5
I would say wrestling matches are a high priority for wrestling shows, and that wrestling fans generally enjoy wrestling matches. If that were true the biggest stars of wrestling in the United States would be Bret Hart, Chris Benoit, Dean Malenko, Dynamite Kid, Lance Storm etc etc and not Hulk Hogan, The Rock, Stone Cold etc etc. No, those guys were huge stars because we wanted to see them kick the crap out of guys we hated and they had AMAZING charisma that was best shown off during matches. Just because I want wrestling matches, doesn't mean I want boring "technical" wrestling all the time. I want superheroes beating up villains. THAT'S what draws me in, not hearing them talk.
|
|
|
Post by ________ has left the building on Nov 30, 2013 22:16:38 GMT -5
A pro wrestling show without wrestling is like a porno without sex. TNA sometimes act like wrestling matches are hindering them and try to downplay it. They got people on the roster who can but on some epic matches to bring back interest in the company but rather give that time for Dixie chew the scenery with her acting.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Dec 1, 2013 13:39:39 GMT -5
Wrestling fans do care if there's a good amount of quality wrestling. What is the most loathed impact in TNA history? The show where the first hours only match was a fingerpoke of doom angle. Most loathed by the IWC. Wrestling matches generally don't matter to people. People only care about matches with some story behind it nobody cares about 2 guys going out and having a quality wrestling match. Let's be honest though, the IWC is the vast majority of who's watching TNA; so even if your argument is that "THOSE FANS" are the only ones that care, by and large, that's TNA's audience.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2013 19:41:56 GMT -5
Definatley more matches. I would push for 5 per show with 6 on occasion.
There is one thing, that TNA have started doing that will help them, is bringing in people to job for the main roster. However these jobbers shouldn't be in title matches or squash matches. I would have swapped Gail Kim with Lei'D Tapa and have her beat the jobbers with Gail watching.
WCW was the one who first put PPV matches on tv and it was one of the factors that made them no 1. Sadly they were the only company which could realistically put star vs star matches on tv, because they had a massive roster (over 250 wrestlers, most of which were names from the US, Mexico and Japan). WWE just didn't have the roster (and still doesn't) and thus used up a lot of feuds. ( A bad Kevin Nash joke from 1999: Nash 3:16. Hall: What? Nash: The number of times Steve Austin has wrestled the Undertaker this year)
Another example was back in 2011, when I asked why it was Cena confronting the returning CM Punk and not Mysterio. I was told they had already had 100 matches on Smackdown TNA had AJ Styles fight Daniels for almost 2 years. They now, cant ever use that match up again. No one is going to buy a ppv to see the match they had already seen 20 times for free.
As for promos...well the thing is. Once upon a time there were 3 guys who had amazing skill and charisma and were able to entertain very large crowds by talking. These 3 however didn't read scripts and didn't stare at a camera. They also didn't ignore the live crowd. Or in a certain former TNA Champion's case, tell the crowd chanting their name to be quiet. They interacted with the live crowd and played off the reactions. But it should be noted that no one else could really pull these promos off. The Rock walked to the ring in Toronto, to a massive babyface pop, and 20 seconds later, had more heel heat that anyone currently involved in wrestling. Austin always had the crowd going and Mick Foley was the master of the cheap pop.
But they were great at it, no one else has even come close. TNA has never and I mean ever, had anyone with that level of charisma and most likely never will (WWE would just sign them away). So why do it? The best TNA seems to get is mild applause 1 out of every 50 promos, with the rest starting a "boring" or "who cares" chant.
What TNA should do is use the same style of 5 minute backstage promo WWE used in the 80's, it would thus be sharper and more to the point. Have maybe 1 in ring segment on Impact and keep it short. TNA strengh is in ring, so damn well use it.
|
|
Glitch
Grimlock
Not Going To Die; Childs, we're goin' out to give Blair the test. If he tries to make it back here and we're not with him... burn him.
Watching you.
Posts: 12,787
|
Post by Glitch on Dec 1, 2013 23:20:07 GMT -5
TNA has never and I mean ever, had anyone with that level of charisma and most likely never will (WWE would just sign them away). So why do it? Ok, completely disagree with this statement. While I do agree that they need more matches and better quality of them, that doesn't mean they'll never have charismatic guys. The problem isn't that wwe can just sign them away.Wcw pretty much swiped all the wwf guys, and yet they still had Undertaker, Stone cold and the rock. There's only so many people that can fit in wwe's already bloated roster. Plus there's talented wrestlers that the wwe will dismiss without realizing their potential.
|
|
JoDaNa1281
Crow T. Robot
Jackie Daytona, Regular Human Bartender. #BLM
Posts: 41,977
|
Post by JoDaNa1281 on Dec 2, 2013 1:40:04 GMT -5
They usually do have a good amount of wrestling, the reason they didn't this week was because it was a holiday show.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2013 1:41:08 GMT -5
TNA has never and I mean ever, had anyone with that level of charisma and most likely never will (WWE would just sign them away). So why do it? Ok, completely disagree with this statement. While I do agree that they need more matches and better quality of them, that doesn't mean they'll never have charismatic guys. The problem isn't that wwe can just sign them away.Wcw pretty much swiped all the wwf guys, and yet they still had Undertaker, Stone cold and the rock. There's only so many people that can fit in wwe's already bloated roster. Plus there's talented wrestlers that the wwe will dismiss without realizing their potential. Is this part of your "Stand up to FAN" campaign? Because I'm in my rookie year and thus don't really count yet. Moving on. Back then, Austin hated WCW because they passed him over for old people with half of his talent...a lot. So I doubt Bishoff was going to get him back. Same with Foley. As for The Rock, WWE was back on track by the time he got hot and had him and everyone else who mattered locked up in long term contracts. There actually was a huge rumour that WCW had signed The Undertaker in 1999....but it was just Dustin Rhodes as Se7en...sigh. Moving on again. If TNA does produce the next big thing, he will immediately cause a jump in their ratings and thus get WWE's attention who are much, much, much, much, much, much, much, much, much better placed to offer him more money than TNA can and more...kinda.... mainstream exposure. Sure Dixie could try begging her parents for the money to keep him, but I doubt she will get it after the whole Hulk Hogan thing. Even if TNA can produce a top guy, he will have to be a Goldberg type eg zero effort needed to build him up. WCW did very little to develop Goldberg and he barely said anything. Over the last few years both TNA and WWE have tried to produce their "Goldberg" with TNA over pushing Crimson and WWE repackaging Skip Sheffield as Ryback. So, since neither company seems to be able to create any new exciting talents, of course WWE is going to poach anyone who comes along.. They did take Chris Harris and Gail Kim. Don't forget RVD... TNA needs to understand this like WWF did in 1996 and look to put on a better show than WCW did by being different and building up young talents that can make then a real alternative to WWE instead of teh laughing stock they seem to insist on being..
|
|
|
Post by Ape Boy on Dec 2, 2013 7:27:08 GMT -5
Heavily storyline-driven products are always the most successful wrestling products. Think of it like a movie. The average weekly show is for storyline progression and character building, which all leads up to the climax, the matches, which typically take place on PPV, or in TNA's current model, themed Impacts.
I'd like to see TNA continue down the path of the average Impact being made up almost exclusively of storylines, and then make the themed shows match-heavy. This is a much better model than giving us the same boring matches, week in, week out. Also, fewer weekly matches will make the match-heavy themed Impacts feel all that more special.
|
|
Snowman
Dennis Stamp
The "Called His Mama at WrestleMania" Guy
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 3,907
|
Post by Snowman on Dec 5, 2013 18:49:23 GMT -5
I think the opposite, TNA should have LESS wrestling matches and be more like it was on the Thanksgiving episode which was a bunch of hugely entertaining segments, and the matches they did have actually meant something (winners get to be in final segment)
I'd be happy with One big match a week, a couple of Jobber Matches and the rest comedy stuff and angle development. They only exception would be when it's a "ppv" impact then have the show mostly matches that have been built up to.
|
|