Lance Storm's "Daily Affirmation"

[BlackHoleMark]

I'm kinda getting sick of Storm. It's enough. I agree there should be more wrestling, but seriously, enough with the bi-weekly articles about it. We get it. Thanks.

[hollywood]

blackholemark said:

I'm kinda getting sick of Storm. It's enough. I agree there should be more wrestling, but seriously, enough with the bi-weekly articles about it. We get it. Thanks.

He's actually written articles about politics in wrestling, traveling on the road, problems within the WWE, and others. But no one gets mad and talks about them.

[MGH]

blackholemark said:

I'm kinda getting sick of Storm. It's enough. I agree there should be more wrestling, but seriously, enough with the bi-weekly articles about it. We get it. Thanks.

Who forced you to read them every week? They can be ignored if his views bug you that bad.

[Dr. T is an alien]

a2j88 said:

Lance Storm is now nearly becoming a parody. Is he looking for a job or something?

"This Is How I Would Book TNA- By Lance Storm"

I see what you mean. It's not like any of us do that.

[Spankymac is sick of the swiss]

hollywood said:

blackholemark said:

I'm kinda getting sick of Storm. It's enough. I agree there should be more wrestling, but seriously, enough with the bi-weekly articles about it. We get it. Thanks.

He's actually written articles about politics in wrestling, traveling on the road, problems within the WWE, and others. But no one gets mad and talks about them.

If he fixated on WWE's problems as much as he did TNA's(And there are just as many), I wouldn't mind the constant TNA fixation he has. But instead, he's always on TNA. I rarely see him devote entire columns exclusively to how he would change WWE.

[hollywood]

chuckymac314 said:

hollywood said:

He's actually written articles about politics in wrestling, traveling on the road, problems within the WWE, and others. But no one gets mad and talks about them.

If he fixated on WWE's problems as much as he did TNA's(And there are just as many), I wouldn't mind the constant TNA fixation he has. But instead, he's always on TNA. I rarely see him devote entire columns exclusively to how he would change WWE.

He makes a point to write columns regarding questions emailed to him. If you want to be mad at someone, be mad at the people who constantly email him about it.

[skskillz]

giovanni said:

It's a pro-wrestling show, people watch for pro-wrestling.

During the booms, the big draws were interesting feuds. Hogan/Andre and McMahon/Austin. That were the big draws, but it were great epic feuds. With strong characters that were given the time to develop.

Exactly. Those feuds in particular were built around storylines and characters, not wrestling. You didn't see Austin wrestling Jeff Hardy on free TV for 10 minutes during that time. It was promos, vignettes, run-ins, etc. Hell, the entire Attitude Era consisted of 2 minute matches all ending in DQ's (on TV). The '80's were all squash matches, promos, an occasional SNME, and then a big event. Savage/Steamboat wasn't built around two great wrestlers. It was built around Savage destroying Steamboat's throat, and Steamboat coming for revenge. Then you had feuds like Danny Davis screwing over face wrestlers (advancing the Harts/Bulldogs feud), etc, etc. You didn't need these guys wrestling for 10 minutes every week. The company made the fans care about those guys without resorting to that.

The concept of weekly television got raped and destroyed during the Monday Night War, but the weekly shows SHOULD BE free commercials for PPV's. It's an avenue to create new characters and storylines so that people will shell out money for whatever show they are running that month. There doesn't need to be a 10 minute match on free TV. That doesn't draw viewers. Make me care about the wrestlers so that I pay $30 (or whatever it is) to watch them for 10-20 minutes on PPV. Don't give me 10 minutes of AJ Styles and Petey Williams flopping around like stunt men for free unless it's either a blow-off to a feud or so toned down that it doesn't ruin the novelty of the match if they intend to put it on PPV down the road. Personally, give me an AJ Styles squash where he looks like a million bucks and hits his signature spots. That will get him over (to newer viewers).

I agree with some of what Storm says, especially the part about wrestlers not showing up on TV every week, thereby making their appearances more special. But I don't agree with wrestling being emphasized on TV. That's what the PPV's are for. Give me a reason to care about Styles vs. Christian (for example), and then put them on PPV for 20 minutes. That's what sells. If you want to introduce a new character, put them in a squash where they look like a million bucks. Ultimately, the main part has to be selling the PPV.

[catwoman]

mygreatesthour said:

What the hell is it with the extremes around here lately? Some people think the show needs to be a full 44 minutes of wrestling and nothing else and then some people there should be no matches what so ever.

Pro-wrestling implies that there are BOTH. Giving away a 10 minute Starr vs Lethal match to get the crowd going isn't going to sabotage your PPV buys which aren't that high to begin with.

Bingo. Like he said, the fourth segment could be used for the obligatory recaps, backstage segments, interviews, etc while allowing for the first two segments to focus on the big stuff in TNA, namely the championship and the X-Div, with the potential for one to two more angles. It's extremely logical IMHO and I think that its a plan that would contribute to the overall flow of the show.

I think he's right on all points. There needs to be a balance here between the flow of the storylines and build of characters and showcasing the actual wrestling talent that the show boasts on a daily basis.

[Lenny: Smooth like Keith Stone]

Wanna know why Lance Storm rants? He has a rant about it! ;D

(This might have already been posted in another thread, but I felt like it needed to be printed in here too.)

Why I Rant
February 5, 2007

After my recent “RussoRiffic” TNA rant I was again bombarded with the question: Why do I pick on TNA, why don’t I rant on WWE? There are several reasons behind this so this week I figured I could look at them in depth.

When I look at WWE and TNA I don’t just do so as a fan that wants to watch wrestling. I watch them with a vested interest in their success as it pertains to the wrestling industry. I want both companies to thrive and succeed for the good of the business and the boys who work in it.

WWE is thriving; they make money, lots of money (grossing $380 million per year). There is little to no chance they are going to go out of business any time soon. There is more chance of WWE shutting down because Vince losses interest than due to financial concerns. TNA on the other hand is losing money, LOTS of money ($10 million per year). Without it’s financial backers TNA cannot exist. At some point in time people investing money in a business expect a return on that investment. If that point in time comes before TNA is able to turn business around and actually make money or at least break even, so it can survive without money backers, it’s game over, no more TNA. TNA supporters constant defense that WWE does Stupid Stuff too, is nothing more than a cop out!!

WWE and TNA are in two completely different boats. WWE has a stable loyal audience that tunes in every week, buys enough merchandise, and orders enough PPVs for WWE to make money. As long as they don’t do enough stupid things to drive their audience away in droves they will stay in business. TNA on the other hand does not have a large enough fan base, and they do not order enough PPVs, for TNA to stay in business without financial help. So TNA needs to attract a ton of new fans in order to become a success. When your goal is to attract new fans rather than just not repel current ones you need to be far more careful and can get away with far fewer mistakes.

The other reason I don’t rant on WWE like I do TNA is that their show in my opinion is far less frustrating. WWE does some stupid shit, don’t get me wrong, but at the end of the day they usually deliver the goods in some form or another. As wrestling fans we’ve been conditioned to tolerate a certain degree of crap as long as IT ISN’T ALL CRAP and once in a while you deliver what we want to see.

Let’s look at SmackDown this past week, which I thought was a weak show by SD standards. SD had 4 matches, two of which had outside interference and were in my opinion crappy finishes, especially the “Little Bastard” Boogey Man finish. As disappointing as those 2 finishes were, there was at least 2 clean finishes on the show and the solid 12 minutes of action delivered by Benoit and Finlay before the finish more than balanced that out. On top of that the show ended with an extremely strong segment involving 4 top guys. We got to see a very serious and dramatic standoff between the two World Champions and the top 2 contenders. It was meaningful and set up the next PPV Main Event, and increased interested in the following PPV (WrestleMania) as well. No other people were involved it was clear cut and focused.

TNA on the other hand had 3 matches ALL of which had outside interference and post match brawling. None of the matches went more than 4 minutes and totaled less than 10 minutes combined. There was tons of goofy stupid crap but not one solid meaningful focused segment to anchor the show. They offered us a “PPV caliber Main Event” which had my hopes up, yet turned out to be another short, pointless match that didn’t even have a finish. Had they let AJ and Joe deliver a great main event, like they both can, all the other stuff would have been forgiven. Those who like the goofy stuff would have gotten their fill and those of use who foolishly expect some wrestling on a wrestling show would have been happy as well. If TNA would give me one great solid match once in a while (and they sure as hell have the roster to do it) I’d watch the show and put up with all the stupid shit. Just because others do stupid shit doesn’t excuse it on your show, especially when the other guys on occasion deliver matches like Edge and Shawn Michaels did 2 weeks ago.

In closing to those of you who emailed me stating that ECW is worse than TNA, which again is not a valid defense. I won’t dispute that. I don’t find it as mind numbingly frustrating, but I don’t enjoy it and gave up on it months before I gave up on TNA. If TNA revamps it’s creative team, or ECW starts featuring more Tommy Dreamer and less Matt Stryker, I’ll likely give both of them a try again.

That’s my two cents,
Lance Storm

[Rick Mad]

I like how a lot of people who spend time online talking about wrestling are criticizing another guy spending time online talking about wrestling. Just because he's Lance Storm doesn't mean anything, he has as much of a right to talk about whatever he wants as we do. Hell, he has more of a right seeing as he's doing it on his very own website.

I slightly disagree that you always need to protect your Champion and make him look real strong, but that's about it.

[Deleted]

I really enjoy reading and respect Lance Storm's opinions on things like this, I think TNA is kind of bizarre at times but I got nothing better to do than to keep watching.

Thing that I appreciate about Lance's opinions on these wrestling shows is that unlike pretty much 99% of those wrestling "journalists" who think they have the key to all that's right about pro wrestling, is that he's actually CONTRIBUTED to wrestling and has been a part of both wrestling and booking, so he's not just talking out of his butt.

[Person With A Hat]

nichotine said:

Thing that I appreciate about Lance's opinions on these wrestling shows is that unlike pretty much 99% of those wrestling "journalists" who think they have the key to all that's right about pro wrestling, is that he's actually CONTRIBUTED to wrestling and has been a part of both wrestling and booking, so he's not just talking out of his butt.

The problem being : "How do you contribute to wrestling when wrestling doesn't want you?" - this is the case of the journalists.