Recent Posts

Sorry this is long, but...

TNA is never going to be what its internet critics want it to be as long as Jeff Jarrett's in charge, and I don't see how or why he'd ever step aside, it's his baby. TNA is always gonna be Memphis-style 'rasslin segments, with a touch of the outdated, late-1990s Monday Night Wars approach, and exciting enough in-ring action to look like a semi-alternative to WWE.

TNA will never stray from that formula, and there will never be as much wrestling on Impact as there was during the weekly PPV days of 2002-2004, because those were commercial free, two-hour shows that you had to pay to see. Taking out commercials, Impact has 84 minutes a week to devote to wrestling, pushing DVDs, and selling PPVs, and I think they've done a pretty good job adding wrestling with the extra hour. Maybe I'm crazy to think there's more wrestling, but I've seen some pretty long, good matches on their free TV lately.

And it's debatable that TNA was "so much better" as a wrestling product back in the early days, because I watched it back then, and they had as much or more stupid crap on the shows as they do now, and the non-wrestling stuff was actually goofier and worse than anything I've seen lately that everyone's so up in arms about. Remember Goldielocks? At least some of the backstage stuff now is funny. Not funny like my favorite comedy shows, but funny for a wrestling show. Maybe I have terrible taste. And if I hate something I see in a backstage segment or think something's lame, I'm like, "well at least the wrestling's pretty decent, and I don't have to see Mark Henry or Batista-types" (at least until McMahon fires them).

They've raised the bar high enough for themselves with two-hours of primetime national TV, if they go to an ROH-style pure wrestling product, they run the risk of alienating the viewers they DO have now that never even heard of their product or cared back when Amazing Red and Low Ki were flipping around with AJ in really exciting matches.

Would I like them to be a little more like an ROH-style product? Sure. That'd be cool. I've come to accept the fact that they're never going to be a PURE wrestling show, and with that, I enjoy it more. Again, maybe I have terrible taste, but I think the wrestling's pretty darn good, and I'm not bored with the backstage stuff even if I think some of it might be a little misguided.

And if they are trying to beat WWE at their own game (which I agree with McMahon's point of view on this), at least they're doing okay IMO, because I still watch their show, and I could care less about any of WWE's shows and haven't for a couple years.

It's alot easier to enjoy when you're not getting frustrated with them, because sooner or later, you have to accept that TNA is what it is, and it's never going to change with Jarrett in charge. Bischoff's not coming to fix it, Heyman's not coming to fix it, and Jarrett and Mantell are never leaving. And they're NEVER changing the six-sided ring, or their name, they'll never get rid of Tenay and West on commentary, Tomko's probably never gonna be world champ, Raven will never be on the creative team, and Matt Morgan's never going to wrestle.

But if you hate the TV show because there's no wrestling, avoid the show altogether, and buy the PPVs every once in a while, because there's usually really good action. What I don't get about the 98% of TNA Impact viewers that don't buy the PPVs is, how could they possibly only watch the TV show? If I only watched Impact, and didn't know they put on pretty good PPVs, I would've stopped watching their crap two years ago. The PPVs are so much better, IMO, and I only buy the freaking things because everytime I miss one, it somehow doesn't wind up on DailyMotion.

So I guess what I could've said in probably 100,000 less words is: Meltzer, Alvarez, the Torch staff, and Lance Storm can complain all they want about it (and it's good that they do even if I disagree with some of their points), but TNA is never going to listen to them. If they did, they wouldn't be doing the exact same style of shows in 2007 as they did in 2002, no matter whether or not you think it's better or worse now. It's the only way Jarrett knows how to do a wrestling show, it's what he learned in Memphis, and while being in WWF/WCW in the 1990s. He's just lucky that Vince doesn't hire too many short, flippy guys, or non-WWF cookie cutter guys like Joe, and that helps make much of the actual wrestling tolerable to good.

Meltzer reported last week that Magnum and his wife just brought their baby twins home from the hospital. They were born premature, and were in the hospital for seven weeks, but now they're home.

Bartlett was worse by far. At least McMichael was a legit, famous former NFL all-pro, and familiar with wrestling. I can excuse an ex-athlete for not being entertaining or understandable on pro wrestling commentary. It'd be like Warren Sapp or somebody announcing wrestling in 5 years. If it's good, it's good, and if it's bad...at least sports fans knew who he was.

Bartlett, as a so-called comedian and entertainer, had absolutely no excuse for being brutal. I don't think Mongo, even with his lame poodle, and misguided attempts at improvising with Heenan, could've possibly been less funny than Bartlett.

*Savage (who I'm a huge fan of) was also brutal. Pulling him out of the ring as a regular worker to use that voice on TV commentary was one of the grand miscalculations of the 20th Century. Right now, McMahon could pull Kane out of active duty as a wrestler, put him as the RAW color man, have him talk in the "Kane voice", and it would not be worse than Macho on color. And I'm a huge Savage mark.

The reindeer costume was a very old school Tennessee rasslin' angle, but I don't think AJ came out any worse for wear out of it. You could've put 1993 Shawn Michaels in that angle on a hypothetical old WWF Christmas special, and it would've come off exactly the same for entertainment purposes (if you were entertained by it), and HBK probably would've wound up having the same career. It wasn't hilarious or anything, but it was as good as it gets for "chickenshit heel doesn't want to put on a costume after he lost a match", a booking device used for roughly 50 years in professional wrestling.

If A.J. wasn't funny and they tried to push him in this comedy role, then I'd have a problem with it. He's actually pretty entertaining, and when it comes time for him to break out of the lackey character (and that time will come), he'll be better off as a singles main-event type wrestler than if he was stuck in the 2004 version of his character that was phenomenal in the ring, but cringe-inducing on the mic.

Now, TNA has proof that he can carry the ball as an on-camera performer to supplement his great athletic ability, and I'd think they'd be more likely to have confidence in using him at the very top in the future. Before this character development, he was a guy who could steal the show on PPV, sure. But in the end, what good is that when nobody's ordering your PPVs to see him steal the show?

A.J. isn't necessarily being used how I'd book him if I were in charge, but I don't think it's the end of the world, and at least he's very good at playing this role.

I haven't seen that DVD yet, but even to the most outside of obsverver (me), there's no doubt David most resembled Fritz (from facial look and speech), but that sucks if he treated him that way. That whole WCCW scene is sad. David Von Erich was super talented, no matter if his father pushed him too hard or not. He was definitely very good at what he did, while he did it.

Just watched a couple interviews from David Von Erich's heel run in Florida during the early-1980s. I think he would've made a terrific heel NWA World Champ in the territories outside of WCCW during the mid-1980s. He's still only 22 or 23 at the time of these clips, so he was only gonna get better and better.

Here's an interview after squashing a jobber.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=nG_yJ1EocLk

Here's a better interview after turning on his mentor Dory Funk, Jr.
(starts about one minute into the clip....)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDC1OoAP0zU

Dude made a much better heel than his brothers, and the fact that he looked and sounded the most like Fritz (who was a pretty good heel himself) helped. His career was a little before my time, but checking out his matches and interviews, he was so far ahead of his brothers as a worker and a talker it's ridiculous.

The Freebirds wore green and yellow (and those exact same sequined robes/vests) for much of their 1979-80 run in Mid-South, and their early days on WTBS. They used to wear Light Blue/Maroon a lot too. Don't think they went mostly red & black until the World Class days.

EDIT: For trivia sake, Pat Patterson WAS Michael Hayes' tag team partner in WWF for the week or so that Hayes worked there after Gordy/Roberts left.

Don't know if this has been posted yet, apologize if it has. The Freebirds make their 1984 debut for Vince in Philly at The Spectrum (as faces).

The Fabulous Freebirds vs. Rene Goulet, Ron Shaw & Charlie Fulton
www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1Z9oz0LkuE

If you put Tomko vs. Hernandez on IMPACT!, I bet there are some people out there flipping channels that haven't watched "that fake wrestling crap" in 5-10 years who'd be roughly 1,000,000 times more likely to stop flipping and check it out than they would if say, Eric Young vs. Johnny Devine is on.

Back during the 1990s, the masses were attracted to guys like Stone Cold and Goldberg because they looked like legit asskickers, and Tomko and Hernandez fit that bill as well.

Plus, Hernandez would suplex Tomko all around the ring before getting kicked in the face and hit with some sick lariats, and that'd be cool, too.