-Partial- 8/19 TNA Spoilers.

[The Dudester]

TNa actually does turn a profit. It's not Millions per year profitt like the E, but it turns a profit. Even ROH turns a profit.

My take on the current TNA-ngle... with RVD being stripped, it gives a built in storyline (and continuity) for when he returns from his family sabatical. As for "putting someone over".. well.. let's take a look..

Abyss... former champ, has not popped the ratings at all, or brought in newer fans.
Aj Styles... actually had some of the LOWEST ratings in TNA as champ Impact history, along with segments with him and Abyss.
Hardy... umm... at this point, how is putting the title on hardy getting him "over"? He's already over as much as he will ever be (and probably past his peak he hit in WWE in 09)

Ya know, whether its Kurt Angle, Sting, AJ, Joe, Abyss, Christian.. no one "pops the ratings", and none of them have even led an improvement to increase viewership. So "putting someone over", which is completely an IWC thoughtline that has increased importance to the IWC past the point of importance to the wrestlers, at this juncture really is basically..bullshit.

However... DQ DID indeed hit the nail on the head. We live in an ADD society where attention spans are miniscule and everyone is willing to hop on the very next fad that catches on, however briefly. TNA is going after those fans, and quick booking, quick turns and trying to add the element of drama every week to keep people staying tuned in is what they are aiming at.

While the IWC (ahem, US typically) miss the days of old with long, drawn out feuds of days before, TODAY"S audience got bored with HBK/Jericho, it was too long, to repetive. The same fans complain when a wrestler holds the belt too long.

The fans HAVE changed and DQ was right. People are complaining this Nexus thing has gone on 12 weeks and hope it ends at SSlam because its "stale".

[Gary]

You know its tiring arguing with TNA fans..with them TNA can do no wrong, everything they has a purpose..im still waiting to see what the purpose and reason for Joe getting kidnapped by ninjas was. At least WWE fans admit when WWE sucks balls.

[Drama Queen]

TNa actually does turn a profit. It's not Millions per year profitt like the E, but it turns a profit. Even ROH turns a profit.

My take on the current TNA-ngle... with RVD being stripped, it gives a built in storyline (and continuity) for when he returns from his family sabatical. As for "putting someone over".. well.. let's take a look..

Abyss... former champ, has not popped the ratings at all, or brought in newer fans.
Aj Styles... actually had some of the LOWEST ratings in TNA as champ Impact history, along with segments with him and Abyss.
Hardy... umm... at this point, how is putting the title on hardy getting him "over"? He's already over as much as he will ever be (and probably past his peak he hit in WWE in 09)

Ya know, whether its Kurt Angle, Sting, AJ, Joe, Abyss, Christian.. no one "pops the ratings", and none of them have even led an improvement to increase viewership. So "putting someone over", which is completely an IWC thoughtline that has increased importance to the IWC past the point of importance to the wrestlers, at this juncture really is basically..bullshit.

However... DQ DID indeed hit the nail on the head. We live in an ADD society where attention spans are miniscule and everyone is willing to hop on the very next fad that catches on, however briefly. TNA is going after those fans, and quick booking, quick turns and trying to add the element of drama every week to keep people staying tuned in is what they are aiming at.

While the IWC (ahem, US typically) miss the days of old with long, drawn out feuds of days before, TODAY"S audience got bored with HBK/Jericho, it was too long, to repetive. The same fans complain when a wrestler holds the belt too long.

The fans HAVE changed and DQ was right. People are complaining this Nexus thing has gone on 12 weeks and hope it ends at SSlam because its "stale".

Exactly. Again, my posts mostly refer to my own enjoyment of wrestling rather than whether or not the company makes a profit. One thing I want to clarify though... RVD losing the belt by pin or submission does not ONLY serve the purpose of putting over the next champ, but ALSO and more IMPORTANTLY putting over the belt itself. It continues the unbroken lineage. Every time a title is stripped it breaks the continuity or as Flair himself famously puts it "to be the man you gotta BEAT the man".... not beat the other also-rans in a tournament.

If you want to have tournaments, like I said, do it for #1 contenderships or for lesser belts. If you want to build a title with prestige however this is exactly what NOT to do.

I do fully accept that my ideas are antiquated, but they still directly influence my enjoyment of the product. I don't usually agree with the IWC on many issues (if I did, I would want every semi-decent wrestler to take a one month title reign because they "deserve" it)... I want long reigning champions whether it be Cena, Styles, Swagger, Sheamus... whoever, pick someone to be your champ and go with it.... and when you feel their time is done, let them continue the prestige of the belt by staring at the ceiling for three seconds and passing on the torch.

[The Dudester]

I think a big problem any wrestling company is going to come into is... what can we do that hasn't already been done?

That's kind of what has wrestling stagnant now... from the 70's to 90's to 00's, angle's and storylines have pretty much gone to every level, from 2-3 year feuds, to invasions, to hardcore, to "pure" to "x-division", Lucha libre, ... even as far as seeing necrophilia and incest make an appearance in stroylines.

A HUGE complain with TNA right now is "oh boy, let's redo old shit!".. but what is to be done, that CAN be done, that hasn't already been done?

You can change the players, but the stories remain the same. Whether its the Rockers breaking up, to AMW breaking up, or Road warriors attacking Dusty with a spike to Roberts having a snake bit Savage, the NWO, NExus, ECW,, CZW, ROH, .. its all be done.

Very much a "hmm.. seen it" type feel. For US... as we grew up during the 80's and 90's. Now.. todays kids.. the target audience mainly.. they have yet to really see an "attitude era" so to speak as they haven't had theres, but even when they do, we, the older fans, will still be "ah, same o shit. Saw the same thing in 1988, 1997, or 2001, or 2009". Be it Aj Styles, Roderick Strong, Danielson, Cena, Jericho, Samoa Joe... theres not really anything else to do BUT recycle old angles with new players... to which the IWC especially, will say "ah, same shit Ive seen before".

[Black Death]

maddox show me the books... i don't think so... but that IMO

Gary right ... I same like TNA fans can see no wrong with this company .  JDM being a expection earlier in this thread.

I don't hate TNA... please I am not a hater of the whole company ,  what I am is a hater of  is the way the company is run.  they flush money down the toilet . they same to do things ass backwards . This thursday show would have made a great ppv ... not that bullshit that happen sunday. That spit on everything that I love about ECW and Hardcore wrestling and if you didn't see that there nothing I can say to you.   I don't understand the ECW angle still going on afterwards... it does not need to go on... you got 4 old vets bitching in the ring about  shit that the average TNA fan has no clue , talking about it time for the young guys to shine ... while there in the  center of ring , taking up a segment ,  doing what they said that they should not do.   no wonder Joe got pissed off ...    I read this crap and it annoy me and you think if I am annoy after reading this, i sure the hell not going to watch.    That ever thing been done before stance is bull shit .  you can do orginial stuff , it takes a creative mind , which TNA has not

hell ROH and DragonGate and Dragongate USA  makes the wrestling on TNA and WWE look like shit .   

[The Dudester]

yes.. and that great "wrestling" is getting them all over TV, and doing tours through Europe and..

oh.. wait...

The "great wrestling" of those places go largely ignored by the masses because "wrestling" isn't as interesting as people want it to be. Kayfabe is dead... there is no more realism to plain old wrestling on the pro circuit and thats what people realize.The reason that the E gets the highest ratings isn't because of their awesome 4 minute matches. it's the DRAMA, the stories.

TNA's highest rating of any recent time was... the ECW brawl! Perhaps the fans don't WANT to see AJ Styles, Abyss, Jay Lethal, Hogan and Flair as much as they enjoy a lil EC-Dub from time to time?

Or maybe it was the drama that was unfolding that got people's attention.

Either way, it's pretty much proven that good old wrasslin in the ring just doesn't entice the masses to tune in. Vince saw this when he had Angle v lesnar in an iron man match on SD years ago.. and the ratings dropped every qtr hour for it and he said "no more" of that.

Times have changed, fanbase has changed. They want Stoies, they want drama. The "wrestling" is secondary to what the majority wants.

[Black Death]

fuck stories , i want good fucking wrestling like when I was young , the story was the wresting match .   


E gets the ratings because it been around the longest ... it what people know ... I am a WWE fan and I will admit right now there about 25%  of the show is good the rest pretty much sucks , because it the waterdown version of wwe and it had not been good for a long time
 

TNA was actually pretty good for awhile ,  that changed and now they pretty much suck .

I want fucking good wrestling  matches and i say it right now ROH and Dragongate give me that shit...

Duckman has another ROH memeber to his growing legion .

[! JDM The Professional !]

Alright, taking some time to think over this shit, I think I have came up with a plan for TNA to improve its product from this rut.

Mr. Anderson vs. Jay Lethal * Douglas Williams vs. Kurt Angle * The Pope vs. Matt Morgan

I assume four more to come.

I am very happy it isn't any of the old guys (besides Angle who will probably win it)

I am hoping it is Angle vs Wolfe for the title. Dixie has been praising him again so hopefully it's a sign that he will get pushed!!

This tourney needs to go very well for TNA to pick itself up!

We can hope <3

regards,

JDM

[Gary]

Alright, taking some time to think over this shit, I think I have came up with a plan for TNA to improve its product from this rut.

I assume four more to come.

I am very happy it isn't any of the old guys (besides Angle who will probably win it)

I am hoping it is Angle vs Wolfe for the title. Dixie has been praising him again so hopefully it's a sign that he will get pushed!!

This tourney needs to go very well for TNA to pick itself up!

We can hope <3

regards,

JDM

Dixie was praising a magic trick he can do...not him.

[! JDM The Professional !]

Dixie was praising a magic trick he can do...not him.

I said hopefully its a sign.

Maybe if they become friends, he can get a push

Regards,

JDM

[Conor]

Maddox, I think at this point you're really just trying to troll us here.

While Dragon Gate, ROH etc. are not on the same levels of popularity as WWE and TNA, that doesn't mean they're not known worldwide or that they don't have significant fanbases. Dragon Gate ran two shows in the UK last year that sold out in quick fashion; they're coming back for another pair of shows that will no doubt do the same. That's literally thousands of people attending these shows by a company fromt he other side of the planet that has no television exposure or promotion outside wrestling magazines.

Drama is always important on a wrestling show, but TNA have never given me a reason to sympathise with any of their wrestlers. Drama is conflict, and wrestling is built on conflict, yet there's no reason for me as a viewer to care about anyone in that ring.

Logic is also important and it's something TNA shows little of. Trying to catch the ADD-afflicted, short-term fans does squat for the growth of your business. Having Van Dam vacate the belt (off screen, by the way - we don't even get a heartfelt promo to say, "I'll be back") rather than drop the title to someone who he can then feud with upon his return does nothing for your belt or for the guy wearing it. It's a similar reason as to why I don't agree with Kurt Angle pinning Styles and Williams while they're both champions. Sure, we all know Angle is a bigger star, but when those guys get pinned cleanly by a guy who doesn't even care about their title, why should we as fans care about their title? Why should we care about them?

A tournament can be a great way of getting someone over, watching a guy fight through adversity to claim his prize. But if you're familiar with Vince Russo's booking, you know that's not what he does with tournaments. Tournaments are an easy way of booking a show without having to put much thought into why the two men in the ring are fighting.

I don't complain about stuff that's been done before. I tend to agree with Jim Cornette's "Seven Year Rule" - because there's such a regular rotation of casual wrestling fans, you can get away with booking an angle that was previously successful with different wrestlers. That's the important thing here - different wrestlers. For example, Dreamer Vs Raven was one of the best feuds of the 1990s, but why the hell would I want to see it now? Why would anyone? Fifteen years ago, Raven and Dreamer could still go. They could brawl and bleed and drive a crowd wild. Today, those guys are broken down, old men who took too many bumps and can't do it like they used to.

If you want to run the suave but cowardly champion versus the blue collar everyman, go for it, but don't give me Ric Flair and Dusty Rhodes in those roles today. In TNA, the story and the characters remain the same.

[Gary]

Btw if we are basing the relevance of promotions based on popularity..as popular as ECW was..it didnt hold a candle to WCW or WWF in terms of popularity..if they did they would've gotten way more tv and way earlier. I was a huge die hard ecw fan when it was still alive, and I would never say it was more popular than WWF or WCW. But yet TNA whored out that ECW legacy like it was no tommorow.

[The Dudester]

No attempt to troll. Just stating the obvious..

ECW in 95-98, was more popular than ROH, Chikara, DGUSA or the other indy feds out there TODAY do. The ROH fanbase isn't nearly as big as ECW's fanbase was in the late 90's. Heck, ECW's fanbase in the late 90's was as big as TNA's is today.

ROH, DGUSA.. those are indy feds that the majority of fans dont even know about, nor do they really care. That's not trolling, it's obvious and factual. Heck, there are IWC fans that don't even care to watch those orgs.

You can even got to WWE shows and ask the fans (I tried this) if they hear of ROH.. and very few say yes. And to prove further, some of those fans dont even know who TNA is.

And I never said they have NO fanbases. I never said they dont have any fanbases overseas. What I am, and have beens aying, is they don't really have MUCH of a fanbase with large overall numbers. This goes back to ROH trying to have a PPV where 17 people.. yes.. 17 people.. ordered it in Canada. (And ROH is the "biggest" infy fed).

It's fine that people like BD want to see long wrestling matches, and guys going hold for hold for 30-20 minutes. He is however, in the minority when it comes to the wrestling fanbase in general.

[The Dudester]

Maddox, I think at this point you're really just trying to troll us here.

While Dragon Gate, ROH etc. are not on the same levels of popularity as WWE and TNA, that doesn't mean they're not known worldwide or that they don't have significant fanbases. Dragon Gate ran two shows in the UK last year that sold out in quick fashion; they're coming back for another pair of shows that will no doubt do the same. That's literally thousands of people attending these shows by a company fromt he other side of the planet that has no television exposure or promotion outside wrestling magazines.

Drama is always important on a wrestling show, but TNA have never given me a reason to sympathise with any of their wrestlers. Drama is conflict, and wrestling is built on conflict, yet there's no reason for me as a viewer to care about anyone in that ring.

Logic is also important and it's something TNA shows little of. Trying to catch the ADD-afflicted, short-term fans does squat for the growth of your business. Having Van Dam vacate the belt (off screen, by the way - we don't even get a heartfelt promo to say, "I'll be back") rather than drop the title to someone who he can then feud with upon his return does nothing for your belt or for the guy wearing it. It's a similar reason as to why I don't agree with Kurt Angle pinning Styles and Williams while they're both champions. Sure, we all know Angle is a bigger star, but when those guys get pinned cleanly by a guy who doesn't even care about their title, why should we as fans care about their title? Why should we care about them?

A tournament can be a great way of getting someone over, watching a guy fight through adversity to claim his prize. But if you're familiar with Vince Russo's booking, you know that's not what he does with tournaments. Tournaments are an easy way of booking a show without having to put much thought into why the two men in the ring are fighting.

I don't complain about stuff that's been done before. I tend to agree with Jim Cornette's "Seven Year Rule" - because there's such a regular rotation of casual wrestling fans, you can get away with booking an angle that was previously successful with different wrestlers. That's the important thing here - different wrestlers. For example, Dreamer Vs Raven was one of the best feuds of the 1990s, but why the hell would I want to see it now? Why would anyone? Fifteen years ago, Raven and Dreamer could still go. They could brawl and bleed and drive a crowd wild. Today, those guys are broken down, old men who took too many bumps and can't do it like they used to.

If you want to run the suave but cowardly champion versus the blue collar everyman, go for it, but don't give me Ric Flair and Dusty Rhodes in those roles today. In TNA, the story and the characters remain the same.

And you see this from a personal point of view. Sure, you may not have liked how RVD was removed as champ. Heck, everyone here at EK may have not liked it one bit.

BUT...

When the following weeks rating comes back in at a 1.2 and the fan base is maintained.. or gasp.. it even goes up, it will actually state the opposite of your opinion, and if it attracts more fans and gets more viewers, then it worked, and your opinion and thought process on this situation is void and incorrect.

IF the rating drops... and people tune OUT of the program... then it would state as you say, people didnt like it, people were turned off and it makes them care "less".

I'm willing to be the rating stays the same, or it will rise before it goes down.



**on a different note, there is alot of talk about the titles being meaningless. At this point in Professional Wrestling, what does the Title actually mean?

Someone's the best wrestler? That's clearly incorrect as 85% of the champs aren't the best wrestlers in the org. Sheamus, Orton, Cena, HHH, Abyss, Booker, Jarrett.. none of them are ever going to be confused with the best wrestlers in the organizations.

Someone sells more merchandise and makes $? Hmm.. probably a bit closer.. Hogan, Cena, Hardy, HHH, Taker, Orton, all top Merch seelers while clearly not the best "wrestlers". In TNA, RVD.. not the best wrestler, but moves merch. Angle and Aj are the ebst in ring wrerstlers they have and having both as champ hasn't ever elevated the company, the title, or the people.

I think times have really changed in the landscape of PRO Wrestling from where it was and things that USED to mean something don't mean something anymore.

If the title ACTUALLY belongs around the waist of the best wrestler.. feel free to explain why John Cena is a 8 or 9 time champ while Regal is a jobber, although 8x a better 'wrestler".

[Drama Queen]

**on a different note, there is alot of talk about the titles being meaningless. At this point in Professional Wrestling, what does the Title actually mean?

Someone's the best wrestler? That's clearly incorrect as 85% of the champs aren't the best wrestlers in the org. Sheamus, Orton, Cena, HHH, Abyss, Booker, Jarrett.. none of them are ever going to be confused with the best wrestlers in the organizations.

Someone sells more merchandise and makes $? Hmm.. probably a bit closer.. Hogan, Cena, Hardy, HHH, Taker, Orton, all top Merch seelers while clearly not the best "wrestlers". In TNA, RVD.. not the best wrestler, but moves merch. Angle and Aj are the ebst in ring wrerstlers they have and having both as champ hasn't ever elevated the company, the title, or the people.

I think times have really changed in the landscape of PRO Wrestling from where it was and things that USED to mean something don't mean something anymore.

If the title ACTUALLY belongs around the waist of the best wrestler.. feel free to explain why John Cena is a 8 or 9 time champ while Regal is a jobber, although 8x a better 'wrestler".

There are different ways of viewing the best wrestler... I take from your post you are talking about the best technical wrestler or who can do the best moves? That is one way. But wrestling is entertainment as much (well let's face it, moreso) than sport. So yes, Hulk Hogan WAS the best wrestler (not that I liked him, but I'm being objective here) in that he was the mecrh-seller and the entertainer.

Being the champ has NEVER been about who does the most moves or the best spots in the ring. I'm not sure where you are pulling this idea from. I don't recall reading anybody here claiming the best "wrestler" in your view of the word should be champion.

I have nothing against Cena being champion. That does not make the belt meaningless.... it is the fact that he is EIGHT OR NINE time chapion as you said.... THAT is what makes it meaningless. Stupid title changes for no reason. Putting the belt on people for one month or even less at a time.

Let me put it this way.... the champion should be whomever best represents the company. A good "wrestler" as you put it, would make for a good ROH champion. John Cena is a fine WWE champion. I thought AJ Stlyes was a good TNA champion but the company changes direction so often that it's hard to say who would make a good TNA champion. I don't rate Raven as highly as others do, but he was a great ECW champ for what they were about.

You see where I'm coming from now? It's not the best "wrestler" the mecrh-mover, the star with mainstream media, it's all of the above, some factors outweighing others depending on what the company is about.

Being the champion used to mean being the ambassador of the promotion, the poster boy.

Now it means "Employee of the Month"