|
||||||||
TNA Wrestling on Challenge TV |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1251 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 3,803
|
Quote:
Bottom end? He's the TV champion! People say TNA doesn't listen to the fans - yet Eric Young gets a well-deserved push for getting over with both the internet marks and the live crowds, and the smarks still complain
Secondly, it wasn't a clean win, so hardly made Anderson look bad, especially as he beat on him with Gunner afterwards. Thirdly, it got a big pop from the crowd and I'm sure the non-smark viewers at home (of which I'll include myself in) got a lot of enjoyment in seeing the always entertaining Eric Young pull one over the arrogant Ken Anderson. Fourthly, smarks act as though these booking decisions never happened before. Yeah, it's not like these ever happened during the Attitude Era or anything...I can remember Triple H being pinned by Scotty Too Hotty or someone of equal standing once, when he was the champion. As usual, smarks reading too far into things - "Oh no, the poor non-internet fans will never want to watch Anderson/Sting now, because Anderson has been made to look 'weak'! Let's ignore the fact that it was entertaining to watch, Eric Young is massively popular with the fans, and it wasn't a clean victory!" I agree whole-heartedly with an earlier post in this thread that said about how internet fans are ruining wrestling for themselves. Just enjoy it and stop over-analysing it.
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#1252 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 5,294
|
I remember Jim Ross pinned HHH once, around 2003 or 2004 I think. Didnt exactly do him any harm.
Also, Vinny Mac pinned HHH for the WWF title in 1999. The Hurricane pinned The Rock before WM 19, best of all being Kevin Federline pinning John Cena! One match, one roll-up, one cheap finish has never harmed a guy that hes no longer over. |
|
|
|
|
#1253 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 17,297
|
what did i tell you! outcry over EY win over anderson......
lmao no creativity in any of the smarks |
|
|
|
|
#1254 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,669
|
Quote:
what did i tell you! outcry over EY win over anderson......
lmao no creativity in any of the smarks |
|
|
|
|
#1255 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,401
|
Quote:
From a business standpoint, you've just made your PPV main event look weak making people less likely to buy your show. From a casual fan, you may think it's entertaining, but from a TNA financial standpoint, it's bloody stupid.
Although if you want to talk about making a PPV main event look weak, go no further than John Cena vs The Miz in an 'I Quit' match Anderson is No. 1 contender because a) it's the culmination of his 'I want my friggin rematch!' mini-gimmick, and b) He won the battle royal making him the No. 1 contender. For what it's worth, I actually think Anderson could beat Sting at Slammiversary, and if Angle goes over Jarrett (which I expect he will), then it'll be an Anderson/Angle feud for the title. This also leaves Sting free to start the expected program with Hogan. |
|
|
|
|
#1256 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 17,297
|
Quote:
So why is Anderson the No.1 Contender then?
THIS IS NOT A SPORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
|
|
#1257 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,669
|
Quote:
why sould one FREAK loss affect that?
THIS IS NOT A SPORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
|
|
#1258 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,401
|
Quote:
It's a predetermined sport. If it isn't why are there titles?
It's an entertaining, action soap-opera...really is the best way to describe it tbh. |
|
|
|
|
#1259 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 236
|
Quote:
A lot of people read the TNA spoilers on this board, myself included, so that limits the 'live' discussion somewhat.
Although in my opinion, I've always found the idea of commenting on message boards while trying to watch something - be it wrestling, football or a TV show - really rather sad. ![]() Quote:
At some point TNA will have to make money or it will die. Any competent business will not just keep losing money and except it. Panda at some point will say enough is enough. If TNA are successful, Panda aren't going to do that.
Quote:
I remember Jim Ross pinned HHH once, around 2003 or 2004 I think. Didnt exactly do him any harm.
Two weeks later, HHH was beat by Batistia at Backlash.At least EY vs. Anderson makes sense. Who in their right minds books JR vs. HHH in a No-DQ match!? It's not a "freak" loss at all. In fact, I'd say EY is twice the wrestler Anderson ever will be. The problem there is that Anderson is ex-WWE and trumps on entertainment value, charisma and mic ability. Although EY isn't far off that standard, in my opinion. |
|
|
|
|
#1260 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Plymouff
Posts: 4,993
|
I get were DejaVoodoo is coming from.
I personally don't have a problem with EY pinning Anderson before the PPV. I mean, it was fun, it didn't make Anderson look weak, Anderson was acting like an idiot. Its not like he was doing a bad ass thing and was made to look weak, he was pretending to be retro Sting and got pinned by someone that was annoyed at him. Personally though I don't think the ME has been played up well enough though. I mean with all the other stories running in TNA at the moment I think the title match has gone under the radar in the build up to the PPV. So for me it looks weaker then something like Angle v Jarrett just because it hasn't been built up enough since the last PPV and when Anderson became the number 1 contender. As for impact itself, I have been enjoying it recently. I really liked the Crimson/Hardy and Kendrick/Kaz matches. Happy to see Shelley back on TV . Plus I am really loving Xplosion.
|
|
|
|
#1261 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 236
|
Apparently, Bischoff doesn't like the Anderson/Sting storyline, which is probably why it's not being pushed as well as, say, Jarrett/Angle. I've enjoyed it though. Been a change.
Someone told me today that Bischgan has become tired of Russo's "creativity" lately. Along with Jarrett getting frustrated also, Russo would be out on his ear soonish... |
|
|
|
|
#1262 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
Posts: 16,707
|
Quote:
why sould one FREAK loss affect that?
THIS IS NOT A SPORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thinking wins and losses don't matter is one of TNA's big mistakes. Because they do. |
|
|
|
#1263 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Pawnee Parks Deparment
Posts: 6,951
|
Quote:
Wins and losses matter. Goldberg was over because he never lost. Brock was over because he never lost. Hogan lost clean twice in the 1990's IIRC (Once to Warrior and once to Piper, who, by the way, also almost never lost clean- and was over).
Thinking wins and losses don't matter is one of TNA's big mistakes. Because they do. |
|
|
|
|
#1264 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
Posts: 16,707
|
Quote:
Apparently, Bischoff doesn't like the Anderson/Sting storyline, which is probably why it's not being pushed as well as, say, Jarrett/Angle. I've enjoyed it though. Been a change.
Someone told me today that Bischgan has become tired of Russo's "creativity" lately. Along with Jarrett getting frustrated also, Russo would be out on his ear soonish... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aW7rS02l3o4 |
|
|
|
#1265 |
|
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,022
|
I agree in general with win/losses playing a factor in getting and keeping people over and pushing towards the PPV. But the 80's and early 90's is a world away in wrestling terms. The game changed with the introduction of Nitro, then again with Raw is War, Thunder, Smackdown and now Impact. Now we expect a serialised format with star vs. star matches, and not too much predictability.
The superhero pushes existed mostly during the era of jobber matches and limited PPV's. It is very difficult to do that now without people turning against them or getting bored by the predictabilty. On the otherhand is can be done on special ocassion, proving very effective -- Batista very rarely suffered a loss between 2005 and 2008, as did John Cena during the same period. |
|
|
|
|
#1266 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 3,803
|
Quote:
The superhero pushes existed mostly during the era of jobber matches and limited PPV's. It is very difficult to do that now without people turning against them or getting bored by the predictabilty. On the otherhand is can be done on special ocassion, proving very effective -- Batista very rarely suffered a loss between 2005 and 2008, as did John Cena during the same period.
|
|
|
|
|
#1267 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,530
|
Quote:
One issue with this: Football Clubs. Owning a football club NEVER makes you money. You're in it just for the enjoyment. It isn't so hard to think that Panda, like Ted Turner, could be in it because they actually LIKE it. And given UFC's off, they'll be the biggest thing on Spike. . |
|
|
|
|
#1268 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 17,297
|
Quote:
Wins and losses matter. Goldberg was over because he never lost. Brock was over because he never lost. Hogan lost clean twice in the 1990's IIRC (Once to Warrior and once to Piper, who, by the way, also almost never lost clean- and was over).
Thinking wins and losses don't matter is one of TNA's big mistakes. Because they do. but you dont want to enjoy yourself, you want a sport stop watching pro wrestling,it isnt for you buddy |
|
|
|
|
#1269 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,669
|
Quote:
Predetermined sport is an oxymoron. There isn't any element of genuine, in-ring competition - all the fights are done via backstage politics.
It's an entertaining, action soap-opera...really is the best way to describe it tbh. For years, wrestling has worked on the premise that your are paying to see one guy kick the other guys backside, or your seing a guy going after a title etc. |
|
|
|
|
#1270 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,669
|
Quote:
shock wins can be great,especially when its a character like EY
but you dont want to enjoy yourself, you want a sport stop watching pro wrestling,it isnt for you buddy Eric Young is treated as a goof. Having him beat your no.1 contender before a PPV is stupid and reduces him as a threat to Sting's title in the eyes of mainstream viewers. If he can't beat EY, he has no chance with Sting? Looking at how TNA's ratings have reduced last week and this week in the States, down to a 1.0, would suggest that people aren't gripped by TNA's storylines at the mo. |
|
|
|
|
#1271 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 17,297
|
im not here to educate you, your beyond help.
|
|
|
|
|
#1272 |
|
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,022
|
Quote:
It's no coincidence that those two are last bona fide 'superstars' WWE created.
I can certainly see the argument in TNA not exactly giving inspiring build to the payoff (PPV). But then I think WWE are just as guilty. I think it's down to the TV fomat mentality from the likes of Russo and Gerwirtz, McMahon going senile and Dixie just being very much out of her depth as a wrestling promoter. The likes of Jim Ross, Pat Patterson, Gerry Brisco etc had a better grasp of booking towards the payoff, due to the 1970's wrasslin' mentality. But all of them have taken a backseat. |
|
|
|
|
#1273 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,669
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1274 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,669
|
Quote:
Absolutely. I bet Batista's successor Randy Orton has not been pinned on more than 5 occasions in the last 12 months. So being a superhero is still quite relevant when it comes to creating megababyfaces.
I can certainly see the argument in TNA not exactly giving inspiring build to the payoff (PPV). But then I think WWE are just as guilty. I think it's down to the TV fomat mentality from the likes of Russo and Gerwirtz, McMahon going senile and Dixie just being very much out of her depth as a wrestling promoter. The likes of Jim Ross, Pat Patterson, Gerry Brisco etc had a better grasp of booking towards the payoff, due to the 1970's wrasslin' mentality. But all of them have taken a backseat. |
|
|
|
|
#1275 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 236
|
Quote:
Do you really think people who own football clubs aren't in it to make money? Same with TNA.
It's a passion. And it seems that, like Ted Turner LOVED WCW and was forced to sell by AOL, Dixie's dad bought her TNA, and she loves that. I can't see it ever being sold off unless a ridiculous amount was offered by someone other than Vince McMahon. Quote:
Shock wins can be good, but this isn't one of them.
Eric Young is treated as a goof. Having him beat your no.1 contender before a PPV is stupid and reduces him as a threat to Sting's title in the eyes of mainstream viewers. If he can't beat EY, he has no chance with Sting? I think after weeks of Anderson getting his own way, it was about time someone brought him down a peg. And, if anything, it'll motivate him to give Sting his full attention and not rip him off. Quote:
Looking at how TNA's ratings have reduced last week and this week in the States, down to a 1.0, would suggest that people aren't gripped by TNA's storylines at the mo.
Aren't they up against the Basketball? Not giving excuses, but hell, if Blackburn Rovers were playing one night that TNA was on, I'd pick the football over TNA.
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 22:00.



. Plus I am really loving Xplosion.

