And whose fault is that?

Certainly not Hulk Hogan or Eric Bischoff.

Weren't you talking about how Bischoff was going to improve TNA's marketing and brand awareness? Didn't you say this:

"I'll watch it if it's on" sorta thing?


Yeah. I heard ten-years as well, but there's never been any solid evidence on it.

Ted apparently had a very deep passion for wrestling, but I doubt he'll go for it again, especially at his time of life.


Coulda, woulda, shoulda.

The guy had a chance, he declined, and now he just likes saying "here's what I would have done." I'm not taking any notice of him, whether his opinions are valid or not.

Heyman's idea is nice in reality but just having one over 40 legend is sillynot going to work. You need 5 or 6 legends to market the product properly. I dont agree with the amount of TV time and main eventing the old guys get at the moment and they need to cut a few WCW/90s stars and push a few TNA guys to the top but you dont hook in casual fans by promoting Styles, Joe, Beer Money. The average guy on the street doesnt know them.

Plus I dont think Heyman is as great as some make out. He's booked bad angles before and armchair booking is easy.

Absolutely, Heyman Isn't the absolute genius people make him out to be. But, what he does have is common sense, and the guy knows how to make a small wrestling company into a relatively big one which is exactly what TNA needed then, and still need now. ECW was never massive, but it stood out because it was different, and because of that it became more marketable and people took notice. It was never going to be a long term winner because there was nothing in ECW that couldn't be copied by WWF and WCW. Which is the same as what he was saying in that interview. His plan would not have worked long term, maybe a few years, but it would have stood more of a chance of getting TNA noticed. A decent Tag division, a reinvigorated X division, home grown stars etc it wouldn't take much to make TNA stand out at all, and that would bring in a lot of casual fans and money to help Impact to get out on the road and build further from there.
It doesn't take a genius to work out that TNA need to do something different to WWE.

Yes the UK ratings are looking good, but so what? for a large slice of the population this is the only wrestling they will get to see so its not like they are necessarily choosing TNA over WWE, its just the only opportunity to see pro-wrestling and as word spreads they are tuning in which is great, but its got little to do with TNA's booking.

As for Bischoff, i actually like the guy, i just don't think he gets enough freedom to do anything, after seeing some of the ways he'd like to change things i think he 'gets it' too. He perhaps got a little ahead of himself by trying to go up against Raw on a monday night, but come on thats how he did it before so you can't blame him for trying.

Hogan's merely a marketing puppet and is just a drain on resources

ecw never made money, in fact there came a time talent weren't even paid

As i said, it was never going to work long term, but it got them noticed

Just caught up with Slammiversary and was disappointed and suprised to find it a very average PPV. I think giving Ken was a mistake -- not a crowd pleaser at all. I only hope the plan is for Ken to lose the belt in days and for the loss to be part of some much bigger and more positive plan for Sting (who performed much better than his recent awful PPV against RVD).

I am sick to death of Winter and Velvet Sky. It makes a mockery of pro wrestling (before anyone posts, I appreciate the irony of what I'm saying, okay?).

But, holy hades! AJ Styles vs Bully Ray. One of the BEST matches I have ever seen. The blood (for once) was justified, the action felt street and hard-hitting, and THAT jump. I was saying to my friends, "okay, either Styles won't jump or Bully Ray will roll off the table before he lands. There's no way in hell, they're going to do a high table jump with Ray lying on it."... and they did! My all time favourite wrestler is Ric Flair. But right now, AJ Styles is the best wrestler in TNA (almost a successor to Chris Benoit) and Bully Ray is easily the best performer on the mic (almost as good as Flair).

There is some absolute gold in TNA! I have my tickets for January 2012 and I can't frikkin' wait!

what good is getting noticed if it doesn't translate into an air tight tv deal or......well a profit?

I'm sure you'd agree with me that it translated into one of the biggest wrestling companies in the world, and one of the most recognisible wrestling brands in history. I don't think Heyman is shy of a few bob on the back of ECW. Don't get me wrong, I'm by no means saying ECW was perfect, it was doomed to fail from the beginning. But what Heyman did was to create something from nothing with its financial model. But whether it made any money at that time or not i can bet you anything you like more people have heard of ECW than have heard of TNA because of what Paul Heyman accomplished. And thats exactly the problem that TNA have, that not enough people know who they are.

Before you start, i'm not knocking TNA at all, i'm a big fan, as i've said on here before all the ingredients are there to compete with WWE more closely and even overtake them, they just need to be used correctly

He created something from nothing, now your wanting him to take money from Panda Energy and let him loose with it? Cause that's what he wanted, he wanted to be in charge of hiring and firing and have full control. It's too risky.

I think if he was given a year or so to go through his plan, and make TNA stand out as it could be doing and should be doing then thats great. I don't see the problem with him steering TNA in the right direction at all. The things he was suggesting in that interview make perfect sense to me, he wasn't suggesting anything radical, he was talking about using whats already there and making people care about it. He mentioned MCMG, Beer Money, AJ styles, Samoa Joe, the X division, all the things that are great about TNA. So i don't think he had any intention of taking those elements out, he wanted to bring them forward and build the company around them. Is that risky in any way?

Yes, financially Paul Heyman is a disaster waiting to happen so they'd have to keep an eye on the purse strings, and have him on a tight leash financially, but it didn't sound to me like he wanted to blow money all over the place anyway.

Limiting the roster to under 40's, (with the odd exception) again, whats the big issue? who does that discount on the current roster that can really draw anymore anyway? Sting? maybe Bully Ray in a couple of months?

If booked properly by the right person they could do away with the likes of Hogan, and use that money to bring in some real stars to build a future for the company.

ecw wasnt a big company they were basically an indy product that had a tv deal..And like I side heyman was horrible with finances in regards to the running of ecw.If he does have money its through other means..Most recognisable? yeah to a certain demographic, most of the teens/early 20 y/o think ecw was that show on syfy

And how would you describe TNA? ECW helped to change the face of professional wrestling, for an indy company with a TV deal they did pretty well for themselves publicity wisewhen there were 2 goliath wrestling companies to compete against at the height of wrestling. TNA are struggling against one that is drifting along with little direction.

I'm not disagreeing on the financial side of things. As i said in my previous post, Heyman would need a tight leash for any involvement with TNA with regards to money.

The reason people might remember 'that show on syfy' is irrelevant, ECW has a legacy that was built by Heyman and will be copied and flogged to death for eternity for its part in changing wrestling. WWECW sucked balls and everyone knows it, even Heyman.
But what they achieved in just a few years in the late 90's TNA has not come anywhere near to yet

Heyman with the right resources and help from panda energy could do well, as the spending would be watched.

TNA isn't at ECW level yet, and as you've mentioned ECW was still going when WWF/WCW were in the ratings war.

Heyman in TNA would be good for the company but its in what direction he would go, imagine samoa joe hitting a fan while drunk or kurt angle pissing on the crowd

Hahahaha! is it bad that i would find that entertaining?

Seriously though, i don't think he'd go for the shock tactics this time around, i don't think TNA needs that. I think it just needs some tweaking to emphasize the plus points that are already there to make it great. And right now would be a gret time to do it while WWE is pretty weak

Did ecw have an air tight tv deal, do tours around the world or have a company like panda energy to financially back it?

You keep sayin that but it was just a boom.You go back to the 90s and realize everything was "shock tv".Gangsta rap,melrose place, jerry springer, maryln manson, eminem the list goes on..These things work in even flows.In hindsight what has held up, Hardcore wrestling is an abomination. Ppl like sandman and blackjack shouldnt be anywhere near the square circle..They stood out alright and brought attitude but spot monkey wrestling and hardcore is bottom of the barrel stuff that hurt the business..

who is copying ecw today? sure ecw has its place in history but so does the XFL

ECW could have possibly survived had it not taken the TV deal. Think something the size of ROH but a completely different animal. Heyman got to ambitious with something possibly too cult like or rebellious for the mainstream. Toning down for TNN changed what it was, WWE used the edgy concept with more money, stars were being swayed by Turner's and McMahon's huge contracts and once anybody made an impact Vince took them back. Plus they had trouble with PPV companies due to being so hardcore.

Heyman is a great booker though. He took Robbie V, Leif Cassidy, Aldo Montoya, Mr JL, Skip, Rad Radford etc and helped them become known. In addition to recognising and signing potential stars and helping very limited acts do something worthwhile (e.g Sandman, Dreamer, Public Enemy, New Jack etc). But Scotty "Raven" Levy arguably deserves more credit on the storyline front.

Are you seriously this idiotic all the time? Do you even know what you're arguing for or against any more?

My post wasn't about the greatness of ECW, i have said it had faults, and no it didn't have financial backing, it got to where it did without one which is further than TNA has gotten so far.

Hardcore wrestling was new back then and ECW was at the forefront of it, whatever your feelings on it now, it changed the face of things for the better. WWE/WCW would not have had anywhere near the success they had in the late 90's if there was no ECW.
Look at some of the stars who went through ECW to get to WWE/WCW, Heyman has an eye for talent, and can get them over with the audience. Something else TNA has struggled with thus far.

As for who is copying ECW today, erm...TNA? are you aware of the forthcoming hardcore justice PPV?

Sorry, kind of re-posted some of what you said.

You are right in all you have said there.

Strange how it always comes down to insults

You called ecw "one of the biggest wrestling companies" & I corrected you.This isnt about tna's succuss vs ecw's, stay on topic..

Hardcore wrestling wasnt new in the 90s it just became mainstream then there is a difference.I dont know how you can say it changed wrestling for the better when WWe the biggest company around has reverted back to kiddie friendly product today.

Not true, bishoff ripped off the idea for NWO from new japan wrestling.Thats also where he saw the lucha libre style wrestling. Both of those aspects is what made wcw really popular.

Hardcore justice was a ecw farewell one night special last year..To say the whole company is copying tna just because of one ppv is kind of silly

My dear boy i've been on topic from the start, suggesting that Paul Heyman would do a good job in TNA based on what he did with ECW. It is alas you that has steered us away from that subject.

I'm not sure you can blame ECW for the WWE being 'kiddie friendly' i would put that down to money.

There will be another harcore justice PPV later this year http://cdn.springboard.gorillanation...justiceppv.jpg

by turning the debate into "ecw achieved this, which is more than TNA has done" is essentially veering off topic, if u cant see that i dont know what to tell you.And who the hell are you calling boy?

Do you even understand the entirety of his demands? the guy wanted the books, and to be able to hire/fire..The same guy that couldnt make any money, loss money even and couldn't pay talent..Its just not wise to make that investment

Who is blaming ecw? all i'm saying is its so called "legacy" has no barring on the worlds biggest wrestling provider today..

All this is is a harcore themed ppv. Hardcore matches existed before ecw if u didnt know.

I know what you mean, maybe it would have been a disaster but we'll never know. But hiring/firing the wrestlers and creative control isn't that dangerous, no more toxic on paper than the backstage input of Hogan, Bischoff and Russo, who all played a role in the biggest downfall in wrestling history.

TNA is a different animal to ECW, which was a lowbudget company that struck a chord, prospering off being anti corporate but ultimately falling due to it and ambition. TNA has a major financial backer, renowned seperate corporate executives in charge of marketing, finance, licensing etc. Not to metion the studio contract, better TV deal and quality production team.

I believe if Dixie didn't have her father's pockets and a huge gap in the wrestling/cable TV market (i.e death of WCW and WWE leaving Spike TV in 2005) TNA wouldn't have lasted close to the time ECW managed to.