Originally Posted by seibu:
“The fact nobody can agree on which parts of TNA were good and which were bad kind of proves that none of it was *that* bad. But also, it's fair to say that very little of it was that good either. Certainly not good enough to overturn the huge advantages of money and brand recognition WWE had.
I maintain there are good stretches where, production values aside, Impact was certainly no less entertaining than RAW. But, production values *do* matter to most people, so there we go.
And TNA at the moment is just depressing, sadly.”
I think to some extent you can say that about any wrestling promotion. It's such a subjective industry, there will always be people that consider stuff to be awful where other people will view that same segment as great.
Take the Attitude Era. Some think it was the best period ever for wrestling. There are a lot of people that wouldn't even consider it wrestling it's that different to what wrestling traditionally was for decades before those 3-4 years. This is why I have no problem with McMahon not liking the term 'wrestling' because it isn't wrestling as wrestling was. What WWE and TNA do is sports entertainment. People may not like the term but I think it fits the product better when you compare the product to the pre-Attitude Era product.
As for production values, it's only shortly before the move from Spike the production values became really bad. For the most part, whilst unable to compete with WWE in that area, were never that bad. If you view TNA as a standalone company, their production values are quite good, it's only when you try and compare to WWE they were bad. Now however they are frigging awful.
I remember watching an episode and they went from a match to a recap to a backstage segment to another recap to a match with nothing to link all of them together at all. No commentary, no graphic, just from one scene to the next.