Would TNA be Bigger - Wrestling Forum : WWE, TNA, Debate League, Wrestling Videos, Women of Wrestling Forums
Reply

Old 10-27-2012, 05:30 AM   #1 (permalink)
Learning to break kayfabe
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 9
SMP082110
Default Would TNA be Bigger

I've been a fan of TNA since 2005 When they showed up on Spike TV and I believe 2005/6 was the better Years of the product. I like some stuff about the product Today, but not everything.

But Anyway my question is do you think TNA would be bigger or seen as competition to WWE if things like January 4th went right, If storylines were consistant, the X-Division was still as good as it was, if TNA focused on the younger stars instead of pushing the veterans all those years.

I think if TNA was consistant in being a WWE Alternative instead of WWE Lite and all those things went right that TNA would be bigger then it is now, ratings would be bigger, and they would have valid stars. For example Bobby Roode should be bigger, and hes a star in my eyes, but i feel he would be bigger as well as other wrestlers would be if TNA were consistant.

The Fact that AJ in WWE is bigger than AJ styles is absolute insanity.
Im not a WWE fan boy by far but they are a machine and TNA could have slowed it down numerous times.

Another recent example is Austin Aries. One of my favorite Wrestlers is being made into a CM Punk Rip Off. Why cant TNA be TNA and not WWE Lite..
SMP082110 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 

Old 10-27-2012, 06:15 AM   #2 (permalink)
Convinced Vince to make me a Main-Eventer
 
joeisgonnakillyou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 10,046
joeisgonnakillyou needs to make some friendsjoeisgonnakillyou needs to make some friendsjoeisgonnakillyou needs to make some friendsjoeisgonnakillyou needs to make some friendsjoeisgonnakillyou needs to make some friendsjoeisgonnakillyou needs to make some friendsjoeisgonnakillyou needs to make some friendsjoeisgonnakillyou needs to make some friendsjoeisgonnakillyou needs to make some friendsjoeisgonnakillyou needs to make some friendsjoeisgonnakillyou needs to make some friends
Default Re: Would TNA be Bigger

- Nope, it has been proven that quality means jack shit these days. No company is perfect, if you love EVERYTHING then something is wrong. Even in attitude era's best days, they made huge mistakes.

- You CAN'T slow down WWE, their brand name = pro wrestling.

- Aries and Punk have been "similar" since their ROH days, both are great at being douchebags, which is pretty funny. TNA stopped being WWE lite in 2010, now they have the balls to create new concepts and make them work even when under heavy criticism. If TNA was WWE lite right now then that would mean WWE is also trying to innovate which sadly isn't the case.
__________________


The reason why we don't get fresh ideas and promotions rising in American Pro Wrestling is because the majority of the community is happy with the same old shit and will reject any chance of change. There is a risk in doing new things, 9 times out of 10, it leads to 50+ pages of bitching and moaning. While business gets turned into a dictatorship and more and more out of touch. Support the indies, support New Pro Wrestling.
joeisgonnakillyou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 06:39 AM   #3 (permalink)
Searching for a new identity
 
Loopee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Your Mum.
Posts: 5,775
Loopee probably won't be missedLoopee probably won't be missedLoopee probably won't be missedLoopee probably won't be missedLoopee probably won't be missedLoopee probably won't be missedLoopee probably won't be missedLoopee probably won't be missedLoopee probably won't be missedLoopee probably won't be missedLoopee probably won't be missed
Default Re: Would TNA be Bigger

I also feel like TNA is WWE-lite. Not that I used to. I didn't. There's just not really all that much that differentiates the two anymore. I don't know. It's weird and I could probably rant about it, but it seems pointless.
Loopee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 06:50 AM   #4 (permalink)
Yelled at by SCOTT STEINER
 
dastardly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,666
dastardly needs to take rep more seriousdastardly needs to take rep more seriousdastardly needs to take rep more seriousdastardly needs to take rep more seriousdastardly needs to take rep more seriousdastardly needs to take rep more seriousdastardly needs to take rep more serious
Default Re: Would TNA be Bigger

While there is a very strong element of truth to the "quality counts for nothing, only the WWE logo in the corner is important" argument, there is also another aspect at play IMO. And that is the fact that the TNA brand is pretty much tainted beyond repair.

While we (the people who watch and generally enjoy the product) can get over this and just appreciate it for what it is, the TNA brand is in many ways working against them as in the eyes of many it is associated with screwy booking, being a retirement home for old guys, being a WWE rejects scrapheap etc.

Unfortunately, I can't see any way around it other than just continuing to produce a good product and then letting news of the quality spread around through word of mouth - a simple rebranding exercise just wouldn't do the trick as people would just think, "Oh, that used to be TNA."

So yeah, while a pathetically large number of people would just never watch anything that wasn't WWE, there's no doubt in my mind that a wrestling company that started in, for example, 2010, with the financial muscle of Panda energy behind it and a top quality roster that included legends like Sting and Hogan, quality veterans like Daniels, Ray and Angle, and generally great wrestlers like Aries, AJ, Roode and Joe, would be much bigger and have better prospects for growth than TNA has now. Even if the actual product was exactly the same.
dastardly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 10:09 AM   #5 (permalink)
Yelled at by SCOTT STEINER
 
TNAmarkFromIndia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: India
Posts: 1,594
TNAmarkFromIndia should be embarassed if they have more than 50 postsTNAmarkFromIndia should be embarassed if they have more than 50 postsTNAmarkFromIndia should be embarassed if they have more than 50 posts
Default Re: Would TNA be Bigger

TNA could have the best wrestling product they could possibly have. They could fire all the former WWE stars in their company and have a "No former WWE wrestlers" policy. They could sign some of the most talented wrestlers in the indies and put out the most unique, innovative product that there is but the ratings will still remain the same. Why? Because it's not that people want an alternative to WWE, it's that they don't really care about anything BUT the WWE. Find one of the casual WWE fans and show them a clip of an X-division match and tell me if they say, "Wow, that's awesome! I'm gonna watch this every single week!". They would rather say, "Yawn. This is so boring. Who in the hell would want to watch a bunch of midgets wrestle some boring matches in a little soundstage with 500 people?". The 2005/06 product itself didn't do too well in the ratings. The problem lies in a lot of other things. TNA needs to improve on their business side of things. They need to market and promote their product well enough so that it reaches more people. People often don't even know that TNA is running a house show in their town until they log into the TNA website. That is simply inexcusable. They have few commercials on other networks. Hell, they're not even advertised enough on their own network. The production is not the best, and people won't watch anything that doesn't have the kind of production that WWE does. The whole argument that people have lost faith in the product due to the damage that Russo, Hogan and Bischoff did to it is bogus, because TNA's highest viewership (on a consistent basis) has been when Russo was booking and Hogan and Bischoff were running roughshod over TNA. They got Russo out, kept Hogan and Bischoff away from TV, pushed newer talent at the top and started having longer wrestling matches and the ratings fell down. It's obvious what the smarks want and what the casuals want are two completely different things. But the smarks make the most noise. Changing the product and making it more exciting, innovative, alternative, unique etc. is not going to help them in the ratings. A lot of other things has to change.

Last edited by TNAmarkFromIndia : 10-27-2012 at 10:14 AM.
TNAmarkFromIndia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 10:18 AM   #6 (permalink)
Acknowledged by SCOTT STEINER
 
WRESTLINGMASTER23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Abingdon Oxfordshire England
Posts: 1,343
WRESTLINGMASTER23 needs to take rep more seriousWRESTLINGMASTER23 needs to take rep more seriousWRESTLINGMASTER23 needs to take rep more seriousWRESTLINGMASTER23 needs to take rep more seriousWRESTLINGMASTER23 needs to take rep more seriousWRESTLINGMASTER23 needs to take rep more serious
Default Re: Would TNA be Bigger

The reality is that everyone needs to understand is that TNA will never be bigger than the WWE. TNA level, is the level that it will stay at for a very long time. TNA has tried different things to enhance the produce, but makes no difference. From the going head to head with WWE, going live every week, moving to 2 hours, moving to Prime Time and even bring in the likes of Hulk Hogan, Sting, Flair and the rest, it has made no difference. The best for TNA is to stay at the level it is at and continue to produce good wrestling. The product currently is not bad, and the best for them to do is to stay an alternative product. If TNA lost its Spike TV deal they would go bust!
__________________
[font="Arial Black"]Hulk Hogan!FONT]
WRESTLINGMASTER23 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 10:29 AM   #7 (permalink)
Humbled
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 475
Roncaglione Roncaglione
Default Re: Would TNA be Bigger

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeisgonnakillyou View Post
- Nope, it has been proven that quality means jack shit these days. No company is perfect, if you love EVERYTHING then something is wrong. Even in attitude era's best days, they made huge mistakes.
One year of varying degrees of quality programming isn't going to make up for years of bad and interest destroying programming. Quality meaning jack shit wasn't proven by TNA 2011-12.
Roncaglione is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 12:35 PM   #8 (permalink)
Humbled
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,096
nevereveragainu nevereveragainu
Default Re: Would TNA be Bigger

Quote:
Originally Posted by TNAmarkFromIndia View Post
TNA could have the best wrestling product they could possibly have. They could fire all the former WWE stars in their company and have a "No former WWE wrestlers" policy. They could sign some of the most talented wrestlers in the indies and put out the most unique, innovative product that there is but the ratings will still remain the same. Why? Because it's not that people want an alternative to WWE, it's that they don't really care about anything BUT the WWE. Find one of the casual WWE fans and show them a clip of an X-division match and tell me if they say, "Wow, that's awesome! I'm gonna watch this every single week!". They would rather say, "Yawn. This is so boring. Who in the hell would want to watch a bunch of midgets wrestle some boring matches in a little soundstage with 500 people?". The 2005/06 product itself didn't do too well in the ratings. The problem lies in a lot of other things. TNA needs to improve on their business side of things. They need to market and promote their product well enough so that it reaches more people. People often don't even know that TNA is running a house show in their town until they log into the TNA website. That is simply inexcusable. They have few commercials on other networks. Hell, they're not even advertised enough on their own network. The production is not the best, and people won't watch anything that doesn't have the kind of production that WWE does. The whole argument that people have lost faith in the product due to the damage that Russo, Hogan and Bischoff did to it is bogus, because TNA's highest viewership (on a consistent basis) has been when Russo was booking and Hogan and Bischoff were running roughshod over TNA. They got Russo out, kept Hogan and Bischoff away from TV, pushed newer talent at the top and started having longer wrestling matches and the ratings fell down. It's obvious what the smarks want and what the casuals want are two completely different things. But the smarks make the most noise. Changing the product and making it more exciting, innovative, alternative, unique etc. is not going to help them in the ratings. A lot of other things has to change.
then f them they should be watching wrestling in the first place

indy wrestling has proved in the last 10 years that you dont need to tv to be valid

if tv really is a dead end for the good of this sport then f it

there are plenty of feds other than tna making money, money that tna and only tna could be making

that should be enough of a separation of wrestling and sports entertainment i can see the tag line now "Sports Entertianments is fake, this is real"
nevereveragainu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 01:41 PM   #9 (permalink)
AJ
*****
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: AJ land
Posts: 1,967
AJ needs to make some friendsAJ needs to make some friendsAJ needs to make some friendsAJ needs to make some friendsAJ needs to make some friendsAJ needs to make some friendsAJ needs to make some friendsAJ needs to make some friendsAJ needs to make some friendsAJ needs to make some friendsAJ needs to make some friends
Default Re: Would TNA be Bigger

Quote:
Originally Posted by TNAmarkFromIndia View Post
TNA could have the best wrestling product they could possibly have. They could fire all the former WWE stars in their company and have a "No former WWE wrestlers" policy. They could sign some of the most talented wrestlers in the indies and put out the most unique, innovative product that there is but the ratings will still remain the same. Why? Because it's not that people want an alternative to WWE, it's that they don't really care about anything BUT the WWE. Find one of the casual WWE fans and show them a clip of an X-division match and tell me if they say, "Wow, that's awesome! I'm gonna watch this every single week!". They would rather say, "Yawn. This is so boring. Who in the hell would want to watch a bunch of midgets wrestle some boring matches in a little soundstage with 500 people?". The 2005/06 product itself didn't do too well in the ratings. The problem lies in a lot of other things. TNA needs to improve on their business side of things. They need to market and promote their product well enough so that it reaches more people. People often don't even know that TNA is running a house show in their town until they log into the TNA website. That is simply inexcusable. They have few commercials on other networks. Hell, they're not even advertised enough on their own network. The production is not the best, and people won't watch anything that doesn't have the kind of production that WWE does. The whole argument that people have lost faith in the product due to the damage that Russo, Hogan and Bischoff did to it is bogus, because TNA's highest viewership (on a consistent basis) has been when Russo was booking and Hogan and Bischoff were running roughshod over TNA. They got Russo out, kept Hogan and Bischoff away from TV, pushed newer talent at the top and started having longer wrestling matches and the ratings fell down. It's obvious what the smarks want and what the casuals want are two completely different things. But the smarks make the most noise. Changing the product and making it more exciting, innovative, alternative, unique etc. is not going to help them in the ratings. A lot of other things has to change.
Paragraphs, paragraphs, paragraphs.
AJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 06:10 PM   #10 (permalink)
Humbled
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 475
Roncaglione Roncaglione
Default Re: Would TNA be Bigger

Quote:
Originally Posted by nevereveragainu View Post
indy wrestling has proved in the last 10 years that you dont need to tv to be valid
Completely untrue

Quote:
Originally Posted by nevereveragainu View Post
there are plenty of feds other than tna making money, money that tna and only tna could be making
Please give me examples ROH was never in it's history profitable and CHIKARA & PWG strive to just break even.
Roncaglione is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On


VerticalSports
Baseball Forum Golf Forum Boxing Forum Snowmobile Forum
Basketball Forum Soccer Forum MMA Forum PWC Forum
Football Forum Cricket Forum Wrestling Forum ATV Forum
Hockey Forum Volleyball Forum Paintball Forum Snowboarding Forum
Tennis Forum Rugby Forums Lacrosse Forum Skiing Forums
Copyright (C) Verticalscope Inc Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2
Powered by vBulletin Copyright 2000-2009 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
vBCredits v1.4 Copyright ©2007, PixelFX Studios