Yelled at by SCOTT STEINER
Join Date: Apr 2012
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.