Well, yes, I bash them for just showing up because I simply hate this format and they should hire guys from the indies that are ready for TV instead. But isn't there really not a more interesting way to bring them back but to throw them together into meaningless matches? Shouldn't they actually develop a gimmick or some tension first? Isn't it more clever to give them a proper storyline instead? Do they have to re-debut on a Thanksgiving episode, where TNA should focus on stuff that draws ratings instead of stuff to let them die a painful death? Gut Check has never done good numbers. Many viewers seem to not enjoy it.
If by top indie guys you mean ROH talent, bad luck because it ain't gonna happen. If they went all crazy over kenny king imagine what would happen if it was richards or steen. Those guys are in WWE's camp, they will never leave ROH for TNA unless they get into some "backstage problems" like aries.
This is a BIG issue I've been talking about for years, TNA sees indy talent as undercard guys so what's the point of going to TNA as a rookie and winning less money? Of course they are going to choose WWE. But this is a $$$ thing, while I'm sure you will blame prichard for everything... dixie is the one that tells him where to use da money.
So if you can't bring in top indy talent what do you do? The old school seminars where you sign prospects, give them the ball and see where they go. Orton and Cena looked like WCW jobbers when they started, now they are WWE's biggest draws.
In every 5 rookies of "AWFUL" talent, there's ALWAYS one guy that rises up from the rest.
Also, remember the bring jobbers back to wrestling thing? Right now, they can use all gut check guys to put other talent over. See how york got himself and hardy over by losing in a big match. I'm not expecting silva, brisco, sam and york to be 5 star makers today... it's all about giving them a opportunity and see where they go.
When did gut check get bad numbers? For a segment that consist in indy/rookie talent so far there hasn't been any drop which proves the concept works.