Round 2: GuyCompton -vs- Riaku

Discussion in 'Debater's League 2010' started by D-Man, Aug 8, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. D-Man

    D-Man Gone but never forgotten.

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    744
    Likes Received:
    1,607
    True or False. TNA’s attempt at trying their own Monday Night Wars with WWE has caused them more damage than benefits to them and their image.

    This is a second round match in the Debater's League. GuyCompton is the home debater and gets to choose which side of the debate they will be on and who debates first, but they have 24 hours to make their choice.

    This thread is for DEBATERS ONLY and will end on Friday at 2pm EST.

    Good luck.​
     
    #1
  2. Turd Ferguson

    Turd Ferguson DA-DA Da Da Da Bah Da Da DADADA

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2009
    Messages:
    957
    Likes Received:
    834
    True, and The Killjoy can go first.
     
    #2
  3. ABMorales787

    ABMorales787 Lord And Master
    Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2009
    Messages:
    3,284
    Likes Received:
    2,812
    Ok then, I'll start. Good luck to Guy and may the better man win.
    I have to debate on this being a false statement. And that is exactly how I see it. False. Why? Easy. During the period in which TNA iMPACT! was broadcasting on Mondays, it prominently featured people such as The Band, The Nasty Boys, Hulk Hogan, Mick Foley, Jeff Jarrett, Eric Bischoff and other wrestlers that people would consider "overaged". Skipping ahead to their return to Thursdays, the show little by little began to shift away from the "Hulk Hogan vs Ric Flair" story and focused more on the development of Fortune, Mr. Anderson's rise in popularity, Jay Lethal's huge push and MCMG finally winning tag team gold. It can be considered a bit of a youth movement, as the older guys have taken the back seat as opposed to their run on Mondays.

    Not only that, but the show has become somewhat more coherent. Matches seem to have purposes, main events have some degree of build up and PPV's get more plugs. It seems to me that TNA has learned more from their stint on Mondays rather than falling behind the proverbial 8 ball. You could argue that their ratings have dropped from 1.2's to 0.9's and 1.0's but last I checked they only made it to the 1.2's on only 2 or 3 weeks and on the night of Sting/Angle in an Empty Arena Street Fight, TNA reached it's highest rating until Jan. 4th (1.3). Basically, I'm saying that they haven't fallen far as their ratings for iMPACT! currently reach 1.1. The same as last year.


    I'll leave it here for now and wait for Guy's response.
     
    #3
    Mr. Steve likes this.
  4. Turd Ferguson

    Turd Ferguson DA-DA Da Da Da Bah Da Da DADADA

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2009
    Messages:
    957
    Likes Received:
    834
    I'll begin with my opening statement and then I will respond to the Killjoy's post.

    The Monday Night Conflict was a period earlier this year where TNA foolishly tried to compete with Monday Night Raw for absolutely no reason. To this day, I still don't understand what in god's name they were thinking trying to cut into the market share of the WWE. The WWE has wrestling on Monday nights on lockdown, and have been a staple of Monday night cable programming for the last seventeen years. During this time, they outlasted fierce competition from WCW, which was an established brand when they made the jump to Monday nights back in 1995, and they had legitimate star power. They made WCW look silly in the ratings in its dying days, and was this back when wrestling was still on the radar of the general public.

    The WWE is a powerhouse, and is very much the biggest wrestling company out there. TNA had absolutely nothing going for it back when they tried to jump to Monday nights. Let's not kid ourselves here, TNA wanted the move to Monday nights to be permanent. Hulk Hogan and Eric Bischoff probably wanted to stick it to Vince McMahon. They probably felt they could have sold wrestling fans on an alternative, but its hard to be an alternative when your company really isn't much more different from the WWE, and you acknowledge them as the competition ad nauseum. Furthermore, they had no idea how to market and promote themselves. They didn't promote Jeff Hardy's debut at all, and they didn't even get him in there to wrestle. The only thing they really promoted was Hulk Hogan being there, and it's not like he was going to wrestle. Hogan's pretty much looked at as a joke now after all of his family issues as well.

    TNA got slaughtered in the ratings week in and week out while they were on Monday nights. If a casual fan tuned in and tried watching TNA, they'd see old guys wrestling, and sure, you'd get that feeling of nostalgia, and that would be it. TNA didn't do anything to pull viewers in throughout that time. I think the ratings showed that they didn't do anything to attract what they wanted, new viewers and to cut into the WWE's market share. They went back to Thursday nights with their collective tails between their legs, and the problem is that they never really promoted that, so when Joe Casual goes back to watch TNA again on some Monday night, and Maximum Overdrive is showing on Spike, they'll probably think the company went out of business.

    The company failed at the Monday Night experiment, big time. It goes to show that they're destined to always ride on the WWE's coattails. It also goes to show that they're just not good enough to compete with the WWE, and that management has no idea what they're doing. They had no real long-term plan with Monday nights. Rather than entice viewers to stay and watch, they trotted out WWE reject after WWE reject, and NOT ONE was a true gamechanger. If you're going to go to war with the WWE on Monday nights, which is what they were trying to do, you need someone with bonafide star power, which is what not one person on the TNA roster has.

    They didn't realize that you need to take baby steps before you compete with the big leagues. They got their collective asses handed to them, and were probably forced to go back to Thursdays by Spike. And as such, TNA will always be seen as a retirement home for WWE rejects.

    I just realized that I'm playing my hand a little bit too much here... this is solid enough for an opening statement.

    Yes, they went to war with has-beens and old wrestlers. People who are well past their prime, and remember, this is how they were trying to gain fans and cut into the WWE's market share. If I'm a casual fan, or just a WWE fan, why would I want to see these guys, when they can't go anymore?

    Irrelevant. This is a debate on how the Monday Night Conflict affected TNA. Everything you just mentioned here took place AFTER the Monday Night Conflict ended and they went back to Thursday nights. If this were a debate on how MOVING BACK to Thursday benefited TNA, then these would be great points.

    You are essentially supposed to be arguing that TNA's attempts at the Monday Night Wars benefited the company. I applaud your effort on trying to spin it on what they've done since then. Nobody in their right mind can argue that TNA moving to Mondays was a smart move and that they had any type of benefit out of it.

    Great, so why couldn't they do this back when they competed with the WWE? Why couldn't they give pushes to the younger guys, and try to be a true alternative that way? Again, this is all irrelevant, because you are discussing what happened after the Monday Night Conflict. By the way, with an estimated 8,000 buys for Slammiversary and Sacrifice, nobody is buying the PPVs in the first place.

    It doesn't matter. When you're on Monday nights, and you're going head to head with the #1 wrestling company on the planet, you need to have your shit together. When you go head to head with the competition, it's not a time to go through a learning experience. You need to prove to a potential new audience that your product is better and they certainly failed to do that.

    The same as last year. Which means that they've been treading water for the last year now, only that they've wasted a lot more money on talent in doing so since that point. They brought in all sorts of guys who they thought would be gamechangers, and they haven't done anything to bring new fans into the company. When you have guys like Jeff Hardy and Rob Van Dam on the roster... those guys are going to cost serious money. They tried so hard to bring these ex-WWE stars in and they thought they'd be the next piece into getting them more recognition. It hasn't worked.

    The audience is staying the same a year later. They utterly failed at trying to take on the WWE. If I'm TNA, I'd be nervous that the ratings will never go above a 1.3, and I'd also be nervous that less people are buying the PPVs. They've taken an overall step backwards in the last year, and a lot of that can be attributed to when they stupidly tried to take on the WWE on Monday nights.
     
    #4
    ABMorales787 likes this.
  5. ABMorales787

    ABMorales787 Lord And Master
    Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2009
    Messages:
    3,284
    Likes Received:
    2,812
    Ending a monopoly. To show there is something else out there. That even if we (TNA) are small, we dare to oppose the giant. TNA has had this in mind since 2006. They just didn't feel safe enough until they got Hulk Hogan.

    Hence why TNA wanted to cut in.
    WCW died because it was full of politics. If the talent wasn't established or had some pull in his contract, he was just there to pick up a check. I wouldn't compare WCW to TNA here. TNA runs on a family-oriented work ethic while WCW was about big bucks at any cost.
    I'm aware of it and acknowledge the fact.
    After holding a 10 year monopoly, I would too really.
    WCW was similar to WWE, it still was an alternative. An alternative is having something different to choose from regardless of its cosmetic similarities. Like Cocoa Krispies and Cocoa Pebbles:
    [​IMG] [​IMG]
    Different company, similar product. Still an alternative.
    This where the learning has come in. Over time, TNA has bettered this. PPV's have been promoted very nicely with every part of the card being plugged.

    [youtube]sS7a7fZnzrw[/youtube]

    These videos were very well presented during TNA's broadcasts heading into the Victory Road event. You can say this isn't related because it happened after the Monday Night period, however I feel it is. The question of the topic is if their time on Mondays damaged the company. They learned from it. The ratings may have fallen, but at the same time, their creative team has changed, their dynamic on iMPACT! has changed, talent has grown, ratings have re-risen, and the roster has never felt more confident.
    I personally agree with you, but not professionally. Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan, Britney Spears, those Disney teens. Face it, it doesn't matter if what a celebrity does is good or bad, the media eats it up.
    RVD's debut took place on their first night. The loudest the iMPACT! Zone has ever been. Sting turned heel the same night. The Angle/Anderson feud happened during this time. RVD won the TNA World Championship after 4 grueling matches in under 24 hours. How's that nothing?
    No. They learned that the fans would rather not choose what wrestling show to watch and watch them both rather than just one. Which is why during the Monday period, they had a repeat on Thursdays with the exception of one week. Testing the grounds.
    Joe Casual must be living under a rock. Spike has been doing a better job of promoting TNA nowadays. A TNA commercial can air during Maximum Overdrive.
    An experiment is not a failure if a positive result can be found. Even if its not the one they had in mind. TNA has wanted to compete with WWE since 2006. Looking back at the days of VKM mocking Mr. McMahon and Triple H and showing up outside a WWE arena. They just waited to have the right person. Once they began to look into the change, they took careful steps to see if it was an idea that could produce more or if they could learn from what they were failing at previously.
    Considering their backup plan by having replays on Thursdays, I'd say they did have a plan. To see if it was a viable idea to directly compete or continue growing.
    Mr. Anderson, The Pope, RVD and Jeff Hardy? Mr. Anderson has grown and grabbed every single bit he had of star power and made it flourish in less than 6 months, same with D' Angelo Dinero. RVD may not be the most impressive promo guy out there, but the crowd eats him up. Jeff has his legal issues, but there is no denying he can still offer.
    Was January 4 not a baby step? Was moving to Mondays while still featuring a Thursday replay not a baby step?
    :disappointed: Come on, man. Don't bring this old, inaccurate cliche in here.

    *huff* *huff* Damn...

    "Ric Flair is in TNA? Man I miss that guy. What's he up to there? Let's watch". They draw people in and then give the rub to the young guy. In the Jan 4th episode of iMPACT! Hulk Hogan made his debut. What did he do? Praise the young guys all promo long (with a little talk about change and challenge too). Then Angle/Styles was announced. The (rather amazing) match took place, and when it ended, you had Ric Flair nodding in approval and Hulk Hogan coming out and saying "Those two guys in the ring right now are the two greatest wrestlers on the planet". We get a similar thing today with Ric Flair, Jay Lethal and Fortune. Yes, you did have The Nasty Boys in there and The Band, however The Band helped put over Beer Money and Eric Young, but outside circumstances came along the way. Sean Morley only had 2 matches. One was a loss to Desmond Wolfe. Orlando Jordan helped put over The Pope, who would then feud for the World Championship. These old guys were here to play as role models to younger talent.

    The topic asks if TNA stint on Mondays did any damage. I was just saying no by presenting what happened afterwords.

    It wasn't the smartest thing to do, but it did benefit them. How is having a billboard on NYC, your network giving green light to the possibility of more shows and having more people in the wrestling business interested in contributing (Tommy Dreamer, Rob Van Dam) to the business in their own way something negative? It got their name out, even if the ratings didn't improve and even fell, they have more notoriety now.
    They did as I explained a bit earlier, however they also focused on getting the "older" name out there as well. But like I said, it did not damage them, it enlightened them.
    I don't buy into these reports. TNA seems way too relaxed on that regard. But that's off topic for me.
    They got their name out to that rather saturated market. They had a solid contingency plan. They retreated before getting in too deep. How did they not have their "shit together"? This is a business that revolves around taking calculated risks. It has always been. How is that a failure? It is the nature of the pro wrestling business. Just because some find more success than others does not make it a failure.


    It's only been 6 months. In the 90's when WCW "declared war", it took them 2 years to finally start getting the upper hand. And when WWE had all the right players (The Rock, Stone Cold Steve Austin, Mankind, etc.), it took them over a year to turn the tide.
    TNA didn't feel satisfied with the way thing were working in '09. Their ratings were growing but not fast enough. Spike wasn't helping either with their lack of marketing. So once TNA got a hold of Hulk Hogan, they decided to change the formula. They went to try and take on WWE on Monday nights. They may have lost in the ratings, but at the same time, they gained some notoriety in the mainstream and Spike has had more interest in them. TNA ReAction (which was produced during its stint on Mondays) is now a 2nd show for TNA to air in its US market and offers a feel different from any other wrestling show in the week. TNA Xplosion was re-branded and Spike has shown interest in bringing it to their channel. This all came from TNA "stupidly and blindly" jumping to Mondays for a while. They told everybody that they can be big some day and are growing to this day. They expanded their market and now have a wider range of programming. Their "competition" has taken notice. How is that damaging?
     
    #5
    Turd Ferguson likes this.
  6. Turd Ferguson

    Turd Ferguson DA-DA Da Da Da Bah Da Da DADADA

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2009
    Messages:
    957
    Likes Received:
    834
    Okay, I'm going to equate it like this. You work at McDonald's, right? You know first hand how powerful the McDonald's brand name is. Imagine if a lower-level fast food joint like Five Guys decided that because they got the guy who was in the Ronald McDonald costume twenty years ago to now be their mascot, that they're going to IMMEDIATELY roll out an expansion where they're going to open up a Five Guys right in the vicinity of every McDonald's in the country. Most people don't know what in the hell Five Guys is. Instead of slowly rolling out locations, and building brand recognition, they decide to go ahead and say, "McDonald's, we're taking you down!" In addition to this, they stop serving what they have on their menu and bring back old and failed items that used to be on the McDonald's menu, such as the McRib. Sure, the McRib might have been popular for a little bit, but people got sick of it, and soon enough, it didn't draw, period.

    It's a terrible business plan. Five Guys would lose a lot of money in doing this and look like complete jokes. You walk before you run... which is what WCW did back when they tried to compete with the WWE. And for awhile, they were successful. You just can't compete with the WWE, when people really don't know what it is you actually are.

    And TNA proved that their management is full of functional ******s.

    Vince Russo, Hulk Hogan, Jeff Jarrett, Kevin Nash, and Eric Bischoff were five of the major reasons why WCW went under back in 2000. These five guys are currently still at the top of TNA. And guess what, everyone who is/was there while the Monday Night Conflict was going on... Scott Hall, X-Pac, The Nasty Boys, etc... they were they to collect a paycheck. They brought in Bubba The Love Sponge because he was Hogan's buddy. The only family-oriented thing that was going on while the Monday Night Conflict was going on was Hulk Hogan trying to sell his over-the-hill buddies on us.

    And they let their short-sightedness make them look like fools.

    An alternative to the WWE is ROH, or ECW 15 years ago, where ROH is based on athleticism and wrestling more than copycat storylines, and ECW was based on hardcore wrestling as well as awesome wrestling out of guys like Chris Jericho, Dean Malenko, and Rey Mysterio, until WCW decided to buy what was making them such an appealing alternative. And when WCW was successful, it was a true alternative to the WWF, because they had something that the WWF couldn't offer.

    What does TNA have that the WWE doesn't offer? Gimmick matches? Sure, they have the X Division, and while the Monday Night Conflict was going on, those guys got no ring time. They took a backseat to Russo's awfulness and Hogan trying to get his buddies to matter even though their sell by date was a long time ago.

    Like I've already stated, when you're taking on your competition, you need to have your shit TOGETHER. TNA wasn't ready for it. They were ill-prepared to take on the WWE, and as a result, they failed. Monday nights is NOT a time to learn. It's a time where you sink a lot of money into promotion, and you feel that this is the time to really cut into their market share. Considering that their house shows draw under 1,000 people, and they have to stay in The Impact Zone for a lot of taping of events, because nobody will go see them is a major problem. They weren't ready for a major stab at the WWE.

    And again, when nobody is buying the PPVs... who cares if they've been promoted nicely? Nobody's going to put their $34.95 down for them. Not in this economy, and not when the WWE puts on a PPV a month, and when the UFC puts on 1-2 PPV events a month.

    Well, you're wrong, because it happened after they foolishly went after the WWE. It's not related. It doesn't matter that they're doing it now, because they didn't do it when it counted the most.

    If they "learned from it"... it means that their image was broken by the move to Mondays in the first place, and they realized something was wrong. So in other words, it took the company to be thoroughly embarrassed to finally get the hint. And in the end, ratings are where they were a year ago. In my eyes, this pretty much means that TNA will never improve their position and stature, and if they ever do get their shit together and really start trying to make waves, attracting an audience like casual fans and fans who watch the WWE, well, Spike still might not let them move to Mondays out of fear that they'll get spanked in the ratings, where a repeat of UFC Unleashed would draw a stronger rating, or at least a rating of what TNA would do there, and it would cost less money for the station to do so.

    As far as the roster feeling more confident... really? Didn't Samoa Joe just get suspended for speaking out on how he's been handled? For god's sakes, this was a guy who could have been a potential star and really spearhead TNA being a contender to the WWE. TNA had him kidnapped by ninjas, didn't explain what happened to him, and they probably booked another silly angle involving him. I'd be upset too.

    Personally agree, but not professionally? What does that even mean?

    In Hogan's case, he gets thought of being a creep for that time he rubbed lotion on Brooke's legs, and how his new girlfriends REALLY look a lot like Brooke. He also is thought of being a bad father, and a complete asshole for all that stuff that happened with Nick's car accident. Hogan really isn't a constant draw for the paparazzi like those people you mentioned are.

    Because they didn't do enough to keep an audience. And that's what it comes down to. Did they or did they not succeed? The only thing I care about is the end result. They did not succeed. Ultimately, who cares if RVD debuted? His match was 10 seconds, and then he got his ass kicked by Sting.

    I think the repeat on Thursdays if anything stated that TNA wasn't confident enough in their product. They knew nobody would be watching them on Mondays. TNA also admitted defeat in the war, leaving their show on Thursdays. It was a bad idea from the getgo.

    Back when TNA first aired on January 4th, not once did they say during the program that they're on Thursdays every night and that this Monday night thing, in the interim, is just for one night. On January 11th, I'm sure people tuned in expecting to see TNA, and instead they got Maximum Overdrive, or something of that nature. Again, I'm speaking from the viewpoint of a very casual fan. When you promote something, you have to do it to the lowest common denominator. When they tried doing it every week, starting in March, it was to very little fanfare. Heck, I had no idea TNA was going to be live that night until I saw a competing LD for it. TNA did a shit job of promoting it.

    Not when you're playing with millions of dollars.

    Then the best way to compete with the WWE is to not give fans a reason to think about the WWE, and not paying them any kind of attention whatsoever. If you want to compete with the WWE, you need to do what ROH is doing, which is being a TRUE alternative, not a watered down version of the WWE, and not copying old WWE storylines. What you consider a backup plan, I consider admitting defeat. You don't let fans choose between your product and your competitor's... you MAKE them choose. And fans will choose your product over the WWE if you truly make your product can't miss. You have to put on the right matches. Less storylines, and more action. If TNA let two talented X Division guys go for 20 minutes, and you let them put on a MOTY candidate, that's something that's not miss. Capitalize on what the WWE is doing wrong... create an exciting tag division, and really capitalize on such an unutilized asset like the X Division. Instead of doing this on Monday nights, where they could have lived up to their name of Total Nonstop Action, they were content in trying to be edgy for the sake of being edgy, and letting old guys nobody cares about shit up the product.

    Again, it doesn't matter if ratings are stagnant and going nowhere. And if they really wanted to compete with the WWE on Monday nights, promoting the FUCK out of these four guys on commercials not only on Spike, but during Raw, and buying ad-time whenever and wherever they could to promote the guys who are talented that the WWE gave up on would have been critical. Imagine if you're watching Raw, and TNA aired a commercial with Bischoff saying "Hey, why are you watching this when Rob Van Dam and Jeff Hardy are wresting right now on Spike TV?" would have been a great way to get viewers to flip over and at the very least check what was going on out.

    No, it was like taking one helicopter flying lesson and calling yourself a helicopter pilot afterwards. They weren't ready.

    They gave The Nasty Boys a major angle. Rhino and Team 3D look very old. Actually, my mistake... they are now a retirement home for ECW Rejects. Look, it's nice they're giving those guys a payday but at the end of the day, and this is always the case with TNA, they need to be focusing on what they have to make things better... not rehashing old ideas that the WWE have done already. And for the most part, that is what they did throughout the Monday Night Conflict.

    The Band and Hulk Hogan took up a lot of airtime. And as far as your statement on Flair goes, the casual fan would be like, "Wait a minute... I thought this guy retired, what the hell is he doing here in this company that isn't the WWE?" And in the end, everything they did on January 4th, in the long run, meant absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things. There was one VERY Critical error they made that I'll get to in a little bit.

    In my eyes, the way you're answering the question is, "The Monday Night Wars benefited TNA because it took them getting their asses handed to them, in addition to a complete company-wide embarrassment for the company to finally take the first step in starting to do things right."

    If you're trying to build your brand name, a billboard in NYC is the last thing you should be doing. You need to be appealing to all sorts of markets, not just one segmented market in New York City. Spike is happy because they're at least drawing over a 1.0 again, which is what they certainly weren't consistently achieving on Monday nights. As far as the green light to the possibility of more shows, that TNA Reaction show was a miserable failure (a .25 rating!). I doubt another show would really succeed. Having more people interested in contributing means that they'd be happy to work for a less demanding schedule, which brings me back to the "retirement home" line. As far as notoriety goes... I think at the end, they're where they were a year ago, just in worse shape.


    Well, these are coming from Meltzer, who is pretty dead-on with his PPV buyrate numbers. And hey, you're the one who keeps bringing PPVs into this.

    It was something they shouldn't have done in the first place. Getting your name out there, when you're planning on doing this permanently is fine. Differentiate your product. The risks taken cost them a lot of money, and any level-headed person could see that it wasn't going to work. This risk wasn't calculated. TNA put their product on Mondays and did nothing to get people to watch. This hurt them in the long term more than anything else, like I mentioned earlier.


    Again, WCW had an already built-in fanbase from their days on TBS. The ratings were always close, because they snapped up guys who the left the WWE and were still popular. Luger showing up literally within days of his last WWE appearance? That was huge, and a true gamechanger. WCW had the element of having gamechangers join the roster on a regular basis. At the end of the day, the only true gamechanger for TNA would be someone like Stone Cold Steve Austin, The Rock, or a top WWE guy like John Cena, Randy Orton, or Triple H (lol) jumping ship. Shane McMahon? That would be a true gamechanger. I really don't think that even someone like Goldberg at this point would be a gamechanger.

    I really don't see any real notoriety for TNA in the mainstream media at all. Please provide some examples. The only example I can think of is when Spike probably mandates that they plug TNA on UFC broadcasts, and that leads to moments like this where Joe Rogan was openly mocking Hulk Hogan:

    [​IMG]

    The only reason why Spike has an interest in them? Well, they draw bigger ratings than other crap on that channel, like Manswers. Of course they want to promote it as much as they can. Doesn't mean they were happy with the Monday Night move, and it doesn't mean that TNA will ever get another chance there.

    I wouldn't use this as a selling point. The first show drew a .25. I was shocked that they actually gave it a timeslot.

    We'll see if TNA XPlosion (and I don't even know what channel it airs on) gets brought over to Spike. I'm sure TNA Reaction will fail again, and I doubt they'll get that chance. Spike of course wants TNA to succeed, but the fact of the matter is that the wrestling market is what it is right now. How as the WWE "taken notice"? Examples please.

    Look... the wrestling market has topped out. Pro wrestling right now just isn't popular. The ratings for both Raw and Impact are both going to stay the same. It's why the move to Mondays was so mindboggling to me. Why would you take away part of your audience (people who watch Raw still watch Impact), and still leave them the option to choose what show to watch? TNA should have been confident enough in MAKING fans choose... and of course the inherent problem there is that you need enough of an audience to make that audience decide what to watch. Promotion was a problem on all ends from this Monday Night Failure, but what was even a more monumental failure, which made TNA dig its own grave, was that despite high ratings in the 8:00-9:00 hour back on January 4th (and they came back to earth once Raw started), they neglected that and decided to go head on with Raw when they tried making Monday nights a full-time move.

    HOW FUCKING DUMB CAN YOU BE?

    This was a very critical error on TNA's part. You grab fans from the 8:00-9:00 hour... before Raw starts. From there, you make the fans make a decision.... and you do your damndest to make sure that they stay on with your product. Seriously, common sense goes a long way, and TNA set themselves up to fail on Monday nights with that monumental blunder. Again, it goes to show how stupid upper management is, and how they let their own arrogance really do a number on them.

    Look, Killjoy, I really like how you're trying to spin this argument, but at the end of the day, you still acknowledge that it took TNA getting killed on Monday nights before they really figured out the problem. The fact that every other week, their show was pretaped, was a killer as well. It killed the WWF back when they pretaped shows during the first Monday Night Wars, because Bischoff used to read results on air (although it ironically also saved them, but that is well beside the point... the WWE didn't and doesn't acknowledge TNA). This was when not as many people had the internet to find results as well. You can read spoilers at the drop of a hat now, and absolutely killed their Monday Night viewership.

    Again, it all boils down to you needing your shit together to take on your competition. TNA didn't do much of anything to instill confidence of that. It took a thorough embarrassment and losing a lot of money for them to realize what was wrong. That's not good.
     
    #6
  7. ABMorales787

    ABMorales787 Lord And Master
    Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2009
    Messages:
    3,284
    Likes Received:
    2,812
    First, if the mascot jumps ship, which would be odd, it would be a copyright infringement. Same with the the mcRib's. It's food. How are people tired of the McRib but not of the Big Mac? Second, fast food courts beg to differ with your point of view.
    Kids meals were first brought in by McDonalds. Every single fast food has them now. Not to mention Burger King taking their ideas and even making commercials about it. It works for them, it can work for TNA.
    Not much to respond to here. Give me a reason why the are "******s".

    Yet the main event revolved around AJ Styles, Abyss, Jeff Hardy and RVD. None of these guys were remotely close to the TNA World title.
    What short-sightedness? They took a calculated risk with a backup plan in hand. In the end, they lost their Monday spot, but gained their networks support. They lost their Monday slot and went back to Thursdays, at the same time, they got a total of 3 new programs and gained the interest of the masses. They did what they wanted without liabilities. With a contingency plan in hand. Being short-sighted would've been jumping straight to Mondays expecting random miracles.

    WWF couldn't offer the NWO. Nor could they offer the 4 Horsemen. They can't offer the Main Event Mafia. They can't offer Fortune, Jeff Hardy, Rob Van Dam, Abyss or the Motor City Machine Guns. Regardless of their formula, TNA is still an alternative to the WWE.
    Their first night, January 4th garnered huge ratings. Sure, they weren't near WWE, but they showed promise. So they went for it. As for the house shows, I'd rather believe what TNA says than what the dirt sheets say.
    I think we've gone way too out of subject. This is about the stint on Monday and if the damaged TNA, not PPV's. However to defend this, TNA is privately owned. They don't release buyrates and if they were this low, they would be doing something about it.

    It didn't damage TNA.


    Before The Bell, Xplosion and ReAction are TNA's new shows. Not only that but they have many sweepstakes and interactive events that have debuted during the Hogan regime, that's not an improvement?

    He was suspended because he was mad that JB counted down the end of the match:
    Nothing to do with Monday nights or Hulk Hogan.

    I hate how people eat up what celebrities do, but it doesn't change the fact that it draws the media. I hate it, but business-wise, it was a smart move.
    He's still wrestling related. A wrestling related celebrity.

    How was giving something new a try a bad idea? They had a backup plan in order to avoid damage.

    [​IMG]

    [youtube]nDfxkSD_i40&feature=fvsr[/youtube]
    WCW, the one time top company, begs to differ. Like I said, WCW was plagued with politics. Not TNA.

    There's a limit to watch you can and can't say on a commercial. Not only that, but neither one of these guys were a lock until the last minute. Hence the lack of promoting.
    You keep talking about the old guys, yet TNA is headlined by young guys. A main event revolves around the World title. Regardless of who gets the highlight earlier in the show.

    They weren't sucking their thumbs in the ring just to take up air time. They interacted prominently with the likes of AJ Styles, Abyss, Beer Money, Desmond Wolfe and Eric Young. Young guys.

    I still see a spark of curiosity in that sentence.
    Mr. McMahon's Million Dollar Giveaway meant nothing in the long run. And literally costed the company millions that didn't further ratings.

    Tommy Dreamer and Raven working on creative, Rob Van Dam joining, not exactly "retirement home" work lines.
    A year ago, TNA's highlight was Kurt Angle allegedly stalking Rhaka Khan.
    Meltzer does not work for TNA.

    Kurt Angle, Jeff Hardy, Mr. Anderson and Rob Van Dam weren't fresh WWE talent went they joined? RVD wasn't but he still has his. These guys were WWE's top guys not too long ago. Not to mention, WWE and Jimmy Crockett Promotions were pretty much they same age.
    You of all people should know wrestling and MMA don't mix. This isn't Rogan's first interaction with wrestling either. And considering the fact that UFC's Heavyweight Champion was a one time pro wrestler, I'd say he just got caught up with Hogan's over the top plug.
    Umm... UFC is in that channel. UFC was sent to Mondays once only, even though it can outrate WWE it didn't stay for a run. Unlike TNA.

    Xplosion does not air in the US market. However it goes very will in European, Australian and other markets. You talk as if TNA was gonna debut the show on Mondays as well.
    January 4th. When Hulk Hogan was announced to debut that day back in October within months Bret's return was secured for that day. He could've come back earlier when Undertaker got screwed or after. But it happened on Jan 4th. Not only that but you have WWE talent actively speaking on the product. JR, Jericho even John Cena.
    :icon_neutral:


    TNA's shows were pretaped before and after Mondays. Yet ratings go up. It's a moot point. How is it getting killed if you gain something? TV ratings did go down, but that doesn't change the fact that Spike has given them more support, people know TNA is out there and WWE knows these guys are not afraid. Notoriety is not damaging.

    I feel like I said enough. Nothing against you, Guy, it's just that I feel my posts just go around in circles talking about the same thing rather than looking at different perspectives. I'll conclude my debate with this post.

    If TNA did indeed suffer any damage from it's stint on Mondays, how could the company be expanding? If it suffered any major losses, why are they looking to move to a larger and probably more costly location (The World, New York)? If the rating did so terribly, why is the channel offering 2 new programs (ReAction, Xplosion)? If the the company is ailing economically, with supposedly low buyrates, low house show sales and low overall income, who is it planning a tour in the other side of the world? These were all things first announced during TNA's short run on a Monday night timeslot that matched WWE Monday Night Raw. Ratings aren't everything. Progression and expansion means a lot. And if TNA is progressing with it's programming and events, as well as expanding, it can't be failing. Therefor TNA did not suffer from it's stint on Monday nights.

    I''l leave it there. Good luck, Guy and may the better man win.
     
    #7
  8. Turd Ferguson

    Turd Ferguson DA-DA Da Da Da Bah Da Da DADADA

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2009
    Messages:
    957
    Likes Received:
    834
    I expected a lot better from you, Killjoy. Your last post was really maddening, because, well, a lot of it was bushleague and full of underhanded tactics.

    Well, did I ever say he'd be playing Ronald McDonald? All of this is beside the point. TNA needs to differentiate themselves from the WWE. The comparison I made would obviously lead one to think that of course they couldn't call it the McRib. It would be something like the Rib sandwich. The Filet of Fish would be something like the "Filet of Sea Creature". The fact of the matter is that TNA is bringing in all of these pieces that the WWE used to offer, under different names and cashing in on a major promotional piece from the WWE 20 years ago. That's the point I was making, and that's the point you missed completely.

    Didn't matter. They booked the show around the wrong people, didn't promote Jeff Hardy and RVD, and that's why they failed on Monday nights. By the way, how the fuck do you screw up having the biggest merchandise mover and quite possibly the most popular wrestler the WWE had over the last two years? If you have Jeff Hardy, you promote the fact that you have him, and that he's putting on matches against RVD and Kurt Angle. You spend a lot on advertising. Problem is, TNA doesn't advertise and market.

    I've already stated the problem with this. And of course Spike is going to support them, they air TNA on the network.

    I've already brought up that TNA Reaction did a .25 rating the only time it aired, and I expressed how I was shocked over it getting a full order. We'll see if they get the other two. Nothing's set in stone yet.

    I'm pretty sure they were expecting a 2.0 or higher. Don't kid yourself.

    Why in god's name are you comparing the nWo and The Four Horsemen to the Main Event Mafia?!

    The only unique thing here is the MCMG. TNA is not an alternative because they are a watered down version of the WWE. ROH is an alternative. TNA is not.

    From 8:00-9:00. I've already gone over this. A big reason why they failed on Mondays was because they didn't utilize that unopposed hour. Did you even read my last post besides posting stuff that offended me greatly (which I'm going to get to)?

    From 8:00-9:00.

    When a company is in trouble, either in the news, or financially, they spin the news and go on damage control. Psst... by the way, you can't dispute actual attendance numbers.

    ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?

    You introduced PPVs into this debate. Once YOU introduce PPVs, I'm going to hammer home that it's irrelevant in all of this. This was just the first time where you were being disingenuous throughout this post. Don't want PPVs brought into this? Don't bring them up in the first place. Don't tell me I'm being off-topic because your argument got turned around on you.

    Meltzer gets these PPV numbers. He also gets UFC PPV numbers, and they're privately owned. Considering Meltzer's main forte is PRO WRESTLING, well I'm sure these are accurate.

    It did. They failed on Monday Nights because they didn't execute what they needed to do to bring in viewers. It was a resounding failure.

    I haven't heard of ONE Sweepstakes/Interactive Event offered by TNA. I've already explained that ReAction did a .25 rating. IT'S NOT A SELLING POINT FOR YOUR ARGUMENT.

    REALLY? You bring something into an argument, I'm going to tell you why you're wrong. I didn't even bring up AJ's comments on RVD being champion.

    Anyone with ANY type of business sense could see it was going to fail.

    Congratulations, you just brought up two pieces of promotion with no context that promoted the January 4th Impact and not the promotion for when they went to Mondays full time. Thanks for helping to prove my point.

    You're getting off-topic now.

    In a commercial, you can do what you want as long as it isn't obscene or misleading. As far as your second point goes, you wait until you can promote those guys on a commercial. I don't think that's too hard of a concept.

    Rob Van Dam, Kurt Angle, and Sting: Young guys!

    It's still a problem when a two hour show features 20 minutes of actual wrestling.

    One of those guys was a main event player. Abyss was literally the second coming of Dave Sullivan. Eric Young was the bitch in The Band storyline.
    For all the wrong reasons.

    McMahon's Millions still garnered a huge response, and even got mention on Fox News and other outlets. His inability to use a phone was also made fun of on The Soup. The site to try to sign up was bombed. It was a huge hit as it got the WWE mainstream attention, something that TNA doesn't have.

    Holy shit.


    Remember that fun game from earlier, "Killjoy being a disingenuous debater"? It's time for another round!!!

    This piqued my interest because I haven't seen any mainstream notoriety for TNA. I was interested in seeing where and I even HELPED YOUR CAUSE by bringing up one example of it, which of course you fucking missed the meaning of. And they had one UFC Fight Night on a Monday night. It wasn't a strong card in the first place, as it was headlined by one of the most boring fighters in the UFC. The UFC, by the way, can't do weekly cards.

    Doesn't mean it will do well over here, and don't put fucking words in my mouth. It's going to fail, period.

    And it's not like Bret coming back was a one shot deal, they built an angle around him and he's been around all year. It's not like they panicked at all and felt they HAD to bring Bret in. They wanted to start the year off with a bang. They could have had the guy from Burn Notice guest host and it still would have done a strong rating. Furthermore, the only time JR and Jericho talk about TNA is in a negative light.

    Doesn't matter. Want ratings to be strong? Want to really compete with the WWE? Be respectably close to their level. Spike gave them more support because they air TNA and they want them to succeed. I still don't think they'll ever get a Monday Night Shot again.

    As far as people knowing TNA is out there... well, people know Syfy airs "original movies" all the time. Doesn't mean people watch them at all, or look upon them favorably.

    No, your posts read like a typical TNA Zombie's and you've been disingenuous throughout this entire last post because I challenged every little thing you brought up to try to spin to your favor. It's not good in a debate where you bring points up and tell ME I'm off-topic when I challenge them. I thought you were above that. If this is the conclusion, then thank god.

    They went back to Thursdays with their tail between their legs. If you consider a show that did a .25 rating "expanding"... your argument is in major trouble. The other shows aren't necessarily guaranteed.

    TNA is run by functional ******s.

    Spike TV is pretty much crap television with the exception of the UFC offerings. They canceled MXC for god's sakes. They don't know what they're doing, much like TNA Management doesn't know what they're doing.

    Big deal, they do overseas tours at least twice a year in the first place.

    Actually... ratings are an essential piece of the puzzle that I'll get to in my wrap-up.

    You know how students who fail when it matters go to Summer School? That's what I'd equate things to. It's too late to change the past, but summer school can at least make you learn from your mistakes after you've paid for them. They screwed up and they're trying to fix their mistakes, but they should have executed in the first place, and if they did, they wouldn't be in this mess.

    Here's my closing statement:

    Nothing against the Killjoy, but I was excited when I got this debate against him. You see, he's a diehard fan of TNA. I've compared TNA fans to Stockholm Syndrome victims in the past. This means that he would have been a very interesting opponent, due to his passion for TNA, and he proved a worthy challenge.

    TNA was given the opportunity to compete against and challenge the WWE on Monday nights. Despite doing low ratings in the first place on Monday nights, they tried their hand at it, due to arrogance and stupidity. Spike nonetheless attempted to give them the tools to succeed, because of the highest ratings they ever did on January 4th. They did a 1.5. The issue here is that the hourly breakdown showed that in the 8:00-9:00 hour, they did quite well, and at 9:00, when Raw started, ratings dropped and leveled off.

    I had to do a lot of fishing around for these, but here are your quarter hour breakdowns for TNA on January 4th.

    1.58
    1.70
    1.78
    1.71
    1.88
    1.30
    1.42
    1.16
    1.17
    1.21
    1.19
    1.30

    The 1.88 was when Hogan apppeared at 9:00. After that, they came crashing back to earth. They didn't do enough to keep a dedicated audience. This was on January 4th.

    On March 8th, two months later, with zero promotion, they moved to Mondays to attempt a full-time run at Monday nights. Raw did a 3.4, and Impact rightfully did a .9. They neglected to realize that the 8:00 hour was crucial in January 4th being a moderate success, and they tried to go head to head with Raw. It wasn't a good move, period.

    Everything is connected to ratings, Killjoy. The wrestling market is very limited right now. People don't attend house shows. Nobody pays to get into the Impact Zone. Don't bring up that they have to get into Universal Studios... it's possible to get into The Impact Zone for free, I've proved this in the past to Sidious. People don't purchase PPVs. Go ahead and dispute Meltzer's claims all you want... there's a reason why they might be cutting back on PPVs and doing more "Clash of the Champions" type specials on Spike. Ratings equal advertising dollars, which seem to be one of the only steady streams of income TNA is getting. If ratings are limited, advertisers will try to reach their target demographics elsewhere. TNA failing on Monday nights really had a negative impact for advertisers, because if they couldn't draw against their competition, why would advertisers waste their dollars there? TNA could have consistently drawn bigger ratings if they were smart about it and tackled that unopposed hour. If they did that, along with that they're doing now, along with some promotion, they would have been more successful!

    Most of all, a move to Mondays really didn't make sense in the first place because the wrestling market is oversaturated for a small market. The WWE puts on five hours of original programming on most weeks, and that's eight hours on PPV weeks. TNA has their two hours of Impact, and then another three on PPV weeks. That's a lot of wrestling for a small market like the wrestling market is.

    Finally, they wasted a LOT of money. Rather than keeping outside acquisitions to a minimum, and not giving the right guys airtime, they gave Ric Flair a lot of in-ring time. Scott Hall and X-Pac got a lot of time. Bubba the Love Sponge overtook backstage duties when TNA already had Borash and Christy to handle those. The Nasty Boys were brought in. Sean Morley was brought in. Jeff Hardy was brought in, and it's not like he's a huge merchandise mover for TNA, which is what I'm sure they were hoping for. Rob Van Dam was brought in, and I'm sure he was expensive.

    Premium talent costs premium money. Rather than building from within, they brought in these guys as surprises, and they overtook screen time from the cheaper guys who rely on their appearances to put food on their table. Bringing in Hardy, The Pope, Anderson, RVD, and yes, even Flair as long as he's in a managerial role are good moves. However, it's a problem when you bring in dead weight and pay them money.

    It's why TNA being where they were ratings-wise a year ago is a problem. They spent a lot more money in paying talent. The revenue streams are slowing down. It took a monumental failure to finally get some positive momentum going... but it still doesn't translate to PPV buyrates and house show attendance, which is a shame because everything I've read about the house shows is that they are a lot of fun.

    But the fact of the matter is that their monumental failure on Monday nights due to not being ready and having their stuff together is going to hurt them in the long term. Spike might not want to give them the chance to go against the WWE again, and advertisers may feel like advertising with TNA on Mondays would be a colossal waste of money and not worth putting their dollars to.
     
    #8
  9. CH David

    CH David A Jock That Loves Pepsi

    Joined:
    May 22, 2009
    Messages:
    896
    Likes Received:
    768
    Damn, Guy brought it this round.

    Clarity: Both were clear and concise, but Guy just kept bringing up point after point that Killjoy wasn't responding to well enough. I admire him trying to spin the whole "learning process" thing, but it doesn't resonate with me.

    Point: Guy Compton

    Punctuality: Killjoy didn't show up for a close, whether it was personal or not, I do not know, but he still had time for one last response. Guy was here and ready.

    Point: Guy Compton

    Informative: Guy went for the throat and wouldn't stop. His use of key ratings and buyrates (disputed) got him this one.

    Point: Guy Compton

    Persuasion: Guy all the way. Like I said above, trying to spin the whole learning process was a good attempt, but Guy shot it down and shat all over it. Monday nights failed miserably for TNA, and sure you can call it a learning experience since they are back at 1.2s, but they failed when it counted. Sorry Killjoy, but Guy took this in a clean sweep in my opinion.

    Points: Guy Compton

    CH David scores this Guy Compton 5, Riaku 0.
     
    #9
    Turd Ferguson and ABMorales787 like this.
  10. Phoenix

    Phoenix WZCW's First Triple Crown Champion

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    1,630
    Likes Received:
    704
    Clarity of debate: GuyCompton
    GUy opened brilliant and didn't look back. He also was useful with the examples he made.

    Punctuality: Draw
    Both men didn't take longer than 24 hours and Riaku announced his sudden end of debating.

    Informative: GuyCompton
    Guy was effective with his information, he used it to back up his points effectively while it seemed like Riaku just used the points just for bringing them.

    Persuasion: GuyComption
    Guy was simply on fire. Like CH, I admired Riaku's use of the learning curve but Guy had him countered and seem to back it up with further evidence, I kept seeing one line responses from Riaku that were more about opinions as opposed to fighting back with fact. Guy takes this.

    Final Score
    GuyCompton: 4.5
    Riaku: 0.5
     
    #10
    ABMorales787 likes this.
  11. BooCocky

    BooCocky On A Nature walk with Daniel Bryan

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,536
    Likes Received:
    687
    I had a nice little response typed up then it kicked me off the internet. So now I'm gonna throw my scoring all in one.

    Guy wins this debate 5-0. He really brought it this debate. He made an excellent opening post. It was clear and concise. It showed us where he stood on the topic and it made the debate easy to follow. Riaku didn't make a closing argument. Therefore I couldn't give him a point here. Guy was on time and had a closing argument. He gets the point. Informative: Guy brought a lot of useful info. His ratings won me over and he brought more than Riaku. He even replied with new information. So GUy won that. Guy was also very persuasive. He made some great posts. Guy brought some facts and Riaku seemed to go the one line way. Which isn't very persuasive. Guy wins it because he brought it and was very persuasive.

    Once again...

    Guy- 5
    Riaku- 0
     
    #11
  12. Cena's Little Helper

    Cena's Little Helper Mid-Card Championship Winner

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Messages:
    1,646
    Likes Received:
    1,498
    Clarity of debate: Draw
    Both guys made pretty good opening arguments.

    Punctuality: Draw
    Both guys were snappy in their responses.

    Informative: GuyCompton
    Yeah, what everyone else says about Guy effectively using the information that he brought into the debate.

    Persuasion: Draw
    Guy owned, but I'm sympathetic towards Riaku, and I'll give him a point here trying his damnedest.

    Final Score
    GuyCompton: 3
    Riaku: 2
     
    #12
  13. Phoenix

    Phoenix WZCW's First Triple Crown Champion

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    1,630
    Likes Received:
    704
    After a complete judge's tally, GuyComption is the victor on 17.5 points to Riaku's 2.5.

    Congratulations and great debating from the both of you!
     
    #13
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"