shattered dreams
Hexagonal Hedonist
Xplosion is for foreign markets which directly relates to what kb brought up about what I said for whatever reason
TNA iMPACT! & ReAction LD for 12/23/10
- Thread starter It's Damn Real!
- Start date
klunderbunker
Welcome to My (And Not Sly's) House
No i'm simply stating that so far you have been wrong as usual.
klunderbunker
Welcome to My (And Not Sly's) House
So they used the domestic market to plug an angle that would be pushed on the foreign show that the domestic market won't see? Makes sense in TNA I guess.
shattered dreams
Hexagonal Hedonist
Its one week. If they do not use him then I'll say I was wrong but give it more than a week, the WWE peeps have no attention span whatsoever.
klunderbunker
Welcome to My (And Not Sly's) House
Yep. The first of many.
klunderbunker
Welcome to My (And Not Sly's) House
And no Brother and Devon this week. Nice cont.....wait why am I bitching about this?
shattered dreams
Hexagonal Hedonist
JJ, I disagree to the extremes you are talking about. They do not HAVE to do anything. Heels have to win feuds, especially when they are champs, from time to time. It just depends on how you go about it. The whole point of a heel winning is to create heat. The way they win usually doesn't glorify anything. It is also easily possible for the issue not to be wrapped up when RVD face Hardy or those two play a role in it. In real life there isn't always a fairy tale ending. When telling a realish story that might be an interesting place to convey that.
shattered dreams
Hexagonal Hedonist
KB's obsession with a 10 second walk through that I doubt they paid him a dime extra for is truly remarkable. Impact is the everybody market btw. I'd tell you they also put him on the most recent spin cycle but I fear for the effect on your heart. But I am sure they have no intention to use him for anything.
JJYanks121
The Mouth of the South Shore
So, in real life, we should glorify a man who carelessly caused another man to have a concussion. Not by accident, not in the heat of battle, but because a simple spot he had to perform, he fucked up. Obviously life doesn't have fairy tale endings, but WRESTLING ISNT REAL LIFE!!! It's never going to be and it shouldn't be. It tells stories like any other TV show, but issues are dealt with in a ring. I have no problem with a heel winning a feud if it's over an issue that isn't so real. If two guys dislike each other for whatever reason, one will win and it won't always be a good guy, but when you have an issue that is real and it is brought on screen (rarely a good idea), the good guy has to win. WWE fucked that up when Edge went over Matt Hardy, and TNA is fucking it up here. Justify it all you want with "Hardy sucks" and "Edge is the better talent", but the story needed to see Matt win. As painted on TV, he was a fucking victim and you just told your audience that it's ok to steal girlfriends and be a douche. Now, we're telling the audience that it's ok to be a ******** and to cause a former friend a concussion with no remorse and no punishment, especially in this situation when those of us talking here know that this happened behind the scenes as a result of the talent in question working under the influence with no form of repercussion on the horizon. If you think this is ok, I really think you need to re-evaluate things.
I'm sorry for getting on you so much, but you have to understand where I'm coming from. Some wrestling fans are barbaric and stupid, but that doesnt' mean we should throw logic and morals out the window to be a little unpredictable. In a situation like this where it is "real", the good guys need to win. Simple as that.
Joe's Gonna Kill You
The Hunt is On
JJ I understand what you are saying but its still way to early to think that it will definitely be RVD who defeats him for the title it could still be Anderson who eventually wins the title from Hardy down the road because I expect him to hold it for awhile.
JJYanks121
The Mouth of the South Shore
Even if Anderson does win it down the road, the whole story of Anderson, Morgan, and Hardy was filler from the beginning. It came about because of what happened in reality, but the problem with that, and it has been the problem from the beginning, is that it's the type of story that people will connect to. Thus, even though you want Hardy to be champ for a year, having him be that despite doing something stupid and having him be a champ despite being portrayed as a heartless guy looking to cause head injuries and not caring when he does is wrong. If it was me and I was backed into this situation, I book Morgan to win the title, have Anderson want the match afterwords, but have Morgan win, leading to Hardy somehow winning the title in a sneaky, heel way a month or two later. Then, you get the good guy triumphing, and then you can move on to other stories without looking like a heartless company.
shattered dreams
Hexagonal Hedonist
JJ, you do realize your opinion on this is entirely subjective, right? If it is your opinion that is fine but if you think this idea is some confirmed fact then I am confused.
How was that Edge storyline not a success? The Edge character was born out of it and went on to be a big part of WWE during that time and was highly watched. Just because the heel wins they are not "glorified." You keep saying people connect to this or it feels real like that is a bad thing. Then you simultaneously say that it MUST have an ending that isn't based in that same vein. Makes no sense to me. If something is working why fake it up on arbitrary supposedly moral grounds. The heel is supposed to be a bad guy. The whole point of Hardy's character is that he is soulless. Why is it incorrect to build that up? It basically boils down to when the heel wins that as long as they are booked to look poorly their is no glorifying anything. It basically says here are the real morals of the world. You can be a soulless immoral bastard and you might be able to win that way, but you are still a soulless immoral bastard.
I think claiming winning is everything is an equally poor life lessons that you seem to put a lot of stock in. A big part of this story is that maybe you should consider other things in your life, like health, more important than a title shot. Selling your soul for a title is hardly portrayed as a good thing.
You also seem to be mixing in kayfabe and non-kayfabe a lot which is a misguided approach. TNA has never mentioned Jeff Hardy and drugs and saying he is actively hopped up on something on impact is irresponsible. Kayfabe this was no accident, it was the same as millions of preceding injury angles just they made it seem more intense.
How was that Edge storyline not a success? The Edge character was born out of it and went on to be a big part of WWE during that time and was highly watched. Just because the heel wins they are not "glorified." You keep saying people connect to this or it feels real like that is a bad thing. Then you simultaneously say that it MUST have an ending that isn't based in that same vein. Makes no sense to me. If something is working why fake it up on arbitrary supposedly moral grounds. The heel is supposed to be a bad guy. The whole point of Hardy's character is that he is soulless. Why is it incorrect to build that up? It basically boils down to when the heel wins that as long as they are booked to look poorly their is no glorifying anything. It basically says here are the real morals of the world. You can be a soulless immoral bastard and you might be able to win that way, but you are still a soulless immoral bastard.
I think claiming winning is everything is an equally poor life lessons that you seem to put a lot of stock in. A big part of this story is that maybe you should consider other things in your life, like health, more important than a title shot. Selling your soul for a title is hardly portrayed as a good thing.
You also seem to be mixing in kayfabe and non-kayfabe a lot which is a misguided approach. TNA has never mentioned Jeff Hardy and drugs and saying he is actively hopped up on something on impact is irresponsible. Kayfabe this was no accident, it was the same as millions of preceding injury angles just they made it seem more intense.
JJYanks121
The Mouth of the South Shore
You are clearly not getting it and you are twisting my words around in a not so impressive fashion. This is building up to the key issue here. It doesn't matter if something "builds a guy up" or "is a success", what matters is that there are certain things you cannot joke about and cannot justify. Having had a concussion myself and seeing others struggle with them, concussions is one of them.
You don't seem to understand that in wrestling, the only way to know whose view was "right" is who ends up winning in the middle of the ring. That's what wrestling is and will always be. It's also scripted entertainment based around the idea that bad guys will come along and mess with the status quo for a period of time before a good guy takes them down. That's how the business works.
In this case, we had a group of bad guys come together to be a group. That was fine until Jeff actually fucked up a spot and gave a wrestler a real concussion. Things changed and concussions no longer were treated as comedy like with Eric Young. When you bring reality onto the screen (a Russo favorite), you have to play it out so the morally wrong gets punished.
I only brought up the Edge thing because I found that to be in bad taste as well. Edge would have become the man he is even if he lost the final match between he and Matt. Had he lost, Matt would come out looking like the hero that overcame, and Edge would be the douche who still had the chick, despite being beaten. He'd bounce back and continue to rise as a bad guy, but the storybook was already closed on the main story and Matt Hardy, the victim in it, would have emerged victorious, showing that guys who steal other people's girlfriends deserve what is coming to them (not that I condone fighting in real life, but this is wrestling after all). The point is, when a bad guy goes too far, he has to lose in the end.
I'll give you another example. Randy Orton went too far when he fucked with Triple H's family. A little bit of reality was thrown in here as its the first time that Hunter was acknowledged on screen as a McMahon. Thus, when the thing finally culminated at Wrestlemania, Triple H won. He won when it counted the most. You can say that Orton won afterwords, but on the grandest stage, the good guy prevailed.
In this case, Jeff Hardy did something very stupid, moreso in real life than on screen. If he wins this feud (and he's going to as he already has two victories over Matt Morgan), it's telling the viewers that giving guys concussions and not caring if they live or die is ok. I know he's a heel and that's his job, but at some point, the heel goes too far. That's when the face has to come in and win. If he doesn't, then there is a real problem. I knew wrestling fans were bloodthirsty, disgusting people, but now, even in knowing that head injuries play a role in seriously deteriorating lives, we are ok with a story taking place where a guy can cause a head injury on screen, laugh about it, and get the last laugh. If you think this is ok, you have more problems than I can help you with.
All I'm saying is that Morgan or maybe Anderson needed to win the title. Even temporarily, and then have Hardy win the belt back shortly thereafter. If that happens, the concussion storyline is justified as the victim prevails over the bad guy, but then a new story can start if the heel cheats the face out of the belt. It's no longer about the concussion, it's now about the heel's cheating ways.
I hope you understand where I'm coming from. So far, you haven't. Maybe this post will finally shed some light on it. I know you are a mark, but I have attacked both companies here. While I don't like using real life in storylines (there are writers for a reason), if you are going to do so, especially with a serious issue like concussions, the story has to go a certain way. Having it go the opposite way is sending out the wrong message. And no, that is not subjective AT ALL. It is a fact that it sends out the wrong message and it is a fact that concussions are a serious issue. If you think it's subjective, you are dead wrong. Concussions suck and I can attest to this. Mine took away my soccer season. It sucks. But that's real life and I don't need to fight the guy who gave it to me. On screen though, you want to show that concussions are a bad thing and anyone who jokes about them and doesn't take them seriously needs to pay. That looks like it won't happen and it's wrong. Not subjective, it's just plain wrong.
Big Nick Dudley
Nick
If Bischoff and Hogan had their way, I absolutely think this could happen.
When this happened, I actually picked up my shoe and threw it at the television. It's insane, I know.
I doubt Shattered would even attempt to defend a pinfall during commercial...please tell me I'm right, Shattered?shattered dreams
Hexagonal Hedonist
There were certainly elements of the show that I could see people finding overbooked. While the process might not have been flawless I thought the culmination of the stories they told both made sense and was interesting. Sometimes getting excessively caught up on one minor detail is a foible of the IWC. Pinfall during commercial, 15 minute ironman, 5 more minutes to a crowd that wasn't that into it. In spite of how you might feel about any of that the segment was good. We had a significant amount of good wrestling leading up to an interesting exchange on the mic that set up the PPV showdown. There is no perfection in wrestling or life for that matter.
shattered dreams
Hexagonal Hedonist
JJ, I like your passion on the subject but we are going to have to agree to disagree. I am not sure how I am twisting your words because I think it is obvious what you are saying, I just disagree that certain things MUST be done because I am not convinced wrestling MUST be the moral compass where being "right" is solely based on winning. If you are then I can see why you feel as you do. I just do not think everytime a heel wins it justifies them. The point of the business is that you make the people want to see the heel get beat. To me, as long as Hardy loses eventually then there is no moral issue. I have a much bigger moral issue with a face calling someone fat for laughs then I do having someone who is portrayed as a bad guy being callous about concussions but I do not want to make this about company vs company and I know I personally do not get my moral lessons from wrestling.
I also think you should follow Joe's advice and see what happens. For all you know Anderson could get Hardy eventually and you are complaining that the Empire won when there is still another movie/feud to come. We may only be right after Hoth now, so you may need to exercise some patience. If you make it too easy to triumph over evil and misfortune then it is equally misleading IMO.
I also think you should follow Joe's advice and see what happens. For all you know Anderson could get Hardy eventually and you are complaining that the Empire won when there is still another movie/feud to come. We may only be right after Hoth now, so you may need to exercise some patience. If you make it too easy to triumph over evil and misfortune then it is equally misleading IMO.
Big Nick Dudley
Nick
Yeah, yeah, yeah. "Stop nitpicking, blah, blah, blah." How about TNA stops making stupid decisions? If you don't think having a pinfall during a commercial break in a 15-minute Iron Man Match is something worth complaining about, you're wrong. As much as you say otherwise, small things matter. Details matter.
Yeah, I wasn't too pleased with that boneheaded move. It's like whoever edited the show just wanted to give the show a live feel even though it's damn obvious it isn't. Not even on a live Raw do you see something that important happening during commercials. But I do believe there was a previous Iron Man match where it also happened. I think it was either the Lesnar/Angle one or the HBK/Angle one. I can't remember though. Still stupid.
shattered dreams
Hexagonal Hedonist
Did you enjoy the segment in general? Sure details matter, but to what extent? Surely not more than the big picture. When you let minor things ruin your major things then that tends to be a disorder of sorts.
Swift thoughts of the things I watched on Youtube of last night's episode:
-The Velvet/Sarita catfight went on for way too long.
-I love Winter, glad to see her in the ring. The Winter storyline is one of the few things I can say I've definitely been enjoying about TNA. Love it.
-Having a fall during a commercial break is STUPID, no matter the company.
-The Velvet/Sarita catfight went on for way too long.
-I love Winter, glad to see her in the ring. The Winter storyline is one of the few things I can say I've definitely been enjoying about TNA. Love it.
-Having a fall during a commercial break is STUPID, no matter the company.
Big Nick Dudley
Nick
Having a pinfall during a commercial break, in a 15-minute match isn't minor, it's beyond stupid. Details matter, Shattered, no matter how much you want to convince yourself otherwise. Did I enjoy the actual match? Of course, I always enjoy a match where two of the best in-ring competitors in the world are in there. However, it makes me absolutely furious when TNA's creative department makes mistake after mistake, which ultimately takes away from the overall quality of the match/entire show. TNA isn't shit because they guys can't work. TNA is shit because Russo/Bischoff/Hogan/whoever haven't done a good job on the creative end when it comes to booking these guys.
I can't believe you work so hard to defend a bunch of guys who have come into TNA and done almost nothing right. You're smarter than that.
JJYanks121
The Mouth of the South Shore
Dude, I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt from the beginning. I talked to you on a much more even playing field that most. For a while, people have been shitting on you left and right and I gave you the benefit of the doubt that you would come to your senses and that you might rattle people for fun, but I didn't peg you out to be plain stupid, ignorant, and a completely blind defender of a company no matter the provocation.
I'm sorry, but if you don't see the problem with this story and it's potential ending, I can't help you. Maybe a psychologist can. You cannot live in a kayfabe world and think that a better product means that wrestling can shit on reality and put forth a terrible message. There is a such thing as going too far and that bridge has been crossed from time to time. That said, the noble thing for a wrestling company to do, and the right thing to do, is that when a heel finally goes "too far", no matter how much the smark crowd loves that guy for doing so, the heel has to get beat. It brings the product back to earth and hopefully reminds young viewers (yes, every company has them), teenagers, bloodthirsty young adults, and any other type of viewer out there that going too far will result in getting your ass kicked.
If you don't see why this whole angle needs to turn out a certain way, think back to 2007. Chris Benoit? Ring a bell. Despite what you want to believe, his actions changed a lot of things in the wrestling industry. He is the catalyst for rule changes, safer product, and better medical research in regards to head injuries. Every company needs to take the proper steps because it's a serious issue is EVERY sport and competition. It took TNA a long time, but I give them credit for finally banning chairshots to the head as a result of this stupidity. Still, banning chairshots happens behind the scenes and many are completely unaware that they did it. Thus, to those people, you must show them why it's wrong THROUGH A STORY. The end of that story needs the bad guys to pay for their indiscretions. This story has been painted perfectly to do this, but I fear it won't. The reason I fear that is because the company, even though they have executed this story well in short order, never had eyes of using this story as major. It became major, but they are waiting on what they perceive as bigger stories (even though they are not). Believe if you will that RVD's revenge angle is bigger, but if you bring reality onto TV, it becomes big because the results matter more.
You may not see it, and I'm not afraid to say it's because you are being ignorant and blind, but this story needs a moral end. Every wrestling story does. The heel keeps going until he goes too far and finally meets his end due to a hero taking him down. Well Jeff Hardy and Eric Bischoff went too far within a month of the big swerve. Whether they wanted to build up heat over time or not, it came early due to Jeff's actual stupidity and the following portrayal on TV. Thus, letting this story close without the faces winning would be a sad testament from a sad company that is telling its audience that giving out concussions are ok, especially in a post-Benoit world. Classy, huh?
On top of that, you couldn't have a serious conversation with me about this topic and this product without trying to take a shot at WWE. No one was talking about it but you are like a Jehovah's witness. You lord is TNA and despite the fact that they do not reward you for your salesmanship, you feel that degrading the competition and pedastaling the thing you are selling is the only way to communicate. This is me though, not some dumb fan you are trying to convert. You know me damn well and you should know that pot shots are unnecessary and plain silly. The Cena/King/Vickie thing is a totally different topic and it didn't need to get brought in. This is about the morality behind a reality based story in TNA and nothing more.
I urge you to take a step back and forget about being a fanboy for a minute. Forget about selling TNA to the masses and forget about defending it on a broader plane. We aren't talking about who should be pushed and which lines are stupid. We are talking about a real moral issue here and if you think that it helps a company's image (a company that needs all the positive stigma they can get) to put a story forward of a heartless owner and champion who give out concussions and show no care to the guy who got it, asking him to compete before being medically cleared, and laughing about it is ok if those men aren't defeated as a result, then you have a lot of problems. Way more problems than any of us here at wrestlezone can help you with. If you want to defend this company you love so much, understand what I am saying and write a letter to them demanding that whatever plans they might have, make sure they include at least a temporary victory for the victims. Anything else will and should result in a negative image for TNA, as this is the risk you run with using reality as part of your storylines.
I'm sorry, but this is how it is. This is why I'm not a fan of taking a real life situation and playing it out on screen. You run the risk of screwing yourself over because the kayfabe world is quite different than the real world. Of course, here in the real world is where us fans live, and us fans need to know the dangers of concussions and that the right message is that of "they aren't good, they have really bad consequences, and we need to work to do everything we can do prevent them and if they occur, protect those who have had them". By letting the heels triumph because g-d forbid it weakens the megagroup a little bit, you are sending the wrong message, and that's the last thing a company looking to grow needs. I'm sorry, but it's just wrong, and if you can't see that, then you are a lot worse than just a pain in the ass that likes to push buttons on the internet. You are a heartless person who will fight tooth and nail to support a company you owe nothing to no matter how heartless they themselves can and seem to be.
I sincerely hope that I'm wrong and that by February, Jeff Hardy is not champion, at least for the short term. If I'm right though, be prepared for a very ugly company portrayal.