Tna = Wcw

[ztwhite]

IMO, it looks like TNA is taking the same identical route WCW took more than 15 years ago.

Sign a bunch of past their prime wrestlers - Nash, Steiner, Sting, Foley, Booker T, Dudley's, etc... - and try to draw on their name recognition. Plus, develop some of their own in the process - AJ, Joe, Daniels, Guns, Beer Money, etc... - and make a splash every once in a while - Angle, Sting, Lashley, etc...

They've taken the route of old school vs new school - MEM vs Frontline - which is eerily similar to NWO vs WCW Originals.

The TNA "management staff" has proceeded to advance to the top of the show - Jarrett & Foley - much like Bischoff pushed himself to the front on WCW.

While it's all been done before, it's arguable that it worked the first time around, so why can't it work this time ?? WCW managed to take a huge chunk of the WWE's viewing audience back in the 90's, hence the Monday Night Wars, and as we all know, became the #1 rated wrestling show on tv for several consecutive weeks.

So I'm going to pose several questions in this thread - is it smart for TNA to go in the same direction as WCW did in the 90's ?? Will it eventually work ?? Should Linda, Vince and the silver spoon kids (Shane & Steph) be worried ??

Most importantly, should TNA make the move to Monday nights in the near future and attempt to compete with Raw ??

And above all else - I am completely off base with this whole scenario ?? Am I the only one who thinks TNA is eerily similar to WCW ??

 

[Chris in SC]

I see some parallels between TNA and early WCW. But what broke WCW out was Ted Turners massive pile of money and actually drawing good stars away from WWF/E.

Until TNA gets that kind of funding, I can't see them being a true threat.

On a side note, that 6 sided ring looks like something from a bad Hulk Hogan movie.

 

[LokiCobain]

They've taken the route of old school vs new school - MEM vs Frontline - which is eerily similar to NWO vs WCW Originals.

While it's all been done before, it's arguable that it worked the first time around, so why can't it work this time ?? WCW managed to take a huge chunk of the WWE's viewing audience back in the 90's, hence the Monday Night Wars, and as we all know, became the #1 rated wrestling show on tv for several consecutive weeks.

So I'm going to pose several questions in this thread - is it smart for TNA to go in the same direction as WCW did in the 90's ?? Will it eventually work ?? Should Linda, Vince and the silver spoon kids (Shane & Steph) be worried ??

Most importantly, should TNA make the move to Monday nights in the near future and attempt to compete with Raw ??

And above all else - I am completely off base with this whole scenario ?? Am I the only one who thinks TNA is eerily similar to WCW ??

I don't think you're the only one by any means who thinks they're "eerily similar", but that isn't relevant at all. The questions you're asking are going to make it more like WCW, so if it's a bad thing, then I don't know why you would want that.

WWE recycles storylines all the time, so why not freshen up probably the best storyline of the 90s? Remember WWE's counterpart to nWo? DX? Okay, fast forward 10 years. Remember DX? I have the capability of feeling naustalgia like everyone else, but was that really the best thing to do?

I don't know why anyone would be surprised that TNA and WCW are similar because it's the same crew. Knowing that, I doubt they'd try for Mondays (Bischoff's idea), or anything that would put them in direct competition with WWE because they can't compete. It's not about ratings. That's a ridiculous thing to fight over. TNA seems to be building a legitimate alternative that cares about the product and history more than capital. They're not going in the same direction as they did in the 90s.

I've said this on numerous threads. When WCW brought in the old guys, it made people watch, right? I think we can all agree. WCW went from nothing to actually being a national contender. They overall lost the war because they rushed it. Name power = viewership. Once people tune in for Sting and Angle, they get distracted by the "homegrown" "Cruiserweights" (WCW's Eddie Guerrero, Christ Jericho, etc). The Legends draw the viewership and PPV buys, and the other talent keeps them.

It seems that everyone thinks starting a company against a monopoly is the easiest thing on the planet to do and it takes no time at all to do it. It's a long shot at best, and the fact that TNA has made it this far speaks volumes. If TNA switches to Mondays then it's a terrible business strategy and it may work in the short term, but staying just under the WWE's radar (which they have done, Vince was quoted as saying he doesn't feel threatened) can allow them to grow. A premature "war" if you will kill any chances of long term success, as you mentioned, they just don't have the money to do that. The bigger surprise was seeing WWE Superstars go Thursdays before TNA. Wednesday was an open night but WWE "chose" Thursdays (if they didn't have a choice it's irrelevant)

 

[bioshock]

You forget one thing. WWE wishes they had Foley & Sting. Had WWE had Foley still then he would of been the guy to of faced Y2J at WM25, and it would of been one hell of a match.

And when WCW signed all the older wrestlers like Hogan, Savage, Bobby the Brain, Mean Gene, Lex Luger, Earthquake, Beefcake ect.. and what did it turn into? Turned into everyone watching WCW over WWF.

And yes I think TNA should move to Monday Nights with a time slot 8pm to 10pm, then like WCW did, just load up that 1st and 2nd hour with rock solid matches. TNA has one edge right now, and its that its not PG, and they like to show lots of blood.

But I think even with Lashley, TNA is still another big sign from moving to say Monday Nights. Maybe they should go after some former UFC fighters or something, like say Chuck Liddell, who at 38 or so would have another 5-10 good years in wrestling if he wanted, compared to being lucky to have one more good MMA year left in him.

 

[Swolfsta22]

Man people need to stop bashing TnA, give them some credit me and my friend recently went to a monday night raw in philadelphia, it was a 3 hour special too and it was not as good as lockdown the past sunday, TnA is excellent. YES i said it Excellent thier storylines are poop 60% of the time but thier wrestling is better the WWE's is nowa days, and as for using old wrestlers, i dont agree with wat thier doin with all the old wrestlers but the do need some big names too get them some hype..

I think they should start looking at thier own original talent and using them more and build them up to main event status, but they are still building their company and making a name for themselves...give them time and give them credit they came from nothing to almost something, u obviously are a wrestling fan if your in these forums so watch thier wrestling, its quite good i tell you!

And as for being another WcW, i think your right they are very simalar to wcw but the arent realy competing with WWE like WcW was they are only competing with EcW but thats safe and not realy a big deal, they arent throwing money around like crazy like wcw did, they are smarter than that, i think they will last longer than WcW...I Hope They Do

 

[Dave]

I think the reason that TNA is becoming more like WCW is because WCW did have a winning formula at one point. I think the way any successful company begins to succeed, not just with wrestling but with anywhere, is that they have a good mix of young stars and experienced guys. Take my work for example. I am a trainee architect. In my office there is 5 guys who have been with us for over 10 years. They have experience that I don't. It wouldn't make sense to just fill a company with young talent just out of college etc.

However, I don't think that the WWE will be overly worried about TNA. Every week the viewrs are not getting any better and I also think that if TNA switched to Mondays, they would get absolutely crushed by Raw. Shame really, but true none the less.

The problem is, TNA just doesn't have the same edge that WCW had. I remember WCW giving away storylines etc. However, I don't think TNA has it in it to come close to WWE. By all accounts it's not really impressing it's fans at the moment.

 

[Davey McBoy]

I think TNA's current strategy is working well, especially for such a young company. You can say what you want about guys being past their prime but in reality wrestlers can work and draw money for decades longer than other athletes IF they treat their bodies right.

As the big names have started to appear on TNA over the last few years people have tuned in. Obviously they are not nearly in the same league as WWE but are making good strides. Using the older guys right now is great for building the product, the real test will come if TNA ever does start to catch up to Vince and become a threat. If at this point the older hands are still at the top and if the younger guys percieve a glass ceiling like Benoit, Guerrero, Jericho, Saturn and Malenko did in WCW then Vince will buy them all, leaving TNA with a poor mid card and under performing main events.

I think it's a great strategy to start out with a WCW mindset but as much as older guys can still draw money, younger talent should be allowed to eventually push through, especially when your main eventers clearly don't have the right body or mindset for in ring stuff anymore. See Piper's last WCW run. That really pained me to watch.

 

[mean_gene_roberts]

It's amazing that people are still rehashing the same arguments after 7 years of TNA. WWE veterens, TNA originals, WCW reincarnated.

I appreciate the fact that TNA is building on the history of professional wrestling as a whole whereas WWF/E has tried it's damnest to bury the history of 150+ years of the business.

Way too much credit is given to Vinnie Mac for supposedly giving birth to wrestling. His vision of wrestling, yes...not as a whole. WWF/E is his vision of the best business model for the genre. TNA is Jeff Jarretts' vision. And the owners of ROH, CZW, NWA and hundreds of other promotions around the world are guided by what they think the "sport" should be.

WCW was formed from what used to be Georgia Championship Wrestling, which was on TBS for quite a few years before the then WWF and on a national audience thanks to the Superstation. The WWF was around, but not on the same level, as their programs were bought by various outlets in a syndication format, just like old re-runs of Gilligans Island. They had no network home.

Vince didn't make it big until he did something unorthodox in buying up the top performers from other promotions...most notably the AWA as can be witnessed on ESPN Classic each night...Shawn Michaels, Marty Jannetty, Sargent Slaughter and Hulk Hogan all were under Verne Gagne until Vince bought their talent and finally the company.

Vince is given way too much credit also for supposedly "creating" stars. Kevin Nash, Scott Hall, Mick Foley, Lex Luger, Dusty Rhodes, The Big Show, Steve Austin and countless others were first brought to the spotlight under the NWA, AWA, WCW banners long before WWE.

TNA doesn't need to get into a ratings war with WWE programming. Just keep building and going in the direction they are going and they will be fine.

 

[latinoheat8979]

I think that TNA is a small version of WCW which isn't a bad thing, I mean it worked well for WCW back in the mid to late 90's so why couldn't it work for TNA. All I think TNA needs besides a couple of big names and live TV is if they could get Spike TV move Impact to Monday Nights that could be the best thing that could happen to this business in a long time. I mean Vince doesn't see them as competition but I think that if Impact ever does move to Monday Night I know Vince will see them as a serious competitor. It could also start a new Monday Night War which would be great for all wrestling fans because we know both companies would try to out do the other and win in the ratings, and then maybe WWE wouldn't be giving the bs that we've been watching for a while now.

 

[Jimmbo420]

i know it wont happen for awhile, if it does happen, but if wwe and tna went head to head I would totally watch TNA over WWE if wwe is like it is today.

TNA needs to go live eventually, because a live amosphere is awsome. It part of the reason raw and nitro were so great, you didnt know what was going to happen next! BUT i could see them not doing it because the current schedule they have now attracts people like sting,angle,nash, ect.

 

[wewanttables]

First, going to monday night would kill TNA unless they did an ECW like show that ran after RAW finished. They don't need a war because they don't have a warchest. Second, TNA developing talent? AJ is a grandslam champion. Joe is a triple crown champion. They could main event any time they wanted. They need new blood but not necessarily established talent. Most importantly they need ppv and gimic buys. WWE still kills them there.

 

[RATED R CHAMPION]

You're Not The Only One Who Thinks That, I Was Waiting For A Thread To Talk About This....

Tna Is Very Similar To Wcw, Taking Stars Made In Wwe, And Bringing Them To Their Company And Putting Them As Champions, Not Pushing The Young Guns, I Mean What A Hell Is Mick Foley Doing As World Champion At This Time In His Career? Foley Was A Comentator In Wwe......damn...

Now, Someone Said Up There, I Think Swolfsta 22, He Said Tna Has Better Matches Than Wwe This Days? What's Wrong With You?...... With Just 1 Example I Can Shut Your Mouth, Undertaker Vs Hbk Wrestlemania 25, It Happened 2 Weeks And A Half Ago, That Match Is One Of The Greatest Of All Time, And You Know What???? Ahahah Tna Has Never Done A Match Like That In It's History......soooo Think Again Please.....

A 6 Sided Ring? What's That? Is This Kickboxing Mma, Or Some Shit Like That, Come On This Is Professional Wrestling, Jeff Jarett Listen To Me....

A Wrestling Ring Is Made By 4 Ring Posts And 4 Corners....... Whoooammmm We Learned Today's Lesson At Wrestling School.....

Damn It! Jarett You're A Veteran And You Have Been In The Best Companies In The World, Put A 4 Side Ring There Damn It!!!

Tna A Threat To Wwe? Nooo Not Yet, I've Got To Say That Wwe Needs To Come Back Into Somewhat The "attitude Era", And Putting More Wrestling And A Little Less Comedy (santino) Or Movies And All Of That, Please This Is World Wrestling Entertainment, Not World Wrestling Comedy Films.....

But With All, Tna Is Not Even Close To Be A Threat To Wwe.....if They Move To Mondays We Will Crush Them, Simple..... They Need To Give Pushes To Young Stars Who Could Be World Champions .... Aj Styles, Come On He's Good, Really Good Why Not Giving Him The Gold.......im Sure I Will Watch Tna If Aj Was The Champ.....not Foley Or Sting......

 

[GBALLA]

I see a lot of similarities between TNA and WCW. Especially with the strangle hold on the heavyweight title by the older guys. They need to give it to guys like AJ, not Foley, he needs to know that his time is over. Yo can tell when you watch his matches, Sting can still go though. They also need to start building their own talent like they did when they first started, now they hire WWE's used talent.

 

[It's...Baylariat!]

There are many parallels between the WCW and TNA. For starters, half their roster are WCW retreads. So there's obvious similarities. The writers are similar. They just don't have that Ted Turner money to throw around. Until they have some financial backing, they'll never be on par with the WWE wrestling wise.

TNA needs to do a few things to freshen things back up. That six sided ring makes no sense. It's different, sure. But no one cares. Put back the old four-sided ring that way you can have normal matches with better spots. How can you possibly have a Battle Royale in that thing? I don't see it.

Second, they need to start to develop their homegrown talent. AJ Styles, Eric Young, Robert Roode, and others have to step up. I know the money's not there, but a development program would make things so much easier for them.

Third, they need someone with a boat load of cash to throw away on wrestling. If they find someone who's willing to fund things in order to get them to make huge profits, then they can start being on the same level as the WWE. With the advertising at a low, the talent being recycled by the WCW and WWE, and the lack of ratings for their top show, TNA needs to make a move quick...or they'll be losing talent and/or money sooner or later. Just like WCW.

 

[mean_gene_roberts]

A 6 Sided Ring? What's That? Is This Kickboxing Mma, Or Some Shit Like That, Come On This Is Professional Wrestling, Jeff Jarett Listen To Me....

A Wrestling Ring Is Made By 4 Ring Posts And 4 Corners....... Whoooammmm We Learned Today's Lesson At Wrestling School.....

Damn It! Jarett You're A Veteran And You Have Been In The Best Companies In The World, Put A 4 Side Ring There Damn It!!!

.

Have you ever wondered why a boxing/wrestling ring is called a "ring" when it's obviously square (except for TNA {6 sided} and CMLL {8 sided})?

In the beginning, the ring was...gasp...round!

So, if anything, TNA is a throwback. Thank you very much.

 

[Dragonslayer]

I think TNA is doing a good job, and provides a viable alternative to the more "family-friendly" direction of WWE. Remember what happened last time WWE went all too family friendly? That's right, the nWo came, brought "attitude" and helped WCW kick WWE's ass for a couple of years.

Now TNA are kind of in a similar spot as WCW was before Bischoff took over and launched Nitro, I guess. Both were not considered a real threat to the empire Vince had created, and both tried to compete by using established former stars of WWE. Now I don't think that's a bad choice now for TNA either. Sure, many of their new additions are past their prime, such as Foley or Sting, but guys like them and of course Kurt Angle, Booker T, Kevin Nash and also now Bobby Lashley have tremendous name value - the mere fact alone is that guys like that who all (except for Sting, obviously) have been in high-profile situations in WWE, gives TNA the credibility it desperately needs. Sure, they do have tremendous athletes and they can beat WWE in the pure wrestling aspect. But if you turn into a new wrestling program, and you see only a bunch of guys you've never even heard of before, you might watch (or not), but you are likely to lose interest again.

However, if you see some familiar faces that you KNOW will entertain you, you might stick around to see what they're up to now - and you may turn in again next week. To be honest, it was the first appearance of Scott Hall and Kevin Nash back in the day that made me watch WCW regularly. I just zapped through one day, and WCW was on, and all of a sudden, (to me) Diesel and Razor Ramon just walked in, haha. Well, that got me hooked. Nowadays, as a more "established" fan of wrestling in general, I don't need guys like Angle, Sting or Foley to draw me over to TNA... I mean, I still think it's cool seeing those guys in action, but I'm also interested in TNA's "homegrown" now.

For new fans, though, I believe the signing of "big names" definitely helps. But they definitely need to be cautious, and not rely too much on the stars of yore... it might just ruin them financially, and in the end, they might be left with nothing. I think they should mix up the Main Event scene a little, not focus solely on the old/former WWE guys, but mix things up more frequently, so as to put their own guys over with the rub they can get of getting into the ring with such established stars.

What TNA now really lacks, and that has been said numerous times here, is - unfortunately - money. I don't really think they need Turneresque sums to hire basically everyone off WWE, but they would definitely need some backing for better production, maybe better timeslots etc. But I guess right now, the only thing that TNA really can do and must do is push the envelope. They need their own Stone Cold Steve Austin, basically. Not necessarily "one guy", but basically a whole bunch of guys who do everything that WWE doesn't do (anymore). Might be a risky move (especially with MMA being so popular now and providing a more "real" form of fighting anyway), but they cannot compete with WWE if they do exactly the same thing that WWE does. They need to be different, and exploit those cracks in WWE's armor that are there. There aren't many, but the main advantage TNA has now is WWE's PG rating, and everything that entails. If they sink their teeth into that, and bring back some of the much-missed "attitude" in wrestling, they might have a shot someday.

But one way or another, it will still take some time for them. But I'm definitely glad they are around, just so there is a least some competition on the horizon for Vince.

 

[nick14]

Have you ever wondered why a boxing/wrestling ring is called a "ring" when it's obviously square (except for TNA {6 sided} and CMLL {8 sided})?

In the beginning, the ring was...gasp...round!

So, if anything, TNA is a throwback. Thank you very much.

There was no ring,the crowd stood in a circle surrounding the "boxers" (not wrestlers)they used fight in this circle, thats why its known as a ring. Its just always been called a ring even though its four sided! Tna reallly needs to do something about the ring.

 

[Fez]

To me TNA poses no threat to the WWE as of now, but in about 5 years, if TNA gets the funding it desrves, they could give WWE a hell of a run for their money. I personally think TNA strongly resembles WCW as the underdog show in this situation. I also think TNA's matches, shows, and work ethic are alot better than WWE's, also TNA is not PG which gives them a huge edge against WWE(I prefer TNA over WWE for that reason). The only thing they need is decent storylines, and ways to pull in more people to watch. They have the talent, they just need the appeal, then they could move the show to monday and really be a thorn in the WWE's side.

 

[Dave]

First, going to monday night would kill TNA unless they did an ECW like show that ran after RAW finished. They don't need a war because they don't have a warchest. Second, TNA developing talent? AJ is a grandslam champion. Joe is a triple crown champion. They could main event any time they wanted. They need new blood but not necessarily established talent. Most importantly they need ppv and gimic buys. WWE still kills them there.

I agree with you so far as saying that a move to Monday nights would kill TNA but to say that TNA needs more gimmicks is crazy ina ll honesty. Look at the card for Lockdown for example. Nearly every match on there was a gimmick match.

 

[mean_gene_roberts]

Let's not getting into a pissing contest over the shape of the "ring". When I first made my statement, it was off the top of my head. Then I checked Wiki and they did refer to boxing...not wrestling. I said boxing/wrestling...emphasis on the slash here.

Wrestling is the oldest "sport" by any ancient manuscripts found thus far. It was probably, as near as historians can agree, the first Olympic sport as well and their matches were fought to the death! The first "Casket" match if you please. And they were fought in the round arena floors.

Wrestling came into prominence in the United States around the time of the Civil War, having been brought to this country by my ancestors...the Irish immigrants. Abraham Lincoln was a wrestler as were many of our early presidents (Jessie Ventura, anyone?).

When matches were staged by traveling pitchmen in the 1870's thru the 1890's, they did not carry a ring in the back of a buckboard wagon. The call went out and the townspeople would form a "ring" around the competitors, as you rightfully say, around the contestants.

When, after the turn of the 20th century, both boxing and wrestling became legitimate sports, both forms of fighting were overseen by the same ruling body and both wrestling and boxing would more often then not be presented on the same card, using the same ring. As CMLL and other organizations in Mexico and more recently TNA in the United States have proven is that the ring or its shape does not make that much difference on what goes on between the combatants. It is the fight that counts...4, 6, 8 sided or no sides at all.

After all, have you ever heard anyone say, preparing to go to a wrestling show "Gee, I hope they use the red, white and blue ropes tonight instead of all one colour"? The wrestlers is the story, not the ring regardless of its shape...that is and was my main point.

 

[ThaRaph]

simply put: TNA moving to monday nights would be career suicide....Vince is holding back on his true creativity because Raw has no competition.....the reason why WWE was so great back in the 90s is because they had a reason to be great....they had Nitro coming into their turf (the Monday night arena) then after the launch of Thunder, Vince fired back with Smackdown.

If Jarret put TNA on Monday nights...you're gonna see the true genius that is Vince MacMahon return, and before you know it...you're gonna see a situation where there's a MacMahon standing in the Impact Zone declaring that their name is on the deeds to TNA

 

[ztwhite]

Have you ever wondered why a boxing/wrestling ring is called a "ring" when it's obviously square (except for TNA {6 sided} and CMLL {8 sided})?

In the beginning, the ring was...gasp...round!

So, if anything, TNA is a throwback. Thank you very much.

Uh, dude ?? They call it a wrestling ring because of the amateur type of wrestling. High school, college, Olympic and international amateurs wrestle on a mat with a circle on it. Points are scored when one wrestler pushes the other outside that circle or performs a takedown manuever. Professional wrestling or sports entertainment borrowed the phrase to capitalize on the amateur audience from back in the day. That's why it is constantly referenced as a squared circle.

 

[ianfromlondon]

it is nothing to do with tna looking like wcw

the truth of the matter is the people in tna wouldnt know how to run a wrestling company so what they are doing is copying wcw and wwe in everyway they can

stealing gimmick
stonecold and a mix of foley and kane

then they just taking stars who have already made names for themselfs and trying to cash in on that

where as wwe and wcw made stars,austin,rock,goldberg,nash,foley,edge and so on and on

that is the difference they just copying things from years ago and there are stupid idiots who keep watching tna ,seriously people who like and watch tna need to really look at the show and relise that its just full of wwe and wcw wannabes copying ideas and taking stars that have ade a name for themselfs,

tna cant make stars because they dont know how to hence why they are trying to cash in on stars who 'were' big in past times or made by other companys

thats the diffeence between tna and wcw and wwe

thats why tna is crap and people need to relise this and turn off

 

[mean_gene_roberts]

Uh, Dude! Go back, read the history of wrestling from some website or even from wikipedia if you must. Wrestling, even as a "professional sport", has been around much, much longer than Yale and Harvard.

Also, why can't we all just agree that wrestling is nothing but a 1 ring circus? Unless it's WCW's World War #3 PPV of course.

The basic layout of anywrestling program is the same. When you go to the arena or tent, the ringmaster comes out, hypes the audience by announcing the attractions and performers that will be featured that evening and then announces the opening act. Usually around mid-point you have a somewhat lengthy comedic relief feature, be that clowns, Santino, Curry Man or whatever. Then you get down to the main event...HHH, Sting, Cena or Sigfried and Roy.

In fact, wrestling fans, at the turn of the century, wrestlers traveld with circuses. Carnivals were a part of the circus. The carnival seperated from the circus and the wrestling went with the carnival. Boxing and wrestling were conjoined in the early days and they seperated into 2 seperate entities.

My father was a golden gloves fighter and each summer in the 40's and 50's, he used to wrestle the "Champ" traveling to town on the back of the carnival and did pretty well at it. Well enough that he was offered the chance to turn "pro" and take their top mans spot. He turned them down cause he said he had more fun taking the carnies money instead of the "marks" (another carnival term) money.

Wrestling did not just magicaly appear in 1980 something. Actually, now that I think about it, your post just confirms what I said here earlier...no matter the shape of the field of combat, the focus is still on the combatants.

 

[mrarmageddon]

If Jarret put TNA on Monday nights...you're gonna see the true genius that is Vince MacMahon return, and before you know it...you're gonna see a situation where there's a MacMahon standing in the Impact Zone declaring that their name is on the deeds to TNA

What absolute McMahon ass-kissing garbage. The reason WWE sucks is because unlike in the late 90s the writers suck. It was great when Russo and Vince wrote the shows, it was equally great when Russo and Ferrara wrote the shows.

But before that in 93-96 when it was McMahon, Patterson, JR, Cornette and all the others with their dated ideas around the table...it was garbage. Now in 2009 Vince once again has a whole bunch of guys all with rubbish ideas and all blaming someone else for the lack of quality.

The idea that McMahon is intentionally making a crap product so he can save great ideas for a rainy day is laughable. The rainy day is TODAY! WWE is losing millions and has had to make significant budget and roster cuts.

To the dude who wrote this and anyone who thinks this...get a clue. Impact has been the best wrestling programme in 2009, anyone who thinks otherwise is a total idiot.

WWE isn't miraculously gonna be become good again, no matter how much you think Vince farts rainbows. Keep watching Raw,Smackdown,ECW...but be sure to tell me when you've opened your eyes.