Are we wrong about everything?

[Jimmy King]

So, there's definitely NOT a fine line with the IWC and a typical "attitude era" (or even "PG era") mark of today. However, there's a big "BUT"

For the past year, TNA has had a constant following online. The majority of the following, though, were bashing its product. Many claim that TNA should focus on their homegrown stars. They say that TNA should leave the "has-beens" alone. However, the January 4 Impact! (with the return of Hogan, The Band, The Nasty Boys, etc.) and this past week (which primarily focused on the ECW PPV) have been two of their highest rated Impacts ever.

So, are we wrong? Unfortunately, in today's mainstream wrestling society, ratings are everything. Sponsors, interests, other bookings all come from strong ratings. Why else are they a hot topic when talking about WWE or TNA?

Are their "demograph" fans just not into the X-division/explosive style of wrestling TNA was notorious for a couple of years ago?

or

Are their "demograph" fans yearning for a chance to relive the "Attitude era" somewhat with the reminiscence of WCW and ECW?

What are your thoughts as to TNA's slight ratings boost this past week?

 

[LigerBomb]

Nostalgia, simple as that.
You mention the Jan 4th Impact but leave out the part where the ratings then nose-dive, The pummeling on Monday Nights, and the struggle to get back to a +1.0 rating.
A debut, or return (which is almost a re-debut if the wait has been long enough) can only be done once. Once the crowd "pops", that's about all you're going to get.
Unless you have an endless conveyor belt of worthwhile returns and surprises hotshot booking is a terrible way to try and achieve economic longevity. TNA may have a bit of a boost for this stunt casting they're currently running with but it won't last, and then they'll be in search of the next big "surprise" that will shake the very foundations of the business and change the wrestling world like never before... yadda yadda yadda.

 

[Ducey13]

It's like this. There are die-hard Hulk Hogan fans (Like myself) who tuned into the Jan. 4th edition of Impact because of him. There are also tons of ECW die-hards who still pop everytime these guys get together.

The problem with that is it's all short term booking. Hulk Hogan and ECW wrestlers will get you a buzz, and die-hards and other curious fans will watch for a minute. But as soon as the buzz or angle is over the fans leave again.

Its the same with all the former WWE wrestlers or good old boys who always show up in TNA. You see a guy like Ric Flair, Scott Steiner or Jeff Hardy. You know who they are, they have a histrory and name recognition, So it grabs your attention. But TNA has trouble holding onto any fans because once that intial interest gets people to watch, they fail to do anything else interesting with the wrestlers.

No matter how big of a Jeff Hardy fan you are, if TNA fails to book him correctly, eventually you'll get frustrated or mad and quit watching. And EVEN if you're the biggest Jeff Hardy mark in the wolrd and watch all his stuff no matter what, you still won't pay any attention to the rest of the show.

I don't have a problem with TNA bringing in guys like Hogan, of Hardy or RVD, ect. But they need to started making more sense creatively, inprove they're production quality, and improve their storytelling and booking.

THEN, if you bring in a guy like Jeff Hardy, (who surely has a few fans who will watch the first few weeks to see him) if your booking is up to standards, the fans will become interested in the overall product of TNA and not just one or two wrestlers.

 

[super_crazy]

Yes, in general the IWC is wrong the vast majority of the time lol. I'm gonna make myself bad by saying this because technically I'm part of the IWC, but IMO, the IWC is mainly just a bunch of know-nothing, know-it-alls. I literally laugh out loud, when fans say the WWE "needs" this or TNA "needs" that. How the fuck do they know what these companies "need"? lol. What credibility does the IWC have? None. None of the IWC are running successful companies with two hours ( or more) of TV time a week, none of the IWC are involved in the pay roll or creative or the dot com side of things so why does the IWC think they know anything about anything when it comes to RUNNING a wrestling program and not just WATCHING a wrestling program?

The WWE guys, or in the most current case, ECW guys bring in more people to watch the show, and then it's up to the "TNA guys" to keep them there. Ducey13 said: "Its the same with all the former WWE wrestlers or good old boys who always show up in TNA. You see a guy like Ric Flair, Scott Steiner or Jeff Hardy. You know who they are, they have a histrory and name recognition, So it grabs your attention. But TNA has trouble holding onto any fans because once that intial interest gets people to watch, they fail to do anything else interesting with the wrestlers." Which pretty well nailed it on the head to me.

I wrote a bit about this in the Samoa Joe got suspended thread that you might be interested in Jimmy.

 

[CJ The Pirate]

I want to be a fan of TNA. So Badly.

I missed out on ECW and WCW. I was 10 or 11 when I started watching WWE. I had been aware of it through about 4 videos my brother had been bought or the occasional pay per view one of his school friends. The invasion happened 3 years after I started watching full time and being that young, that was the best thing to ever happen because, lets face it, WCW was rubbish, right?

Well now I'm grown up a little more and I see that, No, WCW had a lot of good despite all of the bad that eventually led to it's demise. For all the Vince Russo's, Robocops and Dungeon of Doom segments there was the NWO, The Cruiserweights and true stars of the future like Mysterio, Guerrero, Benoit and Jericho. Say what you want about WCW but they changed wrestling for the better.

So I grew up without competition and despite my previous statement, the WWE has got steadily worse since then. The arrival of TNA was something that was in the corner of my eye, wishing with all my might that that seed might grow into something to challenge the WWE to just go that step further. Unfortunately, the only thing the WWE have had to do to counter TNA's best efforts can be described in only three words. Bret Hart Returns.

That was it. Since then, WWE hasn't had to flinch or worry. Sweat hasn't been mopped off their brow since January.

TNA knows it's behind and to it's credit, it keeps on fighting but it's style is all wrong. The recent surge of interest in MMA has taught us on a wider scale how to fight a better opponent. The recent fight between Yushin Okami and Mark Munoz is a perfect example of a fighter who is throwing his strongest move against an opponent who can defend against that tactic perfectly. For those who didn't see it, Munoz repeated tried for a takedown on Okami, utilising his wrestling skill which some may call a smart move. Okami blocked it each time. This continued for 3 rounds, most of the time Okami was just pushing Munoz's face into the mat. At the end of the second round, Munoz just looked exhausted. That is where TNA is rapidly finding itself.

Unlike that scenario, TNA has finally changed it's approach and, while it's not going to damage the WWE, it's not going to do them any harm. But there is one thing that definately will.

They insist on acknowledging the WWE all the time. Little references and jibes... bitchy comments by guys in the ring putting down WWE product in favour of their own. This past episode of Impact, Dreamer first of all hinted at 'legal issues' using the name ECW (Which WWE bought the rights to through being successful, not bitter) and then Ric Flair mentioning how his group is a group of World Champions, not a bunch of aggravated rookies. No matter how true the statement, it just doesn't make me thing... Wow, you sure showed them. This is like the Fly insulting the Spider. And what made it all worse for me was that it was Ric Flair. A man who's promos are genius and have been for his entire career. Am I to believe that it was Flairs decision to say something so juvenile. That right there is the reason WWE has nothing to worry about and I remain unsatisfied.

 

[hellod245]

TNA has a lot of talent no doubt. TNA got the fans interest on Jan 4 edition and even after ECW invasion thing. But did they keep those fans on their side or they will they? NO. Because they are not thinking of future. Thay are not building the future. They got a huge BUZZ when Hardy returned to TNA but what did they do with him after that? Nothing , instead of booking him on upper mid card ner to main event level. They booked him in Tag Team matches with anderson that did nothing for them.
Were we wrong when we criticised ecw invasion angle. Answer is yes and no. Yes because that increased the ratings for TNA a little bit. No because ratings will go down once that angle is over because they are not doing anything excited with talented TNA roster. Aj Styles, Joe, Wolfe , Hardy, Pope all of them are get wasted with little or no storyline given to them. TNA had talent , national TV , big names and everything. All they need to do is book it more creativly and give right people right opportunity.

 

[wushady]

Wrestling fans in general love Nostalgia whether it be TNA or WWE. Ratings almost always go up when someone from the past makes a appearance. In TNA's case they don't seem to keep the ratings up. People watched to see Hogan and the others on Jan 4th then ratings went back down almost instantly.

Last week they went up again because fans wanted to see how they handled the ECW angle. We will see how the ratings go after the ECW angle is over. I think they will go back down rather quickly. They need a constant angle to keep up the ratings. If the ECW angle is drawing higher numbers they should run with it for a while, and step up other angles on the show to keep the new viewers watching after the ECW angle ends. I think their biggest problem has been not having many consistent storylines.

 

[JenksIX]

I feel the IWC is usually wrong in general. The IWC has very low standards for wrestlers and that's the problem I think. The IWC don't care about how a wrestlers marketed and which wrestlers will make the most money for a company.

I feel the IWC are people who major in the art of professional wrestling. They are wanna be wrestlers that watch shoot interviews and learn who the good workers are and what a good match looks like, therefore, that's how they judge a wrestler. But they are even wrong in how they judge a match (in general.)
Take for example the TNA Impact zone crowd, every other match you hear chants of either this is awesome, this is amazing or this is wrestling. They've toned down but those chants were getting real bad at one point, it was like every match.

Spot fests might entertain people, but I find they are rarely a great match.
It seems like these small guys who are always moving, don't know how to sell or what ring psychology is all about. In a tag team x division style match, you will see 6 high flying moves, 7 finisher type moves, 4 tag combo moves all within like 2 minutes. They never sell worth a damn, those matches aren't meant for selling b/c they are basically 45 minute matches condensed into 7-10 minutes.

I admit, Beer Money vs MCMG was a good match this past week ... but you CAN NOT give away a match like that week in, week out. It's like, if Shawn Michaels and The Undertaker had the 2 matches they had, well what if every match was like that? What would you need to buy mania for?

Wrestling is about more then just the match. And it's also about the story being told during the match. Shawn Michaels is not considered a great because he can do moonsaults and is acrobatic and can hit the sweet chin music, it's because he's got good timing and makes the matches dramatic. If he's in pain, you can see the agony in his face but also the determination.

Bret Hart wasn't a great just because he was a great technical wrestler, I'm pretty sure this is what VKM meant(I could be wrong) but Vince said Bret was the best storyteller he ever knew. By that, I take it Vince meant that Bret's ring psychology and ability to tell a story by wrestling another person in the ring, was the best. Jim Ross also said how he loved listening too Bret and Stone Cold break down how a match should go and how they were greats at it.

As good as MCMG and Beer Money are, I would not say they are good storytellers just yet. But that match last Impact with the cage was a good match. Also I think it helps with this best of 5 series because there is a lot of build up and the rivalry is fresh in peoples minds.

For a match to be great, you need to feel something. I'm not going to say this was a good match, but I realized March 8th when Hogan/Flair faced off in a tag team match ... the two were busted open and brawling, I realized then why the two were the legends that they were. There was something intense seeing the way Hogan and Flair brawled, especially at their ages.

If people want to say they are just turning in b/c it's nostalgic, then why do you think more people are tuning into WWE to see the nexus?
I think people want to see the days of an NWO again was one of the reasons and people like groups or factions in general. I think people will tune in for any type of invasion angle b/c it's a storyline. Now that this ECW thing turned out to be a one night stand, people are still curious to see what these crazy ECW mothers got left. It's something new and different.

Okay, so tonight I'm going to watch NXT. Now I'm not watching to see Alex Riley vs Lucky Cannon or w/e ... I'm just watching to see what happens.
Kaval is fun to watch in the ring, but can any of you really say you tune in to solely watch the wrestling?

Most wrestling fans are just interested to see what's next. Also, most fans don't understand how well a match went and usually don't care as long as their guy wins. If something exciting happens, its a bonus.

The point is, the X Division style match ups will never carry a show to epic heights. That's not what WRESTLING is about. They want to see interesting characters with interesting storylines and it helps if those characters are able to progress their storylines in the ring.
It's also like watching a sports game ... I want my team to win.
I really don't care how a game between two teams I hate goes, but if it's the playoffs and my team is in the 9th inning of game 7 ... I'm emotional and nervous for my team because I want them to win. Wrestlers need fans to be emotionally invested in them, if they are faces, we don't want to see them beat up or lose.

 

[King Booka]

Yes, in general the IWC is wrong the vast majority of the time lol. I'm gonna make myself bad by saying this because technically I'm part of the IWC, but IMO, the IWC is mainly just a bunch of know-nothing, know-it-alls. I literally laugh out loud, when fans say the WWE "needs" this or TNA "needs" that. How the fuck do they know what these companies "need"? lol. What credibility does the IWC have? None. None of the IWC are running successful companies with two hours ( or more) of TV time a week, none of the IWC are involved in the pay roll or creative or the dot com side of things so why does the IWC think they know anything about anything

thank you

 

[Jackal960]

TNA has been trying to change itself since the Hogan-Bishoff era started. To say TNA needs to become what it was a couple of years ago means "don't worry we used to love our product and we don't want to grab more ratings".

We as fans can say that. But after all TNA is a company just like WWE who wants to get more profit. Staying at where you are won't help you much with ratings. Thats why they are attempting to add something. If X division was good enough to carry the company they should have got more and more ratings each year, so by now they should have beaten WWE. Thats why now they are trying to attract more wrestling fans, by adding different type of wrestlers like hall of famers or hardcores. At their peak WCW had nWo, cruiserweights showing great matches, legends like Flair and Sting, and guys who could stood up against anybody like Goldberg and DDP. Its good to have a mixture of things.

Nothing wrong with that, as long as you can keep the mixture together without trying to push any of them too hard. You need to use every different asset you have. Everyone should have their own shares in a program. Now TNA has hardcore legends, hall of famers like Hogan and Flair, great performers like Hardy Angle AJ, great talent at midcard, a fairly good x-division, tag team division and knockouts. They should use it all in the mix with good storylines and bookings.

Its good to change if you want to add something to the company. If TNA wants to stay with their X-division forever with low ratings then no need for any excitement, but if they want to grab more attention they need to bring new wrestlers.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

Not at all. For example, there was a big buzz around the January 4th edition of TNA as it promised big changes. No one really knew what they were going to be but there was a promise of some big names from the past and for that reason they had a good rating but after that the ratings went back to normal (and some weeks dropped lower than they've ever been) that means that although they were able to make new viewers watch they didn't provide them a reason to stay and the reason for that is they didn't offer a product these new viewers wanted to watch plain and simple and some weeks lost a big chunk of their core following (when they were on Mondays for that whole 3-4 weeks) which also shows that half their audience would rather watch RAW and still would if RAW was on Thursdays (or iMPACT was still on Mondays). There were times when RAW ratings were 7 TIMES what TNA had (one week RAW had a 3.6 and iMPACT had a .5).

Back to what I was saying they just wanted to see what was going on with TNA and as soon as they found out they went right back to RAW. The reason Nitro did well was because it was an alternative that people WANTED TO SEE and in turn took a good chunk of their audience with them, TNA has taken like 5 people away from RAW, certainly no where near how many people Nitro took from WWE.

Although the fans are often wrong, but many of us have a better understanding of the product than alot of wrestlers or people behind the stage because we've been watching it for so many years, and even some of us have had an opportunity to even work backstage (I got to and had some conversations with people just starting out in the industry). Obviously most in the industry will know more than us because they've been in it, but a lot of them have no concept of what wrestling really is. I feel a decent chunk of the IWC could do a better job with TNA than Dixie Carter and Panda Energy does, they've obviously made alot of bad decisions over time, and a lot of them you knew were terrible right away (like hiring Hogan/Bischoff and the whole Orlando Jordan gimmick). I know Hogan and Bischoff haven't hurt TNA too much, but they haven't much to improve the product. Hogan once promised by March TNA would be getting 3.0 ratings, well that obviously hasn't happened. The fact of the matter is when you get paid the money Hogan and Bischoff does, you expect results and that is something those 2 haven't produced. They've been around 7-8 months and although things don't improve overnight, at this point there should be signs of good things ahead. TNA right now is in limbo and its obvious these 2 aren't getting TNA out of it. TNA needs to find someone that can improve things and take the product in a more positive direction. If Hogan and Bischoff haven't produced anything by this time, you're just wasting your money when you could get someone like D'Amore who will do a better job for less money.

Rambling a bit, so I will wrap it up like this. A lot of the IWC can be stupid, but a lot of them are also very smart to the business and have a good understanding in how things work. We're not always right, but we're not always wrong either.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Are we wrong in sometimes believing that we have the knowhow and the ideas to run a wrestling company successfully? Yes we are. I've never claimed to "know more" than Vince Russo, Vince McMahon, Jim Cornette, Hulk Hogan or any of those people.

However, I don't think we're wrong at all if what we're presented is something that turns us off. I want TNA to succeed, I honestly and truly do. I want to be able to watch an episode of iMPACT! without my gut churning like a maytag on the rinse cycle. I want to be entertained by TNA.

The reason January 4th was such a big night for TNA was the novelty of iMPACT! being live on a Monday night opposite WWE Raw and the debut of Hulk Hogan. The biggest rating in TNA history can be chalked up to being partially driven by curiosity and partially driven by nostalgia. However, the novelty of nostalgia wore off and TNA's numbers did begin a slow and steady decline. A lot of fans were just turned off by the product TNA was putting out. Even when TNA went against Raw on Monday nights, TNA continued to lose viewers. Raw's numbers generally stayed consistent, usually in the mid to upper 3s but iMPACT! continued to lose viewers. They didn't seem to be heading to Raw, but they weren't watching TNA.

TNA did pop a good rating for themselves last Thursday. Now, the question is can they sustain those numbers or possibly even improve upon them. TNA has a big problem with consistency, so history is working against them. TNA allows itself to be defined by nostalgia, but nostalgia doesn't last.

 

[PowerUp5000]

Are their "demograph" fans yearning for a chance to relive the "Attitude era" somewhat with the reminiscence of WCW and ECW?

What are your thoughts as to TNA's slight ratings boost this past week?

I think you hit the nail right on the head with the "Attitude Era" assumption. I think a lot of TNA fans are wanting to see WCW ala the Monday Night Wars V.2 and as a result are demanding TNA to follow in those same footsteps. What you pointed out about the Jan.4th show and last week's show I think displays that what these fans want and respond to is nostalgia. People have been so desperate to relive the glory days of the attitude era that they don't really care what part of it they relive so long as they relive it. The success of the ECW angle in TNA seems to me to be solid proof. To me it's pretty sad because TNA has been trying to deliver a product the fans will respond to and the only things thus far that has done that has been stunts that elude to past events fondly remembered.


Getting straight to the topic at hand though, yeah I'd say we are often times pretty wrong in our critiques of the decisions being made in the business. Not one of us has ever done what both those companies do or carried a responsibility of that weight, yet most of us speak as though the only thing missing from the success pie is our intuitive input as if we should be writing and booking the shows and storylines. How many things that have satisfied the fans would never have happened had the people in the business listened to us? Tons of things. I think the IWC as a whole generally has some good ideas and good intentions but we don't always think those ideas and intentions through to the long haul.

It's easy to say " this guy and this guy should be pushed, and this storyline and that storyline should go this way or that way" but fail to take into account how those decisions would affect other aspects of the company or business. I don't think there is anything wrong about us as a whole saying " I like this and I don't like that" but trying to act as though WE are the answer to the woes of the wrestling world is kind of unrealistic and only takes into account one side of the coin. We are the answer but not in that capacity, we are the answer in the sense that it takes US watching, and buying ppv's, and buying merchandise to make either company a success or failure. It is only with OUR support that they prevail and prosper or fail and fade away. If any of us want to see TNA specifically be a success, I think a little less criticism and a little more appreciation for their efforts is due, mixed with a strong dose of support for the promotion.

 

[rondiesel2005]

Not at all. For example, there was a big buzz around the January 4th edition of TNA as it promised big changes. No one really knew what they were going to be but there was a promise of some big names from the past and for that reason they had a good rating but after that the ratings went back to normal (and some weeks dropped lower than they've ever been) that means that although they were able to make new viewers watch they didn't provide them a reason to stay and the reason for that is they didn't offer a product these new viewers wanted to watch plain and simple and some weeks lost a big chunk of their core following (when they were on Mondays for that whole 3-4 weeks) which also shows that half their audience would rather watch RAW and still would if RAW was on Thursdays (or iMPACT was still on Mondays). There were times when RAW ratings were 7 TIMES what TNA had (one week RAW had a 3.6 and iMPACT had a .5).

Back to what I was saying they just wanted to see what was going on with TNA and as soon as they found out they went right back to RAW. The reason Nitro did well was because it was an alternative that people WANTED TO SEE and in turn took a good chunk of their audience with them, TNA has taken like 5 people away from RAW, certainly no where near how many people Nitro took from WWE.

Although the fans are often wrong, but many of us have a better understanding of the product than alot of wrestlers or people behind the stage because we've been watching it for so many years, and even some of us have had an opportunity to even work backstage (I got to and had some conversations with people just starting out in the industry). Obviously most in the industry will know more than us because they've been in it, but a lot of them have no concept of what wrestling really is. I feel a decent chunk of the IWC could do a better job with TNA than Dixie Carter and Panda Energy does, they've obviously made alot of bad decisions over time, and a lot of them you knew were terrible right away (like hiring Hogan/Bischoff and the whole Orlando Jordan gimmick). I know Hogan and Bischoff haven't hurt TNA too much, but they haven't much to improve the product. Hogan once promised by March TNA would be getting 3.0 ratings, well that obviously hasn't happened. The fact of the matter is when you get paid the money Hogan and Bischoff does, you expect results and that is something those 2 haven't produced. They've been around 7-8 months and although things don't improve overnight, at this point there should be signs of good things ahead. TNA right now is in limbo and its obvious these 2 aren't getting TNA out of it. TNA needs to find someone that can improve things and take the product in a more positive direction. If Hogan and Bischoff haven't produced anything by this time, you're just wasting your money when you could get someone like D'Amore who will do a better job for less money.

Rambling a bit, so I will wrap it up like this. A lot of the IWC can be stupid, but a lot of them are also very smart to the business and have a good understanding in how things work. We're not always right, but we're not always wrong either.

I am going to agree with what you are sayin with the most of us have a better understanding about the product because we been watching it so long... I now most of us watched wrestling since the 80s till now and get have a better understand what's going to work and what's not going to work. we been watching it so long, its like we want to go to that company and tell them what are the things they doing are wrong. I mean look at TNA mistakes looks soo obvious because we are watching it and we understand why the ratings are so slow.also we can feel and understand wrestler's frustration as we are watching the show

I honestly believe that the fans are smarting than the people who are on the creative management and am speaking of TNA, thats the way i see it

 

[WWEWrestleFest]

I feel the IWC is usually wrong in general. The IWC has very low standards for wrestlers and that's the problem I think. The IWC don't care about how a wrestlers marketed and which wrestlers will make the most money for a company.

I feel the IWC are people who major in the art of professional wrestling. They are wanna be wrestlers that watch shoot interviews and learn who the good workers are and what a good match looks like, therefore, that's how they judge a wrestler. But they are even wrong in how they judge a match (in general.)
Take for example the TNA Impact zone crowd, every other match you hear chants of either this is awesome, this is amazing or this is wrestling. They've toned down but those chants were getting real bad at one point, it was like every match.

Spot fests might entertain people, but I find they are rarely a great match.
It seems like these small guys who are always moving, don't know how to sell or what ring psychology is all about. In a tag team x division style match, you will see 6 high flying moves, 7 finisher type moves, 4 tag combo moves all within like 2 minutes. They never sell worth a damn, those matches aren't meant for selling b/c they are basically 45 minute matches condensed into 7-10 minutes.

I admit, Beer Money vs MCMG was a good match this past week ... but you CAN NOT give away a match like that week in, week out. It's like, if Shawn Michaels and The Undertaker had the 2 matches they had, well what if every match was like that? What would you need to buy mania for?

Wrestling is about more then just the match. And it's also about the story being told during the match. Shawn Michaels is not considered a great because he can do moonsaults and is acrobatic and can hit the sweet chin music, it's because he's got good timing and makes the matches dramatic. If he's in pain, you can see the agony in his face but also the determination.

Bret Hart wasn't a great just because he was a great technical wrestler, I'm pretty sure this is what VKM meant(I could be wrong) but Vince said Bret was the best storyteller he ever knew. By that, I take it Vince meant that Bret's ring psychology and ability to tell a story by wrestling another person in the ring, was the best. Jim Ross also said how he loved listening too Bret and Stone Cold break down how a match should go and how they were greats at it.

As good as MCMG and Beer Money are, I would not say they are good storytellers just yet. But that match last Impact with the cage was a good match. Also I think it helps with this best of 5 series because there is a lot of build up and the rivalry is fresh in peoples minds.

For a match to be great, you need to feel something. I'm not going to say this was a good match, but I realized March 8th when Hogan/Flair faced off in a tag team match ... the two were busted open and brawling, I realized then why the two were the legends that they were. There was something intense seeing the way Hogan and Flair brawled, especially at their ages.

If people want to say they are just turning in b/c it's nostalgic, then why do you think more people are tuning into WWE to see the nexus?
I think people want to see the days of an NWO again was one of the reasons and people like groups or factions in general. I think people will tune in for any type of invasion angle b/c it's a storyline. Now that this ECW thing turned out to be a one night stand, people are still curious to see what these crazy ECW mothers got left. It's something new and different.

Okay, so tonight I'm going to watch NXT. Now I'm not watching to see Alex Riley vs Lucky Cannon or w/e ... I'm just watching to see what happens.
Kaval is fun to watch in the ring, but can any of you really say you tune in to solely watch the wrestling?

Most wrestling fans are just interested to see what's next. Also, most fans don't understand how well a match went and usually don't care as long as their guy wins. If something exciting happens, its a bonus.

The point is, the X Division style match ups will never carry a show to epic heights. That's not what WRESTLING is about. They want to see interesting characters with interesting storylines and it helps if those characters are able to progress their storylines in the ring.
It's also like watching a sports game ... I want my team to win.
I really don't care how a game between two teams I hate goes, but if it's the playoffs and my team is in the 9th inning of game 7 ... I'm emotional and nervous for my team because I want them to win. Wrestlers need fans to be emotionally invested in them, if they are faces, we don't want to see them beat up or lose.

I agree 110%.