EC–err TNA LD for 07/22

It wasn't "the real ECW", or at least what people have taken to believe the "real ECW" was. It wasn't about barbed wire and fires and extraordinarily stupid stunts. It had a little of that, but not a sickening level, so it wasn't "extreme enough". Personally, I think it evolved and did a great job with guys like Morrison, Miz, Punk, Lashley etc at giving them TV time to develop, but that's not a good thing, now is it?

Did fine for developing new stars, but the fact it was called ECW was a pathetic "tribute" to what ECW meant.
 
It retained the ECW name and did absolutely nothing extreme.

It wasn't "the real ECW", or at least what people have taken to believe the "real ECW" was. It wasn't about barbed wire and fires and extraordinarily stupid stunts. It had a little of that, but not a sickening level, so it wasn't "extreme enough". Personally, I think it evolved and did a great job with guys like Morrison, Miz, Punk, Lashley etc at giving them TV time to develop, but that's not a good thing, now is it?

If you guys owned fancy restaurant chains, and bought out McDonald's, wouldn't you still use that name even if you didn't sell McDonald's food? The name had value to wrestling fans and that's a main part of why WWE bought it. The name had and still does have value, so they took advantage of that. It's smart business
 
Who the fuck cares what the name of the show was? It was entertaining and had good wrestling.

Me, because ECW meant something more by name alone than any other wrestling promotion in history. ECW defined an entire style of wrestling, so to name a weekly episodic program after it that doesn't even retain the same principles is disingenuous and disrespectful to it's history.
 
It wasn't "the real ECW", or at least what people have taken to believe the "real ECW" was. It wasn't about barbed wire and fires and extraordinarily stupid stunts. It had a little of that, but not a sickening level, so it wasn't "extreme enough". Personally, I think it evolved and did a great job with guys like Morrison, Miz, Punk, Lashley etc at giving them TV time to develop, but that's not a good thing, now is it?
You'll have to excuse me for not crying myself to sleep in my faded RVD 4:20 shirt over something completely inconsequential to my enjoyment of the former C-show. I'm just mellow like that.
 
Maybe it wasn't "Extreme" as some fans wanted, but maybe the business learned that extreme can often be too dangerous, and this isn't an independent promotion where people do stupid things to get noticed. I understand some of that wasn't there, but I think ECW should be known more for some of the interesting stories it came up with that had nothing to do with violence.

Also, I ALWAYS pushed for Rey Mysterio to be on ECW. One thing that I loved about ECW back in the day was the lucha libre matches they had. Those had an equally great impact, but no one talks about that in regards to ECW either.
 
So.....no TNA guys at Hard Justice I'm guessing?

So TNA is gonna put on a PPV where the feature very little of there own stars... if any, yeah this is already sounding like a great fucking idea:rolleyes:

For the record I am not against and ECW faction in TNA, but TNA sacrificing a PPV to give a bunch of old ECW guys on last night of extreme bingo hall action just does not seem like a good idea what so ever
 
If you guys owned fancy restaurant chains, and bought out McDonald's, wouldn't you still use that name even if you didn't sell McDonald's food? The name had value to wrestling fans and that's a main part of why WWE bought it. The name had and still does have value, so they took advantage of that. It's smart business

Yeah, then I'd sell nothing but steaks after a year of selling hamburgers, and I'd continue to call it "The House of Hamburgers" but never actually sell them.
 
Me, because ECW meant something more by name alone than any other wrestling promotion in history. ECW defined an entire style of wrestling, so to name a weekly episodic program after it that doesn't even retain the same principles is disingenuous and disrespectful to it's history.
I'll never understand why people get hung up on "disrespect" in glorified carny entertainment.
 
If you guys owned fancy restaurant chains, and bought out McDonald's, wouldn't you still use that name even if you didn't sell McDonald's food? The name had value to wrestling fans and that's a main part of why WWE bought it. The name had and still does have value, so they took advantage of that. It's smart business

I hope you read my next post, because clearly I'm on your side. I was a fan of the show and I think it evolved to where it should be. I've never been a fan of extreme wrestling myself, as I think "extreme" guys who use weapons are often marginal workers who need that gimmick to get over. I'd rather see matches that are, you know, good.
 
Um, guys what I got out of that promo was that the PPV will feature just as many TNA wrestlers as normal. Only difference is the ECW crew picks the matches and stipulations. So a regular TNA ppv, just every match has an "extreme" stip.
 
So TNA is gonna put on a PPV where the feature very little of there own stars... if any, yeah this is already sounding like a great fucking idea:rolleyes:

For the record I am not against and ECW faction in TNA, but TNA sacrificing a PPV to give a bunch of old ECW guys on last night of extreme bingo hall action just does not seem like a good idea what so ever

Yep. The original ONS worked because it was a special and they had a small WWE influence, but there was a regular PPV that month too. Also, a weak buyrate was something WWE could risk. It also helped that this was 5 years ago when an ECW reunion was a cool idea. It's been done for 9 and a half years. Let it rest in peace.
 
One thing that I loved about ECW back in the day was the lucha libre matches they had. Those had an equally great impact, but no one talks about that in regards to ECW either.
Sure we have. During the gratuitous ****ing of ECW by many parties over the last five or six years, we've pretty much heard it all. Nobody is going into this conversation with any lack of knowledge about ECW, because some people just won't shut up about it and let it rest in peace already.
 
Did fine for developing new stars, but the fact it was called ECW was a pathetic "tribute" to what ECW meant.

Define quality. You mean television production value? Yeah. Creating stars? Not a chance in hell.

You do realize you just completely contradicted yourself right? I think you are trying to knock down something WWE just for the sake of it and forgot that you did so by being contradictory. Just sayin'.
 
Define quality. You mean television production value? Yeah. Creating stars? Not a chance in hell.
You have a strange definition of stardom.

Also, I'd like to make it clear that not everyone that would go through a tour of duty there before making it big was "created" by ECW. Not even close. Keep that in mind before you go off writing whatever little list you think you have.
 
It wasn't "the real ECW", or at least what people have taken to believe the "real ECW" was. It wasn't about barbed wire and fires and extraordinarily stupid stunts. It had a little of that, but not a sickening level, so it wasn't "extreme enough". Personally, I think it evolved and did a great job with guys like Morrison, Miz, Punk, Lashley etc at giving them TV time to develop, but that's not a good thing, now is it?

Anyone who thought for a second that WWE was going to give you an ECW that brought you Barbwire or Flaming Table matches or anything of that sort was a fucking ******, WWE wouldn't stay in buisness for very long if they made a habit of putting their wrestlers in such matches on a weekly basis, not to mention why the fuck would any wrestler want to be a part of that roster when they could go to Raw or SD! and wrestle matches where they don't have to worry about getting maimed or set ablaze on a weekly basis
 
You do realize you just completely contradicted yourself right? I think you are trying to knock down something WWE just for the sake of it and forgot that you did so by being contradictory. Just sayin'.

I meant in terms of what the original ECW was capable of creating in Raven, The Dudleyz, Dreamer, RVD, Dean Malenko, Eddie Guerrero, Rey Mysterio, etc. etc. etc.

Evan Bourne, John Morrison, the Miz, Sheamus, CM Punk, Christian (ECW helped his re-debut a ton), Jack Swagger, Kofi Kingston, and other lower card guys all disagree.

Can't hold a candle to the stars the original ECW created.
 
Sure we have. During the gratuitous ****ing of ECW by many parties over the last five or six years, we've pretty much heard it all. Nobody is going into this conversation with any lack of knowledge about ECW, because some people just won't shut up about it and let it rest in peace already.

I wanted it to rest in peace in 2001...........and then in 2005.............and then in 2006. Once the concept started to change, I couldn't give a shit that the show was called ECW because it became a good wrestling show in WWE's lineup. The original promotion, its concept and influence. those are things of the past and should be left in the past. I mean, Reggie Jackson was important to the Yankees, but you wouldn't bring him back for a game today, would you? Just remember the influence fondly and LEAVE IT ALONE!
 
You have a strange definition of stardom.

Also, I'd like to make it clear that not everyone that would go through a tour of duty there before making it big was "created" by ECW. Not even close. Keep that in mind before you go off writing whatever little list you think you have.

They didn't have to originate there – they just had to elevate there.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,842
Messages
3,300,779
Members
21,726
Latest member
chrisxenforo
Back
Top