Everyone TNA has are old bags!

[shattered dreams]

I don't really see the point. They are old, Sting is 50, Ric Flair is 100, Hogan is like 95, RVD is 40. Nash has to be pushing 70, and not too long ago Hall and Waltman had a decent role on the show and they've been irrelevant and old for like 10 years now. They have Angle, Jeff Jarrett, they're both ancient. Not only does TNA build around former rejects, they build around people who have been in the business since 70's. You can't build around Sting, he is getting older and a lot more shit. They do have decent young stars, but its hard to build them when they're giving TV time to people who do need it. It's one big old clusterfuck and it's hard to build character. You have to eliminate something, and one of these days it has to be the old hags, once they're gone, who do you have?

Let us play the hypocrisy association game.

Hulk Hogan age 56, the most recognizable wrestler ever (health issues with back but can still at least take moves if necessary). Feuds with 61 year old Flair with both of them putting over younger talent in the process.

Bret Hart age 52 (health prevents taking basically all in-ring moves) yes he is gone now probably but he was a focal point of the product for the entire time TNA is under criticism. Most recently he was in a role similar to what Hogan has been doing. Feuds with 64 year old Vince McMahon and involves almost no younger talent.


Sting age 51. Has not held the title since april 2009. Headlined slammiversary losing vs a 39 year old. Headlined bound for glory losing his title challenge to up and coming AJ Styles.

Undertaker age 45. Not even wrestling and is the focus of a main story on smackdown. Headlined wrestlemania vs another 40+ year old. Won the title most recently defeating a younger up and coming talent CM Punk. Held the title from early october 2009 until late february 2010. Dropped the title to someone older than RVD, that being chris jericho. Defeated the up and coming (at least in wwe fans minds) next champion jack swagger in a non-title match for some reason.


Kurt Angle is ancient at 41? I guess HHH will be turning "ancient" about the time he comes back. Of course they won't put him back in the title picture. Kane is getting a major push as a 43-year-old. I could go on and on but it would be pointless. Anyone who actually watches TNA knows they are pushing young talent and the main event scene is anything but an old flameouts reunion. What amuses me is that the people that make these ridiculous claims take a blind eye to the older wrestlers in wwe with prominent roles.

 

[CaptainZaltan]

• Nasty Boyz haven't been on TNA television for over a month an a half – if not longer. Point nullified.

• Orlando Jordan has not been on TNA television for over a month. Point nullified.

• Val Venis was let go over two months ago. Point nullified.

• Sean Waltman was let go this past month. Point nullified.

• Scott Hall was let go this past month. Point nullified.

• Hogan has taken a much smaller role in the company since January 4th, as has Bischoff.

Any other out-dated complaints need debunking?

'

Well, since you feel the need to be a dick about it....

- Orlando Jordan isn't on tv because he isn't entertaining, just like everyone said beforehand. Point nullified.

- Same for Val Venis. Point nullified.

- Hall and Waltman were let go because they couldn't keep their acts together, just like everyone predicted. Point nullified.

- Hogan still sucks and is still on t.v far too often. Point nullified.

Any other obnoxious, condescending retorts that need debunking?

The complaints aren't outdated. The people that created these situations are still in power. If TNA does stupid things that wrestling fans dislike and those things don't work, that doesn't make the company appear more favorable. In fact, it's the opposite. And even disregarding the names mentioned above and just focusing purely on the 'old' aspect of the argument, TNA still legitimately has an older roster than WWE.

In any case, you completely missed the point of what I was saying. The people that don't like TNA don't watch it regularly. There opinions are formed when they do tune in, and the last time casual wrestling fans cared to tune in to TNA, it was definitely full of 'old bags'. I'm sorry, but even if TNA is improving now (for the millionth time), they don't get carte blanche every time they screw up. Casual wrestling fans and WWE fans don't have the patience to watch TNA go through it's endless cycle of up's and down's.
And no-one gives a damn how awesome you think TNA is, or how stupid you believe those who disagree are (which you've made perfectly clear on numerous occasions). If fans don't see something in TNA that the WWE isn't offering when they DO tune in, and are still seeing an equal or greater amount of negatives, than they will NOT continue watching. Besides, people like what they like. It doesn't have to be logical, or fair. I'm sorry that their opinions reflect poorly on something you are obviously passionate about, but that's life.

Not everyone who dislikes TNA is a WWE mark. Personally, I don't give a damn what people prefer. I could take or leave either show. But the endless list of justifications, excuses, and outright obnoxiousness from TNA marks like yourself is irritating.

 

[Reddannihilation]

Bull fucking shit, what was the build around there last ppv? It was Sting, and RVD. Combined age 90 years old. Sting was hogging TV time leading up to the PPV. Don't play that shit, that ppv was 12 days ago. Nothing drastically changes in 12 days. You still have Kurt Angle beating young people, you still have Hogan on air, you still have Flair playing a major role. You have RVD as champ. You know, someone that doesn't really need the title?

Let's see this coming PPV's main event Jeff Hardy vs Abyss vs Mr. Anderson vs RVD. Man those three challengers are old.

Tell me, what's the main focus of the main event? It has RVD, it had Sting before Slammiversary, they're old.

So are the Undertaker and HBK, wasn't that the most hyped match for the past 2 wrestlemanias? Did HHH not win at Wrestlemania this year against a younger opponent? Well then that must've pissed you off.

Build up young stars.

Yeah there's a good idea, how do you propose they do that? From what you've said I guess they could steam roll everyone over 35. Of course that might pose a problem seeing as the credibility those older guys pass to the young guys would be lost somewhat if they couldn't put up a fight.

Samoa Joe sucks,

He's better than any Samoan wrestler who worked full time in the WWE the past 6 years.

Williams isn't that good.

Aside from being a world reknowned talent, yeah not good at all. It's not as though he's got better in-ring skills than every wrestler currently in the WWE.

Desmond Wolfe has completely flopped. AJ Styles heel turn has been atrocious.

This is what happens when people take your advice and try to push only young guys without veterans for them to work with.

Kaz is fucking generic. Yep, I see a build around people who are older than dirt...

And of course Kaz has had ample time to jump from mid-card to main event. A whole 3 weeks in fact.

Seriously do any of your criticisms actually work? Do you live in a fairytale world where every young wrestler goes over every old wrestler on a weekly basis? ******ed criticisms like this are the reason I hate WWE marks so much. Everything TNA gets ripped on for, WWE spends all their time doing the same thing.

 

[realdealasshole]

I can see both points of view very well in this arguement:
- But, there are a number of issues. Firstly, right off the bat. You have the problem that - in some cases - picking up Wrestlers that the WWE release just simply seems weak, if the WWE has no use for them - then you just look like a dumping ground for Talent Vince McMahon simply didn't want. I know you might well say that Vince McMahon is only one man, and that he may not be able to spot potential. But if they've been released then TNA picking them up doesn't look amazing.

- Thirdly - old guys. Yes, there is a problem, most definitely.



That's a list of guys who were just about relevant 10 years ago (I left RVD out of that list). It's a big problem. These people aren't draws on a big enough scale anymore. Sure if you got a small independent promotion and advertised The Dudleys, or Kevin Nash or even Hulk Hogan - they'll pack the place out and create a great buzz. But TNA isn't a small time wrestling promotion. If you want to make it in with the big boys you can't be rehashing old talent - particularly talent as old as some of them guys.

Having older talent is fine provided you can justify its existence. Flair you can, Sting you can. In the cases of Nash, Hall and Hogan - I don't think so.

You made some really great points. My only issue though is that I don't think those guys mentioned are expected to be big draws....at least they shouldn't be anyways.
As I said, they're great minds in the business. Team 3D can give other tag teams some credibility just by fighting them simply because they've been in just about every organization at some point and have been successful in all of them. Same goes for any of those guys. At least in my opinion, they establish credibility to other wrestlers.

As for looking weak by picking up other wrestlers that WWE "didn't want". Again I just have to say, I think that's just wrestling fans being stupid if they see it as a dumping ground. They shouldn't see certain wrestlers as less good talent just because they were no longer wanted by WWE. Kendrick can wrestle and speak good, Kennedy has it all, Tara is one of the best women wrestlers in recent times.

As I said before, Steve Austin was nothing in WCW and they got rid of him. WWF used him in a different way. That's not them being a dumping ground for WCW. That's them using the talent that is out there that has some experience from another organization. That's just how I see it.

 

[realdealasshole]

This is a misrepresentation of the argument. The complaint isn't against TNA signing former WWE employees in general. That's why there are few, if any complaints against Morgan, Pope, Christian, Angle, etc. The problem, as I see it, is with TNA signing guys who are well past their prime and bring nothing to the table (Nastyz), who have known drug or behavioral problems (Hall, Waltman, Hardy), or who just don't bring anything of use to the company (Orlando Jordan, Val Venis). Unfortunately, a lot of the good acquisitions TNA was making at the time got lumped into the same category of 'WWE reject' by association. It sucks, but in some cases I can definitely understand why fans were skeptical. Anderson took some flak when he signed with TNA, because he was unfairly lumped in with the 'behavioral problems' category (we apparently have Orton/Cena to blame for that). Hardy might wind up in prison. Moore had already been in WCW, WWE, and TNA, without getting over.

I can't speak for everyone who has complained about this topic. But personally, of the names you mention the only one I have a problem with is Hogan. And that has little to do with his age; quite frankly, I think Hogan is every bit as good today as he has ever been. But the rest of the names on your list all bring something valuable to the table, IMO.

Does anyone on here REALLY believe that TNA is offering a superior product in any category right now? All I ever hear on this site is 'well, WWE is just as bad!', not 'TNA is better!!'.

You made solid points. Only issue I disagree with is that Venis hasn't been seen since he first arrived with Hogan. Nastyz are gone too. Honestly I think they only came in because they helped Hogan and Flair with the wrestling tour they were doing right before coming to TNA so Hogan gave them a shot for a while simply out of being a friend.

As for Orlando Jordan. Honestly, I really like his character and think if he's shown consistently and in the right manner, he could be tremendously over. We'll just have to see if he gets that chance and if I'm even right. I think his mic skills (and in-ring skills in general) are fantastic. As for Hall and Waltman, I agree. I would never give those two so many chances. Yet, it just shows that Nash is a very convincing guy. Moore, never liked him. But again, he was brought in by influence of Hardy. I guess most of the bad hires are due to friendship loyalties. That ties into Dixie being quite frankly, an idiot.

For Jeff, yeah, he's had problems, but he's a former World Champion in WWE and TNA. So why not? What's the worst that happens? He leaves again just like always and it doesn't really hurt a thing ratings wise. Best case scenario, he provides credibility and gets more kids to watch.

As for the superior product, a bit off topic yes. I can't say that TNA is a better product because WWE is just so much more legit cuz they've been around for decades. But I will say that I enjoy watching TNA a lot more than WWE any day. Impact over Raw and PPVs. But again, that's simply my preference. I like rooting for the underdog.

 

[realdealasshole]

Bull fucking shit, what was the build around there last ppv? It was Sting, and RVD. Combined age 90 years old. Sting was hogging TV time leading up to the PPV. Don't play that shit, that ppv was 12 days ago. Nothing drastically changes in 12 days. You still have Kurt Angle beating young people, you still have Hogan on air, you still have Flair playing a major role. You have RVD as champ. You know, someone that doesn't really need the title?

Tell me, what's the main focus of the main event? It has RVD, it had Sting before Slammiversary, they're old. Build up young stars. Samoa Joe sucks, Williams isn't that good. Desmond Wolfe has completely flopped. AJ Styles heel turn has been atrocious. Kaz is fucking generic. Yep, I see a build around people who are older than dirt...

Ignoring that you simply said Joe sucks without providing any logical reasoning, same for Williams, and for Kaz who's getting great heat yet you claim is generic, you make a hypocritical case. You talked about the older guys taking up too much time.

Do you realize how long Triple H was on top and always on camera in WWE? Or the Undertaker holding the title so recently? Or Mysterio? Or Shawn Michaels v. Undertaker being a year long storyline?

Am I bashing WWE for that? Not one bit. Because they're credible stars. And you wouldn't bash them for that either. But when TNA does it, you bash it. Just trying to make you see the hypocrisy in what you're saying.

 

[the wrestling guru]

Tna has some great talent I think that what they have done with the pope is great and has made him a great face, Wolfe and Anderson are great heels but you need guys like Nash,sting,and the hogans to push it along if they keep coming up with good story lines Vince is going to get a run let's face bishoff had done it before with alot of old dogs helping the new guys along

 

[The Raven's Epitaph]

Here's my honest opinion.

I do wish all the ex-WWE superstars that are now in TNA were still in WWE, but they're doing the right thing. They weren't used enough towards the end of their WWE career's so now that they're in TNA they're helping build up a lowly company.

It's like the Vince McMahon, Hulkamania and early WWF situation. Hulk Hogan basically made WWE what it is today, so all the "good" wrestlers, and by "good" I mean the ex-WWE superstars that are now TNA stars, are making TNA into something big. Or at least trying to.

That's all I have for nao.

 

[Balls_of_Jericho]

Hey well, it's time for my tuppence worth again!

I don't watch much TNA - mainly because I can never seem to find out when it's on over here, and I can never be bothered to learn how to use my SKY+ box!!!

Aside from that, here's a rambling, incoherent opinion from someone with no axe to grind with either wwe or tna, or any posters above me.

If I happen to be watching WWE programming and Jericho, taker, HHH, Kane Punk et al pop on screen i'm glued. My ass aint moving from that seat, and woe betide anyone who even LOOKS at the remote! On the flip-side however, if Mysterio, D Mac, Zach Ryder or a few others so lame i've forgotten their names appear, it's "dashing to the bog cody rhodes" time.

TNA, well, as I say, not watched a huge amount, but oh my... If i flip it over and AJ is on, or MCMG, Angle, Foley (cos he's ace) and of course Daffney (mmmm!) then it's all good too. The first time I saw Desmond Wolfe - man I actually made an effort to watch his feud with Angle - awesome! I was knocked back. The guy should be a megastar within a year! If not there's no justice in the world =(

So umm I guess what i'm saying is that both brands have excellent workers, both brands have their dross. It's all down ultimately to personal opinion, so it's just such a lame argument for, say, a WWE fan to waffle on about rejects and 2nd rate products.

I don't know if you Americans know much about Rugby (think gridiron for MEN!) But there's two "types". League and union. There's similar arguments in England about the pro's and cons. One's a newer "brand" and there's always a lot of controversy when someone switches codes. At the end of the day, each company is trying to do the best it can with the means it has at it's disposal. If TNA had the money and pulling power to acquire the likes of an Orton or a Cena I don't think anyone would be moaning that they're taking up WWE rejects!

Well, i'm gonna stop this diatribe - mainly cos i've forgotten what the heck my point was supposed to be - but mainly cos the Ghana USA match has gone to extra time - 2-1 Ghana! woo woo woo! time to crack open a few beers and chill =) Sorry to the TNA fans if i've got anything wrong - i'm just an amateur with regards to your product.

 

[purefan]

i have only bn watching tna for th last year or so but the reason tna first caught my eye was because of the so called 'old bags.' dont get me wrong, the likes of nash, sting, foley are not in the best shape or cannot work a good match but i tuned in out of curiosity. had it not been for the nostalgia or history that these lads stirred up in me i wouldnt have been a fan or even aware of the likes of a.j, joe, mcmg's, matt morgan (his wwe stint barely even registered with me, yet i rate him v highly now). i have been a wrestling fan for 25 years and as an irish man we were deprived of wcw, so wwF is all that existed for us but the last 3 years wwE (for me) has slowly but surely gone more and more unwatchable. i understand all the loyle mcmahonites (of which i WAS a follower) will lambaste me for this rant but if it wasn't for the 'old bags' i tuned in to have a laugh at i wouldn't have discovered a fantastic (if disorganised and sometimes naiive) old school wrestling promotion.

by the by how polished was the wwf 8 years after inception????

 

[ABMorales787]

i have only bn watching tna for th last year or so but the reason tna first caught my eye was because of the so called 'old bags.' dont get me wrong, the likes of nash, sting, foley are not in the best shape or cannot work a good match but i tuned in out of curiosity. had it not been for the nostalgia or history that these lads stirred up in me i wouldnt have been a fan or even aware of the likes of a.j, joe, mcmg's, matt morgan (his wwe stint barely even registered with me, yet i rate him v highly now). i have been a wrestling fan for 25 years and as an irish man we were deprived of wcw, so wwF is all that existed for us but the last 3 years wwE (for me) has slowly but surely gone more and more unwatchable. i understand all the loyle mcmahonites (of which i WAS a follower) will lambaste me for this rant but if it wasn't for the 'old bags' i tuned in to have a laugh at i wouldn't have discovered a fantastic (if disorganised and sometimes naiive) old school wrestling promotion.

My my. His spelling may not be good, but he has definably hit the nail on the head. There's your proof people. Of the kind of role the older guys play. I just didn't really realize how well it was working. See what happens when you eat the same cereal for too long? You get tired. See what happens when you mix the old with the new? Relativity. Now do you see why these guys play such important roles?

by the by how polished was the wwf 8 years after inception????

Working the old Madison Square Garden. except back then it was a lot easier to book there because it wasn't as huge as it is now. Not to mention WWE was also in the same location and even lower in the notoriety department than TNA.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

Bottom line – those "old bags" sell/sold TNA, regardless of how well they could still go int he ring. The spoiled-rotten IWC love to hate them for a slew of reasons – most notably because they're "over the hill", but I can tell you first-hand that I got three of my friends watching TNA because of them.

Explaining that TNA had AJ Styles and Samoa Joe would have meant nothing to them – but noting that Kevin Nash and Hulk Hogan were there got them interested enough to watch the program, and as a byproduct they fell in love with the MCMG, AJ, Joe, etc.