Hogan Comments On Why Roode Wasn't Given BFG Win

[JJYanks121]

This is exactly what I was thinking. They put too much effort in to the BGF series to not have the first winner of it go on to be successful at Bound For Glory. I also believe that Hogan is exactly right here. I don't think Roode would have been half as interesting as champion as face as he would be as a heel. Not only did not putting the title on him at BFG work, but it made him into a legit superstar. Just at the sake of an awesome concept in the Bound For Glory series.

Here's the thing though, at what point do we start acknowledging the vicious cycle/pattern TNA has created. Whenever the company looks to have a champion for more than a month, they HAVE to be heel. Every since Hogoff came in, that's been the case. The only exception is RVD and I'd argue that RVD as champion wasn't the best idea. Great wrestler but never meant to be a top guy which is ok.

It seems like the company fears creating a major babyface wrestler. They have "flavors of the month" but anytime the fans want to get behind someone, they either lose and go to the back of the line or they become heel. Some examples of each:

Back of the line

-Mr. Anderson in 2010 (though he deserved it)
-Matt Morgan in late 2010. He got crazy over due to standing up for concussions but since the "story" was there for Anderson (a bad one at that as RVD should have been the BIG feud with Hardy and it never happened), Morgan lost two title matches and hasn't been seen near the title since. He could have been a GREAT face champion too.
-Velvet Sky. Gets a chance after two long years and despite lousy booking still gets a pop for winning the Knockouts title. Naturally she gets a 1 month reign and gets pushed aside despite being the most over knockout on the roster.

Had to turn heel

-AJ Styles-guy is having a solid reign and has become the face of the company which was well deserved so naturally he had to turn heel and become Flair Jr. This has been talked about ad-nauseum but the signs were there already of what was to come in this company.
-Jeff Hardy-I know, I know it was for the swerve. Still didn't make it a good idea, especially when either other guy turning (whether because they are evil or because the story is more complicated) would have been better.
-Mr. Anderson-Jeff fucked up so Immortal needed a champion, so naturally the guy who was most anti-Immortal joins because it wasn't ok to have a champion unassociated for over a month.
-Kurt Angle-this one made the least sense. For almost two years, this was a guy working with dignity. He had taken himself out of the top 10 and vowed to beat everyone or retire. He beat everyone and had his shot but Jeff screwed him. Forgetting the fact that he came back when he was supposed to retire, fans felt bad for him because he deserved that win. If anyone was TNA's top face, it was Angle, way moreso than Jeff or Mr. Anderson due to that story. So he feuds with Jarrett forever and he is the ultimate good guy as Jeff is the jerk. It finally ends and Angle gets in the title picture so a year's worth of struggle pays off so Angle can get on top as the company's top face right? WRONG. Angle turns heel and gives a shitty explanation on the next Impact. It was out of nowhere and it makes no sense.
-Bobby Roode-This is what the thread is about and we're finally here. Guy goes through everyone in 3 months kinda like Angle through his top 10 so he's built up to take the title. He's built up as a family man and a blue collar guy. I was actually impressed with this as I thought TNA was FINALLY building a major babyface to have as a company centerpiece. Then BFG happened and the finish was as anti-climactic as can be. A lot of people felt like the BFG series was wasted at that point. Now, I know the argument is "well Roode has been a good heel champion". That may be true, but you wasted a solid tournament to get to that. That tournament could have been a yearly thing but having the first guy lose doesn't do it wonders. I feel like this was just the latest though in this incessant fear that TNA has of building a major face. It's like someone told them "hey, having heel champions sells" so they only allow themselves that. The only face champions they have are there for short term to get to the next heel champ. Sounds a lot like an Atlanta based organization actually........hi Lex Luger's 6 day reign, how ya doing!

Plus, on top of everything else, this is Hogan giving an interview. Is anyone still taking him seriously?

Bottom line, based on the build, Roode should have won. If ANYONE felt he shouldn't, he never should have won the BFG series. It's really that simple.

 

[shattered dreams]

Here's the thing though, at what point do we start acknowledging the vicious cycle/pattern TNA has created. Whenever the company looks to have a champion for more than a month, they HAVE to be heel. Every since Hogoff came in, that's been the case. The only exception is RVD and I'd argue that RVD as champion wasn't the best idea. Great wrestler but never meant to be a top guy which is ok.

Umm no. The two longest new title runs since Hogan and Bischoff came in have been RVD and Sting. The longest heel run is the current Roode reign. Guess how long you have to go back to find two different face wrestlers that held the WWE championship for more than 100 days?

It seems like the company fears creating a major babyface wrestler. They have "flavors of the month" but anytime the fans want to get behind someone, they either lose and go to the back of the line or they become heel. Some examples of each:

Jeff Hardy is going to be a flavor of the month I guess They currently seem deathly afraid of James Storm succeeding as a face.

Back of the line

-Mr. Anderson in 2010 (though he deserved it)
-Matt Morgan in late 2010. He got crazy over due to standing up for concussions but since the "story" was there for Anderson (a bad one at that as RVD should have been the BIG feud with Hardy and it never happened), Morgan lost two title matches and hasn't been seen near the title since. He could have been a GREAT face champion too.
-Velvet Sky. Gets a chance after two long years and despite lousy booking still gets a pop for winning the Knockouts title. Naturally she gets a 1 month reign and gets pushed aside despite being the most over knockout on the roster.

Your examples lead me to believe you don't have near as much evidence as you think you do.

Had to turn heel

-AJ Styles-guy is having a solid reign and has become the face of the company which was well deserved so naturally he had to turn heel and become Flair Jr. This has been talked about ad-nauseum but the signs were there already of what was to come in this company.
-Jeff Hardy-I know, I know it was for the swerve. Still didn't make it a good idea, especially when either other guy turning (whether because they are evil or because the story is more complicated) would have been better.
-Mr. Anderson-Jeff fucked up so Immortal needed a champion, so naturally the guy who was most anti-Immortal joins because it wasn't ok to have a champion unassociated for over a month.
-Kurt Angle-this one made the least sense. For almost two years, this was a guy working with dignity. He had taken himself out of the top 10 and vowed to beat everyone or retire. He beat everyone and had his shot but Jeff screwed him. Forgetting the fact that he came back when he was supposed to retire, fans felt bad for him because he deserved that win. If anyone was TNA's top face, it was Angle, way moreso than Jeff or Mr. Anderson due to that story. So he feuds with Jarrett forever and he is the ultimate good guy as Jeff is the jerk. It finally ends and Angle gets in the title picture so a year's worth of struggle pays off so Angle can get on top as the company's top face right? WRONG. Angle turns heel and gives a shitty explanation on the next Impact. It was out of nowhere and it makes no sense.
-Bobby Roode-This is what the thread is about and we're finally here. Guy goes through everyone in 3 months kinda like Angle through his top 10 so he's built up to take the title. He's built up as a family man and a blue collar guy. I was actually impressed with this as I thought TNA was FINALLY building a major babyface to have as a company centerpiece. Then BFG happened and the finish was as anti-climactic as can be. A lot of people felt like the BFG series was wasted at that point. Now, I know the argument is "well Roode has been a good heel champion". That may be true, but you wasted a solid tournament to get to that. That tournament could have been a yearly thing but having the first guy lose doesn't do it wonders. I feel like this was just the latest though in this incessant fear that TNA has of building a major face. It's like someone told them "hey, having heel champions sells" so they only allow themselves that. The only face champions they have are there for short term to get to the next heel champ. Sounds a lot like an Atlanta based organization actually........hi Lex Luger's 6 day reign, how ya doing!

Do you really not understand wrestling psychology at all? Face pursues title while heel holds it. You seem to waffle a lot between how much of the circumstances you care to remember and just randomly forget or dismiss anything you didn't like even though it clearly contradicts your ideas.

Bottom line, based on the build, Roode should have won. If ANYONE felt he shouldn't, he never should have won the BFG series. It's really that simple.

It is that simple that night but are you really going to deny that the way this played out afterwards was vastly superior to the alternative?

 

[JJYanks121]

Umm no. The two longest new title runs since Hogan and Bischoff came in have been RVD and Sting. The longest heel run is the current Roode reign. Guess how long you have to go back to find two different face wrestlers that held the WWE championship for more than 100 days?

The current one? He's not there yet, but he's pretty close. I'd say they are giving him a fair shake at becoming a new top star as a babyface. Sting on the other hand had one month reigns and fits right into what I'm saying too so thanks for making my point. TNA puts the title on a babyface solely to get to the next heel. There's never a time outside of RVD where a face has held the title very long.

Jeff Hardy is going to be a flavor of the month I guess They currently seem deathly afraid of James Storm succeeding as a face.

Both waffling while Roode holds the title. Until they actually win a title, you got nothing and you further prove my point. Thanks again, this is easy.

Your examples lead me to believe you don't have near as much evidence as you think you do.

I gave at least 3 examples. When does ANYONE on these boards bring more than one. Better yet, when have you ever brought even half of one actual example to support whatever propogrand you are spewing to defend TNA on a given day?

[QUOTEDo you really not understand wrestling psychology at all? Face pursues title while heel holds it. You seem to waffle a lot between how much of the circumstances you care to remember and just randomly forget or dismiss anything you didn't like even though it clearly contradicts your ideas.[/QUOTE]

If you think that wrestling ONLY works when faces chase heels for titles, then you are the one who doesn't understand wrestling psychology. On top of that, if you don't understand the concept of building the megaface who can represent the company both on and offscreen, then no one can help you. THAT is what I'm arguing that TNA lacks. They are afraid to create that guy. It's about having multiple guys that people like who can win for a month and then fall back down when the next heel takes them down for months at a time. You mean to tell me that Velvet Sky couldn't have done wonders walking around as champion promoting the company? Come on dude. Walking around with a title belt to appearances, being pretty and fun to talk to, that's GREAT publicity for the company as she gets promoted as their champion. Rather than expand the company base from a public relations standpoint which in turn can grow the audience, lets make sure to keep the reign short so we get another heel champion because that's the only way wrestling can work right?

It is that simple that night but are you really going to deny that the way this played out afterwards was vastly superior to the alternative?

The topic is "Hogan's Comments On Why Roode Wasn't Given BFG Win". I addressed why and I feel it's because of this fear of creating a megaface. If you want my opinion, even if it's not really part of the this thread topic, I'm not especially thrilled with the title picture since BFG. I think the heel turn of Roode was poorly executed as it was rushed to the point where his emotions weren't realistic, and the Storm injury was poorly executed as well. You gave up a blood feud so that the attacker could be Angle which put off and even made what Roode did to Storm not seem so bad. Roode took his title and hit him with a beer bottle, Angle beat Storm into a pulp and concussed him. Which is worse? Exactly, so the emotional feud that could have been had by the former tag team partners will never have that venom that it should. Thus, I don't think the title picture has been well booked at all, and while I'm uncertain of how it COULD have went down if different people ran the company and a babyface won at BFG, I do feel that building a guy all that time and not having him win the big one as the conquering babyface was a silly idea regardless of whether you like the alternative or not. It was a bad idea at the time and it still is.

I just hope you can understand that this simplicity you believe wrestling should operate under is silly. "The heel is champ and the babyface chases". Problem is, if the babyfaces catches the heel and triumphs for only days before the next heel knocks him off, why should we ever root for the babyface? If he or she will have a short reign at the top, what's the point of wanting them to win? I'm saying that you can have long term babyface OR heel champions within a successful promotion. You are suggesting otherwise. Which one seems more close-minded to you?

 

[shattered dreams]

The current one? He's not there yet, but he's pretty close. I'd say they are giving him a fair shake at becoming a new top star as a babyface. Sting on the other hand had one month reigns and fits right into what I'm saying too so thanks for making my point. TNA puts the title on a babyface solely to get to the next heel. There's never a time outside of RVD where a face has held the title very long.

Sting did have a one month reign in 2011 but he also had a 108 day reign (the longest of anyone since the RVD reign) from February until June. At the very least you need to get your facts straight if you want us to pretend you know what you are talking about. For WWE you named one that isn't even there yet. I said name two that actually did it because that is what TNA has done since Hogan and Bischoff have come in. If this is a huge problem in TNA then it must be an earth shattering one in WWE.

Both waffling while Roode holds the title. Until they actually win a title, you got nothing and you further prove my point. Thanks again, this is easy.

You think a face is made by being champion? You really don't get it.

I gave at least 3 examples. When does ANYONE on these boards bring more than one. Better yet, when have you ever brought even half of one actual example to support whatever propogrand you are spewing to defend TNA on a given day?

You used Velvet Sky What possible relevance could she have on your point? A couple of examples don't make a point. Anecdotes aren't evidence in small samples. Let's pretend the Velvet thing has some relevance. You can, however, use examples to disprove a supposed fact. Like the example of Mickie James having a 112 day KO title reign in 2011.

You include Mr Anderson is late 2010 when that was when he had a concussion. Furthermore you seem to suggest it was the "right" move for him not to be champion so you are talking out of both sides of your mouth. If that was the right thing to do then what you were advocating must be the wrong thing to do so why are you so damn adamant that they must do the "wrong" thing? Makes no fucking sense.

The Morgan thing is just one random guy out of the last two years and he was only in that position because of the Anderson injury. He did well with it but it was hardly the grand must be champion push you make it out to be. It is also hardly indicative of everything that has happened.

If you think that wrestling ONLY works when faces chase heels for titles, then you are the one who doesn't understand wrestling psychology. On top of that, if you don't understand the concept of building the megaface who can represent the company both on and offscreen, then no one can help you. THAT is what I'm arguing that TNA lacks. They are afraid to create that guy. It's about having multiple guys that people like who can win for a month and then fall back down when the next heel takes them down for months at a time. You mean to tell me that Velvet Sky couldn't have done wonders walking around as champion promoting the company? Come on dude. Walking around with a title belt to appearances, being pretty and fun to talk to, that's GREAT publicity for the company as she gets promoted as their champion. Rather than expand the company base from a public relations standpoint which in turn can grow the audience, lets make sure to keep the reign short so we get another heel champion because that's the only way wrestling can work right?

Velvet again? You need to get your head checked. In her promotion of the company it makes no difference if she is the champion or not. I never said it only works that way but most faces cannot be built just by here is the title be a babyface. That is boring and the audience really doesn't care that much. The pursuit is what builds up a new face, not the reign. That is why most companies tend to structure their reigns accordingly. The title is for storytelling and the sign of a true face of the company is that they do not need it to draw people in.

The topic is "Hogan's Comments On Why Roode Wasn't Given BFG Win". I addressed why and I feel it's because of this fear of creating a megaface. If you want my opinion, even if it's not really part of the this thread topic, I'm not especially thrilled with the title picture since BFG. I think the heel turn of Roode was poorly executed as it was rushed to the point where his emotions weren't realistic, and the Storm injury was poorly executed as well. You gave up a blood feud so that the attacker could be Angle which put off and even made what Roode did to Storm not seem so bad. Roode took his title and hit him with a beer bottle, Angle beat Storm into a pulp and concussed him. Which is worse? Exactly, so the emotional feud that could have been had by the former tag team partners will never have that venom that it should. Thus, I don't think the title picture has been well booked at all, and while I'm uncertain of how it COULD have went down if different people ran the company and a babyface won at BFG, I do feel that building a guy all that time and not having him win the big one as the conquering babyface was a silly idea regardless of whether you like the alternative or not. It was a bad idea at the time and it still is.

Hogan is afraid of making a megaface which is why the thing he did that made people the most mad was when he first came into the company he pushed Abyss as a megaface Let us wait to Lockdown in Tennessee and she what happens in the months coming out of that PPV to see if TNA still is afraid of building a babyface. They aren't at all, in fact they are doing it right now but you are too caught in your title focus to understand that you have to lay the groundwork for a win that means something. To do this and to sustain it afterwards you need some established heels.

 

[New Hot Fed]

Here is how I see it. From the perspective of just the BFG show it was not the best decision. From the perspective of what happened afterwards it absolutely was. So a call has to be made if TNA gave enough to entertain people at BFG to justify focusing on the product moving forward over that one night. I think they did when you consider the Hogan match and that TNA PPVs aren't as big a part of their business model as a WWE. It didn't nullify the importance of the BFG series because the whole story was how hard Roode worked for that chance and then it disappeared in an instant. How hard he worked was the BFG series. The importance of every title shot puts over something like the BFG series. The resulting story built up Roode, Storm and the TNA WHC, which was more than the alternative would have.

But the result of BFG made people swear off TNA forever. It should have been the type of thing to put TNA over but it did the opposite because of what because they wanted the storyline to go in a different way? That's always been the flaw in the Russo-type booking where the storyline is more important than the match. Like the match is a throwaway thing. While it should be the opposite wrestling matchs esp. on PPV should be holly ground. It should be why we all watch for. You don't do match to feed storylines, you do storylines to build matchs. They wanted Roode to lose so the storyline would go in a direction they wanted to take the company on, instead of saying no the match is more important.

And because their line of thinking was this way, that the storyline of Roode turning heel was more important to them, they completly forgot about the match, they didn't care about making THAT MATCH special, nevermind if Angle was in bad shape or not. Hell look at the finish, completly uninspired, unoriginal, anti-climatic. They couldn't even bother putting on a plan to make the finish interesting. Even if Roode was losing they could have done it a whole lot better than what they did. Have Dixie Carter come in and as the new owner again decide to put James Storm in a match against Angle and Storm win when it should have been Roode's night. And the spark of jealousy is created.

 

[New Hot Fed]

The topic is "Hogan's Comments On Why Roode Wasn't Given BFG Win". I addressed why and I feel it's because of this fear of creating a megaface. If you want my opinion, even if it's not really part of the this thread topic, I'm not especially thrilled with the title picture since BFG. I think the heel turn of Roode was poorly executed as it was rushed to the point where his emotions weren't realistic, and the Storm injury was poorly executed as well. You gave up a blood feud so that the attacker could be Angle which put off and even made what Roode did to Storm not seem so bad. Roode took his title and hit him with a beer bottle, Angle beat Storm into a pulp and concussed him. Which is worse? Exactly, so the emotional feud that could have been had by the former tag team partners will never have that venom that it should. Thus, I don't think the title picture has been well booked at all, and while I'm uncertain of how it COULD have went down if different people ran the company and a babyface won at BFG, I do feel that building a guy all that time and not having him win the big one as the conquering babyface was a silly idea regardless of whether you like the alternative or not. It was a bad idea at the time and it still is.

While I liked the whole run of Roode, I think having Kurt Angle being involved in this killed the whole heat between Storm and Roode.

 

[JJYanks121]

But the result of BFG made people swear off TNA forever. It should have been the type of thing to put TNA over but it did the opposite because of what because they wanted the storyline to go in a different way? That's always been the flaw in the Russo-type booking where the storyline is more important than the match. Like the match is a throwaway thing. While it should be the opposite wrestling matchs esp. on PPV should be holly ground. It should be why we all watch for. You don't do match to feed storylines, you do storylines to build matchs. They wanted Roode to lose so the storyline would go in a direction they wanted to take the company on, instead of saying no the match is more important.

And because their line of thinking was this way, that the storyline of Roode turning heel was more important to them, they completly forgot about the match, they didn't care about making THAT MATCH special, nevermind if Angle was in bad shape or not. Hell look at the finish, completly uninspired, unoriginal, anti-climatic. They couldn't even bother putting on a plan to make the finish interesting. Even if Roode was losing they could have done it a whole lot better than what they did. Have Dixie Carter come in and as the new owner again decide to put James Storm in a match against Angle and Storm win when it should have been Roode's night. And the spark of jealousy is created.

You have to excuse SD. He is in constant defense mode for TNA so his arguments never make sense as they are all based on this "TNA has never and will never mess up everything. Every move they've ever made has been the right one and anyone who thinks they aren't perfect must be stupid".

Anyone else can see that doing a 4 month tournament that builds up to your biggest show of the year needs the right payoff. It doesn't matter what happens afterwords. People put down money for that show, possibly for the first time ever on a TNA show and it ended the way it did. Those people are probably wondering why they should put down money on a TNA show again. Plus, if for some odd reason they either watched post BFG Impacts or read about them, they would find out that more happened there than at BFG so more reason to not pay for shows. The wrestling business is about making money and the best way to do that is to give fans a reason to spend that money on your product. Your biggest PPV of the year is the best place to earn huge money. Screwing the fans over with a crap finish there is not the way to do it and it undoubtedly did drive some fans away from buying shows in the future. That's simply not good business and at least you get it.

Now, I do want to dispute one thing you said. Don't fall into SD's propoganda. The decision was made last minute for Roode to lose. For a long time, it was a lock for him to win. Thus, it wasn't some thing TNA had for months where they knew he'd lose and turn heel. They decided basically the day of the event that he'd lose and I'm sure sometime between then and the following night when Storm won the title at the taping, it was decided to turn Roode heel. Thus, you got the even more uninspired heel turn out of nowhere with no build and nothing to go on to understand why Roode did it.

No matter how you look at it, it was a bad decision to have Roode lose. I stand by the fact that you build towards your biggest show, not use your biggest show to build to something else. Wrestling is about money and this way of booking undoubtedly would cost the company money in the long run. Sure some TNA fans like that new guys are in the title picture, but it's not helping business to bastardize your Wrestlemania.

 

[shattered dreams]

But the result of BFG made people swear off TNA forever. It should have been the type of thing to put TNA over but it did the opposite because of what because they wanted the storyline to go in a different way? That's always been the flaw in the Russo-type booking where the storyline is more important than the match. Like the match is a throwaway thing. While it should be the opposite wrestling matchs esp. on PPV should be holly ground. It should be why we all watch for. You don't do match to feed storylines, you do storylines to build matchs. They wanted Roode to lose so the storyline would go in a direction they wanted to take the company on, instead of saying no the match is more important.

And because their line of thinking was this way, that the storyline of Roode turning heel was more important to them, they completly forgot about the match, they didn't care about making THAT MATCH special, nevermind if Angle was in bad shape or not. Hell look at the finish, completly uninspired, unoriginal, anti-climatic. They couldn't even bother putting on a plan to make the finish interesting. Even if Roode was losing they could have done it a whole lot better than what they did. Have Dixie Carter come in and as the new owner again decide to put James Storm in a match against Angle and Storm win when it should have been Roode's night. And the spark of jealousy is created.

I can't take you seriously when you are saying it made people swear off TNA forever. It just doesn't make sense. The casual fans didn't give a crap about Roode in the first place and I have a hard time believing the IWC types didn't have their interest peaked by Storm winning the title on the next impact or that if they were that obsessed with Roode winning they didn't pay any attention when he won it the next week. Furthermore, there has be no noticeable loss off viewership for TNA, in fact, impact is in front of the largest crowd in the history of the company tonight.

They could have done the match differently and you might have liked it better that night but it would not have been the same going forward. Did you buy the PPV? I doubt it but if you did to see Roode win then I can understand where you are coming from but it wasn't like there was nothing of interest on that show anyway. If you didn't then why should we listen to you? Everyone thinks they know how to run a wrestling company and they don't have the first clue. You have no idea how PPVs factor into TNAs business plan opposed to tv. That match was hardly terrible, it was just anti-climactic. Certainly not ideal for the main event on your biggest show but it absolutely led to more interesting things than the alternative. No matter how big a show is, it is never more important than the direction of the company as a whole. When people that actually follow the product look back at the match it is an interesting catalyst to the current entertainment.

JJ appears to have conveniently passed on continuing the line of conversation where I showed how little sense he was making to piggyback your post. The fact that he thinks that they just flip a coin before the show three straight weeks just shows his ignorance. He bases this off of a Kurt Angle interview in the same thread where he points out the dicey waters you are in when you trust anything in a Hogan interview. Ironic?

You are right about them killing off some of the heat between Storm and Roode. I am not sure that is much of an issue because a) it should be pretty easy to re-ignite and b) it also has to do with the rise of Jeff Hardy. It just makes sense to keep them apart for a while. Roode needed a lengthy reign to sell his new character and establish himself as a top heel. You can't do that with the crowd hot for Storm to go over him asap. Letting Roode get built up vs others and then going back to Storm when it is finally time to do the program where drops the belt makes perfect sense to me. They separated them so they could both build their characters up instead of detracting from one another. Now when they meet them can push each other to another level again.

 

[Shadow of Darkness]

Hell Yah!

Well i just couldn't believe that none of the guys in this forum posted this topic. . Well must be a lot of Hogan Haters here; isn't it.

Okay lets get onto the topic...

TNA Impact Wrestling star Hulk Hogan was recently interviewed by Joel Ross and Rob McNichol of The UK Sun, and Hogan spoke on a number of topics including what his role in TNA actually is. The following are some interview highlights:

On the topic of what he actually does for TNA:

“I don’t know what I do!” Hogan said. “I really don’t know! Everybody always asks me that! They’ve got a bunch of people there. They’ve got Dixie (Carter), of course. They’ve got Vince Russo who is the head writer, they’ve got Bruce Pritchard is the head of creative. Eric Bischoff is the executive producer. To me he’s between the network and the company, a middle man.

I contribute, I’ll throw stuff out there creatively and every once in a while if I need to hit the ring I’ll slide on out there and do whatever, but I don’t really have a job description. I just try to be there, listen and contribute. If there is anything I can do to help or guide the direction, I’m there.”

On Bobby Roode winning the TNA Title at Bound For Glory, Hogan had the following to say:

“They were setting him up for failure. They had his parents and everybody saying what a great guy he was. You put the belt on him and he’s a good guy but he’s plain white milk toast and who is he going to work with? When I was sitting at home and I watched the interviews of his parents and his kids and his wife saying what a great guy he was I thought ‘You’ve got one of the greatest wrestling angles set up here that I have ever seen and you don’t even know it!’

Don’t let him win the belt, have him screw everybody, turn heel, put some heat on him, keep him heel for a long time, get him red hot, and then when you turn him babyface he’s got a chance to be a Rock or a Stone Cold or a Hogan. . (I thought before Bound For Glory) the way you guys have him set up now he’s just ‘one of those TNA originals that has five-star matches that don’t mean nothing’. Give the guy a chance!”

if you guys want the source - http://wrestlechat.net/hulk-hogan-s...or-stone-cold-clarifies-what-he-does-for-tna/

SO Hogan Haters (well i am also one of them but his IDEA is good ) what to say!
...

Hell Yah!

 

[JAZ]

i agree with this, just because you win a MITB briefcase, Rumble #1 contender spot or even the BFG, does not mean you will automatically win the title. sometimes the chase is more exciting than actually winning.