If WWE didn't have its legacy...

[Alex]

Would you think any different of it.

I mean you get these WWE marks who shit on TNA for not being around as long as WWE, but say both companies had been founded at around the same time would your perception of WWE change. Would you think the wrestling, storylines, overall product be good/bad if WWE didn't have past matches/ storylines to fall back on if it was the same age as TNA???

 

[NWannabe]

I think this thread at best will cause conflict and at worst will fade into obscurity. The birth of TNA, and what influenced it are far too tied to WWF to even pose this question. As JJ, the guy who was in WWF and WCW prominently during the original wars, created it. Would he even been as motivated if not for his history?

 

[Wolf Pac]

TNA is made up of WWE & WCW guys, so TNA couldn't exist if it were to be founded around the same time as WWE in which JCP (WCW) was also around. Maybe if TNA spent most of their time pushing their own stars to become established names instead of pushing WWE rejects, TNA could be taken more seriously like WWE if they had their own names to live of off instead of WWE/WCW names.

 

[Alex]

People are missing my point. I'm asking if WWE was only ten years old would you think any different of it. We've been brought up to believe that WWE is best because it hs been around longest, yet I'm asking would you think different if it wasn't.

 

[Miko]

Yeah, I would.

I'd have stopped watching a long time ago if it werent for people like Kane or Chris Jericho still in it, WWE was proper shit not all that long ago, and it still goes inbetween decent to shit now. If it werent for some of the characters, and their legacy's, or fond memories of the attitude era then chances are I'd have completely dismissed it as totally shite a long time ago.

TNA doesnt have stuff like that to fall back on, when it starts to suck there isnt any sort of bias keeping me watching because of how good it used to be. Then again TNA hasnt earnt the right to have that kind of bias going for it yet.

 

[Djm]

It's an interesting question, that I don't think a lot of people are ready to grasp onto.

TNA, Ring of Honor, and CHIKARA all started in 2002. If WWE started at the same time as each of them, would they be as huge as they are now?

Would they have the same TV deals they have? Would they have WWE 24/7? Would they have the same mainstream foothold that they have now? Not likely?

IMO, with the way WWE is right now in 2010, if they all started right now, I would not be surprised if they were #2.