IMPACT Wrestling LD for 08.18.11

[hatehabsforever]

Perhaps I don't feel the same way about you?

Ouch! Oh well, I'll get over it!

Can...could...could....see all of these qualifiers you keep putting in? Those "can"s and "could"s might be said of anyone. However, we know what we're getting with Sting/Hogan/Flair. And when we're coming up on the biggest show of the year, you need to go with what you know will draw, not what "could" draw.

You have to put qualifiers like "can" and "could" on here because no one (not even you ) knows for sure what the future holds. No one can say for sure who will work and who will not. WWE couldn't have known for sure how huge SCSA was going to get, or how tremendous Cena would become in a relatively short time. But people had the vision to see something, they went with it, and it worked out well. Have they been right every time, of course not. But you need some forward thinking to move your company forward, something consistently lacking in TNA. Otherwise you will stagnate.

You are right about one thing though. I know exactly what we are getting with Sting/Hogan/Flair. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz, brother! Woooooo!

More like TNA was already heading in the right direction before Hogan, Flair and Bischoff showed up. After all, Sting was with TNA back in 2004 and then again in 2006. Angle showed up in 2006. Bischoff and Hogan didn't start until 2010, if I'm not mistaken.

I referred to Sting and Angle there because when those guys came over, that's when we saw TNA really start to rise.

TNA was heading in the right direction before Hogan, Bischoff, Flair, and company, I agree with you about this. I think TNA was at it's best in late 2009, just before the arrival of the relics. Since then I think it has stagnated, if not regressed. TNA made progress due to the guys like Angle and Sting. They also made progress due to securing a TV deal, expanding to two hours, and occasionally venturing out of Orlando. I think you overstate the success of the Hogan regime. And I think you overstate the effect they will have on the figures for BFG. Their figures will stay exactly where they have been, and exactly where they still would be if Crimson/Angle were main eventing. Difference being Crimson, Angle, Styles, etc., have a future, the geezers do not.

Wait, who determines when Hogan is no longer great? TNA has become self-supporting, which means monthly profits are being made, ratings have been going up, and they are getting ready to take their flagship show on the road into new territories.

Wouldn't you consider that a sign of greatness for a company who has been stuck in Orlando since 2003 or 2004, formerly losing money each month and hoping for a TV rating which would now be considered an embarrassment?

Who determines Hogan is no longer great? Common sense, when the man is in the main event and he can hardly walk, never mind compete effectively. I mean I'm all for suspension of disbelief in the kayfabe world of pro wrestling, but come on! As we discussed above, I attribute most of these parameters of success to factors other than Hogan, and he's been coattail riding to a degree.

I'm confused, when was there a match signed between Hogan and Flair for Bound For Glory? Hogan is 59, Flair is 62, but they're not wrestling each other, are they? I thought you were saying Hogan or Flair would be wrestling Sting, not each other. And surely you are not doubting Sting's ability to go in the ring, are you?

I signed off last night because I was getting tired and I felt I would stop making sense and start making mistakes. You should have followed my lead, because you missed my point here entirely. Where did I reference a Hogan/Flair match? Judging from the poster, they will be involved with each other to some extent at BFG, but I said nothing of a Flair/Hogan match. I was comparing a 59 year old Flair in his "retirement match" to present day Flair.

Okay, so now the problem isn't their age, but the context of the match? Seems like you keep changing the situation as it suits your needs.

Can never fully discount context. McMahon's match with SCSA has to be seen in context. An older, non wrestler, getting his ass kicked by one of the greatest faces of all time, because of his tyrannical association with Austin. No one expected a 5 star match here, they just wanted to see Vince receive a can of whoop ass. I don't see the context of a Hogan/Sting match that makes it work other than nostalgia, which is played out.

And yet, they will still draw better than Crimson in the main-event.

Maybe, maybe not. I predict stagnant numbers, and if that's all they are going to achieve, they could do that with Crimson, but build for the future in the process.

I'm not sure why you haven't gotten that yet. You keep talking about how these guys aren't what they once were, but you can't (and haven't) deny they are still a more sure bet than the young wrestler you're using as your example in Crimson.

See, I don't think that Hogan/Flair/Sting are anything near a sure bet in 2011, so let me go ahead and deny it right now. I think they will turn off as many people as they attract.

 

[Slyfox696]

Ouch! Oh well, I'll get over it!

Are you sure? Slyfox criticism is so rare...

You have to put qualifiers like "can" and "could" on here because no one (not even you ) knows for sure what the future holds. No one can say for sure who will work and who will not.

Exactly, and that's what I'm getting at.

We don't know what Crimson will do on the biggest show of the year, but we have a very good idea what Sting vs. Hogan or Flair would do, right?

WWE couldn't have known for sure how huge SCSA was going to get, or how tremendous Cena would become in a relatively short time. But people had the vision to see something, they went with it, and it worked out well.

It did work out well, but the difference is those guys already proved they were marketable and could be stars. Steve Austin had already bumped ratings up a point. Cena was already selling merch out the wazoo.

Do you have any evidence of the same for Crimson?

You are right about one thing though. I know exactly what we are getting with Sting/Hogan/Flair. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz, brother! Woooooo!

Again, I find it amusing you think obviously the biggest "full-time" drawing wrestler in the company, the biggest draw of all-time, and the man many consider to be the greatest wrestler ever to be boring.

TNA was heading in the right direction before Hogan, Bischoff, Flair, and company, I agree with you about this. I think TNA was at it's best in late 2009, just before the arrival of the relics. Since then I think it has stagnated, if not regressed.

Ratings and revenue/profit disagree with you.

TNA made progress due to the guys like Angle and Sting. They also made progress due to securing a TV deal, expanding to two hours, and occasionally venturing out of Orlando. I think you overstate the success of the Hogan regime. And I think you overstate the effect they will have on the figures for BFG. Their figures will stay exactly where they have been, and exactly where they still would be if Crimson/Angle were main eventing. Difference being Crimson, Angle, Styles, etc., have a future, the geezers do not.

Let's put it like this.

You're hosting a wrestling show in Oklahoma. You can put any name on the marquee. Are you really telling me you'd put Crimson's name on the marquee before you put Hogan's? Do you think seeing Crimson's name will sell more tickets than Hogan's? Is that what you are really telling me?

Who determines Hogan is no longer great? Common sense, when the man is in the main event and he can hardly walk, never mind compete effectively.

You just described Mick Foley from 1996 on.

I mean I'm all for suspension of disbelief in the kayfabe world of pro wrestling, but come on!

Again, I direct you to Mick Foley.

I signed off last night because I was getting tired and I felt I would stop making sense and start making mistakes. You should have followed my lead, because you missed my point here entirely. Where did I reference a Hogan/Flair match?

You alluded to it here:

"to a 62 year old man pathetically refusing to let go of the torch. And it is a big leap from 43 to 59"

Or better yet:

There is no context which justifies a 58 year old Hogan versus a 62 year old Flair, especially when there's no guarantee whatsoever that this spells the end either.

Perhaps you're still really tired.

Can never fully discount context. McMahon's match with SCSA has to be seen in context. An older, non wrestler, getting his ass kicked by one of the greatest faces of all time, because of his tyrannical association with Austin. No one expected a 5 star match here, they just wanted to see Vince receive a can of whoop ass. I don't see the context of a Hogan/Sting match that makes it work other than nostalgia, which is played out.

They haven't given you the context yet. They're still building it. Bound For Glorry is still two months away. You're telling me the story of SCSA vs. McMahon, whilst not knowing the story for Sting vs. Hogan (assuming that's what happens).

Maybe, maybe not. I predict stagnant numbers, and if that's all they are going to achieve, they could do that with Crimson, but build for the future in the process.

Stagnant numbers...do explain. First, please explain what those numbers are, because I've yet to see a credible TNA source release those numbers. Second of all, when you say "stagnant numbers", I'm curious as to what you are comparing it too. Other Bound for Glory shows? Other PPVs?

Finally, I think we would both agree BFG probably does more PPV buys than most of TNA's PPVs, why would you say that is? Because it's more special than the other shows? Reasonable, correct? If you put an unproven Crimson in the main-event, what exactly makes BFG different from other shows? And why exactly do you think they would draw the same numbers as if they put Hogan in the main-event?

In the end, I just go back to my previous example. If your financial success depended upon the one name you put on the marquee for your show in Oklahoma, do you put Crimson's or Hogan's?

 

[hatehabsforever]

First of all, come on travis_touchdown, I've seen you lurking there for quite a while, get in here with your two cents worth.

Are you sure? Slyfox criticism is so rare...

Hey, at least it's constructive and non-*******, at least for the most part, got to respect that.

We don't know what Crimson will do on the biggest show of the year, but we have a very good idea what Sting vs. Hogan or Flair would do, right?

There's no way to know for sure what Crimson will do on the biggest show of the year, but chances are he'll do just fine, as he has been demonstrating for months now. He's earned the chance to show us, and I for one would like to see it.

And I really don't know what Hogan or Flair will do, from an athletic perspective, at this stage of their lives. I know what they could have brought back in their primes, over a decade ago, but I question what they can bring at this stage of the game in terms of in ring action. I do know they will bring an aura, a presence, there's no denying that, but they could bring just as much of that in a non wrestling capacity, which I'd be perfectly fine with.

Again, I find it amusing you think obviously the biggest "full-time" drawing wrestler in the company, the biggest draw of all-time, and the man many consider to be the greatest wrestler ever to be boring.

And I find it unfathomable that you don't find what they bring to the table as active singles wrestlers in an in ring capacity in 2011 boring. The biggest drawing wrestler and whatnot, that was fine years ago but it's not relevant today. I think Bobby Orr was one of the two top players in the history of the NHL, who revolutionized the way the game was played and is still played to this day. But I wouldn't want to see him on the roster of the defending Stanley Cup Champion Boston Bruins this season. His time passed years ago, as has the relics'. I could buy him as a coach or an advisor, but not as an active player. Granted that's a flawed analogy as wrestling is kayfabe and the NHL is not, but my point is still the same. Everyone's day comes and goes, and eventually you have to step aside, in an active context, and let the new blood in, something which these Immortals seem to be unable or unwilling to do.

You're hosting a wrestling show in Oklahoma. You can put any name on the marquee. Are you really telling me you'd put Crimson's name on the marquee before you put Hogan's? Do you think seeing Crimson's name will sell more tickets than Hogan's? Is that what you are really telling me?

I would definitely feature Hogan on my show if he we're still with my company, but in a non wrestling capacity. For example, i would have Angle (with Hogan in his corner) versus Crimson (with Sting in his corner). Best of both worlds. Marquee value star power of the legends, featuring guys who can still move in the ring. Personally that's how I would do it.

You just described Mick Foley from 1996 on.

And here's another guy that should be nowhere near the ring as an active competitor anymore, and make no mistake about it, I was a big Mick Foley fan. People on here often say they would like to see Foley and Taker at next year's WM, and a few have even said they would like to see Foley end the streak. I would be vehemently opposed to seeing a Foley/Undertaker matchup for all of the same reasons why I have no interest in Hogan or Flair. Maybe this will be another debate in six months or so.

Don't forget as well, Foley's style is more conducive to him sticking around longer. The hard core legend getting thrown around like a rag doll, absorbing punishment like few before him, that allowed him to prolong his career and help elevate other guys along the way. I don't think Hogan or Flair can bring this dynamic.

"to a 62 year old man pathetically refusing to let go of the torch. And it is a big leap from 43 to 59"

Or better yet:

Perhaps you're still really tired.

My bad, I guess I was more tired than I realized. I stand corrected.

They haven't given you the context yet. They're still building it. Bound For Glorry is still two months away. You're telling me the story of SCSA vs. McMahon, whilst not knowing the story for Sting vs. Hogan (assuming that's what happens).

No one can know the story of Sting and Hogan which is about to unfold, again, but I think I could hazard a pretty accurate hypothesis, and I think you could too. Put it this way, I don't think we will see a clean victory for Sting over Hogan. And I think we know where Hogan is going next

In the end, I just go back to my previous example. If your financial success depended upon the one name you put on the marquee for your show in Oklahoma, do you put Crimson's or Hogan's?

As I said earlier, i think I put Hogan on there in a non wrestling capacity to exploit his name value and reputation, to try to draw in those who seem to enjoy nostalgia. That would appear to be sound strategy, after all, it seems to be working on you . But I would have Crimson on there in a big way, as well as the criminally underutilized AJ Styles and others like this.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

No one has touched on the fact that BFG is in Philly. How is a crowd that is so smarky and crude going to respond to guys in their 50's wrestling in a main event? I can see the Philly crowds chanting, "Fuck you geriatrics!" the whole match.

Not sure how this effects the match but it sure as hell would be an embarrassment for a sweet southern belle like Dixie.

 

[hatehabsforever]

Come on Joe, get in here, let's hear a TNA perspective.

 

[Joe's Gonna Kill You]

I don't think its important

 

[hatehabsforever]

I don't think its important

Should TNA move forward into the next couple of years by relying upon the drawing power of nostalgia, featuring aging superstars who were relevant years ago, or should they start pushing their developing young talent in preparation for the future? Don't say both, that's a cop out. Which do you thinks the more prudent oversell strategy?

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

Should TNA move forward into the next couple of years by relying upon the drawing power of nostalgia, featuring aging superstars who were relevant years ago, or should they start pushing their developing young talent in preparation for the future? Don't say both, that's a cop out. Which do you thinks the more prudent oversell strategy?

Ah, hate to disagree here, but saying "both" isn't a cop out. You need the older guys with familiar faces to draw in general wrestling fans (WWE fans not watching TNA), and the younger guys to entertain them, keep them coming back for years to come. There's a grey area, somewhere. Is TNA where they need to be, in terms of finding that grey area? I'm not sure.

 

[The Dragon Saga]

That or we can go Heyman style and eliminate all but one person over the age of forty, who'd probably be Kurt Angle. Kurt Angle, could he draw on his own alongside the likes of Crimson?

Highly doubtful. Gingerberg wouldn't make me want to watch IW sometimes. Gunner though, I'd actually have a miniscule interest in.

 

[Joe's Gonna Kill You]

But they already are pushing young talent Crimson is getting pushed Gunner is, both Rhoode and Storm two guys that many in the IWC say they would like to be pushed as singles are in the top 4 of the BFG Series and are also featured on the BFG poster.

 

[X]

What is that old saying? "If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything"

You have me very confused xfear. I remember you biting my head off in the Kanyon thread because I wasn't empathizing with a guy who took his own life, and yet here you are wishing injury upon another human being because...you don't like him?


Sure, I suppose you can be as inconsistent as you want to be, but when you willingly admit hypocrisy, it really gives you no leg to stand on at any time in the future, and makes your past scolding seem nothing but argumentative, the very thing you like to accuse me of all the time. I'm just having difficulty understanding your thought process on this.

Do you need to argue with me to get your dick hard in the morning or something? Is it part of your daily routine along with a shower and your morning cereal? I don't want to argue man, take a hint. That Kanyon thread was nearly two years ago, get over it man. Besides, as someone else already pointed out to you, there's a big difference between joking about how you'd like to see someone get injured, and joking about someone who has just died. One is jesting, the other is mean-spirited and fully serious. I don't really hope that Hogan gets hit by a car or breaks his hip, I don't get up in the morning and put it up on my "Things I'd like to see happen today" list, but you damn sure meant every word you said about Kanyon. Which tells me you're a pretty jaded person, whereas I've tried to change and be a more optimistic and less cynical person who doesn't hold grudges over silly shit anymore. Stop taking everything I say so literally and trying to make an argument out of nothing man, it's unbelievably annoying, especially when I repeatedly tell you I've got zero fucking interest in going into another pointless back and forth circle-jerk of our clashing ideals and morals. We know we don't agree with each other, and I for one just do not fucking care one bit anymore. Go argue pointlessly with someone who actually wants to and stop trying to instigate a massive argument over a small and petty joke, it's flat out annoying, boring, and most of all old.

 

[X]

No one has touched on the fact that BFG is in Philly. How is a crowd that is so smarky and crude going to respond to guys in their 50's wrestling in a main event? I can see the Philly crowds chanting, "Fuck you geriatrics!" the whole match.

Not sure how this effects the match but it sure as hell would be an embarrassment for a sweet southern belle like Dixie.

It's in Philly?

Laughing my FUCKING ass off right now. They are flat out fucking ******ED if they do not realize that that crowd is going to take a big fat shit all over Hogan, and maybe Flair and Sting.

Oh my god I'm so excited for BFG now, not for any matches, but just to see that crowd tear them apart. Christ they might as well have held it in Hammerstein. Should make a great crowd for the potential RVD/Lynn match though.

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

It's in Philadelphia, I just checked (I'm sure most already knew that).

Holy. Shit. Philly is fucking paradise to the smark community. Poor Hulkster

 

[Slyfox696]

There's no way to know for sure what Crimson will do on the biggest show of the year, but chances are he'll do just fine, as he has been demonstrating for months now. He's earned the chance to show us, and I for one would like to see it.

No no, you're still not understanding what I'm saying. I don't care what his performance on the show is. He could have a 5 star match for all I care. That 5 star match isn't going to sell tickets, because it happened after the tickets are done being sold.

I'm talking strictly about the card drawing.

And I really don't know what Hogan or Flair will do, from an athletic perspective, at this stage of their lives. I know what they could have brought back in their primes, over a decade ago, but I question what they can bring at this stage of the game in terms of in ring action. I do know they will bring an aura, a presence, there's no denying that, but they could bring just as much of that in a non wrestling capacity, which I'd be perfectly fine with.

But they'll bring more people to the show and have more people buy it on PPV.

And I find it unfathomable that you don't find what they bring to the table as active singles wrestlers in an in ring capacity in 2011 boring. The biggest drawing wrestler and whatnot, that was fine years ago but it's not relevant today. I think Bobby Orr was one of the two top players in the history of the NHL, who revolutionized the way the game was played and is still played to this day. But I wouldn't want to see him on the roster of the defending Stanley Cup Champion Boston Bruins this season. His time passed years ago, as has the relics'. I could buy him as a coach or an advisor, but not as an active player. Granted that's a flawed analogy as wrestling is kayfabe and the NHL is not, but my point is still the same. Everyone's day comes and goes, and eventually you have to step aside, in an active context, and let the new blood in, something which these Immortals seem to be unable or unwilling to do.

We're talking about the biggest show of the year. If you want to change the direction of the company, you do it after the biggest show of the year.

Understand I'm not necessarily arguing about your direction for the company in general, merely what it means at Bound For Glory. At BFG, you put your biggest draws on the card, no matter who those draws are.

I would definitely feature Hogan on my show if he we're still with my company, but in a non wrestling capacity. For example, i would have Angle (with Hogan in his corner) versus Crimson (with Sting in his corner). Best of both worlds. Marquee value star power of the legends, featuring guys who can still move in the ring. Personally that's how I would do it.

But, getting back to the point, you choose Hogan over Crimson, right?

And here's another guy that should be nowhere near the ring as an active competitor anymore, and make no mistake about it, I was a big Mick Foley fan. People on here often say they would like to see Foley and Taker at next year's WM, and a few have even said they would like to see Foley end the streak. I would be vehemently opposed to seeing a Foley/Undertaker matchup for all of the same reasons why I have no interest in Hogan or Flair. Maybe this will be another debate in six months or so.

Don't forget as well, Foley's style is more conducive to him sticking around longer. The hard core legend getting thrown around like a rag doll, absorbing punishment like few before him, that allowed him to prolong his career and help elevate other guys along the way. I don't think Hogan or Flair can bring this dynamic.

That's all fine and good, but I'm talking about 1996 Mick Foley. Everything you said about Hogan and Flair can be applied to Foley, and yet Foley went on to be a huge superstar in the Attitude Era, despite "the man is in the main event and he can hardly walk, never mind compete effectively. "

The point I'm getting across is that almost all your "reasons" Hogan/Flair shouldn't wrestle don't hold up to history.

My bad, I guess I was more tired than I realized. I stand corrected.

As I said earlier, i think I put Hogan on there in a non wrestling capacity to exploit his name value and reputation, to try to draw in those who seem to enjoy nostalgia. That would appear to be sound strategy, after all, it seems to be working on you . But I would have Crimson on there in a big way, as well as the criminally underutilized AJ Styles and others like this.

And you still can. And you don't need their face on the poster to do it.

No one has touched on the fact that BFG is in Philly. How is a crowd that is so smarky and crude going to respond to guys in their 50's wrestling in a main event? I can see the Philly crowds chanting, "Fuck you geriatrics!" the whole match.

Not sure how this effects the match but it sure as hell would be an embarrassment for a sweet southern belle like Dixie.

I'm sure TNA is well aware of this fact. I'm sure they were well aware of it when they decided to host the show in Philadelphia in the first place. But, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Hogan a heel in TNA right now? Has Sting done anything to warrant hatred from the so-called smarks?

I think Sting will be revered and Hogan will be booed mercilessly...which would be exactly how they want it.

Should TNA move forward into the next couple of years by relying upon the drawing power of nostalgia, featuring aging superstars who were relevant years ago, or should they start pushing their developing young talent in preparation for the future? Don't say both, that's a cop out. Which do you thinks the more prudent oversell strategy?

Your presentation is an inaccurate portrayal of the discussion we're having. I'm not arguing Hogan and Flair can lead TNA for the next three years, I'm speaking completely about BFG.

That or we can go Heyman style and eliminate all but one person over the age of forty, who'd probably be Kurt Angle. Kurt Angle, could he draw on his own alongside the likes of Crimson?

Highly doubtful. Gingerberg wouldn't make me want to watch IW sometimes. Gunner though, I'd actually have a miniscule interest in.

Yeah...anyone who goes the Heyman style deserves to go bankrupt, just like ECW did.

Do you need to argue with me to get your dick hard in the morning or something? Is it part of your daily routine along with a shower and your morning cereal? I don't want to argue man, take a hint. That Kanyon thread was nearly two years ago, get over it man. Besides, as someone else already pointed out to you, there's a big difference between joking about how you'd like to see someone get injured, and joking about someone who has just died. One is jesting, the other is mean-spirited and fully serious. I don't really hope that Hogan gets hit by a car or breaks his hip,

So you are now saying you didn't really mean what you said about Hogan. Fair enough. Why not just say that in the first place if you didn't want an argument? Could have solved the issue right from the start. In fact, that's what I was hoping you would say.

I don't get up in the morning and put it up on my "Things I'd like to see happen today" list, but you damn sure meant every word you said about Kanyon. Which tells me you're a pretty jaded person, whereas I've tried to change and be a more optimistic and less cynical person who doesn't hold grudges over silly shit anymore. Stop taking everything I say so literally and trying to make an argument out of nothing man, it's unbelievably annoying, especially when I repeatedly tell you I've got zero fucking interest in going into another pointless back and forth circle-jerk of our clashing ideals and morals. We know we don't agree with each other, and I for one just do not fucking care one bit anymore. Go argue pointlessly with someone who actually wants to and stop trying to instigate a massive argument over a small and petty joke, it's flat out annoying, boring, and most of all old.

I have never seen anyone on this forum more concerned about their ego and forum reputation than you. You see, if you REALLY had zero interest in an argument, you would have just said from the beginning you weren't being serious, and you wouldn't feel the need to, once again, troll me in your post.

You're right, we don't agree with each other, but it seems as if I'm the only one who can have civil discourse with the other. If you're not insulting me to protect your ego, you just don't know how to discuss things. The idea of a mature discussion with me seems to be beyond you right now. Over the last several weeks I have deliberately made it a point to rationally discuss things with you, but you want no part of it.

I pity you. That's not an insult and that's not exaggeration. I truly do pity you. I hope one day you can learn how to have a mature conversation with someone who doesn't agree with your opinions.

It's in Philly?

Laughing my FUCKING ass off right now. They are flat out fucking ******ED if they do not realize that that crowd is going to take a big fat shit all over Hogan, and maybe Flair and Sting.

Oh my god I'm so excited for BFG now, not for any matches, but just to see that crowd tear them apart. Christ they might as well have held it in Hammerstein. Should make a great crowd for the potential RVD/Lynn match though.

I think it's quite telling how stupid those fans are who would boo Hulk Hogan, and cheer RVD vs. Lynn. Just shows you how little they understand wrestling. And I have no doubt TNA knew exactly what they were doing when they booked Philly for Bound For Glory. It doesn't matter if those fans show up to boo Hogan, because those fans bought the ticket to be there in the first place. Boo the heel Hogan all you want, as long as you're giving your money to TNA, they don't care.

 

[ABMorales787]

They've done major shows in Philly before. They aren't gonna just ignore the crowd. They know what they are walking into. That's why Bully Ray is gonna win the BFG Series and win the World title there!

 

[X]

So you are now saying you didn't really mean what you said about Hogan. Fair enough. Why not just say that in the first place if you didn't want an argument? Could have solved the issue right from the start. In fact, that's what I was hoping you would say.

This right here is what I'm talking about. You seriously couldn't tell that I was joking when I said that? Do you not know me whatsoever, at all? Would I really harbor ill will towards random innocent people I don't know? No, I wouldn't would I? I would however crack jokes about the subject, making light of my distaste for certain people, Hulk Hogan included. I'm almost 100% certain you knew all of this, but you still try to stir up some argument as if I had intended to make a "serious point" about Hulk Hogan breaking his f'n hip. You see that shit man? That's the trolling here, not what you like to accuse me of whenever I tell you to fuck off. I've told you repeatedly to just stop picking these petty arguments with me about morals and ideals, and you ignore that request instead by going into threads, quoting my posts and directly trying to initiate a conversation (or rather, an argument) with me anyways, even after I keep telling you that I have no interest in going around in circles with you again man.

I have never seen anyone on this forum more concerned about their ego and forum reputation than you. You see, if you REALLY had zero interest in an argument, you would have just said from the beginning you weren't being serious, and you wouldn't feel the need to, once again, troll me in your post.

Ego? What exactly is egotistical about asking you to stop trying to pick arguments over stupid shit? It has nothing to do with anyone's ego whatsoever, but it's telling that you'd bring that up. And again, no Sly, I was not "trolling" you. I have no idea how telling you to fuck off and not talk to me could be construed as "trolling", but goodness gracious, you sure can say a mouthful.

You're right, we don't agree with each other, but it seems as if I'm the only one who can have civil discourse with the other. If you're not insulting me to protect your ego, you just don't know how to discuss things. The idea of a mature discussion with me seems to be beyond you right now. Over the last several weeks I have deliberately made it a point to rationally discuss things with you, but you want no part of it.

Civil discourse? Get the fuck out of here with that nonsense, nothing you say is civil and we've gone over this before. It's rather simple Sly. You like to insult people by being condescending to them and giving them back-handed compliments, while I on the other hand usually just go ahead and say what's on my mind, which includes when people irk me. What part of you ignoring my repeated wishes that you stop trying to initiate these arguments is "civil" Sly? Doesn't seem very civil to me. It's funny how you turn around then and want to act like I'm the bad guy here and like I'm the one that started this whole stupid, pointless conversation we're currently having here. No, that was you. Usually I choose to just ignore it and go on about my business, but today I've decided to respond instead and surprise surprise here you are playing hurt like you didn't intend to get this insulting reaction out of me this entire time. Dude, you are fucking crazy. It's okay, we are all in our own ways.

I pity you. That's not an insult and that's not exaggeration. I truly do pity you. I hope one day you can learn how to have a mature conversation with someone who doesn't agree with your opinions.

Nothing about your attempts to rile me up and argue with me were attempts at initiating a rational or "mature" conversation Sly, as usual you're just being a condescending prick here and acting like I went out of my way to insult you when really it was you who went ahead and wanted to get this reaction from me the entire time, and guess what? You won! You did it man, you trolled me, you got me to type up some big long post about pointless bullshit and say all kinds of trivial, nasty things that we'll forget about tomorrow. Congratulations. I just want you to know that I'm 100% sick and fucking tired of doing this little dancing and singing routine of ours, and I'd really, really think it would be just swell and oh so civil if you could just have the good will to stop arguing with me and just ignore me for pete's sake. And that's pretty much the last I'm going to say on this topic with you. I know full well you'll respond with some large diatribe here trying to twist my words around to make it seem like I'm fucking with you or something even though I keep fucking telling you to leave me alone, but my part of this conversation is officially over and if you want to say anything else to me and actually get a response, I suggest you do it via PM. Because as I've said a thousand times already...this shit is old. It's older than half of TNA's roster.

And with that bad joke, I'm done here.

 

[hatehabsforever]

No no, you're still not understanding what I'm saying. I don't care what his performance on the show is. He could have a 5 star match for all I care. That 5 star match isn't going to sell tickets, because it happened after the tickets are done being sold.

I'm talking strictly about the card drawing.

I'm understanding exactly what you are saying, I'm just not agreeing with it. The draw can theoretically achieved by putting the fossils on the show in a non wrestling capacity, and once the fans have tuned in, Crimson and Styles can put off a show, a show that will be more entertaining than rehashing a feud that was old a decade ago when it last occurred. And I don't expect Crimson to put off a 5 star match, but I would expect him to put off a match more entertaining than what Hogan and Sting can offer in 2011.

That's all fine and good, but I'm talking about 1996 Mick Foley. Everything you said about Hogan and Flair can be applied to Foley, and yet Foley went on to be a huge superstar in the Attitude Era, despite "the man is in the main event and he can hardly walk, never mind compete effectively. "

I disagree with you, and I already stated why. What Foley offers in wrestling style as a hardcore legend is different than what the other guys offer. And Foley spent a lot of his time putting other guys over, something which you can be goddamned sure Hulk Hogan isn't going to do. Never has before, why is he going to start to do so as he nears his 60th birthday.

We can go back and forth about this all day long and I doubt we'll ever agree, and that's fine, I've enjoyed the back and forth. All I am saying, in a nutshell, is that I am so tired seeing a non stop force feeding of nostalgia, in the ring competing, in an organization that I think has the potential to be capable of so much better. I am so tired of seeing promising talent play second fiddle to the same few guys continuously. I would love go see TNA at least try to move forward into the future, with a mix of non wrestling nostalgia and young talent. BFG seems to be a good place to do it, as more people are going to watch this than any other TNA PPV this year. But they refuse to do it, and are going to do to their wrestling faithful the same thing they did to me last year: disappoint. And there has to be a limit to how much disappointment and lazy apathy the TNA faithful will tolerate.

Oh, and by the way, none of my business, but for what it's worth, it may be time for you and X to bury the hatchet, assuming this isn't a kayfabe feud. Just sayin'

 

[The Crock]

I'm understanding exactly what you are saying, I'm just not agreeing with it. The draw can theoretically achieved by putting the fossils on the show in a non wrestling capacity, and once the fans have tuned in, Crimson and Styles can put off a show, a show that will be more entertaining than rehashing a feud that was old a decade ago when it last occurred. And I don't expect Crimson to put off a 5 star match, but I would expect him to put off a match more entertaining than what Hogan and Sting can offer in 2011.

See, I'm going to have to disagree with you here. People see Hogan, Sting, and Flair on TV all the time, but they don't see them wrestle on TV much. If they wrestle on the pay-per-view, people are going to be interested. It's going to be far from a wrestling clinic, but it'll be a spectacle nevertheless.

I'm also not denying that Crimson is better in the ring than Hogan at this stage of his career (even if Crimson is green as goose shit), but he won't be more entertaining than Hogan. I've seen Crimson wrestle a lot lately, it's nothing I won't see again, but I haven't seen Hogan wrestling much and who knows when I'll get a chance to see him again. Naturally, I'm going to be leaning toward Hogan here, hypothetically speaking.

 

[Joe's Gonna Kill You]

What's wrong with Crimson's in-ring skills?

 

[Slyfox696]

They've done major shows in Philly before. They aren't gonna just ignore the crowd. They know what they are walking into. That's why Bully Ray is gonna win the BFG Series and win the World title there!

Bully Ray wins, people cheer, and I mock them for their stupidity.

This right here is what I'm talking about. You seriously couldn't tell that I was joking when I said that?

No, I couldn't. I was hoping, but I didn't know that.

Do you not know me whatsoever, at all?

Should I? Why am I supposed to know when you're joking? We don't "hang out" on the forum, and the times we post in the same thread, it's usually in opposition of one another. So, the answer is no, and I don't see why you would expect me to.

I'm almost 100% certain you knew all of this

Without trying to seem like an ass, you seem to think I care enough about you to learn all these facets of your personality. I don't. Just like I wouldn't expect you to know me.

I've told you repeatedly to just stop picking these petty arguments with me about morals and ideals, and you ignore that request instead by going into threads, quoting my posts and directly trying to initiate a conversation (or rather, an argument) with me anyways

If I disagree with your statement, I'm going to comment on it. You don't have to respond, you know. You can just ignore it. And just because I quote you, doesn't mean I'm trying to stir things up, it just means I disagree, and I make sure I disagree in a respectful manner. Were you to do the same, we wouldn't have these issues.

Ego? What exactly is egotistical about asking you to stop trying to pick arguments over stupid shit?

It's not the asking to pick arguments it's the fact you just cannot come right out and be honest. You feel as if you have some image to protect, and if someone dares to accuse you of being wrong about something, you have to go into full "xfear" mode insulting the person rather than simply having a civil discussion.

That's where the ego part comes in. You say that I'm trying to pick fights with you by quoting you. Ignoring for a moment how untrue that is, why do you pick up the other end of the rope for the tug-of-war? Why not just ignore it? We both know it's because your ego won't allow you to.

Civil discourse? Get the fuck out of here with that nonsense, nothing you say is civil and we've gone over this before.

I have been nothing but civil and respectful to you over the last couple of weeks. The fact you've been unable to see that I believe says a lot about you. I asked you to positively contribute to my CM Punk thread, without casting about insults, and you never could. You always had to have some insult in your post. I kept asking for mature discussion, you kept resorting to insults. Since that moment, I have done nothing but be completely civil to you and everyone else on this board.

It's rather simple Sly. You like to insult people by being condescending to them and giving them back-handed compliments, while I on the other hand usually just go ahead and say what's on my mind, which includes when people irk me. What part of you ignoring my repeated wishes that you stop trying to initiate these arguments is "civil" Sly?

The fact I'm not initiating arguments, but rather discussion. Have you been following along with the discussion hatehabsforever and I have been having? We've disagreed, but we've been respectful and polite to each other. Why can you not post in the same manner?

Doesn't seem very civil to me. It's funny how you turn around then and want to act like I'm the bad guy here and like I'm the one that started this whole stupid, pointless conversation we're currently having here.

Well..you were the one who mentioned laughing if Hogan got injured, and then when I questioned you on it, you never clarified you were joking. Had you just said from the beginning after I questioned you about it that you were joking, we still wouldn't be discussing it.

I've decided to respond instead and surprise surprise here you are playing hurt like you didn't intend to get this insulting reaction out of me this entire time.

What you're saying almost makes it seem like you have a persecution complex.

I never once asked for your insults. I have been mature the entire time, you're the one who wouldn't just say from the beginning that they were joking. Had you done that, we wouldn't still be talking about it. What you said, had you been serious, was an awful thing to say, and a complete 180 from your position I have when posters cry because people they don't know kill themselves.

The fact you see that as me trying to pick a fight with you would be a little bothersome if I were someone in your life who cared about you.

Nothing about your attempts to rile me up and argue with me were attempts at initiating a rational or "mature" conversation Sly, as usual you're just being a condescending prick here and acting like I went out of my way to insult you when really it was you who went ahead and wanted to get this reaction from me the entire time, and guess what? You won! You did it man, you trolled me, you got me to type up some big long post about pointless bullshit and say all kinds of trivial, nasty things that we'll forget about tomorrow. Congratulations. I just want you to know that I'm 100% sick and fucking tired of doing this little dancing and singing routine of ours, and I'd really, really think it would be just swell and oh so civil if you could just have the good will to stop arguing with me and just ignore me for pete's sake. And that's pretty much the last I'm going to say on this topic with you. I know full well you'll respond with some large diatribe here trying to twist my words around to make it seem like I'm fucking with you or something even though I keep fucking telling you to leave me alone, but my part of this conversation is officially over and if you want to say anything else to me and actually get a response, I suggest you do it via PM. Because as I've said a thousand times already...this shit is old. It's older than half of TNA's roster.

And with that bad joke, I'm done here.

I'm saying here again the same thing I've been saying for weeks. All I want is mature and rational conversation. I don't know why you think me quoting you is me trying to troll you, but you could not be further from the truth. All I wanted was clarification from you because the comment you made was an awful thing to say and was at odds with your previous stances of hurt to human beings.

All you had to say was, "Dude, I was just kidding"...I would have said, "Fair enough", and continued my discussion with hatehabsforever. That would have been the end of it. Now you have both of us wasting our time in a discussion that is, quite frankly, a waste of both our times.

I'm not going to quit quoting you Xfear. I don't go looking for your posts, but if I see one I disagree with, I'm not treating you any different than I treat any other poster. I'm sorry if you see that as me trolling or picking fights with you, but I'm telling you right now, point blank, it's not. I'll say the same thing now I said weeks ago...I'm just looking for quality and mature discussion. If you do not feel like you can handle it, then feel free to continue to ignore me. I have no problem with that. But I know I can handle it, so I'm going to continue to post the way I desire.

I'm understanding exactly what you are saying, I'm just not agreeing with it. The draw can theoretically achieved by putting the fossils on the show in a non wrestling capacity, and once the fans have tuned in, Crimson and Styles can put off a show, a show that will be more entertaining than rehashing a feud that was old a decade ago when it last occurred. And I don't expect Crimson to put off a 5 star match, but I would expect him to put off a match more entertaining than what Hogan and Sting can offer in 2011.

So you're saying you want to draw the fans with Hogan, Flair and Sting, right? You're saying you don't necessarily plan to draw with Crimson and Styles, correct?

So if we're going to draw with Hogan, Sting and Flair, how would we do that? By putting them on the poster, for example?

I disagree with you, and I already stated why. What Foley offers in wrestling style as a hardcore legend is different than what the other guys offer. And Foley spent a lot of his time putting other guys over, something which you can be goddamned sure Hulk Hogan isn't going to do. Never has before, why is he going to start to do so as he nears his 60th birthday.

Hogan's put over plenty of people in his time. That's such a common misconception. Hogan has put people over by losing to them, and merely by being in the same ring with them. If I say the name "Zeus" and you were watching wrestling back in the 80s and 90s, you know exactly who I'm talking about. That's putting someone over.

Putting people over is not just about losing to them.

We can go back and forth about this all day long and I doubt we'll ever agree, and that's fine, I've enjoyed the back and forth. All I am saying, in a nutshell, is that I am so tired seeing a non stop force feeding of nostalgia, in the ring competing, in an organization that I think has the potential to be capable of so much better. I am so tired of seeing promising talent play second fiddle to the same few guys continuously. I would love go see TNA at least try to move forward into the future, with a mix of non wrestling nostalgia and young talent. BFG seems to be a good place to do it, as more people are going to watch this than any other TNA PPV this year. But they refuse to do it, and are going to do to their wrestling faithful the same thing they did to me last year: disappoint. And there has to be a limit to how much disappointment and lazy apathy the TNA faithful will tolerate.

I understand what you are saying, and it sounds great in theory. But Bound For Glory is not the place for it. The PPV after Bound For Glory is the place for it. The other PPVs the rest of the year is the time to try it out. Bound For Glory is not that show.

Oh, and by the way, none of my business, but for what it's worth, it may be time for you and X to bury the hatchet, assuming this isn't a kayfabe feud. Just sayin'

I was willing to bury the hatchet weeks ago. There have been a few times I've edited responses to him so as to not make it look like I'm trying to insult him. I've gone out of my way to try and express a desire to have a mature and rational discussion with him. I'm not sure why he feels the way he does, but I've already been doing this for weeks. I just hope he is willing to do the same.

 

[Kenny Powers]

Here are two Bound For Glory posters. Obviously you have the main players of TNA along with Beer Money on the first poster and possibly AJ Styles and Gunner on the second poster in the background.

Whether TNA is having a house show or the biggest show of the year. I would and especially none TNA fans would buy tickets to a wrestling show that advertised Ric Flair, Hulk Hogan, Sting, RVD, and Kurt Angle instead of Samoa Joe, AJ Styles, Crimson, and Gunner.

It's just common sense. The only thing we know about the main event is that the current TNA champion Kurt Angle will take on the winner of the Bound For Glory Series. Currently Crimson is #1, followed by Bully Ray, Robert Roode, and James Storm.

None of us no for sure if we will see see Sting vs. Flair or Hogan and Bound For Glory. They could book Sting vs. Flair at No Surrender for all we know. Even if they booked it in the middle of smark territory, it doesn't matter as long as it people buy tickets and PPVs. I would pay to see Hogan vs. Sting or Flair in my hometown over seeing Crimson vs. Gunner.

Unless Crimson is injured, it looks like he will face Angle at the biggest TNA show of the year for the TNA heavyweight championship. I'm sure Crimson is thrilled to even have the opportunity. Why does it matter if his face is on the poster again? Especially since we still have two months to go and TNA could always change posters.

 

[shattered dreams]

What's wrong with Crimson's in-ring skills?

He is tall and has skin pigmentation.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

I dont understand any of the arguments here...

You all understand that the card is likely to include both....Sting Vs Hulk AND Crimson Vs Angle for the title? You know...Both of them? Like as in, not just one or the other, but, both matches?

 

[Gelgarin]

Yeah, but they're not all on the poster... which people care about for a series of perfectly valid reasons that I can't quite recall at present.

 

[Slyfox696]

I dont understand any of the arguments here...

You all understand that the card is likely to include both....Sting Vs Hulk AND Crimson Vs Angle for the title? You know...Both of them? Like as in, not just one or the other, but, both matches?

Yes, and that's what I've been saying. The debate has been over which should be THE featured bout.