Is TNA now the better company?

[go_patriots11]

Ok, I get that there will always be WWE & TNA Fanboys I get that. However I would like to hear someone's response that has been watching "Wrestling" (WCW, WWF, ECW) for a long period of time. If you really strip down to the bare bones of each of today's product, do you think TNA is the better of the 2? It pains for me to say this, and I will always be impartial to the WWE as it is what I have been watching for most of my life. In saying that, after another lackluster WrestleMania, it has become very clear to me that WWE has no real depth to their roster other than part-time guys. I mean other than the production value, and if I can say that should not really be a major determining factor in why you watch a show (Hey, look at WWE's stage and ramp. It's huge, I better watch their show now!?!?) how can you dispute that TNA is not the better product? You have to realize that it has it's flaws. Theres no doubting that. The major Hogan, Bischoff influence is very evident but looking past that you have to applaud their upbringing of main event talent like Storm, Roode, Bully. You have guys that can actually wrestle and are not just hired because they have the big look that WWE likes so much. TNA has taken guys and invested time in them. Not just giving them the title to see what happens which isn't a bad strategy per-say, but WWE has really struck out by going this route.
I could really go on and on about this and that but I don't want to come off sounding like I hate the WWE which I don't. In reality I would like to see more than one company succeed but that is the wrestling fan in me. As of right now however, being a "Wrestling" fan, I think TNA is the better product overall.
I would like to hear others opinions as well, preferably from someone that has been watching more than one brand. Thanks

 

[MCMG]

No depth in the WWE roster other than part time guys. WOW. Is that compared to TNA who had AL FUCKING SNOW wrestle in a match at BFG last year. Is that compared to lets say 5 years ago in the WWE I would say it is even. The weakest superstars on the WM29 card were Fandango and Big E but both are young and have potential to be solid. Otherwise it was a very strong card in terms of names and ability. Yes, it wasn't the greatest Mania but there is no way that TNA are even close to the WWE.

You make a good point about Storm and Roode. TNA used them well and they wouldn't have received the same push in the WWE. That is because TNA is a smaller company, smaller roster. They have to be resourceful and use everyone to their best. The WWE can afford to leave Rhodes and Cesaro of the card because there is enough talent to compensate. Moreover, Bully Ray was made by ECW and WWE. I doubt that without his previous work than he would not have been a TNA champion.

Lets just say, Ziggler, Rhodes, Barrett, Ceasro, Sandow, Bryan are all guys worthy of a main-event push. Where is the space when there are guys like Cena, Orton, Sheamus, Punk etc.

TNA could push Roode and Storm because there were only Angle,Sting and Styles who were above them in the pecking order. I'll admit TNA are more flexible. We do see some top quality stars used in lesser feuds which is something the WWE don't do as often.

 

[ヒュー　G.　レックション]

I made the full jump to TNA when around the time Miz had the WWE title. I have since watched odd Raws and WWE PPV's but nothing really convinced me to ever tune back in full time. Not even the Rock who is my alltime favourite wrestler. The times I do watch a Raw, I find myself fast-forwarding a lot. There is a lot more filler and kiddy crap for me to wade through. Impact I tend to FF through Knockouts matches since they seldom interest me, but everything else I can pretty much sit down and enjoy with no problems.

Now some fans are the opposite, they will watch WWE regularly, tuen in to the odd TNA show and not be impressed enough to continue to watch TNA.

Different products, different tastes. I watched Mania and genuinely felt ripped off even though the cost was split. I personally believe TNA has had the superior product since at least mid-2011. But I'm only one fan, who has certain tastes in what he likes to see and doesn't like to see. And those tastes are clearly in the minority.

 

[Spinebreaker]

TNA by-and-large has better wrestling. The last 3 WWE PPV's have been REALLY no more than average for the actual Ringwork. (I'll make the exceptions of CM Punk, Hell No and the Shield) WWE have got Production values right through the roof, and whether you think it *should* make a difference or not, it does.

WWE can have Triple H and Taker, stand in the ring, looking at each other in absolute silence for a full 2 minutes, and it works. I don't think TNA could pull that off, and it's ALL down to production.

Both companies have roster problems, mainly with the mid-card. They have 4 or 5 part-timers who aren't always around plus Cena and Punk. Then there's the top level of the mid-card, Orton, Seamus, Show, Ryback... People who can main event if the storyline calls for it. Then there's a huge gap. I'm sorry but I'm not convinced by Ziggler, Miz, Swagger or the like as main event talent. Not now, and not for the near future.

TNA's problem is similar, They have 4 or 5 main event guys, 4 or 5 potential main event guys who are doing other things and Sting, Angle and RVD who can be main event whenever they need to. The midcard is not only pretty badly represented, but it's given no TV time.

I firmly believe you see better matches on an average Impact than you do in the middle of a WWE PV card. But it's not all about the matches alone. To be fair to WWE, TNA have the freedom to be flexible. If TNA take a Mid-carder and give him a big push, then it doesn't matter as much if it doesn't work. WWE look like they're gonna push Fandango... If it doesn't work, the abuse hurled at them will be immense.

 

[Rayne]

If you strip down to the bare bones, the WWE consistently publishes a profit which it provides to its shareholders, while TNA is completely opaque with their finances. That's good if you're running an offshore holding corporation, but bad if you're running a business which requires public promotion for further investment.

What's more entertaining to someone is completely unimportant, because everyone has different tastes, and what a company is producing may not be targeted towards your particular tastes. This is professional wrestling we're talking about. It's not exactly high art, and I don't see the Library of Congress adding the Wrestlemania III DVD to their collection anytime soon.

The WWE is, and it's not even close, the better company right now, when you focus on what's important. If you feel different, send TNA money.

 

[Dirk]

I made the full jump to TNA when around the time Miz had the WWE title.

That little shit was the worst champion in years. That's the difference between good Paul Heyman heat and bad Miz heat. If people actually tune out, it's bad.

To me, it's all about the matches, so I enjoy TNA much more. Way too much promo crap on WWE.

What I will say about the WWE, though, is that they have a solid long-term plan. When TNA's main-eventers retire (which will be sooner, rather than later), they are screwed. You guys want to tell me that Zema Ion is the face of the company in 2020? If Orton doesn't jump ship (which he won't), TNA's going to be up Shit Creek, counting their chickens into the fire...

 

[Ovaltine]

Okay longtime fan here. Now, if you are talking about production value the WWE kills TNA. If you are talking about advertising the WWE again kills TNA. If you are talking about name brand recognition he WWE kills TNA. If you are talking about skilled main event level guys with charisma and better in ring perforners TNA kills WWE. However, even though TNA has better main event level talent they (for the most part) are not known by anyone aside from die hard TNA fans. WWE has Punk and Cena and that is about it. I don't see anyone else in that company that is even close to main event level. NOT EVEN CLOSE! TNA has tons of guys Roode, Aries, Storm, Daniels, Sting, Angle, Samoa Joe, Styles, Bully Ray hell, even Kazarian is getting good on the microphone and I could buy into him as a champion! I believe that any one of those guys could hold the title and they would be over. The problem is that TNA isn't really a known company. If anyone of those guys went to the WWE and they were allowed to be themselves and received a proper push they would get over. They are a that good. However, they are all (for the most part) TNA creations. That means until HHH takes over that they would never get a push in WWE. I honestly think that when HHH takes over it'll be better for the WWE. HHH doesn't have a grudge against NWA or WCW and it shows.It was due to him the Flair was pushed to the moon in his last run in WWE. He got Bruno into the WWE hall of fame which is something that no one thought was possible. He puts over Sting like crazy on WCW DVDs. Therefore I really believe that due to HHH being old school that would probably push anyone who he thought could get over. Please take into account that I am not really a fan of either promotion or of HHH. It just seems like the more control that HHH gets the better the product becomes. There comes a time when an owner of a business like the WWE needs to step down and I definitely believe that McMahons time has come. He did wonders for that company, but his time at the forefront of Wrestling is over. The reigns need to be handed over to someone new who has a new perspective.

 

[scottyshowman82]

As a wrestling fan that has watched WWF-WWE, WCW, ECW, TNA, I think in a lot of ways TNA is better than the WWE, but I also think in a lot of WWE is light years ahead of TNA. If you want to talk about what the older male demographic is gonna like, I gotta pretty much repeat what has been said by many member of the IWC you'd probably be better of with TNA and ROH which cater to that 18-49 male demographic. I feel the right guys get handed the ball at TNA as of late... Robert Roode should have gotten the ball and he did, same with Aries and same with Bully Ray. I'm frustrated that WWE thinks they know what the fans want to this day. Zack Ryder is a clear cut example. If WWE gave the fans cut and dry what they wanted Zack Ryder would be in the upper mid card to main event status right now but he's not. I think that type of thinking is hurting WWE.

Make no mistake WWE is still #1, is light years ahead of TNA. But if you in that 18-49 male demographic you'd be doing yourself a favour as a wrestling to check out the great work they're doing at TNA and ROH and small indys for that matter.

 

[Flash H]

Personally, I don't think so. When most people hear wrestling, they will probably think either UFC or WWE. TNA just isn't at that level yet. If you take away TNA's stars that were developed and made into real characters in the WWE, there aren't too many people that stand out. What I think would raise TNA's bar is if there is somehow (I wish) a TNA-WWE Invasion angle. In the future, I do think TNA can get up to WWE's level, but it will take some time.

 

[dmc_tim]

I personally like TNA better than WWE. its more exciting while WWE seems too predictable and PG.