Main Page Poll: I'm Sick of it.

[Zeven_Zion]

Alright, I'm not the one to start random threads left and right, I usually steer them in the WWE vs TNA direction. This time, however, I'd like to share my wise thoughts on a matter that has been buggin' me like underwear bugs Britney Spears and that's the monthly poll, ranking TNA's Pay-Per-Views.

We all know TNA isn't the joyride of the century, despite what us TNA marks think. But we also know that TNA isn't the evil of the world and the most dreadful product of this generation, despite what a lot of non-TNA marks think. Another thing we know is that WrestleZone is kind of sort of a haven for WWE fans and that's fine. It's the most popular product, it's only natural.

However, rating each and every TNA Pay-Per-View in the lowest possible manner, with over 40%, despite the Pay-Per-View being nowhere near that mark, to me is freaking disgusting and it shows the IWC's true, biased opinion of Impact Wrestling. It's a true indicator if ignorance and one of the reasons why us TNA fans often seem butt hurt when it comes to TNA. This post is evidence of that.

It is beyond any doubt that people rate it one star simply because it's TNA, and TNA sucks. TNA and its fans have been discriminated for a long time, and not just by other fans but by the dirt sheets as well. It sure feels like everyone is on a crusade to bad mouth this company which I believe is/was/never will be as bad as people make it out to be. Very rarely do you see reports and articles praising something TNA did. Usually when they do, they immediately steer it into a bad direction just so it's not too positive. You often see adjectives as "Big drop for TNA rating", when the rating was diminished by less than a point. Then we have the poll which I already wrote about. Not to mention every post I ever made on a news story (the DisQus thing or whatever it is), that criticized the WWE or praised TNA, that never got approved.

So, this brings me to the following questions ...

1. Is TNA really as bad as people make it out to be?

2. Do you feel that the dirt sheets are not reporting TNA news properly? Do they simply do it because the product IS that bad, or just to ride the wave of negativity and meet the IWC's demand for dirt on TNA?

3. Is the poll any indication of the true face of the IWC, in regards to Impact Wrestling?

 

[D-Man]

1. Is TNA really as bad as people make it out to be?

YES. Next question?

No, seriously though... The bar has been set quite high by the WWE, over the years. Even WCW increased their production value to get on par with the measuring stick that is WWE. In 2010, the TNA promotion came in with guns blazing and tried to step toe-to-toe with the WWE. This put a very bitter pill in the mouths of WWE fans, experts, employees, and the like.

Now, not only are they constantly scrutinized for their sub-par product, but people are just plain pissed off at them and rightfully so. TNA's storylines are convoluted. Their style of presentation is nothing short of chaotic. They keep trying to reinvent the wheel and don't have the means necessary to do it. If they would just follow WCW's direction and try to "fall in line" with their competitor until they're a force that can afford to take risks, they'd be viewed in a more positive light.

2. Do you feel that the dirt sheets are not reporting TNA news properly?

I feel they're honest. To a TNA fan like yourself, the negativity would seem like they have it out for TNA and their fans. But contrary to your personal beliefs, TNA is just as bad as it gets. It wastes their talent with horrific storylines and abysmal production value. It just doesn't seem to add up in any way, shape or form on most occasions.

3. Is the poll any indication of the true face of the IWC, in regards to Impact Wrestling?

The poll is an honest opinion of the audience. The audience is the IWC. I'm sure they wouldn't choose a negative feedback if they didn't feel it was deemed necessary or relevant.

 

[#hamler]

1. Is TNA really as bad as people make it out to be?

No. That's for damn sure. TNA is often treated like trash when in reality, they're the second biggest wrestling company in the United States. They have a two hour time slot, they get solid and at times increasing ratings. TNA is often treated as the minor leagues which couldn't be further from the truth. Sure they're not as big as the WWE or even as good, but TNA is still a wrestling show with a solid audience from week to week. With that said, they can be quite shit at times and that is often the reason many people like myself call the product shit. But they are really underrated. But like D-Man stated, the bar is set high for TNA. They just don't meet our standards yet.

2. Do you feel that the dirt sheets are not reporting TNA news properly?

Don't trust dirt sheets. Hell, at times, I don't think they report WWE news properly. Dirt Sheets are dirt sheets, they will go to anyone to get any news. I often believe they publish what they want and often mis-interpet the so called reliable sources.

3. Is the poll any indication of the true face of the IWC, in regards to Impact Wrestling?

I don't know. Idiots vote the lowest score possible just to show how much they hate TNA. I wouldn't generalize it completely. It isn't fair to say that the entire IWC hates TNA and votes that way.

 

[Zeven_Zion]

YES. Next question?

No, seriously though... The bar has been set quite high by the WWE, over the years. Even WCW increased their production value to get on par with the measuring stick that is WWE. In 2010, the TNA promotion came in with guns blazing and tried to step toe-to-toe with the WWE. This put a very bitter pill in the mouths of WWE fans, experts, employees, and the like.

Now, not only are they constantly scrutinized for their sub-par product, but people are just plain pissed off at them and rightfully so. TNA's storylines are convoluted. Their style of presentation is nothing short of chaotic. They keep trying to reinvent the wheel and don't have the means necessary to do it. If they would just follow WCW's direction and try to "fall in line" with their competitor until they're a force that can afford to take risks, they'd be viewed in a more positive light.

Name these convulted storylines. Current ones.

Also, production wise TNA is not coming anywhere near decent, I can agree here. However, you pawn off production and your own opinion of storylines as if it is the only variable that determines how good a wrestling show is. Meanwhile no one says anything about match value, storytelling, character development, general promo and talent pool. Again, these are all subjective matters. I'm sure you have plenty to say about how bad the aforementioned things are, and believe me I have plenty to say about how awesome they are.

The things you mentioned, however, are also traits of the product you are more accustomed to. You can't sit there and tell me with a straight face that the conspiracy storyline WWE has been running for some months now is going as smooth as baby's bottom. Their production is flawless not because they're "that damn good", but because they've been in the business for over 3-4 decades, they've made a shit load of money and they can afford it. TNA is not doing it because they can't or don't know how, it's a money issue, and no company can come anywhere near WWE's production in their 9th year. No company. It's like throwing your baby boy through a window two months after he was born because he can't walk. Give it time.

I feel they're honest. To a TNA fan like yourself, the negativity would seem like they have it out for TNA and their fans. But contrary to your personal beliefs, TNA is just as bad as it gets. It wastes their talent with horrific storylines and abysmal production value. It just doesn't seem to add up in any way, shape or form on most occasions.

I don't perceive negativity as "dey be hatin' on us". They report WWE negatively as well. I'm talking about bad journalism. Adding personal feelings in news reports, not blogs or articles. Little shots at the company, adjectives in the titles that over-inflate the issue. Purposeful false reports such as the 400 tickets one, and the 2.500 attendance for Bound for Glory 2011, both proven to be a pile of shit. The monthly "TNA lockerroom morale is low" crap. The bias is there, I don't know how can you possibly deny it, you're smarter than that.

The poll is an honest opinion of the audience. The audience is the IWC. I'm sure they wouldn't choose a negative feedback if they didn't feel it was deemed necessary or relevant.

Did you start posting yesterday? So what you're telling me is that every single TNA Pay-Per-View over the last year has been absolutely dreadful, deserves no praises, it had no good moments, the matches were horrible, the storyline outcomes were pathetic, and the general layout of the entire show wasn't worth a damn?

C'mon son ...

 

[DirtyJosé]

U Mad?

I am not even going to begin to try and defend the integrity of the main page, so to jump out of order I'm just gonna take on #2 right now and give it a "pass". I don't really follow enough of the dirt sheets to have an educated opinion on this. I don't read Metzler or whatever, I don't check out other sites; I only read Madden posts for teh lulz.

Going back to #1 and #3, I think that there is a matter of exaggeration in play when it comes to most people giving an opinion or critique on TNA, but that on the whole it earns the bad marks most people give it. Let's just be frank about it: I'm not trying to suggest that I believe TNA to be total shit, but they have the reputation for a reason. I can see where the frustration sets in from your perspective, but I think it's laughable to try and spin this into a "TNA/TNA fans are discriminated against!" thing. You yourself readily admit your own bias and your own tendency to spin things into an anti-WWE slant whenever you can, so your attempts are crying wolf kinda fall flat.

So the majority of the fans online at this website clearly aren't pleased with TNA enough to the point where they shit on the polls. Is this a sign of IWC ignorance or TNA incompetence? Answer: neither. It is far from a scientific poll, and there's no way of knowing whether or not those who voted even watched the show in question. Trying to use it as a figure in some sort of anti-TNA argument is stupid.

Also stupid is any attempt to use the figures to prove some sort of "Ultimate Agenda of The IWC". The cream rises to the top and the shit sinks to the bottom; if TNA gets a bad rep most of the time it's, again, because they've earned it. I don't think it's that you fans are discriminated against; if that were the case I don't think you'd be able to read up on the news for your favorite company and that you'd get no coverage on TNA at all. That's what being discriminated against would be.

If there's any point to any of this it's the long repeated message that shit sells, and there's no group that better represents this than internet wrestling fans. Controversy creates cash and all that shit. But this goes both ways; WWE gets equal shit from most every major online wrestling news and rumor site. Trying to shift the conversation from "The IWC is a gathering of miserable fucks" to "The IWC is a gathering of miserable fucks out to fuck over TNA and it's fans" is, again, stupid. If TNA events and shows are getting consistent low marks, it's not because the IWC hates them; it's because wrestling fans hate the product they are being given.

My last point is that you jest about "MAJOR RATINGS DROP" being only a point or two, but TNA itself and it's fan base are the first to scream "MAJOR RATINGS GAIN!!!" when the change is only a point or two in the other direction.

TL;DR = Internet Wrestling fans and writers are a miserable lot, but TNA mostly earns the shit it gets. Deal with it.

 

[The Dragon Saga]

1. Is TNA really as bad as people make it out to be?

No, it really isn't. TNA has had some difficulties, their road has been very bumpy at times and some decisions made are what seems to make the IWC or at least certain members believe that TNA is all that bad and that TNA, is WCW 2.0. Thing is, in WCW you wouldn't have two guys like Roode and Storm in the Championship picture. You wouldn't have a whole host of things so that argument isn't valid.

TNA really suffers from the fact, that the WWE have been around for so long now and have eliminated the competition before TNA that in a sense, there is no way TNA can compete with WWE because compared to WWE it doesn't hold its own ground in a majority of areas. However, TNA is actually quite good. Do they make mistakes? Yes. Are they perfect? No. But WWE aren't either. Really what it comes down to is this image the IWC has of TNA and the fact, that like a herd of sheep the newer ones come in and almost immediately have this opinion that TNA is below everything in professional wrestling and that the product is dirt.

If somebody can watch Austin Aries and give a legitimate argument that he's a nobody then I'd like to hear it, because what product is he a part of? TNA.

2. Do you feel that the dirt sheets are not reporting TNA news properly? Do they simply do it because the product IS that bad, or just to ride the wave of negativity and meet the IWC's demand for dirt on TNA?

I don't think the dirt sheets treat TNA any different than they do WWE. If some scandal breaks out in WWE they report it, if some scandal breaks out in TNA, they report it. Do some give TNA a bad rap sometimes? Sure, every couple of months you see the report that says TNA has low morale and that people are disappointed, but you can't pleas every fan and wrestler alike so you'll never make everyone happy and therefore you'll always have these rumors and allegations. Kind of how the cycle goes.

3. Is the poll any indication of the true face of the IWC, in regards to Impact Wrestling?

Dude, I've been a member of three different wrestling forums, all as big as WrestleZone and beyond a shadow of a doubt, a majority of the IWC follows the anti-TNA bandwagon because it's the cool thing to do. Sure, there are a lot that have genuine knowledge and can critic the product correctly, but a majority don't do that. They make a post like, "james storm loses title that bullshit!!!!! why??? that bullshit right there he earned it fuck tna fuck the world!!!" And then there are those that see these posts, nod their heads and attempt to make light of the actual situation. That Storm losing the title to Roode also helps push Roode as well as Storm and therefore both men benefit - I've used the Storm/Roode angle as an example by the way.

IWC always find something to complain about. If it isn't TNA, It'll be WWE, and if it isn't WWE and TNA It'll be something from the past, going back years. It never changes and it never will because that is the freedom you get when you make an account on a wrestling forum and that is the freedom of choice you get when a site publishes a poll, no matter how many idiots vote on it or not.

 

[ianruk]

Ok why are tna fans getting mad that people are rating tna ppv's as a 1 star??

tna fans are just so dumb because they get mad at people doing that BUT they do the same everytime a wwe ppv is on the main page poll

seriously get over it, its a poll thats all, if you cant take it then bottom line is stop doing it yourselfs with the wwe polls and stop rating tna ppv's as a 5 when they are not a 5

this is just stupid end of story its double standards you get mad cause people rate them as a 1 star yet you people click on 5 stars for everyone,,then click 1 star for every wwe ppv

get over it and most of all get over yourselfs

 

[SD619]

1. Is TNA really as bad as people make it out to be?

Absolutely not. Like any product it has its pros and cons. Saying that everything that is related to TNA is bad is dumb. As a guy who watches TNA quite irregularly, I can say that there have segments/matches that have quite impressive, while others have not.

2. Do you feel that the dirt sheets are not reporting TNA news properly? Do they simply do it because the product IS that bad, or just to ride the wave of negativity and meet the IWC's demand for dirt on TNA?

The 'dirt sheets' just report news as it is. At times they resort to sensational journalism just to get more visits. The reason is that WWE is a more established and reputed company and people tend to believe in news that put TNA in a negative light more.

3. Is the poll any indication of the true face of the IWC, in regards to Impact Wrestling?

The poll on the main page is bullshit. I doubt if even half of the people who voted even saw the show. Most people tend to give TNA PPVs low ratings because that is what they read in most previews/reviews.

 

[JWGunslinger]

TNA is definitely not as bad as people make it out to be, is it even close to the WWE's level/will it ever be? Absolutely not, but that doesn't mean that it's bad, it's the second largest wrestling promotion in the country and deserves it's props, I enjoy it. They have their faults but the biggest problem for them is living in the shadow of the WWE, and I think that is what makes their faults seem bigger is they're being judged off of the WWE and how they do things.

As for the Dirt Sheets and the main page's poll I think that they're bull and they aren't worth the time.

 

[D-Man]

Name these convulted storylines. Current ones.

Let's start with the whole BFG/world title storyline. They spend 6 months creating a BFG tournament to have the winner lose during the company's biggest PPV event. A few days later on a weekly televised show, they have the retaining champion lose the title to someone who wasn't really in that title focus. Then, THAT person loses the title two weeks later to the guy that lost at BFG.

That's as convoluted as it gets.

Meanwhile no one says anything about match value, storytelling, character development, general promo and talent pool. Again, these are all subjective matters. I'm sure you have plenty to say about how bad the aforementioned things are, and believe me I have plenty to say about how awesome they are.

Actually, I have both bad and good things to say about this stuff. But let's face it; this isn't Ring of Honor. A wrestling promotion is not weighed primarily by the content of its matches. It's about entertainment value. The roster can be filled with the best pure wrestlers in the world and they could push their own talent to the moon. But, in the end, their job is to entertain the audience. (For example, having Karen Jarrett squeal for 15 minutes, week-in and week-out, is not going to keep my attention spam; even if that storyline involves pushing new Knockout talent.)

The things you mentioned, however, are also traits of the product you are more accustomed to. You can't sit there and tell me with a straight face that the conspiracy storyline WWE has been running for some months now is going as smooth as baby's bottom. Their production is flawless not because they're "that damn good", but because they've been in the business for over 3-4 decades, they've made a shit load of money and they can afford it. TNA is not doing it because they can't or don't know how, it's a money issue, and no company can come anywhere near WWE's production in their 9th year. No company. It's like throwing your baby boy through a window two months after he was born because he can't walk. Give it time.

This is why I continue to watch and support TNA. The broadcasts make me cringe but I don't miss an episode of Impact or a TNA PPV.

And yes, I am more accustomed to the WWE's style. Why? Because they are the BEST. Regardless of whether they've been in business 5 years, 10 years, or 10 decades, they produce the BEST wrestling product in the world. You can say that's because of money, experience, or whatever else you want but the fact remains; they are the top of the food chain and that's where my personal bar is set.

I don't perceive negativity as "dey be hatin' on us". They report WWE negatively as well. I'm talking about bad journalism. Adding personal feelings in news reports, not blogs or articles. Little shots at the company, adjectives in the titles that over-inflate the issue. Purposeful false reports such as the 400 tickets one, and the 2.500 attendance for Bound for Glory 2011, both proven to be a pile of shit. The monthly "TNA lockerroom morale is low" crap. The bias is there, I don't know how can you possibly deny it, you're smarter than that.

Dirt sheets are always going to be dirt sheets. They'll have good information and completely fabricated information. Their purpose is to get people to read them so their sites can get hits... period. But we really need to get off this "journalistic conspiracy against TNA" shit. If something looks, smells, and tastes like shit, it's probably shit. Now, many out there might attempt to prove otherwise but the fact remains. If enough evidence supports such a claim, then even in a court of law, the claim stands.

Experts constantly rate TNA with low marks. I know it's a tough pill to swallow but the proof is in the pudding. The majority of the people that TNA is attempting to entertain is not being entertained enough. Whether it's as a result of WWE's superiority, a storyline, a wrestler, or some other report written by a pro-wrestling journalist, the majority of the audience has a voice on the internet and most of them are screaming negativity.

Did you start posting yesterday? So what you're telling me is that every single TNA Pay-Per-View over the last year has been absolutely dreadful, deserves no praises, it had no good moments, the matches were horrible, the storyline outcomes were pathetic, and the general layout of the entire show wasn't worth a damn?

C'mon son ...

Listen, man... I didn't created the polls. I merely voted in them. I highly doubt that some poor schlub is sitting at home in front of his computer, chomping at the bit to fuck up Wrestlezone's frontpage polls. Remember something: When the WWE was going through changes in the early 2000's, their product was so bad that every broadcast made me puke in my mouth a little bit. That lasted for close to 6 fucking years before they began an incline of improvement to the masses. I had to eat shit for that period of time, too, and I also hated it. But I couldn't really argue that much because I didn't have a leg to stand on. They sucked... HARDCORE. Give it time and things will always improve. I have faith in TNA.

 

[Maikeru_1979]

1. Is TNA really as bad as people make it out to be?

No!. plain and simple. yes at times it is bad(immortal/ Hardy at Turning Point, ect) but there is a lot of good. since BFG things have been a little better, hogan is off TV, Originals are fighting over the Title, not Ex-WWE ers
not saying that things will get better but without Russo as the end all be all of the booking committee things SHOULD start looking up as the new year comes around.

2. Do you feel that the dirt sheets are not reporting TNA news properly? Do they simply do it because the product IS that bad, or just to ride the wave of negativity and meet the IWC's demand for dirt on TNA?

I don't think that they are reporting TNA new improperly but they aren't reporting it objectively like a news site should. I have noticed that this site at times can be way to WWE slanted. if that makes any sense.

3. Is the poll any indication of the true face of the IWC, in regards to Impact Wrestling?

no i don't think it is. the WWE fans that don't like TNA or have never watched it just because they aren't the WWE will just vote 1 star no matter how good the PPV is. After the TNA ppvs I vote myself. but i try and give a honest opinion of the Show just like I do with the WWE shows. just with the TNA polls i usually disregard the 1 star votes because more often than not they are from the members that feel WWE should be the only show in town.

I enjoy TNA Impact wrestling. sometimes the shows can be pretty bad and they do need to get storylines a little better.
I also watch Raw weekly unless it is taped like last week. and I NEVER watch smackdown. but that is just me.

 

[kokoBawesome]

TNA gets a bad rap, but I'm gonna split the difference and say its average. Perfectly average in fact. Has a pay per view ever blown me away... not really. Have I ever watched one that was a complete waste of time, no. Do they have a fairly even split amongst the main stars of WWF and WCW castaways, and their own home grown guys? Yes, for every A.J., Abyss and Beer Money theres an Angle Hogan and Sting.

The weekly program is pretty much how I remember wrestling during the monday night wars, more talking than wrestling. The product has decent overall production values, but they still fuck up. The wrestling is either amazing or terrible. The storylines are good but nothing is bringing in fans from the WWE like the NWO or Goldberg.

Maybe that's where the problem lies, TNA is just WCW circa 1998. It literally has a comparable roster with Hogan Stiener Jarrett Flair and Sting. They have an amazing undercard in the X division, just like WCW did with the cruiserweights. They have Vince Russo. They have a product based in the south, with a weekly program in Florida. Its the same damn program. How can the IWC give a promotion an above average rank when they're experiencing deja vu?

Its not the top dog in terms of production and weekly product like the WWE, but its not some underdog promotion thats blowing people away under the radar like ROH. Its right in the middle. If the IWC isn't ranking it high enough for you, don't be upset at the IWC, they want it to be as highly regarded as the WWE. We're first and foremost wrestling fans, and I'm sure every one of us would love a second promotion to watch every week, but TNA needs to step it up for that to happen. If anything the polls reflect how pissed we are that the shows aren't better because we want them to be good. There's always going to be an asshole that gives everything they do a shit review, but the majority of us realize the potential in a promotion that has A.J. Styles, Samoa Joe and Kurt Angle... we're just sick of seeing all this talent wasted in a promotion that doesn't seem to give a shit about what it puts out there.

 

[MrHashasheen]

Experts constantly rate TNA with low marks.

See, that right there is one of the things that bugs me, straight up. Who the hell decided these men were experts? Mark Madden? Josh Isenburg, Justin LaBar, Nick Paglino or any of the dirt-sheet reporters on this site or any other sites? What are their qualifications to judge TNA, a company which draws and maintains millions of viewers worldwide? What have they done to merit such a status as respected and learned 'experts', whose views are to be taken seriously?

 

[Jake Jay Lee]

Wow, my first post...

1. Is TNA really as bad as people make it out to be?

Yes and No. As the saying goes - there is no smoke without fire. First of all I was a big WWE Mark post ECW closing down (yes I'm a ECW Guy). Never liked or cared for WCW but I'm English- the damn thing was never on. TNA is on and it's free. As a free product it's not bad (WWE Shows are <b>NOT</b> free). The storylines are often utter toss and they push people that shouldn't be pushed, you know Old Stars they should putting over the new and not just pushing family (ahm... Eric)

At the same time I have dropped my Sky Sports Package, not because I can't afford it (I'm a voice Actor, I'm in video games, cartoon, etc - I'm not poor) but because I only used it for WWE, I'm not a sports fan- I'm a nerd. The WW is just shit these days, It's dull and puts me to sleep, when I do watch TNA I <b>do</b> watch it, it has it's problems and needs to work it's shit out. It still needs to grow up into the product it needs to be.

2. Do you feel that the dirt sheets are not reporting TNA news properly? Do they simply do it because the product IS that bad, or just to ride the wave of negativity and meet the IWC's demand for dirt on TNA?

Are you fucking ******ed? Dirt Sheets, it's in the name. Move the fuck on. If you don't like them don't read them.

3. Is the poll any indication of the true face of the IWC, in regards to Impact Wrestling?

Again, ******ed question. This is the internet, hey I'm a 10 year old girl- who was a blow job? Do you get my point?

 

[The Suplexer Perfecter]

Alright, I'm not the one to start random threads left and right, I usually steer them in the WWE vs TNA direction. This time, however, I'd like to share my wise thoughts on a matter that has been buggin' me like underwear bugs Britney Spears and that's the monthly poll, ranking TNA's Pay-Per-Views.

We all know TNA isn't the joyride of the century, despite what us TNA marks think. But we also know that TNA isn't the evil of the world and the most dreadful product of this generation, despite what a lot of non-TNA marks think. Another thing we know is that WrestleZone is kind of sort of a haven for WWE fans and that's fine. It's the most popular product, it's only natural.

However, rating each and every TNA Pay-Per-View in the lowest possible manner, with over 40%, despite the Pay-Per-View being nowhere near that mark, to me is freaking disgusting and it shows the IWC's true, biased opinion of Impact Wrestling. It's a true indicator if ignorance and one of the reasons why us TNA fans often seem butt hurt when it comes to TNA. This post is evidence of that.

It is beyond any doubt that people rate it one star simply because it's TNA, and TNA sucks. TNA and its fans have been discriminated for a long time, and not just by other fans but by the dirt sheets as well. It sure feels like everyone is on a crusade to bad mouth this company which I believe is/was/never will be as bad as people make it out to be. Very rarely do you see reports and articles praising something TNA did. Usually when they do, they immediately steer it into a bad direction just so it's not too positive. You often see adjectives as "Big drop for TNA rating", when the rating was diminished by less than a point. Then we have the poll which I already wrote about. Not to mention every post I ever made on a news story (the DisQus thing or whatever it is), that criticized the WWE or praised TNA, that never got approved.

Some people don't like TNA? Gasp. And no, TNA fans are not discriminated. That's a horrible use of the word.

1. Is TNA really as bad as people make it out to be?
Yes. But since Russo is not head writer it has gotten better.

2. Do you feel that the dirt sheets are not reporting TNA news properly? Do they simply do it because the product IS that bad, or just to ride the wave of negativity and meet the IWC's demand for dirt on TNA?

Dave Meltzer and Bryan Alverez have actually praised TNA recently for it's better shows. They also trash Raw constantly.

3. Is the poll any indication of the true face of the IWC, in regards to Impact Wrestling?

Why do you care so much about a poll? Why do you think everyone needs to praise TNA?

Get over it. No one has to subdue to your opinion.

If anything you should watch this guy's videos on TNA youtube.com/foolkiller99

 

[Tugboat Reloaded]

See, that right there is one of the things that bugs me, straight up. Who the hell decided these men were experts? Mark Madden? Josh Isenburg, Justin LaBar, Nick Paglino or any of the dirt-sheet reporters on this site or any other sites? What are their qualifications to judge TNA, a company which draws and maintains millions of viewers worldwide? What have they done to merit such a status as respected and learned 'experts', whose views are to be taken seriously?

A: Gandalf is the most powerful Wizard in the World!
B: How do you know?
A: He fought the Balrog!
B: And the Balrog is powerful?
A: Yes!
B: How do you know?
A: Well, he fought Gandalf!



Watching Wrestling for about 20 years now I say...get over it! Why do so many guys even bother what others think? I favor WWE and some of the things I´ve seen so far from TNA made me turn it off. BUT, I come back regularly to check and most of the time they are a nice addition to SD and RAW for me. And as long as I enjoy the products, I wouldn´t give a @@@@ what others think!

There will always be both sides. The Impact lovers that would even rate Hardys world record match at VR 5 stars to make them look strong and those that would rate the AJ vs Bully Last man standing match (I don´t mind the finish, the match was awesome imho) 1 star and same thing with the E!

None of it will change and it has no Impact (Pun!? ) on either one of the Brands.

Summed up, I care about ME being entertained and some guys around should focus more on that. Stay clean and have a nice day folks.

 

[evilashv02]

Is TNA as bad as its made out to be. Of course it is, why else would everybody say these things about TNA. For fun lol? Don't think so. I just wanted to say to the TNA marks..you can't force us to like it. We either like it or we don't. All the TNA fans can talk a big game 10 ways to Sunday and in the end people are goin to like what they want..just get over it!

 

[Lowdown]

1. Is TNA really as bad as people make it out to be?

It really depends on who the person is that's watching. I watch TNA on a somewhat regular basis and I like it overall, though at times it leaves me scratching my head. Yeah, there are a lot of folks that flat out say "TNA sucks" or a similar sentiment. To them I say more power to you. If its not their cup of tea after giving it a try, then they are more than entitled to their opinion. Speaking for myself though, I say no its not as bad or the worst in wrestling.

2. Do you feel that the dirt sheets are not reporting TNA news properly? Do they simply do it because the product IS that bad, or just to ride the wave of negativity and meet the IWC's demand for dirt on TNA?[/B]

This is hard to say. Its already been established that TNA has its admires and haters. Most of the time columnist such as Mark Madden criticizes TNA for their storylines, burials of talent, etc. Yet he does point out every now and then some of the positives. On the whole, those who are doing actual reporting are usually providing to summary of what happens at televised events or house shows. Every once in a while there's some opinionated excerpt while detailing the goings on, which can be both positive and negative. But there are some reports that do jump on the bashing bandwagon to appeal to the "anti-TNA" fans and readers.

3. Is the poll any indication of the true face of the IWC, in regards to Impact Wrestling?[/B]

In regards to the polls that are on the forums, its mostly fans and the like voting on certain aspects of the promotion, usually PPV outcomes they want to see or who they think will win bouts. No it isn't the face of the IWC being that its a small sample of those who watch and/or follow TNA. It in no way represents the multitude and shouldn't.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

1. Is TNA really as bad as people make it out to be?

In my opinion, as of right now, the answer is no. The answer to this question in 2010 and much of the first half of 2011, in my opinion, would be yes. In 2010, TNA was damn near unwatchable. I do think, however, they've done a good job over the past several months making improvements. Most of the improvements seem like little things, but a lot of little things put together can go a long way. TNA has all but stopped doing 20+ minute promos every other show and have actually devoted more time in their program to actual wrestling matches. That's a good thing because, I'm sorry, but I want some meaningful wrestling content on my wrestling shows and the 4 or 5, 3-4 minute matches that we saw LOTS of last year and most of this year weren't cutting it. TNA is also heavily cutting back on these random brawls that broke out practically every show. They've cut back on having their wrestlers swear every other word in promos, thus they have more impact on viewers whenever they do use them. They also seem to have cut out the 4-5 minute gimmick matches, which have been a long been a staple of IW. TNA is finally putting more focus on some of its homegrown talent, such as Roode & Storm, as singles wrestlers rather than have them play second fiddle to former WWE and/or WCW wrestlers. TNA is also putting far less focus on the aging veterans and guys that just either can't or shouldn't compete in the ring like Ric Flair, Eric Bischoff. Hogan hasn't been since since the episode after BFG and I've no problem with them only bringing him out to occassionally try to pop a rating. It's true that there's still stuff going on in TNA that I'm not crazy about. I don't give two craps about the Bischoff feud at the moment, I'm not all that interested in Crimson vs. Matt Morgan. I'm a little more interested after their match last night, but it could end tomorrow and I wouldn't miss it. TNA's tag team scene is the weakest that its been in years. I don't expect everything to be as I like it, that's just how it is. Do I think TNA still has work to do? Absolutely. But I also do think they've made some good progress.

2. Do you feel that the dirt sheets are not reporting TNA news properly? Do they simply do it because the product IS that bad, or just to ride the wave of negativity and meet the IWC's demand for dirt on TNA?

Probably a combination of any or all of the above. Some probably do report things as exactly as they are, though there are some TNA fans that don't see it that way and will always accuse dirtsheets of purposely being inaccurate. Also, I'm sure some do feel TNA is truly just that bad. How many feel that way, who can say? As for the IWC's demand on dirt, I remember when I first started posting here back in '09 and it was practically nothing but wall to wall anti-WWE on the WWE section of the forums. There wasn't a day that went by it seemed in which there wasn't at least 1 or 2 new threads popping up criticizing WWE for one thing or another. There's been a HEAVY decrease in those threads the past few years because, in all honesty, the WWE has fixed some things that were wrong. In 2009, one of the most common complaints about WWE was the lack of quality wrestling on Raw and it was true. Raw devoted more time to comedy skits and long, drawn out promo segments than any wrestling content, the same handful of wrestlers ALWAYS in the main event picture, little real focus or development of younger talent, etc. In 2010, the WWE got back on track when much better wrestling matches and overall wrestling content started happening on Raw, Hornswoggle barely even popped up, corny comedy skits were kept at a minimum, different wrestlers were starting to get introduced into the main event picture and were being given higher spots in the company, etc.

In 2010, around the time WWE started to get better, TNA immediately started to go heavily downhill. I mean, full on runaway freight train downhill. A lot of fans were hoping for and/or expecting great things with Hulk Hogan coming to TNA but it just didn't happen. We saw Abyss getting huge pushes, most of the matches on iMPACT!/IW weren't worth watching, the so called "WWE Rejects" kept getting pushed ahead of homegrown talent, the young talent and homegrown guys were still being used to elevate and put over the older talent, TNA continued to do the same worn out storyline of a power struggle/faction war that they'd done several times before, the X Division didn't matter remotely, the Knockouts went on a steep decline to the point that it was no longer really superior to the Divas in WWE, etc.

TNA has only just started to really move away from some of what was dragging it down in my view. There are always going to be people that will crap all over anything TNA does just as they do to WWE no matter how much they might improve.

 

[Harddyboy77]

1.TNA isn't as bad as people put it out to be but it still sucks due to the storylines that don't make sense,lack of a wellness policy, and wrestlers that are older than dirt.
2.yes they're true
3. I honestly don't gI've a shut theyre just being honest

 

[harrythem]

When it comes to polls on wrestling sites, I'd take them with a pinch of salt...Hell, I remember on WWE.COM and they had, in 2 seperate polls, Jazz voted, by a clear margain, as the sexiest Diva and the Diva you'd most like to find under the mistletoe...Seems to me that Rodney Mack was spending his time on WWE.COM to fuck up their results.

TNA gets the hassle it gets because it isn't a real alternative to WWE. Yeah its talent has more freedom in matches and promos but, sadly, they are saddled by guys (such as Hogan and Russo) who had their greatest success in the WWE and are more acustomed to doing things the WWE way..It really needs someone with the vision to really turn it into WCW 2.0 (and by that I don't mean the shit that WCW was, I mean the fact that WCW was there to attract a fair amount of wrestling fans that had no taste for the WWE style and left wrestling completely when WCW shut its doors). Who that guy is I don't know, but I'm sure he's lurking somewhere out there.

Dirt Sheets are the Dirt Sheets. Like all the media they're say what they want and how they want it to get their point of view across...For example the other day over here they were trying to say how shit the line up on I'm A Celebrity this year was and, to prove their point, they referred to this dude Dougie as "he dated a Saturday, and went to rehab" ignoring that he spent 8 years as part of McFly and had a pretty damn successful pop career..

Wouldn't let it bug you, haters gonna hate, fans gonna love, Wrestling fans (me included) are gonna bitch yet still watch!

 

[CleverName51]

1. Is TNA really as bad as people make it out to be?

Yes and no-fact is, how many people actually watch TNA to know how good or bad it is? On top of that, WHY should I want to watch TNA? I've tried randomly to get in their product but I can't do it because half the the time, I don't really know what's going on. In WWE, I can be away from the product for 2-3 months, turn it on, and be able to easily figure out what happened while I was gone.


Also; why would I want to watch a show that has such horrible production values? the WWE set with the HD, and the lights and big arenas SCREAMS "PEOPLE WANT TO SEE OUR PRODUCT!" the Impact Zone with its horrible camera work and tiny crowd says "we don't care about producing A+ quality shows, so you shouldn't care about watching"

because of this-there's some sway in the actual product...because, you can market "shit" to people effectively and make them buy it, but if you put something valuable in a shitty looking package, no one is going to look twice at it


2. Do you feel that the dirt sheets are not reporting TNA news properly? Do they simply do it because the product IS that bad, or just to ride the wave of negativity and meet the IWC's demand for dirt on TNA?

dirt sheets are like tabloids, they print "news" without proper fact checking...TNA doesn't have the PR team that WWE has to control misprints so more bad stuff gets printed...


3. Is the poll any indication of the true face of the IWC, in regards to Impact Wrestling?

It's easier for trolls to have an effect on a product that is less watched. In short, if there are 20 trolls voting down for the sake of voting down on every poll, and 1000 people vote on the TNA honestly and 2500 vote honestly on WWE, where do the trolls have a bigger effect? Answer: on TNA, because TNA doesn't have the fan base to swallow the trolls

 

[Azane]

TNA lost my weekly viewership earlier this year, so I only keep up with results and skip over the show most of the time now.

The show got to the point that it insulted me to watch it, I don't vote on TNA Payperviews unless I get to see them, Victory Road with Jeff Hardy was the only 1 Star PPV I've rated, and that didn't send a clear enough message to TNA about hardy.

The dirt sheets report TNA with the same integrity they report WWE, RoH or any other fed. You take them with a grain of salt, then mull the answer over after, TNA has done a lot of disgusting things since 10/10/10.

The poll is a direct indication of the IWC, for better or worse, it shows how we think, TNA's ppvs have not been worth my money since before the Hogan era, I don't rate them if I don't watch them. On the flip side, WWE's ppv quality has gone up, outside the 3 ppv in 6 week schedule, they were able to draw my money, and not make me feel cheated after.

If you're truly sick of internet polls, don't even look at it.

 

[SpecialFNK]

there are too many WWE fans that think TNA sucks but don't even watch it.
if you don't watch TNA on a regular basis, you should not be able to judge what it's like. how can one judge something without knowing what's going on?
WWE fans are going to down vote anything involved with TNA just because they can.
I haven't watched WWE in years. the only way I know of what's going on in WWE is when I see other people comment on what's going on there. just from what I've read RAW for example has not been that good lately. I have no idea myself, so I'm not going to start throwing out OMG WWE sucks.

I think the same thing goes for people who write on wrestling. I don't know this, but I wouldn't be surprised if there are writers who have watched WWE for life but as wrestling writers they feel like they have to write about TNA as well. they likely already have an opinion on before they even watch.
I think that can also be said for fans as well. there are likely WWE life long fans who already have an opinion formed before even watching the product, so they're not really giving it a chance. that's a shame.

the current TNA product is not great for sure. but it's not bad either. definite room for improvement. I think the current TNA product is good, and there is a lot of talent in the wrestlers they have.

 

[Yesiamaduck]

If this is based on the Turning Point PPV then yes, yes it deserves around 1 or 2 stars

Do I always agree the low scores? NO! But you can tend to work out on average if it's a good or bad show simply by the %'s as the number of low votes do decrease quite a lot when the is a good show (ala Bound For Glory) and sky rocket when you get a 'Turning Point'