Main Page Poll: I'm Sick of it.

[StraightEdgeRevenge]

lHaha U mad guy I have been thinking the same thing for months. Every month TNA PPV 40% bad. Funny thing is the people who voted 1 star probably didn't watch. I'd bet money they didn't watch.

TNA is definately treated unfairly by this website. Remember when TNA was celebrating it's most watched episode in history? The next week monday the raw rating was posted with 'Raw Ratings rise after PPV' trying to belittle TNA's accomplishment attributing it a post ppv bump. Even if it was a post PPV bump it's still big news for TNA the 'terrible company that will be dead in a few years.' It's amazing to me that people will criticize the show as a failure when the company is growning despite the fact that the wrestling audience has been shrinking for years.

Seen WWE's stock? it's lost 58.3% of it's value over the last 10 years. Yeah it's safe and pays good dividends but they havn't done much growing. It will be interesting to see what WWE Studios and WWE network do to the stock.(might be a good time to buy?).

Anyway if BFG was polled in 1 star and Wrestlemania this year was polled in better it is a crime.

PS. Is that your girlfriend or wife or something going 'U mad?'

 

[Zeven_Zion]

lHaha U mad guy I have been thinking the same thing for months. Every month TNA PPV 40% bad. Funny thing is the people who voted 1 star probably didn't watch. I'd bet money they didn't watch.

TNA is definately treated unfairly by this website. Remember when TNA was celebrating it's most watched episode in history? The next week monday the raw rating was posted with 'Raw Ratings rise after PPV' trying to belittle TNA's accomplishment attributing it a post ppv bump. Even if it was a post PPV bump it's still big news for TNA the 'terrible company that will be dead in a few years.' It's amazing to me that people will criticize the show as a failure when the company is growning despite the fact that the wrestling audience has been shrinking for years.

Seen WWE's stock? it's lost 58.3% of it's value over the last 10 years. Yeah it's safe and pays good dividends but they havn't done much growing. It will be interesting to see what WWE Studios and WWE network do to the stock.(might be a good time to buy?).

Anyway if BFG was polled in 1 star and Wrestlemania this year was polled in better it is a crime.

PS. Is that your girlfriend or wife or something going 'U mad?'

Well to address another point, I'm not trying to impose my likings onto anybody. Again, certain low IQ people need to learn to read and understand the context of a piece of text before their fingers touch a keyboard. It's not about "why won't you like TNA", it's about the bias some fans have toward it, without watching it regularly or at all, this bias reflecting in polls such as the WrestleZone one and showing potential fans that TNA sucks and don't bother watching it. Be negative all you want, the problem is that some people have legit reasons to dislike the product. They don't like the wrestling, the storylines do not interest them, the production is not up to par with their expectations, the roster is not what they need. Those are valid reasons. "They have no wellness policy" is not. I don't remember who said it, it's in this thread, and you sir are a prime example of the type of lowlifes crawling around in the IWC. How the fuck does that concern you as a viewer.

But the poll thing, it's not even for the first time. It's every month, and anyone who tells me every single TNA PPV over the last five to six months has been utterly horrible is a liar and that's a fact. I'm sure a lot of these people are also the ones who preach that competition will improve both products, which is hypocritical, because if you were you'd support TNA to the fullest. Me? I think that's a bunch of shit. If you need competition to better your product there's something wrong with it.

And that's neither my wife nor my girlfriend. It's Dixie Carter.

 

[Rampage Bentley]

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

Honestly, TNA isn't consistent enough to answer that question. They seemingly change direction every few months, and (to me at least) the quality is very much on a roller coaster like pattern. When it's bad it's REALLY bad

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 thing is, dirtsheets (depending on which ones) don't pull these stories completely out of their asses, they tend to have a few inside people who they talk to, and it's clearly evident that there are at least some people in the TNA locker room with low morale. If half of the stuff reported on this site about TNA are true, how could they not?

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

I've voted my fair share of "1's" for TNA PPV's this year, and while there have been some decent, and even some great moments, the majority of each show has been garbage. For example, The Low-Ki vs. Jack Evans vs Austin Aries vs Zima Ion match earlier this year was fantastic, that match was a 4 out of 5 for me... but it wasn't enough to save the rest of that pathetic card.

And another thing, yes TNA does not have the resources to match the production value of WWE, but their PPV's cost almost as much as WWE's does, so I'm going to judge them on the same scale because it's costing me just as much.

 

[bfred27]

I have watched TNA for a few years now, and honestly its not horrible to me I enjoy alot of the wrestlers out there, and I do believe their undercard is alot better than the WWE's on pure wrestling. I have always had a problem with their PPV's. I dont know what it is about them but I always get the feeling I am just watching another episode of Impact. Even bound for glory which is suppose to be their superbowl it didnt seem special to me at all.

Besides that TNA suffers from alot of the same things WWE complainers complain about. Such as they cram months worth of storylines in to a few weeks just to get the quick payoff. Their storylines at times just dont make sense.

Overall I dont see TNA as being horrible, I dont bash them because I prefer watching WWE. I watch their shows with an open mind, and some weeks they impress, but others like the WWE they stink. TNA has already in my opinion missed an opportunity to win fans over because WWE is gearing up for wrestlemania season and that is the time they put all their energy into their product and you can truly see how much work TNA has to do to even come remotely close to them.

 

[J.J.]

I dont pay those polls any mind. TNA is not a bad product and found myself watching the Jan 4th '10 show over Raw. I applauded the idea of the 6-sided ring when it was still in use. Like how veteran Wrestlers use the promotion as an idea to help get younger talent over. Nash with Samoa Joe, Flair mentoring AJ Styles at one time. Who didn't enjoy Jay Lethal mimicking Ric Flair in the ring? Show puts me in mind with old WCW Nitro(Good thing). Just wish the company would push towards pushing their homegrown talent over WWE's releases.(Angle, Anderson, Hardy, ect). I definitely applaud how well The Pope's character developed after WWE. That's what i say about homegrown talent. They bring in Hardy and Angle and they have the same characters they had in WWE. Same goes with Mr. Anderson, he does exact samething he did in WWE just reciting a different name. Pope is a separation of character from his WWE days. Take Hogan for example, he went to WCW and after a while he had a character change. *Insert Hollywood Hogan*. Last, when they're one on one brawls - stop with all the run-ins. Feud instantly loses fuel. Annnnd get rid of Hogan!

 

[MFR0mack]

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.

WCW gave Benoit, Booker T and numerous other young talent a chance with their world title. Hell, when Benoit left WCW, he was the world champion. So yes, you would have guys like them in the world title picture. "You wouldn't have a whole host of things so that argument isn't valid" is such a vague and dismissive statement, it really makes your whole point invalid. Many things make TNA exactly like WCW 2.0. Horrible writing and booking decisions? Check. Overcrowded roster? Check. Aging dinosaurs fighting to stay in the top spot? Check. 'cause I guarantee when Roode & Storm are done with their program, that belt's going back on someone in their 40s that came from WWE. The fact that Hulk Hogan's apparently such a big backstage influence and can convince Dixie Carter of anything because she's no naive makes it even more like WCW.

a majority of the IWC follows the anti-TNA bandwagon because it's the cool thing to do.

There's really no bandwagon and it's not the cool thing to do. People don't like TNA because TNA does not put out a product that a lot of people can like. They've got a lot of good talent on their roster, but they don't know how to use any of them at all.

 

[MrHashasheen]

WCW gave Benoit, Booker T and numerous other young talent a chance with their world title.

Benoit had a one-day run and left. Booker was a five time champ who probably had a longer run on Smackdown than all five times combined. Anybody else?

Many things make TNA exactly like WCW 2.0. Horrible writing and booking decisions? Check. Overcrowded roster? Check. Aging dinosaurs fighting to stay in the top spot?

The booking and writing has been bad to mediocre to decent. Same for the WWE. The roster isn't as crowded as you seem to think, TNA just needs to improve on time-management. Aging dinosaurs? Flair and Steiner seen once a month or so and that's backing Gunner and Bully Ray (two good talents who deserve their spots), Sting's the manager, Angle's out with an injury, Hogan's missing and that's pretty much it for "aging talents".

There's really no bandwagon and it's not the cool thing to do. People don't like TNA because TNA does not put out a product that a lot of people can like. They've got a lot of good talent on their roster, but they don't know how to use any of them at all.

The stable million + viewers they have each and every week in the USA alone says otherwise. As much as a good chunk of the IWC likes to think, we're not the majority and we never will be. We can bitch and moan about anything, but when it comes down to it, WWE and TNA chug along just fine without us.

 

[willross]

TNA is not as bad as the "haters" say but not nearly as good as the TNA "lovers" say.

TNA is not a good product. They have had good ideas but if you can't end it properly, than it kills the whole thing.

For example: Immortal. Great idea, great swerve with Hardy. BUT, took the belt off of him way too soon and killed him off.
For example: Ken Anderson. Wins the world title too quickly and loses his first match as champion to Gunner (REALLY!?!?!) and then loses the belt.
For example: Bobby Roode. Loses dirty to Angle. But doesn't even get a redemption match. Turns heel on partner (didn't allow enough anger to build up, takes real emotion out of angle, puts fabricated emotion into angle)

All 3 could of been good things for TNA. I started watching consistantly after Hardy won the belt, but then BOOM loses it immediately. Watched when Anderson won, saw him lose to fucking Gunner his first night, realized they weren't doing anything with him so stopped watching. Read some reports on Bobby Roode getting his push, realized his plans were not as big as thought out, now I don't watch.

I will say that WWE is not that great either but in comparison to TNA it is better. The money says it all at the end of the day and opinion of fans say it all. More people watch WWE, more people buy WWE PPVs, more people attend WWE live events, more people buy WWE merch. Say what you want, but TNA got a fair chance when Hogan debuted and they couldn't put together a good enough product on Monday nights to keep new eyes watching their product.

TNA is so damaged right now due to its past and has no credibility of being able to put on a good product. A handful of people will say it was "awesome" back in the Asylum days or whatever, but the fact is, hardly anyone watched it back then so you can't really say that it is better then than now.

Its like LeBron vs. Jordan. LeBron may be a better shooter, rebounder, and passer at the end of the day but no one will ever say he is better than Jordan because he ain't got 6 championship rings. WWE is Michael Jordan and until they are surpassed in ratings, ppv buys, and overall revenue, you can't really say that someone is wrong if they say WWE is better than TNA because you only have intangible arguments.

 

[Rayne]

This post is heavy on personal opinion, as opposed to my normal posts which are logic-heavy and dismissed as opinion by people who don't wish to hear it. How you feel TNA/IW is performing is entirely dependent on the measuring stick you choose to utilize.

If you want to rate TNA/IW on the "how does it compare to the WWE" scale that's popular around here, it's not as bad as people make it out to be. It's a product that really isn't all that different from the WWE on a week-to-week basis; it's only when someone takes the wide view, and compares how the product and story has developed over a few months where one can start to see differences. TNA/IW tends to swap storylines and players around on a pretty regular (or, irregular, depending on your point of view) basis. The WWE will stick with a storyline until you've seen four pay-per-views with the lead actors involved together. (I'm sure people can hunt down exceptions, let's not do the "I found one exception, and that must mean your entire argument is disproved!!1!!!" thing people do around here. We all remember Kurt Angle and Jeff Jarrett using their children for months at a time to make a few bucks.)

The issue here is that the WWE isn't really that good right now. I haven't really wanted to watch either TNA/IW or the WWE recently, although I've kept up with what's going on. The WWE is coasting on their own momentum, and still seem to suffer from the "it's good because we SAY it's good" mindset. CM Punk's recent rise, one of the more interesting things that's happened in the WWE (the first interesting thing since the Nexus storyline, IMHO), has already become old news, and the storyline has kind of died.

If you want to gauge TNA/IW by how they're doing financially- successful entertainment companies don't hide their financial results. It's media. If you don't publicize, you die. (That part, btw, is NOT opinion. I make money explaining this to people professionally.) The trick is what you publicize. If your results are stellar, you point out that your Q3 profit was xx% above your Q3 profit last year, ratings are up yy% over the same period, merchandise is up by zz%, and so on and so forth. If they aren't stellar, you still have to keep up appearances, so you attack your critics and state that they can't know what they're talking about, without providing any information to prove the case. (Yes, yes, I know, Jeff Jarrett said in an interview last year that TNA turned a profit in '06, which means TNA/IW obviously must be making a profit now, right? Businesses never stop making a profit once they start making one, right???)

I think the aggregate consensus on TNA/IW is pretty much dead on. It's not great, it doesn't excite people, but it's professional wrestling on TV. Some people will watch it no matter how much it starts to suck. It has its high moments and its low moments. It's not as bad as some people make it out to be, and it's not as good as others make it out to be. (Hi, Dizzy! Wipe your chin off!)

As far as reporting TNA/IW news goes- THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS WRESTLING NEWS. There are the results from shows, and the transactions of which wrestlers have been hired and which future endeavored, and that's about all the newsworthy information you'll get. What you have left is a shitload of opinion and conjecture packaged as news and, like much of the 'news' in papers and on TV, is geared towards making you buy/watch more. (Plus the odd 'shoot' interview, where wrestlers work fans under the guise of being the 'real' person behind the character.) The question could be better rephrased as "do you like the tone of people discussing TNA/IW in their opinions on the main page?"

On Question #3, the IWC is a fiction created by people who'd like to believe that the group of people in the category "people who use the internet" all have the same opinion. This is why people freak out all the time about the IWC being inconsistent- they're reading a set of opinions from one person, then later an entirely different set from another person, and go "Oh My God, the whole internet isn't agreeing with itself!" It's like asking what black people think about politics, then freaking out when you meet a black person who disagrees with that assessment, and complaining about the inconsistency of the African-American voting constituency.

 

[Psykohurricane55]

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

Right now the TNA product is starting to pick up steam and becoming better but at the same time they still got some huge problems. The main problem is the spacing of storylines. Just look at the break up of Beer Money as the perfect exemple. This should have been a longer build-up instead of scrapping 8 month of build up, just too get a pop in the ratings.

[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?

No not really, TNA has been a really bad product for a long time, even with some improvement, they are still a bad product and the wrestling sites are pretty much reporting what TNA is giving them. When WWE is doing something that is considered negative or if the product is bad like the last couples of weeks that RAW was, you will get negative reporting about WWE.

[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, at less no from this board. Most peoples on this board are level minded fans that know what they want and knows what they like. If TNA is giving them crap every week, they will write about it, same things goes for WWE. If WWE giving them crap, they will write about it.

 

[RicoLen]

Speaking as an old WCW guy, I'm beginning to think that if I were to just devote myself to getting to know the TNA characters I might actually like TNA better than the WWE. All the WWE marks keep complaining about lately are things that I really never considered that bad and were prevalent in TNA.

The Commentating is one such thing that I've noticed recently. I like the commentating in TNA to be honest. So far I like the wrestling just as much as what I see in WWE as well.

The only thing that is holding me back right now is that I hate the process of getting to know a whole new roster of characters. That's why it was so hard for me to get back into the WWE/WWF. First when I finally decided that I couldn't take WCW anymore and it was time to jump back to the WWF at the end of the monday night wars, and then again almost 2 years ago now, when Bret Hart returned for the first Monday Night Raw of 2010. It was months and months before I really was able to get back into WWE again simply because I didn't give a crap about anybody.

That's the same problem with me getting into TNA now. But at the same time I can't shake the feeling that I would probably be a much bigger fan of TNA than of WWE could I just force myself to get to know everyone.

So no. I don't think that TNA is as bad as everyone makes it out to be. But on the other hand I can't really make any better argument than the suspicious one I've already made, because I still get bored and fall asleep watching it every Thursday night. Though the last few weeks I've been doing that during Monday Night Raw too.