Major Title Matches: More or Less of them on iMPACT?

[It's...Baylariat!]

To me, having a Fatal Fourway with the TNA World Heavyweight title on the line so close to a PPV doesn't make any sense. There's NO way the title was going to change hands... unless Sting managed to win it and then go into Slammiversary as the champ instead of the challenger. Which would make ZERO sense, btw.

And I've noticed that not just in TNA, but in other promotions... having title matches on TV too often can lead to the belt not meaning as much. Less is more in my eyes and I think TNA could benefit from decreasing title matches on iMPACT to once every 60-90 days or longer in order to make their matches even more special.

What are your thoughts? Are you fine with the amount of title matches? You think they need less of them? Does it matter?

 

[It's Damn Real!]

I don't mind the idea of having PPV quality matches on TV if they're put on in shortened versions the way TNA tends to do a la WCW, but what I don't like is that the title is on the line week-after-week, so to answer your question, I think the answer is less title shots, but the same amount/level of main-event quality matches, if that makes sense.

I realize some folks don't buy into the idea that a title holder can wrestle without having to put the title on the line, but this isn't collegiate wrestling, or anything even close to it – it's professional wrestling, which means the story trumps all. Stories tend to arc and peak at PPV's for a reason – it's when the company can make the most money off them. Why buy a $30-35 PPV when you can basically see the same matches every week on iMPACT! for free (the cost of your cable bill)?

 

[It's...Baylariat!]

Exactly. When Ric Flair was at his prime in the NWA, he rarely put his belt on the line on free TV. He wrestled sometimes, came out and cut promos and continued storylines he had with certain folks. It's a lost art to simply build to something and let it come to fruition.

Main event quality matches are what make iMPACT able to have decent ratings. Title matches should be few and far between. It should be a special occasion and billed as such when the TNA World Title's up for grabs. If RVD wrestles, do tag matches, or 'special challenge' matches. I think this forumla would be a success for TNA if they used it properly and don't get an itchy trigger finger and decide to hotshot major storylines and go into blowoff matches too soon.

But I'm in agreement with you here. Main event matches are fine...but title matches should be sparse.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

Exactly.

Putting the WHC on the line week-after-week makes it almost like the WCW Television title, which is pathetic for TNA. While plenty of greats held the WCW TVT, there's no reason on earth the most prestigious title in TNA should have to undergo the same treatment, and there's certainly nothing in the script that says it has to be defended weekly.

While it's honorable and noble of RVD to willingly defend it on the drop of a dime the way he has, it's actually doing the company a great disservice in the process, because there's absolutely no reason any of the matches/feuds that have developed as a byproduct of him being champion wouldn't/couldn't have worked had they not actually directly involved the championship and not just the champion, so what positive really comes from utilizing it, ya know?

 

[MB1025]

Exactly. When Ric Flair was at his prime in the NWA, he rarely put his belt on the line on free TV. He wrestled sometimes, came out and cut promos and continued storylines he had with certain folks. It's a lost art to simply build to something and let it come to fruition.

Main event quality matches are what make iMPACT able to have decent ratings. Title matches should be few and far between. It should be a special occasion and billed as such when the TNA World Title's up for grabs. If RVD wrestles, do tag matches, or 'special challenge' matches. I think this forumla would be a success for TNA if they used it properly and don't get an itchy trigger finger and decide to hotshot major storylines and go into blowoff matches too soon.

But I'm in agreement with you here. Main event matches are fine...but title matches should be sparse.

This is also not that day in age anymore. WWE has made their belts props by only defending about half of them. The guy booking Impact believes belts should be props. In my opinion it doesn't really matter. I honestly think it is more of RVD's reputation and gimmick that Bischoff keeps raving about. Mr. TNA, Mr. Thursday Nights, and so on. Hell it makes him look like he can't be beat. When he finally does get beat it will be an even bigger deal because he has been on such a role. They need to have Impact like this for a while so they can get people to tune in to their show. Do you know how bad they would be doing ratings wise and financially if they booked like the WWE? It would be like major TNA star vs jobber of the week with the occasional star vs star confrontation/match.

 

[Tiger Chaos Theory]

What are your thoughts? Are you fine with the amount of title matches? You think they need less of them? Does it matter?

I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment Lariat. The thing about titles matches for major titles is, they should most often be an event of significance.

The problem here is two fold.

1. The more title matches you have, the less appealing they become to the viewer. When these matches are happening not just every month, but what appears to be every two weeks, viewers will care less when they happen because they know in just two short weeks another will happen.

2. The more title matches they have on Impact, the the less TNA books towards the PPV. A large reason that people pay to see a PPV is not just to see wrestling, but for the storylines that are resolved and expanded upon. If you are booking your title matches for both PPVs and Impact tapings, one of two things will happen: Both matches will only be built upon for two weeks and they will both degrade in interest or one will increase in quality while the other will be totally worthless. "But why not use the added title matches to add to feuds"? Simply put, it isn't a viable option for the long term. Imagine if A.J. had taken on everyone he had during his reign in half the time. You just ran out of contenders and your only option is to recycle them (which happens any way, but in a longer period which allows for people's interest in the contenders to come back). Or worse yet, what if A.J. had taken on every opponent twice. Each Impact match wouldn't be as great as the PPV match, so why tease a great match only to deliver a mediocre one on Impact that will hurt the appeal of the following PPV match?

 

[Ruthless-RKO]

That's another problem with TNA...i think they do in a way so they could gain more viewers...i don't think it changes anything really..it makes a ppv look like iMPACT...i believe there was a thread before...they try and make every impact like a ppv...i don't mind seeing the tag titles on the line every now an then, but close to a ppv..i think it's just stupid...

 

[daddyJ_t]

heres a couple ideas. try for starters cutting down on the title matches like stated and use some more of your roster to elevate more stars to eventually challenge for said titles. or maybe turn your champ(rvd at the present time) heel where he dont want to defend his title every week, so when he does defend it, its a grand event? could be me, but i think that this might work and improve their ratings

 

[pgerasucks]

really dude come on,tna put on a damn good show tonight.that put an end to all the other stuff tna haters complain about,so you have to look for the first thing to complain about,and its defending the title on tv. you know all the haters always say oh all they are is a wwe lite,they need do be diffrent from wwe.then when they do something diffrent you guys jump on them for it,i say just watch the show and enjoy it and dont complain about seeing a ppv quality card for free

 

[TellMeWhy]

really dude come on,tna put on a damn good show tonight.that put an end to all the other stuff tna haters complain about,so you have to look for the first thing to complain about,and its defending the title on tv. you know all the haters always say oh all they are is a wwe lite,they need do be diffrent from wwe.then when they do something diffrent you guys jump on them for it,i say just watch the show and enjoy it and dont complain about seeing a ppv quality card for free

Exactly, why these people come on here and find something to complain about is something I don't know. They sit here and try to talk for the viewers and say what and what not will interest the viewers when they don't have any polls or consensus to backup their points.

Me personally, I like a fighting champ. He wants to see a champion talking on tv for months. I don't want a talking champion. Show me you're a man and put your belt on the line in a worthy match. I sure as hell wouldn't want to see a title shot once a month. So you don't speak for me when you all sit up here and say a viewer will lose interest if you defend the belt every week. You don't speak for Letemknow. I want to see what my champion is all about and if he can really walk the walk. By the time the PPV comes around, I know he'll have a worthy opponent setup and I'll want to be able to see if he can walk the walk on that opponent like he did on prior weeks on tv. That would actually stimulate my interest. It's different things for different people so you all need to stop talking like some experts when you know nothing.

When Foley had the belt. He wasn't defending it on tv. It made him look like a paper champion which he was. It went with his gimmick as well. RVD is the champion and all it's doing is proving that he's a fighting champion and really wants to live up to being Mr. TNA. It goes with his gimmick people. Stop nitpicking.

 

[Schizophrenic]

I think it depends on the Champion and if it fits. I get that RVD is a "fighting champion" but I don't think the World Title matches weekly are gonna help in the long run. He will go through all the challengers, maybe even two or three times and when there is no one left what will the TNA Title mean?

I do agree with Lariat in what he mentioned towards the top of the thread. Flair was in his prime and World Champion and hardly wrestled on tv insted cut promos and helped to make the story mean something and you wanted to go to shows or watch the big shows on TV and PPV cause you wanted to see Flair wrestle a good long match and (whether you were a fan or not) get his ass kicked or retain the title. Should RVD have PPV quality matches on TV once in a while like IDR said? Yeah. I think one or two big PPV quality matches on free tv is a good thing since people get to see great wrestling but the Title doesn't have to be on the line every time.

 

[shattered dreams]

I think one of the things they want to do is build RVD as a fighting champion but sometimes putting the title up makes the outcome too obvious, although we probably thought that as well when AJ put it up against RVD, so you do never really know theoretically. The main events they have been booking lately have been a victim of the "too good to be true" typecast. They sound interesting but we know they cannot be that interesting on free tv. Although maybe TNA gets this finally. The way they cut the show last night it did not seem like that was a title match to me even though I have seen it reported as one in various places before and after. Did they film it as one and change it? If so I think that is a step in the right direction. If it never was one then maybe we need to think twice about complaining about booking that never happened.

 

[jccool420]

To me, having a Fatal Fourway with the TNA World Heavyweight title on the line so close to a PPV doesn't make any sense. There's NO way the title was going to change hands... unless Sting managed to win it and then go into Slammiversary as the champ instead of the challenger. Which would make ZERO sense, btw.

Uhh... I don't think I missed anything... I'm pretty sure it was a non-title match...

But, I think TNA needs to have big matches for main events... They aren't giving away much because the matches are short...

This isn't the 80s or the NWA and the original Monday Night Ways pretty much killed off the old school format...

 

[It's...Baylariat!]

Uhh... I don't think I missed anything... I'm pretty sure it was a non-title match...

But, I think TNA needs to have big matches for main events... They aren't giving away much because the matches are short...

This isn't the 80s or the NWA and the original Monday Night Ways pretty much killed off the old school format...

Big matches are fine. TITLE matches aren't. I understand that you must have a feature match in order to have people watch the program. However, putting belts on the line too often will end up turning the belts in TNA into props as well.

Fact is, As much damage that's been done to the title belts in the WWE, TNA has a shot at making their belt prestigious and worthy of being payed attention to. And by defending the belt too often, it makes it less prestigious because it means that the people they wrestle didn't have to work that hard to get their shot.

 

[jccool420]

Big matches are fine. TITLE matches aren't. I understand that you must have a feature match in order to have people watch the program. However, putting belts on the line too often will end up turning the belts in TNA into props as well.

Fact is, As much damage that's been done to the title belts in the WWE, TNA has a shot at making their belt prestigious and worthy of being payed attention to. And by defending the belt too often, it makes it less prestigious because it means that the people they wrestle didn't have to work that hard to get their shot.

Yeah, I get your point... But, the four way wasn't a title match... So, it was just a big match...

 

[It's...Baylariat!]

Yeah, I get your point... But, the four way wasn't a title match... So, it was just a big match...

Thursday's broadcast featured the Four-Way World Title main event, Mr. Anderson vs. Robert Roode, Jeff Hardy vs. James Storm, the Kurt Angle/Ric Flair confrontation and much more!

The match WAS a TNA World Heavyweight Title match. So yea. Either way, TNA needs less WHC matches and more 'big, storybuilding matches'.

 

[gd]

Ya, they do it far too often. Sometimes is fine, for instance AJ/Angle on January 4th and RVD/AJ were both fine because there was actually somewhat of a chance the title was going to change hands and they were given proper time. But doing it nearly every week? No reason at all. Really, what was the purpose of Wolfe losing a 3 minute match against RVD for the title? Nothing.

The one this week was one of the stupidest of them all, as obviously RVD wasn't going to lose his title. In fact, I would've been much more interested to watch if is wasn't a title match because at least then it'd be unpredictable.

 

[ABMorales787]

Actually they pulled the plug on the 4-way match being for the title. All night it was announced as non-title and they never acknowledged it as for the title. The website said it was, but the actual broadcast didn't. Either a mistake or they changed their mind at the last minute.

Anyway, I see nothing wrong with having a World title match on iMPACT! at least once every 2 or 3 months or so. Not everybody can watch the PPV's (like me) so it can serve as a nice treat to loyal viewers. No they should not do it every other week though. No need for it. However seeing more of the Global and X Division titles would be nice. They don't exactly have much build right now, so putting on a few TV defenses would be nice and very helpful.

 

[jccool420]

Actually they pulled the plug on the 4-way match being for the title. All night it was announced as non-title and they never acknowledged it as for the title. The website said it was, but the actual broadcast didn't. Either a mistake or they changed their mind at the last minute.

I thought I was right...lol I watched the show twice on DVR and never heard them say once that it was for the title, JB didn't do the usual World Title intros and there was no World Title graphic on the screen... I think the website made an error...

 

[Kenny Powers]

TNA has shown way too many world title matches on free television lately. It's fine for RVD to be in the main event, but does he need to defend it every week? I know he is a fighting champion but there is no need for it. It doesn't feel special when he defends it almost every week. I felt the same way about the Knockouts title and tag title matches. TNA would put the women's titles on the line every week in six man tag matches.

What about changing it up a little and actually have an X Division title match. Maybe even a Global title match where Rob Terry doesn't dominate his opponents while tripping over himself. TNA needs to promote other divisions besides the world title division. Give Joe or Wolfe the Global title and let them run wild. Have tournaments for the X division title and so forth.

What is the point of the TNA rankings system when anyone can get a title shot at any time?

 

[Mitch Henessey]

Title matches on free tv are supposed to be a treat, but they're not a treat when you have them too often. We all knew RVD wasn't going to lose his belt on Thursday, so there was no suspense or drama. Also, the match wasn't that great either. There should be less title matches on Impact, because if TNA keeps doing this frequently, then that will kill the desire for anyone to buy their ppvs.

 

[shattered dreams]

TNA has shown way too many world title matches on free television lately. It's fine for RVD to be in the main event, but does he need to defend it every week? I know he is a fighting champion but there is no need for it. It doesn't feel special when he defends it almost every week.

What is the point of the TNA rankings system when anyone can get a title shot at any time?

Actually as far as I can tell the ONLY time RVD has put up the title up on impact since he won it was when Wolfe won the initial fans vote for the rankings (and that was a month ago). So all this every week, too often nonsense seems to be extremely misguided and/or based on a mistake that either never aired/happened or they figured out and corrected this week.

 

[It's...Baylariat!]

I thought I was right...lol I watched the show twice on DVR and never heard them say once that it was for the title, JB didn't do the usual World Title intros and there was no World Title graphic on the screen... I think the website made an error...

That's very possible as TNA and their website aren't on the same page sometimes. But at first they advertised it that way. Why they would change it is beyond me. It doesn't draw more viewers to advertise a title match, then NOT do it.

 

[TheAnimal]

Thats a hard one to call for me. Back in the 90s when there were less PPVs it made the champ look good because they were a fighting champion facing all comers, now they do defend it a few times, but its mostly on PPV against the same guy two to threee consecutive PPVs. The problem with defending it on impact is it becomes mostly obvious that the title won't change hands on free tv, except in rare cases, like RVD winning it.
Then we have the problem of to make it a meaningful defence on impact, by having him face a worthy challenger, because if its RVD v say Shannon Moore, its pointless because we all know it won't change hands, but then if he faces a worthy challenger then they lose a good match that people would pay for because they've seen it once for free. So its hard to decide.

 

[Mudd2010]

people that complain about titles being defended on tv annoy me. Take wwe for example and the united states championship. the title is barely defended on tv let alone on ppv. so in your thinking thats just fine. great american bash 2008 was the last time the title changed hands on a ppv. And shelton benjamin only had one title defense on a ppv and it was a dark match before cyber sunday against R-truth before he lost it 8 months later to MVP. how do you hold onto a title for 8 months and they only give you 1 title match on a ppv. I hate that more than a champion defending his title anytime he's on tv