Most realistic fanbase

[shattered dreams]

The question is simple enough. To me TNA fans are way more likely to admit some of the shortcomings of their preferred product than WWE fans are. TNA fans also appear to be much less likely to attempt to exaggerate how good certain areas of their product are. When comparing the two, WWE fans often take the odd position that they feel TNA is bad yet WWE being better than bad makes it good. While that is certainly possible it is not a guarantee. They could simply be a little less bad. So which fanbase do you think is most realistic about the state of their product and why?

 

[Ruthless-RKO]

WWE...there fans come to their weekly shows...TNA they don't have much..the crowd that come to iMPACT aren't even tna fans...lol

And WWE have the whole universe thing going on...always mention it..they get their fans involved most of the time aswell...

I think TNA need to do more of that...i don't think they listen to heir fans either...if they don't listen to their fans...their fanbase will die aswell...

 

[Davi323]

I am sorry, but this is not even close...TNA fans are some of the most delusional people I have ever seen. Shattered Dreams proves the point.

TNA fans also appear to be much less likely to attempt to exaggerate how good certain areas of their product are.

You mean like how Orlando Jordan is the best wrestler ever? How Elijah Burke is the best wrestler ever? How Ken Anderson is the best wrestler ever? How AJ Styles is the best wrestler ever? How "insert random TNA wrestler" is the best wrestler ever?

You guys seriously thought that TNA going to Mondays would be competition. Don't try to deny it, you guys all proclaimed the coming of the Monday Night Wars part II, and what happened? Spike TV demoted you back to Thursdays...so you pretended like that was a good thing, rather than punishment. You hyped up Hulk Hogan and Eric Bischoff taking over Mondays, because they knew what they were doing...do you still think they know what in the holy hell they are doing? There are plenty of other examples of TNA delusions of grandeur, but, the point has been made.

 

[shattered dreams]

You mean like how Orlando Jordan is the best wrestler ever? How Elijah Burke is the best wrestler ever? How Ken Anderson is the best wrestler ever? How AJ Styles is the best wrestler ever? How "insert random TNA wrestler" is the best wrestler ever?

Actually I think you prove my point. No one ever said Orlando Jordan was the best wrestler ever. To suggest that is the general opinion of TNA's fanbase is nothing short of lunacy. I seriously doubt anyone said that about any of those guys. About the closest thing I would buy is someone saying something like AJ is the best worker going today which is at least arguable. I do believe people have said all those guys except Orlando Jordan are much more deserving of respect for what they are accomplishing than some wwe reject label would suggest. That is a far cry from proclaiming them the best ever. Now what I do remember is a ton of people proclaiming the nxt angle beginning as the best ending to raw ever. So who is it that actually exaggerates more? Your method of defending the wwe's product is to bash tna and conveniently ignore everything about your preferred company. . How is TNA fans supporting some of the guys you mention any different than WWE fans supporting Sheamus and Swagger?

Humor me with answering the question of what are some of the problems currently in wwe? If your answer is about TNA or nothing than you are quite unrealistic IMO.

 

[info62]

I don't think it is possible to be unbiased on this question unless you enjoy both companies. Obviously if you are a TNA only fan (like me) then you won't understand why people like WWE and will call them unrealistic. And obviously if you are a WWE only fan (like I used to be) then you won't understand why people like TNA and will call them unrealistic.

Of course there are fans of both promotions who are nuts, stupid, uninformed, etc. Both have their share of unrealistic fans, whether it be the people who got sick of WWE and hate anything about their current state of existance, or on the other side, the people who have never really watched an episode of Impact and are just so loyal to WWE that any other promotion sucks.

However I did vote that WWE fans are unrealistic. Am I biased? Probably, but then again I would bet that every person who votes in this poll is. I agreed with your original post - you hardly see ANYBODY critique ANYTHING about WWE shows anymore. It's seen as a negative thing apparantally, as if whenever you say anything bad ever about WWE then people will just say something like "oh stop bitching" or, as I've been told a lot by people, "why do you watch it if you don't like it?"

And over in the TNA section nobody is afraid to let loose every single little thing they dislike about the company. In all honesty I think both are generally unrealistic in the way that WWE fans tend to underemphasize the bad, while TNA fans seem to always underemphasize the good. But I ended up voting for WWE fans as more unrealistic, since apparantally it's a felony nowadays to not love every second of every WWE show.

 

[CenaFan]

If I was looking at this from a biased perspective, I would have to say that Both Fan bases can have it’s moments and will defend there company no matter what.

I did choose WWE fans, just because, WWE fans seem to be more concerned about wanting to improve there show, and on the other hand from my experience TNA Fans wont admit the flaws.

But I’m being biased right now.

I’m going to change my view and say that both Fan base can have it’s moments.

I think both Fan bases has those type of fans that will think there show is better then the other. One thing I don’t agree with is when Fans say that in order to be a true wrestling fan you have to watch a variety of wrestling shows.

So I am sticking with both Fan Bases can be a pain in the ass when it comes to the current shows they watch.

 

[Dudebuster420]

I voted WWE(to no shock). They have such a long history, the WWWF/WWF/WWE has been apart of people families for generations, a lot of us and our parents grew up watching wrestling and now our kids will be growing up on it too for the most part. The WWE has the looooong running fans who are really "Invested" in the product, know a lot about it(mostly because of WrestleZone ), care a lot about it, and always want to make the WWE better because of those things. I don't mean to infer that TNA doesn't have fans that are passionate about the product, obviously many on here are and defend TNA to the end no matter what. The point is though that TNA doesn't have the lineage of the WWE, period. It is a company that is still very much developing into what it is going to eventually be, they're still kind of looking for their identity.

The WWE's identity has been established for quite a long time. It's been established so well that without even being a fan of the company, you know that identity very well. We know where WWE started, where it went from there, what it became, and what it is. With that clear cut knowledge and understanding of the company I believe that more often that not transfers into a more realistic view of the company. At this point in time because TNA is still growing and developing there is a lot of guess work being done in regards to their future. There's a lot to ponder, which means the imagination takes a greater role. Once the imagination takes a greater role the predictions tend to become more unrealistic as we reflect in those, our personal aspirations for the company. WWE's future and system are pretty clear cut, and easy to determine for the most part, once again leading to a more realistic thought process.

 

[shattered dreams]

I voted WWE(to no shock). They have such a long history, the WWWF/WWF/WWE has been apart of people families for generations, a lot of us and our parents grew up watching wrestling and now our kids will be growing up on it too for the most part. The WWE has the looooong running fans who are really "Invested" in the product, know a lot about it(mostly because of WrestleZone ), care a lot about it, and always want to make the WWE better because of those things. I don't mean to infer that TNA doesn't have fans that are passionate about the product, obviously many on here are and defend TNA to the end no matter what. The point is though that TNA doesn't have the lineage of the WWE, period. It is a company that is still very much developing into what it is going to eventually be, they're still kind of looking for their identity.

The WWE's identity has been established for quite a long time. It's been established so well that without even being a fan of the company, you know that identity very well. We know where WWE started, where it went from there, what it became, and what it is. With that clear cut knowledge and understanding of the company I believe that more often that not transfers into a more realistic view of the company. At this point in time because TNA is still growing and developing there is a lot of guess work being done in regards to their future. There's a lot to ponder, which means the imagination takes a greater role. Once the imagination takes a greater role the predictions tend to become more unrealistic as we reflect in those, our personal aspirations for the company. WWE's future and system are pretty clear cut, and easy to determine for the most part, once again leading to a more realistic thought process.

I like the way you approached the issue. What causes me to disagree is that TNA fans are well aware that the company is searching for an identity. It is something that is discussed quite often. Since that is widely acknowledged, I think that hurts your case significantly. I am not sure your lineage argument is appropriate for the topic at hand. That lineage, opposed to TNA's current situation, is surely why WWE is a better overall company. However, that does not mean the quality of the product is viewed more realistically. I might actually argue that WWE fans might place an unfair weight on the past when determining the present. If you have been involved in something for a long time it is hard to accurately judge it in an unbiased way. The product and certain wrestlers may have hooked you in a different quality state and that could cause you to overrate the current era and expect successes in the future that are unrealistically assumed. While just because TNA has an uncertain future, that is no reason to assume it could not have successes. I would say there are a lot of wwe fans that are distracted by the history and use it to justify the current state. IMO that is an unrealistic approach to the quality question. It is a realistic approach to what kind of success to expect for the company to an extent but that is not what I am interested in.

 

[nightmare]

one big difference is that tna fans think certian wrestlers suck because they cant wrestle. wwe fans think someone sucks b\c they are told to boo them. wwe fans have a hard time realizing the difference between 'drawing heat' as a heel, and being disliked for having no wrestling skill. most wwe fans boo\cheer for who vince tells them to. tna fans are more realistic & understand that the production decisions might suck but they appreciate the matches\competiotion.

wwe fans go mostly by the history vince wants you to remember (chris benoit, etc...), tna fans are more realistic in remembering wrestling history (wwe rarely recognize other promotions title runs\ fueds). they pay more attention to what really happened and not so much to 'kayfabe\storyline' history. tna might just be a few steps up from independent shows but idk, they are still fresh in the grand aspect of history & their fans appreciate what they are trying to do. wwe has been around forever, and had plenty of time to become the machine they are today. if the roles were reversed and tna had been around for decades, vince would be in the same spot as dixie right now.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Both companies definitely have their share of fans that are delusional, uninformed or just plain stupid. There's no way around that, it's just how it is.

As to who has the more "realistic" fanbase, I think I have to go with the WWE. With all due respect to shattered dreams, the idea that TNA fans are more likely to acknowledge their shortcomings and less likely to exaggerate how good certain areas of their product are is absolute nonsense. During the time I've been on the forum overall, beginning in March of last year, what I see more than anything else are TNA fans absolutely hyping the shit out of TNA and constantly attempting to make it out to be something more than what it actually is.

On these forums and others like it across the internet, you'll read posts from droves of TNA fans that attempt to tout that most TNA matches are epic or that TNA is "more adult" or that TNA is edgy. I'm sorry, but it's absolute 100% crap. Honestly, how many times have we heard a "This is awesome" chant from TNA audiences for something going on in the ring that's average at best?

When it was announced that Hulk Hogan was coming to TNA, I couldn't count the number of posts from TNA fans that were already saying that Hulk Hogan was going to lead TNA to dominance over the WWE. The deathnail was already driven into the WWE's coffin before anything had ever even taken place by TNA fans. When Hogan debuts and TNA "declares war" on the WWE, the TNA propoganda machine only gathered steam. Throughout 2010, TNA's product has been less than stellar, yet there are many diehard TNA fans that absolutely refuse to believe otherwise. They've managed to view TNA with rose colored glasses and willingly ignore tremendous shortcomings in the desperate hope of TNA being a viable alternative to WWE.

When TNA gets its ass kicked by the WWE and is massacred in the so called second coming of the Monday Night Wars, here come all the old excuses from TNA apologists as to why it happened. I kept seeing things such as TNA is less than 10 years old or they don't have the WWE's history or the WWE's exposure and droves of other excuses. I'm not saying that they don't have validity, but these were facts that many TNA fans ignored whenever the situation suited them and used as a crutch to justify why TNA failed in its attemps to be "edgy" or take on the WWE in its own yard.

I know that the WWE isn't perfect, nor do I expect it to be perfect. There's always going to be something going on, some match that takes place or some angle that just doesn't interest me. There were a few things like that on Raw last night. A lot of fans, both WWE and TNA, forget that wrestling is a business. I do believe that WWE fans get this and understand it more than TNA fans, however. Numerous members of the IWC has it in their minds that wrestling should cater to their whims, which often change with the weather.

 

[Vintage]

Both companies fans are equally delusional

WWE fans throw stones from their glass houses at TNA fans.
TNA fans defend the crap thrown at them when they know better.
WWE fans see nothing wrong with the product because they have been watching the same stuff for 58 years.
TNA Fans are only 8 years old and are overly optimistic.


Bottom line: They are two different companies with 2 different philosophies and goals. Wrestling vs Entertainment. Merchandise sales, PPV revenue and looking good for Linda's campaign are what drives WWE right now. Giving the fans what they want (cruiserweights, a legit womens division (until recently) and tag teams) and growing TNA's fan base are what TNA are all about. WWE is all about the bigger story since they see themselves as a episodic soap opera, TNA is exactly what they claim to be.. Total Nonstop Action with little and no substance behind it.

Competition is good and in the end both products will be better off for it. Watch the show you like and be happy that you have a choice about how it's presented to you. That was not always the case and if it was up to WWE you wouldn't have one. Like TNA or not, be grateful that Jarrett and Dixie has the stones to do what they do for the love of the business and trying to break the monopoly WWE has on 'Sports Entertainment'
No matter who it is in the ring that you are a fan of, it's more than likely that you can now find them on TV at some point during the week instead of them disappearing if WWE fires them. Be happy that independant wrestlers that don't fit the WWE mold have another place where they can break into the 'majors' if its ok for me to consider TNA as much. Be happy that some people you like in one company can go work in another and show you something you might not have been able to see from them had they stayed where they were. Lastly and most importantly recognize that we all ultimately want the same thing, our companies to succeed and continue to entertain us for years and years to come.

 

[shattered dreams]

Both companies definitely have their share of fans that are delusional, uninformed or just plain stupid. There's no way around that, it's just how it is.

As to who has the more "realistic" fanbase, I think I have to go with the WWE. With all due respect to shattered dreams, the idea that TNA fans are more likely to acknowledge their shortcomings and less likely to exaggerate how good certain areas of their product are is absolute nonsense. During the time I've been on the forum overall, beginning in March of last year, what I see more than anything else are TNA fans absolutely hyping the shit out of TNA and constantly attempting to make it out to be something more than what it actually is.

On these forums and others like it across the internet, you'll read posts from droves of TNA fans that attempt to tout that most TNA matches are epic or that TNA is "more adult" or that TNA is edgy. I'm sorry, but it's absolute 100% crap. Honestly, how many times have we heard a "This is awesome" chant from TNA audiences for something going on in the ring that's average at best?

When it was announced that Hulk Hogan was coming to TNA, I couldn't count the number of posts from TNA fans that were already saying that Hulk Hogan was going to lead TNA to dominance over the WWE. The deathnail was already driven into the WWE's coffin before anything had ever even taken place by TNA fans. When Hogan debuts and TNA "declares war" on the WWE, the TNA propoganda machine only gathered steam. Throughout 2010, TNA's product has been less than stellar, yet there are many diehard TNA fans that absolutely refuse to believe otherwise. They've managed to view TNA with rose colored glasses and willingly ignore tremendous shortcomings in the desperate hope of TNA being a viable alternative to WWE.

When TNA gets its ass kicked by the WWE and is massacred in the so called second coming of the Monday Night Wars, here come all the old excuses from TNA apologists as to why it happened. I kept seeing things such as TNA is less than 10 years old or they don't have the WWE's history or the WWE's exposure and droves of other excuses. I'm not saying that they don't have validity, but these were facts that many TNA fans ignored whenever the situation suited them and used as a crutch to justify why TNA failed in its attemps to be "edgy" or take on the WWE in its own yard.

I know that the WWE isn't perfect, nor do I expect it to be perfect. There's always going to be something going on, some match that takes place or some angle that just doesn't interest me. There were a few things like that on Raw last night. A lot of fans, both WWE and TNA, forget that wrestling is a business. I do believe that WWE fans get this and understand it more than TNA fans, however. Numerous members of the IWC has it in their minds that wrestling should cater to their whims, which often change with the weather.

I guess that the main problem with trying to answer this question is that if you actually prefer one that means you likely have something against the other, so it is likely you view the other one with some pessimism, and thus would think even level headed comments were exaggerated. Jack-Hammer remembers those delusional, uninformed or just stupid tna fans more clearly just like I might for WWE. The issue of objectivity is a huge problem. However, if we acknowledge this is the case wouldn't it be obvious that the larger fanbase is actually the less objective one, and thus the WWE would easily be less realistic?

Regardless of the reason, I feel quite differently of what I have seen on the forums opposed to what hammer is saying here. The most glaring example is something that many have said in this thread and elsewhere that truly baffles me. That being that every TNA fan thought the move to mondays was a good idea and that TNA would surely crush WWE immediately. With all due respect this is absolute nonsense. Maybe someone ******ed said that but that was nowhere near the general sentiment. I remembered it being quite mixed and with a search seemed to confirm that. I found two threads in TNA section before the move with both going about 4 pages, one of which is specifically about if it was a good idea or not. People were excited, both wwe and TNA fans, but I just see no evidence of an ovewhelming or arguably even underwhelming amount of people saying TNA is going to put WWE out of business. I did however find a pretty interesting post by hammer in wwe vs tna about if the monday night wars will still work.

As to the topic, there's a possibility that it can always work. It's probably just a matter of time before TNA moves to Monday nights on a permanent basis. I expect that it will depend upon how the next live edition of iMPACT does in the ratings and that show is expected to be held on either March 1st or March 8th. If TNA pulls in similar or greater numbers than they did on the 4th, then I'd say it's all but a guaranteed lock. In total, about 7.7 million people in the United States were watching professional wrestling on January 4th, 2010. That's the largest television wrestling audience to hit in a long time and those numbers could increase. The ratings of both shows could very well increase. So yeah, I think the Monday Night Wars can very much work again.

Are you really saying the fanbase is unrealistic for thinking things you thought at that time? Sure TNA made many mistakes in the process, most notably IMO not waiting until they got that second rating back in march before committing full-time to mondays, but just because TNA did not do well on mondays does it mean the company sucks or the fanbase was not prepared for that possibility. WWE fans seem to put a lot of emphasis on winning a "ratings war" that they claimed before and after they would win all along. If it was so obvious then why is it a meaningful accomplishment? Everybody knows ratings have many other factors than quality. Just look at transformers 2 box office.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I guess that the main problem with trying to answer this question is that if you actually prefer one that means you likely have something against the other, so it is likely you view the other one with some pessimism, and thus would think even level headed comments were exaggerated. Jack-Hammer remembers those delusional, uninformed or just stupid tna fans more clearly just like I might for WWE. The issue of objectivity is a huge problem. However, if we acknowledge this is the case wouldn't it be obvious that the larger fanbase is actually the less objective one, and thus the WWE would easily be less realistic?

I never denied that the WWE didn't have its share of delusional, uninformed or even stupid fans but the TNA fans do tend to stick out to me due in large part to the amount of smack I've read in many of their posts over the past year or so. I've never claimed to be entirely objective, just as I'm sure you can't either. You know that I prefer WWE just as I know you prefer TNA.

Regardless of the reason, I feel quite differently of what I have seen on the forums opposed to what hammer is saying here. The most glaring example is something that many have said in this thread and elsewhere that truly baffles me. That being that every TNA fan thought the move to mondays was a good idea and that TNA would surely crush WWE immediately. With all due respect this is absolute nonsense. Maybe someone ******ed said that but that was nowhere near the general sentiment. I remembered it being quite mixed and with a search seemed to confirm that. I found two threads in TNA section before the move with both going about 4 pages, one of which is specifically about if it was a good idea or not. People were excited, both wwe and TNA fans, but I just see no evidence of an ovewhelming or arguably even underwhelming amount of people saying TNA is going to put WWE out of business. I did however find a pretty interesting post by hammer in wwe vs tna about if the monday night wars will still work.

There are far more than those 2 threads that you found. If you want to get a clear picture of the discussion, you'd have to go back to almost a year. Right around the time that Hulk Hogan announced he was signed to TNA, that's when things seemed to pick up.

Are you really saying the fanbase is unrealistic for thinking things you thought at that time? Sure TNA made many mistakes in the process, most notably IMO not waiting until they got that second rating back in march before committing full-time to mondays, but just because TNA did not do well on mondays does it mean the company sucks or the fanbase was not prepared for that possibility. WWE fans seem to put a lot of emphasis on winning a "ratings war" that they claimed before and after they would win all along. If it was so obvious then why is it a meaningful accomplishment? Everybody knows ratings have many other factors than quality. Just look at transformers 2 box office.

Ahhh, the old ratings argument. Let's get this out of the way quickly. Yes, ratings do matter to some degree, there's no need in pretending that they don't. As for my statement regarding the Monday Night Wars, I said that if TNA were able to sustain or exceed the type of numbers they brought in on January 4th, then a second Monday Night Wars was possibly viable. I never said that TNA would or that they could sustain those numbers and they didn't. Losing in the ratings wasn't what made me grow to dislike the TNA product, it was the fact that the TNA product went downhill. When I made that statement, TNA still had a much stronger product overall than it has right now. Hulk Hogan popping up and being featured in virtually every other segment, Abyss portraying this neurotic 10 year old while being pushed alongside Hogan as the TNA version of John Cena, according to Hogan. Along with Hogan, at least for a while, came a number of Hogan cronies. Scott Hall, Sean Waltman, Sean Morley, the Nasty Boys, etc. all of them being placed on TNA television either taking time from other wrestlers or going over other wrestlers that were simply better and aren't in the twilight of their careers. TNA, this year, has pushed wrestlers that are significantly weaker overall than many others. For instance, can you say with a straight face that Doug Williams is better than Desmond Wolfe? Or that Brian Kendrick is better than Samoa Joe? Over in the Knockout Division, legitimate forces in women's wrestling such as Awesome Kong, Sarita or Taylor Wilde are either gone or hardly used while they put a championship on Lacey Von Erich? Up until a few weeks ago, the tag titles in TNA wrestling were held by a couple of 50+ year old men. At the upcoming ppv, we get to see a 25 year old man wrestle against a 61 year old man. If he wins, all he accomplishes is beating an old man and, if he loses, his career can be considered a joke from here on in due to losing to someone 36 years older than he is.

There are geniuine and legitimate shortcomings in both WWE and TNA. When I see them on a tv screen, I've got no problem criticizing them if I don't like what I'm seeing. However, I won't pretend that they're not there.

 

[Kenny Powers]

When I was a huge WWF fan in the early 90s before the attitude era started, I didn't even give WCW or ECW the time of day. Even though WCW and ECW were getting the attention and WCW was dominating in the ratings, I never gave them any attention because I was accustomed to WWE.

I really don't know which fan base is more realistic because a lot of people on here will defend TNA or WWE for even the most stupidest decisions. You can be a fan of both promotions and criticize them equally. I have noticed a lot more complaining from TNA fans about TNA then WWE fans in general. The average viewer of TNA isn't really as upset about the company as the hardcore TNA fans that have been watching for years. TNA fans turn on TNA at the drop of a hat. It doesn't matter who is there whether it is Russo, Hogan, Bischoff etc.

They will complain about a six sided ring, 4 sided ring, etc. Everyone was talking about how great Hogan, RVD, and Hardy would be in TNA. When they come in and aren't as stellar as they had hoped then they turn on them. Some WWE fans may be blind, but at least they stick to their product. TNA fans expect Impact to walk on water and beat Raw in the ratings within a month. It's not going to happen.

We just have to enjoy the product. The wrestling business isn't the movie Speed. Just because one company isn't dominating another one in a short time frame, doesn't mean the bus is going to explode.