Praises to Kevin Kelly!

[realdealasshole]

I just want to thank Kevin Kelly for writing such a fantastic article. He doesn't rip on TNA, but he did this time just because he can't take it anymore. And he perfectly captured it in my opinion. Just because no one expected Hardy's turn does not make it a great move or great writing in any way. No one expected Hardy's turn because he's a guy who hasn't wrestled any captivating matches in recent history or cut a captivating promo in recent times. Kelly hit the nail right on the head and I for one am in agreement with him that TNA he can't even watch TNA because of how bad it is and that the people in charge of it need to be exiled from the wrestling world because of what they're doing to not only the company, but to wrestling in and of itself.

So, what did you think of Kevin Kelly's article on TNA? Agree or disagree?

 

[MayorMcCheese]

You know what annoys me?
The snotnosed ROH Alumni and fans who thumb their nose at TNA and WWE, What is ROH? ROH is a glorified indy fed but apparently they know wrestling so much better than the rest of us, which us why about 5 percent of wrestling fans know who they are

 

[JohnOldSnake4]

I agree completely. The Jeff Hardy turn made no sense to me whatsoever. Like, none. A real anticlimax I felt and it's the last straw for me also. TNA has disappointed me time and again this year.

 

[blackmetalbuick]

I agree. The only positive thing I kept hearing over and over after the PPV was "wow, I never saw that coming! They built up Anderson/Angle the last few weeks so Hardy could swerve out of nowhere!". Or, "wow, TNA did something to purposely swerve the IWC!".

...So What?

I didn't expect Paul Bearer to blind Undertaker with a cheesy light from inside the urn at HIAC either, but that didn't make it a good finish.

The only thing Hardy has is a rabid fan base as a face character. He made a name for himself doing high-risk moves in gimmick matches, but at his age now, he doesn't have that either. Making him a heel is stupid. Most people will probably just keep cheering him, and the rest will be indifferent because they don't buy into him as a heel.

In my opinion, heels need to promo. Unless you're the "ruthless monster" type of heel, which clearly Hardy isn't. And Jeff is one of the worst people on the mic, so there goes that.

Yes, an element of surprise is nice and refreshing. If we complain about one thing a lot in the wrestling world, it's predictability. But it's not the ONLY thing that matters. Giving Angle the belt so he wouldn't retire was probably everyone's best guess for the finish. Would it have been terrible for that *predictable* finish to happen? No. Angle and Anderson have been one of the few decent things on the show lately, and Angle succeeding in his mission to get the belt would have been fine. Maybe not shocking, but it would have been a suitable finish. (Although, to TNA's credit, I can imagine everyone reacting with "Come on, how obvious Angle would win because he's clearly not retiring right now. Lame.")

I could think of a million stupid things that nobody would expect to see during a wrestling match. It doesn't mean they are good ideas.

I'm sure as a booker, fooling the IWC can be fun sometimes. But it can't become your only reason for doing something. "Hah! We showed you! We made this lame person a heel and gave him the belt! Woo!"

 

[JayMiine]

If Mark Madden wrote this article everyone would be crying about how much Madden HATES TNA. Madden tells the truth, just like Kelly does. Kelly might do it in a more sugar coated manner, but it's the same thing. Like it or not TNA is not doing a good job, and the marks get offended when someone like Madden says it so blatantly.

 

[ABMorales787]

Disagree. Greatly. I find it funny that people are condemning Jeff Hardy's heel turn when it hasn't even developed yet. Have we seen him cut a promo? No. Have we seen him wrestle under his new character? No. Have we seen how the crowd reacts to him? No. Have we seen anything about Jeff Hardy other than him brutalizing other face wrestlers to win the World title? NO! People are so fucking quick to jump the gun just to seem smart. There is no way in hell I'll take anything Kevin Kelly says seriously. The highlight of his career was sticking his finger up his nose next to The Rock. Just how biased can you act? Well lets condemn something before it even airs. Because if we don't know how it will turn out, then it must suck.

 

[realdealasshole]

"You know what annoys me?
The snotnosed ROH Alumni and fans who thumb their nose at TNA and WWE, What is ROH? ROH is a glorified indy fed but apparently they know wrestling so much better than the rest of us, which us why about 5 percent of wrestling fans know who they are"

If that was directed at me, just know I've never watched ROH...ever. Though, I'm interested in giving it a shot. And I'm not pointing my nose down at TNA. I'm saying what I see in it coming off their biggest show of the year, after watching every impact, every reaction, and every PPV this year and being a TNA fan from the moment it began. That's the opinion of a huge TNA fan. Not a ROH fan: it's unwatchable.

 

[Rammsteinerteen]

I agree with Kevin Kelly. A lot of people are saying Jeff Hardy's turn was unexpected. Agreed, it was. The problem is, WHO THE HELL CARES? If it was WWE, that would be a big deal, because WWE built him, he had thousands of fans cheering for him, he was really in the main event status. He was compelling and everything. But in TNA, they picked up where WWE left off... LITERALLY. Jeff was a star when he first entered TNA. And he had little time to build his character. I don't mind that Jeff Hardy was in TNA for awhile now, but they didn't build his character. They expected the fans just to know who he was. When he returned to WWE, only the original fans knew who he was. But when WWE built him, the fans saw how amazing he was. He was a star years ago in WWE, but WWE REBUILT HIM. Jeff Hardy was a star in TNA when he first entered and all. But they didn't rebuilt him, they just put him in the main event because he was supposed to be a ratings draw. That failed. TNA could've easily put Kaz, Amazing Red, or even Christopher Daniels (BEFORE RELEASED). Because they worked harder. Jeff Hardy is not and never will be a draw because it's too late to make a compelling character out of him. Thats why, even for a guy who defends TNA. doesn't give a rats ass that Jeff Hardy is a heel. Because nobody should care.

 

[Joe's Gonna Kill You]

Disagree. I also find it funny that a Heel Hardy won't work or he can't get a promo when he has not even had a chance to play a Heel yet. Have we seen what is no character is like No. Do we know that fans will cheer or boo Hardy No. I believe that Hardy will play a pretty good Heel and prove all you people doubting him wrong.

 

[JJYanks121]

I also find it funny that a Heel Hardy won't work or he can't get a promo when he has not even had a chance to play a Heel yet. Have we seen what is no character is like No. Do we know that fans will cheer or boo Hardy No. I believe that Hardy will play a pretty good Heel and prove all you people doubting him wrong.

That's not really what this thread is about. It's about Kevin Kelly's article, which was quite good. For the longest time, KK was and still is a very well respected writer that writes articles on WZ from time to time. The second he turns on TNA, all of a sudden he's terrible. I'm not singling you out Joe, because I actually don't remotely think you are in this boat, but too many people are afraid to see the reality of the end of BFG. It was underwhelming, plain and simple. I know you said it yourself. However, when it came under attack, a lot of marks made it their battle to defend it, even though I believe in their hearts they know it was underwhelming too.

However, Kevin Kelly, a guy who has NEVER bashed TNA before, actually took to the written word because of how it bothered him. That should tell you something. There's clearly a lot of issue about this thing and it's not positive. His big line was "if a wrestler dropped a deuce in the middle of the ring, it would be shocking and maybe you'd watch it........once". I think a lot of fans feel like that's what happened. Kevin Kelly is a smart dude and a respected writer. Let's hope everyone can continue to respect him, even if you disagree with him every now and again.

 

[schaeffershawn]

The problem is all we have to judge hardy on is his past. The best indicator for future behaviour is and has always been past behaviour. That is how most poeple know Hardy will use drugs again no matter how clean he claism to be. It is also how we know this ill concieved heel turn will be a bust. See the Austin turn if you doubt. Because Hardy is a bust he has been a bust since he left the WWE and the power of the machine. It is that machine that pushed him and got him over. In TNA his matches have been crap, and his promos have always been crap. If a guy cannot cut a good face promo how and the hell can we expect his heel promo to be better. It will still be in that annoying white trash pig farmer north carolina accent, which just does not draw heat. It will still lack any kind of coherence. In short it will still suckk ass.

 

[ABMorales787]

That's not really what this thread is about. It's about Kevin Kelly's article, which was quite good. For the longest time, KK was and still is a very well respected writer that writes articles on WZ from time to time. The second he turns on TNA, all of a sudden he's terrible. I'm not singling you out Joe, because I actually don't remotely think you are in this boat, but too many people are afraid to see the reality of the end of BFG. It was underwhelming, plain and simple. I know you said it yourself. However, when it came under attack, a lot of marks made it their battle to defend it, even though I believe in their hearts they know it was underwhelming too.

However, Kevin Kelly, a guy who has NEVER bashed TNA before, actually took to the written word because of how it bothered him. That should tell you something. There's clearly a lot of issue about this thing and it's not positive. His big line was "if a wrestler dropped a deuce in the middle of the ring, it would be shocking and maybe you'd watch it........once". I think a lot of fans feel like that's what happened. Kevin Kelly is a smart dude and a respected writer. Let's hope everyone can continue to respect him, even if you disagree with him every now and again.

There's a difference between criticizing past events and future ones. I thinks it's obvious what it is. I think the point of the BFG main event being controversial and that most people found it anti-climactic has already been discussed. But calling Jeff Hardy's heel turn a failure seems rather stupid given the fact that it hasn't played out yet.

The reason Kevin Kelly's article is so difficult to agree with is because he's calling something a failure when it hasn't even developed yet. Plain and simple.

 

[AmericanDragonSW]

If Mark Madden wrote this article everyone would be crying about how much Madden HATES TNA. Madden tells the truth, just like Kelly does. Kelly might do it in a more sugar coated manner, but it's the same thing. Like it or not TNA is not doing a good job, and the marks get offended when someone like Madden says it so blatantly.

If Mark Madden wrote it, he'd go all out to be an a-hole about it. Kevin Kelly to me represents what voice for pro wrestling is supposed to sound like. And as for the referring to ring of honor as a glorified indy league, maybe it is. But it still believes in "pro wrestling" and not "sports entertainment" cause "sports entertainment" is what's given us this stupid Jeff Hardy heel turn in TNA and what's giving us Michael "ass-clown" Cole on every single show for the WWE, complete with bad jokes, worse insults, and reading off "emails" like a total tool.

 

[JJYanks121]

[QUOTE="iMPACT! Player" Riaku;2518262]There's a difference between criticizing past events and future ones. I thinks it's obvious what it is. I think the point of the BFG main event being controversial and that most people found it anti-climactic has already been discussed. But calling Jeff Hardy's heel turn a failure seems rather stupid given the fact that it hasn't played out yet.

The reason Kevin Kelly's article is so difficult to agree with is because he's calling something a failure when it hasn't even developed yet. Plain and simple.[/QUOTE]

See, that's just it though. The article isn't about how Jeff Hardy's heel turn is going to go. The article is about how it went on Sunday. Everyone is getting defensive and saying "let it develop", but that's not the issue at all here. Kevin Kelly looked at the last 15 minutes of the Pay Per View and said "I've seen this before". Right off the bat, he knew it to be underwhelming as the end to a major PPV and the big payoff to a major angle. No one is saying anything about "how it will play out". He is talking about how it already has played out, and the way it did was underwhelming in his eyes. He is entitled to say it and entitled to feel it. Heck, many agree with him. It was an event that pissed off a lot of people in a "I'm not watching this crap" kind of way. That's just how it's going to be. Instead of trying to convince everyone to let it play out though, just enjoy the ride if you are still into it and if others aren't, let them choose whether they will tune in or not. I especially don't think you need to try and convince a man who has worked in the industry for years.

 

[klunderbunker]

The reason Kevin Kelly's article is so difficult to agree with is because he's calling something a failure when it hasn't even developed yet. Plain and simple.

No, not really.

He's saying that the heel turn isn't logical and is there for shock value. No one saw Jeff's turn coming. That's very true. I certainly didn't. There's probably a reason for that: almost none of the evidence pointed to that coming. Now, is it possible that the explanation will cause it to make sense? Sure. However, simply making sense doesn't mean it's good. It could be, but turning Jeff heel was done as a shock move. As Kelly said, going for the shock value is fine....once. After that it becomes shock for shock's sake, which is not interesting or good television.

Jeff's turn wasn't bad. It was illogical. Perhaps there is a logic to it buried somewhere, but as I've said many times: you shouldn't need six months of notes to understand the main angle in a wrestling show. I've spent three days reading arguments as to whether or not it made sense. I think it did but I'm still not sure. I'm an educated man with a college degree and have watched wrestling for over 20 years. I think I have a firm grasp of what's going on during a show, so the fact that after three days I'm still not sure if it made sense or not is not a good thing.

"But KB you haven't heard the explanation yet!" And that's the problem. At the biggest show of the year, the actions shouldn't need or require an explanation. They should speak for themselves, which these did to a very low degree. I had to think about it for a few hours and have the help of a lot of people on here to get why Jeff did it because I had no clue. I get that I'm supposed to watch Impact to find out, but that's the other problem here: Bound For Glory should have been that explanation. We shouldn't need this much time and argument over why he did something. If it's the biggest show of the year it should be explained there.

That's the problem Kelly and I both have with this: it came off as confusing for the sake of being confusing. Hardy was picked because no one expected it, which may make sense (or it may not) but it doesn't make it good simply because it was shocking.

 

[MayorMcCheese]

[QUOTE="iMPACT! Player" Riaku;2518213]Disagree. Greatly. I find it funny that people are condemning Jeff Hardy's heel turn when it hasn't even developed yet. Have we seen him cut a promo? No. Have we seen him wrestle under his new character? No. Have we seen how the crowd reacts to him? No. Have we seen anything about Jeff Hardy other than him brutalizing other face wrestlers to win the World title? NO! People are so fucking quick to jump the gun just to seem smart. There is no way in hell I'll take anything Kevin Kelly says seriously. The highlight of his career was sticking his finger up his nose next to The Rock. Just how biased can you act? Well lets condemn something before it even airs. Because if we don't know how it will turn out, then it must suck.[/QUOTE]
Good post brother, the smarks always condemn or praise things b4 they play out, Jeff was STALE as a face he's never been a heel so it has some potential

It's also funny to me people think Kelly has no agenda he acts like everything in ROH is great, they are trying to come after TNA But for all of the garbage the internet posts about TNA's popularity, they still get 1.5 million viewers on a regular basis! does ROH even get 15,000?

 

[ABMorales787]

No, not really.

He's saying that the heel turn isn't logical and is there for shock value. No one saw Jeff's turn coming. That's very true. I certainly didn't. There's probably a reason for that: almost none of the evidence pointed to that coming. Now, is it possible that the explanation will cause it to make sense? Sure. However, simply making sense doesn't mean it's good. It could be, but turning Jeff heel was done as a shock move. As Kelly said, going for the shock value is fine....once. After that it becomes shock for shock's sake, which is not interesting or good television.

Jeff's turn wasn't bad. It was illogical. Perhaps there is a logic to it buried somewhere, but as I've said many times: you shouldn't need six months of notes to understand the main angle in a wrestling show. I've spent three days reading arguments as to whether or not it made sense. I think it did but I'm still not sure. I'm an educated man with a college degree and have watched wrestling for over 20 years. I think I have a firm grasp of what's going on during a show, so the fact that after three days I'm still not sure if it made sense or not is not a good thing.

"But KB you haven't heard the explanation yet!" And that's the problem. At the biggest show of the year, the actions shouldn't need or require an explanation. They should speak for themselves, which these did to a very low degree. I had to think about it for a few hours and have the help of a lot of people on here to get why Jeff did it because I had no clue. I get that I'm supposed to watch Impact to find out, but that's the other problem here: Bound For Glory should have been that explanation. We shouldn't need this much time and argument over why he did something. If it's the biggest show of the year it should be explained there.

That's the problem Kelly and I both have with this: it came off as confusing for the sake of being confusing. Hardy was picked because no one expected it, which may make sense (or it may not) but it doesn't make it good simply because it was shocking.

Well, when you're right, you are right. I'll admit I had my errors.

However there are things that have been said over the week that still bother me. Just how hard is it to understand his heel turn? Just look at his career. One of the most popular wrestlers of the decade. A 3 time World Champion. Yet most of the time he was dealing with legal issues, countless stompings by "bigger" stars and his runs as World Champion barely reach 3 months when put together. Why would he turn heel and stab everyone in the back? To finally secure what he wanted. Success. He pandered to the crowd, slammed himself thought tables and all it got him was 3 transitional title reigns, 2 suspensions and rants on his attitude by CM Punk. So he traded it all and sided with men who wanted to take over TNA. Why? Well the reason he turned heel in the first place. Secured success.

I don't find it hard to believe when you just look at Jeff's late career and how miserable it really is.

 

[realdealasshole]

Kelly didn't write the article to say that the turn isn't going to work...it's not. But that's not his point. His point, and others have already covered a lot of this so I'll try and keep it brief, was that Hardy didn't do ANYTHING special before Bound for Glory. He was a nobody going into Bound For Glory. Yeah, he has the name "Jeff Hardy". But the fact is, the name "Jeff Hardy" really has no name value at all anymore. There was a time when the name value would have been big enough to have his turn mean something but fact is, the turn meant nothing. It really didn't. Was it shocking, sure, at the moment, it was shocking. But not in a good way. It was shocking because the only reason I wasn't expecting a Hardy heel turn is because a turn wouldn't have many people caring. And that's what happened. Just like Kelly said in his opener:

"After a long series of matches that took significant emotional and physical toll, Jeff Hardy shocks his fans and turns on them, siding with the Evil Empire in order to get what he wanted but couldn’t achieve on his own. Fans cried, screamed in agony and looked ready to riot.

When none of that happened for Jeff Hardy’s turn this past Sunday, I knew I was watching TNA."

When he turned, no one cared. Why? Because Hogan has no star power anymore, Bischoff has no star power, Jarrett never had it, Abyss never had it, and Hardy doesn't have it anymore. And TNA just assumed that Hardy still has star power simply because he once had it in TNA. But he doesn't. And that's why the turn was completely underwhelming and lacks interest.

 

[klunderbunker]

One of the most popular wrestlers of the decade. A 3 time World Champion.

Almost all in WWE.

Yet most of the time he was dealing with legal issues

A lot of which a lot of fans probably have no clue of.

countless stompings by "bigger" stars

Who he now associates with

his runs as World Champion barely reach 3 months when put together

Also all in WWE.

Why would he turn heel and stab everyone in the back?

Been trying to figure that out myself.

To finally secure what he wanted. Success. He pandered to the crowd, slammed himself thought tables and all it got him was 3 transitional title reigns, 2 suspensions and rants on his attitude by CM Punk.

See, here's the problem: none of that happened in TNA. I know most fans know about it, but what about people that don't watch WWE? Or who are new to TNA? Or who simply don't care about what he did in WWE? That's the thing here: what he did in WWE has (or shouldn't have) any bearing on what he does in TNA.

You shouldn't have to know his full history to get what's going on right now. If that's a part of the storyline then TNA needs to tell us that. Not everyone has seen every Raw, Smackdown and Impact in the last 3 years. This is one of my major issues with TNA: they expect their fans to NEVER miss a detail. If you miss a single show at times or don't listen to every word of commentary or stay up until midnight watching ReAction and find Xplosion somewhere a new team or an announcement might not make anything resembling sense.

That isn't fair to the fans at all. Suppose someone simply doesn't know what he did in WWE. Are they supposed to do research on him to understand his motivations? If TNA tells me that then fine but if they don't and I have to figure it out on my own, that's idiotic.

So he traded it all and sided with men who wanted to take over TNA. Why? Well the reason he turned heel in the first place. Secured success.

That's a LOT for TNA to assume that fans will put together by themselves, even if he explains it.

I don't find it hard to believe when you just look at Jeff's late career and how miserable it really is.

In other words, you BETTER have watched the last two years of WWE and Smackdown in particular to know what's going on in TNA today, as well as have a lot of time to think about it or you're going to be lost.

 

[Kcirdor]

Hardy's heel turn seems logical to me. He has one of the largest fan followings in TNA. He has never been a heel before. He wasn't the "obvious" choice. We've all spent countless hours watching, digesting then disecting wrestling that we all know what is going to happen before it happens. Initially I didn't like it because I can't stand Jeff Hardy. But now that he is a heel I may actually give him another chance to get over.. Yea the angle screams nWo all over again, but what is wrestling if it isn't recycled story lines.

At the very least wait until you see Impact to jump off a cliff. Explainations shall be coming..

Hogan's reason for turning Heel didn't really make sense since he was still the biggest name in wrestling... People hated it. But in the end it was the best thing to happen to wrestling.. This will not have the same impact as Hogan's heel turn, but it works for the state of wrestling today.

 

[realdealasshole]

Hogan's reason for turning Heel didn't really make sense since he was still the biggest name in wrestling... People hated it. But in the end it was the best thing to happen to wrestling.. This will not have the same impact as Hogan's heel turn, but it works for the state of wrestling today.

I think that's a lot of what Kelly was trying to say in his article. Hardy's not a big name. He's not even close. He used to be a big enough name for his heel turn to make a splash and be worthy of the top storyline in the company. But that was a different time and a different company. Now he's not even close to that point. Hogan's heel turn was huge and worthy of being the biggest storyline in the company because at that time he was the biggest name in wrestling. Hardy's not even close to being a big name anymore.

 

[the420something]

I think it's absolutely ridic, that everyone's crying foul about Jeff being a heel. They haven't even aired the 1st impact since BFG. I don't think it's all said and done. Jeff seemed like he's trying to channel Raven anyway. Give him a chance to be the heel champion. Who know's it might even be exciting.

And to the indy wrestling haters, just cause you can't afford the HD package doesn't mean ROH doesn't matter. If you really think ROH doesn't matter than how come, over half of the TNA "originals" got their start there?

 

[ABMorales787]

Almost all in WWE.



A lot of which a lot of fans probably have no clue of.



Who he now associates with



Also all in WWE.

How are fans not gonna know Jeff Hardy is a multi-time World Champion if the commentators boast it all the time? I realize it happened in WWE, but what do you expect? Get a big name from a larger organization and expect him to look inferior to your own talent knowing full well that would be a negative move?

See, here's the problem: none of that happened in WWE. I know most fans know about it, but what about people that don't watch WWE?

How do you expect a fan do discover TNA without knowing of WWE's existence? He's a big name and commentators make his credentials clear. TNA has to acknowledge Jeff's history in WWE because it is a larger company. They can't hide it.

Or who are new to TNA? Or who simply don't care about what he did in WWE? That's the thing here: what he did in WWE has (or shouldn't have) any bearing on what he does in TNA.

Tell that to ECW, WCW and ROH. You can't expect a wrestling promotion to acquire a big time name that was in a larger company and totally pass up on milking it for their own benefit. It would be like if Sting finally debuted in WWE and WWE just made him look like new talent instead of the legend we know he is.

You shouldn't have to know his full history to get what's going on right now.

Really? So we should just watch with no clues as to who's in the ring and why?

If that's a part of the storyline then TNA needs to tell us that.

This I'll admit. They haven't yet.

Not everyone has seen every Raw, Smackdown and Impact in the last 3 years. This is one of my major issues with TNA: they expect their fans to NEVER miss a detail.

I doubt it. All I needed to know was that he was a World Champion that hasn't had the title in TNA.

If you miss a single show at times or don't listen to every word of commentary or stay up until midnight watching ReAction and find Xplosion somewhere a new team or an announcement might not make anything resembling sense.

Promo packages help.

That isn't fair to the fans at all. Suppose someone simply doesn't know what he did in WWE.

But they know of TNA? Come on, KB. I realize what you're saying, but do you really expect a first time wrestling fan to be hooked with TNA before learning of WWE?

Are they supposed to do research on him to understand his motivations?

Comparing it to the Taker/Kane feud. WWE's audience is now composed mostly of kids. That means the chances of them knowing who Paul Bearer is are very slim. Unless they've been watching since 2004 there is no way they'll know who Paul Bearer is unless they research the history of these guys. Matt Stryker keeps calling him the "Father of Destruction". Kids will just think the their dad. But we know that's not true.

If TNA tells me that then fine but if they don't and I have to figure it out on my own, that's idiotic.

Well maybe we should wait. We never ha a damned clue why Steve Austin turned in WM 17. Our only clue was JR's "Autin has sold his soul to the devil himself". Something Mike Tenay similarly uttered. "10/10/10 The night Jeff Hardy made a deal with the devil". Why did Austin do it? There was no real explanation other than to secure the title. Same thing falls here.

That's a LOT for TNA to assume that fans will put together by themselves, even if he explains it.

"I wanted the title so badly that I sided with the bad guys"? Doesn't sound complicated at all.

In other words, you BETTER have watched the last two years of WWE and Smackdown in particular to know what's going on in TNA today, as well as have a lot of time to think about it or you're going to be lost.

I think a casual fan might make sense out of it faster than us. "That jerk was so desperate to win that he cheated". In essence, that's all you really need to know.

 

[Stevolutionary]

I think the main issue with Hardy turning heel as opposed to Hogan in 1996 is that Hardy has nowhere near the legacy, which makes it simply a standard (albeit rare for him in particular) heel turn rather than a landscape changing event.

Even Cena turning heel wouldn't have the same impact, as he's not got Hogan's legacy, and has had a career as a hell prior.

Repeating 1996 is doomed to failure simply because nobody currently (or possibly ever will) meet the same criteria that Hogan had right then - an unbroken face career for many, many years and an integral part of the industry's history.

 

[Kcirdor]

I think that's a lot of what Kelly was trying to say in his article. Hardy's not a big name. He's not even close. He used to be a big enough name for his heel turn to make a splash and be worthy of the top storyline in the company. But that was a different time and a different company. Now he's not even close to that point. Hogan's heel turn was huge and worthy of being the biggest storyline in the company because at that time he was the biggest name in wrestling. Hardy's not even close to being a big name anymore.

hardy still has the biggest fan following behind John Cena.. Yea Hardy's merchandise still sells.. yea it is ridiculous. At the TNA house show in Lake Charles, all the people wanted Jeff Hardy merchandise. The problem with KK's opinion is who else in TNA's roster would a heel turn have made a splash? Angle has been a heel on seperate occasions in his career. Anderson just went through a face turn. Angle is awesome but he doesn't have the fan following Hardy does. Anderson is probably the best behind Flair on the mic n TNA currently. But he doesn't have the fan following.

Like I said this turn will not have the same impact as Hogan, due to who hogan is... But who comes close to hogan? No one really.. Closest to getting to Hogan status is Cena. The turn has the backing of Hogan as a heel to pave the way.