Sting Clown Persona Finished? How Did You Take It?

[punchline]

The fact of the matter is that Sting playing the Joker character was well done. This is not opinion, but fact.

You're entire argument falls apart here. Presenting something that can ONLY be an opinion as fact shows that you're just blowing smoke and grasping at straws, It's childish at best, which is sad because i actually agree with you on the gimmick itself. In my OPINION, Sting did play the part very well but I am glad it wasn't a long-term character change. We all know Sting only has a short time left in him, and he should go out as the Icon that he is.

 

[californiachef84]

You're entire argument falls apart here. Presenting something that can ONLY be an opinion as fact shows that you're just blowing smoke and grasping at straws, It's childish at best, which is sad because i actually agree with you on the gimmick itself. In my OPINION, Sting did play the part very well but I am glad it wasn't a long-term character change. We all know Sting only has a short time left in him, and he should go out as the Icon that he is.

The part that is "opinion" is whether or not you liked the character. The part that isn't opinion is whether Sting played that said character well. You don't have to like the character to agree that Sting did play it well. That is like saying that Clint Eastwood did not play a believable bad ass cowboy in the westerns that he did. You may not like the character, but you cannot say that he didn't play the character well. That is just foolish...

 

[It's Damn Real!]

It was a bit of a mess at the start, but in typical Sting fashion he pulled it off masterfully in a short time following.

I can see why people didn't like it seeing how quirky of a gimmick it was, but to anyone who was complaining about him "ripping off" of a movie character... my god, the idiocy — what do you think his "Crow" gimmick was? You can thank Scott Hall for that, too. "Hey yo, I think you should be like a Crow character, Stinger."

Joker Sting really gave a refresher to what was quickly becoming a pretty stale character with crow Sting who was just kind of there in TNA of late. I'm a huge Sting mark, so there's very little he could do to upset me, but either way I was a fan of how Joker Sting turned out. He was utilized as a proponent for the Hogan turn and it worked well IMO.

 

[TCBT]

I think it was stupid, and not because of my personal feelings towards the gimmick. I felt they didn't give it enough time to make it marketable.

Out of all TNA merchandising, people were actually buying the Sting shirts, or at least it seeemed like it from the audience in iMPACT. Why kill a complete gimmick after a few months? You need to give it time to simmer and pick up. Sting has been the Crow for over 10 years. You can't just expect the fans to like a change that drastic without REALLY letting it play out.

That's the cardinal sin when it comes to wrestling. Your fanbase can pretty much buy into anything as long as you give them enough time to buy it.

 

[punchline]

The part that is "opinion" is whether or not you liked the character. The part that isn't opinion is whether Sting played that said character well. You don't have to like the character to agree that Sting did play it well. That is like saying that Clint Eastwood did not play a believable bad ass cowboy in the westerns that he did. You may not like the character, but you cannot say that he didn't play the character well. That is just foolish...

No, see that's still an opinion. Like i said, i agree that he did play the character well, but that's just my opinion, not everyone thinks that way. I know people who don't think that the character was well played at all, stating that it was too reeled in and not over-the-top enough for what the character was supposed to portray. Others say that it was a little too much in a way, with the character coming off forced. judging someones performance can never be fact as people have differing tastes, it will always be an opinion.

 

[MFR0mack]

I do not need a history in WCW... What you are forgetting to point out is that WCW had it's territory in the south. It already had an established fan base. TNA does not have this luxury. Most people still refer to TNA as that "WWF stuff".

Ted Turner, Eric Bischoff, and Hulk Hogan were clueless? Is that how they managed to man handle the great and powerful Vince McMahon? Just for future reference, when you say that WCW was ran by a bunch of morons that makes your precious WWE look even more pathetic.

The fact of the matter is that Sting playing the Joker character was well done. This is not opinion, but fact. The thing that some people on here bash that character for is that they think the "character" is stupid... not how Sting portrayed the character.

Something tells me that if Sting had signed with the WWE and were playing the "joker" character to get inside the head of the Undertaker, that it would be "awesome" or "cutting edge". However, since Sting works for TNA it isn't any good because how could anything good exist outside of WWE?

Bro, WCW was FAILING until 1996. It was the most unprofitable thing Ted Turner had ever done and every single person part of his company told him to shut it down. It's "established fanbase" was like a thousand people. There was barely any difference in their established fanbases when the companies were began.

Yes, Ted Turner, Eric Bischoff and Hulk Hogan are clueless about the wrestling business. That's why they never knew how to use talent or follow through on their storylines. Bischoff was too busy trying to keep a leash on the huge egos he signed to multi-million dollar deals that were always at each other's throats and Hogan was always looking out for himself. All Bischoff did was come up with the idea for an invasion. In reality, Nash & Hall suggested most of the ideas for the NWO (before it started spinning out of control), they were the driving force of why fans switched channels. Not the clueless people. Even Bischoff himself admits to the mistakes he made and that people running WCW were idiotic. Just like all the talent from there.

Joker Sting a critical failure. It didn't get over, literally every Impact Taping compared to Impact Airing talked about how much cheers they edited in. It was sad to see a legendary performer get reduced to a literal joke of a character. They did to Sting the exact same thing they did Mick Foley & Ric Flair. And Sting was completely embarrassing trying to follow through the part (though he was completely devoted to it!! like that means anything). It would have been awful in WWE, too, buddy. Bad decisions are bad decisions, no matter where they are.

 

[Lowdown]

Most people still refer to TNA as that "WWF stuff".

Well I can honestly say that I never read or heard anyone refer to TNA as such. WWF wannabe maybe, but still.

The fact of the matter is that Sting playing the Joker character was well done. This is not opinion, but fact.

I gotta disagree with you on that. The whole Joker Sting gimmick wasn't exactly pulling in huge crowd reactions. I mean Sting Flipping the script after losing the title to Anderson was a buzz kill. Why have him even win the title if he was gonna shift focus to bringing back Dixie, who last year he walked out on? Yes it was building up to this years BFG, I get that. But doing the Joker bit was unnecessary. And truthfully I didn't see too many fans wearing the shirts. I'm just curious where you are basing these facts on.

 

[tomthebodz]

Really glad he's back to The Crow persona. It's the gimmick he had when I first saw him in WCW so it's naturally my favourite.

The Crow is my favourite film ever so I related to The Crow persona on that level as well.

 

[shooter_mcgavin]

It was a like a crazy old man trying to imitate a popular movie and just comes off obnoxious. It was hard watching Sting with his Clown Gimmick, and even harder to respect him for that. He's at the point in his career that he should carry himself with dignity and not making a complete fool out of himself.

 

[SpecialFNK]

now that Hogan came face and Dixie got her company back, I doubt we will be seeing the crazy Joker Sting anymore.

I wouldn't even say Sting is using the Crow gimmick anymore either. right now he's just using his wrestling name "Sting" with no face paint. he doesn't really have a "gimmick" right now, he's just the boss/authority figure using his wrestling name that fans know him by. he just happens to have the long hair, but he's had that for awhile now (compared to his short spiked blonde hair from way back).

it's only been what 2 weeks of Impact that we've seen him on TV, so maybe things will change. depends on whether or not he is booked in any type of matches in the future. last I checked wikipedia had him listed as occasional wrestler. I would guess if he does get into some type of match, he would face paint up for that.

 

[Weems2k]

Where exactly is everyone getting this as a clown gimmick? Is Sting dressing up in big red shoes, green hair, and pulling a loaded fake arm out of his socket? Nope. If any of you IWC dirtballs had actually watched Impact from the beginning of May, you would know how Sting got this new persona. It was in fact Anderson that pushed Sting over the edge. As Sting got more, and more crazy each week, he was actually getting more, and more over. At that point, there was no point then to go full bore, and do the crazy joker look. Guess what knobs. It's wrestling. Gimmicks are copied all the time from movies and people. I don't see your load blower Daniel Bryan having the slightest drip of a personality, unless you count, dull, boring, and overrated as one.

 

[dmac]

I loved the "psycho" Sting! It was different and funny. I've been watching him wrestle since his very first match in Memphis. The "crow" gimmick was far past his expiration date and he needed a change. I agree with one poster who said it was now time for Sting to wrestle without the makeup to close out his career.

 

[One to Remember]

You know nothing about me, yet from my personal opinion (which this thread asked for) on the Joker Sting gimmick, you were able to discern that I am an alleged WWE mark, know nothing about WCW

We know YOU know nothing about WCW..

Your ratings argument is pretty null & void considering wrestling was at an all time high in popularity, regardless of brand, in the late 90s, numbers that either company WISH they could have for one night today. Hell, ECW was running one to two televised shows a month back then and getting the ratings of an episode of Raw today.

based on your "wrestle boom period bubble trickles down to all feds" theory I question why the AWA, World Class,and the UWF not benefit from the rock 'n' wrestling connection? The reason why ECW, WCW, And the WWF prospered in the 1990s is because they worked hard on their storylines, tallent development, and product. That is why XPW and CZW could not ride ECW's coat tails. ECW had hardcore inovation in conjuction with X rated material. WCW revolutionized how heels were regarded and positioned in pro wrestling. WWF's Attitude Era provided an outlit for Generation X's angst and society's discontent with biting its tongue. If TNA was founded in 1997 it would be on the same level or worse then today. It brings nothing but instability and chaos to the table..

Things change. That's business. But as it stands right now, TNA is left languishing right under the 1.0 mark because they don't do anything but non-stop, non-psychology booking with a change of mind made every week, on top of having to deal with their former head-writer trying to revive things he thought worked ten years ago (that failed then and now).

idk about all that because Russo tried the same ideas a decade ago when they were half a decade old and the results were still not this bad. I think the ROH-Sinclair partnership is going to have to be watched closely since the "immitate WCW with a splash of the old WWF" rout aint gonna cut it.

I should also point out, the last highest ratings WCW drew was on the night of January 4th, 1999. They drew a 5.8 rating for their show and from that point on did NOTHING but plummet until they were bought out. That night was the Fingerpoke Of Doom. Their awful writing, lack of storytelling and constant struggles backstage caused them to languish until they were sold. Nitro was still doing 3.0 ratings in 2000 in an era where wrestling was at its hottest, but Thunder was taking in numbers of 1.5 and below (back when Sunday Night Heat was still getting 2.5-3.0), constantly falling until the end.

Highest as in their last strike in the Monday Night Wars? WWE's stupid little "did you know" factoid/tid bit seggments arent going to mention Nitro was TNT's highest rated show and one of cables top ratings grabbers evenin 2001!! I was told the last high rated Nitros were Goldberg defeating Hollywood clean for the title and the ppv reshowing of DDP's title match due to satelites cutting half the buyers off. You have no point here. As for Heat if you were the kid with the dumb parents who thought eleven, ten, even nine was too late to be on or the guy who worked at night Heat was like A.M. RAW at a Godly hour.. This recap show was on in Raw's heyday.. AS for Thunder is was far above Saturday Night but too below Monday Nitro. Its purpose was to serve as a container unit for Nitro's excess steam. If there was no action surplus Thunder faltered. With three hour Nitros Thunder asphyxiated..

Plus, it's well documented that WCW went through RIDICULOUS expenses that were completely unnecessary driving it to bankruptcy, such as flying EVERY SINGLE WRESTLER on their roster to their shows, only to tell half of them they weren't going to be on it.

Half the meat head rasslers that had no qualms sucking WCW down to the marrow like special ed. Vampires enjoy employment with TNA. A quarter of the compentance deprived WCW management also calls TNA home.

TNA has good people in it. Dedicated, talented people that could make it into something great. But people like Dixie Carter and her father are just as clueless about running a wrestling business as Ted Turner was, so they put their faith in selfish, past-their-prime people like Hulk Hogan. If they don't change, they'll be dead-in-the-water in three years. Just like WCW. BTW, who told you WCW wasn't an upstart promotion? Because, uh, yeah, it was based on Jim Crockett Promotions, but by the time of the name change in 1988, there was barely anyone involved in it that had background with the original company and by 1991, anyone involved in Jim Crockett or NWA was pushed to the side so the company could "start anew" in Ted Turner's eyes. It was just as upstart as TNA is now.

Carter and Carter made the right call hiring A wrestling vet.. Verne Gagne, Jerry Jarrett, and Bill Watts are proof wrestlers can run feds..What of the JCP exodus? They were replaced by Watts, the AWA's Eric Bischoff, J.j. Dillon, and etc. So how is the missing JCP brass proof that WCW was upstart in '91? It was already established and Mid Atlantic had a stronger base then TNA ever had and they are both southern based.

I hate Sting's joker persona because its already beendone to death by every boob who thinks hes a cool cat. Its a fifty year old guy trying to be contemporary and it fails. Sting is acting like hes Vampiro Sr. Or sumthin. He has never been a good heel and like Steamboat and Goldberg he simply can't pull it off. OnlyTNA management would be dumb enough to think that was a bad thingthough..

 

[StraightEdgeRevenge]

Why is it bad to watch wrestling without saying 'this is how i would have done it?' Saying you don't like Joker sting because you aren't a mark is absurd. Don't like him? Cheer for him to lose and finish the thought there. Just because noone watches TNA doesn't means it's bad by the way.

Newton released Principia Mathematica de Naturalis and only 10 people could read it. one of the most important books ever written. 10 people read it. You can attribute low rating to bad marketing and the fact that the industry is dying not the quality of the show. Sting is one of the best wrestlers ever and one of hte best on TV right now. You can't compare the Miz and Sting or Mark Henry to Sting. He's on a whole different level. Sting doesn't just have it he is it. If you think WWE wouldn't take Joker sting and immediatly throw him into the main event you are crazy.

 

[New Hot Fed]

The problem with Joker Sting is that he never was really funny. Sting himself is a plain good guy in real life with not a lot meaness to him. And those guys are the worst comedians. So he tried to inject humour but it came off as Ronald McDonald, basically. A 52 grown man making a foul of himself.

Not only he wasn't funny but he was never psycho either. Sting doesn't have it in him to get completly nasty wich is what would have required. He should have gone all serial killer and wage a psychological warfare with Hogan at all times. Attacking him, attacking Immortal, drive everyone nuts. But all he did was show up to the ring and do a promo talking about balloons.

He's better now, away from the silliness as a commish without facepaint. Probably something he should have been a long time ago.

 

[New Hot Fed]

Really glad he's back to The Crow persona. It's the gimmick he had when I first saw him in WCW so it's naturally my favourite.

The Crow is my favourite film ever so I related to The Crow persona on that level as well.

The Crow persona? I thought he was just a commish now.

 

[Viper619]

I thought the "Joker" look was stupid since it seemed like an obvious rip off of Ledger's performance. I'm glad the crow is back but I wonder if he could ever bring back surfer sting?

 

[Dowdsy McDowds]

Not only he wasn't funny but he was never psycho either. Sting doesn't have it in him to get completly nasty wich is what would have required. He should have gone all serial killer and wage a psychological warfare with Hogan at all times. Attacking him, attacking Immortal, drive everyone nuts. But all he did was show up to the ring and do a promo talking about balloons.

But, he DID wage psychological warfare with Hogan. Do you not remember him trapping Hogan in his office and smearing the red facepaint on him? Or stuffing vitamins down Hogan's throat? Or insinuating that 'the Network' had put him in charge for the night when he was just lying his ass off? Or 're-living' the beatdown Flair gave him the week before? All that was part of Sting unsettling the ruling powers so that they couldn't be sure what the hell was going on with him, which is akin to what Ledger's Joker was doing in TDK. The Joker wanted to test what people were capable of (remember the ferries?) and instigating chaos to upset the ruling powers of Gotham and draw out their saviour in Batman.

Why should Sting have gone 'serial killer' exactly when he didn't hate Hogan enough to take Hogan out? He repeated time and time again that he wanted the old Hogan back, not to end Hogan's career.


Anyway, for what it was, I enjoyed it. I didn't watch WCW when it was on and have only seen clips of him at his peak in both his Surfer and Crow gimmicks, so I respect the fact that he wanted to do something new. It wasn't flawless obviously, but the idea was a good one and it entertained me.

 

[One to Remember]

Why should Sting have gone 'serial killer' exactly when he didn't hate Hogan enough to take Hogan out? He repeated time and time again that he wanted the old Hogan back, not to end Hogan's career.


Anyway, for what it was, I enjoyed it. I didn't watch WCW when it was on and have only seen clips of him at his peak in both his Surfer and Crow gimmicks, so I respect the fact that he wanted to do something new. It wasn't flawless obviously, but the idea was a good one and it entertained me.

What Hogan? There are so many stages and forms of Hogan!! Hollywood? The Hulkster? A hybrid? Thunder Lips? The Hogan we saw at WM X8? What is even left to bring out? Bulking up and trying to gain speed would had did better for the crow then trying to be the joker. Sting was jaded, he was never sick..

 

[cola12]

i liked it cuz it reminded me of joker and i love batman cuz its awesome but im going off topic. stings joker gimmick was cool cuz it was a new side of sting we never saw, the insane sting who was truley as insane as willow smith who whips her hair back and forth

 

[One to Remember]

i liked it cuz it reminded me of joker and i love batman cuz its awesome but im going off topic. stings joker gimmick was cool cuz it was a new side of sting we never saw, the insane sting who was truley as insane as willow smith who whips her hair back and forth

and when u leave the shower do u whip ur hair bk n forth? with MR. Borden being alive for more then half a century there is no more "new" to be had..

P.S. Willow Smith?! really, reallllly..?????

 

[Dowdsy McDowds]

What Hogan? There are so many stages and forms of Hogan!! Hollywood? The Hulkster? A hybrid? Thunder Lips? The Hogan we saw at WM X8? What is even left to bring out? Bulking up and trying to gain speed would had did better for the crow then trying to be the joker. Sting was jaded, he was never sick..

The face Hogan, y'know, the one that appeared at BFG, making Sting's crusade complete and meant he could drop the Joker gimmick. Sheesh.

As for Sting 'speeding up', he's what, 52? Doesn't move so well in the ring, but Hogan moves slower. Why would Sting need to speed up when his opponent has had 8 back surgeries? The Crow incarnation of Sting had been on the go for over a decade, his efforts to warn Dixie had failed, he had to try something new and drastic = Joker Sting.

 

[Dagger Dias]

I really hope that persona is over. I am struggling to think of a word to even describe how I felt about it. Hate is too strong of a word, and I sure didn't like it. I had pretty mixed feelings towards it. Yes, it was something new and refreshing for Sting. However, it was more annoying than good. I'd rather Sting have remained in his classic Crow character because this character was never really necessary in my opinion. I hope it never comes back.

 

[MFR0mack]

We know YOU know nothing about WCW..

Are you effin' serious? I just gave a summarized history of WCW's failings from the time of it's inception to the time of it's buy-out, using named sources of its employees as my reference. Go read Bret Hart's book. Read Chris Jericho's book. Read Mick Foley's. Read The Wresling Observer from 1994 to 2001. Look for interviews from Kevin Nash, Scott Hall, Steve Austin, Eddie Guerrero, Christ Benoit... I know what I'm talking about when it comes to both companies.

based on your "wrestle boom period bubble trickles down to all feds" theory I question why the AWA, World Class,and the UWF not benefit from the rock 'n' wrestling connection?

Because the Rock'N'Wrestling Connection was strictly limited to the World Wrestling Federation when it was branching out and territories were folding. The Monday Night Wars was the hottest period of wrestling all around because WCW had a hot angle with the NWO (that they ended up dropping the ball with, over and over) and its solid undercard and WWF had a hot company going with the Attitude Era and Stone Cold Steve Austin. Even ECW was hot at this time because it offered "hardcore," bloody, swearing, naked, uncensored alternative. All companies benefited because all companies had something going for them. Not all companies lasted because not all companies knew how to keep their shit going.

Highest as in their last strike in the Monday Night Wars? WWE's stupid little "did you know" factoid/tid bit seggments arent going to mention Nitro was TNT's highest rated show and one of cables top ratings grabbers evenin 2001!! I was told the last high rated Nitros were Goldberg defeating Hollywood clean for the title and the ppv reshowing of DDP's title match due to satelites cutting half the buyers off. You have no point here.

GOLDBERG DEFEATING HOGAN CLEAN FOR THE TITLE HAPPENED IN 1998, BEFORE THE FINGERPOKE OF DOOM. DDP's match being re-shown happened in 1999. Monday Nitro was not a top-rated show in 2001, it wasn't even TNT's highest rating show. That's why the company was bought so cheaply. All of it, the name, half the talent, the archives, was bought for MILLIONS less than what it would have been worth in 1998. Their sales were horrible on house shows, Nitros, Thunders and PPVs and their ratings by the end of 2000 were literally garbage. The last episode, which ended with Sting/Flair, got high-ratings, because people knew it was the last episode. But that's it. You are the one with no point here. To say WCW was successful in any way in its dying years contradicts A DECADE of written evidence by it's writers, owners and employers. Everyone involved in the company says the opposite of what you say. Go read The Death Of WCW. Amazingly factual, with tons of referenced statistics to support it!

As for Heat if you were the kid with the dumb parents who thought eleven, ten, even nine was too late to be on or the guy who worked at night Heat was like A.M. RAW at a Godly hour.. This recap show was on in Raw's heyday.. AS for Thunder is was far above Saturday Night but too below Monday Nitro. Its purpose was to serve as a container unit for Nitro's excess steam. If there was no action surplus Thunder faltered. With three hour Nitros Thunder asphyxiated..

You're not even making sense now. You're contradicting yourself pointing out WCW's flaws, but still trying to claim they mean anything. Learn your wrestling history. When Heat started, it wasn't a recap show. It was full of actual matches, and before PPVs, it was used as an hour to build up the events with promos from top-stars and great matches from the mid-card that didn't make the PPV show. Thunder wasn't made for Nitro's excess, it was to be to WCW what Smackdown was when it started a year + change later. The first episode featured Sting & Hogan, they kept huge angles going on it, they had great matches on it, for a while. Til 1999. When they started to fall apart completely as a company.

Half the meat head rasslers that had no qualms sucking WCW down to the marrow like special ed. Vampires enjoy employment with TNA. A quarter of the compentance deprived WCW management also calls TNA home.

This is barely English. What little makes can be translated doesn't make sense.

It was already established and Mid Atlantic had a stronger base then TNA ever had and they are both southern based.

Can you please go do some reading? By 1991, everyone in Turner's office was begging him to close WCW. It was a money-sucking hole, it had no audience, no fanbase, no sales. This continued until the big NWO angle when a fight was made (BY GUYS FROM THE OTHER COMPANY THAT THEY GOT RID OF BACK IN THE EARLY 90's). Their audience & fanbase was basically the same amount as TNA's when it started. Mick Foley writes in his book that they were lucky anywhere to break the 1,000 mark with crowds, while TNA was drawing 1,500 or more their first year. They seriously got 90,000 to 100,000 buyrates on their first two months of shows, which is far beyond anything WCW got in its PPVs when it started. Please, don't try to speak down to anyone or act like you know what you're talking about when you're clueless and haven't done any research.

 

[One to Remember]

The face Hogan, y'know, the one that appeared at BFG, making Sting's crusade complete and meant he could drop the Joker gimmick. Sheesh.
The Crow incarnation of Sting had been on the go for over a decade, his efforts to warn Dixie had failed, he had to try something new and drastic = Joker Sting.

Wait so he was trying to warn Dixie that Hogan was really a heel? Yet ingaged Hogan in a fued that turned him face..? If Sting has the powers to turn heels to faces why even bug Dixie at all..?

Are you effin' serious? I just gave a summarized history of WCW's failings from the time of it's inception to the time of it's buy-out, using named sources of its employees as my reference. Go read Bret Hart's book. Read Chris Jericho's book. Read Mick Foley's. Read The Wresling Observer from 1994 to 2001. Look for interviews from Kevin Nash, Scott Hall, Steve Austin, Eddie Guerrero, Christ Benoit... I know what I'm talking about when it comes to both companies.

I do not want to hear about those interviews WWE set up. The producers are like three feet away holding the wrestler's kid or sumthin hostage to assure the statements are pro-WWE. Everytime I watched them it seems like they go out of their way to condemn WCW just to look good to Vince. Or they are bitter about mid card status. When did any of those boneheads speak up or try to help WCW or the business? EXACTLY! THEY NEVER DID! They sure did like not having to work that Nitro, even if they did get flown in for nothing.

Because the Rock'N'Wrestling Connection was strictly limited to the World Wrestling Federation when it was branching out and territories were folding. The Monday Night Wars was the hottest period of wrestling all around because WCW had a hot angle with the NWO (that they ended up dropping the ball with, over and over) and its solid undercard and WWF had a hot company going with the Attitude Era and Stone Cold Steve Austin. Even ECW was hot at this time because it offered "hardcore," bloody, swearing, naked, uncensored alternative. All companies benefited because all companies had something going for them. Not all companies lasted because not all companies knew how to keep their shit going.

Rock n Wrestling brought in new observers of general wrestling just like the Attitude Era did. These observers would look at all companies to see if they offerd similar stars and stories. Surely other companies would atleast experience a few fluctuations.. Thats what you had implied. your last sentence contradicts your own stance. It also means that companies must work on themselves and not ride the coat tails of others. This does not bode well for you TNA apologists who are always looking for excuses to excuse the struggling product.

GOLDBERG DEFEATING HOGAN CLEAN FOR THE TITLE HAPPENED IN 1998, BEFORE THE FINGERPOKE OF DOOM. DDP's match being re-shown happened in 1999. Monday Nitro was not a top-rated show in 2001, it wasn't even TNT's highest rating show. That's why the company was bought so cheaply. All of it, the name, half the talent, the archives, was bought for MILLIONS less than what it would have been worth in 1998. Their sales were horrible on house shows, Nitros, Thunders and PPVs and their ratings by the end of 2000 were literally garbage. The last episode, which ended with Sting/Flair, got high-ratings, because people knew it was the last episode. But that's it. You are the one with no point here. To say WCW was successful in any way in its dying years contradicts A DECADE of written evidence by it's writers, owners and employers. Everyone involved in the company says the opposite of what you say. Go read The Death Of WCW. Amazingly factual, with tons of referenced statistics to support it!

So your books have proof Nitro wasn't TNT's top show and WCW in 2001 was doing worser then TNA today? WCW assets sold for so cheap because Time Warner was scared it could never sell the company. Vince was the only one that would take it without a tv deal. Everyone says the oppossite of me but none of them did the opposite of what they did. If they knew all these things why not play the role of reformer instead of performer?

You're not even making sense now. You're contradicting yourself pointing out WCW's flaws, but still trying to claim they mean anything. Learn your wrestling history. When Heat started, it wasn't a recap show. It was full of actual matches, and before PPVs, it was used as an hour to build up the events with promos from top-stars and great matches from the mid-card that didn't make the PPV show. Thunder wasn't made for Nitro's excess, it was to be to WCW what Smackdown was when it started a year + change later. The first episode featured Sting & Hogan, they kept huge angles going on it, they had great matches on it, for a while. Til 1999. When they started to fall apart completely as a company.

It was like a better version of Jakked and they did for awile talk about the ppv but the show featured raw and smackdown highlights and two are three matches. Such epic bouts as K-Kwik's quest for the hardcore title..Yea Thunder started out strong but it fail off early too. Just like with WWECW the innitial showz were designed to get you hooked. Classic bait and switch. In 1998 WCW still had too much action for Nitro to contain..

This is barely English. What little makes can be translated doesn't make sense.

WHY ARE THE WRESTLERS WHO TOOK ADVANTAGE OF WCW working for TNA if they are mere blood suckers? A company cant have workers in it who dont care to take advantage of it at bad times. Why would TNA hire people who ran WCW with improper oversight and make choices that reeked of incompetence? Is that not a means to an end? Is tgat English enough for u or do u want it in Portuguese you fuckin dumbass...?

Can you please go do some reading? By 1991, everyone in Turner's office was begging him to close WCW. It was a money-sucking hole, it had no audience, no fanbase, no sales. This continued until the big NWO angle when a
fight was made (BY GUYS FROM THE OTHER COMPANY THAT THEY GOT RID OF BACK IN
THE EARLY 90's). Their audience & fanbase was basically the same amount as TNA's when it started. Mick Foley writes in his book that they were lucky anywhere to break the 1,000 mark with crowds, while TNA was drawing 1,500 or more their first year. They seriously got 90,000 to 100,000 buyrates on their first two months of shows, which is far beyond anything WCW got in its PPVs when it started. Please, don't try to speak down to anyone or act like you know what you're talking about when you're clueless and haven't done any research.

Mick Foley did not leave WCW on good terms. I would live to see the Nitro ratings fron 1995 and Saturday Night's from 1991-5 and see how Impact matches up. I would like to see Clash of the Champion ratings against Impact ratings. It took them five years to recover if it was that bad and TNA is nearly ten. How many people even had ppv access when WCW started out? Your numbers arent in historical context.