THE BAND are the New TNA Tag Champs!! Thoughts???

[3/4 Facelock]

You know what I think is cool? That they won without wrestling a match.

Because I tune into wrestling shows to see people not wrestle. I like seeing a busted up 51 year old Kevin Nash and 52 year old run-the-fuck-down Scott Hall with TAG TEAM belts.

51 and 52. Fucking sweet. TNA ROCKS.

 

[Optimist Prime]

You know what I think is cool? That they won without wrestling a match.

Because I tune into wrestling shows to see people not wrestle. I like seeing a busted up 51 year old Kevin Nash and 52 year old run-the-fuck-down Scott Hall with TAG TEAM belts.

51 and 52. Fucking sweet. TNA ROCKS.

Go to a local high school wrestling match if you're so concerned with seeing actual wrestling.

TNA and WWE are entertainment. Do you refuse to watch movies and other television shows because the pictures portrayed aren't actually happening?

Much rather have Nash and Hall as champs - with the chance to push some of the incredibly boring younger wrestlers into relevancy than just hand the younger extremely boring wrestlers the title and continue the cycle of depleting the significance of the tag team division as well as the irrelevancy of these younger amazingly boring wrestlers without personality.

If TNA did what you wanted them to do...they would be bankrupt fast. There's a reason they are running a program and you, simply, are not.

 

[3/4 Facelock]

Go to a local high school wrestling match if you're so concerned with seeing actual wrestling.

Wow. Actual wrestling, huh? WWE & TNA are entertainment? You really think I mean greco-roman wrestling? Or are you reaching and trying to be funny? It's rhetorical so you don't need to answer.

Hey man, I've been a TNA viewers for the past 5 years and I buy the PPVs sooooo.....yeah.....

You're question about how I watch movies and TV is so illogical somebody had to put smelling salts under my nostrils to bring snap me out mini coma it caused.

Hey, you want a team (combined age of 103 years) holding the belts, cool. I don't. In fact, I don't see any boring younger wrestlers. I see a lot of exciting potential not being able to shine. None of these guys need a rub from people who have FACTUALLY destroyed and bankrupted an entire wrestling organization and cannot physically keep up with the wrestlers of today. What the younger guys need to do is to fight other up and coming teams and show some sweet ass moves.

Do you really think a team (combined age 103 years) where one guy walks like Frankenstein and the other stumbles around is going to "push" anyone? How? By losing? Not even that is going to work.

You know what? Hall & Nash (combined age 103 years)...I'd rather not see them at all...than see them decay and lose. I think they are a bad fit in 2010.

You're right though, I am not running the company nor do I want to have the stories unfold the way I want them too. I want to be captivated by the stories and the wrestlers and 6+ months ago I was.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

I actually don't mind The Band as champions, especially because they're utilizing the Freebird rule which allows for Eric Young to get into the angles as well, but I don't like how/when this was applied.

Though it was a legitimate and logical application of cashing in the case, it felt as though it came out of nowhere because of the fact that Nash simply never carried it to remind the fans that he had the shot to take at some point.

I also just don't like how it usurped Morgan and the "we" gimmick for Ink Inc., though that's been rectified since by allocating Morgan a re-match for the titles likely as Slammiversary.

 

[gd]

Definetly an improvement over Matt Morgan, that's for sure. Also much better choice than Ink Inc, Team 3D, and even Beer Money. The Band brings something than none of those guys do, charisma. Say what you want about Scott Hall being a fat, unreliabe, alcholoic. He's entertaining as hell. At this point, Impact may want to consider simply airing The Band walking around the ring and playing to the crowd. I may watch.

They won't be wrestling any great matches, that's for sure, but they've shown they can be serviceable enough. Adding EY into the mix certainly helps out. In an ideal world, they'll enter a feud with the Guns that lasts a few months, eventually putting them over cleanly. That'd be a compelling period of television with a satisfying finish. However, the chances are low.

 

[Optimist Prime]

Wow. Actual wrestling, huh? WWE & TNA are entertainment? You really think I mean greco-roman wrestling? Or are you reaching and trying to be funny? It's rhetorical so you don't need to answer.

Don't worry. I won't.

Hey man, I've been a TNA viewers for the past 5 years and I buy the PPVs sooooo.....yeah.....

Congratulations.

You're question about how I watch movies and TV is so illogical somebody had to put smelling salts under my nostrils to bring snap me out mini coma it caused.

"Are you reaching and trying to be funny? It's rhetorical so you don't need to answer."

Hey, you want a team (combined age of 103 years) holding the belts, cool. I don't. In fact, I don't see any boring younger wrestlers. I see a lot of exciting potential not being able to shine. None of these guys need a rub from people who have FACTUALLY destroyed and bankrupted an entire wrestling organization and cannot physically keep up with the wrestlers of today. What the younger guys need to do is to fight other up and coming teams and show some sweet ass moves.

Do you really think a team (combined age 103 years) where one guy walks like Frankenstein and the other stumbles around is going to "push" anyone? How? By losing? Not even that is going to work.

You know what? Hall & Nash (combined age 103 years)...I'd rather not see them at all...than see them decay and lose. I think they are a bad fit in 2010.

You're right though, I am not running the company nor do I want to have the stories unfold the way I want them too. I want to be captivated by the stories and the wrestlers and 6+ months ago I was.

You seem pretty fixated on the age of the duo. If you look around on this thread you'll notice that you're the minority. Listing something as arbitrary as "age" isn't really a valid argument. Shawn Michaels was nearly 45 this past Wrestlemania and he's still better than literally everybody else in the WWE right now. Age is meaningless. That being said, Kevin Nash and Scott Hall have never been that agile. They were always entertaining though.

You harboring on their age is certainly going to get you continue to throw tantrums if that's what you wanted. But guess what, guys like Hall and Nash (along with Hogan, Flair, Sting, etc.) bring a whole set of generational fans that may watch it strictly for nostalgic purposes. Regardless of whether they are 51, 52, 103, or 26...marketability is marketability. Look at each individual wrestler as if they were their own business or independent contractor (which most are). They build a brand for themselves and certain fans become "brand loyal".

If you watch wrestling to see Rey Mysterio Jr. run around in a ski mask or Rob Van Dam somersault across the ring...that's your own thing. I personally think all of that are nice compliments if they have the marketability, personality, charisma, etc. first. I don't think just solely flipping around off the ropes is going to do anything for anybody. That's like me having the greatest set of tires in the history of the world...but I don't own a car. It's nice to have...but more is needed. On the other hand...you can have the car (and it might be old) and have mediocre tires on it...but it will still perform and/or entertain more of your needs.

I respect the fact that you enjoy being bored with zero personality wrestlers who do cartwheels...but the majority of us (according to the thread) enjoy a little more of a package.

 

[3/4 Facelock]

If you look around on this thread you'll notice that you're the minority.

So freaking what if I'm in the minority? What does that have to do with anything? Does that mean you win? I'm not an IWC Elitest nor am I in highschool, so I'm unsure what to think of that quote other than it doesn't matter. I should shut up and join up with the rest of you meatheads? I could give 2 squirts of piss if I'm part of the minority or not. I'm probably going to be in the minority a lot so get used to it.

The title of the thread is "THE BAND are the New TNA Tag Champs!! Thoughts???" and what I previously said are my thoughts. About them having the belts. My thoughts are fixated primarily on the age of those 2 yes. 103 combined years old. Winning the tag belts. Without using a move.

Regardless if it's in their character to do things like this, it's shitty and lazy writing. It was shitty and lazy back in the mid 90s when they did it and it's even more shitty and lazy now.

And generational fans my ass. That needs to be put to bed right there. I am a generational fan. I've been all about wrestling for nearly 30 years. Sorry pal, but as great as it is to hear Hogan, Flair, Hall, Nash, or whatever should-be-retired wrestler and watch them wrestle a match or 2 again....well shit....they were revolutionizing everything 15 years ago. 15 years later I'm not the same guy so I don't want to see the same shit. If you do, cool.

If you dislike athletic moves and want every wrestler to have the same kind of moves, cool. If you want TNA to be WCW 2.0, cool.

You think they're entertaining? Well I don't.

But thank you for the "respect". I do enjoy high flyers, technical experts, brawlers, and a variety of other styles of wrestler. I respect the fact that you enjoy seeing senior league geriatric champions. Looks like we both get what we want. Hooray!

 

[Optimist Prime]

Looks like we both get what we want. Hooray!

So what are you complaining about then? If we're both getting what we want (like you just said) are you complaining and throwing a tantrum because other people are ALSO getting what they want? Are you insinuating that YOU are the only person who should get what they want?

Anyway, I didn't mention you being the minority as some form of tactic to win the argument. I was strictly saying that the majority disagree with you. Very simply.

You like boring personalities cartwheeling around the ring. I like charismatic personalities being mediocre in the ring. If I can get both, that's great too. But if I have to choose between the two...I'll take the personality any day. Especially since it's the most rare these days.

 

[GameOver]

The fuck?? Kevin Nash couldn't perform 15 years ago and he is even worse now, jesus fuck the guy has less moves than Cena!!
If I was to make a list of the worst wrestlers ever..Kevin Nash would be up somewhere near the top!!
Nash, in addition to having absolutely zero wrestling talent he can't throw a believable punch, works the easiest and safest matches in the world. A few terrible punches, a couple of knee lifts, tag his partner in to do all the work. Which is why I think they have put EY with Hall & Nash...they need someone who can carry them through a match. Seriously Hall & Nash need to think about retiring as they are embarrassing not only themselves but us fans every time they step into the ring.

Well said lol

What the hell did the Outsiders do as a team that makes them the greatest of all time? other than being the precurser to nWo angle, as singles workers they were good "in the days", .

I'd far prefer to remember Hall and Nash back in the heyday then see them lumber around in the ring stuggling to breathe let aknown actually put on a match

And as i said in my inital post "who cares" who they champs is in this case, it's just a 3rd tier title, aslong as the matches are entertaining it makes no difference who is holding the belts.

 

[MancMark]

Granted, Nash was never a great wrestler. I do think he has charisma though and that's what puts him up there with the best big guys.

Hall on the other hand was always a good worker. He had the talent out of the 2. On mic and in ring, he was always quality. I think Hall is still entertaining purely for on-mic purposes. Do I want to see him wrestle still? Well half of me cringes and half of me marks out for The Bad Guy. People always say that Nash hasn't had to work hard over the years. He gets in there, does 3 moves and tags out. Well I beg to differ. He's worked harder than anyone over the years just trying to keep Scott Hall away from the edge of oblivion! EY is clearly with them to help carry them. I heard Hall admit that on one of his Last Calls. Also though, EY can learn from them. Mic skills from Hall and ruthlessness from Nash. If he can learn those 2 things and not pick up too many bad habits, then he has a chance of going far surely?

 

[Optimist Prime]

Well said lol

What the hell did the Outsiders do as a team that makes them the greatest of all time? other than being the precurser to nWo angle, as singles workers they were good "in the days", .

I'd far prefer to remember Hall and Nash back in the heyday then see them lumber around in the ring stuggling to breathe let aknown actually put on a match

I don't get it with some people. They want the entertainment of "wrestling" but they don't want the whole package. "Throw nostalgia, personality, and the rest of the 70% that makes a wrestler/entertainer away. We only want the 30% where the guy does a shooting star press onto a table."

I understand where you are coming from...and if some of these new wrestlers had any personality at all I wouldn't have a problem with letting Hall and Nash head out to pasture...but they can still run the mic better than anybody in TNA (other than maybe Flair). Their whole gimmick (now) is that they're brawlers. They come in and beat ass. That's basically their gimmick. They're not suppose to spin in circles in the air.

Look at the Dudley Boyz or "Team 3D" as they're called now. They're infinitely worse in every aspect of wrestling - other than "age". That's literally the only thing that gives them an edge. Nobody makes a peep about them because they're still (somewhat) "younger". I think people make too big of a thing out of age. Its entertainment. If these guys can still attract a crowd (I'm one of the many who watch TNA to see Hall, Nash, Hogan, Flair, Sting, etc. not to see Abyss, Homicide, and the mohawk brothers.) I don't see why anybody should be complaining about them. And I'd be willing to bet that Hall and Nash attract more viewers (albeit - who probably aren't on this message board) than almost anybody else in TNA right now. I'm a die hard wrestling fan of 25 years...and I can tell you the only reason I tune into TNA every week is to see Hall, Nash, Hogan, Flair, Sting, etc. It's certainly cool to compliment the old guys with the high flyers...but that's certainly not why I'm tuning in...YET anyway.

And as i said in my inital post "who cares" who they champs is in this case, it's just a 3rd tier title, aslong as the matches are entertaining it makes no difference who is holding the belts.

This I agree with. Getting worked up over who the tag champs are is ridiculous. WWE literally has one tag team right now (two now that the sons of the headshrinkers are in it). They had to mush former world champs together in order to keep the belts on life support. Now that Bret Hart has pumped some life into the Hart Dynasty...they should keep those belts (at least) somewhat relevant for a little while.

I think people just like to complain. There's really no reason to get mad about Hall and Nash being world champs again when you have much less entertaining wrestlers running around the ring without hearing a peep.

 

[Joe's Gonna Kill You]

My thoughts on this is that I rather have the Band with the tag titles then Matt Morgan. and hopefully it will be a short regin with the MCMG taking the belts off them