The Return; Sting is the *NEW* TNA World Heavyweight Champion!

[Fire Marshall Bill]

I thought it was a pretty good show as well.

Anderson I feel they're building as a true tweener. He had originally turned face, but after attacking RVD after Hardy's title win and last nights show, I think they're building him as a guy who won't take shit from anybody, face or heel.

As far as Sting's return, it was ok. It wasn't a surprise at all obviously since their 3-3-11 promo made it pretty obvious. My only issue with it is that it still seems like a poor attempt at a shot at the WWE. The 3-3-11 promo, while maybe an attempt at a shot at WWE, came off as a unoriginal rip-off. Then Sting winning the title came off as, "you don't have Sting. We do and we're gonna advertise it by handing him the title."

But the match itself was decent. The Stinger Death Drop from the top of the turnbuckle was a cool spot. And I like how he pulled the 3rd one for good measure. Let's just see how it plays out and hopefully they can build from there.

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

why is it bad to have multiple title changes? one long title run I think is worse when multiple other contenders can't beat whoever the champion is which makes that champion so much higher than anyone else.
I don't think multiple title changes this often is anything bad for Hardy or Anderson. I think it makes all the title contenders on a relative similar level.
how man times did Ric Flair win the world title? like 16/17 times? then he had to lose it that often too, and that didn't make him look bad.

Ric Flair's reigns came over a 20 year career, and he was defending the title several times a week against the main challengers in different territories for many of his reigns. He would always make the home-town guy look like he had a shot at winning and sell like hell before eventually getting the win.

Multiple title changes in a short period of time devalue the title. I do like to see the title change hands as on occasions a long term title reign CAN become boring if the champion cannot put on a different match, if its repetative every PPV then I am all for a title change, but the best wrestlers can make a long reign memorable.

As for TNA? I can see why Sting got the belt. The buzz around him over the last few months has been massive. If only TNA had done their 3-3-11 BEFORE the WWE's version had been revealed as the Undertaker. With everyone thinking Sting was going to the 'E, to have him show up on TNA as a surprise would have been epic.

I understand why he got the title but I do think it leaves AJ Styles in limbo a bit, and Mr Anderson. With Fortune feuding with Immortal, you would have expected Fortunes main guy (Styles) to face Immortals main guy (Hardy), and giving the title to Sting messes this up. I hope TNA have a plan to sort this out quickly.

Taking Impact on the road is a great idea, that arena made TNA look so much more major league. I loved the crowd shot while Sting was on the turnbuckle, the better titantron and the ramp. It made me feel for a moment that Sting was in the WWE, it looked much bigger, brighter and better. That is what TNA needs to be aiming for, it can only be good for the growth of the company. Remaining at the Impact Zone week after week makes TNA look like a regional company, when it clearly isnt.

Taking the show around the country is great move by TNA here thats for sure.

 

[neildittmar]

Solid show all the way around with, what I would consider, a great ending. We all knew 3/3/11 was Sting even if we didn't read spoilers. The man didn't fail to deliver though. The crowd was totally hot for him and after everything that has gone on amongst Sting, Hogan, Hardy, and Immortal, the title win upon return felt right.

This show was also proof positive to me of one of the primary things many folks in the IWC consistently rail about. That is, TNA needs to get OUT of the iMPACT zone post-haste and take their show on the road permanently... if financially feasible of course. Last nights show atmosphere was undoubtedly instrumental in making the Sting return and title win what it was. TNA looked very "big league" with that crowd and how jakked they all were for their product. Call it bandwagon or sheep mentality, but that crowd is what really put the 3/3 show over for me. They all looked excited to be there. Compare that to the typical iMPACT zone crowd.

All around the show was solid and interesting, with Stings return being the true highlight. In all honesty though, it was the crowd that raised the bar and made the moment what it was. Last night, TNA looked like they could actually compete with WWE in the near-term (ie; 1-2 year) future. This is the direction the company needs to continue in.

 

[Souls On Fire]

Its great to see Sting back. The one good thing about the promo they aired last week hyping his return was that as that was airing they were taping this weeks episode. So while most of us knew his return was coming this week the fans at the taping had no clue and it was a complete surprise to them and the reaction they gave him was awesome.

That said however I couldn't help but notice that within about the first 4 minutes of the match it should of ended as a double count-out. Apparently while you get a 10 count in any other match, Sting and Hardy are apparently immune to this little rule as they were outside of the ring for about a full minute and a half just after the start of the match. Still Sting looked good in the ring and i wouldn't mind seeing a Sting/Anderson feud down the line though i was really looking forward to Styles eventually taking the belt off Hardy.

 

[UltimoDragon99]

First things first, I want to make it clear that I was a huge sting fan in the '90s, respected him, and I had nor have any desire to see Sting v. Undertaker @ WM. That being said...

I am incredible disappoint in Sting's return to TNA. For a man who claimed his Christian values are what ultimately made his decision to stay away from the WWE when WCW went under, it seems pretty hippocritical to me that he would return to a company that seems to allow it's characters to pratically commit "murder" (Abyss), make a mockery of family values and marriage (Karen Angle and insert Kurt's rival), refer to themselves as the anti-christ (Jeff Hardy), and mock the church its self (the Pope). I'm calling it what it is he just wants to be remembered as the guy that didn't sell out to Corporate wrestling while working for a company that will lick his boots because they still think that WCW had it right and ran out of money to throw at it.

Add in he was willing to return in an obvious rip off a WWE promo less that 10 days after the original finished running (the show was taped a week ago so 3/3/11 was actually 2/26/11), and it proves my point further. That Sting being champion is a joke. Not because he's too old, but because in the grand scheme it's the equivalent of giving Ric Flair, Hulk Hogan, Triple H, or the Undertaker the title, because they have a name and they held the title before, not because they earned it.

I will stop here because if I don't I will continue to rip WCW 2.0 and that's not what this thread is about. Take my opinion for what it is, an opinion.

 

[sfury2005]

First things first, I want to make it clear that I was a huge sting fan in the '90s, respected him, and I had nor have any desire to see Sting v. Undertaker @ WM. That being said...

I am incredible disappoint in Sting's return to TNA. For a man who claimed his Christian values are what ultimately made his decision to stay away from the WWE when WCW went under, it seems pretty hippocritical to me that he would return to a company that seems to allow it's characters to pratically commit "murder" (Abyss), make a mockery of family values and marriage (Karen Angle and insert Kurt's rival), refer to themselves as the anti-christ (Jeff Hardy), and mock the church its self (the Pope). I'm calling it what it is he just wants to be remembered as the guy that didn't sell out to Corporate wrestling while working for a company that will lick his boots because they still think that WCW had it right and ran out of money to throw at it.

Add in he was willing to return in an obvious rip off a WWE promo less that 10 days after the original finished running (the show was taped a week ago so 3/3/11 was actually 2/26/11), and it proves my point further. That Sting being champion is a joke. Not because he's too old, but because in the grand scheme it's the equivalent of giving Ric Flair, Hulk Hogan, Triple H, or the Undertaker the title, because they have a name and they held the title before, not because they earned it.

I will stop here because if I don't I will continue to rip WCW 2.0 and that's not what this thread is about. Take my opinion for what it is, an opinion.

Sting said he didn't like the product WWE put out as far as his christian ethics were concerned but it wasn't the reason he didn't go to WWE. He said his main reason for not going to WWE was the way WWE/F treated his friends like Booker T when they showed up there. He figured Vince would just smash his character to make him look bad against his WWE wrestlers so he refused to go there. There's even a video of him on Youtube saying that was the reason and he didn't mention anything else as the reason.

The whole video was basically an edit of several of his old return videos put together and they added the numbers at the end.. You and I have no idea if Sting even knew they did it or how they announced his return.

Back to the topic: It was a great show I enjoyed it. But then again I usually enjoy Impact even when it's in the Impact Zone.

 

[mrbooker]

That Sting being champion is a joke. Not because he's too old, but because in the grand scheme it's the equivalent of giving Ric Flair, Hulk Hogan, Triple H, or the Undertaker the title, because they have a name and they held the title before, not because they earned it.

That is the biggest oxymoron I have ever heard they have earned it by their full body of work.

As a wrestling fan for 18 years now i will take Sting now, or HHH now winning a title rather then a young guy like the Miz who uses the title as a prop to be taken seriously , or 7 years ago watching young randy orton at summer slam winning just so he can have the title of "youngest WHC ever" that is not earning it.

 

[UltimoDragon99]

I've been a wrestling fan for 22 years so I respect the earning through body of work but I was more addressing the return after a 4 month absences straight in to a title shot and booking him a win. That basically tells me you thought your current talent couldn't carry your company so you bring in an oldie but goodie. And they way he destroyed Hardy (atleast thats how it felt too me)... I just hope they run an angle that He lost out of shock and wins the title back cleanly.

IMO, I would prefer a champion thats been there day in and day out "earned" his title shot (i.e. MITB, #1 Contenders match, so forth) like the Miz or Mr. Anderson when he had the title. I just never like the returning legend walks right into a title reign especially if it's a legend on his way out.

I'm really just disappointed in TNA and the "creative" team and hate to see one of my favorite superstars as a kid be a figured head for company thats rehashing storylines from a company that's already failed. TNA feels to me like it's copying the life and times of the WCW to a t and I hope I'm wrong.

but as far as the show it's self it was decent... better than anything they've put on tv in a long while

 

[Jack-Hammer]

From a general standpoint, it doesn't really bother me all that much with Sting as TNA World Heavyweight Champion. Hardy has too much hanging over his head at the moment and shouldn't have been given the title in the first place until all his troubles were settled. I won't pretend that I'm overly interested in Sting as champ because we've seen it before. Sting is a guy that's beyond the TNA title quite frankly and really has been for a long while. However, the base hypocrisy of some of the posts I've read is truly mind boggling.

Over the course of several months, I've read numerous complaints about The Miz's feud with Jerry Lawler and how feuding with 61 year old Jerry Lawler only serves in making Miz look like a weak champion. They build up a feud slowly over a few months with Lawler getting the better of Miz generally through the interference of outside parties, which sometimes has resulted in even more criticism. However, Sting shows up after a 4.5 month absence from television and the 51 year old legend wins the TNA World Heavyweight Championship. So where's the criticism? Where's all the complaints that it makes TNA look weak or that it makes Hardy look like a scrub? If Jerry Lawler had actually won the title from The Miz, TNA marks would be popping out from everywhere to bitch at the WWE for making such a horrible choice. Some of the posters that've complained over the span of these months have posted in this thread and seem fine with this even though, for all intents and purposes, this is the very type of situation that they've criticized the WWE for. The biggest difference, however, is that TNA went the extra mile and put the title on their aging legend.

 

[Kenny Powers]

It really depends on the way you look at it and the reasoning behind it. Hardy has his legal troubles so maybe TNA needed to get the title off him again. Maybe Anderson as the TNA champion wasn't the right decision. Maybe TNA was desperate to sign Sting to a contract and wanted to take a jab at WWE, or we could just say Sting is the icon of TNA and was the only real legitimate contender to take on Jeff Hardy.

Personally I could care less what the reason is. I wish TNA didn't air the Sting video last week, because his return was a great surprise if you didn't read the dirt sheets.
RVD and Anderson have been in the title picture against Hardy, and it really hasn't done much for ratings for TNA. Maybe Sting will draw the viewers in or totally tune them out. I can see why people either love this or hate this. We will have to see where this goes and what Anderson and Hardy's roles are.

I would have personally preferred to see Sting challenge Hardy for the title, after Anderson was through with him. Jeff Hardy vs. Sting could have been built up over weeks as a huge match up on PPV. Although we have already seen it on Impact.

I maybe wrong in comparing the two, but I compare Sting's recently won TNA title reign to Hogan's WWE title reign in 2002. Triple H returned from surgery to a huge ovation to become Undisputed WWE champion from Chris Jericho at WM 18. Hogan comes back with the NWO, to face The Rock at WM 18 to a huge ovation. Vince decides to turn Hogan face and takes the belt off of Triple H and awards it to Hogan.

Maybe they shouldn't of done it, but it was best for business at the time. Again, I just wish that TNA would have taken the time to build a feud with Sting and Hardy instead of awarding him the title in a 4 minute match on Impact during his debut.

 

[MB1025]

From a general standpoint, it doesn't really bother me all that much with Sting as TNA World Heavyweight Champion. Hardy has too much hanging over his head at the moment and shouldn't have been given the title in the first place until all his troubles were settled. I won't pretend that I'm overly interested in Sting as champ because we've seen it before. Sting is a guy that's beyond the TNA title quite frankly and really has been for a long while. However, the base hypocrisy of some of the posts I've read is truly mind boggling.

Over the course of several months, I've read numerous complaints about The Miz's feud with Jerry Lawler and how feuding with 61 year old Jerry Lawler only serves in making Miz look like a weak champion. They build up a feud slowly over a few months with Lawler getting the better of Miz generally through the interference of outside parties, which sometimes has resulted in even more criticism. However, Sting shows up after a 4.5 month absence from television and the 51 year old legend wins the TNA World Heavyweight Championship. So where's the criticism? Where's all the complaints that it makes TNA look weak or that it makes Hardy look like a scrub? If Jerry Lawler had actually won the title from The Miz, TNA marks would be popping out from everywhere to bitch at the WWE for making such a horrible choice. Some of the posters that've complained over the span of these months have posted in this thread and seem fine with this even though, for all intents and purposes, this is the very type of situation that they've criticized the WWE for. The biggest difference, however, is that TNA went the extra mile and put the title on their aging legend.

It is actually a very big difference and I will run it down for you.


Sting has been talked about over the past month from just about every rabid wrestling fan. He is on another level then Jerry Lawler, has a unique character, and is 10 years younger. Not to mention a TNA guy beat a WWE guy. Now I know what you will say and that is Sting is a WCW, but WCW is no longer in business and Sting has done more for TNA than just about anyone on that roster. I don't think we see Hardy with the belt back and I honestly think we will see Mr. Anderson beat Sting for the title at Lockdown and it will mean a lot more than just being handed the title because of Jeff's case.

If Lawler won the title there was no where to go in a storyline that makes or puts anyone over because Jerry Lawler is not that big of a name. This move with Sting is something that needs to be given time. If Sting is still champion after Lockdown or if it is clear a younger wrestler isn't going for the title then be my guest and criticize.

IMO it was 2 different situations with the companies and 2 different situations long/short term.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

It is actually a very big difference and I will run it down for you.


Sting has been talked about over the past month from just about every rabid wrestling fan. He is on another level then Jerry Lawler, has a unique character, and is 10 years younger. Not to mention a TNA guy beat a WWE guy. Now I know what you will say and that is Sting is a WCW, but WCW is no longer in business and Sting has done more for TNA than just about anyone on that roster. I don't think we see Hardy with the belt back and I honestly think we will see Mr. Anderson beat Sting for the title at Lockdown and it will mean a lot more than just being handed the title because of Jeff's case.

The reason Sting has been talked about so much is due to the reports, including those in well known and respected newspapers like the New York Daily News, that Sting had signed with WWE. The buzz had virtually nothing to do with TNA. As for Sting being on another level, while that might be true in terms of overall popularity, I can't see it from a purely physical standpoint. If you compare the two, Lawler is definitely closer to the level of physical ability he enjoyed in his prime than Sting currently is. Lawler was never a guy with a great build and looks very much the same now as he did 30 years ago. And, I'd be willing to wager that he can probably do just about everything now that he could 30 years back. All one has to do is look at Sting and can tell that he's not the guy he was 10 years ago, or even 5 years ago for that matter.

If Lawler won the title there was no where to go in a storyline that makes or puts anyone over because Jerry Lawler is not that big of a name. This move with Sting is something that needs to be given time. If Sting is still champion after Lockdown or if it is clear a younger wrestler isn't going for the title then be my guest and criticize.

IMO it was 2 different situations with the companies and 2 different situations long/short term.

Sure there was somewhere to go with it just as much as there is with Sting. Lawler could have enjoyed a brief reign as champ only to wind up dropping the title back to Miz or some other younger wrestler just as you're suggesting that they could do with Sting. I'm just glad it didn't go down that way. As for Lawler not being as big of a name as Sting, that's debatable. Lawler has been a highly visible and heard portion of WWE programming for the better part of 20 years whereas Sting has been out of the limelight altogether for a vast number of casual wrestling fans since WCW folded. Lawler has also most definitely gotten positive responses from the audience during his feud with Miz, has shown that he's still capable of putting on enjoyable matches.

I see no real, tangible differences between the two situations with the exception that TNA has done with Sting what the WWE would be criticized for by the IWC if they themselves did with Jerry Lawler.

 

[presto]

The show was actually pretty decent last night being away from Orlando except for the wedding that had the weird ending of finding the ax in the podium.

But in reference to Sting, the very first thing I noticed was that Jeff Hardy appeared to have real anxiety and trepidation as he walked to the ring. The first thing I thought was that his court date is coming up within the next couple of weeks and that in light of the rumored plea bargain, I wondered if maybe Jeff Hardy may have experienced a "shock" by realizing that maybe he will not see action in a wrestling ring for a long time. It made me wonder if his alleged plea bargain may involve some reduced-sentence jail time w/rehab followed by parole or a mandatory stint in rehab followed by a lengthy probation period. Remember, Sting beat him clean.

When pro boxer Mike Tyson went to prison, the judge stated in his sentencing that Mike could not perform any type of physical workout activity that was boxing related while incarcerated. If Hardy does end up going to prison, a judge could order a similar sentence and make Jeff focus sorely on rehab and not on his physical conditioning.

Either way, Jeff Hardy should have looked more confident as a champion walking down to the ring with the championship belt. He either oversold the fear of the unknown wrestler or I really believe that he's going away for awhile, longer than we realize.

--

I actually like Sting with the belt right now because it can set up Sting / Pope or Sting / Mr. Anderson and it wouldn't make Mr. Anderson appear like a transitional champion in his early title reigns as WWE did with Edge in his first three title reigns.

 

[itssoeasy123]

It is actually a very big difference and I will run it down for you.


Sting has been talked about over the past month from just about every rabid wrestling fan. He is on another level then Jerry Lawler, has a unique character, and is 10 years younger. Not to mention a TNA guy beat a WWE guy. Now I know what you will say and that is Sting is a WCW, but WCW is no longer in business and Sting has done more for TNA than just about anyone on that roster. I don't think we see Hardy with the belt back and I honestly think we will see Mr. Anderson beat Sting for the title at Lockdown and it will mean a lot more than just being handed the title because of Jeff's case.

If Lawler won the title there was no where to go in a storyline that makes or puts anyone over because Jerry Lawler is not that big of a name. This move with Sting is something that needs to be given time. If Sting is still champion after Lockdown or if it is clear a younger wrestler isn't going for the title then be my guest and criticize.

IMO it was 2 different situations with the companies and 2 different situations long/short term.

"Sting has been talked about for the past month from just about every rabid wrestling fan."

Well, that's wrong. Sitng has been talked about in the minority, otherwise known as the IWC. I odubt any mark know's anything about Sting and thought anything other than The Undertaker. And the mark's are the majority.

And the dirtsheet's did'nt help shit either. Especially that bullshit NY Post "Sting sign's 1 year contract with WWE," which was obviously false.

Lawler did'nt win the Title becuase it would'nt make sense. Just like Sting coming in and winning beating the 2 time TNA Champion Jeff Hardy in 10 minutes. Does'nt make sense.

Maybe this was a "thank you," for staying with TNA. Maybe they told Sting he'll become Champion right away and he resigned. Who know's?

But regardless, I think they should've just kept the belt on Anderson for God sakes. The give him the belt for a month, then give Hardy the belt for 2 week's, only for Sting to win it in 10 minutes. Really?

 

[420_24/7]

sting will take on immortal only to be stopped in his tracks and jeff hardy will win the title back within 3 ppvs and make sting his bitch and immotal will be back on top again

 

[mrbooker]

However, Sting shows up after a 4.5 month absence from television and the 51 year old legend wins the TNA World Heavyweight Championship. So where's the criticism? Where's all the complaints that it makes TNA look weak or that it makes Hardy look like a scrub? If Jerry Lawler had actually won the title from The Miz, TNA marks would be popping out from everywhere to bitch at the WWE for making such a horrible choice. Some of the posters that've complained over the span of these months have posted in this thread and seem fine with this even though, for all intents and purposes, this is the very type of situation that they've criticized the WWE for. The biggest difference, however, is that TNA went the extra mile and put the title on their aging legend.

This is how I can break it down much easier for you on how its two different ways.... forget about Jerry being the same he was 30 years ago forget sting not being as good as he was 5 or 10 years ago, because if not then your looking for a bias reason in your argument the are both older guys who arent in theri prime point blank.

Back to your statement

Jerry the King Lawler is a COLOR COMMENTATOR, he has been that for over 15 years, thats what he is thats what he i known as to people for the past 15 years when they see him on their television

Sting is a WRESTLER thats what he was been over the past 30 years in the wrestling world a WRESTLER and nothing else. Jerry the King Lawler could have a match with anyone on this earth and it would not be enough to headline wrestlemania, but not to long ago their were post flooding this forum of Taker vs Sting and how it would be a Mainevent Status match and Dream match come true, I get the IWC represents a small percentage but the fact is its still a dream match it is still a draw, its still something people would pay top dollar to see regardless of age their is not one person Jerry Lawler could vs currently that would be a dream match

I have said this most likely a million times people bitch about the Miz because he has done NOTHING to make himself look strong nothing to prove that he is mainevent material and a legit guy in the ring and he is a world champion which is saying something if he had won elimination chamber even by using every trick in the book it would be a different story he had some great stuff going with the wins over orton, but then wins over morrison and then all the nonsense with lawler are not enough to make you look like WHC material so yes fueding and almost losing to a EX-wrestler who has been Commentator for over 15 years makes you look weak.

Jeff Hardy losing to Sting doesnt make him look bad for 2 reasons

1. Sting is a wrestler and has NEVER been booked, or came off as weak in any wrestling televised organization ever regardless of his age he has always been a top guy, always been a draw

2. Despite his bad choices outside the ring their is ZERO question of Jeff Hardy not being strong or being considered weak he is a multiple time WWE champ, a huge following, clean wins over HBK,HHH, and Undertaker their is no question as to the kind of wrestler and competitor Jeff Hardy is. He could be put into a match with anyone on the WWE roster tommorow and people would think he has a shot of winning the match.

its really apples and oranges when comparing Miz vs Lawler and Hardy vs Sting... Once you reach a certain point of being over and proving yourself with over a decade of matches to prove what you can do in the ring in mark key matches its hard to look weak even when losing

thats why people acted the way they did about Miz vs Lawler and why they are not about Hardy vs Sting

I know what i wrote was a bit much so i will sum it up side by side
Miz= Young champion with one major feud that made him look legit as a champ/maineventer(orton)
Lawler= a Announcer for over 15 years and really has not been booked to look strong since his days in the Memphis territories

Hardy= Veteran we have seen on our television since the year 2000 with as I stated wins over HHH, HBK, Undertaker, CM Punk while he was Mainevent status, as well as a great match against Kurt Angle at no surrender (I wont mention the rest of his accomplish and feuds prior since i didnt do that for the Miz's prior mainevent feuds)
Sting= Veteran for over 30 years who has always been a draw and always been a maineventer and whose character has always come across as nothing but one of the most dangerous guys on the roster in every telvised organization we worked for

I hope that clears things up for you and if none of that does the trick Miz vs Lawler would be equal to Hardy vs Taz, to compare it to Hardy vs Sting is a very silly comparison when you break it down

 

[Jack-Hammer]

This is how I can break it down much easier for you on how its two different ways.... forget about Jerry being the same he was 30 years ago forget sting not being as good as he was 5 or 10 years ago, because if not then your looking for a bias reason in your argument the are both older guys who arent in theri prime point blank.

How is it looking for a bias reason exactly? Pointing out that Lawler is as physically fit and capable now as he was in his prime and that Sting isn't is merely a fact that goes along with the point I'm trying to make. It would be bias if I attempted to twist the facts around in order to make a point. If anything, trying to brush it aside as if it's irrelevant comes across as bias because the physical condition of these veterans is a valid point. Among the most common reasons you hear complaints or even general discussion about older wrestlers being in these high profile spots is due to the condition they're in as a result of being in their 40s 50s or 60s.

Back to your statement

Jerry the King Lawler is a COLOR COMMENTATOR, he has been that for over 15 years, thats what he is thats what he i known as to people for the past 15 years when they see him on their television

Sting is a WRESTLER thats what he was been over the past 30 years in the wrestling world a WRESTLER and nothing else. Jerry the King Lawler could have a match with anyone on this earth and it would not be enough to headline wrestlemania, but not to long ago their were post flooding this forum of Taker vs Sting and how it would be a Mainevent Status match and Dream match come true, I get the IWC represents a small percentage but the fact is its still a dream match it is still a draw, its still something people would pay top dollar to see regardless of age their is not one person Jerry Lawler could vs currently that would be a dream match

We can play word games and semantics all day but that does not to any unbias degree negate the point that I've made: TNA put their top title on an old man and they're praised for it whereas WWE would be massively criticized by the same fans if they had gone in the same direction. Nothing that you've said invalidates that to any degree. As I said, I have no real problem with Sting as being TNA World Champion if that's the direction TNA wants to go but in the end, it's still a double standard just because it's Sting.

I have said this most likely a million times people bitch about the Miz because he has done NOTHING to make himself look strong nothing to prove that he is mainevent material and a legit guy in the ring and he is a world champion which is saying something if he had won elimination chamber even by using every trick in the book it would be a different story he had some great stuff going with the wins over orton, but then wins over morrison and then all the nonsense with lawler are not enough to make you look like WHC material so yes fueding and almost losing to a EX-wrestler who has been Commentator for over 15 years makes you look weak.

So clean victories over a legend like Lawler, the reigning United States Champion Daniel Bryan and briefly winning the tag titles single handedly doesn't do anything to make Miz look strong? He did defeat JoMo on Raw to retain the title and did get past Orton while still retaining the title. So Miz holds victories over a legit main eventer, a legend, a strong mid-card champion, a young guy on the cusp of being a main eventer and gets a clean pin in a tag title match and he still looks weak? Yeah, I'm sorry but I'm just not buying into the whole argument that Miz hasn't done anything to make himself look like a viable champ.

Jeff Hardy losing to Sting doesnt make him look bad for 2 reasons

1. Sting is a wrestler and has NEVER been booked, or came off as weak in any wrestling televised organization ever regardless of his age he has always been a top guy, always been a draw

2. Despite his bad choices outside the ring their is ZERO question of Jeff Hardy not being strong or being considered weak he is a multiple time WWE champ, a huge following, clean wins over HBK,HHH, and Undertaker their is no question as to the kind of wrestler and competitor Jeff Hardy is. He could be put into a match with anyone on the WWE roster tommorow and people would think he has a shot of winning the match.

Again, the fact that Sting is still an old man is being brushed aside as if it's irrelevant to the point I was making whereas it's a huge factor in the whole subject. As for the whole weakness argument, I can play that as well. Miz does have clean wins over John Cena, he's pinned HBK cleanly to both win and retain the tag titles while part of ShowMiz, beaten Randy Orton, numerous wins over John Morrison, etc. It's true that Miz's tally isn't as impressive as Hardy's but that's something that can only be equaled with the passage of time.

In the end, as I pointed out, it still comes down to something of a double standard. There have been numerous threads and posts centered around older wrestlers being placed in very high profile spots. If a guy can deliver the goods, that's fine with me. Lawler & Sting can both still deliver the goods but Lawler still catches all the hell. Just because it happens to be the much beloved Sting doesn't negate that it's still something of a double standard.

 

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

Some people think that this is an awful decision mostly because of the 3.3.11 promos and because they feel that all the work that TNA was doing got undone by Sting showing up and just being awarded the title due to him being a big name. However there is nothing to suggest that he won't lose the title at the next PPV.

I think that it wasn't really too bad a decision. Sting won but that is only because Jeff Hardy was not expecting Sting to show up. At the next PPV, Immortal will be prepared for anything that Sting might have to offer and Jeff may go on to win that match. Hell Sting might be written out of the story altogether by being subjected to a beatdown by Immortal. And that will be a nice feather on Hardy's cap.

Another thing that will make this storyline interesting is if it is found out that there is someone from the babyface team in cohorts with The Network. That will justify all these surprise title shots that the babyfaces are getting.

All in all I think that this evened the playground a bit. Everybody was hoping that Hardy would continue to just steamroll everyone in TNA and hold the title for a long time but this shows that anything can happen. I think that it will be Anderson who will eventually take down Immortal but if no face wins between now and the culmination of the storyline then it would become very boring to watch. These victories are the harmless once that are just given out to pique the viewers' interest.

I see no reason why Jeff should not retain the title at the next PPV.

 

[rondiesel2005]

Let's look at it this way. RVD had the title and was force to give it up to an feud he was involve in. Then Jeff hardy won the title turn heel and he was suppose to hold the title for a long time, but we all know about his legal issues. They took the risk by keeping the title on Jeff Hardy. Then he lost it to Mr. Anderson. Anderson who a lot of people thought he was going to hold the title a bit longer because of Jeff Hardy's legal issues. When they found out that the court got postpone again, they put the title back on Jeff Hardy so then there wasn't any long time plan for Mr anderson.

Now all of the sudden Jeff Hardy lost the title to Sting in the middle of Angle with Jeff Hardy, RVD and Mr Anderson. I thought it was better that why but instead put the title on Sting for rating purposes. It looks to me like they always say, that TNA doesn't have a long term plan with what they want to do with their company. I am not soo excited about Sting being champion because like always TNA would have one good show on TV, then next week they go back to the same bullshit they always do. All i can say is we all going to have to wait and see where this feud is going because putting the title on either RVD or Anderson makes more sense than putting it on Sting where he going to be involve in an Angle with not only RVD and Anderson, but with Immortals as well. we going to have to see how this one plays out

 

[mrbooker]

How is it looking for a bias reason exactly? Pointing out that Lawler is as physically fit and capable now as he was in his prime and that Sting isn't is merely a fact that goes along with the point I'm trying to make. It would be bias if I attempted to twist the facts around in order to make a point. If anything, trying to brush it aside as if it's irrelevant comes across as bias because the physical condition of these veterans is a valid point. Among the most common reasons you hear complaints or even general discussion about older wrestlers being in these high profile spots is due to the condition they're in as a result of being in their 40s 50s or 60s.



We can play word games and semantics all day but that does not to any unbias degree negate the point that I've made: TNA put their top title on an old man and they're praised for it whereas WWE would be massively criticized by the same fans if they had gone in the same direction. Nothing that you've said invalidates that to any degree. As I said, I have no real problem with Sting as being TNA World Champion if that's the direction TNA wants to go but in the end, it's still a double standard just because it's Sting.



So clean victories over a legend like Lawler, the reigning United States Champion Daniel Bryan and briefly winning the tag titles single handedly doesn't do anything to make Miz look strong? He did defeat JoMo on Raw to retain the title and did get past Orton while still retaining the title. So Miz holds victories over a legit main eventer, a legend, a strong mid-card champion, a young guy on the cusp of being a main eventer and gets a clean pin in a tag title match and he still looks weak? Yeah, I'm sorry but I'm just not buying into the whole argument that Miz hasn't done anything to make himself look like a viable champ.



Again, the fact that Sting is still an old man is being brushed aside as if it's irrelevant to the point I was making whereas it's a huge factor in the whole subject. As for the whole weakness argument, I can play that as well. Miz does have clean wins over John Cena, he's pinned HBK cleanly to both win and retain the tag titles while part of ShowMiz, beaten Randy Orton, numerous wins over John Morrison, etc. It's true that Miz's tally isn't as impressive as Hardy's but that's something that can only be equaled with the passage of time.

In the end, as I pointed out, it still comes down to something of a double standard. There have been numerous threads and posts centered around older wrestlers being placed in very high profile spots. If a guy can deliver the goods, that's fine with me. Lawler & Sting can both still deliver the goods but Lawler still catches all the hell. Just because it happens to be the much beloved Sting doesn't negate that it's still something of a double standard.

And you keep forgetting the most important part of my whole post while you focus on age and then bringing up the Miz's midcard accomplishments.


You asked why peole make a big deal about Lawler and not Sting and I keep trying to eplain it to you in t the most basic way possible.

That seeing is believing for wrestling fans Jerry the King Lawler is a Announcer thats is not word play that is a fact he has been that for 15+ years to anyone who watches WWE or goes to live events. Jerry the king Lawler was a announcer So yes it makes the Miz look weak from the viewers view when he struggles with a guy that who was doing commentary for his matches

Thats not a double standard thats called being wrestling fan, and seeing who is at the top of the food chain like I said if it was Jeff Hardy vs Taz then people would be all over TNA for this because they are making their champ look weak to a guy who a couple weeks ago was simply calling Jeff Hardy title matches and now he is getting a shot at the title. I dont understand how you cannot see that

As for the Miz i wont entertain his mid card accomplishment because maineventers like Hardy, cena, orton, or edge's mid card accomplishments all run laps around his, but thats not the point, the point is the Miz did not look that strong to begin with and having trouble beating a announcer didnt help any going into Wrestlemaia with no doubt the biggest draw on the whole card and the Miz is the champion and is about 5% of importantce for the match itself. A strong WWE champion would not let The Rock and Cena pretty much have the fans completly forget about the #1 title in the company.

Which is another reason people are in fits because its the most important season in WWE right now, to have your champ feud with a announcer, have the announcer get pin falls for him in tag matches, then have trouble defeating him is silly to do it on the last ppv before wrestlemania, when you could have made him look like a heel who always finds a way by winning elimiantion chamber thats another reason people are up in arms.

BACK to the OP Sting is champ and it could be for many reason I dont read spoilers so Im not sure were this is leading but the fact is its STING regardless about how people want to bring up age its STING just like you wouldnt here a damn cricket complain Dolph Ziggler becamse champ and Undertaker won it for him because its the Undertaker.

Its Sting its a draw and its a way to see a different feud rather then Hardy vs morgan, Hardy vs anderson, hardy vs rvd. Sting can put someone over and it will be a legit 1 on 1 single one fall match with the better man winning something that i have not seen in the TNA mainevent scene in a while, and it does not make hardy look to weak as he had no clue about his opponent and it was to a legend of the industry

 

[aphazel1]

I love'd Sting's return and when he won the TNA World Heavyweight Championship, I marked out like it was 1989 all over again. Sting is still in fantastic shape & can put on compelling matches, I am absolutely elated that he's back in TNA. Hardy and Sting would be an interesting feud, the angel of death versus the anti-christ of professional wrestling, I can't wait for the re-match!!

 

[CerebralViper96]

I find it sad. Okay, this seriously makes Jeff Hardy look weak and the whole "3.3.11" thing is total plagirism. I am shocked WWE doesn't sue. It would be just like when WCW was making it look like WWE was invading WCW and the fact that WCW was re-using Scott Hall's Razor Ramon character. This makes TNA look desperate copying WWE. So, in order to try and beat WWE when they have people coming back....they have a 51 year old Sting people wanted in WWE beat Jeff Hardy for the world title that barely had any build-up? Exactly.....

 

[T2KFreeker]

Well, Sting winning the title wasn't a bad decision. Hardy is much more entertaining when he is chasing the title, to be honest. On top of that, it adds to what they can try and flesh out as a storyline. Not sure where this is going, but if TNA pulls it out, could be good. I am just happy to see Sting back in TNA.

On a side note, I would rather have seen Lawler win the WWE title. Might not make sense to you all, but he entertains me much more than The Miz does. I do remember Lawler from Memphis and he was the man there for a reason.