This is an argument that pops up whenever I debate about wrestling with my brother. Whenever we talk about the differences between WWE and TNA, he brings this up as a pro for TNA. And I can see where he's coming from, in the sense that the wrestling is a different style than in WWE.
The WWE's wrestling style uses very few unique moves outside of the ones integrated with the wrestler performing them. For example, if you were to look up some of Sheamus' matches from before he was in WWE, you'd see that he could perform a slingshot shoulder block that was fairly impressive. He's never going to use it in WWE though, unless they establish it as a move his character would use.
In TNA, however, the wrestlers commonly use moves outside of their movesets to spice up their matches and grab the crowd's attention. Also, the moves themselves are generally flashier and more impressive than the ones shown in the WWE. Guys like Alex Shelley, Chris Sabin, AJ Styles, Samoa Joe, etc, are considered the cream of the crop in terms of actual wrestling ability because of this. It's one of the few ways one can compare TNA to WCW positively, in that it's similar to the often-praised Cruiserweight Division of its time. They were the ones revolutionizing the accepted wrestling style of the era, much like the "TNA Originals" are doing today.
However, there is a large problem with that happening in this era, and it involves what I and many of you are using right now: The internet.
In WCW's time period, yes, superior wrestling and new styles could be used as legitimate reasons to watch one show over the other. With the internet, however, that is non-existent. Any show on any channel is up on the internet within hours of its airing. Meaning that, if I wanted to, I could watch any show I missed just by looking around a few websites. I can, and have, watch shows from almost a decade ago that aired in another country, in another language. If, for example, on an episode of IMPACT, Jay Lethal was going to take on Douglas Williams. That match is taking place late on the show, but is the only thing that interests me about that show. If I wanted to, I could just skip watching the show on Thursday, and the next day, look up the one match on the internet. I feel satisfied with the one match, and I didn't have to wade through almost two hours of crap I didn't want to see.
The point I'm trying to make is that you can't ride on just "good wrestling" and hope people will tune in. It's one of the reasons ROH doesn't have a primetime TV show on a mainstream channel. You have to give the fans a reason to watch not just the one match that will feature good wrestling, but even the bad matches. In other words, decent stories. And I'm sure many of you will make arguments for the storylines going on right now, but that doesn't mean the people involved are following them. What did RVD VS Rob Terry have to do with either man's storylines? Basically, good or bad, a performer's matches should connect with their stories.
Discuss.
The WWE's wrestling style uses very few unique moves outside of the ones integrated with the wrestler performing them. For example, if you were to look up some of Sheamus' matches from before he was in WWE, you'd see that he could perform a slingshot shoulder block that was fairly impressive. He's never going to use it in WWE though, unless they establish it as a move his character would use.
In TNA, however, the wrestlers commonly use moves outside of their movesets to spice up their matches and grab the crowd's attention. Also, the moves themselves are generally flashier and more impressive than the ones shown in the WWE. Guys like Alex Shelley, Chris Sabin, AJ Styles, Samoa Joe, etc, are considered the cream of the crop in terms of actual wrestling ability because of this. It's one of the few ways one can compare TNA to WCW positively, in that it's similar to the often-praised Cruiserweight Division of its time. They were the ones revolutionizing the accepted wrestling style of the era, much like the "TNA Originals" are doing today.
However, there is a large problem with that happening in this era, and it involves what I and many of you are using right now: The internet.
In WCW's time period, yes, superior wrestling and new styles could be used as legitimate reasons to watch one show over the other. With the internet, however, that is non-existent. Any show on any channel is up on the internet within hours of its airing. Meaning that, if I wanted to, I could watch any show I missed just by looking around a few websites. I can, and have, watch shows from almost a decade ago that aired in another country, in another language. If, for example, on an episode of IMPACT, Jay Lethal was going to take on Douglas Williams. That match is taking place late on the show, but is the only thing that interests me about that show. If I wanted to, I could just skip watching the show on Thursday, and the next day, look up the one match on the internet. I feel satisfied with the one match, and I didn't have to wade through almost two hours of crap I didn't want to see.
The point I'm trying to make is that you can't ride on just "good wrestling" and hope people will tune in. It's one of the reasons ROH doesn't have a primetime TV show on a mainstream channel. You have to give the fans a reason to watch not just the one match that will feature good wrestling, but even the bad matches. In other words, decent stories. And I'm sure many of you will make arguments for the storylines going on right now, but that doesn't mean the people involved are following them. What did RVD VS Rob Terry have to do with either man's storylines? Basically, good or bad, a performer's matches should connect with their stories.
Discuss.
