"This will change TNA forever"

[Reddannihilation]

This is a prime example of that circular "I can't lose!!!" logic that makes you think you're good at this debate thing, but looks like a giant logical fallacy to anyone who's actually debated somewhere besides pro wrestling internet forums. His overall work is obviously good, according to your logic, since a shock booker managed to produce a bump in ratings during his three month tenure. If anyone has anything negative to say about him, however, according to your logic, they can't know what he did or didn't book, and thus have no point.

U mad?

This only works if we assume you know what he was booking. And if we forget that after he was rehired three months later, he was unable to bump the ratings again.

3 months of Kevin Sullivan booking and you're wondering why he had trouble getting viewers to come back? Could you sit through 3 months of the Dungeon of Doom? I don't think so, by the time he was rehired everything was already fucked.

Sources:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e7/Monday_Night_Wars_Ratings.JPG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vince_Russo

yes, big deal.

You can spare me the "you trust Wikipedia, omg!!!" canard that is the last refuge of anyone forced to confront their logic against the actual facts.

That must be whil all those Colleges and Universities ban wikipedia, they just can't deal with the facts. Amirite? Anyway I agreed with the chart.

Now- if we ignore that hole in your logic that forces us to assume you knew what Russo was booking

Actually had you learnt to read, I never said I knew what Russo was booking, I just said that the people who criticise him didn't. You need an example, watch Dixie's YouShoot when Cornette calls her out for hiring Russo and she fires back telling Cornette that most of the "Fire Russo" chants happened during segments booked by Dutch Mantel, it is great to see Cornette sitting their unable to speak.

and assume he was solely responsible for TNA's ratings over the past five years as you are expecting us to do, we still run into a problem. He took TNA from 0.7-0.8 to 1.0 (yay?), and then to 1.0's for the next several years. IF we assume he was solely responsible for that, as your post implies we should, that means he was able to create a short ratings bump, but was unable to follow that up by drawing more viewers. TNA remains at a 1.0 today.

And that doesn't actually mean anything in terms of the quality of his booking. See I guess you don't get how TV works, ratings don't reflect quality at all. For example Jersey Shore is a reality tv show that caters to the lowest common denominator. It is not aimed at an intelligent audience yet it often scores higher ratings than other shows that are scripted and recieve critical acclaim? Why? Because of the audience being catered too.

[QOTE]Professional wrestling is filled with people who struck gold once, and parlayed that into a career. Eric Bischoff was behind WCW's best years, and hasn't done jack-shit since.[/QUOTE]
Didn't he come up with a ton of stuff for RAW?

Paul Heyman was behind ECW's 'rise', since then the highlight of his career has been publishing a weblog and running OVW, and yet he was heavily recruited by TNA.

Paul Heyman's Smackdown! and the voice of Brock Lesnar. Also how do you heavily recruit someone? Does that actually mean anything?

On the other hand, the creative staff at WWE is filled with Stephanie McMahon and a dozen college dropouts. (I don't know that all of them are college dropouts. Most of them are.) The WWE is pulling in ratings in the mid 3 range.

Name branding, bigger network, more advertising. But apparently you hate the WWE writing staff, makes me wonder if you tried out??

We are either forced to assume that Stephanie McMahon is a genius beyond comparison, or maybe that longevity in the wrestling business doesn't imply brilliance.

What's to say Stephanie isn't a genius? She seems to be in a pretty good position in life.

Now I know you can go sentence by sentence, say "nuh uh, you're a stoopidhead!", and act like you've proven something. (Let's not forget the out of context quote games you like to play, where you cut sentences apart and pretend the results are ringing endorsements of your statements.)

U mad?

It gets tiring. If you're looking to go "oh, he didn't respond, I obviously win!", hit me with your little quote wars game again. You're obviously a person that needs every cheap victory he can get. I've responded to your comments with sourced arguments of my own, lets see if you're capable of doing the same.

Yeah U mad.

I doubt it.

I answered, you're quite obviously mad, dunno why. And really, the source you posted was a ratings chart, that doesn't help other parts of your argument. Yes Russo took the shitty ratings in WCW made them better was fired then was expected to clean up Kevin Sullivan's mess and couldn't do it. Not a big deal.

Russo's kept TNA's ratings in a solid position, there hasn't been a massive drop since he took over, what else does he have to do? What pulling in over a million people isn't good enough? When does it end? This is exactly my point Vince Russo to wrestling fans is like Brock Lesnar to MMA fans, Lesnar could beat Fedor Emelianenko by knockout and he would still be shat on. Russo could book the greatest angle of all time and he'd still be shat on.

I see no problem with Russo's current work and you've so far failed to provide a reason as to why I should doubt him.

So come at me bro.

 

[bullsgo]

That Vince Russo is constantly criticised by people who have no experience or knowledge of booking. That Russo is routinely called stupid yet has somehow managed to hold positions in all of the top wrestling promotions of the last 20 years, I'm preyyu sure the point of that statement was to shut up someone who can't hold a candle to an overly criticised booker.

Overly criticized? if anything Russo should be criticized more for being an incompetent hack, who hasn't had an original idea in over a decade.

Infact, TNA fans should boycott the product until he's sent home and replaced with a competent writer.

Rightfully, Russo has a deplorable reputation in the industry. This reputation does not only come from naive fans, as you would believe. Many prominent wrestlers, including prominent members of the TNA roster(Ric Flair, Hogan) have gone on record and criticized Russo and his incompetence for the damage he's done to the industry.

We TNA fans are forced to put up with Russo; however, most of us are intelligent and knowledgeable enough to understand that Russo is more of a liability to TNA than an asset. Most of us fans can't put our fingers on why he's still employed when more talented individuals sit at home.

Imagine how much more successful the company would be with someone in place who had talent and respect for the industry. It's painfully obvious that TNA would be closer to the 2.0 rating rather than being stuck in the proverbial 1.0 limbo for the past three years.

Bottom line, Russo is living off the success of his WWE days, which for the most be he benefited from the big talent around him, and the filter of Vince McMahon. Russo without the WWE machine behind him is simply a train wreck i.e the current TNA product.

Russo can hold his job down for another twenty years and he'll still be a talentless hack, with no business being in the wrestling industry.

 

[Reddannihilation]

Overly criticized? if anything Russo should be criticized more for being an incompetent hack, who hasn't had an original idea in over a decade.

Jim Cornette is that you?

Infact, TNA fans should boycott the product until he's sent home and replaced with a competent writer.

Yeah, TNA fans should stop watching the show they're fans of. That will help TNA. You fucking idiot.

Rightfully, Russo has a deplorable reputation in the industry. This reputation does not only come from naive fans, as you would believe.

Well so far you're not really doing a good job to prove me wrong.

Many prominent wrestlers, including prominent members of the TNA roster(Ric Flair, Hogan) have gone on record and criticized Russo and his incompetence for the damage he's done to the industry.

Strangely Hogan and Flair have no issue working with him though.

We TNA fans are forced to put up with Russo; however, most of us are intelligent and knowledgeable enough to understand that Russo is more of a liability to TNA than an asset. Most of us fans can't put our fingers on why he's still employed when more talented individuals sit at home.

How many times do you need to refer to yourself in plural to make it seem like you represent a group? You are not a TNA fan, no TNA fan would actually suggest everyone stop watching the show under the pretense that it would make it better.

Imagine how much more successful the company would be with someone in place who had talent and respect for the industry.

Hahaha, like who? Paul Heyman? Jim Cornette? Yeah those guys all got high ratings with their tv shows...wait a minute.

It's painfully obvious that TNA would be closer to the 2.0 rating rather than being stuck in the proverbial 1.0 limbo for the past three years.

see above, who in the wrestling world has shown they can take a product and increase the rating by a full point in the last 10 years?

Bottom line, Russo is living off the success of his WWE days, which for the most be he benefited from the big talent around him, and the filter of Vince McMahon.

The same filter who let a storyline involving his son in law humping a corpse and booked Fake Rosie O'Donnell to fight Fake Donlad Trump. Great filter.

Russo without the WWE machine behind him is simply a train wreck i.e the current TNA product.

And here you are telling me you're a TNA fan and somehow a represntative of most fans.

Russo can hold his job down for another twenty years and he'll still be a talentless hack, with no business being in the wrestling industry.

Thanks for proving my point. Russo's critics are 'tards like you. He literally could pull off the greatest angle of all time and you'd still whinge. And I certainly love your "he has no business in the wrestling industry" what are you? The Gatekeeper of wrestling? Yeah the guy who works in wrestling has no business in wrestling so sayeth the person who dreams of one day being backstage as a janitor.

 

[ABMorales787]

Overly criticized? if anything Russo should be criticized more for being an incompetent hack, who hasn't had an original idea in over a decade.

The ideas are original. It's just that not all are good. And besides, how is ripping your self off, "unoriginal"?

Infact, TNA fans should boycott the product until he's sent home and replaced with a competent writer.

While we're at it, we should boycott Hollywood and kill every director that has to rely on a comic franchise or novel to make a movie, too. Then you can pay bail for the 1200 people in the iMPACT! Zone that would be boxed in by the SWAT for being dumb enough to follow your "solution".

Rightfully, Russo has a deplorable reputation in the industry. This reputation does not only come from naive fans, as you would believe.

So Ed Ferrara gets no mention? It's amazing that Vince gets so much hate. As if he singlehandedly murdered WCW. What the hell WCW do? Make him the president of the company?

Many prominent wrestlers, including prominent members of the TNA roster(Ric Flair, Hogan) have gone on record and criticized Russo and his incompetence for the damage he's done to the industry.

Yet, Hogan does nothing about it. Even though he's also supposed to be on writing. Yeah, I kinda agree with you here.

We TNA fans are forced to put up with Russo; however, most of us are intelligent and knowledgeable enough to understand that Russo is more of a liability to TNA than an asset. Most of us fans can't put our fingers on why he's still employed when more talented individuals sit at home.

MEM/Frontline, Joe/Angle, Anderson/Angle, AJ/Angle, Joe/Daniels/AJ II, etc. I see him hitting good stuff on occasion. Unless JB was the one pitching that stuff.

Imagine how much more successful the company would be with someone in place who had talent and respect for the industry. It's painfully obvious that TNA would be closer to the 2.0 rating rather than being stuck in the proverbial 1.0 limbo for the past three years.

That one's laughable.

Bottom line, Russo is living off the success of his WWE days, which for the most be he benefited from the big talent around him, and the filter of Vince McMahon. Russo without the WWE machine behind him is simply a train wreck i.e the current TNA product.

Living off his WWE days? More like dragging his WCW days. I'm surprised he's done good stuff.

Russo can hold his job down for another twenty years and he'll still be a talentless hack, with no business being in the wrestling industry.

He's hit-or-miss in my book. You're making it sound like TNA's creative meetings are just him sitting alone.

 

[Reddannihilation]

Yes, it's me...your genius has come through for you. You wouldn't happen to be Vince Russo? If so meet me outside of the nearest Dairy Queen. I'll bring my tennis racket. You bring one of Dixie's yankee lawyers.

I'll bring my job, you can bring your slew of interent fans and the $5 you earn in ROH.

Very classy. More ad hominem abuse from the master. Very classy. What are you fourteen or just too immature to argue your point without belittling everyone who doesn't believe TNA, Vince Russo and Dixie Carter are the greatest things in the world since sliced bread?

It's amusing because you argue I can't debate and all you've done is whinge about how I post. Funny. Tell me again, how does not watching TNA help TNA?

In your warped mind everything TNA does is gold and makes sense. Too bad the ratings and the attendance don't show it. That's right, in your little world everyone else is stupid and not TNA.

1 million people watch TNA each week in the US alone. About 20,000 people worldwide come on the internet to bitch about them. I think my side is winning. Still you've yet to answer my question, how does not watching TNA help TNA?

Do you know who you remind me of? Comic Book Guy.

That's funny because Comic Book Guy is a pessismist who complains about everything tv show writers do (see: Poochie). Good job knowing your Simpsons character, your method of thinking is actually a lot closer to that of a whiny pessimist like the CBG.

You would defend TNA if every wrestler came through the curtain,took a dump in the ring for two hours straight, then ate it for an hour.

This is a great argument you've got here, really solid and entertaining.

You'd defend TNA if the opening segment involved Orlando Jordan having anal sex with Eric Young's mannequin friend. Your act is getting tired and stale.

The funny thing is you're the one coming up with these scenarios, so maybe this is the product you want from TNA? I guess it must be.

You're not a fan you're an obsessed fan boy and a spinmeister.

Yeah I'm totally spinning this, you said "Stop watching TNA and it will help TNA become better". I'm still waiting to find out how that works, any idea?

TNA should give you a job all the crap you're able to come up with.

And again, u clearly mad bro! I have no shame in admitting that I defend TNA, but I've never made up anything, I usually spend all time rebutting the likes of people who post "facts" that they get from guys like Mark Madden and Nick Paglino.

The bottom line is, despite being around for eight years and all the talent on the roster, TNA remains, stagnate, irrelevant and second rate and Vince Russo is one of the main reasons. Deal with it

Yes, Russo controls everything in TNA, he also raped your mother and spat on your dog. TNA is the #2 company in wrestling, has a huge fanbase and one of the main reasons for that is Vince Russo.

You have no mind of your own. You're a robot. Everyone knows what you're going to say before you do.

this is hilarious, coming from a guy who posts the smark 101 "I hatez Russo argument" at least I'm original in my thoughts.

They need the paychecks. The IRS waits for no man. If they had saved their money, they'd each be on the beach right with a blond in one hand and a beer in the next. It's a shame they have to work under a bum like Russo. I suppose that's how life works out. Can't be on top forever, unless you're the Simpsons.

Ahh, so Hogan came in to work with Russo and it's all because of money and he couldn't have possibly solved his issues with him? No? I'd bet more money on that being the case.

A real fan is someone who cares enough to critique the product out of respect.

I'm sorry what about "Don't watch TNA it'll help them" is respectful? It's not even a critique it's like voting informally it doesn't help or hinder the process. You aren't critiquing TNA, you're whining about Vince Russo.

A sheep(you) is someone who agrees with everything the company does and will go on message boards and disrespect and insult complete strangers if they fail see their obsession the same way.

And so once again you pretend as though you know me and how I think. There are things in TNA I don't like, the difference is I'm not a whiny bitch. But anyway, go through with your plan, stop watching TNA, then you can stop whining about it and TNA will surely miss the one viewer they lost in you.

Fans like you are pathetic and cheapen fandom.

Fans who watch the show and enjoy themselves are pathetic? I guess you can't be a real fan unless you bitch about everything they do.

It's the sheepish fans who will cause TNA to fail, and Vince McMahon to own the wrestling world.

So the fans who watch TNA are the fans who are going to cause it to fail? Ok, so I watch TNA, I buy TNA PPV's and I'm the problem? And you tried to say I have a warped mind.

Real fans will stand by the company by standing up to it, and demanding a quality product. Sheepish fans will eat the shit and like it.

LOL, "real fans", so in your world, standing by the company means not watching it and demanding a quality product means whine on a forum? I see.

I don't know a single TNA fan who wouldn't take Heyman over Russo, and that includes Dixie Carter. Too bad Heyman wants more money than TNA is worth.

There are plenty of TNA fans quite happy with TNA the way it is, they tune in every week. I don't think any of them care whether Heyman is involved or not.

Vince Russo is a talentless bum, and you only make yourself look silly defending him.

Talentless bum who got work in the biggest wrestling companies in the world vs. guy on the internet who hasn't done anything ever. I pick Vince Russo.

Not even worth the response. Only a fool would compare Vince McMahon to Vince Russo. That's like comparing the Hilton Hotel to the Eazy Stay roach motel. The truth is Russo couldn't wipe McMahon's ass.

Yeah, remind me again how that great filter Vince McMahon is always coming up with A-grade ideas? You remember when he made Trish Stratus bark like a dog for him? Yeah man he was so much better than Russo, especially when he figured he'd let HHH fuck a corpse on telelvision. Man, that Vince McMahon he's certainly never let a bad angle slip through.

No doubt about it. Not all fans are fan boy sheep who can't see the cracks in the wall. A real fan would want to see the cracks mended before the wall crashes. If you were a real fan and not an obsessed sheep, unable to critically think his way out of a paper bag, then you'd understand.

Real Fan = whiny bitch apparently. Last I checked I'm not the person telling people that if they want to be "real fans" they should not watch the product they like.

If only you could spell ******.

Let's give it a try, b-u-l-l-s-g-o. YAY I did it.

Maybe if you'd spent more time educating yourself you could one day argue a simple point using critical thinking skills, and learned knowledge. You don't debate, instead you attack like a miserable child with too much time on his hands, with a slight case of insanity.

Still waiting on an answer as to how "not watching the show you're a fan of makes you a "REAL FAN" "

I have no interest in working in the wrestling business. Frankly it would be my worse nightmare. I'm just happy being a fan

No, you aren't happy with being a fan, because you're not a fan. You're a whiny cunt, who wants things their way and can't accept that the majority prefers a different thing to you. Boohoo 1 million people don't agree with your opinion that TNA sucks, go punch it out with your pillow.

It's you who considers himself the gatekeeper of TNA.

No, not really.

You spend your life on this board

I joined a year ago and make what is worked out as an average of 1.15 posts per day. Apparently that's my whole life.

waiting for an unflattering TNA comment to show itself and then you strike with an ignorant tirade spewing childish words like tard, idiot, with your limited vocabulary.

Yes, I'm ignorant, I ask people to provide sources for their "facts" and they throw hissy fits whining that they shouldn't have to. I ask a basic question and get pages of excuses and insults and no answer to that question. You're a whiny bitch sitting on an elitist cloud where you refuse to like anything.

Why am I even wasting time on you? You need to really grow up. You take this stuff way to seriously.

I take TNA seriously because it's something I like. But you're right you are wasting your time, you waste your time everytime you post one of you little hate rants about TNA, because the people they're aimed at aren't listening.

And still I await an answer, how does whining about everything TNA does and suggesting people boycott the product make you a "Real fan"? What it makes you is a pessmissitic asshole who whinges about any and everything. If you don't want to watch TNA then don't, but don't come online whining about how much you hate this and that and something else. If you want to boycott TNA then do it and while you're at it boycott all things related to TNA, like the TNA forum section.

 

[Reddannihilation]

So you know more than Cornette?

Said that where?

Are you a wrestling wunderkind or just plain ignorant.

You don't have to be the greatest wrestling mind of all time to be smarter than a guy stuck in 1980.

Not watching TNA will force the company to regroup and to get their stuff together.

Or you know, ignore the one guy who actually thinks like that (you) and keep doing what they're doing. Hey, you can't even follow through with your threat so I don't think they'd care.

When revenue goes down, change happens or you close the doors.

Yeah except your idea doesn't work and is stupid.

Besides, I was simply being hypothetical in the first place.

Being hypothetical, stupidly.

I never posted: BOYCOTT TNA TILL RUSSO IS LET GO! Most fans watch wrestling out of habit whether it's quality or not. I'm one of them.

Really? What's this then;

if anything Russo should be criticized more for being an incompetent hack, who hasn't had an original idea in over a decade.

Infact, TNA fans should boycott the product until he's sent home and replaced with a competent writer.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

That's no accomplishment when you've been around for eight years with the big name talent and national exposure you have. Something is wrong. The brand should be further ahead, pulling in at least twice the fans they have by now. They should be touring the world regularly growing the company. They should be a solid #2 rather than a economical off brand version of WWE.

I guess all those other 8 year old wrestling companies are doing much better, hey ROH how's your ratings? Bad huh? What about you CZW? You're older than TNA and you have nothing to show for it? Damn. Apparently every wrestling company that started post 2000 has had far less success than TNA and some of them started with the exact same tools as TNA? So somehow TNA must've done a lot better.

No doubt. But my argument was that comic book guy is an immature, fat loser who thinks he knows everything; who will argue a blue streak with a ten year old using a hominem abuse rather than taking a step back and conducting himself like an adult. Does that sound familiar?

Well, I have a college degree, am fit and don't think I know everything but a pessimistic asshole who complains about everything and somehow feels a television show that's provided him hours of free entertainment for 8 years owes him, yeah sounds a bit like you, doesn't it?

It would score better than what they're getting now, despite the spending spree, and roster turnover, which about the same for the past three years.

Sure it could boycott bill, sure it could.

Simple hypothetical business scenerio.

This is too rich to pass up, "if only you could spell scenario".

If the customers step away a business must step up their game, offer a better product or close the doors.

Except that you aren't a customer, you pay nothing for TNA.

We the fans are not obligated to support anything out of blind faith and fandom.

Take off the symbiote suit, Eddy Brock. It turns out you're a singular person.

People pay for quality and should go elsewhere if the company fails to deliver.

You don't pay for anything. You take free entertainment from a business and don't give anything in return, save for endless whining about how the company should do more to appeal to someone who won't support them. Tell me, what reason does TNA have to cater to you when you don't give them anything in return?

When they get their act together, they'll see a spike in rating and an increase in revenue. Until then, you'll have to keep spinning the reality.

Ahahahahahaha, good one dude. Yet another person claiming to understand how TNA's revenue plays out. You've already admitted you won't even go through with your "boycott" so your threat isn't just stupid it's idle.

Define Rebuttal? Define Ad Hominem? See the difference.

This is coming from someone who previously said "U r a fatt lozer, so there".

Did I say Russo is the man behind the curtain.

umm, yes? Is that even a question? It seems to be lacking that magical hook sign that generally ends a question.

No, Dixie Carter means well but is clueless,

Ah yes, the person who managed to get herself a position as president of TNA is clueless, guess she just won the Nashville lottery.

Hogan is in business for himself most of the time,

So, you know Terry Bollea personally?

and Bischoff is a empty suit without Turner's check book.

Yes a cheque book causes ideas to be thought up, wait no that's a brain. Perhaps you should consult the Wizard and see if he can lend you the Scarecrow's.

I'd say the biggest obstacle is the writing itself.

But you don't know anything about script or television writing, so your opinion has no credibility.

Everyone else is dead weight other than the creative writing team.

Wait, the biggest problem is the writing, everyone except the writing team is dead weight? Logic...WHERE ARE YOU?!

That's the one place where they must strive. TNA is #2 by default.

Because no other wrestling companies exist other than WWE and TNA? Oh wait, nope.

I don't know a single fan who respects Vince Russo, other than a couple of deranged fan boy, who felt Shark Boy should be main eventing.

Wait what? Is this some magic correlation in your mind that Vince Russo likes Shark Boy? What the hell are you smoking?

You'll eat shit when you have to. Hogan is simply doing that. If he had his way, Russo would be out the door, no doubt about it.

So you somehow have the full insight into Terry Bollea's mind? Ok then.

When a person says Russo they essentially mean the creative product in itself. It's like when a person says he's mad with Obama, what he's essentially saying is he's upset with the government.

Seriously, back pedal faster, unfortunately you still said this;

TNA fans should boycott the product until he's sent home and replaced with a competent writer.

I'm pretty sure you're just a Vince Russo hater.

The boards were set up, not as a cheerleader outlet, but essentially so that fans can discuss their likes and dislikes of the companies A person like you fails to understand this simple logic and brings down the board with your compulsive and childish, "Stop whining like a bitch!" LOL Take that BS elsewhere.

You aren't discussing anything you're whining about Vince Russo. That's it.

I never said people who enjoy the TNA product was pathetic.

Ummm;

Fans like you are pathetic and cheapen fandom.

Now since I enjoy the product and according to you I'm pathetic, then anyone like me who enjoys TNA is pathetic in your book, Soz bro.

Most fans articulate their likes and dislikes without spinning everything, as if the company lacks flaws.

And I've never said TNA is flawless. Try again.

What I said was that nasty people who behave like eight year old's on a message board are. Opinions are like asses, everyone has one. Learn, accept, and move on. Not everyone thinks like you. Most kids learn that out at five years old.

Wait accepting other peoples opinions? You? What's this;

Vince Russo is a talentless bum, and you only make yourself look silly defending him.

Ah yes, you're quite accepting of alternate opinions. I see that now.

Prove me wrong.

Ok, people who give TNA money are good fans and you're a free loading leech? Done.

Unless TNA develops its audience, talent pool, brand name, creative team, they won't be around too much longer.

Ah yes, APOCALYPSE NOWISH. People like you have existed since TNA started, oh it'll be dead in 6 months, maybe a year, 2 years, 3 years, 4 years. It never ends.

That's what forum's are for. A very simple concept. We go on forums and whine and complain about what we don't like about our favorite shows. It makes life more fun, and helps us sustain our interest through interaction with other fans.

Actually a lot of people talk about things they like. You know I don't go on TV.com and talk about what I hate about Veronica Mars, probably because it actually is flawless. But seriously, if the only reason you use this forum is to bitch I'd say you're the immature one.

We saw a ratings increase with the ECW angle a few weeks back. Imagine the buzz the company would create if Heyman were brought in? Imagine the WWE/ROH talent who would be tempted jump ship on that occasion.

So in your opinion Heyman outdraws Hogan? When has that ever been the case? Who in the WWE would jump for Heyman? All those ECW Alumni that don't work there? And TNA doesn't need anyone from ROH or WWE. And from ROH is going to leave just to be with Heyman? Steve Corino? The guys in ROH struggle to get paid already, with Heyman on hand they can just empty out their bank accounts in exchange for magic beans.

That's what TNA needs mostly is a creative punch in the arm. Most fans would welcome him Heyman with open arms, and see it as a step forward for the company.

The only fans who'd give a fuck about Heyman already watch the show. Heyman never got anyone to watch his own show, how could he get them to watch another show that caters to the same audience? Casual fans aren't going to tune in to see Paul Heyman.

However, even Russo has his loyal fans, which defy logic in itself.

Hey did you know as a head booker Russo can claim a 3.5 to his name. What can Heyman claim?

If TNA is every going to get to the next level, they must do things like this. Until then, they'll be a distant second by default.

For someone who says "I have no interest in being in the wrestling business" you certainly have a strange desire to pretend you know what makes companies successful.

I never said I was Dave Meltzer or Vince McMahon.

Never said you did.

I never once said I knew more about the business than Russo.

Scroll up like 6 lines, you literally said what TNA needs to do to succeed, make up your mind.

I'm no wrestling guru. However, I know the recipe for the soup, as most fans do, and we know the taste of shit soup when we taste it.

Soup? You know the taste of shit soup? Why would you eat shit soup? That's disgusting. Shooter McGavin and you should get together for Brunch.

You're taking my argument out of the context. McMahon's WWE has been around for a long time, (25-30 years) therefore, you're going to see some bad television, as we're seeing for the most part right how.

Some bad television? William Regal the Man's Man, Doink, The Goon, Mae Young giving birth to a hand, HHH humping a corpse, Mark Henry as sexual chocolate, The Gobbledy Gooker, Duke the Dumpster, Rosie v. Donald, Hornswoggle, The Invasion, Big Dick Johnson. And that's just off the top of my head.

That being said, you're also from time to time going to see cutting edge; quality television as we've seen over the years.

1997 to 2000. 3 years of cutting edge TV in 30 years. So 10%.

It's all about numbers. McMahon may throw about one hundred ideas and maybe ten might stick and generate millions in revenue. That's called playing the percentages. Wrestling is a hit or miss business. McMahon will swing five hundred times, strike out 70% of the time and homer about 30%.

Seriously get McMahon's balls out of your mouth.

Russo on the other hand will swing five hundred times, Strike out 80% of the time and lay down about forty bunts.

The MEM > the last 5 years of WWE. Looks like Russo's doing quite well for himself.

Nothing but class.

This coming from a guy who says "you're a fat, loser".

"Whiny cunt?" Who are you Don Logan?

Who?

You come off more as Frank Gallagher, smelly, drunk, and full of crap.

Who? Wait what was that class thing you said a few lines up? So I'm not classy and you're calling me smelly and drunk. Pot kettle black.

LOL The majority of wrestling fans don't watch TNA, they watch WWE and MMA.

The majority of wrestling fans watch MMA? Wouldn't they be MMA fans? MMA isn't wrestling.

And I said the majority of TNA fans disagree with you. 2/3's of WWE's fans don't know what TNA is.

Only a fringe group(me included) watches and goes to TNA events.

A fringe group of over a million. Hmm.

As long i'm investing my time and spending my cash i have the right to discuss my likes or dislikes on a forum. Deal with it. I've been a fan since 2002 so i've earned that right.

hahahaha "I've been a fan since 2002" wow you're cool. We should all grow up to be as cool as you. You already admitted before to not paying for TNA's PPV's or events. Now you apparently do attend them. But no, you're just a freeloader.

If only that were true.

Join Date: 07-16-2009
Posts
Total Posts: 489 (1.16 posts per day)
Find all posts by Reddannihilation
Find all threads started by Reddannihilation

Uh oh.

That's what forums are for. Hopefully, someday you'll grasp that concept. As for your rebuttals, they're imply open ended questions and insults. I took debate in school and you my friend can't debate your way out of a paper bag.

You took debate in school OMGZ. What's an imply open ended questions? I'm implying open ended questions?

Very classy indeed.

Again this from the guy who says "you're a fat loser and you're a smelly drunk". Forgive me if I'm not taking you too seriously.

Wah wah wah wah wah wah wah wah wah wah wah wah wah, you completely slaughtered my shitty post and now I can't to anything to challenge what you said WAHHHHHHHHHH

I agree Rayne, that is quite true.

 

[johnbragg]

If we could talk about something other than pointless flamewar pissing contests for a minute, I'd like to look at something ReddAnnihilation said.

I guess all those other 8 year old wrestling companies are doing much better, hey ROH how's your ratings? Bad huh? What about you CZW? You're older than TNA and you have nothing to show for it? Damn. Apparently every wrestling company that started post 2000 has had far less success than TNA and some of them started with the exact same tools as TNA? So somehow TNA must've done a lot better.

TNA had the advantage of Panda backing them through a reported $30 million in losses before starting to break even. No one had "the exact same tools as TNA," because no one else had the financial backing. CZW and ROH had to do whatever they did with the money they generated from their product. Without major financial backing, Jeff and Jerry Jarrett lose their houses by the end of 2002.

And AJ Styles goes to ROH (he's still not WWE material in 2002), and when Spike TV is desperate to get back into pro wrestling, ROH is on Spike TV.

I would guess that ROH on Spike TV with AJ Styles, Samoa Joe, Chris Daniels, CM Punk, Nigel McGuinness and Brian Danielson would be pulling a 1.0 rating, if not more.

 

[Reddannihilation]

TNA had the advantage of Panda backing them through a reported $30 million in losses before starting to break even. No one had "the exact same tools as TNA," because no one else had the financial backing. CZW and ROH had to do whatever they did with the money they generated from their product. Without major financial backing, Jeff and Jerry Jarrett lose their houses by the end of 2002.

So TNA sought out a major financial backer in what was an intelligent business move. So what? TNA did not start out as a Panda Energy company, they were an indie wrestling promotion with a roster primarily made up of unknowns. ROH was exactly the same, TNA made smart business choices and now find themselves at a much higher level than another company who started at the exact same time with the same level of chance.

And AJ Styles goes to ROH (he's still not WWE material in 2002), and when Spike TV is desperate to get back into pro wrestling, ROH is on Spike TV.

Speculation. You have nothing to suggest this could've or would've happened. You can do this with anything. What if Rob Feinstein didn't turn out to be a pedophile? What if?

I would guess that ROH on Spike TV with AJ Styles, Samoa Joe, Chris Daniels, CM Punk, Nigel McGuinness and Brian Danielson would be pulling a 1.0 rating, if not more.

Again complete speculation. TNA had their weekly PPV's make them money, that was a major part in them convincing a network they had enough of an audience to warrant a show. ROH took 7 years to get a TV deal. You can't just assume that things would be different if what has happened, didn't.

At the end of the day ROH and TNA both started as companies in 2002. One has become the #2 company in wrestling today and the other has become a farm league who have their top talents grabbed by either TNA or the WWE as soon as they start to gain a following.

 

[johnbragg]

So TNA sought out a major financial backer in what was an intelligent business move. So what? TNA did not start out as a Panda Energy company, they were an indie wrestling promotion with a roster primarily made up of unknowns.

Jarrett didn't "seek out" the Carters. They had sought out HealthSouth, granted, but the Panda connection was just that their publicist happened to own an energy company.

Speculation. You have nothing to suggest this could've or would've happened. You can do this with anything. What if Rob Feinstein didn't turn out to be a pedophile? What if?

Breaking it down real slow.
With no Dixie Carter, J Sports and Entertainment and NWA-TNA close their doors by the end of 2002. That's pretty widely reported, the weekly PPV model was losing boatloads of money.

AJ Styles, reallly the one new star that had emerged in the first couple of months of TNA, is going to go somewhere. I don't think WWE would be that interested in him--he's a cruiserweight, he's not great on the mic, he doesn't have the "look."

If he's not going to WWE, I think we can safely say that he would be going to the biggest indy in the US, ROH. He did work with ROH anyway, until TNA cut their talent off from ROH.

In 2005, WWE left Spike TV to go back to USA Network. Spike picks up TNA immediately. Spike wanted wrestling, badly. If there's no TNA, I think it's fair to say that they pick up ROH.

TNA had their weekly PPV's make them money, that was a major part in them convincing a network they had enough of an audience to warrant a show.

What? The weekly PPVs didn't make money, they lost money. I can't remember if the Fox Sports Net timeslot was paid for by TNA, or if Fox Sports Net gave TNA chump change, or just said "be happy you're on TV--go sell your PPVs now."

 

[Reddannihilation]

Jarrett didn't "seek out" the Carters. They had sought out HealthSouth, granted, but the Panda connection was just that their publicist happened to own an energy company.

TNA partners with HealthSouth, HealthSouth goes under, Dixie suggests Panda, Panda agrees. TNA still started off in the exact same spot as everyone else.

Breaking it down real slow.
With no Dixie Carter, J Sports and Entertainment and NWA-TNA close their doors by the end of 2002.

Yeah, but that DIDN'T happen, so why are you bringing up an irrelevant what if scenario?

That's pretty widely reported, the weekly PPV model was losing boatloads of money.

Pretty widely reported by the same people who report anything and everything that will get them hits. It was never reported by a legitimate source so it's not really relevant. Beyond that I'm still trying to work out why you're bringing up this "what if" situation.

AJ Styles, reallly the one new star that had emerged in the first couple of months of TNA, is going to go somewhere. I don't think WWE would be that interested in him--he's a cruiserweight, he's not great on the mic, he doesn't have the "look."

And this has what to do with anything?

If he's not going to WWE, I think we can safely say that he would be going to the biggest indy in the US, ROH. He did work with ROH anyway, until TNA cut their talent off from ROH.

And?

In 2005, WWE left Spike TV to go back to USA Network. Spike picks up TNA immediately. Spike wanted wrestling, badly. If there's no TNA, I think it's fair to say that they pick up ROH.

ROH in 2005 was not in a position to be broadcasting a weekly tv show. They had just come out from under the Pedo-stein situation. And I'm still not getting how this has any bearing seeing as it's a what if scenario.

What? The weekly PPVs didn't make money, they lost money.

Based on?

I can't remember if the Fox Sports Net timeslot was paid for by TNA, or if Fox Sports Net gave TNA chump change, or just said "be happy you're on TV--go sell your PPVs now."

And? How is any of this hypothetical shit relevant? Fact is TNA and ROH both started off at the same level. TNA is much bigger than ROH. Simple as that, you can pen your "what if" scenarios as much as you want but that doesn't change the fact that TNA has done well as a business beating out several companies who were gunning for their position. Chikara started in 2002 as well, CZW had 3 years advantage and did nothing with it. XPW went from 1999-2003 and that was the end of that.

So tell me, how does your what if scenario prove anything regarding TNA?

 

[johnbragg]

TNA still started off in the exact same spot as everyone else.

No, not at all. TNA had assets that other startup companies (ROH, XWF, WWA) didn't have. They had:

1. Deep-pocketed corporate partners
2. Jeff Jarrett, 3 or 4 time WCW champion and WWF IC champion
3. Jerry Jarrett, an experienced territorial promoter.

Jarrett also arranged to have
4. The NWA World Heavyweight title. (True, ROH or XWF could have arranged that but didn't.)

XWF had Hulk Hogan, WWA had Sting. ROH had Nothing.

So tell me, how does your what if scenario prove anything regarding TNA?

That TNA started with major, no, make that "significant", advantages over ROH. That's all.

I'd say that two of TNA's biggest advantages, Panda's financial backing and the Spike TV contract, were more the result of luck than anything else. They fell into the Panda Energy link, and that kept them alive long enough to get the Spike TV deal. (Although in the case of the Spike TV contract, "luck" is the result of preparation for an opportunity)

 

[mrbooker]

No, not at all. TNA had assets that other startup companies (ROH, XWF, WWA) didn't have. They had:

1. Deep-pocketed corporate partners
2. Jeff Jarrett, 3 or 4 time WCW champion and WWF IC champion
3. Jerry Jarrett, an experienced territorial promoter.

Jarrett also arranged to have
4. The NWA World Heavyweight title. (True, ROH or XWF could have arranged that but didn't.)

XWF had Hulk Hogan, WWA had Sting. ROH had Nothing.




That TNA started with major, no, make that "significant", advantages over ROH. That's all.

I'd say that two of TNA's biggest advantages, Panda's financial backing and the Spike TV contract, were more the result of luck than anything else. They fell into the Panda Energy link, and that kept them alive long enough to get the Spike TV deal. (Although in the case of the Spike TV contract, "luck" is the result of preparation for an opportunity)

I have been reading this garbage enough, you have done nothing but throw what if situations, then you want to bring luck into the equation, Do you really think Spike TV is just going to just give TNA a 8 o clock timeslot, do you really think Panda is going to put money into a company just for fun??? No is Spike wanted ROH they would have signed ROH, if ROH was worth putting money into then someone would have opened their check book for them the facts are they didnt. Panda felt there was potential for money to be made, spike tv felt their are viewers to be gained by giving TNA a weekly show.

You have been bashing TNA on the most ridiculous things and then you want to break it all down to luck? You are like the kid who is losing a argument and then looks for the most immature statment possible to validate his point

TNA started out in memphis as a small promotion and evolved, to having 3 hours of product ,primetime, weekly on television and you want to claim luck, learn how to look at things with an open mind TNA bettered themselves, and then used resources who felt their was money to be made, you want to sit here and claim ROH would be in the same boat if they had the same resources but they don't because ROH isnt worth putting money into for any business men.

You call it luck but you are someone on the side lines just spouting what if trash, companies do not spend money, and tv stations dont give away prime time slots just because, TNA earned it by being the 2nd best wrestling promotion. ROH had nothing because they are worth nothing to everyone, to business companies, to national TV channels, to star wrestlers!!! You say TNA started with assests like they started with with a billion in the bank, wow they started a wrestling company with people with experience in the wrestling business if ROH wasn't smart enough to do that then thats stupidity on their part as a WRESTLING PROMOTION!!

 

[TCBT]

"It will rock TNA to it's core"
"TNA will never be the same again"
"I'm gonna turn TNA upside down"
"We are going to take TNA over"
"I built this company, I'm not going to let someone else ruin it"

Why does every other storyline have to be centered around one of these lines?

I've heard these line so many times in the last 4 months, and none of them even make any sense. They all seem to be around changing TNA forever. Abyss said it last week, Flair said Fortune were going to take over TNA, Jeff Jarrett keeps talking about the future of TNA.

Its all such bullshit. Take the whole Jarrett/Sting/Nash/Hogan storyline. I still have no idea what they are talking about, but they keep talking about it as the "TNA power struggle" - or the commentators do atleast.

But this isn't a "power struggle" at all. Lets just say that Jeff Jarrett came out next week on Impact and admits defeat. Says that Sting and Nash win. Then what happens? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. They talk up power struggles, and changing TNA forever - when nothing can happen.

Then there's Ric Flair. Who claims that Fortune are taking over TNA. Again it makes no sense. Abyss said it too.

There are two problems with this (other than the fact it's fucking stupid):

1) Dixie Carter is an onscreen character - how can anyone take over TNA, when the person signing the paychecks is part of storylines? Surely the minute any of these groups start to become an actual threat to TNA, she pulls the plug on their contracts and ends it.

2) How can three seperate things take over TNA? - Abyss said that "they" will turn TNA upside down (think that's what he said), Flair's FoUrtune (yes, there called FOURtune, but there's 7 of them - it's Russo I'm hardly surprised) said that they are taking over TNA, and the Jarrett storyline talks about a power struggle. They can't all take over TNA.

3) It's fucking stupid - Seriously. All of these storylines, and there's nothing to get exited about. Nothing will happen, nobody is going to change TNA forever.

I'm baffled anyone can watch TNA for it's storylines, nothing to get exited about. The wrestling at times is very good, but all these bullshit storylines are stopping TNA from gaining any long term new viewers.

I would LOOOOVE it if we stuck to the subject originally started by JPK so this thread doesn't get closed for ignorant spamming and flaming.

I want TNA to be successful. I really do. I'm a wrestling fan and have been consistently watching wrestling for over 25 years. Like some of the members posting on this topic, I'd like to give my OPINION about the TNA programming in hopes that it gets better in time.

I personally think TNA needs major changes from the ground up. People have mentioned that TNA is at its best right now, and I RESPECTFULLY disagree. How can you bring in proven money makers like Angle, Sting, Hogan, Flair, Jeff Hardy, Mr. Anderson to some extent, and STILL have NO movement in your numbers?? Hell, Hogan starred in a reality show for a couple of seasons which had nothing to do with wrestling and STILL managed to beat the numbers put up by TNA.

This leads me to believe that TNA is not doing a good job recruiting fans to follow them on a weekly basis. I personally think the writing has a ton to do with it. Shooting iMPACT in the same location is also a huge factor.

But to stay on topic about the writing, I agree with a lot of what was said originally by JPK. The Sting, Nash, Jarrett, sometimes Hogan program is as convoluted and unspecific as can get. I don't have one clue as to what Sting or Nash want, I don't know why Jarrett's involved, what is Samoa Joe doing now (wasn't he kidnapped for MONTHS a few months ago?), why Dixie Carter ISN'T involved and is caught up in the mess with Fourtune instead, etc. How are Sting and Nash a "cancer" to TNA? What are they doing that's so bad? They take 5-10 mins total of TV time and they're cancerous to the TNA product??

I understand completely that wrestling is fake. I know storylines are obviously fake, but like a movie, if you're watching a story and it's not making sense to you and blatantly insulting your intelligence, you're going to notice the problems a lot more. They stick out like a sore thumb.

And when you continue to push the idea that "TNA will change forever," and at the end of the day you're still getting the same worn out storyline of people taking over for no particular reason, having ECW old-timers waste valuable TV time after you've established some young stars for apparently no reason (Jay Lethal? Hernandez? Rob Terry? Desmond Wolfe?), unexplained storylines end abruptly, and Dixie continue to brag about how great TNA is after her own employees are trying to beat her and run her out of her business (kayfabe obviously), you start wondering, "what are the writers thinking?"

 

[Reddannihilation]

No, not at all. TNA had assets that other startup companies (ROH, XWF, WWA) didn't have. They had:

1. Deep-pocketed corporate partners

Panda did not join until a few months after TNA's creation, HealthSouth quite clearly didn't have deep pockets seeeing as they went under quite quickly. Dixie was solely a publicist at the company's inception.

2. Jeff Jarrett, 3 or 4 time WCW champion and WWF IC champion

And XPW had a slew of former WCW and ECW talent, in 2002 no less. As you go on to mention XWF had Hog and the WWA had Sting, both of whom outdraw Jarrett by a mile.

3. Jerry Jarrett, an experienced territorial promoter.

And ROH had Gabe Sapolsky and Rob Feinstein both of whom had worked in ECW for years. Feinstein even had his own video distribution company.

Jarrett also arranged to have
4. The NWA World Heavyweight title. (True, ROH or XWF could have arranged that but didn't.)

So Jarrett made a smart business decision, oh man what a dick.

XWF had Hulk Hogan, WWA had Sting. ROH had Nothing.

ROH had nothing? A video distribution company, a booker who had worked in ECW and a president who had worked in ECW. Yeah nothing.

That TNA started with major, no, make that "significant", advantages over ROH. That's all.

No, they did not. Jeff Jarrett made smart business moves to keep his company afloat, TNA still started off as a simple wrestling company run out the fairgrounds with no tv show and very little money.

I'd say that two of TNA's biggest advantages, Panda's financial backing and the Spike TV contract, were more the result of luck than anything else. They fell into the Panda Energy link,

Yes it was all luck, and it was luck also that lead to RF being booked for trying to rape kids.

and that kept them alive long enough to get the Spike TV deal. (Although in the case of the Spike TV contract, "luck" is the result of preparation for an opportunity)

TNA sought out a TV deal, the first that got from FSN and Spike a year later. TNA came and said "we have a show and a fanbase, you interested?" and the network said "yes" there was no more luck involved here than saying it was lucky that the WWE beat out WCW. By your definition everything in the world is based on luck.

 

[johnbragg]

Panda did not join until a few months after TNA's creation, HealthSouth quite clearly didn't have deep pockets seeeing as they went under quite quickly. Dixie was solely a publicist at the company's inception.

Right. When you find an investor to assume ownership of 72% of your company because he's YOUR PUBLICIST'S DAD, that is luck. "Luck=failure or success based on things beyond your control." If TNA's publicist's dad had fed Pandas at the Dallas Zoo rather than run Panda Energy in Dallas, TNA would have died along with XWF and WWA. I specifically mentioned WWA and XWF because they were startups at the same time, with bigger stars, that failed. Partially because they didn't have deep pockets.

I'm not damning TNA or Jarrett, I'm trying to be fair. As Yogi Berra said, "I'd rather be lucky than good." Look where luck has gotten TNA, and look where good has gotten ROH. 8)

3. Jerry Jarrett, an experienced territorial promoter.
And ROH had Gabe Sapolsky and Rob Feinstein both of whom had worked in ECW for years. Feinstein even had his own video distribution company.

In 2002, Jerry Jarrett was a widely respected wrestling executive. He had run a successful territory, there were even rumors that when Vince was facing prison for distributing steroids (or taxes, I forget which), that he had lined up Jerry Jarrett to run WWF for him.

Gabe Sapolsky and Rob Feinstein were rookies with some midlevel experience in ECW.

Jarrett also arranged to have
4. The NWA World Heavyweight title. (True, ROH or XWF could have arranged that but didn't.)
So Jarrett made a smart business decision, oh man what a dick.

I'm not attacking him for it. It was a smart move. But it was a much easier move for Jerry and Jeff Jarrett to pull off than it would have been for Gabe Sapolsky or Ian Rotten or someone else without a lifetime of wrestling industry connections.

By your definition everything in the world is based on luck.

No, luck is when you succeed or fail based on factors beyond your control.

Like having a publicist who is the daughter of an oil company owner.

 

[Reddannihilation]

Right. When you find an investor to assume ownership of 72% of your company because he's YOUR PUBLICIST'S DAD, that is luck. "Luck=failure or success based on things beyond your control." If TNA's publicist's dad had fed Pandas at the Dallas Zoo rather than run Panda Energy in Dallas, TNA would have died along with XWF and WWA.

You don't know that. TNA could've ended up with a different backer. Panda were the first to call, but suppose they didn't how do you know someone else wouldn't have stepped in? You don't. Which is why these stupid What If? scenarios are meaningless.

I specifically mentioned WWA and XWF because they were startups at the same time, with bigger stars, that failed. Partially because they didn't have deep pockets.

So they made poor business decisions. TNA still started off as a tiny operation out of Nashville.

I'm not damning TNA or Jarrett, I'm trying to be fair. As Yogi Berra said, "I'd rather be lucky than good." Look where luck has gotten TNA, and look where good has gotten ROH. 8)

Yes creating What If? scenarios that rely exclusively on speculation is being fair. ROH started immediately with DVD distribution and an online store, RF video was already hugely popular among smark fans because of ECW. Here's a hypothetical for you "Fan heads to RF's site to see if they've got anything new, see's ROH DVD, buys DVD" vs. "Fan scrolls through PPV events and sees a cheap wrestling event, buys PPV", who's at an advantage here?

In 2002, Jerry Jarrett was a widely respected wrestling executive. He had run a successful territory, there were even rumors that when Vince was facing prison for distributing steroids (or taxes, I forget which), that he had lined up Jerry Jarrett to run WWF for him.

A successful territory that went out of business and rumors about something from 10 years prior to TNA means TNA had an unfair advantage? Sapolsky and Feinstein worked in ECW and ECW was more successful than the USWA. Jerry had no experience in running a show with a hugely different format to what he'd been doing previously, ROH had two guys more than capable of utilizing new media to sell their product.

Gabe Sapolsky and Rob Feinstein were rookies with some midlevel experience in ECW.

Sapolsky started working for ECW in 93, planning live event programs. If he's still a rookie 9 years after he started working in wrestling then maybe he's in the wrong industry. Feinstein also was around for most of ECW and had a successful video operation to help fund his idea.

I'm not attacking him for it. It was a smart move. But it was a much easier move for Jerry and Jeff Jarrett to pull off than it would have been for Gabe Sapolsky or Ian Rotten or someone else without a lifetime of wrestling industry connections.

What so 9 years isn't long enough to develop working relationships with people? You make it sound like the Jarrett's just walked in and said "hey, NWA Title please".

No, luck is when you succeed or fail based on factors beyond your control.

Well then it was luck that Steve Austin was fired by EB otherwise the WWF never would've survived. See, your concept is pointless.

Like having a publicist who is the daughter of an oil company owner.

Or being the son of an already successful wrestling promoter who's put in 20+ years of groundwork before you buy him out. Or having Ted Turner ok all your ideas at the drop of a hat.

 

[johnbragg]

ROH started immediately with DVD distribution and an online store, RF video was already hugely popular among smark fans because of ECW. Here's a hypothetical for you "Fan heads to RF's site to see if they've got anything new, see's ROH DVD, buys DVD" vs. "Fan scrolls through PPV events and sees a cheap wrestling event, buys PPV", who's at an advantage here?

If you really think that in 2002, ROH and NWA-TNA were equally prominent, then I don't know what to tell you. From their start in June 2002, TNA was running weekly shows. I looked up their debut show, and they had Jarrett, Ricky Steamboat, Harley Race, Dory Funk, Ken Shamrock, Scott Hall, Jerry Lynn, Ed Ferrara (Russo's old partner), ECW Francine, Jeremy Borash, Mike Tenay, Toby Keith, Buff Bagwell, Konnan, Rick Steiner, plus a lot of others (and a lot of real crap). http://www.onlineworldofwrestling.com/results/tna/020619a.html

ROH's first show had Eddy Guerrero, Super Crazy, Low Ki, Bryan Danielson, Christopher Daniels, Mikey Whipwreck and Steve Corino. (Steve Corino was also at TNA's first show, by the way.) http://ringofhonor.wikia.com/wiki/The_Era_of_Honor_Begins

TNA and ROH have both stayed alive for eight, nine years. That's a huge accomplishment in wrestling. (They've recently exceeded ECW's lifespan, for instance.) But to say that TNA and ROH started from the same starting point is just nonsense. TNA spent a lot more money, and would have went down like XWF and WWA and many more if they hadn't found someone to supply them with money.

It's not like "we need to find someone to fund our operations" is a genius business strategy. The problem is finding a sucker, er, investor.

 

[Reddannihilation]

If you really think that in 2002, ROH and NWA-TNA were equally prominent, then I don't know what to tell you. From their start in June 2002, TNA was running weekly shows.

because of smart business decisions that allowed TNA to do that.

I looked up their debut show, and they had Jarrett, Ricky Steamboat, Harley Race, Dory Funk, Ken Shamrock, Scott Hall, Jerry Lynn, Ed Ferrara (Russo's old partner), ECW Francine, Jeremy Borash, Mike Tenay, Toby Keith, Buff Bagwell, Konnan, Rick Steiner, plus a lot of others (and a lot of real crap). http://www.onlineworldofwrestling.com/results/tna/020619a.html

Ignoring that half the people you listed weren't wrestling and that the biggest draw you mentioned was either Hall or Shamrock. Half of the people who were wrestlers didn't do anything other than partake in a ceremony.

ROH's first show had Eddy Guerrero, Super Crazy, Low Ki, Bryan Danielson, Christopher Daniels, Mikey Whipwreck and Steve Corino. (Steve Corino was also at TNA's first show, by the way.)

And a bunch of other guys you didn't mention. Still I'd safely bet that Eddie Guerrero in 2002 was a bigger draw than Hall or Shamrock.

TNA and ROH have both stayed alive for eight, nine years.
That's a huge accomplishment in wrestling. (They've recently exceeded ECW's lifespan, for instance.) But to say that TNA and ROH started from the same starting point is just nonsense. TNA spent a lot more money, and would have went down like XWF and WWA and many more if they hadn't found someone to supply them with money.

Starting point: Jeff Jarrett says "hey, I'm going to start my own wrestling organisation"

"Rob Feinstein says, "hey, I'm going to replace ECW tapes as my primary income source and start my own wrestling company"

Same place.

It's not like "we need to find someone to fund our operations" is a genius business strategy. The problem is finding a sucker, er, investor.

Apparently it's a better one than whatever the XWF, WWA and ROH had going for them.

 

[johnbragg]

Ignoring that half the people you listed weren't wrestling and that the biggest draw you mentioned was either Hall or Shamrock. Half of the people who were wrestlers didn't do anything other than partake in a ceremony.

But they still got paid a decent fee for showing up.

ROH's first show had Eddy Guerrero, Super Crazy, Low Ki, Bryan Danielson, Christopher Daniels, Mikey Whipwreck and Steve Corino. (Steve Corino was also at TNA's first show, by the way.)

And a bunch of other guys you didn't mention. Still I'd safely bet that Eddie Guerrero in 2002 was a bigger draw than Hall or Shamrock.

You'd lose that bet. Scott Hall, the biggest wrestler of the '90s to not win a world title vs Eddie Guerrero, midcard cruiserweight. Scott Hall had just been booted from the WWF and a program with--Steve Austin. Eddy Guerrero's last big program before being fired from WWF was with--Test for the European title.

I didn't mention the rest of the guys on the ROH card because they weren't worth mentioning in 2002.

 

[excel_excel]

I have to agree JPK. None of the story lines will 'change' TNA, and its getting really repetitive having them constantly saying the same thing. My god they say it just as much as they say 'were taking TNA to the next level' when in actuallity the ratings are the same as ever and the PPV buyrates are as low as they've always been.

 

[Reddannihilation]

But they still got paid a decent fee for showing up.

How do you know what they get paid?

You'd lose that bet. Scott Hall, the biggest wrestler of the '90s to not win a world title vs Eddie Guerrero, midcard cruiserweight. Scott Hall had just been booted from the WWF and a program with--Steve Austin. Eddy Guerrero's last big program before being fired from WWF was with--Test for the European title.

Scott Hall who hadn't been a draw since the dying days of the nWo, coming off the worst run imaginable in the WWF vs. Eddie a guy who 1.) had developed a huge fan following as Latino Heat and had the added advantage of smarks actually liking him. This seems to be a big thing you're ignoring, indie wrestling is built for smarks, you're telling me Scott Hall, Jeff Jarrett and Ken Shamrock had wider appeal among smarks than Eddie Guerrero? No fucking way.

I didn't mention the rest of the guys on the ROH card because they weren't worth mentioning in 2002.

And again you're ignoring the fact that ROH was appealing to the old ECW smark audience, smarks love Homicide, they sure as hell don't love Ken Shamrock.

 

[johnbragg]

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnbragg View Post
But they still got paid a decent fee for showing up.
How do you know what they get paid?

How do any of us know anything about the business end of pro wrestling? But if you want to believe that they got paid the same as Joel and Jose Maximo, then go ahead and believe it. I believe that NWA legends like Steamboat and Harley Race got paid more, even in non-wrestling roles, than anyone but Eddie Guerrero and Super Crazy did for the ROH show. I believe that at least 20 guys at TNA's debut show got paid $1000 or more, while 2 guys at ROH's show got paid that kind of money (Eddie Guerrero, Super Crazy).

Also, Redd, go ahead and believe that Eddie Guerrero was a bigger draw in 2002 than Scott Hall, and more importantly would get a bigger appearance check than Scott Hall.

And again you're ignoring the fact that ROH was appealing to the old ECW smark audience, smarks love Homicide, they sure as hell don't love Ken Shamrock.

Maybe you looked at that ROH list and saw a lot of names you knew. What you forget is that they weren't smark favorties in 2002. They were nobodies--who became smark favorites because of ROH and TNA.

With Jerry Lynn, Psicosis and Steve Corino, there was a little something for the smarks on TNA's debut show, too. Heck, going through the card again to count WCW/ECW/WWF names, I just noticed that TNA had Low-Ki teamed with Jerry Lynn and AJ Styles.

Low Ki was one of the main eventers of the ROH show, with Daniels and Danielson, and I lost him in the card of the TNA debut.

Yeah, TNA and ROH were starting in the same place.

MODERATOR'S NOTE: Guys, enough with the back-and-forth one-liner chit chat. If you wish to have that type of discussion, either do it in the spam-friendly zones or via PM's. Either discuss the topic at hand and stop spamming up this thread or I will close it. End of story.