TNA Does It Better

[klunderbunker]

There's a lot of bashing TNA around here every day, but TNA keeps me coming every single week. That means there has to be stuff there that they do, and I'd say does it better than WWE in some ways. Here are some of them.

1. The women. While the Divas are presented as serious competitors and usually bomb in the ring, the Knockouts are often treated as sexy and skilled in the ring, which they usually are to a much better extent than their WWE counterparts. Also, they're more than capable of having a five minute match without things falling apart in front of your eyes.

2. Continuity. TNA will call back on ideas from years ago with stuff like Bobby Roode hitting James Storm with a beer bottle, MVP having money from being Smackdown's highest paid athlete, and the history of the Beautiful People standing out. In WWE, Edge and Christian stopped being brothers. Advantage: Orlando.

3. Backstories. How many times do you ever get a backstory to a character in WWE? Fandango dances, Bo Dallas is a motivational speaker and Paige is a wrestler. Over in TNA, Knux has brought in his friends from a failed carnival, Gunner is a former Marine who helped his friend through a stay in a mental institution and Samuel SHaw has a disturbing mother and the bedroom of an eight year old. While these may not be the most fascinating characters in the world, they're about 9000x more detailed than WWE, which usually gives them a longer shelf life.

There's more out there so list what you think WWE does better, as well as questioning any of my correct statements.

 

[Robert Roode Fan]

I agree with you back in 2012 or 2013, epically with roode storm segements, this made tna better tv to watch back in 2012 than wwe at the time, WAY BETTER. Now both are bad, but wwe is better more tna and they do things that are WAY BETTER, like they acually end REALLY LONG TITLE CHASES WITH SOME PAYOFF, bryans title run sucks but at least he got one.

 

[MyndZero]

I stopped watching weeks ago, TNA as of late has been copying WWE so hard, it honestly made me want to stop watching - so I did, I stopped watching.

The ONLY things I watched TNA for before that, was bobby roode, austin airies, and the samuel shaw storyline. Granted I still watched the whole show.

If I was to go back right now, it would only be to watch the segments with them and skip over everything else. If those 3 guys jumped ship to WWE, I would never watch TNA again. Granted if samuel shaw jumped ship, he would need to keep his current gimmick, he does it so well - I wouldn't want him playing anything else, but he might prove me wrong on that.

It's unfortunate but right now, TNA is not an alternative to WWE - It's just a different brand.

 

[Kylewait89]

TNA also isn't busy trying to plug other shows. They have one a week and that's what they worry about. WWE simply does too much and sometimes the product is hurt. I have never once watched TNA and thought, man they did a great job with this story. You know why? A lot of it is borrowed work. Devon's sons allegiance on the line? I feel like I saw that somewhere. WWE perhaps?

Not gonna lie, any wrestling diva now is typically going to be subpar but if she looks good then fine. Conversely, if they can wrestle but look like ODB, does anyone really care?

The Edge and Christian argument is ridiculous. They also portrayed cult members who drank blood so are you complaining about the continuity there too? You can cherry pick where you want but continuity flaws exist everywhere.

And back stories? Really? How about the Wyatts? How about Rusev? Rhodes brothers? Orton? I mean getting on them for having real characters instead of cartoony type characters is ridiculous. I believe the best wrestling character of all time, The Undertaker has a pretty vivid backstory.

TNA is like the little engine that wishes it could yet people constantly try to defend it like it is even as good as the garbage that WWE is spewing out right now.

 

[klunderbunker]

TNA also isn't busy trying to plug other shows. They have one a week and that's what they worry about. WWE simply does too much and sometimes the product is hurt. I have never once watched TNA and thought, man they did a great job with this story. You know why? A lot of it is borrowed work. Devon's sons allegiance on the line? I feel like I saw that somewhere. WWE perhaps?

Not gonna lie, any wrestling diva now is typically going to be subpar but if she looks good then fine. Conversely, if they can wrestle but look like ODB, does anyone really care?

The Edge and Christian argument is ridiculous. They also portrayed cult members who drank blood so are you complaining about the continuity there too? You can cherry pick where you want but continuity flaws exist everywhere.

And back stories? Really? How about the Wyatts? How about Rusev? Rhodes brothers? Orton? I mean getting on them for having real characters instead of cartoony type characters is ridiculous. I believe the best wrestling character of all time, The Undertaker has a pretty vivid backstory.

TNA is like the little engine that wishes it could yet people constantly try to defend it like it is even as good as the garbage that WWE is spewing out right now.

Yeah I kind of am complaining about it as going from vampires to not vampires and then from brothers to best friends who met over a ninja star is kind of a big deal.

As for those people, let's see.

Wyatt - Not really explained.
Rusev - He's Bulgarian
Rhodes Brothers - They're brothers that wrestle
Orton - He's the son of a famous wrestler.

Those could be applied to anyone. Save for Rusev, a lot of people could easily be swapped in for characters like those. It's taking a very easy road as opposed to coming up with something interesting. Wrestling with really generic characters can work, but when the people aren't all that talented, you need something to add to them. Look at what Dustin Rhodes was and what he became with Goldust if you need proof for that.

 

[Kylewait89]

Other examples are the Daniel Bryan copycat, abyss being a blatant mankind rip off and Samuel Shaw being obsessed with someone is new? Really? Uh, Kane and Lita ring a bell? That is just my favorite one, not the only one.

 

[MC_Live]

I'll give you the point about the Woman's divisions. The Knockout division is given much more respect than the Divas division. However, continuity and backstories are certainly not better.

Continuity- Example AJ Styles. His dark return in 2013 where he came back and said "I'm not picking sides. All I care about is money." Then, just weeks later when Dixie is making contract offers to AJ, he said "It's not about the money." Clear continuity contradiction right there. I could go to list many more contradictions I've found, but I don't have enough time.

Backstory- I don't really get your point. They're all characters. What's Mike Knox's character? A carny with a weird family. Samuel Shaw's character is a creepy guy who lives at home. That's just where TNA decided to focus those characters.
Bo Dallas and Fandango don't need 10 minute segments to explain the outside lives of their characters. Their characters are pretty blatant from just looking at them. A dancer and a motivational speaker. Once you see them for just a 30 second promo, you should get the character and move on to more important stuff, like seeing them actually compete.
But, if you want more backstory, how about Kane? He's been using the character created to be Undertaker's brother for a decade and a half. How bout Bad News Barrett? He gives people Bad News, and then knocks them out with the Bull Hammer.

Not to hate on TNA, but there isn't a lot they do better than WWE. Really, the only thing I can think of is the Knockouts division. And recently, the Divas division has made serious advances, making the gap much smaller.

I could make a more in depth argument, but I stopped watching TNA a few years back. I pay attention, but every time I try to give them a shot, I just get overwhelmed with all the problems I see. TNA has a habit of screwing up their story lines. Bobby Roode and James Storm had an AMZING feud in 2012. Their face to face promo on the Impact before Lockdown was one of the best in ring segments in a very long time. And then, they completely ruined the story by having Storm lose. Having Storm beat Roode at Lockdown would have been the perfect ending, and they messed it up. And that's just one of countless examples. AJ Styles, Chris Sabin, even Eric Young now. They all had story lines with really great potential, that TNA just squandered. So does TNA do anything better than WWE? In my opinion, no. They're not an alternative. They're WWE light. And when you rip off a bad product, you just look terrible.

On an unrelated note, does nobody know how to spell check on this site? Capitalization is the easiest thing in the world. When you're typing someone's name, just hold the shift key please. That way you'll capitalize their name, the way proper English is written.

 

[Kylewait89]

Rusev has been on TV for all of a month right? Are they really going to get much out when they already have so many established guys?

Telling me the Wyatt's aren't ever explained is crap as they have basically poured countless hours into that and have actually taken time with a story for once. They explain the whole Sister Abigail thing in the first few months and he isn't the character that he is now. Essentially being guided by words of an unknown sister that lead him to think he is capable of being a god is going to get attention. I don't necessarily like watching "follow the buzzards" and the "in his hands" song every week but to tell me a backstory just isn't there is false.

You basically proved my point by bringing up Dustin Rhodes as I was talking about the story lines that led to what they avoided so long, acknowledging the brother connection when we all knew it.

Orton being a third gen wrestler isn't the only part of his backstory but he is a real life character, they have worked his story pretty well from the beginning.

Sorry but the cartoonish characters like Fandango don't need backstories when they aren't big names. They are for the PG audience, that's it. Failing to acknowledge that is on the viewer.

 

[klunderbunker]

Continuity- Example AJ Styles. His dark return in 2013 where he came back and said "I'm not picking sides. All I care about is money." Then, just weeks later when Dixie is making contract offers to AJ, he said "It's not about the money." Clear continuity contradiction right there. I could go to list many more contradictions I've found, but I don't have enough time.

It's a bit better than the week to week stuff we get on WWE. The whole AJ thing was indeed a mess though.

Backstory- I don't really get your point. They're all characters. What's Mike Knox's character? A carny with a weird family. Samuel Shaw's character is a creepy guy who lives at home. That's just where TNA decided to focus those characters.

It's a far better focus than a lot of what we get in WWE. Even Wyatt, the most interesting character they've had in years, is barely getting any details anymore.

Bo Dallas and Fandango don't need 10 minute segments to explain the outside lives of their characters. Their characters are pretty blatant from just looking at them. A dancer and a motivational speaker. Once you see them for just a 30 second promo, you should get the character and move on to more important stuff, like seeing them actually compete.

Yeah, and then Fandango ran out of interesting things to do in a few months. It's a constant problem for WWE: their midcard characters die off quickly because there's nothing for them to do long term. Dallas has more potential than one note characters like Fandango, but they need more details than just that.

But, if you want more backstory, how about Kane? He's been using the character created to be Undertaker's brother for a decade and a half. How bout Bad News Barrett? He gives people Bad News, and then knocks them out with the Bull Hammer.

Kane is good but nothing that's been introduced recently.

....how many times has Barrett actually done that? The Bad News thing is more of a nickname and a way to start promos than a character.

I could make a more in depth argument, but I stopped watching TNA a few years back. I pay attention, but every time I try to give them a shot, I just get overwhelmed with all the problems I see. TNA has a habit of screwing up their story lines. Bobby Roode and James Storm had an AMZING feud in 2012. Their face to face promo on the Impact before Lockdown was one of the best in ring segments in a very long time. And then, they completely ruined the story by having Storm lose. Having Storm beat Roode at Lockdown would have been the perfect ending, and they messed it up. And that's just one of countless examples. AJ Styles, Chris Sabin, even Eric Young now. They all had story lines with really great potential, that TNA just squandered. So does TNA do anything better than WWE? In my opinion, no. They're not an alternative. They're WWE light. And when you rip off a bad product, you just look terrible.

It never ceases to amaze me how people will criticize a company they haven't watched in awhile.

 

[klunderbunker]

Rusev has been on TV for all of a month right? Are they really going to get much out when they already have so many established guys?

Considering Knux's character was explained in about two weeks, yeah I'd think it's a fair request.

Telling me the Wyatt's aren't ever explained is crap as they have basically poured countless hours into that and have actually taken time with a story for once. They explain the whole Sister Abigail thing in the first few months and he isn't the character that he is now. Essentially being guided by words of an unknown sister that lead him to think he is capable of being a god is going to get attention. I don't necessarily like watching "follow the buzzards" and the "in his hands" song every week but to tell me a backstory just isn't there is false.

And is Abigail a real person or a figment of his imagination? Is he actually supernatural? There's a story, but it's not complete yet.

You basically proved my point by bringing up Dustin Rhodes as I was talking about the story lines that led to what they avoided so long, acknowledging the brother connection when we all knew it.

....when was it a secret?

Orton being a third gen wrestler isn't the only part of his backstory but he is a real life character, they have worked his story pretty well from the beginning.

No not really. It's more like "here's Randy Orton. There isn't much to him but his dad and grandfather wrestled." That's rather shallow, which was the point I was making.

Sorry but the cartoonish characters like Fandango don't need backstories when they aren't big names. They are for the PG audience, that's it. Failing to acknowledge that is on the viewer.

There are several adult characters who are one note. The PG thing doesn't hold up.

 

[Kylewait89]

Klunderbunker,
He clearly watches as he knows what he is talking about. I assume he means in line with a week to week basis. And honestly, I don't see how anyone watches TNA week to week.

 

[MC_Live]

Yeah I kind of am complaining about it as going from vampires to not vampires and then from brothers to best friends who met over a ninja star is kind of a big deal.

Two things. A) Characters evolve. So yes, they can stop being vampires at some point and it could be fine. B) Sometimes, it's best not to treat the audience like idiots. In 1998, you could get away with saying Edge & Christian were brothers. They looked very similar. In 2004,5,6,7 so on up until today, when people can readily access the internet and very easily find out the two aren't actually brothers, kayfabe is pick and choose. So, WWE decide to not keep up the brothers storyline in order to better fit the way they wanted to present the characters of edge and Christian.

Wyatt - Not really explained.
Rusev - He's Bulgarian
Rhodes Brothers - They're brothers that wrestle
Orton - He's the son of a famous wrestler.

Has the Wyatt Family really not been explained to you enough? They're some creepy fellows seemingly from the swamps. Bray is a charismatic enigma who can use his cryptic language to gain followers. As for everything else we don't know, well the mystery adds to the mystique of the characters. Rusev is more than a Bulgarian. He is the super athlete. His deal is that he believes he is the most superior athlete in the world, and is set on showing everyone on how inferior American athletes are. And the Rhodes Brothers are two shining examples of character development. Cody went from being Dashing to Disfigured behind a mask. Two of the best characters in recent memory. And Goldust is one of the best characters of all time, no need in citing his credentials. And now they're two brothers who fought for their jobs, and went form being unemployed to Tag Team Champions within days. That's a good story. And to say Randy Orton is the son of a famous wrestler gives nowhere near the amount of credit he is due. Yeah, he's the son of a famous wrestler. But by the time he was 25, he was already way more successful and famous than his father ever was. Also, the Legend Killer and the Viper. Two of the absolute best characters in wrestling history. I'm sorry, there is absolutely no way Samuel Shaw or Mike Knox measure up to The Viper. Just look at 2009 Orton when he was on the top of his game as a heel.

WWE may have a lot of "generic" wrestlers like Kofi kingston or Justin Gabriel, but you aren't giving them the credit they are really due. They just use more subtle, realistic characters. John Cena, Daniel Bryan, Sheamus. They're all characters. They're just based more in realistic personas.

Also, let us not forget Mike Knox is a WWE alum. And while many alumni were released because they weren't given the right opportunities, some WWE alumni have been released because they just didn't have what it took to make it in the biggest company in the world. To me, Mike Knox falls into that category. Just food for thought.

And to be fair to myself, I stopped watching full episodes a while back. I've seen segments recently while attempting to watch a full episode. I just can't bring myself to finish one. So it's not completely try to say I haven't watched in a while. Like I saw the EY title win. And I've seen almost every segment with Willow since the character debuted. I'll admit, I love the Willow character. But I think that's more so Jeff Hardy than TNA's doing.

 

[Kylewait89]

Klunderbunker

Now you are just being sore about it. Rusev doesn't get time, he gets squash matches as nothing is exactly open for him. TNA literally can do whatever it wants, because people don't care. They could get away with not having a
name or two to not show up while exploring someone else.

WWE fans would whine and cry all week if Wyatt's, SHIELD, Evolution, Bryan and a few others aren't on tv on Raw.

In line with trying to explain Knox and continuity, wasn't he just an A&8 member? Now he has a carnie family? See how easy cherry picking is?

You not liking WWE is on you but you basically try to dumb
All of these things down like we couldn't do the same with TNA or call out the constant copying is just being ignorant at this point.

 

[klunderbunker]

Klunderbunker

It's klunderbunker, or KB.

Now you are just being sore about it. Rusev doesn't get time, he gets squash matches as nothing is exactly open for him. TNA literally can do whatever it wants, because people don't care. They could get away with not having a
name or two to not show up while exploring someone else.

WWE fans would whine and cry all week if Wyatt's, SHIELD, Evolution, Bryan and a few others aren't on tv on Raw.

Whatever it wants and people don't care? I'm sure that's why bashing TNA is such a popular pastime on here.

Also people would complain if 10+ people weren't on Raw because it would cut out about half of the show. I'd hardly complain ten people to "one or two". But I'm just bitter or whatever you said, meaning I can't count apparently.

In line with trying to explain Knox and continuity, wasn't he just an A&8 member? Now he has a carnie family? See how easy cherry picking is?

Becoming a biker and then going home after everything falls apart is a bit bigger of a stretch than we're vampires then we're brothers then we're friends. Just a bit.

You not liking WWE is on you but you basically try to dumb
All of these things down like we couldn't do the same with TNA or call out the constant copying is just being ignorant at this point.

Me? Not like WWE? You're new around here aren't you.

 

[klunderbunker]

Two things. A) Characters evolve. So yes, they can stop being vampires at some point and it could be fine. B) Sometimes, it's best not to treat the audience like idiots. In 1998, you could get away with saying Edge & Christian were brothers. They looked very similar. In 2004,5,6,7 so on up until today, when people can readily access the internet and very easily find out the two aren't actually brothers, kayfabe is pick and choose. So, WWE decide to not keep up the brothers storyline in order to better fit the way they wanted to present the characters of edge and Christian.

So changing what was supposed to be a blood relation by saying they're no longer related is treating them like intelligent people? Balderdash. Undertaker and Kane, who look far less alike, have been treated like brothers for 17 years now and no one has seemed to be insulted. That's quite the disconnect.

Has the Wyatt Family really not been explained to you enough? They're some creepy fellows seemingly from the swamps. Bray is a charismatic enigma who can use his cryptic language to gain followers. As for everything else we don't know, well the mystery adds to the mystique of the characters.

So we can assume fans will buy that a man is a swamp preacher but not that various pairs of brothers are or aren't brothers? Good to know.

Rusev is more than a Bulgarian. He is the super athlete. His deal is that he believes he is the most superior athlete in the world, and is set on showing everyone on how inferior American athletes are.

Actually that's mostly Lana, but I can see how a WWE fan of limited intelligence, which apparently most of them are because they're supposed to believe Undertaker and Kane are brothers because that wasn't changed in this new era, would confuse the two.

And the Rhodes Brothers are two shining examples of character development. Cody went from being Dashing to Disfigured behind a mask. Two of the best characters in recent memory. And Goldust is one of the best characters of all time, no need in citing his credentials.

This explains a lot.

And now they're two brothers who fought for their jobs, and went form being unemployed to Tag Team Champions within days. That's a good story.

Good story, generic characters. It can definitely work but it's not as easy.

And to say Randy Orton is the son of a famous wrestler gives nowhere near the amount of credit he is due. Yeah, he's the son of a famous wrestler. But by the time he was 25, he was already way more successful and famous than his father ever was.

Successful yes, famous no.

Also, the Legend Killer and the Viper. Two of the absolute best characters in wrestling history. I'm sorry, there is absolutely no way Samuel Shaw or Mike Knox measure up to The Viper. Just look at 2009 Orton when he was on the top of his game as a heel.

And very shallow characters. He beats up old people and gets mad easily. Again, you're assuming that because I say they don't have depth that I think they're bad.

WWE may have a lot of "generic" wrestlers like Kofi kingston or Justin Gabriel, but you aren't giving them the credit they are really due. They just use more subtle, realistic characters. John Cena, Daniel Bryan, Sheamus. They're all characters. They're just based more in realistic personas.

Subtle and realistic usually doesn't mean successful, as completely over the top (and one note) characters like Austin, Rock and Hogan would suggest.

Also, let us not forget Mike Knox is a WWE alum. And while many alumni were released because they weren't given the right opportunities, some WWE alumni have been released because they just didn't have what it took to make it in the biggest company in the world. To me, Mike Knox falls into that category. Just food for thought.

Yeah he's generic, hence why he needs a more in depth characters.

And to be fair to myself, I stopped watching full episodes a while back. I've seen segments recently while attempting to watch a full episode. I just can't bring myself to finish one. So it's not completely try to say I haven't watched in a while. Like I saw the EY title win. And I've seen almost every segment with Willow since the character debuted. I'll admit, I love the Willow character. But I think that's more so Jeff Hardy than TNA's doing.

And I'm accused of cherry picking?

 

[DeadWalkerr]

The TNA knockouts know how to put on a match. I know some used to be in the WWE and I wish WWE would sign Velvet Sky and Gail Kim. Those 2 would run circles around the WWE Diva's with the exception of Paige and AJ Lee.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

It is not something I care much about but TNA seems to be right now keeping their talent on a level playing field. I feel like anyone could enter the main event scene and have a chance to succeed. A lot of people complain about the predictability in matches. I don't feel that exists in TNA in 2014.

Again, I'm not sure if this is a good thing but it is something TNA does better than WWE.

 

[das1234]

i think tna continuity is in some places really good, like them taking time to have storm-roode talk about the past and things like that, but then they destroy it all by doing way too many swerves and the sheer amount of Face- and heelturns keeps people from investing in anyone i think.
just look at aries, he turned like 5 times over a year. MVP is here since lockdown basically, already a heelturn. roode turned face for one day, bully ray was just a swerve for swerves sake and makes no sense, Aj turned face for no reason, Magnus turned for no reason, abyss and park just stopped and turned heel, it goes on and on. why they do it in storyline doesnt matter, it just makes people unable to care, because the turns happen all the time and you expect them, they kill every investment anyone can have in these characters.

i will give you the fact that tna has way less gimmick cartoon characters and handles them better, but i dont think anyone takes people like shaw, fandango or crazy steve seriously since the 90s.
thats why WWE is a circus for babies and TNA should try to distance themselves creatively as far as possible which they dont do. WWE has a bearded underdog champion? why not put the title on Roode? Or Storm? Or someone like Joe or Angle or have a heel bully ray prove he can do it on his own.
Anyone EXCEPT the guy who looks exactly the same? Also, WWE has heel authority, so why not remove the heel authority from TNA? Instead now we have TWO, including one where the (basically) GM is part of a three man team. i swear, they are TRYING to get these comparisons, this cant be a coincidence.
Just look at what TNA can produce when they just let people do their thing, Bad Influence, EC3, Spud or Roode are really fun and organic acts that have entertainment value because they arent bound to some kindergarten-level word-for-word WWE script involving sesame seeds in buns. They just need more of what WWE cant provide and less of the same stuff.

The KO division at least provides better matches than the divas, but they suffer from low budget and feels like basically 4 people. not sure what you can do about that when you dont have money. Maybe they could outsource their womens contracts to one of these women promotions or something, i dont know.

 

[Fire Marshall Bill]

The Knockouts Division is an easy call. They've always been better than the Divas. And to the poster who said the gap is closing: one small uptick in recent storylines does not instantly develop credibility. The Knockouts aren't even close to what they used to be and are still way better than the Divas.

With the whole Randy Orton discussion, didn't they use his former Marine background and anger management issues as a backstory? It's not overly detailed, but he's also a more realistic character.

With Bray Wyatt, they did a few segments of someone (can't remember who) visiting his home in the swamps. I don't see that as much different than Knux's visit home to his family. And while I understand you're saying they haven't expanded upon Wyatt in a long time, I'm honestly expecting the same thing with Knux. Remember he's still new and TNA's ability to maintain most anything is suspect.

When it comes to characters you can nitpick if you want, but it honestly all depends on how well the wrestler pulls off that character. Do you think Giant Gonzalez could've played the Undertaker? Hell no. That's a colorful gimmick that requires a dedicated, able person.

James Storm is one of my favorites today, but if you wan't to pigeon hole him, he's simply a cowboy who drinks beer. That's not a detailed individual - pretty down to Earth even - but he pulls it off extremely well.

Today's wrestling has a lot of realistic characters. One thing I think Knux has going for him is while he himself is pretty normal, his group is very colorful. It makes for realism and fun at the same time.

As far as continuity goes, I see no point in discussing it. Any wrestling program ever has developed holes in continuity. It's the nature of long term storylines as well has heel/face turns.

 

[Whap Me Jungles]

It is not something I care much about but TNA seems to be right now keeping their talent on a level playing field. I feel like anyone could enter the main event scene and have a chance to succeed. A lot of people complain about the predictability in matches. I don't feel that exists in TNA in 2014.

Again, I'm not sure if this is a good thing but it is something TNA does better than WWE.

Funny thing, a lot of people on TNA sites I frequent feel the opposite. They feel there should be more of a "division" structure, and the lack of heirarchy makes having the X or TV (what happened to that?) title useless.

I don't agree with that particular view. The current state of affairs keeps the TNA product unpredictable because you think anyone could win the title. Eric Young's recent win was the epitome of that; no one at all saw it coming, and all anyone after him needs is one night and one match to capture the prize.

 

[FitFinlay4Life]

People laughing at KB's opinion? Y'all know he's the guy who watches more wrestling than, likely, all of us put together?

As to the characterization, I definitely see were he is coming from:

Bray Wyatt is a religious zealot of types with two followers and a muse of sorts called Sister Abigail... but what lead him to that; how did his two 'brothers' come into the equation? Likewise, Randy Orton and Goldust - what part of being a former legends son makes you schizophrenic or androgynous? Rusev is a Bulgarian who is introduced by a Russian as a Russian representative... why? Mankind, Dude Love, Cactus Jack, Mick Foley... there was never any explanation for the various faces of Foley asides from he fancied that particular guise for that particular period/ match type.

Mike Knox is a guy who walked out on the family business to become a professional wrestler and is now trying to connect the two to try and keep said struggling business going. James Storm is a good old boy who tried his hand at wrestling to put the food on his families table (hardly complicated but TNA has devoted time to this before... and it worked quite well for SCSA). Sam Shaw is a guy with Oedipal issues who is currently being offered assistance by Gunner who had a friend who suffered mental problems as a result of combat in the Marines with Gunner (a history oft covered and reason behind his Mr. Intensity gimmick). Abyss is a guy with parental issues that led to his character changing from goofy solicitor to a sado-masochistic madman to schizophrenic.


I'm confused why people are arguing this point; while there are exceptions in both the WWe and TNA. As companies, TNA has for some time gone more into who their wrestlers are, most likely because of their smaller roster. Because of the sheer size of their roster, WWe rarely shows the same inclination.

 

[snoopy]

Funny thing, a lot of people on TNA sites I frequent feel the opposite. They feel there should be more of a "division" structure, and the lack of heirarchy makes having the X or TV (what happened to that?) title useless.

I don't agree with that particular view. The current state of affairs keeps the TNA product unpredictable because you think anyone could win the title. Eric Young's recent win was the epitome of that; no one at all saw it coming, and all anyone after him needs is one night and one match to capture the prize.

TNA has been establishing unpredictabilty for a while now.showing fans anything could happen at anytime. Like when Bobby Roode lost in the main event at Bound for glory. And when a sensible fan looks back on the decision it makes sense and leads to a bigger pay- off.

Even EY winning the world title is smart because he has a show on animal planet in which he could use as a way to get his foot in door of other shows who generally wouldn't have any interest in the TNA champion. Just smart stuff no matter what anyone says. They are doing a great job of bringing in new characters and giving them back stories. Why fans can't appreciate that is beyond me.

 

[Slash-LN]

KB I'm with you on the back story stuff.

Bram coming in with a back story about him and Magnus automatically made me interested in him. He wasn't just some guy that showed up on the roster randomly.

Also even though it was obvious that Jeff is Willow I liked that they didn't try to insult the fan base and pretend it wasn't.

TNA is good at adding another layer of depth to the stories. We get the in ring and backstage stuff but we also get off location stuff like Bully going to Dixie's office and home and the search for AJ Styles. I know it's not the first time in wrestling that stuff has been done but TNA does it really well.

 

[rbv13]

A very entertaining read with the back and forth regarding character background and development. I can see where both sides are right on the money and where each side is completely stretching to make a point. It is almost as if each side has gotten away from the original point of the thread.

………….

Of course TNA dose a lot a positive things and in some cases they do them better than the" untouchable" conglomerate monster known as the WWE. The real problem in trying to have this discussion is a large portion of the fans being beyond stubborn when it comes to acknowledging another wrestling company could be doing something right.

I really get a kick off out those claiming that everything in TNA is a direct rip off of the WWE. I will concede to the notion there have been a lot of similarities between the two as of late but that is an aged old, not just wrestling, but business tactic. If a competitor is doing something that’s gaining attention than you sure as hell better start doing something like it. What really cracks me up his comparing current TNA characters or programs to stars or angles that happened ten years ago. I hope in this day and age even the biggest mark would realize that 90% of what you have ever seen in the E was ripped off or borrowed from somewhere else.

I would like to touch on the Abyss/Kane comparisons. I can see where they share similar qualities but to say Abyss is a TNA created rip off is ridiculous. First off the Abyss character was created in Puerto Rico while Parks was working with Dutch Mantle. The very same Dutch Mantle that worked with and saw amazing talent in a young Glen Jacobs. As in many cases Dutch would suggest that the big monster type of physiques dawn the mask. The two are crazy monster types but that can be said about countless individuals of the past fifty years.

 

[pipebomber]

3. Backstories. How many times do you ever get a backstory to a character in WWE? Fandango dances, Bo Dallas is a motivational speaker and Paige is a wrestler. Over in TNA, Knux has brought in his friends from a failed carnival, Gunner is a former Marine who helped his friend through a stay in a mental institution and Samuel SHaw has a disturbing mother and the bedroom of an eight year old. While these may not be the most fascinating characters in the world, they're about 9000x more detailed than WWE, which usually gives them a longer shelf life.

Maybe... at first. but the problem with that detailed of a backstory if they are easily painted into a corner. These backstories aren't based off the truth so with the internet, people are going to know the truth. It's harder to change a failed gimmick and make it believable when you have this detailed backstory about who they are and where they come from.

As you mentioned in WWE Edge and Christian stopped being brothers. This is because, Edge and Christian aren't brothers. Most people knew this so they stopped acting like they were to see more realistic. that was simply a way to add a bit more realism to the product.