TNA iMPACT! & ReAction LD for 10.14 — THEY are here! | Page 11 | WrestleZone Forums

TNA iMPACT! & ReAction LD for 10.14 — THEY are here!

Wow they making immortal look really strong. i like it. So tempted to read the spoilers to see when the first match will occur.
 
Well, Taz does know what it's like to have a messed up neck.

inb4willtazjointhefightagainstimmortalquestions

EDIT: Too late.

You do realize I was joking right? What I said was meant to be absolutely ridiculous. That was the point of my post. Blatant sarcasm. By now, this should be considered part of my persona and gimmick.
 
I think the whole no wrestling thing is supposed to convey the unprepared nature of the show on account of all the shit that's going down. It actually works pretty effectively (as an idea. TNA's history of limited in ring action hurts the premise somewhat) but I can't say I like it.
 
I think the whole no wrestling thing is supposed to convey the unprepared nature of the show on account of all the shit that's going down. It actually works pretty effectively (as an idea. TNA's history of limited in ring action hurts the premise somewhat) but I can't say I like it.

Again: one night is ok. This being the norm is bad.
 
Don't really get why if all of a sudden Jarrett is such a badass, part of this "they" or "immortal" or whatever they are going to be called, and they are going to be such major players in TNA, why does Jarrett listen to Tazz and go backstage when Tazz tells him to? Shouldn't Jarrett, with cronies in tow, tell Tazz to go to hell and beat him down too?
 
And no I don't see what you did there. Pushing the big word boat out into waters too deep.
Sometimes I forget the audience I'm addressing and don't remember to dumb down what I say for a lowest common denominator. My bad. What I did was respond with the same non-response as you did, attacking a generic stereotype instead of what someone's actually saying. They call that a 'strawman' in big-word land.
Except where you did.
You quoted me how many times in that post, and the one time you don't quote me is for your claim that I said something specific? Riiiiiight.
Something about looking and barking like a dog comes to mind. Can't bring the prescise phrase up right now, but I'm sure you can fill in the blanks.
Is the phrase "if all you have is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail?" That's the one I'm thinking of. It sure makes things simpler when you're arguing on the internet to attack a generic stereotype instead of having to worry about what someone's actually saying.
The people who actually like TNA seem to be enjoying it. The people I see here week on week are having a very good time. And going to go ahead and push the idea that just maybe we are TNA's target audiance and you are not. That doesn't make TNA "shit wrestling".
As a company that still has illusions of growing, I thought they were trying to attract new fans? You don't seem to get that I want to like TNA, but what they are offering me, I don't find compelling. I'm far from the only person who feels that way, but anyone who expresses displeasure with anything TNA does is automatically an "internet drone". Again, it's much easier to argue against some strawman than it is to argue against someone's opinions.
Well no, because that's simplistic rubish. But you agree with me on that so I won't push it. WWE is many, many times more successful than TNA and is also good wrestling. Bad wrestling is the crap that people don't want. TNA has a major audiance which is retains week on week. All the reports indicate that it runs at a profit (which given it's status as a tax sink is pretty good going).
And what reports are those? The one pulled from in between Left Cheek and Right Cheek? All reports indicate that TNA is going out of business next week. Someone posted it on the internet on a message board, it *must* be true.
No, you're confusing me with you. I could give a shit whether and not anyone likes TNA. What I don't like is the peopole who are so full of themselves that they like to pretend that their personal oppinions reprosent some kind of baromiter of inherent quality. It doesn't.
You are doing the same exact thing right now, except you liked the segment in question. This is Live Discussion, right? Not the Live Mark-out forum?
Enough advertising (which TNA didn''t have in the early days) can get an audiance, but it could never keep it. Quality TV does that.
This I will say is wrong. If you tell people that something is good enough times, there's a healthy bottom percentage who will believe it. That's Marketing 101 right there; if you don't believe me, it's election season. The candidate who spends more on advertising wins, more often than not.
 
Joe is one of the best bigger guys for making a short match look reasonable. Say what you like, he's got intensity down pretty well.
 
What's going on here? They are actually having a wrestling match. And it's only 75 minutes into the show.

Oh that's right, there was one other match, the female equivalent of the Fingerpoke of Doom.

Is this a Hot Tub Time Machine situation or what?
 
Thats pretty bad to air the Joe promo right after the Jarrett/Angle segment, then to have Joe wrestle next, why wouldn't he just come out when Jarrett was out there.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,846
Messages
3,300,837
Members
21,727
Latest member
alvarosamaniego
Back
Top