TNA iMPACT! & ReAction LD for 10.28.10

With all due respect, SD, Morgan could step into a TNA ring and do his version of Riverdance, and you'd tout this as a 5-star match. After all, it is TNA.

Yeah I do that all the time, get a new shtick already.

Without a doubt, the in-ring product is better in WWE than it is in TNA. Without a doubt. Because in WWE, the in-ring activity actually includes wrestling matches, not just a series of promos to further convoluted storylines.

Right they never wrestle in TNA. Give me a fucking break.
 
Without a doubt, the in-ring product is better in WWE than it is in TNA. Without a doubt. Because in WWE, the in-ring activity actually includes wrestling matches, not just a series of promos to further convoluted storylines.
No offense, but in my eyes, WWE's in-ring product is slow, un-entertaining and way formula-based. I honestly prefer a 3 minute high speed chase over a 15 minute "sniff-my-armpit" contest.
 
Yeah I do that all the time, get a new shtick already.

No need to get testy now, SD. You know as well as I do that you in fact do that all the time. You are a hopeless TNA mark, and I don't mean that in a deragatory fashion, but just as a statement of fact. Perhaps you are the one who needs the new schtick.

Right they never wrestle in TNA. Give me a fucking break.

Come on now, take a typical episode of iMPACT and look at promo or backstage time versus in ring wrestling time. Ask KB to give his thoughts on this. It's not even up for discussion how lopsided the talking versus action ratio is. Cannot imagine you would dispute this. Then again, see my last paragraph.
 
First, define "good matches". Second, WWE has 3 shows before TNA airs Impact.

"good matches" - wwe main event by default, only way I can figure they come near that number even in a marks mind.

WWE had what 10 hours of tv time plus 3 on a ppv over that time while TNA had 4 on tv and zero on ppv. But sure that is a fair comparison....
 
Really guys? Again with the drawing lines and taking sides. Both companies employ the best wrestlers in the world. They obviously do, because they have to put faith in those people to represent their product well. To think otherwise is ridiculous.

As for what you see on a weekly basis, at this point, WWE has more in ring action. Yes, they have a lot more shows, but on a per show basis, it's still true. Lately, TNA has been lacking in time given to wrestling matches and that's not debatable. With that said, there's still talented workers in the company that given a chance, can perform.

The same can be said of the WWE workers. Not all of them get a chance to showcase how good they are, whether because of booking or time, but that doesn't mean they can't work.

It's ridiculous that you guys sit here and argue this. Like what you want, but why it always has to be a comparison between companies is ridiculous. They both put athletes on TV, so clearly they employ talented workers. Stop saying otherwise, because you sound ridiculous when you do.
 
The same can be said of the WWE workers. Not all of them get a chance to showcase how good they are, whether because of booking or time, but that doesn't mean they can't work.

No one said they are not talented or capable. Of course they are. However, as you point out the booking match style in WWE is precisely what we are debating. At last that is what I am talking about. I think the in-ring style TNA uses allows their talent much more room to entertain in-ring than WWE does.
 
Really guys? Again with the drawing lines and taking sides. Both companies employ the best wrestlers in the world. They obviously do, because they have to put faith in those people to represent their product well. To think otherwise is ridiculous.

As for what you see on a weekly basis, at this point, WWE has more in ring action. Yes, they have a lot more shows, but on a per show basis, it's still true. Lately, TNA has been lacking in time given to wrestling matches and that's not debatable. With that said, there's still talented workers in the company that given a chance, can perform.

The same can be said of the WWE workers. Not all of them get a chance to showcase how good they are, whether because of booking or time, but that doesn't mean they can't work.

It's ridiculous that you guys sit here and argue this. Like what you want, but why it always has to be a comparison between companies is ridiculous. They both put athletes on TV, so clearly they employ talented workers. Stop saying otherwise, because you sound ridiculous when you do.
I know. But sometimes you gotta fight for what you believe.
 
No one said they are not talented or capable. Of course they are. However, as you point out the booking match style in WWE is precisely what we are debating. At last that is what I am talking about. I think the in-ring style TNA uses allows their talent much more room to entertain in-ring than WWE does.

Fine, but those on the TNA side are playing semantics like "there's not as many shows to have good matches". You can have a lot of good matches on Impact if you......HAD MATCHES ON IMPACT. Especially with Reaction being a talking show, do more in ring stuff on Impact. I have no doubts that you'd see some positive stuff. There's some workers I like in TNA that I wouldn't mind seeing work on a more weekly basis.

Style-wise, I do think TNA's matches lack psychology sometimes, but some enjoy the spots. That's fine, and power to you if you do. No one will deny you your opinion (or they shoudln't), but then again, you need to accept those who prefer the storytelling, methodic matches the WWE has. You don't have to love it, but respect those who do like it.

Mutual respect, it would be a beautiful thing.
 
Impact has been lacking in the wrestling department lately. Ever since Bound For Glory. I would usually be on the other side of this argument, but Raw and Smackdown had better matches then Impact. Not all were great, but Bryan vs. Ziggler was better then anything I saw tonight on Impact. Impact has been focusing more on reality television and shoot promos recently then wrestling. Its good to have that, but you need a steady flow. Having to wait almost an hour for a Lethal vs. Robbie E match is pitiful.
 
Impact has been lacking in the wrestling department lately. Ever since Bound For Glory. I would usually be on the other side of this argument, but Raw and Smackdown had better matches then Impact. Not all were great, but Bryan vs. Ziggler was better then anything I saw tonight on Impact. Impact has been focusing more on reality television and shoot promos recently then wrestling. Its good to have that, but you need a steady flow. Having to wait almost an hour for a Lethal vs. Robbie E match is pitiful.

What? Kenny Powers, one of our better and more repected TNA marks, actually giving WWE some credit and being a little critical of his beloved TNA? It's getting late here where I live, I must be starting to hallucinate from sleepiness or something, I think it's time for me to call it a night. Next thing we know, Shattered Dreams or Zevon_Zion might start saying something pro-WWE or anti-TNA ;)
 
What? Kenny Powers, one of our better and more repected TNA marks, actually giving WWE some credit and being a little critical of his beloved TNA? It's getting late here where I live, I must be starting to hallucinate from sleepiness or something, I think it's time for me to call it a night. Next thing we know, Shattered Dreams or Zevon_Zion might start saying something pro-WWE or anti-TNA ;)
He caught Randy Orton Syndrome.
 
Fine, but those on the TNA side are playing semantics like "there's not as many shows to have good matches". You can have a lot of good matches on Impact if you......HAD MATCHES ON IMPACT. Especially with Reaction being a talking show, do more in ring stuff on Impact. I have no doubts that you'd see some positive stuff. There's some workers I like in TNA that I wouldn't mind seeing work on a more weekly basis.

Actually the amount of shows only came up because someone wanted to do it by pure quantity which is obviously not the best way to compare the two.

Style-wise, I do think TNA's matches lack psychology sometimes, but some enjoy the spots. That's fine, and power to you if you do. No one will deny you your opinion (or they shoudln't), but then again, you need to accept those who prefer the storytelling, methodic matches the WWE has. You don't have to love it, but respect those who do like it.

The thing is the average WWE match does not have that much storytelling IMO. Methodic would be a good word to describe WWE matches but that is precisely what I dislike about them over time. TNA gets sold short on psychology and just relying on spots. They have those matches sometimes but I think people enjoy them from time to time as long as their is variety elsewhere. To me TNA has a diverse mix of styles and movesets, including being capable of what WWE supposedly does well. TNA has put on some extremely good psychology matches. They have put on matches with solid build and great in ring story. When has WWE really put on the fast paced, high flying matches or done much with tag team style etc.

Mutual respect, it would be a beautiful thing.

I have no problem with you liking wwe matches. Glad you weighed in, although a little confused why you felt it was so confrontational later. It is just a friendly debate. I am legitimately surprised people feel so strongly WWE match style is so good. But then again if we all agreed this would be a boring place.
 
I'll check out some of the Bryan Ziggler matches to see what I think in the interest of fairness. I have heard some decent things about them. The thing is people are acting like a couple of weeks on tv with less time than usual condemns TNA. What about their PPV matches? What about what was happening in all the time before these two times where they pushed the wrestling back into the second half of the show? Two weeks is hardly a representative sample of the whole of their work.

I have said it before, the way wwe does their matches is about all that keeps me from regularly following them. I find them boring and pointless drawn out considering the finishes. It is even more frustrating when you consider what some of those guy are obviously capable of.
 
Actually the amount of shows only came up because someone wanted to do it by pure quantity which is obviously not the best way to compare the two.



The thing is the average WWE match does not have that much storytelling IMO. Methodic would be a good word to describe WWE matches but that is precisely what I dislike about them over time. TNA gets sold short on psychology and just relying on spots. They have those matches sometimes but I think people enjoy them from time to time as long as their is variety elsewhere. To me TNA has a diverse mix of styles and movesets, including being capable of what WWE supposedly does well. TNA has put on some extremely good psychology matches. They have put on matches with solid build and great in ring story. When has WWE really put on the fast paced, high flying matches or done much with tag team style etc.



I have no problem with you liking wwe matches. Glad you weighed in, although a little confused why you felt it was so confrontational later. It is just a friendly debate. I am legitimately surprised people feel so strongly WWE match style is so good. But then again if we all agreed this would be a boring place.

To be clear, I never once said what I prefer. Not once. If you are assuming I prefer WWE matches, you are doing so because I used your post as an example. I was pointing out both sides of the equation and am the only one to truly stay neutral in this argument. Ask me privately and I'll tell you what I think about matches and the like. Either that, or check out my writing externally from this site. But don't make an assumpton about a side I'm on when I haven't publically stated that I'm on one.

You guys are funny though. Everything is WWE vs. TNA. It's adorable.
 
To be clear, I never once said what I prefer. Not once. If you are assuming I prefer WWE matches, you are doing so because I used your post as an example. I was pointing out both sides of the equation and am the only one to truly stay neutral in this argument. Ask me privately and I'll tell you what I think about matches and the like. Either that, or check out my writing externally from this site. But don't make an assumpton about a side I'm on when I haven't publically stated that I'm on one.

You guys are funny though. Everything is WWE vs. TNA. It's adorable.
Well dude of course it is. I mean you can't like and watch both of them. It's simply not possible.
 
I actually used to really like the TNA in ring product. They, at times were far ahead of WWE in the ring. Then Hogan came and then TNA tried to come up with all these complex storlines, which the booking team couldn't handle because they were used to running a more laid back indy style promotion, and all of these new storylines were a real shock to their system. Now look at them, some weird or guessing stroyline every week.Thats my view anyway.
 
The best thing about the show is no more Dixie acting. I don’t miss that. Keep her off the show please. I’m sure she’s the nicest person. I’ve heard great things. It doesn’t mean she should be on TV.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,837
Messages
3,300,747
Members
21,726
Latest member
chrisxenforo
Back
Top