TNA is More Action-Packed Than WWE

[Radical]

Is it just me or do you agree that on average TNA Wrestling matches are more action-packed and faster paced than WWE matches?

I feel like this is very consistent. I feel like when I watch a TNA match, whether it be a singles match or tag match, the match starts pretty fast, usually a few good moves, then even once a few impact moves are made, the pace is kept up. Even once one wrestler puts on a submission move like a headlock I feel they transition out of that move to rope running or moves/counters pretty quickly.

WWE has the star power and the majority share of wrestling fans interest and thus people still watch it more but I swear most matches are pretty slow. I feel like in WWE matches there is a lot more pace-slowing submission moves occuring early in the match, not very many notable moves (just a lot of punches and chokes). WWE in my memory that seem to have the best pace are Crusierweight matches (when they really had the division), Hardcore matches (esp. back when they had the title/division, but at least most Last Man Standing/Falls Count Anywhere matches today are a bit more interesting because they go all over).

Anyway... does any one agree with this analysis? Or am I someone perceiving things wrong?

 

[RCProAm29]

I agree to some extent and I am not a TNA fan by any means. WWE tends to really slow down the action of most of their matches because they want the crowd fired up for the bigger stars. They want certain guys moves/persona to have emphasis in matches. If Hunico vs Heath Slater stole the show, they would be screwed when people chant boring at their bigger stars if that match didnt live up to the hype. I am not saying it's the right approach, but I feel that is why they do it.

 

[Peaky1969]

I don't think you are perceiving things wrong, that is your opinion. I actually agree with a lot of what you said. I think that a large amount of the matches, or the athletes more to the point, put on better matches in TNA. I'd rather watch AJ Styles than Brodus Clay. I think RAW is the better show per se, so it's six of one, half a dozen of another. Depends on what you watch for....overall entertainment, or "wrestling"....

 

[RCProAm29]

TNA is trying to draw fans in with better wrestling action. That is their strength. Story telling....not so much.

 

[WWEIsLife2]

My biggest issue with TNA's Matches is that they have no idea how to end them. All of sudden they will end out of nowhere and you'll go thats it? WWE knows how to do their Matches. Beginning,Middle,and End.

 

[The Realist]

WWE is soooooo predictable. Last nights TNA pay per view was far better than WWE's last Wrestlemania. The main event was actually A TITLE MATCH.

 

[MWRedskins]

WWE is soooooo predictable. Last nights TNA pay per view was far better than WWE's last Wrestlemania. The main event was actually A TITLE MATCH.

sadly, that shouldnt have been the main event as it was a poor match that made Brian Hebner look REALLY stupid. WWE can be predictable (hello Big Show getting involved), but it's not predictable all the time. i would've NEVER guessed that Punk would hold the WWE title so long or that Rock would've beat Cena or even Lesnar would beat Cena. TNA has their moments and they have great wrestling and can put on great matches, but their stories, characters and bookings need work. it's time to turn RVD heel in my book as there's nothing for him, Hardy or Anderson to do unless they feud with Roode or Bully Ray, turn RVD heel and there's another heel to feud with. book Roode better, i mean, i understand cheating, but at least have him cheat in a way that it doesnt look so weak or make a ref look like he's really stupid and have more stories, especially involving number one contenders or guys around the title like Anderson, Hardy and RVD, i still think it would be best to turn RVD.

 

[LK1331]

It all comes down to styles but honestly I like both.. That said, TNA used to be an alterntive to WWE and for a few years now, they've tried to copy off of WWE.. which is a terriable move cause rarely are their storylines imo.. I barely watched impact for a few months because of hogan and bischoff.

Lately though, things have kinda flipped.. The WWE writers seem stale, they refuse to utilize some of their younger talent and I have little to care about.

in terms of in the ring, TNA sunday was awesome and had great pace but I prefer WWE's pace when it's done well... sadly that doesn't happen often lately.

 

[Elementz of Fear]

I guess their matches are more action packed but that doesn't translate to a better product. Granted, WWE screws up their booking every now and then but TNA is a train wreck booking wise. If all it took was action packed matches, we'd be comparing Ring of Honor to ECW rather than WWE to TNA right now. WWE tells better stories than TNA and although they are often predictable at least they make sense.

As for what The Realist said, say what you want about which PPV you liked better as that is your opinion but that is A) not the point and B) not the criteria to judge which is better. You can take any 2 PPV's from each company and compare them TNA will win some, WWE will win some. As for the title match not being the main event, you mean to tell me if The Undertaker walked through TNA's doors for 1 night only they wouldn't make a Taker vs Sting main event at Bound For Glory?.......actually I retract that entirely, you're right, they wouldn't. TNA would manage to screw it up by turning Undertaker heel and putting him against Bischoff's son.

 

[SD619]

WWE is soooooo predictable.

As opposed to Roode retaining against Sting?? Predictability is not an issue as long as the booking makes sense.

Last nights TNA pay per view was far better than WWE's last Wrestlemania.

You are entitled to your opinion. I think it was the other way round (Slammiversary was great, 'Mania was better).


As for the in-ring styles, they are not that different. TNA focuses a bit more on the in-ring action and WWE focuses a bit more on in-ring psychology.

 

[Elementz of Fear]

As opposed to Roode retaining against Sting?? Predictability is not an issue as long as the booking makes sense.



You are entitled to your opinion. I think it was the other way round (Slammiversary was great, 'Mania was better).


As for the in-ring styles, they are not that different. TNA focuses a bit more on the in-ring action and WWE focuses a bit more on in-ring psychology.

Hit the nail on the head about Roode. Predictability doesn't make anything bad. Remember the Elimination Chamber PPV? Santino the last guy left vs Daniel Bryan? EVERYONE knew Santino wasn't going to win but it was entertaining as hell to watch. If predictability made things bad every single super hero movie ever made would be considered a failure.

 

[ヒュー　G.　レックション]

Hit the nail on the head about Roode. Predictability doesn't make anything bad. Remember the Elimination Chamber PPV? Santino the last guy left vs Daniel Bryan? EVERYONE knew Santino wasn't going to win but it was entertaining as hell to watch. If predictability made things bad every single super hero movie ever made would be considered a failure.

I also have to agree, when people get the result they predict it's "predictable" and when they don't it's "bad booking".

 

[lowandmighty]

I absolutely agree. TNA matches have always seemed a bit more fast paced and action packed to me. I love it especially the x division, that used to take the cake as far as action went now its toned down a bit but its still there a bit.
I think TNA matches being slightly more exciting as far as action goes than wwe matches is the one advantage TNA has but I feel they're squandering it by having slow ass back problems Hogan around. He doesn't wrestle, he just talks and not really about anything all that interesting. I don't like him in the general manager type role, it just doesn't seem like him to me. Don't get me wrong I love Hogan to the point of blurring the line between hetero and homo sexuality but I don't love him in TNA.

 

[Irig]

When its comes to pace of the match or movesets tna beats wwe. But when it comes to promos and big star power wwe beats tna IMO

 

[MWRedskins]

If predictability made things bad every single super hero movie ever made would be considered a failure.

true and i dont think predictability is always bad. for example, if Bryan were to win the WWE title by pinning Kane with help from AJ like i predict will happen, while it's a correct prediction, it's not something that's a failure because at least it's entertaining and the story is fresh and it continues what i feel is a great feud. it also depends on what story is predictable. the reason people didnt like the Big Show predicition is fear of another Cena vs. Big Show match which we have seen. now maybe they shock me and put on a great match, but the worry is that we will see a worse match between them.

as for Slammiversary being better than Mania just because the title match was at the end. that doesnt make a ppv better, it's the matches and how good or bad they are and it was not bad, but tna's main event finish left a bad taste in people's mouth, so that's why i think WM was better, they had great matches and the main event was really good and had a nice finish.

 

[ROFLCOPTERftw3]

It's named Total Nonstop Action for a reason! ;D But in all seriousness, WWE's in ring product ir really lacking speed and unpredictability. When I watch Raw most of the time Im bored as hell. And remember WWE is still PG!

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

More action packed? Not sure. Personally, I couldn't give a fuck less about how fast they're moving, or how many moves they can do. That shit's annoying. However, TNA matches are far less predictable.

WWE matches, especially with mid-carders, are really formulaic. They rarely tell stories (not today, at least), and most mid-card guys just show off their move set. It bothers me. TNA isn't a ton better, but definitely less predictable. Makes the matches less boring.

 

[ABMorales787]

More action packed? Not sure. Personally, I couldn't give a fuck less about how fast they're moving, or how many moves they can do. That shit's annoying. However, TNA matches are far less predictable.

WWE matches, especially with mid-carders, are really formulaic. They rarely tell stories (not today, at least), and most mid-card guys just show off their move set. It bothers me. TNA isn't a ton better, but definitely less predictable. Makes the matches less boring.

It's probably because WWE tends to direct their wrestlers with their matches. Not that it's a jab, because when WWE wants to grab attention with matches they are damn good at it. But TNA's wrestlers are looser and given more freedom of what to do in the ring. You see them wanting to work quicker and such or take big risks.

I remember when Kurt Angle and Abyss wrestled in... 2008 at No Surrender I believe. A Hardcore match that had Kurt do a 450 flip off the entrance ramp. A totally uncharacteristic move from him if you've followed his career, but he's done it a few times in TNA. It kinda shows how loose these guys are and that's probably why people see it as fast pace. There's no real control, limitation or intended direction in the matches.

 

[HBsam31]

I guess it all depends on what you are looking for in a wrestling show. TNA is trying to appeal to the people that want to see more wrestling, and they are definitely pulling it off, but I agree that it does seem like they have trouble with the endings to their matches. I enjoy both TNA and WWE, but I have to agree to some extent that TNA is more action packed from start to finish. Over the last few months I have enjoyed TNA a lot more than in the past, and I think they are finding their niche. If they would keep their focus on being different and stop trying to compete with WWE I think they will be on the right track.

 

[IT Factor]

Both shows have their strengths and weaknesses. IW has more wrestling with emphasis on being good in-ring[with a few exceptions, obviously] and WWE has more emphasis on entertainment over wrestling. Impact could stand to make their product more story-driven with an actual point whilst WWE could start making in-ring stories more meaningful like they used to be with more WRESTLING[yes, we all know McMahon thinks that's a dirty word].

As for the overall pace of the shows, I actually find myself looking forward to Impact more than WWE. WWE is on auto-pilot and are arrogant enough to depend on their existing fanbase to always remain loyal, no matter how badly the show sucks. And IW thinks one huge idea will save them when, infact, Hogan & Bischoff's approach is a major part of blocking them from advancing to that "next level". Like I said, positives and negatives in both shows.