Vince Russo Dragging TNA Down?

[RatedR69]

if you're a fan of lance storm's commentaries, then you're not going to be a fan of me.

Glen, why is Lance so bitter? WCW gave him best moment as a wrestler, in terms of POSITIVE exposure, real push, and good pay. Every internet marks favorite organization (WWE) took a big a dump on him, buried his character, a was made to look like a jobber on his way out.

Oh, and tonite's Impact kicked Raw's ass, without the need for stupid presidential look-a-likes.

 

[Damien Reign]

Tonight was a perfect mix of sports and entertainment. If TNA could feature that much wrestling and a little more editing, it would be a top notch show. That is why Vince Russo doesn't drag down the TNA Product.

I have been a wrestling fan since Monday Night Wars. I watched WCW until the day it died. One of the saddest moments for me as a wrestling fan was when Vince McMahon announced that he purchased WCW and when Sting and Ric Flair had that last match. There were many things that led to the demise of WCW but WCW Creative didn't lose them millions of dollars would is why they were sold.

I was happy when TNA came onto the scene in 2002. I was watching the WWE for the past few years and thought I finally had an alternative. The WWE went downhill since the Monday Night Wars and in my opinion they were nothing like WCW. I liked the wrestling on TNA but it didn't offer the all around product I was looking for. TNA wasn't my favorite wrestling promotion but I hung in there because I was a fan.

The WWE Product went downhill easily making TNA my favorite wrestling promotion by default. I never looked back since.

The time Vince Russo came on board TNA, I went from a fan to a TNAddict. I loved the product. I was getting the wrestling I wanted plus the storylines I saw in WCW.

There are problems with TNA. I definitely think we don't get enough wrestling on iMPACT and times and think the storylines sometimes interfere with the matches. I also thought 2007 was a horrible year for TNA. In my opinion I thought many of the storylines were less the perfect and the product suffered.

When do we get that happy medium between wrestling and storylines. I love the Sports Entertainment aspect of the company and I now view it as a show rather than an athletic competition. After reading Glen's thoughts on the product I have a whole new outlook.

The best storyteller in wrestling today is Vince Russo, I have always heard Jim Cornette was one of the best bookers in history. Why not have Russo and Cornette work together, with Russo having an editor to create an excellent product. With Jeff Jarrett having final say we have a great team. This way the creative process doesn't interfere with the wrestling. Cornette could easily pull Russo back into reality when he steps out. Many problems with TNA lie with booking of the matches in my opinion (unclean finishes, stupid matches and the wrong person winning). This would allow Russo to put out his storylines and allow Cornette to put it into booking to allow a better product.

I love TNA way better than WWE. When I watch WWE I quickly get bored with it. I see the same promos, the same segments week in a week out. I occasionally get excited as a fan when I watch Santino or the Dating Game. I loved the Storyline of Vince McMahon getting murdered and the Illegitimate Son (until it was revealed to be Hornswoggle).

There would only be two ways I would stop watching wrestling. If I just lost interest (if TNA went to pure wrestling this would happen) or if TNA went out of business. If that happened I would know that the product I love has evolved into pure wrestling crap. I would hate it so much there wouldn't be a reason to watch it any more. Vince Russo's TNA is my favorite wrestling promotion in history and the moment it died, than so would my passion for the business.

 

[Father:_Polley]

- as for polly's questionabout how i know wwe sucks or not. Well, after russo left in late 99, i still taped and fast forwarded most of the crap and watched wwe for about a year or two, before stopping. For WWE.. over the past 3-4 years.. i think i watched the first 3 hour raw where austin stunned the entire mcmahon family. it's just not on the scale of creativity from the time russo wrote

the matches are boring, the promos are lame, the stories are not intriguing, the backstage segments insult the living hell out of me. there would be times where i try and watch a Raw and then it bored me and i stopped..

In 2006 i think raw left the channel i ahve.. but i do get smackdown and ecw. i taped the first ecw and thought it was okay, but not good enough to follow. i saw the ecw episode where monty brown showed up.. again, nothing extraordinary. and imo smackdown is just boring wrestling with uninteresting finishes. it's incredibly boring. everytime i sample wwe.. it bores me.. that's simply the reason i dont watch. it's also a waste of my time..

i'd rather watch nothing than sit through a wwe show nowadays. and i was the biggest advocator of the attitude era. The Russo WCW shows were incredible too.. Watch it in full before you read and take meltzer's word as gospel. I'm not telling oldschool marks to watch it, i'm telling guys in their early 20s who probably didn't watch it back then and come online to believe all the "critics"

i asked a question??? I think it was mr Shango asked how you knew about wwe if you hadn't watched in 5 years. and seriously marty, there needs to be more on TNA than what you want. because if it was a sharkboy show, i wouldn't watch. the same way you wouldn't if you didn't like the sound of the promos.

as for the controversy...isn't there enough of that in wrestling with steroids, racism and deaths at the minute. do you actually think that parents will let children watch their beloved sharkboy on TNA if they knew that there would be a sexual angle between SoCal Val and Sonjay Dutt immediately after? It would appeal to the teenagers & young men who'd want to see Val in a bra, but it would reduce other demographics.

and i have watched, and yes, some were decent. however giving birth to a doll hand, beaver cleavage???

 

[abrighterabyss]

I don't believe Russo could be blamed for TNA's direction. I don't necessarily see how his creative input helps the product. TNA seems to be plaguing from having a lack of focus of what type of company they want to be, other than the opposition. They're getting (at least to them) positive responses from gimmicky characters like Curry Man, Super Eric, and Black Machismo. That sort of character development will only take you so far, before it pass its expiration date. I think they're going with the idea of expanding their viewer base by adding these sort of elements will attract an aspect of the overall wrestling audience. It's clearly based on their ratings that such efforts are not getting them anywhere. It's a systemic problem more than on the fault of one man. It maybe just the fact that they're growth has spawned tendencies of sloppy booking, and loss of creative direction.

 

[misskim]

I think the people we should blame for TNA's lack of ratings right now is the IWC. TNA has all these awesome stars but it seems like Jeff and even Russo are getting influenced by the IWC even if it's not conscious but it looks like that.

The IWC just craps on the real big stars like Sting and Scott Steiner just because they're old (and that's really stupid, my dad is one year older than Scott Steiner and my dad is hardly 'old', Ric Flair is 'old), they don't care that they are super over, and super popular among the normal people, for some reason they think wrestlers should get the title when they're 21 because they can "work".

Take Samoa Joe, NONE of my non smark friends like him, absolutely none, my girl friends who watch wrestling thinks hes ugly and my guy friends thinks he's boring, but yet TNA pushes him down our throats in the Main event spot for 2 years straight it sucks so much.

Instead of having a good feud with Scott vs Kurt and maybe Scott could carry the belt for a year I bet Stupid fat joe will win and nobody will care again. If JJ and Russo would stop listen to the IWC and actually want ratings they would let Scott Steiner have the belt for atleast a year, I bet a main event of just Scott Steiner doing a promo would get more ratings than a match with fat Joe and I'm so sick of getting sloppy joe crammed down my throat every week.

Also if TNA were smart they'd have Scott feud with Booker when Scott is the champ because Scott and Booker had a great feud in WCW


Oh and Disco I don't know if you read this but do you know if TNA tried to get Midajah back or was that not in the picture? Rhaka is ok but Midajah was tons better, she even looked cool in chain mail

 

[Slyfox696]

I think the people we should blame for TNA's lack of ratings right now is the IWC. TNA has all these awesome stars but it seems like Jeff and even Russo are getting influenced by the IWC even if it's not conscious but it looks like that.

Meh, the only guy on TNA's roster who has ever shown the ability to be a major big-time draw is Sting, and even that was when he was feuding with the biggest wrestling star ever, who was the head of the biggest faction ever.

The IWC just craps on the real big stars like Sting and Scott Steiner just because they're old (and that's really stupid, my dad is one year older than Scott Steiner and my dad is hardly 'old', Ric Flair is 'old), they don't care that they are super over, and super popular among the normal people, for some reason they think wrestlers should get the title when they're 21 because they can "work".

I think the reason is because both of those guys are just as likely to quit and retire as they are to work the next PPV.

Take Samoa Joe, NONE of my non smark friends like him, absolutely none, my girl friends who watch wrestling thinks hes ugly and my guy friends thinks he's boring, but yet TNA pushes him down our throats in the Main event spot for 2 years straight it sucks so much.

I completely agree.

In the end though, for TNA to become a major player, they have to find that lightening in a bottle. They have to find their nWo, or their Steve Austin. They have to find that wrestler or angle that just captures people's attention.

Until that happens, the only thing that TNA can really hope for is a slow and steady rise.

 

[gg inferno]

I don't believe Russo could be blamed for TNA's direction. I don't necessarily see how his creative input helps the product. TNA seems to be plaguing from having a lack of focus of what type of company they want to be, other than the opposition. They're getting (at least to them) positive responses from gimmicky characters like Curry Man, Super Eric, and Black Machismo. That sort of character development will only take you so far, before it pass its expiration date. I think they're going with the idea of expanding their viewer base by adding these sort of elements will attract an aspect of the overall wrestling audience. It's clearly based on their ratings that such efforts are not getting them anywhere. It's a systemic problem more than on the fault of one man. It maybe just the fact that they're growth has spawned tendencies of sloppy booking, and loss of creative direction.

curry man gets a better pop than daniels, super eric gets a better pop than eric young, and black machismo gets a better pop than jay lethal. would you suggest that we revert their characters back to the characters that were less over, or do the common sense booking scheme of continuing to build their characters as they are? don't read the "those gimmicks can only go so far" bullshit and actually believe it. that is a perfect example of how faulty propaganda creates a snowball effect with the internet sheep that believe what they read from non-credible sources. digest what i've just written, and undersrtand that it comes from somebody that knows a thing or two about writing television.

 

[14-Year Old Virgin]

i've been trying for months to present facts, and they're more often than not discredited. *sigh* oh, well. ar least i try. the problem is that basically these forums are full of critics. critics that complain about the product, and critics that complain about the critics. i'm one of the latter, because alot of the product criticism is based on faulty information. perfectexample, the fuss about shark boy. "That's stupid" "He'll never draw" "nobody wants to see him" and then i'll point out that he gets one of the biggest pops on house shows and his merchandise sells out, and then i'll read more posts of "Glenn works for the company" "why should we believe a wcw jobber" "Shark boy still sucks" "Shark Boy will never draw a dime" Then people wonder why i act like such a condescending ass.

Some of the critics of critics on here have been very amusing to me. It's like watching two school boys arguing over a girl or something silly. I am hesitant to give my opinion as some critics are pretty judgemental and are one sided in thought. Which means a good debate is not possible. Some people are just stuck in their ways.

I personally love the Sharkboy remake of Austin. He impersonate's him very well all the way down to the voice. LOL I pretty sure it was here that I read that Austin even got a kick out of it. I know if I was Sharkboy, that would be a compliment. People who say he will never get over with it has already been proven wrong. That argument was over before it started.

Now, Disco may have had some jobber time in wrestling. But it's your opinion if he was nothing but a jobber. As I have said before, I liked the Disco gimmick. Regardless of the 70's type wrestling gear, Glenn was a SKILLED WRESTLER. He was comical and added something more to his style. Here's the kicker. Austin, HHH, Cena, Foley, The Undertaker, KANE, ANGLE, JARRETT, and a Whole host of others spent time as JOBBERS. Disco's career was not that long. Austin's gimmick, just to give one example as I could sit here all day giving them, took YEARS, to even a decade before it amounted to anything. He was the Ringmaster for petessake. That was the dumbest gimmick next to the trash man or the pig farmers. LOL HHH was a disgruntled Englishmen, Kane was a DENTIST, Foley was Dude Love LOL, & Jarrett was Double J.

Until Jarrett created TNA, he was a J-o-b-b-e-r. He gave himself a legacy. So, before you pass judgement on Disco, think about the others and believe that if Disco dawned the boots again, under a new name or such, he could make it with ring skills alone.

 

[misskim]

JJ was not a jobber before TNA that's very ignorant, he held several titles and was a main event player in WCW. Disco was not a jobber either to be honest he was a well established character in WCW and played his part as a comedy mid card character great

The jobber aspect is intersting though, every old school character was a jobber or atleast not too big before they hit it big, take Scott Steiner who didn't find his real over persona until very late in his career, same with Kane and especially with Austin, yet the IWC always screams for the new guy to get the belt early, that's stupid and brings him nothing because once you get the belt there's not much you can do besides go down and if you're not a well established character you're doomed. The ideal shoudl be to have hunted the belt for like 10 years before you get it and not get it when you're 21 because the IWC thinks you can "work"

 

[14-Year Old Virgin]

JJ was not a jobber before TNA that's very ignorant, he held several titles and was a main event player in WCW. Disco was not a jobber either to be honest he was a well established character in WCW and played his part as a comedy mid card character great

The jobber aspect is intersting though, every old school character was a jobber or atleast not too big before they hit it big, take Scott Steiner who didn't find his real over persona until very late in his career, same with Kane and especially with Austin, yet the IWC always screams for the new guy to get the belt early, that's stupid and brings him nothing because once you get the belt there's not much you can do besides go down and if you're not a well established character you're doomed. The ideal shoudl be to have hunted the belt for like 10 years before you get it and not get it when you're 21 because the IWC thinks you can "work"

Sorry, I should have clearified myself when I said that. I am not talking about his entire career. I was talking about his career just before TNA making my case saying at some point, ALL big names were JOBBERS. Jarrett's legacy would have probably gone overlooked if TNA hadn't put him back into the spotlight. Up until TNA, Jarrett had hit a dry spell. Sorry. I ment no disrespect.

You make an EXCELLENT point with Stiener as an example, that is the best one yet. As for making them wait 10 years, that a bit extreme really as some wrestlers careers don't last that long. In fact, Most wrestlers don't last that long. Giving them some kind of push towards the title earlier will help establish a wrestler and give a company a feel as to whether or not they can make it in the main event.

Perfect example of that would be Jeff Hardy. In the WWE, he was never even pushed until his title reign in TNA. Then you could also say Cage as well. Those were two guys I have always thought could be main eventers if done right. Unfortunatly for them, WWE could not see it and they wasted a good chunk of their career trying to prove themselves. TNA however, seen the possibilities and ran with it proving Vince wrong.

 

[Marty2Hotty]

curry man gets a better pop than daniels, super eric gets a better pop than eric young, and black machismo gets a better pop than jay lethal. would you suggest that we revert their characters back to the characters that were less over, or do the common sense booking scheme of continuing to build their characters as they are? don't read the "those gimmicks can only go so far" bullshit and actually believe it. that is a perfect example of how faulty propaganda creates a snowball effect with the internet sheep that believe what they read from non-credible sources. digest what i've just written, and undersrtand that it comes from somebody that knows a thing or two about writing television.

I hate lance's commentaries.. anyway, glenn, wasn't it you who helped write him as the 'serious canadian' in WCW 2000? I loved that stuff. Especially when he won the "SHIT title: Saskatchewan Hardcore INternational Title". Some great stuff

As for somebody who knows how to write television, you should start writing it. The stuff on last night's TNA was boring wrestling and Jim Cornette ranting through most of the show. I liked probably some of it. but all the characters and storylines were done to death before. It was just booking matches for Sacrifice rather than attempting to grow a new fanbase..

 

[misskim]

I thought last nights iMPACT was great, if TNA would constantly do crazy stuff to get new viewers they would probably alienate current viewers AND cheapen the effect of the crazy stuff that does infact bring in new viewers, TNA can't lose the core product which is a wrestling show.

And it wasn't boring they were building Sacrifice really good which is something they have started to do really well lately to build the next PPV, now we know it's a good main event, a tag team match and a diva shaved bald head ladder match

 

[AndySmithers]

I thought iMPACT was great also. I enjoyed every bit of it. But was funny how at the start you saw Matt Morgan take down Kip James and then did not see any more Matt Morgan for the rest of the show. They should have at least shown him take out one more guy, or at least do something backstage.

I like what they doing with JC. And I am happy they are going for a tournament for the tag titles. I actually would like them to partner Sting and Booker up, have them win the titles. Have them keep the titles for 2-3 months and lose it to LEX. I would say MCMG's but they seem to be being punished lately. But i did think it was stupid making them lose to Black Rain and Rellik (that's Killer spelt backwards by the way).

 

[Audioslave]

@Glenn: By the way. How can you keep going on and trying to defame Meltzer and his credibility with news and information when the same things that you apply to him and his newsletter apply to you on this site?

Meltzer may get paid by writing the Observer, but you are also paid to write for this site. Add to the fact that you work at TNA and your best interest is to promote their product and quell any dissenting opinions.. and what that does is put your credibility into question. Especially since it's obvious that your stuff is written solely to stir up controversy among the internet wrestling community and get a lot of the "smarks" up into a huff.

 

[gg inferno]

@Glenn: By the way. How can you keep going on and trying to defame Meltzer and his credibility with news and information when the same things that you apply to him and his newsletter apply to you on this site?

Meltzer may get paid by writing the Observer, but you are also paid to write for this site. Add to the fact that you work at TNA and your best interest is to promote their product and quell any dissenting opinions.. and what that does is put your credibility into question. Especially since it's obvious that your stuff is written solely to stir up controversy among the internet wrestling community and get a lot of the "smarks" up into a huff.

*sigh* i get paid to write one article a week, and to answer questions on the message board. my articles are generally my opinions. if you think i'm lying, then provide evidence to prove me wrong. i can provide a ton of evidence to discredit meltzer, the easiest one being that he printed that i was going to the wwe, i called him up and said it wasn't true, and the next week he didn't correct himself, instead he reiterated that i was going to the wwe. yeah, he's a great journalist.

 

[amodernphoenix]

Glenn going to the WWE? He should have known THAT wasn't true. WWE requires talent and charisma, both of which escape Glenn's grasp.

So how do you get off insulting everyone on this board and then feel slighted yourself, when people respond to your asinine drivel?

 

[amodernphoenix]

curry man gets a better pop than daniels, super eric gets a better pop than eric young, and black machismo gets a better pop than jay lethal. would you suggest that we revert their characters back to the characters that were less over, or do the common sense booking scheme of continuing to build their characters as they are? don't read the "those gimmicks can only go so far" bullshit and actually believe it. that is a perfect example of how faulty propaganda creates a snowball effect with the internet sheep that believe what they read from non-credible sources. digest what i've just written, and undersrtand that it comes from somebody that knows a thing or two about writing television.

Glenn's comments here show exactly what is wrong with his booking. If it gets a quick pop, it must be ok. Ignore that it will undermine the wrestler's credibility in a year or so and make them unmarketable, it's working right now. Remember Glacier who was so popular for a few months and then his last angle on tv was selling his Glacier gear? How about the Kiss Demon or Brutus Beefcake as The Disciple?

Sure, Beefcake couldn't wrestle his way out of a paper bag, but he WAS over with the crowd for years when he teamed with Greg Valentine as The Dream Team. Jesus, even the WWE tried that bullshit with The Acolytes, which quickly evolved into the APA. Most gimmicks have a lifespan and if your gimmick is to degrade yourself, when the gimmick dies, so does your career.

Part of good booking is not only getting the audiance pops now, but setting yourself up to get them continuously down the road. It's a chess game, really, and it seems that Glenn and everyone else with the book in TNA doesn't get it.

 

[Audioslave]

*sigh* i get paid to write one article a week, and to answer questions on the message board. my articles are generally my opinions. if you think i'm lying, then provide evidence to prove me wrong. i can provide a ton of evidence to discredit meltzer, the easiest one being that he printed that i was going to the wwe, i called him up and said it wasn't true, and the next week he didn't correct himself, instead he reiterated that i was going to the wwe. yeah, he's a great journalist.

I'm not the one with the sources inside wrestling and I've never personally talked to Meltzer, so I couldn't inquire to him the validity of your claims as far as his comments about you going to WWE. They say there's three sides to every argument: Yours, mine and the truth. And in this case it's yours, Meltzer's and the truth. My own assumption is that you were trying to work both sides of the negotiating table and he had his sources in WWE that said it was close to a done deal, so he reported something of that nature. I don't have that newsletter or a copy of the quote, so I don't know the context of what was said.

Either way, you being paid to both write opinion columns (which almost always attack dissenting opinion, no matter how logical the opposing argument is, in favor of a pro TNA stance) and post on these forums. And a majority of what you have said has stirred shit up on these forums, so you've done you're job in terms of rattling people's cages and getting them interested in this site. So it doesn't do anything for the credibility of your statement. How can you claim your being honest, yet you're being paid, and then say Meltzer's not being honest, because he's being paid? It doesn't add up.

Glenn going to the WWE? He should have known THAT wasn't true. WWE requires talent and charisma, both of which escape Glenn's grasp.

That's not really fair to him. I may disagree with the guy on a lot of things and think his booking philosophy is highly flawed, but he was a fairly talented dude during the Monday Night Wars era. He was charismatic and generally a fun guy to watch in the same way that I assume people enjoy Sharkboy. A midcard fun-fun joke act that gets people smiling and laughing with or at him. There was also a time in 97/98 when Disco was able to hang with those "workrate gods" (I hate that term, btw, so much nerdage) of Malenko, Guerrero, Booker and others of their ilk. I saw some Nitro's from 98 when he was having a pretty good string of entertaining matches. And his team with Alex Wright was awesome.

 

[abrighterabyss]

curry man gets a better pop than daniels, super eric gets a better pop than eric young, and black machismo gets a better pop than jay lethal. would you suggest that we revert their characters back to the characters that were less over, or do the common sense booking scheme of continuing to build their characters as they are? don't read the "those gimmicks can only go so far" bullshit and actually believe it. that is a perfect example of how faulty propaganda creates a snowball effect with the internet sheep that believe what they read from non-credible sources. digest what i've just written, and undersrtand that it comes from somebody that knows a thing or two about writing television.

Understandable. I don't see where you're getting this sheep internet crap. My comments were mearly a reflection of how I feel on the manner. I think you're investing too much in the fabled views of "the internet fans". I'm merely posting my views, not based on what I read on any website. I will agree in some part about the "internet fans". They're not the wide demographic of overall wrestling fans, they're the 18-35 male demo. They doesn't care for gimmick like curry man and such. The internet gives them a place to share such viewpoints.

A question I have, is do you really see someone like Jay Lethal building a string of successful programs with other wrestlers by being a nostalgic throwback to another wrestler? Tell me how that will not grow stale? He's basing his character off the branding of another wrestler. I will concede that TNA has to appeal to an audience outside of what is (and what seems to be "internet fans") and it's an easy target to sit behind a computer and spout viewpoints. Never the less there is that segment of the audience that feels it's being ignored. As TNA is growing I think a lot of that very audience felt like it's deja vu all over again. That a product that they once felt they could get behind as the opposition of WWE is now showing clear signs of similar direction. I think it's foolish to dismiss this segment as a bunch of bitchers and whiners. They're the people that they should be appealing to, not saying to always be appeasing. Dismissing a viewpoint as making it seem like it's a collective thought, is not a logical viewpoint. That would be like saying that one member of a wrestling promotion makes a comment and the views are true of the whole industry.

 

[gg inferno]

Glenn going to the WWE? He should have known THAT wasn't true. WWE requires talent and charisma, both of which escape Glenn's grasp.

So how do you get off insulting everyone on this board and then feel slighted yourself, when people respond to your asinine drivel?

i insult people that challenge my credibility. and i do so with facts and evidence. give me specific examples of asinine drivel, and i can answer this question more thoroughly. you have compared to what tna is doing with curryman, shark boy, and jay lethal to beefcake, glacier, kiss demon and the acolytes, with flawed logic. would you suggest that their characters would've been better off if they had remained the same? That the acolytes should never have been part of the corporate ministry angle which produced high ratings? you absolutely have no clue about what it takes to write television, because you wouldn't care if the ratings stunk or not. if characters aren't getting over, you change them. if they get a pop, you stick with it. if they don't, you change it again. TNA is letting the fans decide what to do with curryman, lethal and shark boy. which is how you're supposed to book. listen to the people. but here you would be, with your arms crossed and a stern look on your face, telling the fans that they shouldn't be cheering for those guys, because in the long run it's not good for their characters. or maybe i'm misinterpreting what you're saying?

 

[gg inferno]

Understandable. I don't see where you're getting this sheep internet crap. My comments were mearly a reflection of how I feel on the manner. I think you're investing too much in the fabled views of "the internet fans". I'm merely posting my views, not based on what I read on any website. I will agree in some part about the "internet fans". They're not the wide demographic of overall wrestling fans, they're the 18-35 male demo. They doesn't care for gimmick like curry man and such. The internet gives them a place to share such viewpoints.

A question I have, is do you really see someone like Jay Lethal building a string of successful programs with other wrestlers by being a nostalgic throwback to another wrestler? Tell me how that will not grow stale? He's basing his character off the branding of another wrestler. I will concede that TNA has to appeal to an audience outside of what is (and what seems to be "internet fans") and it's an easy target to sit behind a computer and spout viewpoints. Never the less there is that segment of the audience that feels it's being ignored. As TNA is growing I think a lot of that very audience felt like it's deja vu all over again. That a product that they once felt they could get behind as the opposition of WWE is now showing clear signs of similar direction. I think it's foolish to dismiss this segment as a bunch of bitchers and whiners. They're the people that they should be appealing to, not saying to always be appeasing. Dismissing a viewpoint as making it seem like it's a collective thought, is not a logical viewpoint. That would be like saying that one member of a wrestling promotion makes a comment and the views are true of the whole industry.

i think you think that the segment of the audience that thinks it's being ignored is way bigger than it actually is. if the audience that you speak of was bigger, shark boy would be getting some boos, and so would curryman. they're not. they're getting good pops and selling merchandise. that is the truth. you're going to have a difficlut time convincing anyone with average intelligence that your viewpoint of those characters is correct. you say that they will grow stale. you may be right, but it's not looking too good for your argument right now.

 

[Damien Reign]

Hey Glen, how do you view the TNA Product.

Is it more of a show that incorporates wrestling like as a Male Soap Opera. I have heard you talk about how Championship Belts are props, and characters are as important as wrestling and more.

My question is where do you want TNA to head creative-wise? Is the current product what you like, do you want more storylines or do you want more wrestling? Do you want more comedy in the product or do you think the product isn't serious enough?

I am not trying to kiss you butt but I just wanted to know what someone with the company actually thought about the product. I have read about your defense of Shark Boy, Curry Man and Jay Lethal and I agree with you.

What do you think TNA needs to do to get past that 1.2 rating and what chances there are that TNA will go there? Do you know where TNA is going creative-wise

On topic, I will reiterate that Russo is a resource and shouldn't be fired if you don't like the product.

 

[clifffside]

What do you think TNA needs to do to get past that 1.2 rating and what chances there are that TNA will go there?

I know I'm not Glenn, but I have a wild theory that address this question.

TNA ratings wise would be better off if they moved to Monday Nights. I say that for these two reasons:

1.) Thursday Nights is not a wrestling night anymore. 9 years ago when nearly 8 million people tuned into Thunder and Smackdown each week that may have been the case, but times have changed and Monday Night is the only wrestling night left. Also, Monday Night is a night where people are used to/looking for wrestling and TNA would be easier to find if they were on that night.

2.) TNA would actually have less competition on Monday Nights than they do on Thursday Nights. Lets face it, shows like Grey's Anatomy, 30 Rock, The Office, CSI, Without a Trace, ER, Lost and Thurday Night sporting events (college football, NBA playoffs, etc.) are a murder's row of primetime entertainment that draw very good ratings (not to mention Thursday Night is a popular movie night for cable networks). On Monday night TNA would be up against Raw, Deal or No Deal, Dancing With The Stars and maybe a few other shows/events including Monday Night football. But those lineups don't compare to primetime Thursday Night which is thee TV night in America.

 

[Damien Reign]

Even though you aren't Glen, thank you for your input. I sometimes question whether the night of the week affects the product, especially after such a solid week this week.

 

[Marty2Hotty]

glenn coming on these forums to belittle the 'little people on the net' is cool but kinda pointless, in my opinion. if he wants to really make a difference, he'd get vince and jeff to make the show extremely entertaining to the masses. Once it reaches that stage, THEN, he can come on the forums and defend the direction and how they succeed in the "long run"

Doesn't really make sense to me for him to come on here and diss guys like meltzer, keller yet he isn't doing anything to make TNA succeed the way he wants it to succeed.