What Do You Consider TNA's Identity to Be?

[It's Damn Real!]

From a psychological and sociological (as well as anthropological) perspective, identity is effectively the collective conception and expression of a persons' own self, juxtaposed against (or with) group affiliations.

But in simpler terms, it's simply what you identify as. What you expect to be perceived as by others. Most people's identities encompass far more than one trait or group or characteristic, but in the sense of pro wrestling, what we often see is that the identify of the program or company is largely the same. They may have smaller, less important deviations and variations, but all of them adhere to an overall "theme" that is ultimately how that company is perceived.

Lucha Underground, for example, carries with it a saturated soap opera-style storyline that serves to feed the in-ring reasoning of why the men and women of LU are fighting in their ring. It's all shot in high definition with high contrast lighting in a "temple" that is designed to appear in a manner in which most would associate with an underground "Mexican" theme. You're made to feel like you are a spectator to an underground fight club of sorts, run by an untrustworthy promoter, where the action in the ring is also designed to come across as "real" as possible. There's little, if any, comedic relief, and they display the product itself in a very kayfabe-protective style. They also play to the anthropological aspects Mexico's ancestry, specifically it's cultural connections to the Aztecs, right down to their fascination with death. Many of their characters fall in line with this, including Mil Muertes, Pentagon Jr., Vampiro and more.

So what is LU's identity? If you are asking me, I'd say they are a high-pace, high-impact product that is designed to appeal to the historical record of luchadore wrestling and Aztec warrior culture. When you combine all the elements into one product they sell you, the target audience for them would hit as many of these targets as possible, if not all.

TNA, for years, I would have argued were also a high-impact, high-pace, high-contrast product. They effectively stole/borrowed/lifted from the independent scene, predominantly ROH, and took the same approach and style most of those federations and companies operated with but lit it and presented it like higher-priced theatre. The acronym TNA, after all, is supposed to stand for Total Nonstop Action. A play on words designed to attract an audience craving the kind of wall-to-wall action they were apparently presenting you. And for years they did. Then they moved away from it and shifted focus in the "IMPACT Wrestling" era during and post-Hogan, but have now, in a way, attempted to move back toward the identity of old.

But I have a hard time buying it. I don't know if it's the tainted history of that Hogan-era shift, the change in cable carrier, the wealth of associated talent that's left or some ominous combination of all of them, but I'm just having such a difficult time understanding the identity TNA/IW are trying to establish (or re-establish).

The product itself, the wrestling itself, have all been better than average for months in spite of the negative response from fans (mostly online), in spite of the rumors of cancellation and in spite of the cable carrier shift. Hell, even in spite of the wave of talent that's left and is being replaced by far lesser known faces. Yet I can't help but feel the company itself is still in the midst of a damaging identity crisis that they not only created themselves, but can't seem to get out from under.

I can't imagine I'm alone in thinking that, but I figured the best place to start would be to simply ask everyone outright what you consider TNA's identity to actually be?

 

[johnbragg]

Recycling and reliving the Attitude Era, including a fascination with ECW and NWO revivals, and regular Vince Russo comebacks.

Complicated storylines that don't pay off. Inattention to detail, a lack of long-term planning.

A company that has looked like it was dying for most of its 13-years-and-counting run, which is now longer than WCW's run.

 

[World Class Mark]

I honestly think of TNA as a show that usually has good/great wrestling matches, and the internet community hates on them. Their story lines are often inconsistent, but I've always liked the in-ring product regardless.

 

[klunderbunker]

I had an answer ready, but the more I think about it, the less sure I am.

Like IDR said, at first TNA was the indies on a national platform. They had high flying as a featured attraction, some big names who could be the draws, and things moving so fast that you wanted to watch and spend most of the two hours jumping off your couch, freaking out over what they managed to pull off this time.

Then however, they started to lose their way, and I think it happened on one particular night. And no, it's not the day Hogan and Bischoff arrived.

It was Bound For Glory 2008, the night that Samoa Joe lost the World Title to Sting.

Though he got his start in ROH, Joe is perceived as a TNA guy. His three way feud with Daniels and Styles is probably the high point of the promotion and the one time that people felt TNA had a chance to really go somewhere. Joe FINALLY won the World Title (about a year after he should have but that's a different story). He then feuded with Booker T. in a watchable but ultimately not great feud over the summer, but his time was almost up.

Joe lost the title to the 49 year old Sting at Bound For Glory 2008. Here are the next few champions with their ages.

Mick Foley (43)
Kurt Angle (40)
AJ Styles (32)
Rob Van Dam (39)
Jeff Hardy (33)
Mr. Anderson (34)
Jeff Hardy (33)
Sting (51)
Mr. Anderson (34)
Sting (52)
Kurt Angle (42)

James Storm would take the title from Angle just after Bound For Glory 2011 and then lose it to Robert Roode eight days later. For the sake of simplicity, we'll say this is over the span of three years, from Bound For Glory 2008-Bound For Glory 2011.

Look at that list. Save for AJ Styles, every single one of them made their name in WWE or ECW. The one who came closest to making his name in TNA, Mr. Anderson, had two reigns of about a month each. Hardy won the title by turning heel, negating almost everything that had made him the star he was.

The key here though is the lack of TNA stars winning the title. This was the equivalent of the WWF rejects and signees carrying WCW for a few years. Yeah it worked for a time, but at some point the fans want something new. Sting, Angle and Foley are great, but there comes a point where their time has passed and the fans want (and need) something fresh. I can only watch Sting and Angle turn back the clock so many times before I start getting bored, but TNA never got that. Having Hogan, Bischoff and Flair as the focal points of the company made things even worse.

That's what I think TNA's identity is: trying to make success with other company's talent. They barely have their own identity because they've been so busy either trying to redo the NWO invasion, ECW, or whatever else the could come up with that had drawn money in the past. Instead of trying to make a future for themselves, they were stuck in the past, trying to squeeze whatever they could out of old, dead angles. As they were doing this, it seemed that they actually thought this could go up against WWE as a real threat, which proved to be one of the biggest disasters imaginable.

So the short version: TNA's identity is someone with a major inferiority complex. They tried to do their own thing, but as soon as something that had worked before came along, they gave up on the hope they had in themselves and tried to be like everyone else. To put it mildly, it really hasn't worked.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

I tend to agree with you here, KB, same with you as well JB.

In hindsight, I don't think I'm asking the right question. Or maybe I'm thinking the better question (more productive, really) would be to ask — what should TNA's brand actually be? It's clear as shit they're re-branding, or attempting to reclaim the old brand in some way, and we've seen numerous interviews from ex-talent (Magnus, Shaw) talking about them not really having one, and being in an "identity crisis", as well as guys like Corgan talk about how TNA need to produce TNA content, and associate guys (again) as TNA guys, etc.

 

[johnbragg]

I tend to agree with you here, KB, same with you as well JB.

In hindsight, I don't think I'm asking the right question. Or maybe I'm thinking the better question (more productive, really) would be to ask — what should TNA's brand actually be?

Five years ago I would have had an answer (but it would have already meant dumping the TNA brand officially in favor of IMPACT). Be THE alternative to WWE, the Sam Adams to WWE's Budweiser. Cut the roster down to 20 regular talents--half dozen singles guys (Angle Styles Joe Daniels Wolfe Dinero), half dozen Knockouts, four or five tag teams on contract supplement with special-appearance guest stars. Focus focus focus--have 4 PPVs a year that ARE special events. "Less but better."

Now, if I won the company in a drunken poker game, I don't know what the hell I'd do with it.

 

[klunderbunker]

I tend to agree with you here, KB, same with you as well JB.

In hindsight, I don't think I'm asking the right question. Or maybe I'm thinking the better question (more productive, really) would be to ask — what should TNA's brand actually be? It's clear as shit they're re-branding, or attempting to reclaim the old brand in some way, and we've seen numerous interviews from ex-talent (Magnus, Shaw) talking about them not really having one, and being in an "identity crisis", as well as guys like Corgan talk about how TNA need to produce TNA content, and associate guys (again) as TNA guys, etc.

Right now their identity isn't clear because they can't worry about having one. Right now they need to do whatever they can do to survive, because they don't have a guaranteed future after a few weeks from now.

As for the last few years, it's been WWE lite. They've been the same idea with Dixie as the Authority and half the roster stuck in that one story that people aren't interested in. However, WWE has more talent, better production and a far better track record and history. Anyone trying to play WWE's game is going to lose because WWE is the undisputed king of wrestling and has been for years. Yeah WCW pulled it off for a bit, but people tend to forget that it was at the rock bottom for the WWF. Things were AWFUL back then and WCW attacked when they could. TNA tried to attack with the same strategy when WWE was in a good place.

Ever since that mess, they've been trying to be WWE lite and it has still not worked, because they're fighting an uphill battle from behind with a good but not excellent talent pool, a bad reputation and horrible leadership.

Overall at the moment though, TNA's identity is that of Tito or Jermain Jackson. Yeah they might have good moments, but they're such a joke because of how lame they've been over the years that no one is going to care, barring a huge turnaround and one of the biggest hits of all time, which isn't likely under Dixie's watch and with cancellation looming.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

I agree, though probably not down to the specific model. I'd have done iPPV for "lesser" PPV's and then had four massive supercards that were critical to the company, like Clash of the Champions style. Genesis, Lockdown, Slammiversary, Bound For Glory. Anything/everything in between could have been iPPV format.

Without knowing a lick about the financials behind what is or is not do-able, I'd argue that while a rebrand is still necessary, TNA could still carve out a unique identity from the ashes. Whether that's simply going back to their roots of being an independent product on national scale (with superior graphics and filming techniques to allow them to stand out) or otherwise.

Unfortunately, part of the problem—a large part, mind you—is that the entire re-brand to IMPACT Wrestling was so poorly handled to begin with. Dumping the TNA brand for IMPACT, or otherwise, would have been fine. Was fine, in principle, I should say. Except that it was a golden opportunity they flubbed hard on, where it's still being explained to this day (even though I don't buy it) that the show is called IMPACT Wrestling and the company is still called TNA. It was a total failure to launch. The plane didn't explode on the tarmac, but it sure as shit never cruised to the planned 30,000 feet either. If anything it sputtered, kind of took "flight", so long as we define flight as simply not being on the ground, and seems to be coming to a hard landing here soon.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

Right now their identity isn't clear because they can't worry about having one. Right now they need to do whatever they can do to survive, because they don't have a guaranteed future after a few weeks from now.

As for the last few years, it's been WWE lite. They've been the same idea with Dixie as the Authority and half the roster stuck in that one story that people aren't interested in. However, WWE has more talent, better production and a far better track record and history. Anyone trying to play WWE's game is going to lose because WWE is the undisputed king of wrestling and has been for years. Yeah WCW pulled it off for a bit, but people tend to forget that it was at the rock bottom for the WWF. Things were AWFUL back then and WCW attacked when they could. TNA tried to attack with the same strategy when WWE was in a good place.

Ever since that mess, they've been trying to be WWE lite and it has still not worked, because they're fighting an uphill battle from behind with a good but not excellent talent pool, a bad reputation and horrible leadership.

Overall at the moment though, TNA's identity is that of Tito or Jermain Jackson. Yeah they might have good moments, but they're such a joke because of how lame they've been over the years that no one is going to care, barring a huge turnaround and one of the biggest hits of all time, which isn't likely under Dixie's watch and with cancellation looming.

But couldn't it be argued that having one would actually help with guaranteeing their future? Part of the reason people aren't watching is because of the lack of direction, the shifting motives, the inconsistencies week-to-week or month-to-month. Having the rebrand and focus of the company all locked in place, I would argue, might be too little too late, but would still give them a better shot at securing their future than continuing this ad hoc version in the hopes that enough of the core audience don't just bail.

 

[johnbragg]

Unfortunately, part of the problem—a large part, mind you—is that the entire re-brand to IMPACT Wrestling was so poorly handled to begin with. Dumping the TNA brand for IMPACT, or otherwise, would have been fine.

The problem there (one problem anyway) is that they didn't rebrand from "TNA." It's not Impact Wrestling Presents Slammiversary, it's TNA Slammiversary. Tits-N-Ass Wrestling is still a millstone around their necks in the English-speaking world. There are no Impact house shows, you have TNA house shows.

Changing the name kinda-sorta was a flubbed opportunity because it wasn't part of a re-brand and re-launch. Hogan taking over was more of a rebrand than "TNA Impact" becoming "Impact Wrestling."

 

[TDFG]

TNA looks like a cheap tv series. At one stage it was an alternative to WWE and they were gathering a bit of steam.

But now with the next set of tapings after BFG taking tna up to the end of 2015 they need to make a big decision for 2016.

The roster could do with a shake up. TNA has a lot of veterans, even 'TNA Originals' like Roode & Young are late 30's. Add a couple of talents like Bennett, Ricochet, Shelley & one or two tag-teams and the roster looks fine. They can always trim what they have i.e. Grado.

Change the set. I liked the whole tunnel entrance them into a bright arena.
Find a couple of places to tape Impact.
Go with 4 or 5 ppv's and finish the ONO events or have them for the OnDemand Service.
The X Cup, BFG Series were good when organised, bring them back.
Improve those damn entrance videos.

 

[johnbragg]

But couldn't it be argued that having one would actually help with guaranteeing their future? Part of the reason people aren't watching is because of the lack of direction, the shifting motives, the inconsistencies week-to-week or month-to-month. Having the rebrand and focus of the company all locked in place, I would argue, might be too little too late, but would still give them a better shot at securing their future than continuing this ad hoc version in the hopes that enough of the core audience don't just bail.

I don't think you can have a credible rebrand with Dixie Carter still in the building. There would have to be one (probably new) voice, one vision of what the company is and is going to be. Jarrett would be an improvement, but I think we've already seen what his vision of a wrestling company looks like.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

Unfortunately TNA's identity is a sinking ship. WWE is bringing in the new fans (kids) and the other indies are getting the scraps. There are few people that want to get on board with TNA or know where/how to find it. DA seems to only have been a Hail Mary for TNA and a chance to get some recognition for DA. Is this opinion wrong? Well, it doesn't matter. The perception is hurting the product's numbers. They are keeping some TNA die hard fans and pro wrestling die hard fans but so many others don't want to commit to something that feels so inevitably dead.

How should they brand? I don't know. I don't know if they can. I've been throwing ideas out for TNA for four years on this forum and I have reached the point where I am all out of ideas. The WWE alternative always seemed to work the best but TNA had bigger aspirations. I guess at this point TNA could brand themselves as the company that cut ties with Hogan well before WWE. That would be kind of funny.

 

[klunderbunker]

But couldn't it be argued that having one would actually help with guaranteeing their future? Part of the reason people aren't watching is because of the lack of direction, the shifting motives, the inconsistencies week-to-week or month-to-month. Having the rebrand and focus of the company all locked in place, I would argue, might be too little too late, but would still give them a better shot at securing their future than continuing this ad hoc version in the hopes that enough of the core audience don't just bail.

In theory it could, but I don't know how much it would work in reality.

Look at what happened when they went with WRESTLING MATTERS. Yeah it sounded cool for a bit and then it was right back where they started. Then it was Corgan coming in. What has really changed since he's been there?

Changing the brand completely would give them a bit of a change, but the problem is TNA has had too many moments where "THIS is the big change we've been waiting for!" for a lot of the fans to buy it. On top of that, it doesn't matter if you put the new presentation out there and then do the same show with Dixie Carter coming out there and calling everyone darlin and having the X-Division mean nothing and Gail Kim putting the fans to sleep during the Knockouts segments.

The rebranding would help a bit, but they need to change internally. The problem though is I don't think the fans have enough patience to care about TNA long enough for those changes to take place.

 

[Lowdown]

Its hard to pigeon-hole TNA into a single description. From recent history it looks like they have a bit of an inferiority complex, like that awkward school kid that couldn't fit in with anyone. Again, I missed out on TNA's early years, pretty much '02-late '10, and I go by what most of y'all said it was like. I was always told that if it ain't broke don't fix it. And KB brought up good points about how TNA elevated former WWE and ECW talent into top spots during a three year period. It's been discussed quite a bit over the years about "homegrown talent" being held back. For better or worse, this played a huge part in where they are now. As much as I rag on my like for WWE, they have put younger stars in positions to excel. I have love for Sting, Angle, and other former stars, but their heyday was way back in the day. Maybe it's too late to go back to TNA's peak, but they could slowly become a promotion that folks speak of positively again.

 

[Starkist]

TNA's identity has been stolen from themselves. They where truly Total Non Stop Action then it vanished. They went into being WWE lite which was nothing but former WWE guys holding the belt. This pointed out by KB already.

TNA needs a direction fast because they are not drawing fans being a circus. I hope TNA goes back to being a nom-stop action show with good story telling. I hope TNA survives and gets a break they truly need and for once not mess it up. If they don't GFW could become the number 2 promotion regardless what ROH fans may think or say.

 

[FromGlasgow]

I think its an enjoyable wrestling show, Ive always watched it since the start and its the most watched wrestling show in the UK so they must be doing something right, Its not perfect but neither is WWE and wrestling as a whole isn't exactly in a golden age at the moment.

For some reason I still can't understand its absolutely hated by the IWC, I prefer using the don't like don't watch system yet I still read on here the IWC constantly critizing every single moment of the show, Someone on here claimed their always rehashing the NWO angle, I presume their talking about the Band angle that they had that lasted for about 3 weeks over 5 years ago? and now their apparently copying the attitude era, Maybe I'm missing something but I can't even see any comparisons between modern day TNA and the attitude era?
It makes me ashamed to be a wrestling fan being that some of them are just always so constantly negative that they will do no right in some peoples minds no matter what they do.
To sit and watch a 2 hour TNA show every week just to find all the faults to keep bringing it up on message boards I dont get it.

 

[johnbragg]

Someone on here claimed their always rehashing the NWO angle, I presume their talking about the Band angle that they had that lasted for about 3 weeks over 5 years ago?

The Band, the Voodoo Kin Mafia, endless permutations over the years of Nash, Hall, Waltman, Kip James and BJ James trying to revive and relive the NWO/DX glory years. And Immortal (the NWO as it was getting bloated).

I was also thinking of the Main Event Mafia, but that was more an attempt to revive the Millionaires' Club angle.

To sit and watch a 2 hour TNA show every week just to find all the faults to keep bringing it up on message boards I dont get it.

I haven't watched in a long time. But I've watched and followed over a long enough time to answer the OP's question.

 

[FromGlasgow]

The Band, the Voodoo Kin Mafia, endless permutations over the years of Nash, Hall, Waltman, Kip James and BJ James trying to revive and relive the NWO/DX glory years. And Immortal (the NWO as it was getting bloated).

I was also thinking of the Main Event Mafia, but that was more an attempt to revive the Millionaires' Club angle.



I haven't watched in a long time. But I've watched and followed over a long enough time to answer the OP's question.

I don't agree with anything you said
Voodoo Kin Mafia was just a tag team and a play on Vincent Kennedy Mcmahon's name they were nothing like the NWO Kip James and BJ James were never in the NWO they were in DX, May as well say the current tag champs The Wolves are a copy of the NWO The others you mentioned werent in any other factions and Main event mafia or Immortal was nothing like the NWO so I can't see where your endless permutations is. Is it because their both wrestling factions with men in them?
I guess you could view things any way you like and it basically could be any wrestling faction that could be accused of copying the NWO? As The Freebirds, Four Horsemen, Heenan Family etc where all there for years before NWO.
Do you even watch any wrestling now? As WWE has factions too the Nexus faction for example was more of a copy of the NWO than anything TNA has ever done, Not to mention that WWE has brought the actual NWO back several times but do your NWO rules not count for WWE? Personaly I enjoy seeing them back together occasionally as I was such a big fan of them back in the day.

I'm glad to hear you don't watch TNA anymore as you clearly have always hated it and they have done no right, usually others who hate it will still watch every week just to negatively critisize every single moment of the show like they search for negative.

 

[Messiah]

It's funny people use to praise TNA more than WWE and talk about how they're different.. Man, times have changed.. Now all the talk is about Lucha Underground and Ring of Honor and people are betting on how long TNA lasts.. I actually enjoy watching the product more than i use to, it's actually entertaining, but their TV deal really hurt them. Once they got cancelled from Spike TV people have been putting a time limit on TNA, even though they have a solid deal with Destination America.. I think TNA is fine and they'll last for a while longer.

 

[whoopin' ass]

I think its legacy is trying to continue the Attitude Era without most of the major players who made the Attitude Era great and an adult alternative to what wwe was producing. While TNA has people who were a part of the Attitude Era, they really didn't have any of the main guys early on. They had Russo who worked for both companies so he could write that kind of show but the problem early on was they didn't have the top talent to support that. Jarrett was the top guy and while he did work for both companies during the Attitude Era, he was never a top guy or someone people think of from that time. That happened a lot - Raven, Rhino, and others were all part of it but they were not a Steve Austin or Hogan. Eventually they did get some names like Angle and Sting but it seems like even then, there was always that reference back to the Attitude Era but it was too late for most fans as you could go to Raw and see a lot of the guys there instead or they had already been on Raw and kind of did their last run so you weren't seeing their big return to wrestling, you were seeing them after they left wwe.

I do think they will be remembered for putting on a more adult product than wwe. I agree with what people have said - they have done some fantastic matches and I think that has a lot to do with them not catering to the kids. It allows a diversity in the matches because you can use moves that others don't compared to wwe who has banned a ton of moves over the years. I think to that by bringing people from different promotions and letting them be more or less themselves, they created an interesting product compared to wwe where before you hit the mian roster, you get trained to work a wwe style no matter how many years you have wrestled.