If I had to pick one over the other, I'd have to pick the WWE at this point. While I do want to see TNA continue to grow, as it does give fans and wrestlers themselves more options, I just view the WWE product as superior overall for a number of reasons.
I suppose I'll start off with matches. In terms of match excitement in TNA, those matches tend to be between X Division wrestlers and are typically loaded down with high spots. That's all well and good, nothing wrong with that if that's what you're into. The problem is that there's almost no psychology in so many of TNA's matches. Week after week on iMPACT!, there'll be these seemingly random matches just thrown together without really any point or a purpose. It just gives me a feeling that the matches are done just in order to have something to fill airtime. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that TNA doesn't have good matches and that good matches don't take place on iMPACT! because that's not true. However, for most TNA matches, there's just no substance about them. The spotfests they have, for instance, are exciting while they're going on but are completely forgettable half an hour after they've taken place. When it comes to match quality on Raw and iMPACT!, it's a toss up. Some weeks, the matches on both will be pretty damn good and some weeks not so much. But, more often than not, I do at least see a point to most of the matches that take place on Raw and they do usually tell a story.
One of the biggest problems I see on TNA is the overall lack of substance and sustainability for most of their feuds. They move so swiftly sometimes from one feud to another that they don't really even feel like wrestling feuds. Sometimes, you'll see wrestlers will have a single match on iMPACT! or maybe one on a ppv before they both move on to something else. It's hard to get an insight into a wrestler's character when they don't really even have any opportunity to build a character. WWE does go overkill with some feuds like Randy Orton and Triple H. Sometimes, they just don't know when to pull the plug on something. But the WWE does often use feuds to build character and elevate wrestlers. Not that TNA doesn't at all, but the only wrestler that I've seen in TNA this year that seems to be getting built up in any believable way without being rammed down anyone's throat is Ken Anderson. And it could very much be argued that Anderson was already a star before he ever set foot in TNA. TNA is full of stars, but most of them were built during their time with other companies.
A few things that have turned me off at times regarding TNA is the fact that some fans, and TNA themselves somtimes, consistently refer to the company as being a "more adult" or "more innovative" product. It's just something that I find incredibly lame and it just seems like some TNA fans are grasping at straws in order to find something in order to slam the WWE over. Now, it's true that TNA does use blood in some matches whereas the WWE has all but cut it out. It's not that huge of a factor for me because neither company tends to have their wrestlers bleed all that often. However, blood does help in certain situations and matches. I've watched TNA for several years and there's nothing really more "adult" about it than the WWE. Sure, TNA wrestlers will toss around a few dirty words every so often and has a handful of women, namely The Beautiful People, that are keeping the sexpot aspect alive in the Knockout Division. So, a few dirty words and scantially clad women are supposed to make TNA "more adult"? Yeah, I don't think so. If that's all it takes to impress someone, then they're pretty lame to begin with. TNA had an opportunity to do something controversial and groundbreaking with Orlando Jordan but both TNA and Spike decided not to go through with it. It's all a smokescreen that both TNA and Spike pay lipservice to. Groundbreaking or "pushing the envelope" in Spike or TNA doesn't go any further than what the WWE was already doing in 1998.
The WWE is a company that is building towards building new stars and it's been something of a consistent effort on the company's part for close to a year. CM Punk, John Morrison, The Miz, Kofi Kingston, Sheamus, Drew McIntyre, Dolph Ziggler, Cody Rhodes, Ted DiBiase, etc. You also have the NXT concept that does have several interesting wrestlers on the show that could potentially be big stars in the WWE. I'm not saying that all those young wrestlers have worked out or have even reached their full potential yet, but it's there. When I look at TNA, I simply do not see many young stars being made in the company. Desmond Wolfe seemed to be on the fast track to the TNA main event scene. However, since Hulk Hogan's debut in TNA, Wolfe's push has come to a stall. He's gone from wrestling clinics with Kurt Angle to losing to Abyss in about 90 seconds. Now, to be fair, I think that TNA's primary goal right now is to increase its audience rather than really building new talent.
Don't get me wrong, the WWE isn't perfect. I do think that the WWE has concentrated more on the wrestling aspect of their product rather than the "entertainment" part. Building storylines, building up feuds, wrestling matches and promoting ppvs have been what the WWE has focused more on in 2010 thus far and there's been a dramatic improvement to the quality of Raw. While the guest host angle has been hit and miss, Raw hasn't been built around the celebrity guest hosts in 2010 as it was in 2009. This year, they've come out for a few minutes, done their thing and they're off camera. The WWE is no longer trying to dominate Raw with the presence of celebrities. And, perhaps most importantly, Hornswoggle's use has been quite minimal thus far in 2010 and I hope it stays that way. There's still room for improvement on Raw and I'd love to see SmackDown moved to another network on another night. However, I feel that the WWE product overall is significantly been better in 2010 thus far than in 2009. The WWE is using a good formula and I see no reason they can't keep it up.