When is TNA a "success"?

[bigflo82]

To the guy that does the quotes thing, you my friend, may need to seek help. You said tna gets paid for every person that walks inside universal studios. I would really love to see proof of that. You talk as if you know everything about this company when in reality you know no more or less than anyone else on this entire board. All you do is talk out of your ass and try to insult people. How old are you, that you can't just make your point without being a douche. Also, how can you say those things about bret hart. He had a stroke, there's nothing he could have done about that. You should hope and pray that your or no one close to you ever has to go through that. Scott Hall on the other hand is an addict. He chose to do those things to himself. In any event I appreciate both for busting their ass for us the fans. You should learn to do the same. As far as the topic goes, I agree with the poster who said tna level of succeeding changed when their goal changed. They tried to go up to the big time and failed. That's the opposite of what they wanted to do. Don't fool yourselves into thinking they brought those guys in to increase awareness for their product. If that was the case, why move to mondays. They were just fine on thursdays. They wanted to compete and they couldn't. That equals failure right there. It's that simple.

 

[shattered dreams]

Can we drop the threadjack of repetitive comments about TNA failing on mondays? If you want to pay some more lipservice to that no duh dead horse go find a thread about it. WWECW failed and the XFL failed. That does not mean WWE isn't a success or that Vince McMahon isn't a successful businessman. Point is one small venture going wrong can be a failure but that does not make everything an organization has done, is doing and will ever do a failure. To suggest such a thing is simply asinine. I repeat this thread is about when would you say TNA is a success or has successfully reached the next level. You can disagree with someone saying they are a success now but at least answer the question at hand as well if you do not think they are currently successful.

 

[FightOwensFight]

I would say they can be considered successful when they stop trying to compete with WWE. Bear with me, it will make sense (I think). Right now, all I see is constant reminders during their broadcast of how this is better than anything on TV (obviously a dig against Vince and Co.) But, as a neutral observer (I prefer WWE but still enjoy TNA) I want nothing more than for TNA to succeed. As a wrestling fan I pine for the days of the Monday Night Wars when I was flicking back and forth like a madman trying to take it all in. But, with TNA now they are trying too hard. When you constantly have to draw attention to how different you are and how great you are, it pretty quicklly becomes obvious you are trying more to convince yourself than anything else.

Bottom line, TNA can be considered a success only when they feel confident enough in their own product to not constantly be taking shots at WWE. If you put out a good enough product, fans and people paid to cover the wrestling industry will decide for themselves if you are a better alternative to what is out there. You don't need to tell them. Just show them.

 

[shattered dreams]

I would say they can be considered successful when they stop trying to compete with WWE. Bear with me, it will make sense (I think). Right now, all I see is constant reminders during their broadcast of how this is better than anything on TV (obviously a dig against Vince and Co.) But, as a neutral observer (I prefer WWE but still enjoy TNA) I want nothing more than for TNA to succeed. As a wrestling fan I pine for the days of the Monday Night Wars when I was flicking back and forth like a madman trying to take it all in. But, with TNA now they are trying too hard. When you constantly have to draw attention to how different you are and how great you are, it pretty quicklly becomes obvious you are trying more to convince yourself than anything else.

Bottom line, TNA can be considered a success only when they feel confident enough in their own product to not constantly be taking shots at WWE. If you put out a good enough product, fans and people paid to cover the wrestling industry will decide for themselves if you are a better alternative to what is out there. You don't need to tell them. Just show them.

Do you really "pine for the monday night wars" if you want TNA to not try and compete with WWE? Wasn't there a whole lot more shots taken at the other company on both sides during this time? I understand what you are saying but just do not see how that remotely is consistent with your thoughts about the monday night wars. I also think being a success is a lot more complicated than simply dropping comments here and there. IF that is all TNA had to do to succeed they would be idiots for not having done it a long time ago. Unfortunately, for them and wrestling fans, it is more complicated than that.

 

[FightOwensFight]

I didn't like the taking shots at each other during the Monday Night Wars either (really the one aspect that annoyed me) other than the really creative stuff (like when DX went to Atlanta with the tank and WCW gave away the results of Raw).

I guess I should clarify what I mean by not trying to compete. Take last nights Impact (which was fantastic, by the way) for example. During the tag match I can't count how many times Tenay and Tazz made a point to say "You won't find this anywhere else..." or "The greatest series in the history of wrestling". They always do this and to me it comes across as desperate.

I would just rather they become comfortable in their own shoes (last night was a huge step if you ask me, the best Impact in a while) and let the product speak for itself.

I guess that is the point I was trying to make.