Many wrestling fans are not as intelligent as the OP. They're much rather turn the product off because of incredibly idle reasons, or because they read something on the Internet or heard how much it sucks from a friend. Wrestling fans are not the brightest crayons in the box. They'd much rather bet on what's popular, what has worked for 50 years (even though is broken now), and watch the WWE not because it's good and entertaining, but watch it because they're hoping for a glimpse of the Attitude Era.
People watch WWE because they have variety. WWE has actually changed with the times. They aren't pushing the envelope like they used to, but why would they? Raw still gets ratings consistently over 3.0 which is enough to keep them towards the top of the ratings list every Monday. They put on a good product, it just isn't a GREAT product because they have no one to compete against other than themselves.
TNA is a younger company, smaller company with a product (promos, matches etc.) that almost rivals WWE's.
Really? TNA has some good action but they seriously lack psychology in their matches. Their good promos are all by their veteran talent, compared to WWE where most of their best talkers are younger. There is no rivalry, WWE is blowing them out of the water.
TNA has been around for nine years. Face it, TNA won't get as big as the WWE or even come close in the next ten. That's the truth. It won't gain viewers over a night, it won't gain them in the next year. TNA is a baby of a company, and people expect it to be as efficient as an adult. They're not even on the road yet. TNA will not grow anytime soon, and we all need to live with that.
This is literally due to their own ineptitude, not the amount of time they have been around. WCW and WWF had to deal with coming on to national television with guys mainly only known from local territories. They had to build a completely new audience for their product. TNA had a pre-made niche to fill, they had the big names to do it, and they have just been astonishingly inefficient at progressing forward.
The ratings have been stuck in one place, and that's usually a bad thing. But then look at WWE's ratings. They're the same every-single-week. That tells you that it's not a WWE thing, it's not a TNA thing, it's a wrestling thing. And this is where TNA is supposed to chime in and reinvent the business. Well it won't happen when fans are so close minded and cynical when it comes to Total Nonstop Action.
The difference is WWE is pulling in consistently good ratings while TNA is pulling in consistently mediocre ratings. You can blame the change in people's attitudes to an extent, but it primarily IS a TNA thing that they aren't improving.
Fans around the globe treat it like trash, while it's not. Old guys this, old guys that. Yes, they do talk on the mic. To some fans that's taking the spotlight off the young guys. But at the same time, the young guys are the one in the ring, wrestling, so it's balanced. TNA has Ric Flair, Bischoff and Double J. I'm even going to exclude Double J from the mix because he's very good and entertaining. That's two guys. Flair and Bischoff. Two guys with great mic-skills, guy who can act, guys who can do it all on the mic. Is that so bad? Is that making the product unwatchable?
No one with a sensible opinion is going to argue that Ric Flair having some mic time every show is a bad thing, but I can easily refute this. If Kurt Angle had taken John Cena under his wing when Cena first debuted and had done all the talking for Cena for the next two years of his career, would Cena be over like he is now? No.
Like I said, TNA's product will never be flawless, but at least they're working on it unlike WWE who kept doing everything we hate for the last five, six years, completely ignoring the fans, as if saying "fuck you, you don't know shit". You can feel that TNA is trying to find the pulse of their company, you can feel the passion, you can see that they're experimenting and it's only a matter of time until they find themselves. People need to open their minds, remember why they love the business and try to enjoy a product that is in no way shape or form unwatchable. It's unwatchable for the ignorant sheep, for the idiots, the morons who decide to bash it for the fun of it.
WWE has put over CM Punk, Bryan Danielson, Evan Bourne, Sheamus, John Morrison, The Miz, Jack Swagger, The Nexus, ect...People have hated all of this? Seems to me that when WWE gave these guys the ball it made for dramatic changes in the product and was viewed as mostly positive by fans in the long run. TNA USED to put over guys like Styles and Joe, which was looked on positively, but that no longer happens which is why TNA isn't even on the WWE radar to this day.
I know, it's frustrating that it hasn't gained any viewers and it hasn't grown. But hating it because it doesn't grow is pretty stupid. Hating it because they sign this guy or that guy is pretty stupid. Hating them because they give the belt to a wrestler who has worked at another company is pretty stupid.
When you are a "fan" of a product and they are doing a large number of things you don't like it is actually pretty smart to complain. Even WWE listens to their fans occasionally in order to appease them and bring in a little extra money for themselves. CM Punk would not exist in WWE if the fans didn't love him from the indies, TNA is just dead set against listening to ANY criticism which is counter productive.
They're not putting the belt on Mr.Anderson because he worked in WWE, they're doing it because he's over with the fans, he's good in the ring and one of the best mic workers in the business.
Anderson is relatively over compared to other TNA people. Anderson is moderately talented in the ring and is far from polished, he looks good because guys like Angle made him seem that way. Also, a bunch of TNA veterans and half the WWE lockerroom would like to argue the idea that Anderson is one of the best mic workers.
They put the belt on Hardy for the shock factor of his heel turn and his popularity. Is that so wrong? Isn't "popularity" and merch. sales the reason why Cena is the poster boy?
Yes, very good, this is how business works. We finally have an issue we can agree on.
TNA has put the belt on someone for the fuck of it. RVD and Foley are perfect examples. They've done it for good and bad reasons. Excluding either is idiotic.
...I don't have the slightest idea what you're trying to say here.
They hire ex-WWE guys, yes. But while most fans see "that guy who worked in WWE", I see the worker, I see the wrestler. I see RVD who can still go and has had some cool matches. I see Anderson who's the most entertaining guy to watch in TNA bar Flair. I see Jeff Hardy who reinvented himself and is more interesting than he's been in a long time. I see Ric Flair who's the Flair of old, the guy who cuts a promo like no other, the guy that's not fed to the viewer as an old man, he's Naitch now and is awesome at it. I see Kurt Angle, a guy who has helped the company a lot and had amazing matches and storylines.
They have hired some dumbasses. Matt Hardy comes to mind. All the EV2.0 guys come to mind. It's how it goes, it's a business decision and it sometimes work, and sometimes does not.
I agree with most of this, except the last point. Nearly everyone saw the catastrophe of EV2.0 coming a MILE AWAY, even Heyman was against it. Yet still, TNA decided to go with the angle and act shocked when it completely bombed.
Think of it this way. You're making a movie. You have actors who are talented but not famous. You need that movie to sell, and one of the best way to sell it is to slap a famous actor on the poster which would increase the chances of people going to see it. If you're making that small budget movie and Robert DeNiro comes to you and says he wants to be in it - would you say "no", you're old? DeNiro is DeNiro just like Flair is Flair. He doesn't have to go "You talkin' to me?" in the movie, he just needs to use his ability to act, just like Flair uses his ability to be ... well Flair, I can't define what he does. You want the best possible cast, and the more famous people you have - the better. Some of them might be bad actors, some of them might be great, but put them in the movie with the talented youngsters and you have yourself a nice little cast, plus the youngsters will get some experience and exposure by working with the celebs. That's why TNA hires them. Certainly didn't work because the ratings are the same, but just enjoy my example
Think of it this way. You're making a low budget movie. You sign Robert De Niro and decide to cast him as the young, suave romantic love interest which he has no business being. In fact, you manage to miscast nearly everyone in the movie on the basis that Robert De Niro is a "big enough draw" and HAS to be the lead even if the role doesn't suit him. Your movie will get a 0 rating on Rotten Tomato and put De Niro's career in the toilet. Good job slick.
And that begs the question: should TNA Fire the famous wrestlers/legends they signed because the ratings did not increase? Absolutely not, because if they do - they might as well fire the youngsters too. It's up to them too, isn't it? It is, to an extent. It's also the writer's fault, and the people who market the product.
Again, your point escapes me. Clearly, not EVERYONE shares equal blame in this problem. I understand what you're trying to say, but businesses don't work like that. Only a few people are in charge and they are ultimately responsible for the overall quality. If a guy gets hired by WWE and he sucks, the fault falls on the person that hired him. This is why talent scouts make a lot of money.
Personally, I honestly believe that TNA's problems are not that much what goes ON AIR, it's the backstage things, the business aspect of it. I've heard Flair say that there are very few people backstage doing a lot of things, he said that the show could use more "man power". Could it be that TNA's all fine, product wise, but it's not ran by the right people? Are all the right people, interested in working for a wrestling company, in WWE? TNA was awesome in 2005-06. It had everyone we all wanted. The young guys, the awesome wrestling, nice little storylines. Then why did it not succeed? The product was awesome, was it not? Writing was great, matches were great, talent was great, the divisions were great. One more proof that it might not be the people on the air, but the ones backstage who halt TNA's success. Not that they're not trying, they're just not good enough.
Most of this is correct, but TNA's writing has ALWAYS sucked. Watch some old TNA segments, they are terrible. TNA has never had a good writing team and THAT is the reason they were never able to bridge the gap from "great wrestling program" to "great entertainment program".
Don't hate TNA for doing mistakes, that's stupid, because while they do mistakes, they also do a lot of great and entertaining things, and people seem to forget about that and harp on the bad stuff.
Can I get examples? Because I'm drawing a blank. And I'm not saying that to be a dick, other than Beer Money and Motor City Machine Guns I can't think of a single thing TNA has done that was worth a damn in YEARS.
Like I said, it'll take years for TNA to grow. It won't happen now, this year or next year. It takes time. WWE's been aroun for 50 years and it took them 40 to reach their absolute peak, and all they had to do in order to reach it was to exist. Wrestling was a new thing. It's not anymore.
Who knows? Maybe that's WWE/TNA's ceiling now. Maybe WWE will keep drawing the 3.0's and slowly losing them. Maybe wrestling's simply dying and it'll take a miracle to save it, not a new Attitude Era.
WWE did big ratings early in it's existence...so did WCW...but we'll ignore that for the convenience of your argument.
Either way, I'm enjoying TNA's product, I watch it as a fan, not a smark - it does miracles if you do so, by the way. I'm watching a company that develops its identity, a company that has things happening in it, new "firsts", moments, a company with a lot of potential which shows no sign of sinking, and it won't as much as some people would like to just so they can boast about it. I'd much rather watch TNA which is going somewhere, than WWE which is going absolutely nowhere but down. They'll have the money, they'll market the crap out of it, buy new trons, new sets, pyro, production, all is fine. They can't buy fans.
Right now we shouldn't worry about TNA beating WWE and being huge. They're about to go on the road and see how it goes, they have a few nice storylines going on, some piss-breaks of course, some wrestlers you wanna see, others that you don't, it's wrestling, it's never perfect. Enjoy it for what it is, we're lucky we even have that.
I'm glad you enjoy TNA. Seriously. I wish I could. Just don't be an apologist for them, all of us have been at one point or another, and we've all lived to regret it.
