Would 'better wrestling' actually be good for TNA's business?

[Rebecca]

People have been talking about how TNA should go back to the way it once was: more wrestling, less promos/backstage skits, and I agree, ideally speaking it should be that way.

But the question is; will such a strategy actually be beneficial for TNA's business?

I mean TNA is trying to expand their fanbase and attempting to attract what are normally called "garden-variety" fans, and while fans around the world, especially in Britain and Japan might indeed favor better wrestling, as far as I can tell the home fanbase (i.e. the American fans) is always, ALWAYS top priority for promotions like TNA and the WWE.

We all know that most wrestling fans in America were weaned off promotions like WWF/E or WCW which emphasize/d the sports-entertainment aspect of wrestling, or are at least vaguely familiar with the old ECW which emphasized ultraviolence, hardcore matches and raunchy gimmicks/storylines. At the risk of sounding misinformed or clueless, I'd like to state that a match over 5 minutes featuring mostly wrestlers who can't cut it on the mic or have little to no "star aura", probably isn't the average "garden-variety" fan's idea of a fun time.

So just to rephrase the question; will the "more wrestling/less promos" strategy do more good than bad for TNA?

 

[Wrath]

NO! NO! NO! NO! Its's one of the problems that IWC bring up all the time. They say TNA does not offer a different product then they say they want more wrestling matches. ROH and WWE right now offers a product that empasis more in ring action than segments,promos,storylines and characters. Even though RAW seems like a more soap opera show SD,ECW and Superstar are all wrestling programs and don't forget PPVs every month. Right now TNA offers a different product which emphasis more segments,longer promos,more time for storylines and feuds.

What's TNA's purpose ? Being an alternative product to WWE. Just remember WCW back in the time. WWF offered a product that had cartoonish characters,more storylines more unrealistic gimmicks and WCW offered the opposite to compete with them. TNA should do the same. WWE's offering a more kid friendly product TNA is offering more adult oriented product. WWE have bigger wrestlers like Triple H,John Cena,Batista and TNA have smaller wrestlers like Aj Styles and Daniels. That's why TNA should do the opposite thing WWE's doing to be an alternative. So TNA shouldn't have more matches like back in the day

 

[HellWoo]

Whether more or less wrestling happens, they need to do a much better job with their stories and character development. Most people watch it to be entertained and if they're not interested in a part of a show, then they'll turn it to the next channel.

 

[Nate DaMac]

Sidious is going to murder this thread. Let's see if I can state my opinion without ripping him off. Honestly, I think TNA should stay the course. WWE can afford to change the direction of their programming as their audience is built in for the most part. The casual fan probably doesn't realize that it has switched to a PG format. In TNA, well the casual fan doesn't watch. Most of their audience are people looking for an alternative to the kid friendly WWE, and if TNA were to switch to a similar format, it would alienate a lot of people and possibly drive them away. Cnuld they do away with a little bit of the time spent on promos? Maybe. But I don't think a more wrestling driven program is going to drive in any more viewers. I don't think Raw's ratings spike is a result of more wrestling, as much as the "Guest Host" concept. The other shows are definitely more wrestling driven and they aren't even beating Impact by much.

 

[Rebecca]

NO! NO! NO! NO! Its's one of the problems that IWC bring up all the time. They say TNA does not offer a different product then they say they want more wrestling matches. ROH and WWE right now offers a product that empasis more in ring action than segments,promos,storylines and characters. Even though RAW seems like a more soap opera show SD,ECW and Superstar are all wrestling programs and don't forget PPVs every month. Right now TNA offers a different product which emphasis more segments,longer promos,more time for storylines and feuds.

What's TNA's purpose ? Being an alternative product to WWE. Just remember WCW back in the time. WWF offered a product that had cartoonish characters,more storylines more unrealistic gimmicks and WCW offered the opposite to compete with them. TNA should do the same. WWE's offering a more kid friendly product TNA is offering more adult oriented product. WWE have bigger wrestlers like Triple H,John Cena,Batista and TNA have smaller wrestlers like Aj Styles and Daniels. That's why TNA should do the opposite thing WWE's doing to be an alternative. So TNA shouldn't have more matches like back in the day

You're right in a sense, I mean, does more wrestling-less promo work as a business structure? No, but I think better wrestling and less promos could. A show can be based around the sports entertainment viewpoint and still be a predominantly wrestling show. I think the territories did the best at mixing things up to where they balanced out the equation perfectly, where promos didn't become intrusive, off-putting, and pointless. When someone talked, they had something to say. When something happened backstage, or in a vacant lot (poor Dusty), there was a reason for it, and therein lied the spectacle. In TNA and the WWE right now, one could say that there's too much fluff at times. Case in point, on Raw the other week, we had a 30 minute, THIRTY MINUTE, that's a quarter of the show, wasted on a DX opening segment celebrating Vince McMahon's birthday. Add onto the fact that the outcome of the segment made NO SENSE, and that nothing major or longterm was accomplished with the promo, and tack on the pointless 5 minutes tacked on afterwards with DX backstage, and you've got a very dull quarter surrounding only three men, one of which isn't even a wrestler. Now one could argue that they were stretching for Mayweather to arrive, and one could argue that they managed to entertain the house audience, but if they'd thrown two guys out there to kill time, like maybe Kofi Kingston and Jamie Noble, the audience would have still been entertained, and odds are a majority of their smarky audience wouldn't have turned the channel. I know I did.

So yes, there's such thing as wrestling overkill, but there's also such a thing as too much fluff. Could a company thrive off of good fluff? Potentially, it worked in the 90's for both WCW and WWE, but inevitably even that loses steam when people realize that they've tuned into World Wrestling Entertainment for...well...Wrestling. I also think that there are shifts where one need outweighs the other. We're a generation living in the glory of the Attitude Era, but at the same time, those who remember it fully remember the undercard, we remember half of the WCW jobbers being inducted into nWo, we remember *cringes* Ahmed Johnson and Road Dogg, and complete shows booked to the teeth with factions, in DX case, resulting in double duty for some wrestlers who aren't worthy of licking the dirt off of Killer Kowalski's grave. At the end of the day, we're starved for good wrestling. Some vaguely remember Steamboat vs Savage, Magnum TA vs Tully Blanchard, Rude vs Roberts, some have even got matches trapped in their psyche from childhood and they want to see that quality of wrestling again. They're not the entire market, but there is a niche that needs filling, and I definitely believe that a company called TNA could fill that niche, and make it grow in this era of wrestling that has yet to form a true identity, style, or big name.

 

[L4L]

Honestly I think TNA has more entertaining matches right now than the WWE does. I wouldnt mind their matches being a little bit longer but overall I dont think TNA needs to chnge anything.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

The average wrestling fan needs more than just wrestling matches to be interested in professional wrestling, that's just simply how it is. Now, over this year and the past several months in particular, I think the WWE has found an overall good mix of promo and matches. Raw is more promo driven while Smackdown, ECW and Superstars are more match driven. Maybe TNA needs a similar format where one show has some wrestling but is primarily based on storyline and promo build up and the other focuses more on the matches themselves.

Now, TNA can advertise itself as an alternative to the WWE all it likes, but I think there are only so many things it can do differently and still be successful. Both companies have great wrestlers fully capable of putting on tremendous matches, but it takes more than that for your average fan. American fans have to care one way or another about the wrestlers and promos are a must. Outside of the MEM, I think most of TNA's wrestlers are pretty bland, without real personality and most certainly don't have that "IT" factor. There will be times that match quality may have to be sacrificed for promos and building up characters and there will be times in which it's the other way around.

In the end, if TNA hopes to be pulling in numbers like the WWE does, then they're probably going to have to do a lot of things similar to what the WWE does. I don't think TNA can cater primarily to its devoted following AND attract hundreds of thousands, or even millions, of new viewers at the same time.

 

[psykohurricane]

In a way, i think it would be fun to see them return to what they were doing before because it did they had better feud build-up that way. The problem with what TNA is doing right now is not really the wrestling aspect of it because the match are really good, it's that everybody in the locker room has to have a storyline and as to have backstage skits and promo.

When TNA was a PPV only company you had wrestling and you had backstage promos and skits but it was only for the major feuds. Rarely would you see a x-division guy cut a promo or have been involve in feud. That'S what'S the problem is right now, TNA needs to get back to the old models were the backstage interview and skits were balanced with the wrestling.

Right now they got more or less 90 minutes for Impact if you take out the publicity. Some show get alot of promos and not a lot of wrestling and the next show doesn't have any promos and alot of wrestling. That's not really affective because if your a casual fan and you decide to take a chance and watch TNA and you get the episode that got a lot of promos and almost no wrestling you might not want to come back and watch the next week.

Look at the history of TNA, some of the most momerable feud that happened were those that came out of the weekly PPV's. AMW vs XXX, Jarrett Vs Raven, A.J. Styles Vs Jarrett. All exemple of great feud that where build-up by promos and wrestling and they didn't have to fight with all the other guys that need to get over because most of the other guys didn'T need promo to get over.

So, personally i don'T want them to change the concept they got now, but just stop giving everybody promo time even if they are not on tv. If you want to get over a feud give them promo time, it will help the casual fan care about the feud. But what the point of having the motor city machine guns come out every week with another backstage skits. I understand, they are not involve in anything, don't need to waste time telling people about it. Same thing goes with the X-division guys, stop talking a let your actions speak for you, they are taking alot of promo time that could be giving to a major feud that need the build-up. Also stop those promos that are suppose to be major announcement and become a let down like last week's interview with Dixie Carter. I didn'tcare to know that LAshley was wrestling at the next PPV because i already knew that and yet another announcement about a new deal with Spike TV. I didn'T serve anything and they lost valuable time that could have been use to help one of the major feud.

The point i'm making is they can keep doing promos and backstage skit but limit them to the bared essential that all, you cut the crap out of TNA like lame announcement and skits with guys that don'T have a program and you will have TNA will have a better fanbase. So stop trying to make every wrestler in TNA happy and focus on does that will help the company make money.

 

[samboisdead]

I think TNA is doing ok. The WWE is what over 50 years old and people expected TNA to be competing with them in just a few years. nical but very That would be like a new football league coming in and trying to run the NFL out of town over night. Oh yea Vince tried that. Anyway I think what TNA needs is to better use the old stars they have to better build the young stars they have like Styles and Joe. I think they need their storys to apeal to adults and their matches to be very technical but very tight matches. And i think they need the promo time because lets face it WWE is a star making machine, but guys on TNA need to talk and tell us who they are because for one although they are improving the TNA announce team isnt half as good at storytelling as the WWE guys are. I dont no how many terrible matches I set through in the WWE just because JR or the king is keeping me entertained. Anyway I think TNA is doing the right thing for the most part, the only thing they need to do diffrent is start pushing some of their young talent harder. i dont think TNA has created a new star since Styles and they nearly destroyed Joe who was on his way to be huge all for the sake of putting guys like Nash over for the 12000th time.

 

[wcw_nostalgia]

Matches are secondary, IMO. If two people go out there and have the best match ever, the "suck it Dave Meltzer, this is more than *****"-match with no storyline, or build up, it wouldn't matter. On the other hand, if two guys go out there and have an abortion of a match, but were over as hell and the people cared, and I mean really cared, the quality of the performance wouldn't be that much of an issue. Remember Hogan vs. Rock? It sucked performance-wise, but everyone cared, everyone popped, because it meant something. That's what TNA need to do, be it by better advertising, ot better storylines, they need to get the people emotionally involved.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

Sidious is going to murder this thread. Let's see if I can state my opinion without ripping him off. Honestly, I think TNA should stay the course. WWE can afford to change the direction of their programming as their audience is built in for the most part. The casual fan probably doesn't realize that it has switched to a PG format. In TNA, well the casual fan doesn't watch. Most of their audience are people looking for an alternative to the kid friendly WWE, and if TNA were to switch to a similar format, it would alienate a lot of people and possibly drive them away. Cnuld they do away with a little bit of the time spent on promos? Maybe. But I don't think a more wrestling driven program is going to drive in any more viewers. I don't think Raw's ratings spike is a result of more wrestling, as much as the "Guest Host" concept. The other shows are definitely more wrestling driven and they aren't even beating Impact by much.

Well, I wouldn't say that I am necessarily going to "murder the thread". However, I do want to point out that there is a difference between "better wrestling" and "more wrestling". Although Rebecca seemed to confuse these two when creating the thread as her thread title says one thing, yet the OP says another.

I have less of an issue with people saying that they want "better wrestling" as opposed to people saying that they want "more wrestling".

As I've stated in the past, I feel there is a time and a place for everything ... and what makes for a successful wrestling product is the perfect blend between the two.

The end goal is to get the fans to care enough about the talent and the feuds/storylines to motivate them to purchase the PPV's and see the "feuds come to a head" between any two superstars that are feuding. So you can't put the cart before the horse, and give those same matches between the two competitors for free on weekly TV, or else that simply spoils the thrill of the confrontation between the wrestlers in an actual match on PPV.

However, you can't just throw wrestlers out there on weekly TV, make the show nothing but matches, and expect the crowd to cheer or boo, unless there is real effort made at character development and the placement of these same characters in feuds or storylines. In other words, you can't sell solely wrestling on weekly TV with more of the same on PPV. I know fans of technical wrestling want to believe differently, but it just isn't true for the majority of the fans out there. Those of us who have followed wrestling for many years know this.

I've given TNA another chance, as I used to watch it a couple years ago, and just couldn't get into it ... however I have watched it for about 4 weeks straight now and am committing to following it weekly now. Impact does seem to provide a very nice blend of wrestling (for a free weekly show) along with promo time and character/storyline development based on what I've seen thus far.

Vince McMahon is absolutely obsessive over the quality of wrestling on his shows, while he let everything else go to Hell this past year. And the ratings prove that this is not the answer. He has made some noticeable improvements in some of the things he is focusing on, but he is still way too obsessive over the quality of wrestling, in my view ... while not concentrating enough on character development and storylines. Again, that is putting the cart before the horse ... in that you first have to get your audience to care about the talent involved, IF you want the fans to care about them having good matches that they will react to and be enthusiastic over.

If he should have learned anything from the Hogan and Attitude Eras, you don't necessarily have to have a high quality wrestling product to have a successful and profitable wrestling product. What got the Hogan Era over was the characters and gimmicks, where as the Attitude Era got over via the characters/gimmicks ... as well as the addition of edgy storylines that have never been done before. The quality of wrestling in the Hogan Era was not very good at all .... and the Attitude Era was definitely a big step up, but still not necessarily great overall. But both of those Eras were still very successful without it.

Again, I am not advocating poor wrestling. However I don't want to see anyone in charge demonstrate tunnel-vision and set the bar so high on only the quality of wrestling while not giving the proper attention to all the other components that make for a great wrestling product.

Going in the opposite direction that WWE goes is in TNA's best interests ... so that way they can pick up the disgruntled WWE fans they currently have, as well as attempt to attract some fans who have left. While WWE tries to focus on the Kids, TNA can gear their product towards the Adults. While WWE focuses their product more on in-ring wrestling, TNA can focus theirs on what WWE used to be, that being a Soap Opera for Guys.

I don't see where more wrestling or a better quality in-ring product would necessarily help TNA's business whatsoever. I think the in-ring product they do have is more than satisfactory at the moment.

Where their efforts need to be placed is on Product Presentation and more specifically .... Advertising/Marketing.

 

[gd]

I think TNA has the perfect balance betwee backstage segments/promos and wrestling at the moment. The last few weeks, there have been at least 2 or 3 very good matches on each show, and there has been a good amount of time given to promos. TNA can always improve the quality of it's matches, but every match isn't going to be a five star match.

As long as there are a few good wrestling matches on TNA, I'll be happy. A few months ago, they had a show where there was like 16 minutes of total in ring action. I think that is way too little, but I feel that TNA has found a good balance recently and shouldn't mess with it.

 

[SK]

No, definitely not. TNA need to distinguish themselves for WWE as much as they can, they need to offer a more entertainment focussed option to WWE's more wrestling based programming.

If TNA were going to improve on anything, it should be production quality. Right now TNA looks like WCW did, cheap. Anyway, TNA have got good enough wrestlers and the X division offers fans good athleticism and wrestling without too many storylines. I think TNA's fans enjoy TNA because it's more edgy than the WWE, offers more storylines and entertainment, they don't want to see a WWE rip off.

TNA should definitely differentiate themselves from the WWE if they want to compete. However, TNA could use a few WWE tips by losing the six sided ring, improving production value, and work on wrestler entrance video and music. TNA just feels cheap, I think if they went for a better looking programme, they could compete more, I definitely don't think that offering 'better wrestling' would improve TNA.

 

[X]

Maybe I'm confused, but why the hell is everyone saying that the WWE is a wrestling-focused promotion? Are we serious here? Smackdown, yes. But RAW? No, not even close. And we all know Raw is the A-Show.

TNA DOES need to establish itself as an alternative to the WWE; and right now, they simply aren't doing that. They feature almost no in-ring wrestling every week, and the entire program is focused on ex-WWE guys doing the same shit they've been doing for over a decade. This wouldn't be a problem if we were talking about the same product that TNA was producing in 2005, but we aren't. TNA has been sinking lower and lower with their in-ring work, and quite frankly I think that's a huge mistake. TNA needs to establish itself as an alternative to WWE programming, not as WWE Part 2 or the Wrestling B-Team. They need attitude, they need creative angles, but most of all they need quality wrestling. If they really want to establish themselves as an alternative to the WWE, they need to feature the X-Division much more prominently then they have among other things.

So yes, I do think better wrestling would be good for TNA's business. I'm not sure how anyone could argue that it wouldn't be. Do wrestling fans not enjoy quality matches now or something? It doesn't have to be ALL about the entertainment part people, at the end of the day the people go to your show to watch people WRESTLE, not to see the latest storyline.

 

[SK]

Maybe I'm confused, but why the hell is everyone saying that the WWE is a wrestling-focused promotion? Are we serious here? Smackdown, yes. But RAW? No, not even close. And we all know Raw is the A-Show.

I don't know X, what was the last proper 'storyline' on RAW? I think it was Orton vs the McMahons. I think the WWE has certainly cut down on it's storylines, I mean now it just seems like I don't like you, you don't like me, lets have a match. Obviously it isn't all just wrestling on RAW but it's only real storylines and entertainment is to do with the guest hosts. Maybe you consider guest hosts and not liking each other to be a storyline or entertainment, but I personally don't, I guess it's all down to preference really.

TNA DOES need to establish itself as an alternative to the WWE; and right now, they simply aren't doing that. They feature almost no in-ring wrestling every week, and the entire program is focused on ex-WWE guys doing the same shit they've been doing for over a decade. This wouldn't be a problem if we were talking about the same product that TNA was producing in 2005, but we aren't. TNA has been sinking lower and lower with their in-ring work, and quite frankly I think that's a huge mistake. TNA needs to establish itself as an alternative to WWE programming, not as WWE Part 2 or the Wrestling B-Team. They need attitude, they need creative angles, but most of all they need quality wrestling. If they really want to establish themselves as an alternative to the WWE, they need to feature the X-Division much more prominently then they have among other things.

I agree with most of this though, WWE at times seems like it just wants to be WWE-Lite, they focus heavily on ex-WWE wrestlers, which is a shame, because people like AJ and Joe should be at the top of the card. X-division is really TNA's shining light, they've got some great performers who aren't ex-WWE, and I definitely agree that they should be pushing more X-division wrestling. But I don't think the way for TNA to go forward is to concentrate on wrestling, whilst they do need good entertaining wrestling, they need some work on their production quality, I mean all of the video packages are terrible, the entrance videos and music are unmemorable, the six sided ring is hideous, the commentary sounds bad, it all feels so cheap.

But I guess that just where we differ, you'd rather see 'better' wrestling, whereas I'd rather see better booking and more work done on the production side of things.