Last night WWE took 3 shots at TNA. When showing Lesnars highlights they showed 3 matches. 1st was against Jeff Hardy, 2nd was against Hulk Hogan, and 3rd was against Kurt Angle. Just wanted to point it out and know if you noticed WWE taking any shots at TNA in the near past.
WWE shots on TNA
- Thread starter uguess94
- Start date
ProWrestlingFan
Championship Contender
Actually Kurt Angle, Hulk Hogan and Jeff Hardy are 3 of the Biggest names in Professional Wrestling and Brock has defeated all 3 of them.
It was more to show Brock's dominance than taking shots at TNA.
It was more to show Brock's dominance than taking shots at TNA.
How is that a shot at TNA? Those matches all occurred in a WWE ring, not a TNA ring. Those matches were all milestones in Brock Lesnar's career. They certainly weren't going to show clips from his debacle against Goldberg, were they? Further, if they wanted to get in as many TNA references as they could, why not include Brock's King of the Ring victory over RVD? Why not mention how he forced Eric Bischoff, the RAW GM at the time, to have to create a new World Title because he refused to defend the unified title on RAW, since he was a Smackdown exclusive wrestler?
You really need to stop trying so hard.
You really need to stop trying so hard.
Marxman1531
Dark Match Jobber
I too noticed that they chose to showcase these 3 opponents as opposed to say idk The Rock at Summerslam or The Undertaker... While yes I get they probably only did it to showcase the fact he's beaten some of the most renown wrestlers in the world it did strike me as odd that all 3 happen to be TNA mainstays.
PowerHouse
Pre-Show Stalwart
Another desperate attempt to grasp at something that did not happen. WWE does not need to take pot shots at TNA they are killing them by just doing what they are and that is putting out a more interesting product. Hogan,Angle and Hardy all wrestled for the WWE befor they did TNA so the WWE can use that footage anytime they want some of you people need to get a grip.
jrichardson25
Pre-Show Stalwart
They had previously shown the match against The Rock so those particular points were defining in Brock's early career. I feel like its complete coincidence. No shot at TNA. More of a boost if you ask me...
#hamler
That's all folks.
His match with Kurt Angle was arguably his best match ever. His match with Jeff Hardy displayed his dominance on someone who was and still is fairly popular within the WWE. His match with Hulk Hogan saw him defeat a legend of the business in which everyone who's anyone knows. I believe they showed Brock Lesnar defeating The Rock for his first WWE Championship at Summer Slam in 2002. The only other major milestone Brock achieved is beating The Undertaker which I seriously doubt the WWE will ever mention or show due to 'Taker being an active legend still on the roster. Yeah, I don't think these are the shots at TNA you're hoping for. It's purely coincidental. It just so happens these were three major achievements Brock Lesnar reached during his time in the WWE.
I'm not sure if they were shots at TNA. Maybe they did it in a roundabout way and disguised it as chronicling his career. His debut match was against Jeff Hardy, his first Wrestlemania was a main event WWE Championship match against Kurt Angle, and, like him or not, the name Hulk Hogan still means something, so why not show that victory as well?
Again, I can see it being a subtle shot at TNA. In one of the video packages, they briefly showed him putting Rob Van Dam through the announce table. But the matches they chose to include make sense.
As always, get over yourselves and enjoy some wrestling.
Again, I can see it being a subtle shot at TNA. In one of the video packages, they briefly showed him putting Rob Van Dam through the announce table. But the matches they chose to include make sense.
As always, get over yourselves and enjoy some wrestling.
neildittmar
Getting Noticed By Management
A similar thread about WWE "shooting" on TNA was posted last week when one of the Three Stooges came out to "Real American." I'm a pretty big fan of TNA, moreso than WWE for the most part, but it wasn't a shoot last week and it isn't a shoot now.
Why? Because WWE cares very little about what TNA as a company does. Financially, they're not in the same league. They're not the gigantic media conglomerate that WWE has established itself to be (thank God). They don't steal any measurable ratings away from WWE. They don't beat them in PPV, advertising, or merchandising sales. TNA is a pro-wrestling product and that's pretty much it. WWE is a multimedia company whose crown jewel is a sports entertainment product that is based off of traditional pro-wrestling. Big difference.
WWE does in fact care about Jeff Hardy, Kurt Angle, and Hulk Hogan regardless of where they are now or who they work for currently. The reason is that all three have deep histories in WWF/E, were established names in WWF/E at one time and were all guys that Brock Lesnar beat up. Why not feature Brocks victories over guys like Rock and the Undertaker more prominently instead? Well, why make boys on your existing roster look weaker when you can use guys who don't wrestle for you anymore that still have decent name recognition and accomplish the same task?
The logic goes... Hardy, Angle, and particularly Hogan were big names in WWE. Outside of the company, WWE doesn't really care what they do. If any of the three of them returned, they'd be treated with a level of fanfare like they didn't miss a beat. See Brock, Rock, Flair, and others for proof.
The WWE Universe truly is this entity that exists within itself. Actually, other than when WCW was giving the company real competition, that's how WWF/E has always been really.
Why? Because WWE cares very little about what TNA as a company does. Financially, they're not in the same league. They're not the gigantic media conglomerate that WWE has established itself to be (thank God). They don't steal any measurable ratings away from WWE. They don't beat them in PPV, advertising, or merchandising sales. TNA is a pro-wrestling product and that's pretty much it. WWE is a multimedia company whose crown jewel is a sports entertainment product that is based off of traditional pro-wrestling. Big difference.
WWE does in fact care about Jeff Hardy, Kurt Angle, and Hulk Hogan regardless of where they are now or who they work for currently. The reason is that all three have deep histories in WWF/E, were established names in WWF/E at one time and were all guys that Brock Lesnar beat up. Why not feature Brocks victories over guys like Rock and the Undertaker more prominently instead? Well, why make boys on your existing roster look weaker when you can use guys who don't wrestle for you anymore that still have decent name recognition and accomplish the same task?
The logic goes... Hardy, Angle, and particularly Hogan were big names in WWE. Outside of the company, WWE doesn't really care what they do. If any of the three of them returned, they'd be treated with a level of fanfare like they didn't miss a beat. See Brock, Rock, Flair, and others for proof.
The WWE Universe truly is this entity that exists within itself. Actually, other than when WCW was giving the company real competition, that's how WWF/E has always been really.
OneTooManyPunts
Pre-Show Stalwart
They weren't taking direct shots at TNA. Look at today's roster in WWE. Besides Cena, what other talent was around during Lesnar's last run in WWE? Yes HHH, Undertaker, and HBK, but WWE is still riding high of their End of an Era program from WM 28, and as such they aren't going to be mentioning either of three outside of that match in any way for a some time.
Angle and Lesnar had a classic match at Wrestlemania, probably the best match of Lesnar's first run. He made his mark in WWE by debuting and destroying the Hardy's, and his program with Hogan is simply smart to acknowledge, because regardless of where Hogan hangs his hat now, WWE knows fans are still very aware of who he is.
WWE doesn't take shots at TNA, doesn't even acknowledge their existence, because they feel no threat from them. They simply used three of the biggest names in wrestling right now, to re-familiarize fans with Lesnar's first run, and to show those that maybe weren't around the first time that Lesnar wasn't a flash in the pan.
Angle and Lesnar had a classic match at Wrestlemania, probably the best match of Lesnar's first run. He made his mark in WWE by debuting and destroying the Hardy's, and his program with Hogan is simply smart to acknowledge, because regardless of where Hogan hangs his hat now, WWE knows fans are still very aware of who he is.
WWE doesn't take shots at TNA, doesn't even acknowledge their existence, because they feel no threat from them. They simply used three of the biggest names in wrestling right now, to re-familiarize fans with Lesnar's first run, and to show those that maybe weren't around the first time that Lesnar wasn't a flash in the pan.
It was a good decision. Why show Lesnar being the crap out of three people on the roster? Showing Brock beating Cena makes the match seem a formality and showing him beating anyone else makes any matches he might have in the future seem like a formality too.
However you show him beating the crap out of three guys who it's nearly impossible that he will face in the next year and you get over how dominant he is without burying anyone in the company at the same time. Sensible thinking by the big E.
However you show him beating the crap out of three guys who it's nearly impossible that he will face in the next year and you get over how dominant he is without burying anyone in the company at the same time. Sensible thinking by the big E.
wrestlemaniac
Getting Noticed By Management
I'm a tna fan...hardly even watch raw. I'm trying to picture in my had how it went down and just by reading how everyone is describing t...yea I really dont think it was a shot at tna. I mean maybe they could've shown a match w jericho...but I dont recall that match happening and besides I mean I thought jericho was doing something w punk? so yea showing jericho being beat by lesnar wouldnt be good for that. Yea...no foul play here
LOL. When I was watching Raw, and saw those 3 videos with Brock. I knew some jackass was going to come on here and think that they were shots at TNA. Dude, it doesn't mean anything. You all keep trying to find little TNA hints within WWE for some odd reason. And I have no idea why.
PowerHouse
Pre-Show Stalwart
I know why these TNA fans jump at every little thing that WWE does and tries to say WWE is taking shots at TNA. I think TNA fans want the WWE to acknowledge that TNA exists. If the WWE does that it actually helps TNA. So for all the make believe outrage these TNA fans express at these non pot shots at TNA in reality its exactly what they want. The anger and outrage is fake... TNA fans want nothing more than for WWE to take shots at TNA in hopes it will boost TNA but I have news for all you TNA fans WWE will never take shots at an inferior company that cannot compete with them.
That was as much of a shot at TNA as it was a shot at WWE when they showed R-Truth in The Cowboy's emotional speech about being one of the two guys in TNA, who are still there and have been from day one. At that time, Angle, Hardy, and Hogan were WWE Superstars. It wasn't a shot. Geez, TNA fans are paranoid sometimes.
WWE does not need to take shots at TNA LOL
1. Jeff hardy-was his debut in ring match? they clearly stated this and they can change who his debut was against.
2. Hulk Hogan-was to show how he beat and bloodied probably the biggest legend in wrestling history.
3. Kurt Angle- probably his best performance and one of his most memorable match minus the botched shooting star press.
4. You cannot talk about milestones in brock lesnars career without highlighting these 3 matches and they already showed the other most important match of his career against the rock.
5. WWE owns all the rights to the videos they showed last night and therefore can do what the hell they like.
People just look for stuff that isnt there half the time
1. Jeff hardy-was his debut in ring match? they clearly stated this and they can change who his debut was against.
2. Hulk Hogan-was to show how he beat and bloodied probably the biggest legend in wrestling history.
3. Kurt Angle- probably his best performance and one of his most memorable match minus the botched shooting star press.
4. You cannot talk about milestones in brock lesnars career without highlighting these 3 matches and they already showed the other most important match of his career against the rock.
5. WWE owns all the rights to the videos they showed last night and therefore can do what the hell they like.
People just look for stuff that isnt there half the time
If anyone remember, back in 1996, WCW used to do the same thing to WWF on WCW Saturdaynight. They would show 20 to 30 second clips of everyone who left (Cactus Jack, Big Van Vader and other stars) being defeated by current WCW wrestlers. I think it definetly was a shot at TNA by showing how "Legitimate" Brock Lesnar is by showing clips of him defeating current TNA stars.
to some degree i feel they were somewhat shots. yes they were greaqt matches for him and yes they were against now tna big names. but how bout instead of rvd and hardy, they put in when he superplexed big show and beat him or when he broke hardcore hollys neck? if they were jus trying to showcase his dominance and mean streak. they couldve done that instead of taking "shots" that werent shots at tna
Shakin' Abe
Pre-Show Stalwart
I didn't take it as a shot at TNA at all. Vince doesn't even consider them a threat. At one point they did show Brock slamming the Rock. With Edge coming out and trying to motivate Cena, has anyone thought that maybe the Rock might come out and say he doesn't like John Cena but he doesn't like Brock Lesner even more and try to motivate Cena? Maybe even form a bond until it's title run time?
Jack-Hammer
YOU WILL RESPECT MY AUTHORITAH!!!!
I haven't read all the posts but I have to go with the vast majority of those that I have read and say that this wasn't some planned shot at TNA. WWE wants to emphasize the fact that Brock Lesnar was one of the most dominant guys in the company's history, especially when you consider he was only in WWE for about 2 years.
As some have already mentioned, they've showed the clip of Lesnar beating The Rock several times over the past several weeks and the three clips they showed featuring Angle, Hardy & Hogan were designed, first & foremost, to show what a beast Lesnar is.
His match with Angle is , in a lot of ways, one of the overlooked classics of the past decade. It was a fantastic outing that you don't hear people talk about a lot. Angle was still at the top of his game at this time and Lesnar beat him in a dominant fashion in what was a highly competetive match.
Jeff Hardy still remains a beloved fan favorite no matter how much he's screwed up. The clips of Lesnar just powerbombing him damn near through the ring, again, just showed Lesnar's dominance.
As far as Hogan goes, again, it's all about dominance. Hogan is certainly nowhere near his prime but he was soundly & utterly destroyed in this match against Lesnar. Hogan is still the biggest name in the history of wrestling regardless of how far he's fallen or how little overall ability he had inside the ring. Lesnar, for all intents & purposes, beat on Hogan to such an extent that Hogan was out on his feet and just couldn't continue.
If anything, I'd look upon it more as a positive thing. Angle, Hardy & Hogan are three of the biggest stars ever, so it's easy to paint a picture of Lesnar being so utterly devestating that three of the biggest of all time couldn't take him.
As some have already mentioned, they've showed the clip of Lesnar beating The Rock several times over the past several weeks and the three clips they showed featuring Angle, Hardy & Hogan were designed, first & foremost, to show what a beast Lesnar is.
His match with Angle is , in a lot of ways, one of the overlooked classics of the past decade. It was a fantastic outing that you don't hear people talk about a lot. Angle was still at the top of his game at this time and Lesnar beat him in a dominant fashion in what was a highly competetive match.
Jeff Hardy still remains a beloved fan favorite no matter how much he's screwed up. The clips of Lesnar just powerbombing him damn near through the ring, again, just showed Lesnar's dominance.
As far as Hogan goes, again, it's all about dominance. Hogan is certainly nowhere near his prime but he was soundly & utterly destroyed in this match against Lesnar. Hogan is still the biggest name in the history of wrestling regardless of how far he's fallen or how little overall ability he had inside the ring. Lesnar, for all intents & purposes, beat on Hogan to such an extent that Hogan was out on his feet and just couldn't continue.
If anything, I'd look upon it more as a positive thing. Angle, Hardy & Hogan are three of the biggest stars ever, so it's easy to paint a picture of Lesnar being so utterly devestating that three of the biggest of all time couldn't take him.
The one thing I'd like to footnote about the Angle footage did you notice how they left the botched 5-star press out? I don't see it as a open bash on TNA at all if TNA was half as big as WCW in the day then maybe. Today there is no point to it besides being petty.
HBKStreakbuster
Occasional Pre-Show
WWE doesn't need to take shots at TNA. TNA does it to themselves by taking all the WWE guys once they are has-been status. If I turn to Spike in 10 years I will see a 45 yr old Santino giving the "Python" to Ric Flair in a wheel chair.
gazzatticus
Dark Match Jobber
The other thing is at that time period there was a lot of Blood around especially in Brocks matches and PG means they can show those matches. so they are a bit limited.