WWE takes nobodies and makes them marketable, TNA takes stars and makes them nobodies

[bongorider]

Conclusion. Today credibility lies in the company, not in the talent. Fans see the big stars as whoever is on top in the WWE.

Solution. Build TNA up as a legit rival company, make it seem as big if not bigger than WWE by using larger venues and higher production values. It's not necessary to fill an arena, just fill the areas on camera (WCW did this) perception is everything and by moving around in this way you reach out to more people. "Big name draws" obviously not living up to their name should be fired to balance the books. WWE relies on it's long standing reputation and lineage to be viewed as the only company around. TNA need to focus on building it's own reputation and lineage.

Alternative. Focus on the niche market they catered to in the early days. Niche markets by definition appeal to a smaller audience though, so they would need to cut a lot of costs and would never be a big promotion.

Or they could just continue to throw good money after bad which is what they are doing now.

 

[Andy 2 Randy]

I'm Half/Half on this one. On your side, Yeah most of TNA nobodies have came straight to TNA, like Generation Me (?) ,while WWE take people from THEIR devolpment territory, and they become huge, look at Orton, Cena etc... HOWEVER, You can't say that all TNA stars are now nobodies, they take nobodies from WWE and make them stars! Elijah Burke, didn't really hit it in WWE, went to Wrestlemainia once (or twice, forgive me if im wrong) then forced to job against Jimmy Wang Yang! TNA take him, repacckage him as a suburban pope, and hey presto, D'angelo Dinero is born and is one, if not the, most popular figures in TNA today, same with Matt Morgan etc...I'm Just Sayin...

 

[mlp420]

This is like criticizing an indie label for not being able to sell records like Interscope.

It cost money to book the big arenas, so they would lose millions trying to book venues they can't even come close to filling. The same goes for production values. This was why WCW went out of business. They were spending money at the same rate (actually much higher) as the WWE were, yet they weren't drawing any money.

Brand awareness is what TNA needs to address. Even their last study revealed their biggest problem was that a majority of wrestling fans had no idea who they were.

 

[bongorider]

This is true, but TNA have already expressed their intention to longer BE an "indie label" and therefore need a game-plan to accomplish this OTHER than signing new talent. They have to spend money to make money, sure they shouldn';t go and book MSG, but some of the venues they have PPVs at are about 5 - 10,000 capacity and they look so much better and have a proper crowd sound and atmosphere even though they don't fill them.


ALSO

WCW was like TNA in the early 90s, although slightly more well known, but the first step they made before signing the WWF guys was to have the production values and the big fancy sets.

This way when guys showed up on Nitro, it didn't seem like they had got fired and were now having to work in the little leagues, it seemed like they were jumping ship to an equal or better company for positive reasons.

 

[VencomHardcore]

i do understand your logic . I say TNA needs to book venues that have a maximum capacity of no more than 1500. This is the size they draw on house shows. As far as set up goes, they can make a 1500 venue look like 3000 people there with the right camera angles and a long entrance ramp that extends through the crowd.

I don't think they should be trying to go after wwe though. They are better off focusing on the same 3rd tier cities they go to and have a rotation like wwe. By rotation i mean, have a set of cities you go to every year. So those towns become TNA towns and then throughout the year you can use your wrestlers to do public relations in those areas to further the brand.

But the production values are 100x better than original ECW yet ECW packed out the shows and people really didn't care about the production because it was marketed as a gritty, hardcore niche product that was about the action rather than the look

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I don't think the title of the thread is entirely a fair assessment. The WWE is a much bigger company and has been around for much longer than TNA has. It's also true that the WWE has produced a huge number of wrestlers that are household names among wrestling fans. It's also true that TNA has signed many wrestlers that were made into big stars while in the WWE and, more often than not, has pushed those wrestlers rather than their "homegrown talent". Don't misunderstand me, I'm not trying to make any excuses for TNA. It's just that there are certain principles that've taken place in wrestling that I don't think that TNA can just ignore or bypass.

TNA has a lot of problems right now, but I think among the biggest ones is that it hasn't managed to establish its own identity to a wide audience. Much of TNA's fanbase is made up of internet fans and fans of the indy circuit. In order to grow, however, TNA has to be able to somehow attract your average wrestling fan. So, the company brass thinks that they can do that if they bring in wrestlers that are already stars. When they do this, however, criticism comes from some within their fanbase that these former WWE and/or WCW wrestlers, most of whom are much older and no longer in their prime, of going over TNA's younger talent instead of being used to help build the young talent. But, TNA continues on down this line of reasoning and manages to sign Hulk Hogan to their roster. At this time last year, the internet was buzzing with speculation, concern and criticism of what Hulk Hogan coming would mean for the company. Hulk Hogan was hyped to be the one to take TNA to the next level and, the truth is, it turned out disasterous overall. The quality of the TNA product went downhill as did the number of viewers.

TNA has attempted to piggyback off of the successes that WWE and WCW attained over a long period of time in the hopes that it can reach a similar level in a very short span of time. I just don't think that it's going to work that way because both WCW and the WWE had long and distinguished wrestling histories before TNA was a twinkle in Jeff Jarrett's eye. The WWE started out as a regional NWA territory in the 1950s and was hugely successful in the Northeastern section of the United States and, by late 1962 to early 1963, ol' Vince, Sr. figured he didn't really even need the NWA. There were other rivalries going on with the NWA that contributed but, in actuality, it was true that Sr. didn't really need the NWA. After being named the WWWF, Sr. started doing his own thing and never really looked back and the rest is history. As for WCW, the overall history is somewhat similar. WCW was originally Jim Crockett Promotions, which was originally Mid-Atlantic Championship Wrestling. Jim Crockett, Sr. ran wrestling shows all over the Virginias and Carolinas for nearly 40 years before dying and his son Jim, Jr. took over in 1973. Even when Ted Turner bought Crockett Promotions in late 1988 and renamed it WCW, he got more than just that. During the 80s, Crockett bought out a lot of other promotions just as Vince, Jr. was doing. Crockett aquired the name, titles, tape libraries, etc. of some of the greatest companies in wrestling. Bob Geigel's Central States Wrestling, Georgia Championship Wrestling, Eddie Graham's Championship Wrestling from Florida, Bill Watts' Universal Wrestling Federation and others. The legacy and foundation of WCW was laid years and decades before Ted Turner bought the company and renamed it. Both WWE and WCW literally have had, literally, generations of fans built into watching their show and the successes they achieved took place over a long period of time. TNA simply doesn't have that and it's probably not going to have it for a long time. I believe that TNA has attempted to do things somewhat backward. They've believed that they can simply bring in wrestlers that have already been made into huge names by other companies, put them out there and have their company taken to the next level and then establish a legacy of greatness. I just don't believe it's going to work that way no matter how much the TNA brass may want it to. TNA's attempt to move to Mondays head to head against Raw I think is a perfect example of that.

I think that TNA can possibly attain the level of success that they want, but I don't believe that they're going to be able to take short cuts in order for it to happen.

 

[Josefien]

No. At least to the thread title.
Which stars exactly did TNA take and make nobodies? I don't even really know who you're talking about.
Did they make Kurt Angle a nobody? Surely not. Kennedy? A nobody? No. Are you talking about Hardy? Hardly a nobody.
Others have already mentioned that TNA took WWE 'leftovers' and made them stars.
Of course, those people rather often get pushed above TNA's 'original' talent, but that's another topic.

Now for what you're talking about in the OP.
Larger venues and higher production values are fine and dandy.
But how exactly should they be able to afford them, even more so if they can't even fill the arena? That's throwing money out right there. They're asking their talents to take pay cuts, obviously trying not to spend as much.

The alternative you proposed is just not what TNA is going for at the moment.
Bringing in Hogan, moving to Monday Nights (and back), all that jazz and then cutting everything to become a niche caterer? I don't think so.

 

[Vintage]

WCW was like TNA in the early 90s, although slightly more well known, but the first step they made before signing the WWF guys was to have the production values and the big fancy sets.

It's not fair to compare TNA to WCW. Ted Turner had more money than Vince McMahon. WCW had an unlimited budget to improve things and Turner also gave them prime real estate in regards to their Saturday Night, Monday and then Thursday night television shows. WCW was also paying top dollar for the icons of the business. TNA has Dixie Carter and while she's hotter than Ted her pockets aren't nearly as deep. That said her roster is nothing short of impressive with a nice mix of old and new.. indie and major talent.

TNA is still very much a work in progress. If you were to take a look at the TNA of 2008 and compare it to the TNA of today, production wise they have evolved by leaps and bounds. The set looks a lot better, entrance packages are getting better, entrance music is way better. They need less backstage segments, it exposes how smalll their set is. In my opinion though the announcing took a step back. I think Don West and Taz would sound a lot better together, Don has the passion Tenay lacks and I think that's the difference maker in TNA's announcing.

At this point though, they have the right talent to take risks to grow the brand faster, something ECW never had. Hopefully TNA can cleanse the world of sports entertainment, 1 mark at a time.

 

[ilapierre]

This thread i actually agree with somewhat. Not completely though, as there are very acceptable reasons why the title of this thread is accurate. WWE took Triple H and made him into one of the greatest wrestlers of all time. For me, he was one of the most agonizing to watch wrestlers in the history of wrestling. But that's because i just didn't want to drink the kool aid and, in the late 90s, i could flip the station to something a whole lot better. He only became a great star cause the WWE is the biggest wrestling stage in the world and cause he hooked up with the boss' daughter, he was shoved down all our throats.

The WWE was even able to make Hulk Hogan the greatest wrestler in the history of wrestling while TNA can't get new fans to come back and watch Hulk Hogan. How did WWE manage to do what they did while TNA is turning Hogan into a nobody? WWE made Hogan immortal and let him go half a decade without being pinned. TNA doesn't dare give Hogan or anyone anywhere near that kind of airtime cause WWE/TNA fans would criticize it and TNA doesn't have the money or the stage at this point to be turning off potential fanbase.

And look at guys like Fit Finley, William Regal, Steve Austin, Chris Benoit, Mick Foley, etc etc who came to WWE and became bigger stars than they were in WCW. They were nobodies in WCW but came to WWE and were forced on the audience and given prominent air time compared to other wrestlers and they became stars because of that extra airtime. To me, that's how it works. The more interesting you are/become to fans, the more airtime you deserve over those who just aren't as interesting. Companies like TNA give equal airtime to almost all their wrestlers and because they do this there is no prominent wrestlers built and the stars become nobodies and the nobodies don't become stars cause TNA turns their old stars into nobodies. All to satisfy whiny moron fans who complain about everything. WWE doesn't give a hoot about its fans and they love their beloved company no matter how much it stinks. When WCW created the NWO angle it felt as if WCW didn't care about its fans because everyone acted so negatively and repulsed by the NWO. I think TNA has got to start taking on that same attitude with giving the fans something they initially don't want if it wants to prosper in the future. Wrestling fans always want something bigger and better but they never appreciate it when their concerns are addressed because they've already changed their mind about what they want at that point. My simple solution is TNA gives their fans the opposite of what they want: Let all the old guys rule the roost again and to f*** with the marks who like all the technical wrestlers. Technical wrestlers don't sell tickets, they maintain audience interest until the big names come on. AJ Styles, RVD and Jeff Hardy may be first string grapplers, but they'll always be second string stars.

 

[mlp420]

If TNA ever wants to be in the same league as WWE they're going to have to start making more stars like this, only much, much, bigger.

Here we go again with this obsession with "Making Stars". Why do people think "Making Stars" is so simple? This goes back to my Indie Label vs. Interscope point. The WWE is in a better position to "make stars" than TNA is.

If the WWE booked Samoa Joe the way TNA did in 05 he would be a star. If the WWE wanted to make AJ Styles a star they could, even if they booked him exactly the way TNA has booked him throughout his career. The WWE isn't doing anything better creatively to make their stars than TNA is doing. They just have a stronger, more established brand.

For god's sake when Austin was signed to the WWE he was The Ringmaster. The Rock had that stupid blue chipper gimmick and the fans crapped on him. Triple H was a blue blood. Cena was Prototype. Batista was a deacon, I could go on and on. Don't tell me the WWE has some brilliant formula when it comes to making stars. They don't.

 

[a0161613]

You're wrong.

What TNA does well is taking stars and giving you no reason to get into them or their character. Hardy is one example. I say RVD is another.

That is not to say they can't do it. AJ pulls it off. Pope is fantastic face but the ability of these two is due to their ring work, rather than the material.

I think your point is biased because WWE released the perfect rough diamond in Danielson, who could have been cut into the ideal WWE Superstar. And I severely doubt their ability to make stars when MVP, Matt Hardy etc have been around and are now more irrelevant than they were five years ago.

 

[vampirek]

The WWE was even able to make Hulk Hogan the greatest wrestler in the history of wrestling while TNA can't get new fans to come back and watch Hulk Hogan. How did WWE manage to do what they did while TNA is turning Hogan into a nobody? WWE made Hogan immortal and let him go half a decade without being pinned. TNA doesn't dare give Hogan or anyone anywhere near that kind of airtime cause WWE/TNA fans would criticize it and TNA doesn't have the money or the stage at this point to be turning off potential fanbase.

This is perhaps, if not the most idiotic comment ever. The answer is quite simple, the WWF(E) made Hulk Hogan big on the back of his appearance on the Rocky 3 movie and made him a larger than life character aimed at children. It was unique and broke the barrier in terms of making wrestling mainstream and right in the public eye. He was the main figure of this.
Now you are saying TNA can't match this? Well dur! The man has had hip replacements, in his later 50's and can barely walk.... and you expect the same level? Please!
Nobody wants to see Hogan in the ring wrestling, let alone have more air time. What does it bring? Certainly not wrestling.
Why would new fans tune in to see Hogan? Please do explain because I can't for one think of one.
Next you'll be saying TNA should hire Warrior and Savage because they were big during the Hogan era and would be big now!

Now back to the real world, both WWE and TNA takes stars and ruin them, but they also improve on others. The WWE have the Austins, HHH's etc, but they do have the DDP's etc. TNA have the Matt Morgans', Popes' etc but they do have the Black Reigns etc.

 

[GameOver]

Well yes and no. mostly yes.
It's the WCW syndrome LOL Take a legend and crucify there careers, or kick people out who have phenomenal talent, so WWE can turn them into legends.

With a few exceptions. Hogan/Nash never suffered for going back to WCW "funny that"
but Savage though he had a few more title runs really was nothing in WCW compared to his WWe reign, Bret Hart (final tombestone on his career) thats just a few

TNA seems to do the same thing. They bring in talent and every one of them is the "greatest aquisition" in wrestling history and what happens they immedaately get top billing but within a few months they haven't had anything really impactful.

Kurt Angle is maybe the only exception. but Christian was pushed for months, then he was taken out of the picture altogether, Mick Foley had a couple of angles then taken out just to name a few. Bringing in people won't achieve anything if you don't actually utilise them with whats already there and spend some money on marketing.

Which is something WWE can afford to do, even if someone doesn't work out, it's not often through lack of trying.
WWE spends money on dreams but pumps more into reality
TNA spend too much on hopes and dreams and very little on reality.

 

[Vintage]

The difference between TNA and WWE are very simple.

In WWE you do not need talent to get over. The writers provide you with everything that you need to succeed. Think of them as a Broadway production. The only people who don't get over are those who were handed a crappy gimmick or they just failed to connect with the crowd with bad portrayal of a good gimmick.

In TNA you absolutely need to rely on talent to get over. You are given a general outline of what needs to be mentioned and you ad lib your way through the rest. Think of them as improvisational comics. You either have it, or you don't to carry a segment. The most successful TNA talents are always the ones playing exaggerated versions of themselves. They fail when it comes to gimmicks The Nature Boy AJ Stylin' and Profilin' Styles, Suicide and Black Reign ironically.

Jeff Hardy is a shining example of this contrast. In WWE he's the Charismatic Enigma, he's interesting, he makes a little more sense and his mic time was limited. He was an above average talent that stood out due to his in ring style. In TNA, he's just Jeff Hardy and he's an Asshole. He's a little bland, his promos are all over the place and last too long. He's an above average talent but he's not as impressive in the ring compared to those around him.

 

[Ruthless-RKO]

TNA don't market well...yet they are mainstream on tv...you have hit the nail on the head with this...

With in a month..Sheamus is WWE champion...and they've built him as a main eventer...say if tna did this with morgan...what would happen..people would be like ...wtf...why him..

TBH i was like that with sheamus, but wwe made it work...

Remember Kurt Angle...if he was still in WWE he would still be a household name...i thinkhe is kinda forgotten from a few ppl..