WWE vs TNA "Tale of the Tape"

[IrishCanadian25]

Assume for a second WWE and TNA do end up going head to head. Let's have a look at who has the edge in several different categories, shall we?

Main Eventers

WWE boasts Cena, Randy Orton, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, Batista, CM Punk, Chris Jericho, and Edge.

TNA boasts AJ Styles, Kurt Angle, Samoa Joe, Christopher Daniels, Sting, Abyss, Matt Morgan, Scott Steiner, and Kevin Nash.

Advantage: TNA. Surprised? Look at WWE's roster and notice the names. Most - except for Orton and Punk - are over 30. Many are at or over 40. And you know what? Of those older main eventers, most are still involved in major storylines and title matches. TNA has sort of phased out many of their older main eventers (Sting, Steiner, Nash) to make sure guys like Styles, Joe, Morgan, and Daniels are developed. Desmond Wolf is getting instant cred. It's a slight advantage. Feel free to try to change my mind.

Mid-Card

WWE uses the Intercontinental, United States, and ECW Titles. Names such as Christian Cage, Sheamus, Kofi Kingston, Drew McIntyre, Jack Swagger, Legacy, Miz, Morrison, etc. come to mind immediately.

TNA uses the Global and X-Division Titles. Names like Eric Young, Amazing Red, Suicide, Dinero, Creed, Lethal, Kiyoshi, etc. come to mind.

Advantage: WWE. While TNA took a lot of their mid-carders to develop the main event scene, WWE practically doubled the depth of their mid card. The X-Division doesn't mean what it used to, and while Eric Young's character development has been a pleasant surprise, the TNA mid-card isn't on WWE's level.

Tag Team

WWE has Jerishow (for 1 more week?), Legacy, Hart Dynasty, DX, Cryme Tyme, MVP and Henry.

TNA has Beer Money, LAX, British Invasion, MCMG.

Advantage - TNA. WWE's Tag Division has sucked ass with a twisty straw for a while now. TNA has legit teams which, at any moment, could split and filter into the mid card or even the main event quite easilly. Hart Dynasty and Cryme Tyme haven't even gotten serious matches, MVP is basically now Henry's valet, and Legacy is there to keep Orton elevated.

Women

WWE has McCool, James, Melina, Kelly, Maryse, Hall, Torres, etc.

TNA has ODB, Kong, Sky, Sarita, Alissa Flash, Daffney, Hamada, Rayne, Val, Traci, Taylor, and Tara.

Advantage - TNA. WWE has two mediocre women's titles / divisions. TNA is so deep, it's got a good women's title AND a tag team division for the ladies. They should have a slogan - "Go Deeper with TNA Women."

Television

WWE has the USA family of Networks and My 9. That includes ScyFy.

TNA has Spike TV.

Advtantage - TNA. I decided this one last night when USA, so hard up for cash, aired a TNA commercial during Raw. I don't think Spike would do that for WWE. Furthermore, Spike's best show - TUF 10 Finale - saw Spike give air time to Hogan to promote TNA Wrestling. They seem more like a united team that is behind TNA wrestling. And when WWE initially got the ScyFy deal for ECW, the deal required the WWE to book some ScyFy characters like The Zombie and Kevin Thorne.

Misc.

WWE has history, Vince McMahon, political clout, constantly changing venues, Wrestlemania, the ability to give money to successful TNA up-and-comers.

TNA has youth, a unique ring, Hulk Hogan, a stable home territory in Orlando, the ability to sign disgruntled WWE rejects.

Advantage - WWE. Casual fans know the WWE FAR better than they know TNA. Bring back The Rock or Steve Austin next and the fans will check it out. Who is TNA gonna bring back? Chris Harris?

Final score: 4-2 TNA.

Maybe you disagree. If so, I'd love to hear it.

 

[Reddannihilation]

I agree, especially your point about the WWE main eventers. So many people like to give TNA shit for having too many older wrestlers in their main event scene, yet TNA gave us a year long storyline that has elevated several young wrestlers to main event status. By comparison WWE has given us one irish man who went from jobbing to Goldust on ECW to World title holder on RAW in the span of about 3 months. The only area I think I'd disagree with you is that TNA's midcard is more interesting to me, outside of Morrison, Miz, Christian and Kofi there isn't really anyone in the WWE midcard I enjoy and one thing I've noticed is that each of those wrestlers share similarities both character wise and in their ring work (especially Kingston and Morrison). By comparison TNA has wrestlers like Dinero, Young, Hernandez, Red all of whom have distinctive characters and varied wrestling styles, so IMO TNA's midcard is better than WWE's as well.

 

[Dagger Dias]

Main Eventers

WWE boasts Cena, Randy Orton, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, Batista, CM Punk, Chris Jericho, and Edge.

TNA boasts AJ Styles, Kurt Angle, Samoa Joe, Christopher Daniels, Sting, Abyss, Matt Morgan, Scott Steiner, and Kevin Nash.

Advantage: TNA. Surprised? Look at WWE's roster and notice the names. Most - except for Orton and Punk - are over 30. Many are at or over 40. And you know what? Of those older main eventers, most are still involved in major storylines and title matches. TNA has sort of phased out many of their older main eventers (Sting, Steiner, Nash) to make sure guys like Styles, Joe, Morgan, and Daniels are developed. Desmond Wolf is getting instant cred. It's a slight advantage. Feel free to try to change my mind.

Ok.... I see the point you are making here, but.... the main eventers in WWE are bigger names than most of TNA's. Many fans are going to be wondering who some of TNA's main eventers even are, whereas they can recognize the names of most of WWE's. When it comes to every other factor (in-ring, mic ability, longevity) you're right that TNA's guys will mostly stick around longer. I give WWE the advantage here because their names will make a lot more money right now than TNA's because some are still not that well known outside of TNA fans or these forums.

Mid-Card

WWE uses the Intercontinental, United States, and ECW Titles. Names such as Christian Cage, Sheamus, Kofi Kingston, Drew McIntyre, Jack Swagger, Legacy, Miz, Morrison, etc. come to mind immediately.

TNA uses the Global and X-Division Titles. Names like Eric Young, Amazing Red, Suicide, Dinero, Creed, Lethal, Kiyoshi, etc. come to mind.

Advantage: WWE. While TNA took a lot of their mid-carders to develop the main event scene, WWE practically doubled the depth of their mid card. The X-Division doesn't mean what it used to, and while Eric Young's character development has been a pleasant surprise, the TNA mid-card isn't on WWE's level.

Agreed. WWE's midcard is still a bit of a mess, but it has been improving in the past year or two, whereas TNA's has done just the opposite.

Tag Team

WWE has Jerishow (for 1 more week?), Legacy, Hart Dynasty, DX, Cryme Tyme, MVP and Henry.

TNA has Beer Money, LAX, British Invasion, MCMG.

Advantage - TNA. WWE's Tag Division has sucked ass with a twisty straw for a while now. TNA has legit teams which, at any moment, could split and filter into the mid card or even the main event quite easilly. Hart Dynasty and Cryme Tyme haven't even gotten serious matches, MVP is basically now Henry's valet, and Legacy is there to keep Orton elevated.

Agreed. TNA's tag team division is stale at the moment, but it actually exists. WWE has been making their tag team titles more important again, but TNA has true tag teams competing for and winning theirs.

Women

WWE has McCool, James, Melina, Kelly, Maryse, Hall, Torres, etc.

TNA has ODB, Kong, Sky, Sarita, Alissa Flash, Daffney, Hamada, Rayne, Val, Traci, Taylor, and Tara.

Advantage - TNA. WWE has two mediocre women's titles / divisions. TNA is so deep, it's got a good women's title AND a tag team division for the ladies. They should have a slogan - "Go Deeper with TNA Women."

Absolutely agree here. TNA has one awesome female division and even a tag team one. WWE has two below average female divisions. While I support the idea that WWE has two female divisions, they need to improve them more. TNA on the other hand, is doing everything right with their female division(s).

Television

WWE has the USA family of Networks and My 9. That includes ScyFy.

TNA has Spike TV.

Advtantage - TNA. I decided this one last night when USA, so hard up for cash, aired a TNA commercial during Raw. I don't think Spike would do that for WWE. Furthermore, Spike's best show - TUF 10 Finale - saw Spike give air time to Hogan to promote TNA Wrestling. They seem more like a united team that is behind TNA wrestling. And when WWE initially got the ScyFy deal for ECW, the deal required the WWE to book some ScyFy characters like The Zombie and Kevin Thorne.

What? Sorry, I disagree there. WWE are easier to find and notice on tv. I have never seen a commercial for Impact or a TNA PPV on any channel other than Spike. They can't rely on only Spike. It isn't only because WWE airs on multiple channels, they also advertise on multiple channels. That more than makes up for things like WWE's ECW having to use characters such as the Zombie.

Misc.

WWE has history, Vince McMahon, political clout, constantly changing venues, Wrestlemania, the ability to give money to successful TNA up-and-comers.

TNA has youth, a unique ring, Hulk Hogan, a stable home territory in Orlando, the ability to sign disgruntled WWE rejects.

Advantage - WWE. Casual fans know the WWE FAR better than they know TNA. Bring back The Rock or Steve Austin next and the fans will check it out. Who is TNA gonna bring back? Chris Harris?

Agreed. WWE reaches casual fans so much easier than TNA. It wouldn't kill TNA to advertise better or more often, as I have pointed out in other threads.

Final score: 4-2 TNA.

Maybe you disagree. If so, I'd love to hear it.

I still say WWE has the overall advantage because of name-value and being more easily found by casual fans. TNA has the better product, but WWE has the advantage by a long shot.

I'm willing to debate this further if you disagree.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

I agree with your scoring, but I don't agree that it in some way gives TNA the "edge" here. While they do have the "edge" in terms of product potential and storylining, the WWE is a house-hold name at this point and because of that rich 58-year history they still "take the cake" so to speak in a head-to-head like this.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Assume for a second WWE and TNA do end up going head to head. Let's have a look at who has the edge in several different categories, shall we?

Main Eventers

WWE boasts Cena, Randy Orton, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, Batista, CM Punk, Chris Jericho, and Edge.

TNA boasts AJ Styles, Kurt Angle, Samoa Joe, Christopher Daniels, Sting, Abyss, Matt Morgan, Scott Steiner, and Kevin Nash.

Advantage: TNA. Surprised? Look at WWE's roster and notice the names. Most - except for Orton and Punk - are over 30. Many are at or over 40. And you know what? Of those older main eventers, most are still involved in major storylines and title matches. TNA has sort of phased out many of their older main eventers (Sting, Steiner, Nash) to make sure guys like Styles, Joe, Morgan, and Daniels are developed. Desmond Wolf is getting instant cred. It's a slight advantage. Feel free to try to change my mind.

I'd hardly consider Abyss or Matt Morgan to be main eventers. Abyss hasn't been in the main event scene for a few years now and Morgan is once more firmly within the mid-card ranks once again. Wrestling a single TNA world title match doesn't quite equal main event in my view. Up until the past few months, older guys like Angle, Sting, Steiner and Nash have been the dominant forces within TNA. The few months the older guys have been phased out, at least some, hasn't been enough for these younger guys to come out and really make an impact as main eventers for me. As to the thing with the WWE hardly having any of their main eventers under 30, I fail to see any difference within TNA. The average age for all the TNA main eventers listed is 39.5 years with two members listed being in their 50s. The average age for all the WWE main eventers stands at 37.2 years, so the whole age comparrison thing doesn't hold water in my view.

Mid-Card

WWE uses the Intercontinental, United States, and ECW Titles. Names such as Christian Cage, Sheamus, Kofi Kingston, Drew McIntyre, Jack Swagger, Legacy, Miz, Morrison, etc. come to mind immediately.

TNA uses the Global and X-Division Titles. Names like Eric Young, Amazing Red, Suicide, Dinero, Creed, Lethal, Kiyoshi, etc. come to mind.

Advantage: WWE. While TNA took a lot of their mid-carders to develop the main event scene, WWE practically doubled the depth of their mid card. The X-Division doesn't mean what it used to, and while Eric Young's character development has been a pleasant surprise, the TNA mid-card isn't on WWE's level.

I agree. The WWE mid-card does still have some problems, but it has dramatically improved in post WM 2009 while TNA's mid-card scene has just been going downhill.

Tag Team

WWE has Jerishow (for 1 more week?), Legacy, Hart Dynasty, DX, Cryme Tyme, MVP and Henry.

TNA has Beer Money, LAX, British Invasion, MCMG.

Advantage - TNA. WWE's Tag Division has sucked ass with a twisty straw for a while now. TNA has legit teams which, at any moment, could split and filter into the mid card or even the main event quite easilly. Hart Dynasty and Cryme Tyme haven't even gotten serious matches, MVP is basically now Henry's valet, and Legacy is there to keep Orton elevated.

I'm torn here really. While it's true TNA does have more of a developed tag team scene, it's completely stale. While the only relevant thing going on in the WWE tag division is Jeri-Show/DX, it's still head and shoulders above anything going on in TNA's right now in my view. For me, I'm giving the nod to the WWE because, as I said, they've got the only interesting thing happening in tag team wrestling right now. However, I couldn't hold it against anyone for choosing TNA.

Women

WWE has McCool, James, Melina, Kelly, Maryse, Hall, Torres, etc.

TNA has ODB, Kong, Sky, Sarita, Alissa Flash, Daffney, Hamada, Rayne, Val, Traci, Taylor, and Tara.

Advantage - TNA. WWE has two mediocre women's titles / divisions. TNA is so deep, it's got a good women's title AND a tag team division for the ladies. They should have a slogan - "Go Deeper with TNA Women."

TNA definitely has the advantage here, but the WWE isn't losing much sleep over this. The Divas are, primarily, a joke. It's a shame because there are some legitimately good female wrestlers in the WWE. Personally, I think the Knockout Division has gotten pretty stale over the past several months. The Knockout tag titles are virtually useless and Tara having the Knockout title just doesn't have the impact it could have had. Still, it's better than what the WWE has.

Television

WWE has the USA family of Networks and My 9. That includes ScyFy.

TNA has Spike TV.

Advtantage - TNA. I decided this one last night when USA, so hard up for cash, aired a TNA commercial during Raw. I don't think Spike would do that for WWE. Furthermore, Spike's best show - TUF 10 Finale - saw Spike give air time to Hogan to promote TNA Wrestling. They seem more like a united team that is behind TNA wrestling. And when WWE initially got the ScyFy deal for ECW, the deal required the WWE to book some ScyFy characters like The Zombie and Kevin Thorne.

I've got to disagree strongly here. You have to look back over the whole course of TNA's association with Spike. Spike occassionally has aired a TNA commercial. One of TNA's biggest shortcomings has been its lack of advertisement. It's only been within the past few weeks that Spike has stepped up the advertising of TNA and that's only been for the Jan 4th show, whereas USA advertises Raw on a consistent basis. As for Spike advertising the WWE, Spike runs commercials for the Raw vs. Smackdown game all the time, they've done it quite a few times during Impact itself. While a video game might not be a show, it's still a WWE product featuring WWE wrestlers.

Misc.

WWE has history, Vince McMahon, political clout, constantly changing venues, Wrestlemania, the ability to give money to successful TNA up-and-comers.

TNA has youth, a unique ring, Hulk Hogan, a stable home territory in Orlando, the ability to sign disgruntled WWE rejects.

Advantage - WWE. Casual fans know the WWE FAR better than they know TNA. Bring back The Rock or Steve Austin next and the fans will check it out. Who is TNA gonna bring back? Chris Harris?

Final score: 4-2 TNA.

Maybe you disagree. If so, I'd love to hear it.

The only area I can solidly agree is in the women's divisions of both companies. Using the names you came up with, the WWE has an overall younger, more currently relevant and well known main event scene, a greatly improved mid-card scene, the only relevant situation currently in tag team wrestling and the WWE has its dynasty. It's a household name. There's just no way I can give it to TNA.

 

[VintageWWE]

I would have to disagree. WWE definitely beats TNA the other way around 4-2. It's true that WWE main eventers are mostly 35+ but so what. When it comes to name recognition and dare I say wrestling ability WWE is still the best. TNA may have a better tag team and women's division but WWE has a far superior mid-card division. WWE has more air time and reaches more audience in both tv and arenas. WWE will always be more well known than TNA will ever be.

 

[Motor City Jeezy]

...the main eventers in WWE are bigger names than most of TNA's. Many fans are going to be wondering who some of TNA's main eventers even are, whereas they can recognize the names of most of WWE's. ...I give WWE the advantage here because their names will make a lot more money right now than TNA's because some are still not that well known outside of TNA fans or these forums.

You have to remember that WWE's current main eventers are all over TV outside of wrestling. Triple H has done movies and walked with Floyd Mayweather in his recent return to boxing. HBK is a Hall of Famer and a legend among the other wrestling fans. Cena has also done movies as well as commercials. I've seen Edge do commercials. Jericho has done numerous things outside of the WWE such as being part of a band, hosting a radio show, doing movies, etc. What do you have from TNA? A season of American Gladiators for Morgan? Some dead end movies for Angle and Nash? Reality shows for Sting and AJ Styles? Come on. There's just no comparison between the absolute media blitz WWE wrestlers put themselves into (or WWE puts them through) and the lack thereof from TNA's.

And since I've brought it up, I think the fact that TNA wrestlers focus on their wrestling and their matches, and not spend their time between movies and talk shows and whatever else, means that TNA puts out a better overall product. The original poster should've also included a match quality category as well as an overall entertaining show category. TNA would've won hands down. Far too many times have I seen botched maneuvers from the WWE wrestlers. There's YouTube channels dedicated to them. WWE's RAW has made me want to rip my eyeballs out of the sockets for weeks now. ECW has been amazing and SmackDown has been mediocre, but RAW... ugh. There just aren't words. Impact continues putting out a solid show every week. The tag team divisions, both female and male, have slid off a little, but they're still much better than WWE's by a long shot.

I will agree that WWE's mid-card is better than TNA's. The X Division has gotten a bit stale lately, while the Intercontinental championship contenders have been looking great week in and week out. (Why has the Miz recently disappeared? Except for appearing in what was basically a Kofi/Orton segment, he's been out of the picture the past few weeks. Anyone care to explain?)

All in all, I'm not going to be watching RAW next week. The storylines for that show are absolute garbage. Besides, I'm sure WWE will be shoving the recaps down our throats for the duration of ECW and SmackDown next week. (Which just so happens to be something else I LOVE about TNA. They started doing SOME recaps recently [probably to get the new watchers they're expecting to get up to speed] but it only takes up a few seconds at the beginning of the show and doesn't dominate the entire program.)

 

[Dagger Dias]

You have to remember that WWE's current main eventers are all over TV outside of wrestling. Triple H has done movies and walked with Floyd Mayweather in his recent return to boxing. HBK is a Hall of Famer and a legend among the other wrestling fans. Cena has also done movies as well as commercials. I've seen Edge do commercials. Jericho has done numerous things outside of the WWE such as being part of a band, hosting a radio show, doing movies, etc. What do you have from TNA? A season of American Gladiators for Morgan? Some dead end movies for Angle and Nash? Reality shows for Sting and AJ Styles? Come on. There's just no comparison between the absolute media blitz WWE wrestlers put themselves into (or WWE puts them through) and the lack thereof from TNA's.

That's more of less a part the point I was trying to make in the portion of my post that you quoted. Cross-promoting wrestlers and other products is a very powerful business technique. I'm a marketing major, so I've studied cases like that for a couple of years now. TNA's biggest mistake is not advertising as much, and doing more cross-promotions would help them too.

TNA puts out a better overall product. The original poster should've also included a match quality category as well as an overall entertaining show category. TNA would've won hands down.

Yes they do, but the better product is not always what wins in the end. WWE still has the advantage. Match quality is important, sure, but that doesn't give TNA any advantages over WWE on monday. Right now "name values" are more important. If TNA can keep up their quality of matches and having divisions superior to WWE's counterparts.... AND do something about getting more easily recognized by casual fans.... THAT is when they will have an advantage because the perfect product has the best quality AND is widely recognized by fans.

I want TNA to do well, but if I had to give my guess right here and now, my guess would be that WWE would slaughter them. I'll still watch both shows on monday though because they might have something awesome planned for us.

 

[hardymiz1020]

yeah your supposed age difference in main eventers makes no sense. the oldest in WWE is only 44 while in TNA its 50 and theres two of them> Steiner and Sting. The total age in WWE is 335 while TNA its 356. (yes i have no life and added them up lol) but yeah your age difference claim completely makes no sense. i would say more but everyone else has pretty much covered the basics

 

[IrishCanadian25]

yeah your supposed age difference in main eventers makes no sense. the oldest in WWE is only 44 while in TNA its 50 and theres two of them> Steiner and Sting. The total age in WWE is 335 while TNA its 356. (yes i have no life and added them up lol) but yeah your age difference claim completely makes no sense. i would say more but everyone else has pretty much covered the basics

If you isolate the numbers, you're absolutely correct. But Sting has been off TV for a while and Steiner is, for lack of a better term, being phased out due to injury. Nash hasn't been relevant for a while.

In WWE, on the other hand, Triple H is the likely challenger for the WWE Title at Wrestlemania, Shawn Michaels and The Undertaker are headed for another clash, and Batista is the main heel in the WHC Title picture.

So what does that tell you? The main eventers of advanced age in TNA are being phased out, whereas the main eventers of advanced age in WWE are still getting the top slots at the biggest show.

That's essentially the point I was trying to make.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

If you isolate the numbers, you're absolutely correct. But Sting has been off TV for a while and Steiner is, for lack of a better term, being phased out due to injury. Nash hasn't been relevant for a while.

In WWE, on the other hand, Triple H is the likely challenger for the WWE Title at Wrestlemania, Shawn Michaels and The Undertaker are headed for another clash, and Batista is the main heel in the WHC Title picture.

So what does that tell you? The main eventers of advanced age in TNA are being phased out, whereas the main eventers of advanced age in WWE are still getting the top slots at the biggest show.

That's essentially the point I was trying to make.

The Undertaker will probably drop the WHC at the Royal Rumble, I'm guessing due to intereference from Shawn Michaels, which means that he and HBK will be out of the main event scene. HBK, with the exception of the DX/John Cena Triple Threat Match really hasn't been in the ME scene in the WWE for a long time. So, after the Rumble, he and Taker will be out of the picture. It's far too early to tell what's going on with Triple H though I don't really expect him to be a dominant force in the WWE Championship picture. Sheamus will keep the title until WM before dropping it back to Cena. Batista could still be in the WHC picture to some degree. I really don't know, to be honest, as I didn't really expect him to lose to Rey Mysterio in the #1 contenders match a few weeks ago. Batista could be in it, and he could possibly not be in it. He probably will, but can't really say for complete certainty right now. I'm guessing at least the two oldest will be out of the main event scene after by the time the Rumble is out.

As for the older wrestlers in TNA's main event scene, Nash, Sting and Steiner are being phased out, but Kurt Angle is still right there in TNA's world title picture. Of course, Sting could possibly be brought back at anytime and pick up right where he left off. Doubtful, but possible. And, of course, there's also Hulk Hogan to consider. Whether he's wrestling for the world title or not, Hulk Hogan is going to be the centerpiece of TNA for some time to come. So, by defacto, it could argued that Hogan will be in the main event situation in TNA one way or another whether he's wrestling for the strap or not.

Basing a judgement on which main event scene is better based on age just isn't really all that accurate or convincing. In the WWE, it's all but guaranteed that two of the 40 or over wrestlers in the main event picture in the WWE are going to be doing their own thing. Batista and Triple H are something of wild cards at this point. I'd say Batista has more of a solid chance of remaining in the main event picture right now. In TNA, Kevin Nash and Scott Steiner seem to be out of the main event scene, Sting has been gone for months but could very well show up and resume his place and Angle is still right in the thick of it. Neither company has shown, to my satisfaction at least, that the old guard is being firmly and undeniably phased out to make room for younger ones.

 

[AceMan32]

The fact of the matter is TNA always had these guys like A J Styles and know one gave a Sh*t. Your talking about a show (TNA) that averages ratings of 1.0 a episode verses WWE Raw's who averages a rating of 3.5 a week. might as well put ECW vs TNA. i respect the fact that TNA is trying to compete with WWE buts this is like WWE vs WCW part 2. TNA should leave the fight now before Vince buys them out. Its just a matter of time. and it doesnt matter that WWE has 30+ year old wrestlers if WWE is doing good thats all that matters. WWE RAWs highest rating was 5.4 TNA is highest is like a 1.3 so who wins. so i mean words dont mean nothing until july 4th comes so we will see

 

[Kanye South]

Assume for a second WWE and TNA do end up going head to head. Let's have a look at who has the edge in several different categories, shall we?

Main Eventers

WWE boasts Cena, Randy Orton, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, Batista, CM Punk, Chris Jericho, and Edge.

TNA boasts AJ Styles, Kurt Angle, Samoa Joe, Christopher Daniels, Sting, Abyss, Matt Morgan, Scott Steiner, and Kevin Nash.

Advantage: TNA. Surprised? Look at WWE's roster and notice the names. Most - except for Orton and Punk - are over 30. Many are at or over 40. And you know what? Of those older main eventers, most are still involved in major storylines and title matches. TNA has sort of phased out many of their older main eventers (Sting, Steiner, Nash) to make sure guys like Styles, Joe, Morgan, and Daniels are developed. Desmond Wolf is getting instant cred. It's a slight advantage. Feel free to try to change my mind.

I only disagree with your main-event placings.

Outside of Angle, Nash, Steiner, Sting, and possibly Styles, not many casual fans know the TNA main eventers. Most casual fans know who WWE main eventers are. Daniels is like 39. WWE has face value, and has the budget to put a young new star in a movie or on the red carpet, thus giving him exposure. TNA has...MMA fights? The WWE definitely has the advantage here.

 

[Big Sexy]

Main Eventers

WWE boasts Cena, Randy Orton, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, Batista, CM Punk, Chris Jericho, and Edge.

TNA boasts AJ Styles, Kurt Angle, Samoa Joe, Christopher Daniels, Sting, Abyss, Matt Morgan, Scott Steiner, and Kevin Nash.

Advantage: TNA. Surprised? Look at WWE's roster and notice the names. Most - except for Orton and Punk - are over 30. Many are at or over 40. And you know what? Of those older main eventers, most are still involved in major storylines and title matches. TNA has sort of phased out many of their older main eventers (Sting, Steiner, Nash) to make sure guys like Styles, Joe, Morgan, and Daniels are developed. Desmond Wolf is getting instant cred. It's a slight advantage. Feel free to try to change my mind.

The WWE definitely has the main event advantage. Both have there fair share of older guys that will be gone soon. TNA has Sting, Nash, and Steiner who will all probably be retired within a year. WWE has HBK, Taker, and Batista who have a couple years left at best. However, with the older guys I'll take Taker, HBK, and Batista over Sting, Nash, and Steiner any day.

Looking at the rest of TNA AJ Styles and Samoa are probably their two best all around main eventers. They are both in their early 30's and are the back bone of the TNA main event scene. However, Samoa Joe really hasn't been that great lately and his first run as champion was pretty bad. I'll take Cena and Orton as my backbone over Styles and Joe. Cena is only 32 and could be at the top of the WWE for another 10 years easily. Same goes for Orton who is only 29.

Looking again at your TNA list you have Kurt Angle. He is now over 40 years old and who knows how long he can still go with his injuries. He's in kind of the same boat as Triple H. HHH is 40 and if he can stay healthy he'll be a guy who will always be in the main event but it seems like every other year Triple H has some major injury.

Christopher Daniels is 38 and I never saw him as much of a main event player. Everything about him screams upper mid card. Abyss hasn't been involved in the main event in a while and his character seems to be getting stale. I've never liked Matt Morgan but I guess he has the potential to be a major player. I'll take guys like Jericho, Edge, and CM Punk over those borderline TNA main eventers.

The WWE has the better current main eventers and they also have more potential future main eventers on their roster then TNA does.

 

[Thriller Ant]

Assume for a second WWE and TNA do end up going head to head. Let's have a look at who has the edge in several different categories, shall we?

Main Eventers

WWE boasts Cena, Randy Orton, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, Batista, CM Punk, Chris Jericho, and Edge.

TNA boasts AJ Styles, Kurt Angle, Samoa Joe, Christopher Daniels, Sting, Abyss, Matt Morgan, Scott Steiner, and Kevin Nash.

Advantage: TNA. Surprised? Look at WWE's roster and notice the names. Most - except for Orton and Punk - are over 30. Many are at or over 40. And you know what? Of those older main eventers, most are still involved in major storylines and title matches. TNA has sort of phased out many of their older main eventers (Sting, Steiner, Nash) to make sure guys like Styles, Joe, Morgan, and Daniels are developed. Desmond Wolf is getting instant cred. It's a slight advantage. Feel free to try to change my mind.

The advantage here depends on what your criteria is. If you are judging by which company is in the better position for a battle between the companies that will last for many years, then I will completely agree with your assessment, IC. However, if you want to go by name value and/or credibility, then I must regretfully give this one to WWE. The casual fan will know Steiner (although I would put him as upper midcard, but that is splitting hairs), Nash (same as Steiner), Sting (who, as you mentioned in a later post is on hiatus), Angle, and maybe AJ while that same fan will know just about everyone on your list for the WWE.

Mid-Card

WWE uses the Intercontinental, United States, and ECW Titles. Names such as Christian Cage, Sheamus, Kofi Kingston, Drew McIntyre, Jack Swagger, Legacy, Miz, Morrison, etc. come to mind immediately.

TNA uses the Global and X-Division Titles. Names like Eric Young, Amazing Red, Suicide, Dinero, Creed, Lethal, Kiyoshi, etc. come to mind.

Advantage: WWE. While TNA took a lot of their mid-carders to develop the main event scene, WWE practically doubled the depth of their mid card. The X-Division doesn't mean what it used to, and while Eric Young's character development has been a pleasant surprise, the TNA mid-card isn't on WWE's level.

I'd say Sheamus would now be considered a main eventer, and the debate could also be made for Kofi. Besides that, I completely agree with your post. TNA uses their midcard as more of a warm up act for the PPVs and Impact rather than a distinct, competitive division. If TNA needs to improve anywhere, I would say it is here. WWE has really begun building their midcard again recently with the New Superstar Initiative on ECW and their work is paying off.

Tag Team

WWE has Jerishow (for 1 more week?), Legacy, Hart Dynasty, DX, Cryme Tyme, MVP and Henry.

TNA has Beer Money, LAX, British Invasion, MCMG.

Advantage - TNA. WWE's Tag Division has sucked ass with a twisty straw for a while now. TNA has legit teams which, at any moment, could split and filter into the mid card or even the main event quite easilly. Hart Dynasty and Cryme Tyme haven't even gotten serious matches, MVP is basically now Henry's valet, and Legacy is there to keep Orton elevated.

With rumors of the tag teams leaving ROH, I would say TNA has the best tag team division in all of professional wrestling. Beer Money, the Brits, MCMG, and 3-D are all going strong, Lethal Consequences is there if needed and the Young Bucks will bring more high-paced action to the division.

Women

WWE has McCool, James, Melina, Kelly, Maryse, Hall, Torres, etc.

TNA has ODB, Kong, Sky, Sarita, Alissa Flash, Daffney, Hamada, Rayne, Val, Traci, Taylor, and Tara.

Advantage - TNA. WWE has two mediocre women's titles / divisions. TNA is so deep, it's got a good women's title AND a tag team division for the ladies. They should have a slogan - "Go Deeper with TNA Women."

This is no contest. Where WWE is doing the "Piggy James" angle with the woman who may be their best worker, TNA has Hamada, Sarita, Flash and the others putting on great matches week after week. The value the division and they take the girls that are the worst workers, the Beautiful People, and have the focus on them be on their promos rather than their in-ring work.

Television

WWE has the USA family of Networks and My 9. That includes ScyFy.

TNA has Spike TV.

Advtantage - TNA. I decided this one last night when USA, so hard up for cash, aired a TNA commercial during Raw. I don't think Spike would do that for WWE. Furthermore, Spike's best show - TUF 10 Finale - saw Spike give air time to Hogan to promote TNA Wrestling. They seem more like a united team that is behind TNA wrestling. And when WWE initially got the ScyFy deal for ECW, the deal required the WWE to book some ScyFy characters like The Zombie and Kevin Thorne.

This one is tough. WWE has Raw on USA, which is a member of the NBC family, therefore allowing shows such as Tribute to the Troop and Saturday Night's Main Event to air on NBC. They are also the centerpiece show on MyNetwork TV, which means that the network needs to promote the hell out of SmackDown to keep it afloat. And SyFy, well, it's SyFy. They have their audience and they have people that tune in just for ECW.

TNA, on the other hand, is only on Spike, but they have an amazing gig there. They get plenty of cross-promotion, The Ultimate Fighter finale is proof enough of that, and word is that talks have been had if not finalized for another TNA show on Spike. This one is close, but I am also leaning toward TNA methinks.

Misc.

WWE has history, Vince McMahon, political clout, constantly changing venues, Wrestlemania, the ability to give money to successful TNA up-and-comers.

TNA has youth, a unique ring, Hulk Hogan, a stable home territory in Orlando, the ability to sign disgruntled WWE rejects.

Advantage - WWE. Casual fans know the WWE FAR better than they know TNA. Bring back The Rock or Steve Austin next and the fans will check it out. Who is TNA gonna bring back? Chris Harris?

You forget that TNA also has a lot of angry smarks on their side. IC, I'm pretty sure you and I agree that the constant complaining from people like Sid gets really old really fast. But what we can't deny is that there are plenty of people on this forum and others that 100% agree that WWE sucks right now, even if I don't. There has already been at least 1 thread started here on WZ asking people to watch Impact on Monday to jump start another potential Monday Night War to improve WWE's programming. This may benefit WWE in the long term, but the immediate reaction to turn on WWE and watch TNA will give the company a huge boost in the short term.

Also, as much as I am prepared to hate Hogan in TNA, what is going to get the people who know very little about wrestling to tune in more, Bret Hart or Hulk Hogan? Steve Austin or Hulk Hogan? The Rock is the only man who has nearly as much name recognition, but with the kids movies he has been doing, it is entirely possible he has lost credibility inside the wrestling world. I think TNA wins this one.

Final score: 4-2 TNA.

Maybe you disagree. If so, I'd love to hear it.

I have 4-1, with the main event being disputed, as I mentioned. TNA has a really good opportunity here that I am excited about, but so did WCW and we all know how that turned out.

 

[psykohurricane]

Here a funny thing about that. We are a month into this new TNA regime with Hogan and bischoff and look where the focus is. The focus is on Hogan, Nash, Hall, Waltman, Angle, Jarrett, Ric Flair, The Nasty Boys, Team 3D and Mr Anderson. You could put A.J. in that category but let's face it, since Joining with Flair, he's became almost pointless and he's always in the shadow of Ric Flair.

On the OTher side of the spectrum, you look at the WWE right now: The focus is on the usual guys like Cena,Orton,DX, Undertaker, Batista,JEricho, CM Punk and Edge but they also started to push some of the mid-carder like Kofi Kingston, Ted Dibiasie, R-truth, John Morrisson, Sheamus, Drew Macintyre and if you watch ECW, Yoshi Tatsu has been getting a big push ever since he been on ECW. So right now, The WWE is trying to build new stars while TNA is keeping the new generation of guys in the shadows of these old guys that shouldn'T be the focus of the show in the first place.

So WWE right now is doing the one thing that all of us have been asking them to do and it's pushing some of the younger talents into a main event spot. Let's face it if TNA didn'T try to start a war with the WWE, None of the younger guys in the WWE would be in the position they are in right now. I'm sure that R-Truth, John Morisson, Ted Dibiasie, Kofi Kingston and Sheamus wouldn'T be in theur respective brand's main event at the next PPV.

So If you compare TNA to WWE right now, WWE would probably crush them. Even throught TNA got the better roster, they don'T know how to use them and are relying to much on these old stars and that's the main reason why TNA would fail if they go against the WWE on a regular base right now.

 

[Samurai Executioner]

Originally Posted by IC25
Assume for a second WWE and TNA do end up going head to head. Let's have a look at who has the edge in several different categories, shall we?

Main Eventers

WWE boasts Cena, Randy Orton, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, Batista, CM Punk, Chris Jericho, and Edge.

TNA boasts AJ Styles, Kurt Angle, Samoa Joe, Christopher Daniels, Sting, Abyss, Matt Morgan, Scott Steiner, and Kevin Nash.

Advantage: TNA. Surprised? Look at WWE's roster and notice the names. Most - except for Orton and Punk - are over 30. Many are at or over 40. And you know what? Of those older main eventers, most are still involved in major storylines and title matches. TNA has sort of phased out many of their older main eventers (Sting, Steiner, Nash) to make sure guys like Styles, Joe, Morgan, and Daniels are developed. Desmond Wolf is getting instant cred. It's a slight advantage. Feel free to try to change my mind.

I assume your tellin us the names of the guys who TNA are using as main eventers rather than those who have the potential.... As far as TNA goes, i can see only four main event type guys: AJ , Daniels , Joe and ofcourse Kurt.

Sting is not to be seen these days... same goes to steiner

Also steiner never really was a main event material...He is more suited for tag team style of wrestling... though he has power i personally dont think he has "durability" factor to give a good big match.

Abyss is more like wwe's Kane.... neither there nor here...

Kevin is just too old... its painful to watch him wrestle , especially when he moves so slowly... its as if he is in pain every moment.

Now considering the wwe's side:
Some of them may be old but they can still deliver... Shawn is still excellent... Undertaker though he s in pain still hasn lost his in-ring speed and his classic moves
Batista , jericho, cena and edge are in the peak of their career.

I just dont see how TNA can win in this section. May be in another three four years its possible but then by then their "STRONG" mid-card wrestlers will be ready to take up their positions...

So the way i see it its wwe all the way here

 

[Davi323]

WWE boasts Cena, Randy Orton, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, Batista, CM Punk, Chris Jericho, and Edge.

TNA boasts AJ Styles, Kurt Angle, Samoa Joe, Christopher Daniels, Sting, Abyss, Matt Morgan, Scott Steiner, and Kevin Nash.

And those same WWE main eventers that "lost" to the TNA main eventers, according to the OP, are capable of filling up 20,000 seat arenas each week, and then an 80,000 seat stadium in March/April...instead of the TNA studios which hold what, 2,000 at most? The WWE main eventers have proven time in and time out that they can most definitely, in the words of Tony Schiavone, "put butts in the seats". All of the TNA main eventers that aren't WWE/WCW castoffs can't say that. And for the WWE/WCW castoffs, they may have been able to do it at one time, but are no longer capable of it.

To claim that the TNA main eventers are better than the WWE main eventers would be humorous, if it wasn't so absolutely ridiculous.

 

[bigtimejad]

Assume for a second WWE and TNA do end up going head to head. Let's have a look at who has the edge in several different categories, shall we?

Main Eventers

WWE boasts Cena, Randy Orton, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, Batista, CM Punk, Chris Jericho, and Edge.

TNA boasts AJ Styles, Kurt Angle, Samoa Joe, Christopher Daniels, Sting, Abyss, Matt Morgan, Scott Steiner, and Kevin Nash.

Advantage: TNA. Surprised? Look at WWE's roster and notice the names. Most - except for Orton and Punk - are over 30. Many are at or over 40. And you know what? Of those older main eventers, most are still involved in major storylines and title matches. TNA has sort of phased out many of their older main eventers (Sting, Steiner, Nash) to make sure guys like Styles, Joe, Morgan, and Daniels are developed. Desmond Wolf is getting instant cred. It's a slight advantage. Feel free to try to change my mind.

I'm surprised.

All of those TNA names you've mentioned are over 30. Even Desmond Wolfe who has only been at TNA for a few months is older than Orton, Punk and Cena who are far more established as main eventers. So basically your point of TNA having youth to there advantage is entirely wrong.

 

[Tastycles]

Assume for a second WWE and TNA do end up going head to head. Let's have a look at who has the edge in several different categories, shall we?

Main Eventers

WWE boasts Cena, Randy Orton, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, Batista, CM Punk, Chris Jericho, and Edge.

TNA boasts AJ Styles, Kurt Angle, Samoa Joe, Christopher Daniels, Sting, Abyss, Matt Morgan, Scott Steiner, and Kevin Nash.

Advantage: TNA. Surprised? Look at WWE's roster and notice the names. Most - except for Orton and Punk - are over 30. Many are at or over 40. And you know what? Of those older main eventers, most are still involved in major storylines and title matches. TNA has sort of phased out many of their older main eventers (Sting, Steiner, Nash) to make sure guys like Styles, Joe, Morgan, and Daniels are developed. Desmond Wolf is getting instant cred. It's a slight advantage. Feel free to try to change my mind.

Come on now, this is ridiculous. The only reason you're picking TNA is age here. Ignoring the fact that at least four of the TNA list are worse than all of the WWE list is one thing, but to argue a completely false premise is another.

The ages of the WWE guys you named respectively are 32, 29, 40, 44, 44, 41, 31, 39 and 36. The average of that is 37. The ages of the TNA people you named are 31, 41, 30, 38, 50, 36, 33, 47, 50. The average of that is 40. As for the older guys stepping aside. Sting, aged 50, was a TNA world heavyweight champion in the past year, as was Mick Foley, aged 44. Shawn Michaels hasn't held a world title since he was 37 years old.

There is no criteria by which TNA is better here. Only AJ and Angle would get anywhere near the WWE list, and for such a list of young up and comers, they are, on average, three years older. Of more consequence, Orton and Cena, the two upon which the WWE is built are 29 and 32 respectively. Angle and AJ are 41 and 31.

Mid-Card

WWE uses the Intercontinental, United States, and ECW Titles. Names such as Christian Cage, Sheamus, Kofi Kingston, Drew McIntyre, Jack Swagger, Legacy, Miz, Morrison, etc. come to mind immediately.

TNA uses the Global and X-Division Titles. Names like Eric Young, Amazing Red, Suicide, Dinero, Creed, Lethal, Kiyoshi, etc. come to mind.

Advantage: WWE. While TNA took a lot of their mid-carders to develop the main event scene, WWE practically doubled the depth of their mid card. The X-Division doesn't mean what it used to, and while Eric Young's character development has been a pleasant surprise, the TNA mid-card isn't on WWE's level.

Agreed. Look at the ages there too though. Only three of the WWE list are over 30, only Red, Creed and Lethal aren't in the TNA list.

Tag Team

WWE has Jerishow (for 1 more week?), Legacy, Hart Dynasty, DX, Cryme Tyme, MVP and Henry.

TNA has Beer Money, LAX, British Invasion, MCMG.

Advantage - TNA. WWE's Tag Division has sucked ass with a twisty straw for a while now. TNA has legit teams which, at any moment, could split and filter into the mid card or even the main event quite easilly. Hart Dynasty and Cryme Tyme haven't even gotten serious matches, MVP is basically now Henry's valet, and Legacy is there to keep Orton elevated.

Agreed, although the TNA one is hugely overrated, in that most of their big teams like Lethal Consequences and MCMG don't get a look in in real terms, but there is no contest.

Women

WWE has McCool, James, Melina, Kelly, Maryse, Hall, Torres, etc.

TNA has ODB, Kong, Sky, Sarita, Alissa Flash, Daffney, Hamada, Rayne, Val, Traci, Taylor, and Tara.

Advantage - TNA. WWE has two mediocre women's titles / divisions. TNA is so deep, it's got a good women's title AND a tag team division for the ladies. They should have a slogan - "Go Deeper with TNA Women."

Agreed entirely.

Television

WWE has the USA family of Networks and My 9. That includes ScyFy.

TNA has Spike TV.

Advtantage - TNA. I decided this one last night when USA, so hard up for cash, aired a TNA commercial during Raw. I don't think Spike would do that for WWE. Furthermore, Spike's best show - TUF 10 Finale - saw Spike give air time to Hogan to promote TNA Wrestling. They seem more like a united team that is behind TNA wrestling. And when WWE initially got the ScyFy deal for ECW, the deal required the WWE to book some ScyFy characters like The Zombie and Kevin Thorne.

No. USA has a much bigger audience than any other cable TV station. SyFy and MyNetwork do let the side down a little, but four seperate channels air WWE programming, which means four different demographics that can be pulled in. The same is not true of TNA. However, Spike seem a little more invested in TNA, so I'd call it a draw.

Misc.

WWE has history, Vince McMahon, political clout, constantly changing venues, Wrestlemania, the ability to give money to successful TNA up-and-comers.

TNA has youth, a unique ring, Hulk Hogan, a stable home territory in Orlando, the ability to sign disgruntled WWE rejects.

Advantage - WWE. Casual fans know the WWE FAR better than they know TNA. Bring back The Rock or Steve Austin next and the fans will check it out. Who is TNA gonna bring back? Chris Harris?

TNA doesn't even have youth, to be honest with you.

Final score: 4-2 TNA.

Maybe you disagree. If so, I'd love to hear it.

Final score 3-2 WWE. WWE wins in the two divisions anybody cares about and on general name value though, so it is as easy a 3-2 win as you'll ever see.

 

[Zigglerfan227]

Ill say that TNA has a better tag team division and even a better Women division but other than that WWE reigns supreme. There is really not much to say here. WWE has the bigger stars and the greater history. It is known more than TNA. The likes of Triple H, The Undertaker, and even John Cena could destroy just about everyone in the TNA roster except maybe Kurt Angle or Sting. But see the three I mentioned from WWE or not the only great ones, there is also Chris Jericho, The Big Show, Shawn Micheals, Randy orton, Rey Mysterio, Edge, and Batista. WWE is the obvious winner here.

 

[psykohurricane]

So now that it'S official and TNA is foolish enough to go head to head with Raw let's look at what going on storyline wise in each company to see who as the most compelling product right now.

RAW

First, we got The Bret HArt/Vince Mcmahon Feud. For me personally this is an very entertaining feud and the intrigue of knowing if Bret will get a match against vince at mania keep me watching Raw every week to find out if it'S going to happen or not.

Shawn Micheals's breakdown: Again another compelling story and HBK as been great in the role and again i wonder what'S going to happen to HBK and if he'S going to get what he wants.

Legacy's breakup: they've been teasing this for weeks now and i can'T wait to see what happens when they finally do pull the trigger on this break-up

Batista vs Cena: Finally something interesting to do with Cena and i loved the segment last friday night on Smackdown when Batista said nothing.

The Hall of fame nominations: Again something that i can wait to see who'S getting into the Hall of Fame.

TNA

Bischoff vs Mick Foley: If there as been something as overdone as this angle i don'T know what it is. And the fact that this will probably lead to a match between the 2 doesn'T make me jump for joy.

Bischoff vs Jarrett: same thing goes there. Why is Bischoff in so many storyline at the same time. Don'T forgot you still have the Bischoff vs Flair feud that just got added to the list of stuff Bischoff is involve in.

Hogan vs Angle: Another story that don'T make sense and that i don'T want to see the pay off to. It'S either going to be Angle vs Hogan one on One or Angle/Hogan Vs The Band. Neither match is interesting to me and it makes me want to turn off my tv.

A.J. as the new Ric Flair: I'm all for Ric Flair being in the corner of A.J. but my problem is that first A.J is playing second banana to Ric Flair when it should be the other way around and secondly A.J. is Becoming an exact copy of Flair. Personally from what i read from casual fan after the january 4th show, i thought that A.j. had the perfect gimmick since it sounded like A.J was really over with the casual viewer. I guess i was wrong since the pretty much has to make him look and sound like ric Flair.

Mr. Anderson's push: here somebody who has become outdated, is gimmick worked fine when he was in the WWE because he was doing it in big arenas but in a small studio, it doesn't have the same Impact and when Anderson isn't entertaining on the mic, it tend to expose him as the average wrestler that he is.

If you look at this, just based on the current product that each company is giving right now, WWE blows TNA out of the water as far as compelling television is concerned. Sure TNA got the best tag team division and i better roster of young wrestlers but were are those guys. Same goes for the knockout division while they are on par with the WWE as far as talent goes were are they. Wrestlers like Beer money, Daniels,TAylor Wilde, ODB, Hamada, Jay Lethal and the list goes on for days are stock doing live event and webmatch while guys like Mr.Anderson the Nasty Boys, The beautiful people and the BAnd take all the t.v time. At less even with all that's going on on Raw, they give time to some of the other wrestler on the roster, for god shake Sheamus is the WWE champion and they actually gave him time to grow as a solid upper mid-carder.

Enough about comparing storyline and roster, let'S talk about production value. RAW is live every week from a different arena, IMPACT is Live one monday then tape the next 2 show before returning live and are either live or tape from a tv studio. Which one look more like a big time product, TNA or WWE. This is like if Nitro would have been live one week and tape the 2 others weeks from the CNN Center in Atlanta. If that would have happenned, WCW would have been crush by the WWE because even with all the big surprises, all the great wrestling, all the big names it still would have look like a minor league promotion trying to look bigger than thery are. By having Nitro being live from a different place in the U.S. it made WCW look bigger then i actually was and the fans took notice that another company existed. Right now, even ROH look more like a big company then TNA just with the production valuee of there show compare to TNA.

If it seem like am not a big TNA fan because i'm bashing them, it not what this was meant to be. I'm bashing TNA for be clueless about what'S going on right now, They are doing exactly what Vince McMahon wanted them to do and that for IMPACT to move to monday nights before they were ready. TNA has been stuck in a holding pattern for the last 3 or 4 years now. their Rating have always been between 0.9 and 1.2 ever since they started to air IMPACT for 2 hour on spike. They have no momemtum going for them and are challenging the WWE during the biggest time of year for the WWE. They are either ballsy or Bischoff and Hogan have been paid by McMahon to kill TNA either way i don'T see them succeeding and by the end of the year, TNA will be back on Thursday and Hogan and Bischoff will be back doing what they were doing before joining TNA.

 

[medz]

main eventers: well easily tna you have sting aj styles rvd, hardy kurt angle, the best wrestler ever, the pope,and samoa joe. that is superb.


now to wwe.............

well there is obvioulsy undertaker, cena, edge, triple h and now sheamus, and randy orton, the others are part time main eventers, and batista is leaving(thank god), off the wrestlers just mentioned only undertaker orton, and unfortunatley cena, can stack up to the tna guys.


mid card : wwe does win this here, they have r truth, john morrison, drew mcintire, cm punk, mvp, rey mysterio, christian, kofi kingston, and the miz.



now to tna.............

there strongest candidates here are homicide(if used well), desmond wolfe, mr anderson, abyss, and matt morgan, so wwe wins this



woman: tna: this would, have been a landslide for tna 7 or 8 months ago, however since then the quality has gone down dramatically, no more kong, no more tara, sarita, is being used poorly, where is hamada.


now to wwe............

this division has been disgraceful since 2007, the matches on raw are absouloutly depressing, extremely fake looking, and just could fill up a whole botchamania by themselves, the wwe hire models, not athletes.

however having said that, and despite knockouts dramatic decline, tna wins this one,just about.


tag team: wwe, i will keep this brief....................THERE IS NO FUCKING TAG TEAM DIVISION!!!


now to tna...............


this wins easily, mcmg, are the best tag team in america, and have a good supportiong cast in team 3d beer money, the band and generation me, tna wins again.




television: well wwe are gonna win this one, there television network is more known than tna's, wwe is a worldwide known company, tna are just above indy level in terms of worldwide, exposure.



i would also like to add in 1 special on myself

match quality: just like the same answer, as the knockouts(a lthough to a lesser extent), the match quality has noticeably gone down, the matches are at times playing second fiddle to some stupid angle/storylines at times, the matches were also more fast paced and realistic looking, however it is still a million times better tha n the pg slow paced wwe raw wrestling matches, smackdown matches are good even on level with tna..................

however....................

due to raw's awful matches sucking i will just about give this to tna.


so there you have it tna is better than raw in my opinion, but only just in all categories.