LuckyLopez

While Hogan's part was no more than that once video the ultimate payoff was Sting in what I THINK was his debut with the company. So as much as the Hogan thing was an abortion it actually did turn into something that mattered. My guess is you get Hart and is calvacade of old friends of Hogan (Jim Duggan and Rick Steiner to my memory) ultimately ending with Sting, and I assume the "big" match there. Sting/AJ vs JJ/Luger, I think. Certainly not my choice for a show but I guess its a notable enough part of TNA's history and lets them showoff their ability to get guys like Hogan and Luger to "appear" and maybe puts AJ over a little. But from what I've noticed I don't think TNA really has a clear ulterior motivation for Epics or they wouldn't be showing so many departed wrestlers, especially WWE players. I think one of the upcoming weeks is actually "The Best of Jeff Hardy."

I think that's just it. He's really not built in the "big man" mold despite being large. He's certainly not in the "freak" or "monster" mold that the likes of Show or Khali are. And he was never booked in those ways. Rather I think he gets naturally grouped into the likes of Orton, Rhodes, Dibiase, DJ Gabriel, Rob Conway, La Resistance, and other fairly generic looking body builders with similar looks (many of which are unspectacular or poor in the ring). He's got more muscle than most of them so stands out a little, but not enough to pull him apart from that group and put him in with the "big men" and "monsters." And whether its fair or not that group and that look (the oiled up bodybuilder) is often assigned to a Vince McMahon "fetish" and the idea that he picks talents based on appearance rather than talent. So Masters sort of became the poster boy for that. If Masters changed his look up drastically and was booked as a monster or big man, maybe he'd work different. But he's just the narcissist cocky young douchebag bodybuilder that a lot of OVW/FCW graduates were/are. The mold that makes guys like Kennedy, Swagger, Carlito, or whoever stand out a little because they're not quite that.

He got put into the King of the Mountain match after his Storm feud and it was a hard enough push and the match was in enough doubt that a lot of people thought there was a real chance he'd get the title. And he was booked well in the match. Then coming out of the match he feuded with Christian and was definitely in the main event mix. Then he got sidetracked when he went into a feud with Dustin Rhodes/Black Reign, which probably wasn't intended to be a demotion but was cruddy enough to amount to it. That's when he started to pack on the pounds and seem to get lazy in the ring, and most fans seemed to figure he was unhappy that his main event push had ended up with him wrestling "Rat On a Pole" matches with the poor man's Goldust. When it was over he had lost a lot of stock thanks to the feud and his physical condition and TNA ended up sticking him on the sidelines. For the last few weeks he would get TV time to complain about his lack of TV time and push in some kind of quasi-shoot thing that resulted in TNA granting him his release. His stock had definitely dropped from his flirtation with the main event to his release but certainly not close to the Walker levels. At that time most figured "He was getting lazy thanks to TNA's bad treatment so he'll get back in shape with WWE."

That's "Sirelda", aka Jamie D. After Gail Kim proved a constant advantage for AMW in that feud AJ and Daniels brought her in to neutralize Kim. She disappeared from TNA right after that feud ended. The Dudleyz vs Rick Steiner/Animal match was SUPPOSED to be Dudleyz vs The Steiners in one of those "first time matchup between legendary teams" things. But a week or so before the match Scott suffered that near fatal throat injury in Puerto Rico so they just threw Animal in last minute. It was a nothing match that wasn't even supposed to happen but from the looks of that Slammiversary card there really wasn't much to speak of beyond KotM. That card features entries from the never ending EY vs Roode feud, the comedy Bob Backlund vs Alex Shelley feud (which at least was where the Guns more or less formed in TNA), the uncomfortable VKM vs Christy Hemme feud that had VKM as the faces for saying a woman's place was on her knees, and a Frank Wycheck match. EDIT: And yes, Harris was tremendous back then. AMW would have great feuds with AJ/Daniels and LAX, break up, and then Harris and Storm would have an absolutely GREAT Texas Death Match just about 2 years ago that many called a MOTY contender and another really brutal and fun match in the KotM qualifiers. Which remains the hugely shocking part of how much he dropped in a year from June '07 to Braden Walker in July '08.

I'm not sure I want to see either step in the ring considering their age and what kind of shape they were in last time I saw them. But either could be a valuable part of a company as an announcer, manager, or booker. And I'm guessing this could just be a 1 or 2 time use for an angle like Balls and Spike were used awhile back. I don't know, but TNA's never been shy about using "big" guys in 1 or 2 appearances so I'm not going to assume they're in for the long haul until we know. Also, TNA named all 3 people on their website in the Impact preview so spoilers might not be necessary.

I thought last week was a real dud and a complete waste of time to watch. This week was a substantial improvement but not a great show or anything. The two things I'll remember from it are Love's awesome promo and the Morgan/Angle match. To that end while I agree with you that you can't expect too much new story development on the "go home" show I was surprised by how those singles matches went as I thought they did a good job with the losers. The matches were clearly intended to help get over the Sacrifice main event but at the same time they managed to use them to advance the story of EY's frustration, make Morgan look great and advance his desire to join the Mafia, and push the Joe/AJ thing into physicality. It was just very effective use of 3 matches where the winner was inevitable.

Yeah, Jarrett vs Raven was the big match TNA built to that they screwed up bad and it soured a LOT of people on TNA. Raven had Sandman, New Jack, Saturn, and Justin Credible helping him and beating down Jarrett and he still won. Mind you, I think it gets overblown a LITTLE because in reality the ECW guys left, Raven was forced to uncuff Jarrett in order to pin him, and then Sabu attacked Raven allowing Jarrett to hit the stroke and win. At least I think that's how it happened. Don't get me wrong, it WAS bad booking and Jarrett DID end up looking like Superman but there was actually a portion of the match after the cuffs and 4 guys that made the pin KIND of make sense. But not booking wise, because really... that was a horrible screw up. I'm a long time TNA fan and I'll defend them plenty but they've never known when to pull the trigger on a big win, turn, moment, or whatever. Their timing has always sucked.

Hey lost in Mexico to Rey and then soon after lost it in WCW to Billy Kidman. He didn't have it when he was in WWE with the Mexicools either. Someone else wears the mask now. EDIT: I really didn't mean to triple post. My apologies.

Steamboat was one of the early authority figures in TNA. I think he made a couple of early appearances to promote the X Division and hype AJ Styles as a future star and then they brought him back to get control of the company when Jarrett and others were running roughshod. The big thing I remember him doing was that when Ron Killings first became the Truth and spent weeks complaining about the racism in wrestling he confronted Steamboat about it saying that he more than anyone should know what a glass ceiling there was for guys like them. And Steamboat actually conceded that Killings had some points and then basically said "You want an opportunity? All you have to do is ask." He booked a world title match the next week and Killings upset Shamrock to become the World Champ. The promo between the two was awesome and Killings basically became a star in TNA over the course of those two weeks.

I think TNA was probably trying to put its best foot forward. I think TNA's always been proud of 3 things. (1) The X Division, (2) The early years Tag division, and (3) the faces that have come through. The first two really are TNA's biggest success stories and the "six sides of steel" is another one they're very proud of. So I'm not surprised we got a pair of tag matches that SHOULD have been a bigger deal if they had presented them properly. As for the singles match, I can understand why they didn't do Jarrett/Sting (since it isn't much to talk about) or Joe/Angle (since while I loved it it was oddly paced and a lot of people didn't care for it) but Christian/Rhino was a very strange choice given how little that has to do with the product. My guess is TNA figures that if you're watching Epics you're already aware of Impact and watching or not watching. A decent Jarrett/Sting match or good Joe/Angle match won't win you over and if you gave Epics a chance one assumes you gave Impact a chance. But I don't know. Who knows? Maybe there's a "Joe vs Angle" or individual show for either guy upcoming and the match was held back for that reason? Realistically maybe they used a throw away match because it was a throw away match and didn't fit into a larger theme? After all they're going to burn through basic themes like "steel cage matches" and "X Division" pretty quick and they'll have to find some other ideas. Not at all. I understand where you're coming from. All the context was ripped out of those matches by just showing them with no background and Foley did very little to add anything to them besides "BRUTAL MATCH!" Just the sort of videos that WWE does on PPVs or that TNA does online fairly often could really make the matches mean something. Instead you have no idea that AMW and XXX have feuded for 2 years and the loser breaks up in this nor that its a rematch of one of TNA's biggest matches ever, you have no idea that AJ and Daniels recently united after a long standing feud (with Joe) and knocked off AMW and were now being attacked by the upstart LAX who would win their first titles in the company, or that Christian and Rhino had a long and bitter feud based on their real life relationship and Rhino's sense of betrayal and that this is a match Rhino wanted to finally get his revenge on Christian. None of that was presented to the audience and anyone who didn't watch them the first time or just doesn't remember all the details is left with no story to the match. I remember for awhile WWE Heat used to do something like this where every week they'd show some big match like TLC I or Foley/Taker HIAC and the participants and other people would sit around talking about the match and what led to it complete with highlights and clips. THAT's what I think TNA should do with Epics even if it means cutting the show down to 2 matches a week. Taking 20 minutes to not just show a big match but to tell the story of the match might be more entertaining.

Yeah, but you seemed to dislike the matches themselves which surprised me. You called the AMW/XXX match "average" and called the fans delusional when that was widely considered at the time a great match and one of the matches that made TNA worthwhile. Of course a great part of that had to do with this being the blowoff to a nearly 2 YEAR feud filled with great matches, that this was the rematch to the first TNA cage match which was widely considered a MOTY contender, and that the stipulation on this match (which went unmentioned on the show as best as I can remember) was that the losers would have to break up. And you seemed to suggest that the LAX match was "brutal" in a bad way. Which again, strikes me as odd because I loved that match and it was right in the middle of the period when LAX were one of the hottest things in wrestling and AJ/Daniels were having tremendous match after tremendous match. Again, perhaps its a match that loses something without context because LAX were just red hot at the time and I remember some people actually suggesting they might be TNA's "nWo" if played right. And along with AJ/Daniels and AMW they were in the middle of what more or less amounts to TNA's last great run for the tag division before a LONG run of mediocrity. I just watched. The format/layout of the show could definitely use work. It felt very thrown together and not up to par with TNA's usual production. It really felt like they took 3 matches, a quick Foley stand up, and some voiceovers and threw it all together. I can't help but wonder if they're being lazy considering the show's only airing in the UK. I would think they'd clean it up if it was airing on Spike in the US. Just to address one of your questions/complaints, the key in the opening match didn't appear out of nowhere. Daniels was carrying with him and when Storm laid him out he dropped it in the center of the ring. While I can't necessarily blame you for tuning West and Tenay out but they were actually making mention of it prior to him losing the key. I think they may have cut out a chunk of that match during the commercial but I'm not sure. The Christian/Rhino match had some kind of weird stipulation for the weapons that I can't recall. I think they had wrestled in a pole match on an earlier Impact to win the right to specific weapons which the refs would then give them. It was weird. Again, missing context. Along with that the match was kind of in a weird place because Christian was undefeated in TNA at the time and hyping it pretty heavily, but at the same time this was more or less the blowoff to a long feud and Rhino kind of had to win it. That's why they booked it with the gore through the cage so Rhino walked away having got his revenge on Christian but Christian was able to continue boasting that he was undefeated. I thought the show was ok but nothing special. I liked the first too matches a lot but if you didn't I can see where the show would be a big disappointment. Like I said, the whole thing felt very thrown together to me and that's not good but I watched a few good matches from TNA's past that I enjoyed so it worked well enough for me. The one thing I think they could really stand to add would be a quick setup for the matches to give them context. Maybe some highlights or quick interviews from the wrestlers (or the ones still in TNA) or just Tenay and West. Just something to give the matches context because those were 3 matches that were all significant parts of very brutal feuds and yet they were more or less presented as just matches. And the XXX/AMW match had the huge stipulation of them breaking up that I don't think even got mentioned.

Wait, so did you not like the matches or was it the format and extras that you hated? Because I LOVE those first two matches. The LAX vs AJ/Daniels feud was one of my favorite in recent memory. Christian/Rhino was from some special Impact. Either their first primetime show or their first live show. Whichever it was I remember it being a solid show but they tried to cram a LOT into it and nothing ever really clicked as a result. The cage match was entertaining if memory serves me correctly but nothing to be upset you didn't see in full. There are definitely plenty of better cage matches in TNA's history to choose from and the theory that they were showcasing Christian doesn't seem unreasonable.

The point is that you're balancing the number of fans who really will get a kick out of this "angle" vs the fans you piss off by taking a show away from them to spite someone... or the fans who find this moronic and have no interest in watching 2 hours of shots at the Nuggets. Not to mention that WWE and Vince will probably manage to complete reverse the opinion of the mainstream in days. As you said, they got a ton of publicity and the really unique part of that was that for once the mainstream was on their side and was treating them with respect. But with all of this stuff if ESPN isn't once again rolling its eyes at WWE by Monday night and the rest of the media hasn't once again dismissed WWE as the useless sideshow it is then I'll be shocked. And I know Vince goes by the "no such thing as bad publicity" mantra and if he gets a marginal one time bump in ratings he'll somehow see that as a gigantic victory for WWE. But still, seems really silly to squander some good will and annoy some fans all to take pot shots at someone who kind of screwed you in business. A situation you have to assume most wrestling fans have no idea is happening or couldn't care less about.

People read the thread curious if its interesting but find that it doesn't interest them enough to jump into conversation? You want 98 people posting "I have nothing worth adding"?

And comparing the situation to cassettes/CDs is just silly and pointless. Vinyl, 8 tracks, cassettes, CDs, MP3s... they all provide the same function. The ability to play music. The advancements in technology have made the music clearer and the methods smaller or more convenient. CDs replaced cassettes because they were a superior product that presented a better sound and objective advantages in the quality and flexibility. As far as MP3s work over CDs its because of storage issues, cost, the ability to pick and choose, and other advantages it has. What is the advantage that ebooks have over printed books? That's the real question and the reason they'll replace books if it happens. Will the cost make the difference? Printing companies will obviously not push this as opposed to the CD/cassette issue where the recording companies are the same people making money off the new format and actually charge MORE for the new format. What are the advantages that the technology will provide that will allow it to replace a form that has existed in the same form for millennia? Add in that while cassettes may be pretty uncommon these days that's because of the flaw of the particular format. Vinyls remain popular enough amongst many music fans. The format appeals to many fans for various reasons. I find it hard to imagine that the same thing won't happen for generations after the time when/if ebooks become the norm. There will still be a significant number of collectors and great fans of literature who are wiling to spend time and money to build impressive libraries of classics, first editions, and examples of a once popular form that is fading away. It seems more than a little disingenuous of you to insult and scold a poster for not offering a detailed response when you yourself failed to offer anything resembling a sophisticated or well thought out argument for it in the first case. "Elitism" and other such phrases are getting tossed around a lot in this thread yet calling a poster "elitist" for offering a 1 line rebuttal to your 1 line comment (neither with any explanation or reasoning) seems about as poor a use of these terms as I've seen. If anything YOU come off as the poster who believes his opinion needs no explanation and that his fellow posters should make more effort than you.

I just wanted to say that. I'm registered on the board and have been active. I am in no way, shape, or form one of the "cool kids" on this board nor have I ever been. I have been on this board for years and probably barely been noticed. I haven't made friends and I haven't become part of the community. I'm sure some people liked me and some people disliked me because that's basic human nature. I both had someone suggest I'd make a nice member there and had someone nominate me in the "worst poster" tournament. But in the end I doubt many if any of the "Maff Clique" would really even know who I was, but I'm pretty confident none of them saw me as a member of the "elite." That's not elitism on display. One of the very issues had over here was that the admin changed PMs because he deemed posters as "spamming" the board. They weren't picking and choosing the best of the lot, they were inviting anyone they deemed possibly worthwhile. They selectively passed on a few for some reasons. Is that rude? "Wrong"? Distasteful? You're free to call it what you will but at its heart its a practice most every group or messageboard does to some extent or another. Banning a poster because you deem what he brings to the board to be a negative. The problems simply arise where people feel differently about who and what constitutes a worthwhile negative. But that's not elitism, its selectivity. And its actually a pretty common practice in almost any group situation. Somewhere there is some line in which you say "He is not welcome because he'd make us uncomfortable or make things worse." And I'm willing to bet that some of the initial rejections (most likely made by 1 or 2 posters) done in the opening day or two of that board wouldn't hold up now. That board was just taking shape and was probably not seen by many to have the potential to get as big as it has in so little time or to affect this board as it has. I know there's at least 1 poster I saw rejected in the opening days who ended up joining since. In a lot of ways its a big game of gossip. Person A mentions Person X, Person B says he dislikes Person X and doesn't want him there, Person A doesn't object because he has no reason to. Person Y tells Person X that he's been rejected, Person X opts to not register, Person A would have pursued the issue and possibly overruled Person B if he had. Not to say that WILL happen with anyone in particular as I'm sure there remains any number of people not wanted. Were I pulling together a board there'd certainly be some people I deemed undesirable or who bring more harm or risk than good. But my guess is that the initial drama of those opening days and the issues had with Leena and Mike ended up leaving some messages and ideas out there that have faded in the weeks since. And that many of the continued hard feelings seen could be smoothed over with a civil conversation, if that was what anyone wanted. But that also doesn't mean you would be reconsidered. Because lets face facts. I think I'm a nice guy who is fairly intelligent and who presents reasonable opinions. But someone doesn't like me and there's at least one messageboard out there where I would not be welcome. Be it because of who I am, because of bad impressions, because of guilt by association, or any number of other things. That is life. EDIT: Just cleared up some weird wording. Just my 2 cents as a guy who has kind of observed this a bit from the outside. And honestly, as I find myself visiting this board less I think it has less to do with the inactivity of the board and more to do with how much of the activity is a lot of name calling and complaining about a board, some of which just seem irrational such as the idea that board is made up of a "clique" of "cool kids" that number in the hundreds.

You seem to be confusing what TNA implied with what you inferred. There really is nothing resembling a clear implication of a competitor in that headline "a former world champion coming to make an impact." Its not terribly unreasonable for you to infer from it that a wrestler is coming but since a wrestling company has many roles outside the ring in which someone could "make an impact" there's really no reason for you to hold TNA accountable for your assumption. And really, that's all it was. You claim that a vague tease is intended to imply a wrestler. That's not inherently true. A vague tease is used to leave open many possibilities. If they push you towards "wrestler" in some way when there's no real plan of that then there's certainly a bit of dishonesty and manipulation at play. You clearly feel that "world champion" is a significant push towards "wrestler." I and everyone else who has responded to you disagrees. But whether you're right or wrong you're really just making assumptions about TNA's intentions based on your own inference of their vague tease. Its a pretty flimsy approach from the get go. You're also extending that to make another assumption that I haven't seen supported or even suggested anywhere besides one of your posts. That TNA actually recognized the implication in their headline and thus changed plans to use Lashley in order to make good. Which seems like a pretty unfounded and questionable theory when (a) one assumes Lashley would have taken more than a phone call to get in, (b) TNA teased 2 world champions thus accounting for Lashley and the rumored Taz, © Taz's true reason for being behind a curtain is presumed to be a no-compete clause that doesn't allow him to appear on TNA TV yet, and (d) TNA's pulled MUCH bigger bait and switches in recent memory including billing Al Snow as a former "world champion" so it would actually be quite out of character for them to agree with you on this matter.

I don't know how I feel about Foley as champ, but I can see him putting over a Joe or AJ as absolutely well as he possibly could physically. And the two of them can work a lot better than Sting and Joe's pulled damn good matches out of Steiner so it could work. And intriguing option someone said to me was Hernandez. Foley gave him back his title shot after the Mafia screwed up, Hernandez stepping up and challenging Foley to give him a fair shot could work. Meanwhile Foley could play it a little heelish as owner and act as if he doesn't HAVE to give him the shot since he's the one who gave him t hat contract in the first place. I don't know. It seems like a logical way to put the belt on Hernandez if TNA wanted to but I'm not sure Foley is the first solo wrestler of note you want Hernandez beating. Of course I'm more than prepared for Angle to try and take the title back for the Mafia or Jarrett to try and get the belt from Foley to protect his company. Neither of which is a match that needs that title or should have it involved. Part of me is thinking one of those happens (or Sting) at Sacrifice and the title ends up vacant just in time for King of the Mountain.

I think there's probably something to be said for TNA being serious time off, especially if you come in as a non-wrestler. I mean, if Taz has signed on as an announcer that means, what? Working 2 days of tapings and getting 2 weeks off, working 2 days of tapings and getting 2 weeks off, and then working a PPV. And then you have guys like Cornette who don't even make THAT many appearances in a month. Plus its almost always the same place so even if you're not living in Orlando there's something stable about traveling for business when you go to the same place and eat at the same places and stay at the same hotel... then when you're following WWE's traveling show in a new town each week/day. But yeah, he clearly teased ROH and UFC as much as TNA so I'm not expecting anything as far as Taz/TNA. I won't be surprised if it happens Sunday but I also won't be surprised if the world champ ends up being Justin Credible.

I like the basic idea of West as the heel announcer but I think he's forcing it really hard right now. There's no logic or natural character to it. He doesn't reason out WHY the heel is right like JBL did or just expose himself as a total weasel like Heenan did. He's just rooting for the heel because that's what he's supposed to do. And it kind of works when its the Mafia stuff because Angle, Sting, and Co have already spun the notions he needs and there's enough gray there for West's siding to sound unreasonable in a reasonable sort of way. But now he's applying it across the board and its just feeling forced like he needs to rant for every angle. Some stuff like the Beautiful People he didn't even seem to have an idea why he was supporting them. It was just his side of the fight. Its very similar to the way he was when he first showed up in TNA and its possible he'll get more comfortable and improve as he did then. But its also possible he never gets "good" just as he never did as a face announcer.

Taz would be the first to come to mind, but remember that TNA keeps its definition of "World Champion" pretty wide so they could well be talking about a former "World Tag Team Champion" and the list could be a lot of guys.

It fits with the promos he's given at Destination X and the following Impact, that the Frontline had failed and were being pushed around by the Mafia. Honestly, its exactly what we've all been saying for 6 months, isn't it? That the Frontline, Joe and AJ included, have looked bad and failed to hold their own against the Mafia. That's TNA's screwup so, I don't know. I prefer that they're acknowledging it. Its kind of weird and meta but it feels more organic. I mean, AJ doesn't look bad for saying he has failed. He looks bad because we agree. If the guy had looked awesome and been the star of the last 6 months then we'd just think him self deprecating or something. Instead he's introspective, and really that doesn't make him look worse. We were already thinking the things he said so him not pretending otherwise seems reasonable. Of course he could have said nothing. He could just accept the captaincy and continue out without addressing the last 6 months or why the Mafia/Frontline war got as deep as its gotten. But I don't know, like I said I kind of appreciate that AJ seems to be acknowledging the last 6 months. I didn't remotely get the "mistress" vibe from Steiner talking about Jarrett's wife, although certainly friends and I were joking about it while it was happening. That's Steiner's character so of course you basically expect him to say something like that. Instead it seemed like a sincere and serious Scott Steiner promo instead of a Poppa Pump one. Which I agree, was weird and probably a mistake. When it was over I actually had to ask what the point was and then Angle went and basically recut the promo to fill me in. I get the idea, it seemed fine. But Steiner's so entrenched in his character that stepping outside of it just feels weird, and he's not exactly an on point sort of promo guy. I enjoyed the episode well enough but nothing to write home about. Rayne vs Taylor is weird. I think that's the 3rd time I've seen it and there's something about their chemistry. Its like they're half a step off from having a really good match or something. Everytime I watch them go at it I start to get a little excited for a good match but it just never gets out of that opening stage. I guess they seem poised for a PPV match so maybe if they go 1-on-1 they'll have the chance to either get the flow or show they don't have it. I was surprised to see that Evil Foreigner stable including No Limit (who I must have missed news of being more than NJPW loans) and their win, and I was pleased to see Daffney. A solid episode in (IMO) a run of solid episodes means a solid build for Lockdown. But not a lot more.

Money's money. It just doesn't make a lot of sense to give up even a little unless you think you're getting something out of it. I totally get what you and Francessa are saying and it would be a cool little thing as a fan. But if there's no real gain in it for the businessmen than there's no real reason to deal with the headaches, be they financial or scheduling. Its a cool idea, its just that you probably need a little more than that to move the pros to do the bit of extra work or sacrifice it takes. I'm not saying its impossible or terribly damaging or anything. Just that "some fans might enjoy it" is kinda "meh" motivation for them. But then again they went and scheduled a cool Mets in Wrigley, Yanks in US Cellular doubleheader a year ago that drew me and a bunch of fellow Yankees and Mets fans to Chicago. So obviously it not beyond baseball. To be honest it was probably just an instinctive reaction I had because so many baseball fans seem to enjoy ripping MLB apart for every little thing they do or don't do. And you didn't do that, you merely presented a simple idea you thought would have been good. I probably just had a knee jerk reaction. My bad.

Its a reasonable nice story but its a bad business move. Any Yankee/Met game is an automatic sellout. Opening Day is an automatic sellout. Make Opening Day a Yankee/Met game and you lose a sellout. Plus the way you have it put with April 6th in the Bronx and the 7th in Queens... again, a cool little baseball thing, but that takes away the Opening Day homestands for the two clubs (or at least one of them) that usually draws money. I mean, the Yanks can return to the Bronx on the 8th and both teams can do homestands but you lose that immediate "I want to go to Opening Day but I can't... I'll go the next day" impact. Its all a lot of little things you can say are less important than a cool baseball story. Pain in the ass scheduling. Really screwy schedule for the Yanks and Mets to start the season. The off chance that rain means TWO Opening Day rainouts and pissed off fans. A few thousand less tickets purchased. The hassles it makes for the scheduling down the line when interleague play starts. It can probably all be worked around but ultimately the business men probably have no desire to. Its just the fans who really don't care about the business who like to see stuff like that and don't care about the pains. But its probably just not worth it.

I really thought there were only a handful of guys who looked arguably bad taking a loss. 2 of them were No Limit who don't really matter for TNA. Homicide and Morgan were the unfortunate ones but I don't think they necessarily looked "bad." Just early eliminations who you can't point to them being in a war or lasting a long time. Eric Young and Hernandez got the double team from Steiner and Angle for quick eliminations but I didn't TOTALLY mind it with Hernandez. He threw the two of them around for 90 seconds before Angle caught him. My bigger issue there is the general idea that an Angle Slam is good enough to keep down a fresh man after no other offense. But I guess its perception. I was watching with someone who freaked out when Booker pinned AJ after one move but I and others couldn't understand how he was reacting that way. AJ had been in the match for 40 minutes. He had been through hell before Booker got in the ring. Booker merely took advantage and got the pin. It was 1 move for Booker but 40 minutes of wrestling for AJ. But he still couldn't get past "one move" and maybe he's not alone in that mind set. Personally it doesn't strike me as a knock that guys like AJ, Rhino, and Angle got pinned after extended matches. Or that Angle managed to clean house on Lethal Consequences and the Guns after they had taken it to each other. I don't know. Its wrestling, you lose matches and this was a match where 19 out of 20 people were going to get pinned. No great shame in it. But I guess I can understand that some people just see a loss as a loss since there's certainly the "_____ is jobbing" reaction that occurs all over the web for any company when a favorite takes a couple of losses without clear purpose. I didn't love the way the Gauntlet ended. I didn't hate it but its not like I was into Jarrett as the big hero to do what Hernandez couldn't. And the weird way they did the Jarrett/Joe thing just screwed up pacing. Jarrett coming out at 20, West screaming like an idiot about how it was unfair for him to get a 2nd chance even though he never entered the match in the first place, and then Joe coming out well after his clock while West continued to yell nonsense and Tenay actually had to say "He's only 21 if you count Jarrett twice." It was just kind of a mess. And between the underwhelming nature of Jarrett as the hero and the underwhelming image of Joe at the moment I couldn't help but realize that I would have been more excited with quite a few guys winning that match including the 19th entrant.