One and Only NWA:TNA Week ? Thread

[Corey_Lazarus 0]

Corey,

 

I can understand you being pissed off at JJ, but saying "Fuck Michael Shane" is just stupid.

Not when the circumstances for it are different than they are for "Fuck Jeff Jarrett."

 

"Fuck Jeff Jarrett" = He made the World champion look like shit for the 4 months leading up to AJ's title loss, is the man in charge backstage, and is put over as Superman every show. He is not a draw, never has been outside of Memphis when the territory was still rather popular, and is best known as "that guy that used to say 'Slapnuts' while hitting women with guitars." Why should he have gone over when AJ was THE premiere young talent since TNA's inception?

To put in WWE terms, HHH just had Kurt Angle job to him for no reason.

 

"Fuck Michael Shane" = He is the most undeserving X-Division champion in the company's short history. At least Sonny Siaki, when he DID do a move in his matches (since most of each Siaki match was stalling), made his moves look good. Shane? Aside from the Superkick, he can't make a single move look like anything more than fake. He's uncharismatic, generic in the ring, and is put over better, more deserving talent. He is NOT getting over the way a heel should, as he's not getting over at all. He only gets boo'd, "heat" if you choose to call it that, because he's stealing time away from the better talent.

 

Two similar phrases for two different reasons. JJ is not a draw and books himself as such, and Shane is awful and is the #2 champion.

 

Tell me again why TNA is better than WWE?

[Guest CubbyBear]

RoH does have less expenses, but they have better ticket sales than TNA, they do various venues and cities, as opposed to just one, and they put on a way better show with way better wrestling and far better storylines. As opposed to TNA, ROH has been adding expenses as they've made money, as opposed to cutting them to deal with losses. The Punk-Raven storyline blows anything TNA (Or WWE, for that matter) has done this year. You seem to think that RoH has no storylines or feuds and that it's just random guys wrestling. Get a clue. Speaking of Russo....

 

ROH has far less expenses which is why they can afford to run other cities.

 

The argument that they have better storylines and wrestling - all matter of opinion.

 

I didn't see Punk/Raven (mainly because I have no access to ROH unless I want to buy a $15 tape and wait for three days to get it...just like millions of other people out there) but I heard that the last match they had sucked ass.

 

Let's look at Russo's Ratings Record in 99:

3.32

3.51

3.21

3.31

3.1

3.41

3.12

3.0

2.9

3.2

2.84

3.3

3.4

(Gone)

 

The idea that you're going to give him credit for bringing the ratings up to 3.4 just because he put on 2 big shows in the end is ridiculous, the numbers were wildly varying. Either way, total money these ratings brought in: Negative a lot.

 

The numbers dropped below a 3.0 only twice in three months that he was booking. Yeah, that's just horrible after just three months of work, filled with politics, unexpected injuries to top stars and lots of other stuff.

 

You have the Meltzer syndrome where you DON'T FRIGGEN UNDERSTAND THAT YOU CAN'T TURN A COMPANY AROUND IN THREE MONTHS.

 

Let's look at buyrates:

Halloween Havoc: Russo did 1 Nitro before this show, and nothing else. Buyrate: .52

 

Mayhem: Russo's first masterpiece: .45

 

Starrcade: The biggest WCW PPV of the year, with 2 months of Russo Build: .23

 

Souled Out: .26

 

Buyrates, the things that made WCW money, went WAY DOWN under Russo. The "casual fan" that they were trying to catch might check out the show, but he sure as hell wasn't dishing out 35 bucks to see it. Hogan can be useful to the company, hell, so can Luger and Sting, but if they base the company around these guys they are heading for disaster. Look at WWA, for god's sakes.

 

Again, same thing. WCW was already on a downward spiral. HE was promised a year and given only THREE MONTHS. Three months to turn a company like WCW around is just the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. The ratings maintained in the 3's and he was building momentum at the end but what did they do...they pulled the rug out from under him. We'll never know what would have happened because WCW never gave him the year that he was promised and that's a fact.

 

And all the Russo arguing is pretty pointless considering Dutch Mantell is booking the show right now and not Russo.

 

And talking about WWA, a company that tossed those names out there without any promotion, storylines, buildup AT ALL adds TONS of credibility to your argument.

 

The lesson here about buyrates and ratings is telling as well. The "casual fan" (who lives in the 80s according to all of you) may stop when he sees Hogan on a channel and watch, but why would he be more inclined to actually pay to see Hogan? Will Hogan pimping the show on Jay Leno really do a lot for buys?

 

Yeah, people won't pay to see Hogan but they'll definitly pay to see Colt Cabana, and Low Ki, two guys they've never heard of in their life. You're really the one that needs to get a clue.

Edited October 24, 2003 by CubbyBear

[Michrome 0]

Yep, throwing out "names" that people know, even if they're lumbering old 50 year olds will help a company be succesful in the U.S. Just ask WCW. I can't wait to hear your excuses when TNA is in the shitcan months from now if they head down this direction.

 

Some people learn from the mistakes that drove companies into the ground. Others, like yourself, will continually try failed policies, because hey, they're bound to work someday.

[Guest CubbyBear]

Yep, throwing out "names" that people know, even if they're lumbering old 50 year olds will help a company be succesful in the U.S. Just ask WCW. I can't wait to hear your excuses when TNA is in the shitcan months from now if they head down this direction.

 

 

I proved this point to you over and over and you just refuse to see that it does indeed make sense. And if TNA is in the shitcan they'll still be ahead of where ROH will ever be.

 

 

Some people learn from the mistakes that drove companies into the ground. Others, like yourself, will continually try failed policies, because hey, they're bound to work someday.

 

And then there's people like you, who looks at something logical and then wants to do the exact opposite.