Guest TDinDC1112 Posted November 6, 2003 Report Posted November 6, 2003 This is why Luger is good for TNA (and the ONLY reason why!): Everyone agrees they need TV. In order to get a TV slot, the various stations/companies ask them, "who is on your show?" This is why it is vital to get Hogan in there. If TNA can answer, "Hogan, Sting, Luger, etc.," then they have a MUCH better chance of getting someone to give them a TV slot then if they say "Styles, Danies, Sabin." No one in TV land WHO MAKES THE IMPORTANT DECISION knows those guys. As Meltzer has often written, the people who control the industry often don't know anything about or have anything to do with wrestling (TV execs who canceled WCW). WWE could be very profitable, and if the head of Viacom decides they hate wrestling, then WWE goes bye-bye. It's the same thing on Radio when radio shows try to sell advertising - the advertisers ask them, who has been on your show? It's all about name value. You use Hogan, Sting, Luger to get the TV shot, and then you let your other guys (Styles, Sabin, Daniels) become the stars.
Guest Salacious Crumb Posted November 6, 2003 Report Posted November 6, 2003 I can live with Luger, doing a tag match. One appearance, where he'll see limited action most likely, doesn't offend me.
The Ghost of bps21 Posted November 6, 2003 Report Posted November 6, 2003 It's good for TNA because there are very few people in the industry (for good reasons or bad) who's name makes my jaw drop. Due to bad cicumstances Luger is one of those now. Let the trainwreck commence.
Guest TDinDC1112 Posted November 6, 2003 Report Posted November 6, 2003 Totally agree - one appearance is all they need to be able to drop his name.
eirejmcmahon Posted November 6, 2003 Report Posted November 6, 2003 I honestly don't think that you'd want to drop Lex's name to a television executive - last time his name surfaced in the media, he was being questioned by police in connection with the death of Liz.
Michrome Posted November 6, 2003 Report Posted November 6, 2003 I will only be happy if Styles pins him clean. This excuse for bringing in old wrestlers will fly a few times, but so far it's Hogan, Duggan, Steiner, Sting, and Luger....when the list expands, and it likely will, will this continue to the the excuse?
Guest Salacious Crumb Posted November 6, 2003 Report Posted November 6, 2003 You forgot the Legend Killer gimmick with Kid Kash. That saw Ricky Morton, Bobby Eaton and several other older guys face off with him. Though Morton wasn't that bad.
Guest Ghettoman Posted November 6, 2003 Report Posted November 6, 2003 The only way that would be good is if they had him for a long term deal, and even then he's another name stuck with the b-rate stigma. TNA's only chance is to go after a younger audience who's bored with WWE, and there not gonna do that by signing guys who those same fans were bored of before they got into the current WWE. TNA's just looking bad right now.
Steviekick Posted November 6, 2003 Report Posted November 6, 2003 I honestly don't think that you'd want to drop Lex's name to a television executive - last time his name surfaced in the media, he was being questioned by police in connection with the death of Liz. True...even though Lex has certainly had a bad year in the public eye, he does have name recognition.
Guest Salacious Crumb Posted November 6, 2003 Report Posted November 6, 2003 The only way that would be good is if they had him for a long term deal, and even then he's another name stuck with the b-rate stigma. TNA's only chance is to go after a younger audience who's bored with WWE, and there not gonna do that by signing guys who those same fans were bored of before they got into the current WWE. TNA's just looking bad right now. Actually I disagree. There are 2 million WCW fans out there that just disappeared in 01 and they're rip for the picking.
King Cucaracha Posted November 6, 2003 Report Posted November 6, 2003 The only way that would be good is if they had him for a long term deal, and even then he's another name stuck with the b-rate stigma. TNA's only chance is to go after a younger audience who's bored with WWE, and there not gonna do that by signing guys who those same fans were bored of before they got into the current WWE. TNA's just looking bad right now. Actually I disagree. There are 2 million WCW fans out there that just disappeared in 01 and they're rip for the picking. Wasn't Luger an upper mid to midcarder in WCW 01? I don't see how this can be good...his in ring work is bad, he has a bad public name...he's one of the few wrestlers around I would hate to watch a match featuring. I can put up with Batista, I can put up with Michael Shane...Luger is one of my very few hates.
OldSchoolWrestling Posted November 6, 2003 Report Posted November 6, 2003 They can pick up some viewers on name but not enough to make much of a difference. They need to stick to solid storylines, pushing those who plan to be around awhile and quit bringing in scrubs who no one cares about.
Guest Salacious Crumb Posted November 6, 2003 Report Posted November 6, 2003 The only way that would be good is if they had him for a long term deal, and even then he's another name stuck with the b-rate stigma. TNA's only chance is to go after a younger audience who's bored with WWE, and there not gonna do that by signing guys who those same fans were bored of before they got into the current WWE. TNA's just looking bad right now. Actually I disagree. There are 2 million WCW fans out there that just disappeared in 01 and they're rip for the picking. Wasn't Luger an upper mid to midcarder in WCW 01? I don't see how this can be good...his in ring work is bad, he has a bad public name...he's one of the few wrestlers around I would hate to watch a match featuring. I can put up with Batista, I can put up with Michael Shane...Luger is one of my very few hates. Well for starters, he's probably coming in for no more than a handful of appearances. He'll probably do the tag match, maybe a second appearance to job to Styles, and then appear in Gauntlet for the Golds once or twice a year as elimination fodder.
Corey_Lazarus Posted November 6, 2003 Report Posted November 6, 2003 I can understand thinking Hogan is good for TNA in the long run, because he is (as far as securing a TV deal is concerned). I can understanding thinking Sting is good for TNA in the long run, because he is (as far as securing a TV deal is concerned). But Luger? Fuck no. He hasn't been a draw in over a decade, and has also not put on a good match in just as long. I also don't think "hey, the guy that killed Miss Elizabeth is in TNA" is good publicity at all.
Guest TDinDC1112 Posted November 6, 2003 Report Posted November 6, 2003 In TV it's all about ratings. Kobe = ratings OJ = ratings I'm not saying Luger = ratings, but TV execs might think so. It doesn't matter that he sucks in the ring. It doesn't matter that he has legal problems. It doesn't matter that he's old. It doesn't matter that he never was a big draw. What matters is he is a NAME from wrestling's PAST. A name that a 50 year old TV exec might recognize and think the company is credible. If you want TNA to succeed in the long run, they HAVE TO GET TV. Bringing in Old time Big names can help with this. THEY WILL NEVER GET TV if all they can tell TV execs is they have some guys named AJ Styles, Chris Sabin, and Chris Daniels, no matter how much we love them and want to see them.
Guest TDinDC1112 Posted November 6, 2003 Report Posted November 6, 2003 I also don't think "hey, the guy that killed Miss Elizabeth is in TNA" is good publicity at all. He didn't kill her, and anyone who thinks that is ignorant. She took drugs and drank alcohol. Until he's proven guilty of murder, it's ridiculous to say that. Is he a good person - hell no! But he didn't kill her.
RedJed Posted November 6, 2003 Report Posted November 6, 2003 I can understand thinking Hogan is good for TNA in the long run, because he is (as far as securing a TV deal is concerned). I can understanding thinking Sting is good for TNA in the long run, because he is (as far as securing a TV deal is concerned). But Luger? Fuck no. He hasn't been a draw in over a decade, and has also not put on a good match in just as long. Amen to that, Luger is not a name that even an ignorant TV exec would likely recognize when you think about it. Sting and Hogan, yes......Luger, no. His name power at this point is akin to a guy like Duggan. Hell, they'd be better investing in Piper compared to Luger if we're going to do the "star power to the TV execs" deal here.
Guest Ghettoman Posted November 6, 2003 Report Posted November 6, 2003 Even if a TV exec recognizes the name, and somehow that magically leads to a TV deal, that would mean TNA started there base with talent from 10 years ago, and they can't just dump him off once they get the deal, that'd defeat the whole purpose. If TNA's gonna be an alternative to the WWE, then it needs to stop looking so desperate and realize where they are. Make AJ Styles a name, make Chris Daniels a name, thats how you really get the attention of a TV exec. Bringing in such older talent makes for a complete styles clash(no pun intended) and when no one's looking great in the process there is no benefit. But yeah, Lex Luger and Hogan are the names you want ushering in a new era in professional wrestling....
Use Your Illusion Posted November 6, 2003 Report Posted November 6, 2003 Who bailed him out? .....IT WAS ME. Seriously, I'm all for Luger being used purely for name-value and as a means to better the image of the company. As long as AJ pins him, I may even enjoy the match. UYI
Guest BrokenWings Posted November 6, 2003 Report Posted November 6, 2003 I think Luger still has name value, and could garner some interest. Whether that be positive or negative, is still yet to be seen, however. I think the match will be decent, as I don't mind the in-ring work of Jarrett and am a fan of both Sting/Styles. They should be able to hide Luger's weakness', providing they book the match correctly. And I agree with all of those who said Styles should get the pin over Luger.
Guest TDinDC1112 Posted November 7, 2003 Report Posted November 7, 2003 Make AJ Styles a name, make Chris Daniels a name, thats how you really get the attention of a TV exec. How?
tommytomlin Posted November 7, 2003 Report Posted November 7, 2003 Eh. The only reason he's in TNA is because of his history with Sting. Jarrett wanted to get back at Hart and Sting, so he brings in Luger. It's logical. Luger hasn't been truly over since 1998, but he won't be around long anyway. I say two weeks max. TNA has survived a year and a half even though they brought in guys like Moondog Spot, Lex Luger isn't going to do any harm. If anything, they'll get a little pop in buyrates from old WCW fans nostalgiac for a Sting/Luger confrontation.
Michrome Posted November 7, 2003 Report Posted November 7, 2003 Is a nostalgia buyrate boost worth alienating fans that want real nonstop action and not horseshit?
Guest One Trick Pony Posted November 7, 2003 Report Posted November 7, 2003 If this were pre-00 Luger I'd be all for it. He had intensity and could get the crowd behind anyone of his matches no matter how bad. Right now though, WWE recently badmouthed him. Luger would do more to stereotype NWA:TNA as WWE Reject land than he would at making it WWE Competition Land.
HandofFate Posted November 7, 2003 Report Posted November 7, 2003 Someone mentioned this before, but no one answered them....How do you get the young guys over? Honestly...how many people know AJ Styles or Christopher Daniels or Chris Sabin outside of people who read internet wrestling boards? I dont' think that many. You can't get guys over with just us. You have to get them into the mainstream conscience. How do you get them into the mainstream? By getting them to beat people who have been in the conscience before and look GOOD doing it. It does no good to have them go over "legends" and look terrible. As for Luger being good for TNA...I wiill reserve my judgement for when his part in the storyline is over. If he can help to make AJ Styles (I don't think that they will feed Luger to anyone else while he is in TNA) keep climbing that ladder into the mainstream conscience, then I will say that he did his job. One last thing...as many people say, though hasn't been said yet on here, any press is good press. How the Gospel of the Fallen Angel is spread to the masses to save their souls does not matter as long as our souls are being saved.
Guest Ghettoman Posted November 7, 2003 Report Posted November 7, 2003 You can't do ti with names of the past because it exposes the business. Those guys are working a faster stiffer style, when you got guys like Luger and Hogan coming in, your forcing your young guys to sell for weak offense, and no one gets over selling for weak offense. How did AJ and Daniels get as over as they are? It wasn't by beating useless names, it was by people hearing there great at what they do and acting on that interest. Putting them in the ring with guys who were over the hill in 98 isn't going to do anything but hurt the company in the long run. TNA's best shot at competiting is offering a product thats clearly different from the WWE, and in a good way. Signing names like Luger and Hogan show people that there just another struggling b-rate fed trying to make it on names of the past that peoploe barely remember.
Guest TDinDC1112 Posted November 7, 2003 Report Posted November 7, 2003 You can't do ti with names of the past because it exposes the business. Those guys are working a faster stiffer style, when you got guys like Luger and Hogan coming in, your forcing your young guys to sell for weak offense, and no one gets over selling for weak offense. How did AJ and Daniels get as over as they are? It wasn't by beating useless names, it was by people hearing there great at what they do and acting on that interest. Putting them in the ring with guys who were over the hill in 98 isn't going to do anything but hurt the company in the long run. TNA's best shot at competiting is offering a product thats clearly different from the WWE, and in a good way. Signing names like Luger and Hogan show people that there just another struggling b-rate fed trying to make it on names of the past that peoploe barely remember. When you say AJ and Daniels are over, what do you mean? Who are they over with? Being over means you draw money, and Daniels and AJ aren't draws. No indy guy is a draw. Very few WWE guys are draws. No one will ever know about them if they just keep wrestling each other and having great matches. There are about 4 million people who watched wrestling 5 years ago. They all know who Hogan and luger are. Not one of them knows who AJ and Daniels are.
eirejmcmahon Posted November 7, 2003 Report Posted November 7, 2003 Mentioning Luger in the same breath as Hogan in terms of name recognition is ridiculous.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now