TNA Impact - January 29, 2009

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

No the best part is that he avoids commenting in the WWE folder when WWE does something stupid. I look through that abomination of a Raw thread and...nope... Nonsensical Hardy turn? Comments? Nope.

 

He's a troll. He's always been a troll. Just ignore him like everyone else has learned to.

 

This is, after all, the guy who said Mike Adamle did a fine job after his first time commentating ECW.

 

Since this is where my page begins, I thought this was actually about me.

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

It's not like the WWE or other indy promotions don't do the same angle.

 

 

Scroby, TNA isn't supposed to be like WWE, and was doing a great job back in 2004-2005, but this past year or so has been brutal. It seriously is WWE lite and it has no reason to be, and that's where my frustration comes in. I don't care if any other promotion does it, it sucks no matter who does it. I can deal with WWE since I'm loyal and I probably will never stop watching, but with the potential of TNA continuing to be flushed down the drain, it gets frustrating. With a well-booked year or two, TNA could actually truly be some competition to WWE, but they are nowhere close right now.

That's the most retarded thing I've ever heard. It's ok for the WWE to do it because you're more loyal to them? You're kidding right?

 

If you break it down the points he makes are correct. TNA becoming WWE-Lite (and then making everything worse by making it Crash TV that makes no sense) is exactly what made them go from winning "Promotion" and "Show" Of The Year Awards to the internet's most hated show.

[Chazz 0]

What types of steps can TNA take to avoid being "WWE-Lite"? And just to be fair, what can The WWE do to change up the way they have presented their programs since The Monday Night War Era?(Another complaint that I frequently hear.) Since The Monday Night Wars/Boom Era Period, everything anymore just comes across as "been there, done that" for both promotions. There doesn't appear to be any quick fix soloutions/easy answers, or I'm sure one or both companies would've tried something different by now. Then again...

[luke-o 0]

Man, if the F4O review of the show is anything to go by, then wow what an awful show. But they hate every show.

 

If I'm going to take one postive, it's that Samoa Joe's new "look" is not entirely like Umagas. Thank God.

[Silence 0]

If I'm going to take one postive, it's that Samoa Joe's new "look" is not entirely like Umagas. Thank God.

 

Too bad TNA might fuck this up too, even though it seems like Joe's going back to being a badass.

 

[The Truthiness 0]

 

http://www.stormwrestling.com/012909.html

 

Okay now onto to TNA Impact, which I think may have been the worst wrestling show I’ve ever seen, despite actually having a fair bit of wrestling on it. The only reason I thought RAW was more counter productive than this show was that RAW was actually great and had heat starting out. TNA is TNA and if stupidity made you tune out you’d have stopped watching a long time ago.

 

The only entertainment Impact provided me this week was hysterical laughter during Scott Steiner’s ring introductions. When he introduced the Kong-tourage as Kong-Fucious (I think that’s what he said) I almost fell off my couch. We learned 2 things from this introduction: 1) Scott Steiner does not watch the product and doesn’t know who any of these people are, and 2) The guy who wrote out the ring introductions for him has such poor penmanship that Scott Steiner couldn’t read his handwriting. Some might think he did it on purpose but he struggled so long trying to figure out what it said that there is just no way. Not to mention the fact that Nash corrected him right away.

 

Booker T and Kevin Nash on commentary was horrible. Booker who did almost all of the talking sounded like he was trying to do his best imitation of Don West imitating a fast talking auctioneer. He talked so fast with suck a gravelly voice I had no idea what he was saying. Both guys came off like they couldn’t give two shits about this show, so why should anybody else? The only reason I didn’t turn this show off was because I wanted to be able to write a rant about it once I’d seen it all.

 

The whole first hour on the show was a direct rip off of the angle WCW did when the NWO took over Nitro, which ironically enough holds the prestigious place in history as (I believe) the most unsuccessful wrestling show there ever was. That episode of Nitro made more people turn off the show than any other episode in history. If as many people tuned out during this week’s Impact as tuned out the first time this angle was done, TNA will actually end up with a negative number of viewers.

 

To make matters worse, once Foley showed up and took back the show things got dumber, although in a more subtle way. This show, for the um-teenth time in a row, COMPLETELY buried the Baby Faces. When the MEM was in charge of the show and booked matches in their favour, they completely dominated and squashed their opponents. ODB got Killed, Petey got killed, and the Refs got killed. Then when the tables were turned and all the matches gave the baby faces the HUGE advantage, the matches were competitive even contests. Even with the deck stacked in their favour these Baby Faces cant’ win.

 

Sting fought both Dudley’s and held his own and I think wend to a no contest. Abyss fought Scott Steiner in a match where he could use weapons and Scotty couldn’t yet it was an even battle and Abyss could not pin Steiner despite hitting him with several weapons. Then the real kicker, Kurt Angle faced both members of LAX (one of whom had just been awarded a World Title Shot) and BEAT THEM CLEAN. The baby faces in this company are the most useless tools in wrestling history.

 

A couple other nit picky points; showing footage from the UK trip was brilliant, the crowds looked awesome, but why did they have to show Jeff Jarrett and Samoa Joe? Both guys are “out” in story line, yet they were shown wrestling this past week. If they are healthy WHY AREN’T THEY ON THIS SHOW? The whole premise of this show was that the Mafia could take over because Foley wasn’t there and Jeff was still home healing from his beat down. If Jarrett is working live events why isn’t he doing his job running Impact?

 

Last but not least. When Cornette made the SURPRISE announcement that Booker T would face Shane Sewell at the PPV, Don West immediately piped in that Shane Sewell was fine with this and felt that he owed it to the rest of the referees to stand up for them. WHERE THE F--- DID HE GET THIS INFORMATION? He had no prior knowledge of this announcement, yet he already has knowledge about how one of the guys in the match feels about. Did referrer Shane Sewell telepathically alert Don West of his feelings?

 

 

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Man, if the F4O review of the show is anything to go by, then wow what an awful show. But they hate every show.

Blanket statements, especially those without context (it was a correspondent who actually wrote the report), are fun, aren't they?

 

And that show was indefensible, so it's not a reach to rip into it.

[CubbyBr 0]

Booker T and Kevin Nash on commentary was horrible. Booker who did almost all of the talking sounded like he was trying to do his best imitation of Don West imitating a fast talking auctioneer. He talked so fast with suck a gravelly voice I had no idea what he was saying. Both guys came off like they couldn’t give two shits about this show, so why should anybody else? The only reason I didn’t turn this show off was because I wanted to be able to write a rant about it once I’d seen it all.

 

Well gee, since Nash, Booker, and the rest of the Mafia are out to destroy TNA (within the storyline), wouldn't it make sense for them to be obnoxious idiots on commentary and not pay attention to anyone outside their group.

[MillenniumMan831 0]

The less the MEM know about the rest of TNA, the better. I just found Booker's voice to be downright irritating. And it's more irritating knowing that he probably had a sore throat afterwards. Not to mention (even though I did earlier in the thread), he never shut up. Nash was the one that should have been doing 2/3 of the talking. He can bury people far more humorously and efficiently than Prince Booker.

[garfieldsnose 0]

Maybe Truthiness is just like Jack Swagger All American and because he's also more loyal to the WWE, the WWE gets a break.

 

No need to bring me up here. Don't do it again.

[CubbyBr 0]

Show scored a 1.2 rating. Pretty good (by TNA standards) for the "worst wrestling show ever" as it's being called in some circles.

[AlaskanHero 0]

I thought the show was extremely entertaining.

 

Never do it again, TNA.

[CubbyBr 0]

I'm watching the show for the first time right now and I'm thinking Nash pretty much needs to be doing commentary every week. Him and Steiner were fucking great.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

I liked the look on Bubba's face when Steiner introduced them being from Dunkin Donughts and the state of obesity. Then he shook his head in agreement and raised his arms. Awesome.

[garfieldsnose 0]

Donughts? Seriously?

 

If TNA can't get past a 1.4 (I think that was their best rating, but I could be mistaken), they need to make serious changes. If Kurt Angle, Christian, Sting, Nash, etc. can't help make a serious climb in the ratings, who can they get that actually will? I don't think Samoa Joe is the answer anymore. I doubt even HHH would help them.

[luke-o 0]

Man, if the F4O review of the show is anything to go by, then wow what an awful show. But they hate every show.

Blanket statements, especially those without context (it was a correspondent who actually wrote the report), are fun, aren't they?

 

And that show was indefensible, so it's not a reach to rip into it.

 

Okay, then he hates every show.

 

But from the sounds of things he had every right too.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

If TNA can't get past a 1.4 (I think that was their best rating, but I could be mistaken), they need to make serious changes. If Kurt Angle, Christian, Sting, Nash, etc. can't help make a serious climb in the ratings, who can they get that actually will? I don't think Samoa Joe is the answer anymore. I doubt even HHH would help them.

Getting past a 1.4 shouldn't be TNA's concern. Their concern should be figuring out how to get more than of their 1.6 million die-hard TV viewers to actually buy a PPV; for all the praise TNA gets for their consistent viewership, it's often overlooked than their PPV buys, which ideally should be a major revenue source, have a ceiling of around 20,000. TNA rarely get over that mark, and when they do, like with the Joe vs. Angle match at Lockdown, they completely ignore what got them that increase in buy rates and go back to a formula that has long since shown to be a failure in getting strong buys for them.

 

What types of steps can TNA take to avoid being "WWE-Lite"?

 

Not constantly making themselves look minor league would help; their always using their talents WWE accomplishments to get them over, they're always saying how this top guy top guy used to be a star in WWE or talking about what that top guy did in WWE 5-10 years ago. More than anything, though, they need to completely change their format and style; TNA are essentially WWE but in smaller venues. They do the SE-style skits, SE-style booking and SE-style matches. It's when they've done the exact opposite of that, as with Joe vs. Angle at Lockdown or the first Joe vs. Angle match, that they've been able to convert the most TV viewers into PPV buyers. Unfortunately, those in TNA's creative seem unable and unwilling to try anything other than they what they've done themselves (Russo) or seen themselves (Jarrett/Mantell) firsthand. Unless that changes, you're going to get a terrible product that admittedly has a loyal viewership, but also does nothing to make more than 20,000 diehards put down $30 every month.

[RedJed 0]

As much as I disagree with you at times, HTQ, you are spot on there with why TNA can't really expand their pay per view audience, and in a second tier level of importance, their general audience for Impact. They are unwilling to truly become that "alternative" properly. They have seen the fruits of success at times when they have truly distanced themselves from the competition, but its far from consistent. And thats the problem....that consistency they need to have to really stand out as unique.

[CubbyBr 0]

Here are the quarter hour breakdowns for Impact:

1.19

1.2

1.27

1.22

1.17

1.17

1.07

1.04

 

I seriously think the first hour success was due to Nash and Booker commentating. It's not like the content they were presenting was anything good but the commentary made it pretty entertaining. It's pretty telling how the ratings dropped the minute TNA took back control of the show and stuck Tenay/West back out on commentary.

 

 

[LuckyLopez 0]

I doubt there's much they can really take from those besides an idea everyone knows already. Shock/"Crash" TV draws eyes. If you do something crazy and unexpected people will stop and watch to see where its going next. And when Impact switched back into normal gear then the need to keep watching in case you miss something disappeared.

 

I mean, I'd like them to see those breakdowns as evidence for why Nash needs to be added to the commentary team too. But I'm not sure they really mean anything.

[King Cucaracha 0]

The only reason I didn’t turn this show off was because I wanted to be able to write a rant about it once I’d seen it all.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

The Internet.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

The only reason I didn’t turn this show off was because I wanted to be able to write a rant about it once I’d seen it all.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

The Internet.

I like how you explained why you didn't like what Storm had to say.

[MillenniumMan831 0]

I thought he was implying that virtually everyone sat through Impact so they could rant about it.

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

To go with the whole "TNA putting over WWE accomplishments / coming off as low rent" deal, there's one very important thing that TNA needs to remember about the wrestling business: It's a lie. A scam. A work. Yeah, if you get too stupid people will call you out on bullshit, but the cardinal rule is "perception is reality" (isn't that Vince's motto?).

 

If you write Team 3D to cut a promo saying winning the tag titles in Japan is the biggest accomplishment since wrestling for gold in MSG, that really makes your titles look low rent. This should have been their biggest thrill since winning the NWA/TNA tag titles (because that cemented them as the only team to ever win ECW/WCW/WWE/NWA tag titles, and now they've just added another milestone to their record).

 

Whether TNA is major league or not is not an issue - they have Angle, Foley, Steiner, etc. on their roster and they can certainly ACT like they have a major league roster.

 

I was thinking about all of this while watching the ladder match from Starrcade 2000. Mark Madden proudly declares that "two years ago" when WCW was #1, they had major stars but the cruiserweights were a key part of their prior success. Why would this even be brought up?

 

 

[Scroby 0]

If you write Team 3D to cut a promo saying winning the tag titles in Japan is the biggest accomplishment since wrestling for gold in MSG, that really makes your titles look low rent. This should have been their biggest thrill since winning the NWA/TNA tag titles (because that cemented them as the only team to ever win ECW/WCW/WWE/NWA tag titles, and now they've just added another milestone to their record).

While I understand what you mean Venk, and by all means you're correct but what happen is that Team 3D being the 2nd (or 3rd) American Team to win those is a huge deal that both sells Team 3D and TNA. TNA having one of the few tag teams to win those titles (IWGP Titles?). It's like when WCW used to talk about Scott Norton being one of the two Americans to win the IWGP title. Even though Norton wasn't really wrestling for the WCW World title, it still really helped put Norton over when the IWGP title win was mentioned.

 

Also the thing about them mentioning wrestling for tag team gold in MSG. They're from New York, wrestling in MSG is a child hood dream for most wrestlers from the New York area, it's another big personal accomplishment for the team. I mean it's not really something TNA can really use as a selling point, but yeah..that's why Team 3D mentioned it. But Venk you are right, I'm just sorta explaining why these two things were mentioned.

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

I didn't mean to say they shouldn't put over the IWGP tag titles, but I did mean that they shouldn't say it's the biggest deal since the WWE tag titles. But you understood the basic point I was making.

[King Cucaracha 0]

The only reason I didn’t turn this show off was because I wanted to be able to write a rant about it once I’d seen it all.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

The Internet.

I like how you explained why you didn't like what Storm had to say.

 

I thought he was implying that virtually everyone sat through Impact so they could rant about it.

 

That wasn't directed at Storm in particular, or Impact in particular, just the internet in general. Anyone will sit through anything if they can complain about it later.

 

It was more a general statement.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

I thought he was implying that virtually everyone sat through Impact so they could rant about it.

It's hard to make an assessment of a show without watching it. If people said they didn't watch the show and then ranted about, he'd have bitched about that, too.

 

In any event, few people would have watched that show wiithout ranting about it to some degree.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

People rant about shows all of the time without seeing them. It's called the spoiler threads.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

People rant about shows all of the time without seeing them. It's called the spoiler threads.

True, but that's before they've aired and the rantings are in the context of how things come across on paper. Once the show has aired, though, and we've had the chance to see how things come across on television, if you're going to complain about it you should at least watch it, because occasionally things come across a lot different on television than they did on paper, and if there's a disparity between the two, you'd be looking at things wrong if you've not seen the television product. Bottom line is, if you're wanting to give an accurate assessment of how you think things came across on television, you have to watch the show. Otherwise, you get the hardcore defenders dismissing what you have to say, regardless of how accurate it is. Then again, as this forum continues to show, even if you do watch something before commenting on it, those some people simply resort to telling you not to watch it if you don't like it, before sticking their fingers in their ears and ignoring the actual points made.