|
nooneofconsequence posted:Why isn't anyone talking about TNA's new tv deal? Many of us are trying to will it out of existence.
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 01:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 05:00 |
|
|
Wait, XPlosion still exists?
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 01:57
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:Wait, XPlosion
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 02:10
|
|
|
I think its just an international show that has one original match and then a bunch of web content and recaps. I see the matches pop up sometimes on youtube.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 02:58
|
|
|
Great White Hope posted:This is your reminder that AJ Styles vs. a nobody in the middle of bumfuck nowhere managed to draw larger crowds than TNA could despite having AJ + people fans have actually heard of + a national television program that, for all we laugh at how awful it has been, averages about a million viewers a week. In my opinion, this is because TNA is irrevocably poisoned. Due to years of insanity, awfullness, and bad bad wrestling decisions, the TNA brand has such a terrible reputation that no self respecting wrestling fan wants anything to do with it. They certainly don't do themselves any favours by consistently booking themselves in arenas, stadiums, high school gyms that they cant fill. Even if, (and it's a big IF), TNA gets its poo poo together, and Dixie inexplicably starts making decent decisions, and the product becomes watchable, they are so poisoned by what they have done before, and burdened by the reputation of "lolTNA", that it will be really really hard to build themselves up to any decent level. So, as long as it is on the Carter family gravy train, (also known as the "please don't let my daughter experience the real world"), TNA will limp along pathetically watched by the same rusted on fans and no-one else, and perform in front of the 5 homeless people they couldn't scare away from the abandoned warehouse that they are booked in.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 05:43
|
|
|
I agree- at this point the brand is toxic. Even if they somehow got their poo poo together nobody would notice, especially because they've had their brief moments of seeming to have it together before only to gently caress it all up before the year was out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 05:57
|
|
|
The brand was toxic the minute they named it "TNA" and expected anyone anywhere to take it seriously
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 11:55
|
|
|
nooneofconsequence posted:Why isn't anyone talking about TNA's new tv deal? I clicked the link below and apparently the WWE released Eugene.  How long till he gets a run as TNA champ?
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 14:40
|
|
|
Even if you explain that tna stands for 'Total Non-Stop Action' to people it still sounds like a stupid name that a 6 year old came up with when he was coming up with a name for his imaginary wrestling company.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 14:49
|
|
|
ColeM posted:Even if you explain that tna stands for 'Total Non-Stop Action' to people it still sounds like a stupid name that a 6 year old came up with when he was coming up with a name for his imaginary wrestling company. That's because it's exactly what happened. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 15:39
|
|
|
Chokes McGee posted:That's because it's exactly what happened. I forget, was the story about Jarrett naming the company TNA so people would confuse it with porn (and thus buy the PPVs without realizing their mistake unti it was too late) true, or was that just some wrestling urban legends stuff?
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 17:48
|
|
|
  What am I looking at here? I assume it's about how lovely TNA's arenas and crowds are, but the first one is too dark for me to make out if there's a lot of empty seats, and the second one is zoomed in pretty close. What's specifically laughable about these two?
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 17:56
|
|
|
Jonny Angel posted:the first one is too dark for me to make out if there's a lot of empty seats It's TNA, of course there's a lot of empty seats.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 17:56
|
|
|
Jonny Angel posted:
The reason it's so dark is because they turned the lights off so you wouldn't see the empty seats.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 18:01
|
|
|
Mr. Carlisle posted:The brand was toxic the minute they named it "TNA" and expected anyone anywhere to take it seriously
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 18:58
|
|
|
And by the time they decided to try and rebrand (when they renamed the TV show Impact Wrestling and switched to the blue-and-white logos), the dumb name was so entrenched that it was futile. Of course, they half-assed the rebranding anyway, so it would fail even if it hadn't been doomed from the start.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 19:10
|
|
|
Sydney Bottocks posted:I forget, was the story about Jarrett naming the company TNA so people would confuse it with porn (and thus buy the PPVs without realizing their mistake unti it was too late) true, or was that just some wrestling urban legends stuff? Sports Entertainment Xtreme
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 19:30
|
|
|
I still think that 90% of the reason why the Knockouts were a draw was channel-flippers who happened to be going through during Knockout matches, so they saw a show called TNA that had chicks, so they stuck around, only to change the moment they realized it wasn't 2 hours of hot girls. I never checked the numbers to know if the Knockouts no longer being a draw coincided with changing the show's name to Impact Wrestling, and that's far more effort than the company deserves.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 19:37
|
|
|
Sydney Bottocks posted:I forget, was the story about Jarrett naming the company TNA so people would confuse it with porn (and thus buy the PPVs without realizing their mistake unti it was too late) true, or was that just some wrestling urban legends stuff? The TNA name was chosen because they wanted to do more risque stuff without the need to worry about TV sponsors.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 19:58
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:They even had a chance to rectify this. The brand was the NWA when they debuted, and TNA was the name of the television show. When they dropped the NWA, they essentially made a conscious choice to continue using a ridiculous name at a crossroads where they could've easily rebranded. They also hamstrung themselves by having Jarrett be ric flair 2.0 without any metric to see how well they were drawing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
coconono posted:They also hamstrung themselves by having Jarrett be ric flair 2.0 without any metric to see how well they were drawing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 06:59
|
|
|
MassRafTer posted:The TNA name was chosen because they wanted to do more risque stuff without the need to worry about TV sponsors.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 21:56
|
|
|
Perigryn posted:Didn't Russo come up with the name? I have no idea. The name was original Tuesday Night Attitude because they were REALLY committed to having that acronym. I think that was chosen before Russo came on board, but it's possible when they got the Wednesday timeslot Jeff went to Vince and said "We need something else TNA can stand for."
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 21:59
|
|
|
So when did TNA became so bad?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
Sramaker posted:So when did TNA became so bad? Become? They've certainly had bright spots on the show for most of their history, and even periods, like in around 2005-06, where the show was broadly enjoyable, but the very first show was a pretty atrocious trainwreck.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
Sramaker posted:So when did TNA became so bad? When Jeff called up his dad and said "I have an idea for a promotion based around weekly PPVs."
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 23:00
|
|
|
Sramaker posted:So when did TNA became so bad? Bad is their default state, it's more that they managed to have a few brief periods of goodness, but always, ALWAYS blew the opportunity in some form or another.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
Just follow the thread of that one guy who's going through their weekly PPV era... both ROH and TNA had homophobic-stereotype tag team match beginnings for their first cards*, but ROH's card at least ended with Bryan Danielson vs. Christopher Daniels vs. Low Ki. TNA's on the other hand... * I like to think that "lol ill pretend u said 18" was karma punching Rob Feinstein in the face for that first match.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
Chortles posted:Just follow the thread of that one guy who's going through their weekly PPV era... both ROH and TNA had homophobic-stereotype tag team match beginnings for their first cards*, but ROH's card at least ended with Bryan Danielson vs. Christopher Daniels vs. Low Ki. TNA's on the other hand... I didn't realize Awesome Kong was working with them so early.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 23:26
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:Bad is their default state, it's more that they managed to have a few brief periods of goodness, but always, ALWAYS blew the opportunity in some form or another. Yeah there were several hope spot moments through their history but then they would blow it and destroy any sort of goodwill they built up. They even had streaks with good feuds and strong action. And for a while they had what was considered one of the better woman's divisions in wrestling. But after Hogan came and they changed a lot and forced a good chunk of the roster away it just went downhill. Joseph Park Esq. was one of the best things in recent history and it just ended flatly. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2014 00:35
|
|
|
EC3 is still too good for this company but I'm glad everyone else found out how great he is and hopefully he can make some good indie money
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
or maybe go back to WWE, get utilized and make good money(LIKE HE SHOULD HAVE THE FIRST TIME YOU HACKS)
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2014 18:47
|
|
|
coconono posted:or maybe go back to WWE, get utilized John Ce--whoops sorry, wrong thread. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2014 19:01
|
|
|
I still don't know why people think Jeff Jarrett was such a great promoter since TNA has always been a failure and has only lived by being bailed out by the owner's rich parents.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2014 19:10
|
|
|
achillesforever6 posted:I still don't know why people think Jeff Jarrett was such a great promoter since TNA has always been a failure and has only lived by being bailed out by the owner's rich parents. Who has ever said Jeff Jarrett is a great promoter? Besides TNA diehards who say all sorts of stupid stuff
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2014 19:16
|
|
|
I think the people who call Jeff Jarrett a great promoter are basing it on the fact that his wrestling promotion that does not exist is going to have its first show be New Japan's Wrestle Kingdom. So, much like GFW, it is a joke.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2014 19:17
|
|
|
achillesforever6 posted:I still don't know why people think Jeff Jarrett was such a great promoter since TNA has always been a failure and has only lived by being bailed out by the owner's rich parents. I think its more people are hoping something of Jerry Jarrett's promoter expertise has filtered down to Jeff.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
Great White Hope posted:I think the people who call Jeff Jarrett a great promoter are basing it on the fact that his wrestling promotion that does not exist is going to have its first show be New Japan's Wrestle Kingdom. which is the carniest promoter move i've seen this year and therefore he is the purest promoter and will be the 2015 promoter of the year and the king of the mountain.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 01:10
|
|
|
Judging by the activity in this thread the thread title seems to be a boldfaced lie. I guess it's because all the shows have already been taped and discussed and TNA managed to not majorly screw up anything for days now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 13:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 05:00 |
|
|
Grendels Dad posted:Judging by the activity in this thread the thread title seems to be a boldfaced lie. I guess it's because all the shows have already been taped and discussed and TNA managed to not majorly screw up anything for days now. There's really nothing new to discuss aside from TV deal news, and nothing's come out on that front for a while. The TV is all taped. Their next 4 events are a One Night Only taping in Japan in a couple weeks main evented by The Great Muta and Tajiri vs. Sanada and James Storm, which is only slightly above a midcard match, and the UK Tour in January. And honestly, there's nothing to say about Impact other than how goddamn depressing the shows are because the crowd is so tiny.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 14:19
|
|