brashleyholland

Actually the second set of Impact spoilers doesn't seem that bad.

Here's where the guy kills it for me. 12-20 of them. The DO NOT like the way the company is going. Geez, how would TNA survive without them? If TNA only gets a top end of 2000 people in the building, wouldn't we have noticed these 'hundreds of people' walking out? Wouldn't someone have mentioned this before now? Again, what, all 20 of them? What do they plan on doing when they get in the ring, aside from getting thrown out an banned from the venue? If this in indeed legit, he just comes accross like a petulent kid who's resisting change just because. I know the ECW crowd added alot to their shows, but they aren't the ECW crowd and this certainly isn't ECW.

Extra's get paid. There are also there to work, not enjoy something. This happens all the time, in all sports.

Thats great, if it is being used to irradicate bad language or fans intentionally disrupting the flow of the show with 'insider' chants etc. But if they are telling fans they cannot boo something that they don't like...how does that benefit them in the long run? You judge a performer and their performance on how well it goes over with the crowd...if the crowd isn't allowed to say 'This sucks', where is the impetus to change it? Take Morley for example. They're pushing him as a good guy, but people don't like him as a good guy and think he is performing poorly. However, they are told to cheer him because he is a good guy. Does that mean we're stuck watching him until they decide otherwise? If thats how they want it, fine. They might as well go the whole hog and have production staff with 'CHEER' and 'JEER' signs held up. It's very hypocritical to profess that you are 'giving the fans what they want' while telling them how to behave at your TV tapings.

Something funny I just noticed...TNA are still advertising Bobby Lashley for the UK tour, including a Jan 30th event in Laaaandan, when Bobby will be busy grinding out some scrub at Strikeforce: Miami. 'Card Subject To Change' is all well and good, but knowingly advertising a fighter who won't be appearing is a bit of a stretch. If anyone wants a refund after the show, there's your reason! From TNA's official website: http://www.tnawrestling.com/live-events/item/1478-1/30-london-uk

There is somthing about knowing that Bubba got his clock cleaned by a 270lb woman which reassures me that there are some things that are still right with the world

Thats the kind of thing that would make me just up and leave. Especially if I hadn't had to pay. Maybe it's being blown out of proportion though. From the looks of things nobody actually left. The biggest complaints on that video seemed to be some whiny whispers from a couple of teenagers. "Why would you bring your kids!" "This is getting like the WWE!" I guess you get what you pay for...at the same time I think it entirely removes the point of going to watch a live wrestling show. Maybe they'll get their way and the hardcore fans will stop attending, allowing them to fill the place with kids who'll cheer when they hold up a sign telling them to do so :-p

Ok, I understand the no swearing, no gang signs etc. I said in a previous post that it's essential that they have control of their product and don't have 'smart' fans spoiling the flow of things intentionally. I still stand by that. ...BUT...after watching that video, it seems like they were trying to say that the fans had a specific role, that being to "help tell a story". This I don't agree with. It's the performers job to get people to like/loath them. If people genuinly aren't doing it, then it's the performers who are to blame for not being good enough at what they do. I can absolutly understand them not wanting fans to chant "You're on drugs" to Jeff Hardy, or make light of Scott Hall's problems etc. If it isn't part of the story, then it's irrelevent. However, from what that guy said (at least how it came across to me) was that they don't want the crowd chanting "boring" or "we want wrestling" etc during taping. If that is the case, then whats the point? Isn't the yardstick for how good something is how well it goes over with the crowd? How are TNA supposed to know what is going down well if they are coercing the crowd into desired responses? I can only assume that they don't care. TNA Staffer 1: Hmm, people keep chanting boring in this guy's matches. The crowd really doesn't like him and he sucks the atmosphere out of the building. We should probably think about taking him off TV for a while or dropping him altogether. TNA Staffer 2: Nah, we'll just tell the fans not to chant boring during his matches and to cheer him instead. They have to help us tell the story and he *is* supposed to be the good guy after all. If they don't like it they can leave, it's not like they're paying. It's certainly a novel way of getting a desired response out of a crowd.

They must be paying absolute bottom dollar then. Although I heard that they don't pay to use the venue, which in turn must save them a fortune.

But it they make all the 'TNA' guys 'good guys' and the like of Hogan, Jerrett, Morley, Nash etc heels, wont people just complain when the heels win all the time? As I see it, the whole point of wrestling is that the bad guys constantly get the better of the good guys by fair means or foul, only for the good guy to get that one big win in the end. Maybe thats just a very black and white way of looking at it though. I see your point about letting people cheer who they want to cheer and boo who they want to boo.

Wow, I had no idea things were that dire. How does TNA make money? Are they making money? Do they run regular house shows?

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, as I'm not really a wrestling fan and am going off a hazey old memory here...but when TNA first started, didn't they have a bunch of fans that would turn up every week to cheer the bad guys and boo the good guys no matter what? Now, I fully understand the idea of "you pays your money, you makes your choice", but surely part of enjoying wrestling is suspending disbelief etc. If a 'bad guy' isn't good at making you hate him, don't boo. If a good guy isn't good at making you like him, don't cheer. However if you're 'smart' to the business or whatever and you intend to go against the grain for the sake of going against the grain, no matter how good someone is at being a 'heel' or 'face' thats pretty childish/pointless. As for how this related to TNA's situation now, they're in a possition where they have less than 2000 people in a building. If they are going to compete with WWE, it's essential that they have control of their product. People boo'ing Sean Waltman 'just because' for example...a new wrestling fan will have no idea why it's happening, so it's confusing. At the end of they day its a free TV taping. They need to control their product. 'Smart' fans in the crowd who want to sound clever by referencing someones drug problems or backstage persona should pay for a house show ticket. Or just grow up.

That's just speculating though. Isn't TNA recored in a theme park or something? Can anyone get in? Maybe Universal Studios don't want 'gang signs' and coarse language if young kids can get in? Maybe Spike have had a hand in it? Maybe if TNA *do* want to compete with WWE (who put out a family friendly product) then they feel that they need a tamer crowd in order to attract a more mainstream audience?

Maybe they can draw a posotive out of the Hall situation. He gets a reaction after all, so why not play off it. I wouldn't mind seeing him walk a fine line for a few weeks as long as he isn't in the ring. Keep him around, in the background, make it part of the story. Maybe he gets some dirt on Hogan from Jerrett so that he can use blackmail to keep his job? Double J is clearly out to get Hogan, so having Hall as his man on the inside might make sense...

Spot on. If the grapefruits are big enough to make comments like that, fine. But if thats the case then they are also big enough to deal with the consiquences, such as losing your job. It brings to mind that old saying: "It's better to keep you mouth shut and let everyone think you're an idiot than open it and remove all doubt!"

No, he means a solarium. Just because you don't understand what a word means, doesn't mean it's not the correct thing to say.

This is probably a really stupid question - but is all this talk of Hogan/Bischoff "running the show" storyline, or have they actually bought in to TNA? Are they actually writing/booking events now?

Ok, so I'm on a mission to rediscover what I loved about wrestling as a kid/teenager for an article I'm writing. It's turning into something of a monster. As part of this, I endeavoured to spend some time over the hollidays watching the last few months of TNA programming ahead of Monday's big show. I think I got to know the characters and where they were going with various storylines etc. I should say also that the last time I followed (watched weekly) wrestling was around 97-2000. I was a fan of the early NWO at that time; Knowing that Hogan would be returning, along with Hall and with Nash and Sting already there, thats why I chose TNA to catch up on. Here's my thoughts on the show. - Hogan driving to the show for an hour then announcing that he'd been back all day - unintentionally hillarious. - Ric Flair look OLD. Old man old. I'm sure he can still do a slow paced match, but I remember this guy having to wear a shirt back in 99 when he wrestled. I dread to think what he looks like a decade later. Hogan's physique may have deteriorated, but at least he still looks like an old wrestler, rather than an old man. I hope they Ric him as a mouthpiece, but he didn't exactly get much time to speak on Monday... - It was cool to see Hall, Nash, X-Pac/Syxx/Waltman, Hogan and Easy-E back in the same ring and Sting in the rafters. Cool for me, because that was the last time I loved wrestling - realising that it was 13 years ago worries me. - It seems that Hall, Nash and Waltman have become parodies of themselves. Nash admits he's in it for the money - Hall and Waltman 'want to party' despite both looking like they have done more then enough of that. - Hogan saying that "Things would be different" really bothered me. Saying that with the same four guys you've been rehashing the same gig with for over a decade seems pointless. Sting is back in the rafters. His buddy Bubba the Love Sponge is working backstage. What exactly is different? - Abyss is a poor man's Mankind. Started off as a monster, now is some kind of mentaly simple clapping fool. He doesn't seem to have the charisma of Foley to pull either roll off well though. - Speaking of Foley, wow, he's been my biggest let down of this entire project. He's bounced through all his persona's so many times it's hard to keep up. Now he's just a watered down amalgamation of Foley/Cactus/Mankind. He's fooling around backstage, then he's using a barb-wire bat in the ring, then he's a shareholder. Give me one of those three and I'm happy, not weak versions of all three. - Seriously, the Nasty Boys? I don't even remember them being around in the Attitude era - they were early 90's right? So its not like they are popular enough to give anyone else a rub, they are simply taking a spot on the roster from someone more deserving. At least Hall, Nash and co can add something that people want to see. What next, Brutus Beefcake? And did I really hear one of the Nastys call Bubba Ray Dudley fat? Talk about pot and kettle... - Matt Morgan, Hernandez, Samoa Joe, Daniels, Beer Money, Eric Young - where were these guys? Shouldn't the focus of the show have been on them, seeing as they are supposed to be the stars that sepparate TNA from the WWE? - Wolf - for the past few weeks he's been the man to beat, holding his own against Angle, portrayed as a dangerous man. Now he gets squashed in a couple of minutes? Why weren't Hall, Nash, Waltman, Val Venis and the Nasty Boys out there taking the fall for these new guys? I'm gonna leave it there as I'm aware that I'm rambling. If I had to sum it up... - Not enough wrestling (outside of Angle/Styles) - Too many old faces bringing nothing to the table - Bring in the Nasty Boyz, but have them losing in double quick time to Beer Money - Poor use of guys that could make a difference (Hardy, Wolf, etc) - Disjointed production If this show was suppose dto hook me in - it didn't. I'm going to give them time, it's not fair to judged based on one show - maybe I'm just out of touch on what makes good wrestling, but I've enjoyed the past few months of Impact much more than I did last night.