Bye Bye Bobby

[James Casey]

Both WWE and TNA tend to make my head hurt from time to time. However, TNA wins the prize for most farcicial decision in the last 12 months by booking Pacman Jones to win the tag title, closely followed by the rotten job they did with Abyss. Not to mention the over-relaince on gimmick matches - a sure sign of a company short on ideas. Oh, WWE continues to employ Khali, and Big Daddy V, and seemed to take perverse pleasure in cramming super-face Cena down our throats, but I'd say that as a regular WWE watcher (nearly every Raw and SD, some ECWs) they offer more pluses than minues, whereas as a sporadic TNA viewer (once or twice a month, most PPVs) the minuses outweight the pluses. The thing that gets me with TNA is that so often they do something really, really well - and then in the next show they burn all the good graces they earned. Look at Jay Lethal - put over clean by Angle in a fantastic match, and primed to zoom up the card as a legitimate contender. An hour later he gets punked out by Samoa Joe when it's four on one in Lethal's favour, and six months or so down the line he's still stuck as a midcard nobody. It's the sort of thing that drove me nuts about latter-day WCW, and it's all the more infuriating because the workers in TNA seem generally prepared to do what's right for the business (you know, putting on good matches, getting each other over...) but some of the booking decisions just cut them off at the knees.

[Thomnipotent]

[QUOTE=adamrobertk;363381]The fact is what the critics claim as quality music is what a small minority of people claim as quality music and the films that they claim as quality are what a small minority claim are quality. Why is Terminator 2 better than Million Dollar Baby, easy, because more people prefer terminator 2 to Million Dollar Baby. It's like this. If you have 5 guys who say 1 wrestler is superb, and a hundred guys who say the next wrestler is superb, who is better? By common concensus you have to go with the 100. Just because these idiots claim to be experts, means they have a more indepth knowledge and therefore their oppinion seem's to be worth something. However if 200 people believe that idiot is speaking bull**** then you kinda have to go with the masses. The simple logic with this is, more people chose to turn on WWE on a monday night and watch it, therefore we have to assume that those people do actually enjoy watching it. Say 3 million people watch Raw and 500'000 watch TNA. 2.5 million people like WWE and by not watching TNA therefore we have to assume that they do not like TNA. If the minority watch TNA and preach that it is brilliant because they are smarks who love the buisness, who gives a ****, the wrestling buisness is built on the casual fan and unless tna can appeal to the casual fan it cannot be better than WWE because more people will believe that WWE is better than TNA. To me TNA dosen't try enough to capture the casual fan, and the only way they will ever be succesfull is by doing that. At the moment each week WWE has more people believing their product is worth watching than TNA does. In terms of buisness and making money (lets not forget this is the wrestling buisness where the prime objective is to make money), thats all that counts.[/QUOTE] There are a lot of examples in history of a group of people who made up the majority making bad decisions and doing bad things. I'm not even going to start, but "majority rules" isn't always the best way of doing things.

[Woodsmeister]

dont know if this has been mentioned but lashley's profile is being removed go click on it, or maybe i had an error as it said it couldnt be found.

[Woodsmeister]

ok now his profile has gone

[Wallbanger]

I think I may be the only Lashley fan on the board. :D Sad to see him go. Not saying he was perfect by any means and I can't dispute the comments made about his mic work. But in my opinion he's an amazing athlete that was limited by the WWE style more than anything. People have brought up the Benoit and Cena matches as examples -- I think these "exceptions" to Lashley's typical performance were more because Lashley was allowed to perform and less about him being "carried", per se. If TNA picked him up AND allowed him to wrestle a more athletic style there would be real potential there. Find the right manager for him and you could package him as a legitimate main eventer in my opinion.

[Mtm2k6]

[QUOTE=James Casey;363389]Both WWE and TNA tend to make my head hurt from time to time. However, TNA wins the prize for most farcicial decision in the last 12 months by booking Pacman Jones to win the tag title, closely followed by the rotten job they did with Abyss. Not to mention the over-relaince on gimmick matches - a sure sign of a company short on ideas. Oh, WWE continues to employ Khali, and Big Daddy V, and seemed to take perverse pleasure in cramming super-face Cena down our throats, but I'd say that as a regular WWE watcher (nearly every Raw and SD, some ECWs) they offer more pluses than minues, whereas as a sporadic TNA viewer (once or twice a month, most PPVs) the minuses outweight the pluses. The thing that gets me with TNA is that so often they do something really, really well - and then in the next show they burn all the good graces they earned. Look at Jay Lethal - put over clean by Angle in a fantastic match, and primed to zoom up the card as a legitimate contender. An hour later he gets punked out by Samoa Joe when it's four on one in Lethal's favour, and six months or so down the line he's still stuck as a midcard nobody. It's the sort of thing that drove me nuts about latter-day WCW, and it's all the more infuriating because the workers in TNA seem generally prepared to do what's right for the business (you know, putting on good matches, getting each other over...) but some of the booking decisions just cut them off at the knees.[/QUOTE] Completely agree with this view, just what I would have put, and now I don't have to write it :p The stupid thing is TNA have a lot of talent, but when I watch the TV shows and see these talented wrestlers in horrible skits or jobbed to Attitude-Era rejects, I get mad and turn off.

[sebsplex]

[QUOTE=Wallbanger;363587]I think I may be the only Lashley fan on the board. :D Sad to see him go. Not saying he was perfect by any means and I can't dispute the comments made about his mic work. But in my opinion he's an amazing athlete that was limited by the WWE style more than anything. People have brought up the Benoit and Cena matches as examples -- I think these "exceptions" to Lashley's typical performance were more because Lashley was allowed to perform and less about him being "carried", per se. If TNA picked him up AND allowed him to wrestle a more athletic style there would be real potential there. Find the right manager for him and you could package him as a legitimate main eventer in my opinion.[/QUOTE] Yeah I pretty much agree. Lashley's main problem seemed to be that he was pushed too quickly at first, when he was still green and coming across as Black Lesnar. The move to ECW was a good one, but instead of letting him develop more, he was just pushed and pushed and pushed. He was crying out for a solid midcard feud like MVP/Benoit to really help him along, but instead, he was shoved into matches with people who couldn't be relied on to really carry him along. Having also seen nothing of him before he appeared on Smackdown, I'm really not sure how good a worker he actually is/was, although typically guys working the WWE style are often more talented/adept than they get showcased as. That being said, I can't say I'll miss him particularly (apart from the fact that I barely watch anything WWE-related anymore), as I never really got into him all that much and once his mega-push started, he left little impression other than his rather feminine "NO!" during that pre-WM segment with Mr McMahon.

[Dubya]

[QUOTE=Ransik;363142]if every WWE fan gave TNA a month trial you'd see a drastic improvement in audience. [/QUOTE] Depends on which month of TNA they watched, I'd say. Sometimes they're great. Other times they're nigh-unwatchable. And really, at ALL times, they look/book themselves like the 4th WWE brand.

[screwus]

i think this will probably hurt WWE is name value as they were struggling with injuries and other misfortunes. i thought when he first came onto the scene he was going to be big especially when he fueded with finlay. But he needed some like Paul Heyman, like Brock Lesnar, to guide him until he became they finished product. i would like to say though i caught raw this week and thort the first match with michaels and kennedy was very good considering it was raw alot of good matwork at the beginning and i liked how kennedy changed his style to a more aggressive one. That said enough with the 20 min promos even if it is Jericho:D

[Remianen]

[QUOTE=Ransik;363142]if every WWE fan gave TNA a month trial you'd see a drastic improvement in audience.[/QUOTE] Absolutely not Ransik, and you know it. There are people who would buy WWE PPVs if the Great Khali vs The Big Show was the ONLY match on the damn card. Come on now, you know as well as I do that there are folks who are WWE fans solely because of WWE's accessibility and/or because they don't know anything BUT Sports Entertainment. And as much as I'd love to engage adamrobertk in repartee, his view is so far from the truth, it can't even see it on the horizon. Tell me, what's the highest quality operating system? Now, what's the most "popular" (i.e. what's on more computers)? Careful how you answer that one, you could make yourself look silly. What's the highest quality web browser? Now, what's the "most popular" web browser? What's the higher quality vehicle, a Toyota Camry or a Ferrari FXX? Nissan Altima or McLaren SLR? Which of these is "more popular" than the other? Also, qualifications come into play. If I went to the Bronx and asked 10 guys in Concourse Village which is "higher quality" caviar, would I really want to take their opinions to heart? Not to say that their opinions aren't worth listening to but I don't really expect too many people in the South Bronx to know the difference between Beluga, Ossetra, and Sevruga from personal experience. Likewise, WWE is far more accessible to the audience at large (like Internet Explorer and Windows are) than any other promotion. It doesn't cost a thing to wait a few months before a WWE show is held nearby while at the same time, watching the promotion three times a week on TV. Just like rice is "more popular" around the world than caviar, WWE is more popular for similar reasons. Accessibility, low barrier for entry (doesn't take much to understand a typical WWE show. There's little to no complexity involved), and mainstream exposure driven by aggressive marketing contribute to WWE's continuing popularity. Even when they SUCK, they still stay on top because their fans, generally speaking, desire what they offer (that accessibility thing again). Personally, I've spent obscene amounts going to shows as far away as Japan but I wouldn't burn a fare on my MetroCard (or even walk crosstown) to see WWE at Madison Square Garden. So their accessibility isn't a selling point for me. Likewise, their lack of complexity irks me as well (I like my entertainment to be a bit more thought provoking than "OMG look at her tits!"). There's a very derogatory term used to describe people who define quality by what's "most popular". Guess what that is? :)

[Guest Ransik]

You're speaking of popularity, not quality. My point was that WWE can put a piece of trash in the ring and air it wafting in the breeze from the arena fans for 2 hours and people will sit there mesmorized by it because they're convinced everything with a WWE logo on it means "best in show." I like... like so many fans, didn't watch TNA the first couple years. Then when I happened by it on FSN... I was instantly hooked. The problem is a lot of people don't even know TNA exists because it's a young promotion and Spike doesn't give it enough exposure to draw in a bigger audience, and they don't have a few decades of time behind their name to have a man who had a son who grew up watching TNA with his dad who watched it with his kids like the WWE does. But in the numbers game... in 2007 Smackdown and TNA are the only two programs that even increased viewership in 2007. Smackdown went up maybe because they had better talent... maybe because it was on basic cable most of the year.... maybe because it changed from UPN to the CW... who knows, I honestly don't. TNA rose I think the same amount Smackdown did... I think it was an average .3 higher. RAW went down .3 and ECW dropped .6 on average. Point being, WWE lost an average half million viewers a week on their 3 programs while TNA rose about a quarter million. Hard to say who does what right and wrong, but TNA is slowly gaining a bigger fanbase because fans run into the programming and continue watching.

[Thomnipotent]

Anyway, to stick with the topic, I was a big fan of Lashley. It did take him time to develop, but he did it and was really on his way to becoming an asset to the company. Not good to see him go.

[lordprimeau25]

All: 1. I too will miss Lashley. I did feel that he was very raw on the mic but had great in ring ability and was still evolving his character. I will miss him. 2. WWE and TNA are two very different products, which is good for all wrestling fans. I am a fan of both. I don't think it is right to bash a fan of either because as a fan of both, I feel slightly offended. Certainly WWE survives on its namesake which is why I remain a fan. I grew up on WWF/E and have very fond memories of it from 1990-present. TNA is awesome because it has a tremendously different style of workers than the fed. Though it is unfortunate that TNA does not have the monetary backing WCW did, I find TNA to be a more exciting brand of competition to WWE than WCW was because, it offers such a DIFFERENT style. For the record, I find TNA's storylines to be no more thought provoking than WWE's. Again, the main difference is the style of wrestling. And if TNA ever wanst to be at WWE's level, the number one thing they have to do is change the ring. I am sorry, but mainstream America will not accept that six sided monstrosity for many, many years. I hate Vinny Mac and HHH as much as the next guy but WWE was in a nasty 2-3 slump of ugly matches, ugly writing, and ugly promoting, but I am really noticing a nice change. Some significant star power is returtning, and the writing is making a drastic improvement. I have greatly enjoyed the Kennedy/Michaels matches. Jericho and JBL are doing some terrific mic work. The Ric Flair angle is getting interesting and will come to the inevitable end that Naitch deserves. In fact, I wouldn't even be surprised if another wrestling legend like Tommy Dreamer and Chavo run a program to Mania, in some sort of "Rocky" angle that i feel Dreamer deserves as a pioneer of the hardcore style. And more recently as a true fan of wrestling I am loving the fact that an ROH legend is about to ind himself in the main event scene on Smackdown. Believe me, when Punk hits the mic, he and Edge will do great things together for both of their careers. 3. We are entering a new era of wrestling. TNA is prooving that littler guys , like Jay Lethal, AJ Styles, Chris Daniels, and even Cage can do great things in the business. They will at some point give the fed a run, and the talent flux between the two should make for some interesting behind the scenes stories. And it is quite fun to watch younger guys or former mid-carders like Kennedy, MVP, Punk, Hardy, and Orton become the new wave of wrestling. I am really not looking to gripe of cause an argument. I'm sure there are many that will disagree with what I have said but that's fine, I just want to keep it friendly. As a new guy to the forums I just wanted to interject some of my thoughts and defend fans of both styles of wrestling. I really don't feel it is necessary to attack one company or the other. Wrestling is a great form of entertainment and thats why we are all here isn't it?

[alden]

I think quality is such a hard term to define to be honest. Who are you talking about? A wrestling fan or say a wrestling promoter? It is simple economics to be a promoter. Quality equals buy rates to a business man. If they made x amount of profit then it is a quality product. If you are talking about a fan then again what is quality to them? A child fan who does not know anything about wrestling is going to say what is put out now is quality do to the fact that they enjoy it. Enjoyment equals quality. A teenage boy is going to look at the TV and see a lot of hot women in almost nothing. To him T&A equals quality, a quote quote working man, is going to see a guy like him *stone cold* who drinks beer, kicks his bosses ass and cusses all the time quality. Relationship to himself equals quality. While this might not be true for all cases it is true for some. Look at the other then. A young guy *mid twenties* has been a wrestling fan all his life. Knows what is going on and that is it all a work and likes a little intelligence in his wrestling is not going to call it quality. They are going to look at everything that the other people call quality *T&A, simplicity and dull over done gimmicks* as poor quality.

[BlueStar]

Strange that WWE pulled the plug on a guy they invested a lot of time and money in. I never understood the appeal of Lashley. In my opinion, he was just another muscular guy without an ounce of charisma. Even through all the hard work and training, he still never made an interesting appearance, as far as I'm concerned. If WWE had given a Paul Burchill (just to name one) the amount of time and energy as Lashley, they'd have built an entertaining star. Lashley, even after his big push, was still boring IMHO.

[Remianen]

[QUOTE=BlueStar;363731]Strange that WWE pulled the plug on a guy they invested a lot of time and money in. I never understood the appeal of Lashley. In my opinion, he was just another muscular guy without an ounce of charisma. Even through all the hard work and training, he still never made an interesting appearance, as far as I'm concerned. If WWE had given a Paul Burchill (just to name one) the amount of time and energy as Lashley, they'd have built an entertaining star. Lashley, even after his big push, was still boring IMHO.[/QUOTE] Totally agree. Lashley was a look and little else. Burchill would've been HUGE if given a similar (or even less aggressive) push, without the cartoony gimmick. And lord primeau, don't take my analysis as an insult. Nothing I said was untrue. The WWE's product IS simple and easy to understand, easily accessible to a mainstream audience, and aggressively marketed to said mainstream audience. Where's the insult? My personal opinion aside, there's nothing wrong with being a WWE fan. What I was trying to point out to Ransik is the fact that, even when the WWE was putting out poor quality shows [B][I]by their own standards[/I][/B], they didn't lose a great amount of fans. About the only time I remember them "losing" fans was when they couldn't capitalize on the acquisition of WCW. But you can't really lose what you never had in the first place. As much as some folks would like to believe that all it would take for TNA to "rise up" would be for them to get exposed to WWE's audience at large, it's simply not true. Yes, there would be a few convert. But to use the word "drastic" to describe that is about as idealistic as 'Make Love Not War'.

[Guest The Aussie]

[QUOTE=BlueStar;363731] If WWE had given a Paul Burchill (just to name one) the amount of time and energy as Lashley, they'd have built an entertaining star. Lashley, even after his big push, was still boring IMHO.[/QUOTE] Funny that you bring up Burchill. WWE had him do a dark match on Smackdown last week but there are pairing a terrible gimmick wiht him. Ladies and Gentlemen, The incest gimmick rears its head again.

[DanB]

I've heard that! I really hope they dont run that gimmick and just run Burchill as a Legit singles worker!

[Guest The Aussie]

[QUOTE=DanB;364004]I've heard that! I really hope they dont run that gimmick and just run Burchill as a Legit singles worker![/QUOTE] Hell, a lot of people on the Wrestlecrap boards are getting quite irate about this planned gimmick.

[sebsplex]

[QUOTE=The Aussie;363951]Funny that you bring up Burchill. WWE had him do a dark match on Smackdown last week but there are pairing a terrible gimmick wiht him. Ladies and Gentlemen, The incest gimmick rears its head again.[/QUOTE] Poor Burchill. He must have gone months waiting to be informed that WWE creative had something in mind for him only to find out that he can now have his career tarnished with an incest angle that will probably result in Katie Lea giving birth to a midget pirate with webbed feet.