The Official TNA / Impact / GFW Discussion Thread

[thepeopleschamp]

I thought the show ok I liked most of it not there best show not their worst but I thought it was pretty funny when Foley and Bischoff were in the ring and Foley told him he was the worst annoucer evre or something around those lines and Tz cut in and said "Mick obviously hasn't heard of Mick Adamly" I thought that was funny

[thommohawk]

In my honest opinion TNA cops far too much harsh criticism, especially when compared to the dross that WWE puts on every week more often than not - and this is coming from someone who was a big WWE fan who grew up watching them.....for me TNA's backstage stuff for the most part isn't bad and the in ring product ranges from the decent to the unbelievable, compared to WWE's mostly boring rarely unbelievable matches. I just don't get how people can slate TNA when it's WWE that I find unwatchable for the most part, but therein lays the crux of the thing, it's all about opinion as opposed to fact.

 

Personally I think Hogan/Bischoff are great for TNA, they know what they're doing since any attention is good attention and the recent growth prove this. TNA previously relying on it's own talent couldn't break 1.1 million viewers all year and suddenly they're up since Hogan and Bisch came in, so there comes a time where you have to man up and admit that TNA needed the help that Hogan and Bisch bring.

 

Not really digging AJ's heel character, liking his alignment with Flair though. Hogan's storylines (all of them lol) seem to be interesting and have legs. For me Joe and AJ need more characterization as they are both kind of bland despite their awesome ability in the ring - think on it both Austin and Maivia did nothing until they both became larger than life Stone Cold and The Rock respectively. Speaking of The Rock, Mr Anderson is the new Rock - very similar characters but Anderson's a better in ring talent. He could well be the dark horse that puts TNA where it wants to be. He is uber entertaining. I only hope RVD and Heyman turn up too.

[cappyboy]

In my honest opinion TNA cops far too much harsh criticism, especially when compared to the dross that WWE puts on every week more often than not - and this is coming from someone who was a big WWE fan who grew up watching them.....for me TNA's backstage stuff for the most part isn't bad and the in ring product ranges from the decent to the unbelievable, compared to WWE's mostly boring rarely unbelievable matches. I just don't get how people can slate TNA when it's WWE that I find unwatchable for the most part, but therein lays the crux of the thing, it's all about opinion as opposed to fact.

 

Agreed. 100% here. And you know who else could be this way if they'd just recognize their full potential? WWE.

 

It's not that they don't have the talent compared to TNA. They have plenty of talent I'd either like to watch more often or get to know. It's not that they can't put on better material. It's that they lack the willingness to. I know I probably come of as very anti-sports entertainment a lot of the time. But even in the context of that product, they could do a lot better. It's the entertainment part that they seem to lack. They have a rigid definition of it and that doesn't always translate properly to us the fans.

 

Personally I think Hogan/Bischoff are great for TNA, they know what they're doing since any attention is good attention and the recent growth prove this. TNA previously relying on it's own talent couldn't break 1.1 million viewers all year and suddenly they're up since Hogan and Bisch came in, so there comes a time where you have to man up and admit that TNA needed the help that Hogan and Bisch bring.

 

You know, I think it's a little early to be saying that. Hogan and Bischoff have only been around for a month so for. They are still laying the groundwork for all their plans and schemes for the company. If things hold together well enough to talk this way in the summer or even better the end of the year, then you might have something. But let's allow the novelty to completely wear off before we go nuts about whether TNA really NEEDED the help.

 

Not really digging AJ's heel character, liking his alignment with Flair though. Hogan's storylines (all of them lol) seem to be interesting and have legs. For me Joe and AJ need more characterization as they are both kind of bland despite their awesome ability in the ring - think on it both Austin and Maivia did nothing until they both became larger than life Stone Cold and The Rock respectively.

 

I'm not buying this at all. AJ had become one of the most compelling guys on the roster to me with the evolution they put him through in 2009. From fiery warrior for the Front Line to emotionally beaten to world champion was anything but a bland journey. While I do like the pairing with Flair and agree the heel turn feels rushed, I'd much rather have seen AJ continue to progress along the course he was on. He'd been TNA champion before but not as the fully formed face of the company he was blooming into in the final quarter of 2009. It's usually the Chicken Little critics of TNA who like to invoke WCW comparisions. But I feel like bringing Hogan in when they did and putting the brakes on the progress they had going was a very WCW-ish move. Just as WCW was when they finally closed, TNA was building to a very strong creative period when the brakes were slammed on.

 

Your point on Joe I might grant you. His road wasn't quite as strong because there wasn't as strong a payoff to his journey as there was AJ's. For all the consternation there was between Joe and AJ when the Nation of Violence thing started, it never came to quite the head it could have. Between Daniels stealing Joe's thunder on the friend struggling with the shadow front and Nation of Violence membership never really growing beyond Joe and Taz, a good deal of meat was missing with the Samoan Submission Machine. I like that they are still exploring the strained friendship between Joe and AJ despite the transfer over to Hogoff. But so much more could have been done on Joe.

 

Speaking of The Rock, Mr Anderson is the new Rock - very similar characters but Anderson's a better in ring talent. He could well be the dark horse that puts TNA where it wants to be. He is uber entertaining. I only hope RVD and Heyman turn up too.

 

At least that's what we're supposed to think. I don't know. Maybe Mr. Anderson is the wrestling equivalent of Ozzy Osbourne to me. Maybe like Ozzy, getting in the know late on Anderson cost me the ability to properly appreciate all he really has to offer. He wouldn't be the first boat I missed.

 

The comparison to The Rock is hard to swallow though. I never had any trouble getting The Rock. I witnessed his evolution so there was never that "what the duck" feeling with him that I get with Anderson. I got why I should care about Rock. I'd seen him as far back as the crowd verbally wishing him dead. My first two thoughts upon seeing the then Mr. Kennedy for the first time where "Man, I thought the Hollys were all out of WWE now." and "Why is this schlump doing Road Dogg's aspiring announcer shtick?" Plus, Rock had the Peter Maivia/Rocky Johnson pedigree to justify him. Anderson was just some random guy I'd happened to see referenced in passing in Promotion Wars. I've just never been able to find a reason to care about Anderson.

 

Between the heritage and having watched him evolve it was easy to care about The Rock. Anderson just feels like a pale imitation doing what he must to stay afloat in the business. There's nothing to suggest to me he has anything else to help him. I know that probably puts me in a distinct minority. But if I end up bailing on the Hogoff version of TNA, Anderson getting pushed too hard will probably be one of the reasons why.

[SaySo]

Thursday’s episode of iMPACT! drew a final 1.2 cable rating with 1.6 million viewers — a drop from the previous week’s record high 1.4 rating. The Wrestling Observer is reporting that there was a lot of unhappiness within the company when Thursday’s rating was released.

[Blackman]

I think lots of the heat on TNA is from early fans (like moi) who are disappointed because TNA is just a shell from what it could potentially be at the moment. Critisizing the promotion might make them want to devote more attention to their priorities.

 

That said, I did like the Hogan/Flair/Bischoff segments.

[thommohawk]

I think lots of the heat on TNA is from early fans (like moi) who are disappointed because TNA is just a shell from what it could potentially be at the moment. Critisizing the promotion might make them want to devote more attention to their priorities.

 

That said, I did like the Hogan/Flair/Bischoff segments.

 

Same but again you need to stop and take note for a moment too, look at how far they come in 7 years, and yes they do still have a very long way to go to be sure, but end of the day the wrestling industry and the companies within it are ever changing and morphing and TNA of old vs Hogan's TNA if you will was always on the cards and will be the thing that spurs TNA onto a bigger platform provided Hogan and Bisch don't wreck it, which they won't because Bisch knows what he's doing and Hogan's the most recognized name in pro wrestling. Another thing to take stock of is that we can sit and criticize until the cows come home and in some sense that's all we seem to do lol, but we also have zero idea how to put a weekly wrestling program together outside of TEW and certainly not in the real world.....and for me, I trust Bischoff to bring TNA up and Hogan has the name value, but it's going to take at least 2 years I'd say before we see TNA anywhere near. But I might be wrong.

 

As for the other guy who mentioned AJ Styles in response to my comment, I wasn't talking about his storylines I was talking about his character. Again think WWE, I gave examples of Stone Cold and The Rock but I'll give another, HBK....and I'm not suggesting for 1 moment that AJ should become a HBK type character that loves himself to the extent of walking out at Wembley with full sized mirrors lol just saying that these wrestlers no matter how awesome they are in the ring they need characterizing properly and again I point you in the direction of The Rock, nobody cared until they repackaged him. Same thing would happen with Cena too except we live in a different age and Vince will keep him face no matter what so long as he's selling merchandise and all that fun stuff.

 

As for Mr Anderson, if you drop all the prejudice and watch him as is, there's a hell of a lot of Rock in his character. As for AJ, there's a hell of a lot of an in his prime HBK in AJ's in ring ability. All of this is of course just my opinion and the impressions I get from watching TNA and these guys, but it has to be said I'm watching to be entertained, as always, and one thing I'm not doing is critiquing or being judgemental and maybe that's why I'm really enjoying TNA wrestling.

 

WWE on the other hand I cannot help, they are horrible to watch now. But we all know WWE is the best at entertainment as and indeed whenever Vince chooses to pull his finger out. Which is why I fear somewhat for TNA and the future of the industry because we all know the WWE story when they have competition like in the Attitude Era vs when they have no competition like in the last 10 years just about.

[brashleyholland]

My take on this, in terms of TNA taking stick for what they do, is that they have to cater to the lowest common denominator.

 

People who post here talking about wrestling are for the most part hugley passionate wrestling fans, some of whom have followed the industry since before TNA's target audience were born. People here know what they like and have a very specific idea of what makes good wrestling. Be in an intellegent angle or an incredibly athletic match.

 

WWE is the survivor in this industry - they provide a watered down, entertainment based product with a wide market appeal. They can't cater to the specific wishes of the hardcore fanbase. TNA are (quite rightly) following their lead - they haven't had the same success thus far, so they are trying to emulate what WWE does by having a watered down product that appeals to the broadest range of wrestling fan - mostly kids, teenagers and young adults who will watch the shows and buy the merchendise.

 

People shouldn't expect a great 'pure' wrestling product or intensely ceribral angles and storytelling because it doesn't sell to the masses. There are countless failed promotions and struggling indy's that are living proof of that. There will always be negativity towards TNA and WWE in a place like this, because they aren't catering to you with their product.

[cappyboy]

Same but again you need to stop and take note for a moment too, look at how far they come in 7 years, and yes they do still have a very long way to go to be sure, but end of the day the wrestling industry and the companies within it are ever changing and morphing and TNA of old vs Hogan's TNA if you will was always on the cards and will be the thing that spurs TNA onto a bigger platform provided Hogan and Bisch don't wreck it, which they won't because Bisch knows what he's doing and Hogan's the most recognized name in pro wrestling. Another thing to take stock of is that we can sit and criticize until the cows come home and in some sense that's all we seem to do lol, but we also have zero idea how to put a weekly wrestling program together outside of TEW and certainly not in the real world.....and for me, I trust Bischoff to bring TNA up and Hogan has the name value, but it's going to take at least 2 years I'd say before we see TNA anywhere near. But I might be wrong.

 

You know, I'd like to have had more thoughts here. But can't say much of anything. The run-on sentences killed any sense I had of your train of thought here. W

 

As for the other guy who mentioned AJ Styles in response to my comment, I wasn't talking about his storylines I was talking about his character. Again think WWE, I gave examples of Stone Cold and The Rock but I'll give another, HBK....and I'm not suggesting for 1 moment that AJ should become a HBK type character that loves himself to the extent of walking out at Wembley with full sized mirrors lol just saying that these wrestlers no matter how awesome they are in the ring they need characterizing properly and again I point you in the direction of The Rock, nobody cared until they repackaged him. Same thing would happen with Cena too except we live in a different age and Vince will keep him face no matter what so long as he's selling merchandise and all that fun stuff.

 

That's just the thing. I was talking character too. The storylines were one thing. But it was his character development that really had me pumped about AJ. Before he went on the emotional roller coaster that was 2009, AJ Styles was just another guy on the TNA roster to me. I liked him to the level I was supposed to. But to really rally behind him, not so much. By the time he'd won the title at Bound For Glory however, he was my boy. I'd gotten deeply invested in his friendship travails and the whole psychological beatdown he'd suffered at the hands of the MEM and right on down the line. It was because he'd grown so much AS A CHARACTER that I embraced him as the champion and one likely to reign long. He was the gritty, scrappy underdog who'd scratched and clawed his way to the mountaintop. A guy I related deeply to.

 

As for Mr Anderson, if you drop all the prejudice and watch him as is, there's a hell of a lot of Rock in his character. As for AJ, there's a hell of a lot of an in his prime HBK in AJ's in ring ability. All of this is of course just my opinion and the impressions I get from watching TNA and these guys, but it has to be said I'm watching to be entertained, as always, and one thing I'm not doing is critiquing or being judgemental and maybe that's why I'm really enjoying TNA wrestling.

 

And what you're asking is the impossible. Believe me, I've tried to watch him as is. I just can't do it because I can't find the HIM in him. The look is pure Holly family. The shtick I still harken back to Road Dogg on. You can try to compare him to The Rock all you want. But The Rock took ownership of his catchphrases and made them feel organic in a way Anderson has never done for me.

 

Even in the ring there's nothing to make me say "Man, Anderson's coming up. I can't wait to see those insanely high hiptosses." Or the killer aerial skills or whatever ring skill he has that sets him apart. There was nothing fancy about the Rock's trademark moves either. But he was able to make the People's Elbow and the Rock Bottom feel uniquely his. Anderson doesn't do that. He's just a pastiche of all these other people I've seen before. He's like a midcard e-fed wrestler brought to life. That's why I'm so "prejudiced" against him as you put it. I WANT to be able to pull something out of his routine that's distinctly him. I WANT to do what you suggest and take him as he is. It's the fact that there doesn't appear to be anything to find that turns me so far off from him.

 

WWE on the other hand I cannot help, they are horrible to watch now. But we all know WWE is the best at entertainment as and indeed whenever Vince chooses to pull his finger out. Which is why I fear somewhat for TNA and the future of the industry because we all know the WWE story when they have competition like in the Attitude Era vs when they have no competition like in the last 10 years just about.

 

Yeah well, I've pretty much gotten used to the WWE issue. I'll look in from time to time and hope to see the talent I like on their roster have a cool match or what not. But what material I do watch of them I take almost as a vaccuum because I know I can't trust them to hold my interest over the length of a show.

[thommohawk]

Well to tell you the truth I always thought The Rock was overrated as a wrestler and between him and Austin as entertainers I always felt Austin to be more entertaining and the better character...as for Ken Anderson we agree to disagree - Anderson is his own character with the whole entrance and self mic thing, there's a big difference between what he does and what Road Dogg did in his prime.

 

And besides what makes characters like Anderson and The Rock sink or swim is the entertainment factor brought by the over confidence of their characters which wasn't a problem for either wrestler....the thing with Anderson was that he was wasted in WWE and never recovered. Then of course he was fired for Wellness Policy violations. But had he been given a shot at the top of the card like CM Punk has, then Kennedy would have been the new Rock. The similarities in character are almost uncanny. When you say The Rock was unique, he is, but how much of that was down to WWE and their worldwide exposure and having The Rock in play at the top of the card ? A whole hell of a lot I'd say. Same with Stone Cold too.

 

Austin was called an average journeyman before Vince and he came up with the Stone Cold character and both him and The Rock basically won the WWF the wrestling war almost single handedly - which just proves the value of entertaining characters because neither were great wrestlers. But given the right character and angles at the top of the card they were both awesome entertainers. Exposure and characters are the key. Also look at Shawn Michaels, he was always a class act in the ring, but it wasn't until he split from The Rockers and became HBK that he really took off.

 

So all that proves the importance of good characters. Where is all this leading? AJ and Samoa Joe's characters even now are bland. Mr Anderson's character is really entertaining to watch and his interaction with the TNA faithful too, he's brilliant on the mic also, and that's what it's all about. If anyone is going to lead TNA to the top it's him. Because he has that larger than life thing going on that TNA sorely lacks that WWE has in abundance. Same for RVD too if he goes to TNA which he probably will do reading between the lines.

 

Whether good or bad in the ring the bottom line is it's the larger than life characters that gets people tuning in. There's countless examples of this from the original DX to the nWo, Stone Cold, The Rock etc. But really it's The Undertaker and (ironically) Hulk Hogan who are and have been prime examples of this during the last 20 years.

 

And for me, AJ is the best wrestler I've seen in a long long time. But as a character he's lacking that larger than life feel which ultimately will seperate him from his rightful place among the likes of HBK and RVD unless corrected and it's purely down to the complete lack of the larger than life factor of his gimmick and nothing more. In my honest opinion.

[Bigpapa42]

I don't know if I would categorize Austin as an "average journeyman" before his WWE run. He was in WCW for 5 years and held 5 titles in that time. Not the world title, obviously, but I don't personally see an "average journeyman" as someone who spends a lot of their time involved in title feuds, even if for midcard ones. Austin had potential back then and some people saw it. Just not Bischoff. And the promos he cut in ECW were very very good.

 

As for the Rock-Anderson comparison... Sorry, I don't see it. I quite like Anderson, but I don't think he's nearly on the same level as Rock, either on the mic or in the ring. There's a reason that Rock was able to seamlessly transition into films. I watched Anderson's one movie and it was painful. You can say both are entertaining, but I think Anderson has a long long way to go before he hits the level of the Rock at his peak.

[lazorbeak]

First, Thom, I actually had to look up dross. Good to know it's the scum that forms on molten metal. What that has to do with wrestling remains an enigma.

 

Well to tell you the truth I always thought The Rock was overrated as a wrestler and between him and Austin as entertainers I always felt Austin to be more entertaining and the better character...as for Ken Anderson we agree to disagree - Anderson is his own character with the whole entrance and self mic thing, there's a big difference between what he does and what Road Dogg did in his prime.

 

So wait, Anderson is like The Rock, but his own character and not like the Road Dogg? How can you legitimately argue that both ways? Especially since there's really nothing about him that's like The Rock at all? On the other hand, Road Dogg looked like all those other Armstrong's, but since he had a marketable gimmick he managed to get pretty over. He's accomplished far more than Mr. Kennedy has to this point, too. Sure, his last few years in TNA sucked, but Brad Armstrong is almost 50 years old and was working twice a week; I don't think he was motivated.

 

And besides what makes characters like Anderson and The Rock sink or swim is the entertainment factor brought by the over confidence of their characters which wasn't a problem for either wrestler....the thing with Anderson was that he was wasted in WWE and never recovered. Then of course he was fired for Wellness Policy violations.

 

No, he wasn't wasted, he was pushed, then got hurt, then got suspended, then went to film a movie, then got hurt again, etc. Seriously what else could WWE have done with the guy?

 

But had he been given a shot at the top of the card like CM Punk has, then Kennedy would have been the new Rock. The similarities in character are almost uncanny. When you say The Rock was unique, he is, but how much of that was down to WWE and their worldwide exposure and having The Rock in play at the top of the card ? A whole hell of a lot I'd say. Same with Stone Cold too.

 

 

Wow. Seriously, Kennedy did get his shot. He feuded with Undertaker, he feuded with HBK, two of the top talent groomers in the company. He wrestled Batista at the Royal Rumble for the title in a match that if you sort of squinted looked like Lesnar v. Holly from a few years prior. Were any of those matches "classics"? How many were even "good"? Kennedy had a trial run at the top and he sank. CM Punk had a trial run at the top and he swam. One guy still works for the company: one does not. Not saying Kennedy can't improve, but to argue he just needed an opportunity is completely the opposite of what happened: he had an opportunity and proved he wasn't ready for it.

 

Austin was called an average journeyman before Vince and he came up with the Stone Cold character and both him and The Rock basically won the WWF the wrestling war almost single handedly - which just proves the value of entertaining characters because neither were great wrestlers. But given the right character and angles at the top of the card they were both awesome entertainers. Exposure and characters are the key. Also look at Shawn Michaels, he was always a class act in the ring, but it wasn't until he split from The Rockers and became HBK that he really took off.

 

Do you know what an "average journeyman" is? Hint: they don't win rookie of the year their debut year, and they don't win every belt except the world title in 5 years. Anybody who knew anything about the wrestling business could tell you Steve Austin was going to be very, very good as early as 1990. Just because Easy E didn't want to build "old-school" guys didn't mean he wasn't recognized for his ability.

 

Also you're wrong that WWF won the war because of two guys, and you're also wrong that neither were great wrestlers. Extraordinarily wrong in Austin's case.

 

And for me, AJ is the best wrestler I've seen in a long long time. But as a character he's lacking that larger than life feel which ultimately will seperate him from his rightful place among the likes of HBK and RVD unless corrected and it's purely down to the complete lack of the larger than life factor of his gimmick and nothing more. In my honest opinion.

 

So AJ needs a larger than life character? Whose life? Steve Austin got over being himself. Mick Foley got over being himself. Even Ric Flair, who stole Buddy Rogers' gimmick, made it his life. How does married, Christian AJ Styles get over doing a playboy gimmick?

[cappyboy]

I don't know if I would categorize Austin as an "average journeyman" before his WWE run. He was in WCW for 5 years and held 5 titles in that time. Not the world title, obviously, but I don't personally see an "average journeyman" as someone who spends a lot of their time involved in title feuds, even if for midcard ones. Austin had potential back then and some people saw it. Just not Bischoff. And the promos he cut in ECW were very very good.

 

Agreed. Stone Cold may be what pushed Austin over the top but your "average journeyman" usually doesn't get a character to successfully cross company lines. Yet Austin did with the Stunning Steve persona. Making it work as a compelling character not only against his mentor Chris Adams in World Class but in high quality teams like The Hollywood Blondes and The Dangerous Alliance in WCW. If memory serves, he's the longest reigning TV champion WCW ever had. Or it might have been the US Title at the time. Was one of the two anyway. "Average journeymen" don't tend to have that on their resume. You can make the case Austin wasn't fully formed until Stone Cold but "average" is being needlessly harsh.

 

 

As for the Rock-Anderson comparison... Sorry, I don't see it. I quite like Anderson, but I don't think he's nearly on the same level as Rock, either on the mic or in the ring. There's a reason that Rock was able to seamlessly transition into films. I watched Anderson's one movie and it was painful. You can say both are entertaining, but I think Anderson has a long long way to go before he hits the level of the Rock at his peak.

 

Agreed. When The Rock was around, he could take lines "if you smell what The Rock is cookin'" and not only strip them of their ridiculousness but make them seem natural. He could take a an elbow drop with some random flourishes or a uranage and make them memorable. They say those who are most creative conceal their sources the best. Anderson doesn't seem to know how to conceal his sources. He clearly wants to be at The Rock's level and he's trying stuff that worked in the past or related variations of it and forgetting to put his own stamp on it.

 

But I'll tell you what. You want me completely and utterly absorbed in Anderson tomorrow? For all my frustrations with him, it would be really simple. Just have someone, be it another talent or some fictional bloc of faceless fans, calling him out on his trouble bringing anything new to the table. If that charge were levelled against him in character, I'd love to see how he'd react. Would he come up with some catchphrase to counter things proclaiming his authenicity? Maybe he ditches the conceptually bland Mic Check and finds a new move he can make his own and call say the Mold Breaker. Perhaps he starts referring to his knack for making the old new again. Maybe just as folks used to like to framing warning promos in the structure of You Don't Mess Around With Jim by Jim Croce (you know tugging on Superman's cape and all that) maybe he could model a response to the copy cat charge in the terms of Seventh Son by Johnny Rivers. Those lyrics would make a great shtick for an Anderson type character. Maybe references to the differences in invention and perfection. I can't remember hearing of him ever having his authenticity called into dispute. Which would make it so fundamental an attack in-character it would make for great TV.

 

Does Anderson have the foundation to be the next-gen Rock? Absolutely. But the reason The Rock got to be THE ROCK was because he built on that foundation. Anderson seems content to just have it and rest on the work of others. If I could just see him build around what he's got going and be able to say "Now THAT'S where the Ken part comes in", most if not all of my complaints would go away. Until that happens, he's still just a indy-caliber poser and a shell of what he's trying to be.

[Stennick]

So Kazarian got married and immediately afterwards it comes out he's been fooling around with some adult film star for two years. Apparently Tracy found out before the marriage. Is Tracy still in TNA? She's the won that posed nude right?

[thommohawk]

Pardon me, but can you tell me at what point did I (me, myself) say that Steve Austin was a journeyman ? I never said he was a journeyman, I was stating that others considered him a journeyman before the Stone Cold gimmick started. Which they did. And that nobody really cared when he was The Ringmaster. Which they didn't. Which also proves my main point that wrestlers need characterizing properly so that they are larger than life and whether you like it or not it's precisely that what gets people tuning in and as I say look at the difference in Steve and Rocky both before and after they became Stone Cold and The Rock respectively. Night and Day springs to mind in every single respect.

 

Also you keep bringing up my comparisons of Anderson to The Rock like that's the only thing I ever said and as if that was my main point, which of course it's not. I agree with cappyboy that Anderson has a lot of the foundations that The Rock had but again, that's exactly what I was saying all along. He has a lot of core similarities....

 

As for the other dude commenting what the hell dross has to do with wrestling, dude you're obviously unaware and trying to be smart, so I'll inform you - it's a saying in other countries for awful.

[justtxyank]

Do you know what an "average journeyman" is? Hint: they don't win rookie of the year their debut year, and they don't win every belt except the world title in 5 years. Anybody who knew anything about the wrestling business could tell you Steve Austin was going to be very, very good as early as 1990. Just because Easy E didn't want to build "old-school" guys didn't mean he wasn't recognized for his ability.

 

I think it is unfair to say he was an average journeyman, but in 1990 there wasn't much reason to think Austin was something more special than Dustin Rhodes who also won ROY and multiple titles in his time in WCW and the WWF. There was also Marc Mero who was a ROY and won multiple titles in WCW and then went on to win a title in the WWF as well.

 

Austin wasn't average, but he was not pegged as a superstar. Heyman liked him, which speaks well of Austin, but when he got to the WWF he wasn't moving mountains there either. It wasn't until the Stone Cold character that Austin became more than a really good midcarder.

 

So AJ needs a larger than life character? Whose life? Steve Austin got over being himself. Mick Foley got over being himself. Even Ric Flair, who stole Buddy Rogers' gimmick, made it his life. How does married, Christian AJ Styles get over doing a playboy gimmick?

 

To be clear, you are asserting that in real life Steve Austin is a beer swigging redneck who doesn't really like anybody, wants to fight everybody, takes orders from no one, has no respect for authority and that Mick Foley is really a deranged lunatic who hears voices? I mean Ric Flair by all accounts really is an egotistical womanizing alcoholic, but I never knew that Austin and Foley were their characters in real life.

[Franchise22]

I agree with cappyboy that Anderson has a lot of the foundations that The Rock had but again, that's exactly what I was saying all along. He has a lot of core similarities....

 

ive always thought anderson was a little too similiar to the rock in his delivery (turn off for me) and the way he works in the ring. the way he does the mic check very similiar to the rocks exact movments to the rock bottom. Heck, raw vs smackdown gave him alot of the rocks moves lol

its always bothered me that he was that similiar.

 

my opinion, im entitled

 

mic check:

 

rock bottom

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3iuuczmamw&feature=PlayList&p=B886AE79FC1549EC&index=43

[Stennick]

To be clear, you are asserting that in real life Steve Austin is a beer swigging redneck who doesn't really like anybody, wants to fight everybody, takes orders from no one, has no respect for authority and that Mick Foley is really a deranged lunatic who hears voices? I mean Ric Flair by all accounts really is an egotistical womanizing alcoholic, but I never knew that Austin and Foley were their characters in real life.

 

I think Austin is a beer swigging redneck who you could argue did have a DTA attitude after being fired from WCW.

 

Foley didn't really get "over" being a deranged lunatic. He got over being Mic Foley with a Mankind mask on. Or I should say thats what got him a World Championship.

 

I haven't paid attention to the rest of the conversation but I'd say yes, just like many people agree that Macho Man is really Macho Man in real life, etc.

[justtxyank]

As for Mr Anderson, if you drop all the prejudice and watch him as is, there's a hell of a lot of Rock in his character. As for AJ, there's a hell of a lot of an in his prime HBK in AJ's in ring ability.

 

I think I've been pretty clear on this site that Anderson has never appealed to me in anyway. I've never seen the comparison to the Rock as legit. The reason people naturally make that comparison is because of the attitude and the mic work which have similarities in tone and character, but not in delivery. Anderson has always felt forced on the mic to me and has always been bland in the ring. He doesn't have The Rock's look either.

 

As for AJ-HBK, this is another comparison that gets made and I think it sucks equally. AJ is very flashy and I definitely think he is one of the generation's best workers, but he is no HBK, especially not Prime HBK. AJ still doesn't have the psychology or the selling ability of HBK.

[justtxyank]

I think Austin is a beer swigging redneck who you could argue did have a DTA attitude after being fired from WCW.

 

Foley didn't really get "over" being a deranged lunatic. He got over being Mic Foley with a Mankind mask on. Or I should say thats what got him a World Championship.

 

I haven't paid attention to the rest of the conversation but I'd say yes, just like many people agree that Macho Man is really Macho Man in real life, etc.

 

Foley got over by being Cactus Jack and then Mankind in the WWF. By the time he became goofy Mankind he was already over, Vince just wasn't sure he could carry a strap.

[Stennick]

He was over to a degree yes. But he wasn't main eventing or anywhere near the main event outside of being cannon fodder for the Undertaker and a one off against HBK.

[justtxyank]

He was over to a degree yes. But he wasn't main eventing or anywhere near the main event outside of being cannon fodder for the Undertaker and a one off against HBK.

 

He wasn't main eventing because he was fat and ugly though, not because of overness. Vince was afraid that Foley would fail as a main eventer. Foley himself has stated this. He said that no matter how crowd's reacted to him, Vince never took him seriously until he went off the HIAC.

[Tag01]

I like Anderson. I think he brings a lot to TNA, enjoy his Shtick, and think he pretty much has the total package when he's healthy. But he's no Rock. Maybe it's because my time following wrestling closely was during Rock's hayday, but he's my favorite ever; bar none. I liked his matches, I liked his charisma, and his mic work was the best ever.

[lazorbeak]

To be clear, you are asserting that in real life Steve Austin is a beer swigging redneck who doesn't really like anybody, wants to fight everybody, takes orders from no one, has no respect for authority and that Mick Foley is really a deranged lunatic who hears voices? I mean Ric Flair by all accounts really is an egotistical womanizing alcoholic, but I never knew that Austin and Foley were their characters in real life.

 

In a word? YES. Steve Austin really is a small-town, accent-having, beer-swilling, wife-abusing guy. Playing off who he actually was made him such an effective heel in the early 90's and such an effective babyface in the late 90's.

 

Mick Foley has ALWAYS gotten over by being Mick Foley. What does he do? He gives heartfelt promos, he connects to the crowd, and he is willing to do anything to entertain. Mankind, crazy guy was a guy that existed for about a year and a half in 96-97 and didn't do much other than win some fans' respect. It was Mick Foley, crazy hardcore guy who is also fun-loving and goofy that became a world champion and a main eventer.

 

Maybe you didn't watch enough WWF to know much about the characters, but this isn't exactly esoteric knowledge.

 

Also if Vince "never took him seriously" prior to June 1998, why did he main event against Steve Austin in April and May, 1998?

[justtxyank]

In a word? YES. Steve Austin really is a small-town, accent-having, beer-swilling, wife-abusing guy. Playing off who he actually was made him such an effective heel in the early 90's and such an effective babyface in the late 90's.

 

Fair enough.

 

Mick Foley has ALWAYS gotten over by being Mick Foley. What does he do? He gives heartfelt promos, he connects to the crowd, and he is willing to do anything to entertain. Mankind, crazy guy was a guy that existed for about a year and a half in 96-97 and didn't do much other than win some fans' respect. It was Mick Foley, crazy hardcore guy who is also fun-loving and goofy that became a world champion and a main eventer.

 

OK, not going to argue about whether Foley was over before he converted to Goofy.

 

Also if Vince "never took him seriously" prior to June 1998, why did he main event against Steve Austin in April and May, 1998?

 

Getting a few main event matches doesn't mean the promoter is taking you seriously as a legit main eventer. Austin could main event against anybody in 1998 and sell out as he was on of the best draws in the history of the business. It's fine if you disagree with me, but Foley has stated this himself that it took him going off the HIAC for Vince to believe in him.

[cappyboy]

Pardon me, but can you tell me at what point did I (me, myself) say that Steve Austin was a journeyman ? I never said he was a journeyman, I was stating that others considered him a journeyman before the Stone Cold gimmick started. Which they did. And that nobody really cared when he was The Ringmaster. Which they didn't. Which also proves my main point that wrestlers need characterizing properly so that they are larger than life and whether you like it or not it's precisely that what gets people tuning in and as I say look at the difference in Steve and Rocky both before and after they became Stone Cold and The Rock respectively. Night and Day springs to mind in every single respect.

 

All well and good. But that's not what has been translating. I can't speak for the others. But part of my problem (if it is mine) may be the fact we've been discussing characters that didn't necessarily translate to me as intended in the first place.

 

Also you keep bringing up my comparisons of Anderson to The Rock like that's the only thing I ever said and as if that was my main point, which of course it's not. I agree with cappyboy that Anderson has a lot of the foundations that The Rock had but again, that's exactly what I was saying all along. He has a lot of core similarities....

 

Well you been pushing it a bit hard to just say he had core similiarities. You've been talking the guy up like he had achieved or is capable of achieving the Rock's levels of "Rockness" for lack of a better word. And he's no where near it. He's a mimic cutting and pasting pieces of the guys he wants to be into his work and not giving anything that feels organic. Which would be fine if he were in USPW or CGC. But he's not. He's in a company that the second largest in America and a national presence. He needs more going for him if he's going to be worthy of all the hopes and dreams his supporters have for him.