The Official TNA / Impact / GFW Discussion Thread

[brashleyholland]

I'll field this one. In any way most of us have are capable of observing first-hand, he was one-dimensional because he was booked a certain way. Could be it was the only dimension he had. But in general, we'd only be able to know that secondhand from folks who were there in WCW at the time. So I'd be more comfortable saying the former until reliable inside voices said otherwise.

 

The next logical question then would be: If he was actually capable of more, why was this ability never showcased? The streak was a great gimmick, but when it was over, why didn't we see anything new?

 

NB: I realise that this isn't a perfect world and we don't always see guys given an oppertunity to showcase their full potential. That said, I do see Goldberd as having the kind of 'pull' to make it happen. Maybe he was happy being what he was?

[Moderndaywarrior]

Goldberg was a one trick pony because he was booked as a one trick pony. Imagine if you take a genuine great NWA/WCW superstar like Ricky Steamboat or Great Muta or Sting and say fellas, you've got 1 to 2 minutes max every night, I want you to do the spear and jackhammer, and thats it, how else can you be made to look? When they needed to pad out matches on Pay-Per-View he had some decent qualities to him. Not outstanding, but enough coupled with the massive popularity and star quality to make something more of him, far beyond a one trick pony.

 

I would say yes and no....he was booked in quick matches which makes it hard to do alot but also when he did do longer matches he didn't show a whole alot of range outside of what he did in short matches unlike say, a Magnum T.A. who got a similar Jesus push but could deliver in a longer match.

 

Ironically,now that i think of it, 90's WCW was 80's MACW.WCW 2.0.....Goldberg was their "new"Magnum T.A., the N.W.O. was their "new" Four Horsemen... strangely enough their "new" Sting was still Sting.....

[tristram]

Could he have been booked as anything else though? I guess we'll never know.

 

To me, someone like say, Flair, is great because they *can* be booked in a variety of ways. He could make almost anyone look good, can work with big guys, small guys, have technical masterclasses or wild brawls.

 

It's a case of what came first, the chicken or the egg? Was Goldberg one-dimentional because he was booked a certain way, or was he booked a certain way because he was one-dimentional?

 

Because that's how he was booked.

 

If you look at some of his Pay-Per-View matches, they're quite controlled in contrast to his Monday Nitro squashes. When he was repeatedly given the likes of Mean Mike Enos or Glacier to beat down in half a minute flat, that's what he did. When he was asked to bide some time, that's what he did. As I say, look at his PPV match with DDP. It's a very, very good match. And, then jobbing him to Nash, and diong next to nothing with Nash aside from the finger poke of doom and some comic routines, how on earth can he progress beyond that with any surety?

 

To me he could easily have been Brock Lesnar. You know he's hella strong, but he can give you some minutes and work a decent match. Nothing outstanding, but you can vary the inputs and outputs.

[tristram]

I would say yes and no....he was booked in quick matches which makes it hard to do alot but also when he did do longer matches he didn't show a whole alot of range outside of what he did in short matches unlike say, a Magnum T.A. who got a similar Jesus push but could deliver in a longer match.

 

Ironically,now that i think of it, 90's WCW was 80's MACW.WCW 2.0.....Goldberg was their "new"Magnum T.A., the N.W.O. was their "new" Four Horsemen... strangely enough their "new" Sting was still Sting.....

 

In his short matches he came to the ring, snarled, got in a kick, then it was spear and jackhammer time.

 

In matches where he was allowed to execute more variety because he had more time, he did alright. Nothing outstanding, but alright. Got by with working the crowd for wont of a better term, but still, could take you down to the mat and use some good moves. Had some decent martial arts variety to him as well. Not Benoit, Jericho league, but decent enough to hold his own.

[tristram]

Agreed, the ending was probably the worst way to end it and not much came after it (for either party) I wasn't dissapoined at the cheating aspect as it kinda seemed like you had to cheat to beat him, just in retrospect looking at the post-defeat action they could have def. done more and i agree with you it seemed like they didnt know what to do w/him since he didnt have the streak to fall back on

 

edit: Actually, a cool ending would have been losing to Flair, showing it took "The dirtiest player in the game" to beat this monster man beast that is Goldberg, and I dont think anyone would look bad losing to Flair after a low blow. Better than a cattleprod.

 

Good thinking on Flair. Someone who needs the rub, can legitimately wrestle, and because of a lengthy push up the card themselves its no disgrace to lose to, infact, perhaps even he can take something from. Nash was not the guy, unless they really run with Nash-Goldberg, which they didn't.

[PeterHilton]

To me he could easily have been Brock Lesnar. You know he's hella strong, but he can give you some minutes and work a decent match. Nothing outstanding, but you can vary the inputs and outputs.

 

I think you're giving Bill too much credit or Brock not enough. Goldberg could be carried to a watchable match...but he's nowhere near Brock in the ring.

 

Great look, great persona, decent amount of charisma...the gimmick was great but that monster push wouldn't have worked if Goldberg didn't play it so well.

 

I agree with Hyde though; Bill Goldberg really isn't bringing anything to the table if he goes to TNA. Of course...that didn't stop them from signing some of those other 'names' on the roster.

[cappyboy]

The next logical question then would be: If he was actually capable of more, why was this ability never showcased? The streak was a great gimmick, but when it was over, why didn't we see anything new?

 

NB: I realise that this isn't a perfect world and we don't always see guys given an oppertunity to showcase their full potential. That said, I do see Goldberd as having the kind of 'pull' to make it happen. Maybe he was happy being what he was?

 

You'll get no argument here about the next logical question. All I can say in answer is that there are a lot of things in that period that should have happened and didn't. For all I know you may have answered it with your final question.

[tristram]

I think you're giving Bill too much credit or Brock not enough. Goldberg could be carried to a watchable match...but he's nowhere near Brock in the ring.

 

Great look, great persona, decent amount of charisma...the gimmick was great but that monster push wouldn't have worked if Goldberg didn't play it so well.

 

I agree with Hyde though; Bill Goldberg really isn't bringing anything to the table if he goes to TNA. Of course...that didn't stop them from signing some of those other 'names' on the roster.

 

Oh God no, I wouldn't bring in Goldberg now. To me, Goldberg's long term star value drops big time by the way he was booked in WCW. He's like Kevin Arnold, you can do whatever you want and you can try as many different career alterations, but at the end of the day in your main field of expertise you're always going to be the man with the streak, and once that's done... what more is there? He would add nothing at all to their situation, plus, I feel he'd decrease the value of their brand "Bobby Lashley" style in that I don't think professional wrestling will ever be his main priority again.

 

Bringing Goldberg back now to me would be the equivalent of WCW bringing in the Ultimate Warrior. Don't get me wrong, I popped big time when Warrior showed up, but there's not much beyond the initial reaction that they can really do and it ends up being a great big embarrassment for all concerned.

[cappyboy]

Oh God no, I wouldn't bring in Goldberg now. To me, Goldberg's long term star value drops big time by the way he was booked in WCW. He's like Kevin Arnold, you can do whatever you want and you can try as many different career alterations, but at the end of the day in your main field of expertise you're always going to be the man with the streak, and once that's done... what more is there? He would add nothing at all to their situation, plus, I feel he'd decrease the value of their brand "Bobby Lashley" style in that I don't think professional wrestling will ever be his main priority again.

 

Okay. Color me confused here. What does Fred Savage's character on The Wonder Years have to do with your point about Goldberg?

[lazorbeak]

So much bad armchair booking here. Goldberg wasn't able to follow up after his loss to Nash because he hurt himself on TV and WCW had to find some excuse to remove him. I don't care who you put over him having him lose and then disappear isn't exactly going to keep the crowd hot.

 

Good thinking on Flair. Someone who needs the rub, can legitimately wrestle, and because of a lengthy push up the card themselves its no disgrace to lose to, infact, perhaps even he can take something from. Nash was not the guy, unless they really run with Nash-Goldberg, which they didn't.

 

Ugh, no. Flair, in the worst shape of his life, fifty years old, is going to beat Goldberg with a low blow? Why not just tell every mark in the audience to just leave? There's a reason Flair wasn't booked as an active wrestler during this time period in WCW, and the idea that a guy like him who would receive almost zero rub from ending the streak should've been the guy to do it is just a bad idea.

 

Nash was the right choice: he got a big win out of it, have him go from tweener to heel turn, re-unite the NWO, all of that was fine. Right up until the point when they put the belt on Hogan AGAIN. Nobody wanted to see that either by that point.

[Hyde Hill]

I agree with Lazor, but this is becoming a rebook wcw thread guys so lets not go there.

 

In short Goldberg can possibly be useful for TNA but only if handled very very well and if he doesn't cost too much and his heart is in it. Since 2 and 3 are very unlikely and 1 is very hard to do it wouldn't be a smart move even if he is willing to return to the ring.

[PeterHilton]

I believe he's saying that no matter what Fred Savage does, he's 'Kevin Arnold.'

 

No matter what Bill does...he's going to be 'Who's next Goldberg.'

 

I see the connection. I think one of the main reasons Goldberg can't bring more to the table is that he never wanted to. I saw a ton of interviews with him at his height of popularity and later whn he started appear in movies and you could just tell he didn't have the passion for the business that others have.

 

The very definition of a guy who went into wrestling because his 'real career' fell a little short.

[PeterHilton]

I agree with Lazor, but this is becoming a rebook wcw thread guys so lets not go there.

 

 

Well this wouldn't keep happening if TNA didn't have such a WCW in its dying days feel.

[Hyde Hill]

let's not go there either. :p

[jesterx7769]

I;m just excited for tomorrow, I'm hoping they really cut out silly/trying to be cool or smart and just put on a great show using the talent and storylines in place.

[PeterHilton]

I;m just excited for tomorrow, I'm hoping they really cut out silly/trying to be cool or smart and just put on a great show using the talent and storylines in place.

 

BWAHAHAHA...wut??

 

It's TNA. It's going to be a hit or miss clusterf--- of overbooking, with several turns, a few big name appearances, and at least one match so good that it will make you wish the WWE would let their own workers go w/o all the restrictions of working a "WWE style."

 

I mean ..don't be surprised if you see a match that net fans will call a free tv MOTY candidate, but the show ends with Hogan turning on Abyss and forming a 'new nWo' with Nash, AJ, Flair, Foley, and OJ.

[Bigpapa42]

Haven't seen it mentioned here. But it looks like the final Thursday Impact did a 1.1 rating. So they're basically back down to pre-Hogan ratings. Moving to Monday's better give them a bit of a boost, or they've essentially killed all the momentum they had to start the year.

[PeterHilton]

Haven't seen it mentioned here. But it looks like the final Thursday Impact did a 1.1 rating. So they're basically back down to pre-Hogan ratings. Moving to Monday's better give them a bit of a boost, or they've essentially killed all the momentum they had to start the year.

 

Yeah...that's horrible news for TNA. I saw that.

 

But honestly, nothing much has changed even with all the changes.

 

TNA has ALWAYS had talent. But the storylines have also ALWAYS been painful to follow.

 

They brought in a crapload of 'names' but haven't really done anything to tak advantage of them.

 

The Flair/AJ partnership and the Anderson/Kurt feud are the only thing that has been presented in a clear and understandable manner. Everything else? Same hot mess as before.

[jesterx7769]

I agree, its bad news b/c it shows people weren't interested enough to stick around, now hopefully that changes but by the numbers its a fact right now.

 

A lot of the problem seems to be relying on the old talent too much, I know you need old talent but this is how I see Monday, if you watched WCW or WWE or event caught TNA for a bit, is Hogan and Flair in the ring really going to make you watch? Or would Angle vs. Sting/RVD (just for example) make you tune in? While I agree they need the "old names" on the show, it seems theyve just used them too much which has turned people off, I mean how many times did Scott hall and Waltman close TNA since the new year? Half the time? Then when you dont use some guys that the TNA fans that kept the company alive get upset you lose both new viewers who dont stick around for Hogan/Hall/Nastys and old ones who are upset people like Joe/Daniels aren't being used.

 

Is it hard? Hell yes it is, theres a reason there hasn't been a number two company for about 10 years. I just hope this Monday move can be the spark they need to get their ratings about 1.5 consistently

 

edit: Two other things that stick out to me that I've thought for awhile. The name, while TNA is getting more popular they really to get away from the "dirty" name, when i mentioned it to my girlfriend she asked me if it was porn and mentioned the tits and ass. Ignorant? Yes. But how do you expect people to react when they don't know you? I'm sure there are parents out there that would much rather have their kids watch WWE than give this new TNA thing a try. Ignorant? Yes, but once again they know WWE, they don't know TNA, and wrestling already has a bad image. I know someone will probably say "then what do you want them to be called!?" just replace the N with a W, Total Wrestling Action, TWA doesn't give off such a bad image.

 

2) Russo. Now my reason is not that he sucks b/c I have no idea what parts of TNA he writes and which parts he doesn't...which is the problem. A lot of people give him a bad wrap for WCW and that reputation hurts by having someone there especially when even if Russo is writing gold for TNA right now, no one knows it and it comes down to "I didnt like what he wrote then and buried a company I like why would I watch him now?" Ignorant? sure, but once again why do you expect people to give it a try when you send out so many negatives before they even see an episode? Kinda the same boat with Bischoff, sure people know him, but alot of WCW fans dont like how he ran WCW at the end and your WWE fans dont like him since he was the "bad guy from WCW" he obviously knows alot about the business but it just helps create negative energy and obviously his name isn't drawing people in after two months (short time I know I'm not saying hes a bum fire him)

[PeterHilton]

Here's the worst part: The show peaked with the first quarter-hour with a 1.31. the show dropped consistently throughout the remainder of the show with the final quarter-hour drawing a show-low .93 rating.

 

For those who don't remember, the final quarter hour featured a world title match between four of TNA's 'hottest young stars' (AJ/Pope/Wolfe/Abyss) and a bloody brawl with Hogan and Flair.

 

So no one is getting over. Not the names. Not the young guys.

 

Try reading the recaps sometime to get an idea of how much of the show is dedicated to skits and angles: they are just giant blocks of text with a two minute match to break things up every once in a while.

 

The booking is bad.

 

I fully expect for the Monday night move to produce a nice bump for the ratings, but it won't match the 're-launch' from a few months back. And if they can't keep the momentum in the following weeks- no matter how many RVDs and Jeff Hardys they add - it won't matter.

[Hyde Hill]

Lol TWA has always been my fav for a name change as well. And if they ever are going to do it now is the time. Or just ad the w as in TNAW presents Impact etc.

[Tag01]

I TEW I notice that when I take over an org there is a lot of upheaval at the beginning: turns, firings, new guys, title changes, etc. Often the way the roster is built isn't exactly what I want. But after some time things gel and the direction I'm going in is clear. I don't know if this is what will happen with TNA or not. But I hope so; it's pretty bad right now. It reminds me of dying WCW in the sense that they're always trying to do to much, do to many turns, big shockers, etc. I think they'd benefit from actually simplifying. The stories themselves are not necessarily so bad; they're just using too many angles and making too many twists and turns. Cultivate the stories more slowly, and let the ringwork tell some of it.

 

Some of the examples of things I like right now in TNA: (1) Angle-Anderson. Anderson might be a Rock knockoff but he;s a good one, and I enjoy his schtick. It works for me, and his fued with Angle is the best thing going right now. (2) The Hernandez-Morgan dynamic. They're slowly building towards a turn and the angles they've used have been perfect. The in ring work is telling the story well also. Once they fued, the winner will be ready to go to the top of the roster.

 

The problem with TNA is the main event picture. Could Jarrett vs. Bischoff be any more of an irritating, confusing waste of time? If Bischoff is so evil, why is Hogan still with him? What's the point of The Band vs. Nash/Young? I think if this big cluster actually shakes out with some clearly drawn battle lines then TNA will be in a much better position. Monday Night is the PERFECT opportunity to clear ALL of these things up, but I'm not holding my breathe.

[PeterHilton]

I TEW I notice that when I take over an org there is a lot of upheaval at the beginning: turns, firings, new guys, title changes, etc. Often the way the roster is built isn't exactly what I want. But after some time things gel and the direction I'm going in is clear. I don't know if this is what will happen with TNA or not. But I hope so; it's pretty bad right now. It reminds me of dying WCW in the sense that they're always trying to do to much, do to many turns, big shockers, etc. I think they'd benefit from actually simplifying. The stories themselves are not necessarily so bad; they're just using too many angles and making too many twists and turns. Cultivate the stories more slowly, and let the ringwork tell some of it.

 

Some of the examples of things I like right now in TNA: (1) Angle-Anderson. Anderson might be a Rock knockoff but he;s a good one, and I enjoy his schtick. It works for me, and his fued with Angle is the best thing going right now. (2) The Hernandez-Morgan dynamic. They're slowly building towards a turn and the angles they've used have been perfect. The in ring work is telling the story well also. Once they fued, the winner will be ready to go to the top of the roster.

 

The problem with TNA is the main event picture. Could Jarrett vs. Bischoff be any more of an irritating, confusing waste of time? If Bischoff is so evil, why is Hogan still with him? What's the point of The Band vs. Nash/Young? I think if this big cluster actually shakes out with some clearly drawn battle lines then TNA will be in a much better position. Monday Night is the PERFECT opportunity to clear ALL of these things up, but I'm not holding my breathe.

 

Here's the thing (and I hate that I'm starting to sound overly negative because I'd love to see TNA succeed) : you made a lot of great points, but everything you've said that's a problem FOR YEAAAARRRRRRSSSS.

 

It's not like this stuff all just cropped up because of the new regime.

 

Too many angles and too many convoluted and pointless plot twists? See almost every episode since Impact went to two hours.

 

What's the point of The Band vs Nash and Young? See What's the point of The Maffia vs The Frontline.

 

Pointless Jarret story that no one cares about? See Pretty Much TNA's Entire Existence

 

Even the good stuff...like 'the Hernandez/Morgan break up' has been repeated ad nauseam. TNA has it's tag teams break up and feud constantly and BOTH guys were already in a position to main event LAST YEAR.

(you pushed them down the card to move them up the card???wtf??)

 

It's so frustrating. So incredibly frustrating.

[cappyboy]

 

edit: Two other things that stick out to me that I've thought for awhile. The name, while TNA is getting more popular they really to get away from the "dirty" name, when i mentioned it to my girlfriend she asked me if it was porn and mentioned the tits and ass. Ignorant? Yes. But how do you expect people to react when they don't know you? I'm sure there are parents out there that would much rather have their kids watch WWE than give this new TNA thing a try. Ignorant? Yes, but once again they know WWE, they don't know TNA, and wrestling already has a bad image. I know someone will probably say "then what do you want them to be called!?" just replace the N with a W, Total Wrestling Action, TWA doesn't give off such a bad image.

 

You know it's funny. Ring of Honor has the name to be successful in the mainstream but not the product or profile. TNA has the product and is working to build the profile but one of the crappiest names possibly for attaining true number two status. Especially where the acronym is concerned. If the two promotions could somehow just swap names, TNA could push forward and RoH would have the cult fed name that still describes them quite well.

[jesterx7769]

You know it's funny. Ring of Honor has the name to be successful in the mainstream but not the product or profile. TNA has the product and is working to build the profile but one of the crappiest names possibly for attaining true number two status. Especially where the acronym is concerned. If the two promotions could somehow just swap names, TNA could push forward and RoH would have the cult fed name that still describes them quite well.

 

Lol TWA has always been my fav for a name change as well. And if they ever are going to do it now is the time. Or just ad the w as in TNAW presents Impact etc.

 

lol I am actually surprised the first two people to comment on a name change agree with me! There are def. bigger problems but as I mentioned its just one more thing giving viewers a reason Not to tune in, if people tune in and don't like the product fine on to stage two of making a better product. but WWE gets over 3.+ for their ratings and TNA cant even get 1.5 once (i think they might have done it once) when theoretically if you like wrestling you like WWE, if you like wrestling you should want to watch it more on tv and TNA is clearly lacking those cross over viewers, internet fan or not its in your tv guide