The Official TNA / Impact / GFW Discussion Thread

[Stennick]

I think thats his way of appeasing TNA's fairly large internet base. They can find stories for Rob Terry, ECW rejects, and all sorts of other talentless hacks but they can't find something for Christopher Daniels? I honestly don't know how they fired the guy in the first place. Everything TNA has done for the last seven years he's been a huge part of and to just up and fire a guy like that because hew as making too much money and then turn right around and bring in Orlando Jordan smacks of B.S to me. Oh well Daniels is doing his thing in ROH and honestly I hope he stays there.

[Jaysin]

You can be as cynical of it as you want, but I believe him. Then again, I like the ECW "rejects", Orlando Jordan, and Rob Terry can develop into a decent big man given enough time and grooming.

 

I love Daniels and I do hope he comes back.

[Stennick]

You know I was the biggest Bischoff fan in the world. I truly believed that from 95-98 he was the smartest man in wrestling (to some degree). I loved the way he counter balanced WWE programming, he gave away results, he was on when they were on commercial, he had an entire network at his disposal and he used it like nobody else ever did.

 

Even his book I most believed and thought he was given at the very least what he honestly thought was the truth. Then comes TNA and every fantasy booker/dynasty writer on the planet has exactly what they want. Bischoff vs. Vince part II, TNA vs. WWE, Monday Night Wars, EVERYTHING you could ask for from a wrestling fans stand point except for the excitement. Bischoff had been down this road before and did nothing.

 

In WCW the entire reason there was a cruiserweight division is because there wasn't one in the WWF, the entire reason for the nWo and other realistic stories was because that wasn't going on in the WWF. He was the anti WWF. It took him about a year but by 1996 he was flast out producing better television than Vince. He knows what it takes to be successful and he did none of those things in TNA. So far the only new thing he has brought to TNA are the REaction type promos that we see.

 

Eric has been around for over 9 months now and I have to say other than a stint of about two months the quality of the show has not improved at all. In fact I don't even know what his role in the company is. He seems to take on a producer type role of just over seeing the product and not injecting himself in it. Are they really paying this guy to say "yeah that looks good". Because that was essentially his role in WCW while working with Russo the first time and he proved to not be so great in that role during that time period either.

 

I like Eric but the fact that he's got all these other guys jobs and hired in countless guys that nobody cares about but can't find something for Daniels to do makes me think he's blowing smoke.

[Hyde Hill]

Think the Daniels release also has to do with Terry Taylor being the talent relations guy and he is slowly being replaced with D-Lo.

[Self]

As for 'they', I'd love to speculate, but I cannot possibly be interested in anything to do with Abyss.

 

As for Daniels, he's good, but I'd MUCH rather see someone new.

[Hyde Hill]

I don't know about Bisch. He has done some good and some bad apparently but it's hard to say what he is and is not responsible for so it is hard to judge.

[Stennick]

So shortly after Hulk Hogan is going to TNA shock wore off I got to thinking. What exactly do you do with a Hulk Hogan that can't wrestle? He's one of the most charasmatic men on the planet but Hogans promos are about Hogan. They always have been even at the height of the nWo outside of mentioning the groups name he had very little to say about his "band mates". Hogan's schtick only works for Hogan and only works when he's wrestling. He's not a great authority figure because again he's not a great promo when it comes to putting over other guys or the show in general. Even before his heel turn he wasn't out there bragging about WCW he was bragging about Hogan.

 

So what exactly do you do with a 50 year old Hulk Hogan who can't wrestle. You pay him all that money to go on talk shows and talk about TNA? Thats expensive marketing when you could essentially do the same thing with Ric Flair who's already proven he's great in the manager role (taking on the manager/player role in Evolution). So is Hogan there as Hyde suggested to get those over seas television deals? And since their paying him so much they bring him onto the show and might as well get some mileage out of him? What would you guys do with Hogan if you HAD to use him? Preferably realistic no Abyss vs. Hogan thumbtack matches.

[Hyde Hill]

Use him much like they used him in the "good" period and only let him come out if absolutely necessary. Make it special, as less is more in the case of legends. And yeah he needs to improve in putting others over and the promotion. Don't know about another role then authority as he doesn't strike as a manager type ala Flair. Maybe more like an occasional manager/supporter and sorter out of issues that don't involve authority.

 

For the rest he should be backstage as a semi road agent or mostly on the road talking to every media outlet that will have him and always have something TNA on him and name-drop it. Like he should have done with the Hasselhof rost.

[PeterHilton]

As for 'they', I'd love to speculate, but I cannot possibly be interested in anything to do with Abyss.

 

As for Daniels, he's good, but I'd MUCH rather see someone new.

 

Daniels' big problem is that, with TNA's shift in the product their presenting, he's just entirely too bland. Unless he does that Fallen Angel thing, he's "just a guy."

 

And TNA doesn't need any more of those.

 

So what exactly do you do with a 50 year old Hulk Hogan who can't wrestle. You pay him all that money to go on talk shows and talk about TNA? Thats expensive marketing when you could essentially do the same thing with Ric Flair who's already proven he's great in the manager role (taking on the manager/player role in Evolution). So is Hogan there as Hyde suggested to get those over seas television deals? And since their paying him so much they bring him onto the show and might as well get some mileage out of him? What would you guys do with Hogan if you HAD to use him? Preferably realistic no Abyss vs. Hogan thumbtack matches.

 

I'd continue the PR thing and actually keep him as the Authority Figure, buthave him play more of the bad guy role: have him talk about how the young guys can't hack it, how HE'S the reason TNA is even on the map, have him constantly telling guys they need to show they have the IT factor...and as wrestlers work to gain his favor he slowly builds a stable of his "chosen few" (they get the title shots, they get screwy referee bias ) ...so you're taking advantage of Hogan's popularity and leaving the focus on him as a storyline but you're also using the natural smarkiness of TNA fans who kinda want to root for their guys as the underdog anyway

[SaySo]

Imagine if McMahon had a corporate backing during 1996/1997 of a Time Warner, there wouldn't be a threat of bankruptcy or being taken off the air since Ted Turner would pump money (which he did to WCW since they weren't a profitable venture until Bischoff took it over).

 

When WWE was at its darkest hour, it took McMahon to screw one of the most loyal worker in his company to start getting the momentum to change in his favor. The Montreal Screwjob was the creation of the Mr. McMahon character, the character that would set the course. Montreal Screwjob was D-Day...the push that would take five months to finally snap the WCW 83 week streak on top and eventually winning the Monday Night War.

 

While WCW was on the hook to pay Bret "The Hitman" Hart, they didn't utilized him like his price tag that first year. As WWF was starting to catch Nitro in the ratings war, Eric Bischoff seem to make decisions like putting Goldberg / Hogan on Nitro instead of investing that match on a pay per view (I guess they wanted to start another ratings streak, which didn't bode well because WWF won majority of the times post May 1998).

 

I guess WWF signing of Mike Tyson for the Road to WrestleMania forced Eric Bischoff to outdo VKM even better by signing Karl Malone, Dennis Rodman, and Jay Leno to wrestle on their pay per view while their champion Goldberg was somewhere in the card (not until Halloween Havoc that he main evented a PPV, but that went off the air in some markets i believe reading). Then he signed the Ultimate Warrior, maybe he's the solution since Warrior was big in the WWF.

 

When WWF started to win the Monday Nights, the backstage atomosphere of WCW became heading to the road less traveled (Where the Big Boys get Paid and Get the Final Say). While The Rock, Foley, HHH became main event stars, WCW had similar faces fight it out throughout 1999 (Flair-vs-Hogan, etc.). WWE were heading to ratings over 5.0. WCW was dropping down to 3.0 into the next year.

 

Who was running WCW in 1995? In 1997? In 1998? In 1999? It always appear to me that Bischoff tends to deflect his involvement post 1998. But i can't blame him for doing that if you look at WCW after 1998 (financial statement 1999, 2000 | Buy rate drops | attendance drops, etc.).

 

Did 1996-1998 lead to long term success with WCW? Looking back now, not a chance. The intent of Bischoff was to get rid of WWF which he came very close to achieving but didn't get the job done. The short term success of being on top of Monday Night was coupled with the Long Term failures that allowed the value of WCW to shrunk in its value (, 2001, AOL-Time Warner sold WCW to WWF for less than $10 miillion. I remember reading that the value of WCW was nothing without TNT broadcasting it. Couldn't they shop it to another network? Fusient back out only cause TNT / TBS isn't airing it). If only Bischoff thought of selling WCW back in 1997 instead of 2001, it would have been singing a different tune.

 

Bischoff was innovative in his approach for Monday Nights but sometimes you have to be consistent and good for a longer span, not a few years.

[Hyde Hill]

Ehm I think we where talking Bisch in TNA not Bisch in general. So what is your opinion if you have any of him in TNA so far SaySo?

[SaySo]

I don't think highly of him. Just don't know what kind of value (valuable enough, positive change to, etc.) he has to offer to the wrestling world since of his initial run in WCW which clouds my judgment. But if i had to choose between Bischoff or Hogan, i'll pick Bischoff since he has experience running a rasslin' company. And Hogan could do a better job promoting TNA instead of his book but that was ten months ago.

[Stennick]

I agree that Eric didn't make the most wise decisions in the world but the truth of the matter is they were a successful professional wrestling company. For the first time in HISTORY Eric had WCW turn a profit in 1995. WCW was born in November of 1988 so it was over six years of time before WCW made a profit. Men like Bill Watts, Ric Flair, Dusty Rhodes, Ole Anderson to name a few couldn't do what Eric Bischoff did and thats turn a profit.

 

From 1994 until 1999 Bischoff ran a successful pro wrestling company. It was profitable, it was main stream, it was for the majority of that the number one company in the world or neck and neck with. Nobody in the history of that company had more success running it than Eric did. I'm not saying he built long term plans but they certainly worked.

 

Not only did he ask for television time on Monday nights to compete, but he made more use of Ted Turner's media than anyone ever had. He had television on two different networks, he was making sure WCW were on the air while Vince was on commercial. He CREATED the over run. There are a lot of things Eric Bischoff did which by the way includes the very format WWF use today. Eric was the first to take us to twelve pay per views, he was the first to take us to two hours of prime time television.

 

Eric's not really a creative genious in the ring but as far as forever changing the way pro wrestling television was done. Everyone gives Paul E all this credit but the truth is. The long television promos, cruiserweights in meaningful roles, luchadors, multiple hours of prime time television, TWO prime time television shows. (Thunder was around two years before Smackdown), twelve pay per views a year, the over run.

 

Eric has done more for pro wrestling than anybody gives him credit for. He made mistakes but so did McMahon (nearly bankrupted his own company), so did Heyman (he DID bankrupt his company) and so has every other promoter out there and the truth is nobody else in the history of pro wrestling has beaten Vince McMahon at his own game, EVER and at this point they likely will. As of this year Vince has been in business for himself 28 years. When they look back on that time its going to read 26-2. Those two losses are 1996 and 97 and those two losses came against Eric Bischoff.

[PeterHilton]

Eric has done more for pro wrestling than anybody gives him credit for. He made mistakes but so did McMahon (nearly bankrupted his own company), so did Heyman (he DID bankrupt his company) and so has every other promoter out there and the truth is nobody else in the history of pro wrestling has beaten Vince McMahon at his own game, EVER and at this point they likely will. As of this year Vince has been in business for himself 28 years. When they look back on that time its going to read 26-2. Those two losses are 1996 and 97 and those two losses came against Eric Bischoff.

 

I think that, at least for me, the problem is that Eric is VERY aware of how much he did for wrestling and spends as much time as possible reminding people of it, while conveniently forgetting the mistakes he made (which were never his fault according to him)

 

He was a brilliant producer, was much better than Vince about being smart about popular culture, could spot trends much earlier than the WWE did, and knew how to take advantage of the benefits that came with being attached to a large corporation.

 

But that ego - that part of him that won't let him admit to his mistakes even years after the fact - is what killed WCW in the end. His unwillingness to change,his unwillingness to create new stars, his unwillingness to admit the nWo was dead, his unwillingness to take the WCW and net fans seriously (something he still does today with TNA's hardcore fans)...those all created an atmosphere where WCW went from cutting edge to tired and played out in barely over two years.

 

He was a smart guy with a fatal amount of hubris. And he still is.

[LiquidSwords]

I have one question about TNA. Does Spike have any say in the booking or creative process? Do they try to use their influence to have certain people booked well that they think are marketable or will make TNA money?

[jwt13]

I think thats his way of appeasing TNA's fairly large internet base. They can find stories for Rob Terry, ECW rejects, and all sorts of other talentless hacks but they can't find something for Christopher Daniels? I honestly don't know how they fired the guy in the first place. Everything TNA has done for the last seven years he's been a huge part of and to just up and fire a guy like that because hew as making too much money and then turn right around and bring in Orlando Jordan smacks of B.S to me. Oh well Daniels is doing his thing in ROH and honestly I hope he stays there.

 

I've never seen anything in Daneils I've always thought he was a midcard at best for a national company so ROH probley is the best fit for him he could be good for a small indy fed like ROH

[brashleyholland]

I have one question about TNA. Does Spike have any say in the booking or creative process? Do they try to use their influence to have certain people booked well that they think are marketable or will make TNA money?

 

I have been told by someone who works for the UFC as one of their Spike TV liaisons, that the network has final say over what goes on....which is the same with any network and makes perfect sense.

 

So while they may not have the kind of influence to say "We want Jeff Hardy to be the TNA champion for the next six months", it's probable that if TNA did a storyline where a good guy with a white supremacist gimmick beat up on 'evil' black guys each week then burned a Koran live on Impact, they could certainly veto the idea.

 

The issue is that TNA doesn't really have anyone or anything that Spike can 'ask for' in order to spike (no pun intended) ratings. They've often come to verbal blows with the UFC over wanting certain fights or fighters (Penn, Rampage, even Lesnar at one point) on Fight Nights or 'numbered' UFCs on their network. However who or what does TNA have that would give them cause to say "We want THAT every week"?

[Hyde Hill]

I have one question about TNA. Does Spike have any say in the booking or creative process? Do they try to use their influence to have certain people booked well that they think are marketable or will make TNA money?

 

It's not one hundred percent sure. But as they are TNA's main business partner they definitely have indirect influence by defining TNA's target audience (males 18-39) and stuff like that. Further reports indicate that Spike foots a large part of the bill (around 50 percent) of some of TNA's talent or have at least done so in the past so they want to see that talent featured at the very least. The only direct and specific influence story I know of is that Spike said they wanted the belt put on Sting when he was first signed to a long term deal.

 

Edit: And yeah final say as brashley pointed out but I thought that was a given and it's more a negative power then a we want this power.

[Jaysin]

 

I'm going to a TNA live event tomorrow. I'm so excited

[ampulator]

I have been told by someone who works for the UFC as one of their Spike TV liaisons, that the network has final say over what goes on....which is the same with any network and makes perfect sense.

 

So while they may not have the kind of influence to say "We want Jeff Hardy to be the TNA champion for the next six months", it's probable that if TNA did a storyline where a good guy with a white supremacist gimmick beat up on 'evil' black guys each week then burned a Koran live on Impact, they could certainly veto the idea.

 

The issue is that TNA doesn't really have anyone or anything that Spike can 'ask for' in order to spike (no pun intended) ratings. They've often come to verbal blows with the UFC over wanting certain fights or fighters (Penn, Rampage, even Lesnar at one point) on Fight Nights or 'numbered' UFCs on their network. However who or what does TNA have that would give them cause to say "We want THAT every week"?

Which brings me to this question? If there isn't something Spike particularly wants from TNA, why need TNA in the first place? They got the UFC.

[Stennick]

There are several advantages to having TNA there as well as the UFC.

 

For all intents and purposes at the current moment MMA is surging in popularity while pro wrestling at the very least is treading water. This basically means that earning the rights to UFC programming is only going to get more expensive as it gets more popular. If the UFC get a deal on HBO, or any other large network such as Strikeforce has done it could put Spike on the losing end of a bidding war for any significant UFC programming. To where as with the current state in wrestling the WWE can't even find programming outside of the Universal banner (Raw and Smackdown are both broadcast on NBC Universal while NXT/ECW has been cancelled). The CW no longer wants wrestling despite strong ratings, MY T.V backed out of wrestling despite it being their only content and shattering records on a weekly basis. This means that for the forseeable future TNA's only television outlet is going to be Spike T.V. If they are their only media vehicle in the United States its gives them a TON of power in negotiating with them as far as advertising revenue etc.

 

On top of that I'm not even sure UFC produces a weekly television show outside of TUF which to my knowledge has seasons (not in the strict television sense but none the less periods of time where new television is not shown). I'm not sure if Fight Night is every week, every month or only special occasions. So really it comes down to TNA drawing them a 1.0 (one of their biggest ratings outside of UFC) week in and week out.

 

So they have a show that brings them the highest ratings on the network, its a show they know isn't going anywhere, its virtually costless for them to produce it AND they can control just how much advertising revenue they get from them being as TNA can't get television elsewhere.

 

So there are plenty of reasons to keep it around. Thats why I always laugh when I hear "Spike is about to pull the plug on TNA".

[PeterHilton]

So there are plenty of reasons to keep it around. Thats why I always laugh when I hear "Spike is about to pull the plug on TNA".

 

This plus there's still more than 2years left on a guaranteed 3 year deal

 

Your post also makes me wonder how long is left on Spike's deal with UFC? Wouldn't it be a mutually beneficial deal if ESPN were to come in...they need programming, UFC would love the added exposure, revenue, and it makes them seem more legitimate..

 

I mean, that seems like the obvious move for UFC imo

[LiquidSwords]

I'm surprised FX wouldn't be open to showing wrestling. TNA's product fits in with most of the shows that are currently on the channel.

[LiquidSwords]

This plus there's still more than 2years left on a guaranteed 3 year deal

 

Your post also makes me wonder how long is left on Spike's deal with UFC? Wouldn't it be a mutually beneficial deal if ESPN were to come in...they need programming, UFC would love the added exposure, revenue, and it makes them seem more legitimate..

 

I mean, that seems like the obvious move for UFC imo

 

To be honest I wouldn't be surprised if ESPN would try to bring UFC over to their network. Boxing is barely shown besides Wednesday and Friday Night Fights. UFC would definitely benefit from ESPN's production values and like you said the added exposure.

[Stennick]

FX has one of the best top to bottom line ups of original programming that they really don't need pro wrestling.

 

Sons of Anarchy, Its Always Sunny, Rescue Me, Damages, Justified, Terrier's, The League. Thats just new content.

 

They also just got down airing The Shield and Nip Tuck both pretty successful shows that cost them less to air in syndicated re runs.

 

Pro Wrestling doesn't bring in the advertising that its supposed to. Even though its aimed at that 18-34 demographic there are a LOT of advertisers that aren't interested in buying advertising during a pro wrestling show. They feel although the people watching are the desired age demographic, its not wise to do business with such an unpredictable form of entertainment.

 

With the controversy that wrestling brings Katie Vick, Muhammad Hassan, even in later years Chris Benoit, multiple wrestling deaths, not too mention all sorts of other examples.

 

When RAW was pulling in 6.0's on Cable Television it was a LOT more worth it to do business with them than when their doing 3.0's.

 

If you think about it no pro wrestling company in over 20 years has had any success on cable outside of WCW which was OWNED by a cable company (essentially) and WWE RAW which has had success on USA, UPN, TNN (later Spike), SyFy, MyTV, The CW.

 

So when you look at it like that. Nobody outside of Vince McMahon has had success on any sort of prime time cable television in a very long time. Even Vince is having a hard time getting cable companies to do business with him with his drop in the ratings among other controversies listed. So networks are even LESS interested in doing business with companies that are just as risky and are doing a third of the business that Vince is doing.

 

Spike does it because they have very little interest (at this time) of being a "major" player in the original programming scale of things. TBS, TNT, FX, USA, A&E, and some others are all producing full lineups of original programming. While Spike (aside from a few shows) mostly sticks to UFC, TNA, syndicated television, and half hour reality like programming such as Deadliest Warrior, ManSWERS, etc. So that combined with them pretty much having all the power over their biggest ratings getter makes it a no brainer that Spike would do business with them while other networks have long since stopped showing interest in being anywhere near pro wrestling. Not too mention the stigmata with airing pro wrestling takes away from any networks credibility in the entertainment worlds eyes atleast.