The Official TNA / Impact / GFW Discussion Thread

[The Final Countdown]

I'm not going to get into a big thing about the ratings. I don't pay much attention to them at all, and as far as I know, TNA hasn't seen a significant long-term bump in their ratings in the last several years.

 

But I will say why I thought TNA's original Knockouts division, with Kim, Kong & the like, was a good idea: it was something they offered that WWE didn't. I think that's key for TNA: make your product a true alternative to the WWE. Don't try and beat them at their own game. Offer something different instead. They need to be doing as many things as possible to differentiate themselves from WWE, IMO. The quality of wrestling in the Knockouts division used to be something they could point to and say, "See? You won't see THAT in the WWE." Just like the X Division used to be, and the tag team division was, and kind of is again thanks to the Guns and Beer Money. Are any of those things going to set the world on fire? No. But they could help establish some kind of brand identity. Certainly far more than hiring Tommy Dreamer & friends to do another ECW rehash.

 

I'm not saying they shouldn't offer the T&A also. By all means, keep the Lacey Von Erichs of the world under contract and let them do their thing. But that doesn't mean you can't throw a Cheerleader Melissa or a Hamada out there to put on a legit match as well.

[Self]

Meh...everything you said is true...but (as someone else pointed out) the division is an absolute wreck right now and they are getting the same ratings for their KO segments as when they had really good storylines going.

 

While it's good to has some idea about "draws" and "ratings" it's not something I want to get hung up on. I'm a wrestling fan. I want to watch (what I consider to be) good wrestling. Good wrestling requires a strong babyface you can get behind. Mickie James may not fix things for the masses, but she may fix it for me. Which is ultimately all I care about. I'm sick of forcing myself to be okay with things I don't like because of "ratingz".

 

That being said, I'm quite forgiving of hot chicks who don't know a wristlock from that single grape they allowed themselves to eat for lunch. However, I also like the occassional gal who can 'work'. Variety is the spice of life.

 

... as long there's a sufficient amount of T&A the results will be the same regardless of storyline

 

You're not wrong, but if I ever let myself believe that I'd probably jump off a cliff I haveto believe that stories matter. I just have to.

 

That striptease segment was... Hell, I was watching it on the edge of my seat. That was compelling stuff. It's just a shame the pay-off was so disappointing. They promised one thing, then failed to deliver. I don't think I watched the following week's episode.

[juggaloninjalee]

Watching Impact I got really annoyed with some things.

 

1) The EV 2.0 part walking backstage and saying they just left Dixies office and Sabu has a ladder match with AJ tonight. Well Dixie was just out at the announce table about 5 minutes before that.

 

2) When Chris Sabin was saying that Generation Me just wanted the tag titles because he and Shelley would get stripped of the belts in 30 days. He said it had only been a week not even close to 30 days. At the bottom of the screen in captions it said "earlier today" and hasn't it been a couple weeks now that Shelley has been out now? That bothered me too. Attention to detail people.

 

3) That AJ Styles vs Sabu match was one of the worst matches I have seen in awhile. Nothing happened. Punch punch throw guy outside. Punch punch slide in the ring. Punch punch try to put ladder up. Punch punch and more punch punch. Sabu didn't sell anything at all in the match either.

 

I like the TNA roster a lot more than most of the WWE roster. They have the potential to be great with their roster but they are messing up bad.

[djthefunkchris]

You're not wrong, but if I ever let myself believe that I'd probably jump off a cliff I haveto believe that stories matter. I just have to.

 

They do in my opinion, over everything else (including T&A and wrestling/match's).

 

A strip segment will get alot more hype then we can get out of it in TEW, but a solid storyline will get people involved in it, over several shows.

 

This is something that TNA should realise. It doesn't matter how great of a match they have, as it's the story... You can have the best match "ever", but if no one has any feelings about it one way or the other (a favorite), then it's not going to matter at all.

[PeterHilton]

While it's good to has some idea about "draws" and "ratings" it's not something I want to get hung up on. I'm a wrestling fan. I want to watch (what I consider to be) good wrestling. Good wrestling requires a strong babyface you can get behind. Mickie James may not fix things for the masses, but she may fix it for me. Which is ultimately all I care about. I'm sick of forcing myself to be okay with things I don't like because of "ratingz".

 

That being said, I'm quite forgiving of hot chicks who don't know a wristlock from that single grape they allowed themselves to eat for lunch. However, I also like the occassional gal who can 'work'. Variety is the spice of life.

 

You're not wrong, but if I ever let myself believe that I'd probably jump off a cliff I haveto believe that stories matter. I just have to.

 

That striptease segment was... Hell, I was watching it on the edge of my seat. That was compelling stuff. It's just a shame the pay-off was so disappointing. They promised one thing, then failed to deliver. I don't think I watched the following week's episode.

 

To take a step back....this conversation isn't (or wasn't) about my own personal beliefs or likes. I would prefer at least some semblance of a storyline to explain what the divas are getting in to. The conv started (as usual) because of the debate on whether or not Mickie is a 'big' signing.

 

I actually agree that Mickie playing a traditional face could do a lot of that division because -for whatever reason - every well known KO TNA has seems to be better playing the role of a heel. Mickie could straighten that out and give things a focus...TBP united against the 'big name' from up North or whatever...so we can stop this seeminlgy endless Angelina-Velvet-Madison story.

 

Awesome.

 

But when people start saying that Mickie has afanbase that will follow her or that there's this audience for women's wrestling that will somehow make a difference for TNA....? No. That's where I disagree.

 

Does the KO division (when run w/a wrestling first priority) make TNA different than the WWE? Yes.

 

Does it make a difference in the long run? Who knows?

 

Does the KO division get better ratings when it's more sexualized? Yes.

 

Does TNA care more about ratings or differentiating itself? Well...I think we've seen the answer.

[Slim Jim]

While it's good to has some idea about "draws" and "ratings" it's not something I want to get hung up on. I'm a wrestling fan. I want to watch (what I consider to be) good wrestling. Good wrestling requires a strong babyface you can get behind. Mickie James may not fix things for the masses, but she may fix it for me. Which is ultimately all I care about. I'm sick of forcing myself to be okay with things I don't like because of "ratingz".

 

That being said, I'm quite forgiving of hot chicks who don't know a wristlock from that single grape they allowed themselves to eat for lunch. However, I also like the occassional gal who can 'work'. Variety is the spice of life.

 

http://southparkstudios.mtvnimages.com/shared/characters/adults/wrestling-coach.jpg

 

"THAT'S NOT WRASSLIN'!"

 

[Jaysin]

http://southparkstudios.mtvnimages.com/shared/characters/adults/wrestling-coach.jpg

 

"THAT'S NOT WRASSLIN'!"

 

 

DEY TOOK HIS JOWB!

[Hyde Hill]

To take a step back....this conversation isn't (or wasn't) about my own personal beliefs or likes. I would prefer at least some semblance of a storyline to explain what the divas are getting in to. The conv started (as usual) because of the debate on whether or not Mickie is a 'big' signing.

 

I actually agree that Mickie playing a traditional face could do a lot of that division because -for whatever reason - every well known KO TNA has seems to be better playing the role of a heel. Mickie could straighten that out and give things a focus...TBP united against the 'big name' from up North or whatever...so we can stop this seeminlgy endless Angelina-Velvet-Madison story.

 

Awesome.

 

But when people start saying that Mickie has afanbase that will follow her or that there's this audience for women's wrestling that will somehow make a difference for TNA....? No. That's where I disagree.

 

Does the KO division (when run w/a wrestling first priority) make TNA different than the WWE? Yes.

 

Does it make a difference in the long run? Who knows?

 

Does the KO division get better ratings when it's more sexualized? Yes.

 

Does TNA care more about ratings or differentiating itself? Well...I think we've seen the answer.

 

And that was what I was trying to adress as there is not sufficient evidence either way for us, now if we had minute by minutes and an overview of what caused people to tune in in the first place (total product appeal) then we could have this discussion, and that there where a lot of mitigating factors that would not allow you to put the up the Lacey strip as evidence that it does.

 

Also I am not saying that Sex appeal does not have drawing power but that a very good match/angle without sex appeal can have similar drawing power.

If the ending of good match off Kim vs Kong, or to lessen sex appeal, Kong vs bald Roxxi was in said overrun it might have even been higher.

 

Of course having both is best and that is what they had when the KO's where drawing really well by comparison.

 

Does TNA care more about short term ratings then long term ratings? Yes definitely agree there. As evidenced by most of it's booking and Russo's and to a lesser extent Bischoff's booking philosophies.

 

 

Edit: On Micky James is she a big signing as said by the sheets and not TNA? No not on her own.

 

Does she have a small but dedicated fanbase? Yes

 

If you factor out those of them that already watch TNA does that leave many people? No

 

Could she help bring the KO's back to where they where? Not on her own but she can be a valuable ingredient.

[juggaloninjalee]

DEY TOOK HIS JOWB!

 

I loved that South Park episode. She is addicted to abortions!

[PeterHilton]

Also I am not saying that Sex appeal does not have drawing power but that a very good match/angle without sex appeal can have similar drawing power.

If the ending of good match off Kim vs Kong, or to lessen sex appeal, Kong vs bald Roxxi was in said overrun it might have even been higher.

 

 

And that's where I think you're nuts. Completely nuts.

 

If you honestly think that you'll get the same amount of people to watch Roxxi vs Kong as you could a catfight/striptease by someone like LVE or TBP, then you're grossly over valuing the importance of women's wrestling.

 

There's nothing that's happened in the last 20 years to back that idea up.

 

Fans of wrestling are a niche audience. Fans of wrestling who care more about the actual wrestling than the sex when it comes to women are a tiny fraction of that niche audience.

[lazorbeak]

Does the KO division get better ratings when it's more sexualized? Yes.

 

Does TNA care more about ratings or differentiating itself? Well...I think we've seen the answer.

 

You're absolutely right that there's no evidence that female wrestling is what people want to see in record numbers. Women wrestling is a niche, and it's probably always going to be that way.

 

But, the mistake TNA is making, which is the same mistake WCW made 11 years ago, is that there is no pay-off to T&A segments, especially in a situation like the over-run: even if you make short term gains it leads to long-term losses. TNA can say that PPV buys aren't their primary revenue source and that's fine, but nobody watching that TNA over-run you're referring to was more likely to go "gee I better buy the PPV now!" It'd be one thing if they were out there saying "hey there might be nudity at this ppv!" Bizarrely enough, that would sell, albeit to a niche in TNA's already niche audience, but it also runs the risk of costing you sponsorship money and getting a bunch of values ****s after you (see: WWF in 1999 and 2000, and the resulting publicity for the PTC [consequently, this was probably the last time Stevie Richards was over in any real way]). But even if you say "well they don't want to sell the PPV," just having T&A for the sake of T&A is still bad long-term strategy because while you are drawing in casual channel flippers, you're not keeping them and you're not establishing a brand identity. And since TNA's current brand identity is that of WWE's retirement home/ rehab alternative, putting the "T&A" in "TNA" just makes the company look bad. I mean WWF could've had Sable getting her top ripped off in every overrun from 1997 to her trip out the door and it would've drawn ratings equal to or greater to what WWF was doing at the time, but to what end? Instead, WWF would end on big moments featuring their top guy(s) every week, so that Mr. idle channel changer sees Austin stunning 10 guys and he knows "this is what WWF is about: watch next week for more!" over time strong over-runs were one of the many reasons the show steadily increased in viewership.

 

I mean TNA needing to find an identity that isn't fundamentally derivative is a bigger problem, but high profile T&A segments is a symptom of that problem, and when they had Kong and Kim et al., they could at least point to that and say "this is how we're a wrestling alternative: we do this thing better." Now they can't really say that about anything they do outside of tag team wrestling, a concept WWE has all but abandoned.

[PeterHilton]

You're absolutely right that there's no evidence that female wrestling is what people want to see in record numbers. Women wrestling is a niche, and it's probably always going to be that way.

 

But, the mistake TNA is making, which is the same mistake WCW made 11 years ago, is that there is no pay-off to T&A segments, especially in a situation like the over-run: even if you make short term gains it leads to long-term losses. TNA can say that PPV buys aren't their primary revenue source and that's fine, but nobody watching that TNA over-run you're referring to was more likely to go "gee I better buy the PPV now!" It'd be one thing if they were out there saying "hey there might be nudity at this ppv!" Bizarrely enough, that would sell, albeit to a niche in TNA's already niche audience, but it also runs the risk of costing you sponsorship money and getting a bunch of values ****s after you (see: WWF in 1999 and 2000, and the resulting publicity for the PTC [consequently, this was probably the last time Stevie Richards was over in any real way]). But even if you say "well they don't want to sell the PPV," just having T&A for the sake of T&A is still bad long-term strategy because while you are drawing in casual channel flippers, you're not keeping them and you're not establishing a brand identity. And since TNA's current brand identity is that of WWE's retirement home/ rehab alternative, putting the "T&A" in "TNA" just makes the company look bad. I mean WWF could've had Sable getting her top ripped off in every overrun from 1997 to her trip out the door and it would've drawn ratings equal to or greater to what WWF was doing at the time, but to what end? Instead, WWF would end on big moments featuring their top guy(s) every week, so that Mr. idle channel changer sees Austin stunning 10 guys and he knows "this is what WWF is about: watch next week for more!" over time strong over-runs were one of the many reasons the show steadily increased in viewership.

 

I mean TNA needing to find an identity that isn't fundamentally derivative is a bigger problem, but high profile T&A segments is a symptom of that problem, and when they had Kong and Kim et al., they could at least point to that and say "this is how we're a wrestling alternative: we do this thing better." Now they can't really say that about anything they do outside of tag team wrestling, a concept WWE has all but abandoned.

 

Don't disagree with anything you're saying there; just think that there are probably more and better ways to differentiate themselves which WILL draw fans than a 'serious' women's division.

 

It'd be a bonus...but not essential

[Self]

To take a step back....this conversation isn't (or wasn't) about my own personal beliefs or likes. I would prefer at least some semblance of a storyline to explain what the divas are getting in to. The conv started (as usual) because of the debate on whether or not Mickie is a 'big' signing.

 

I actually agree that Mickie playing a traditional face could do a lot of that division because -for whatever reason - every well known KO TNA has seems to be better playing the role of a heel. Mickie could straighten that out and give things a focus...TBP united against the 'big name' from up North or whatever...so we can stop this seeminlgy endless Angelina-Velvet-Madison story.

 

Awesome.

 

But when people start saying that Mickie has afanbase that will follow her or that there's this audience for women's wrestling that will somehow make a difference for TNA....? No. That's where I disagree.

 

I agree with that. If I were to put money on it, I'd say Mickie won't bring an influx of fans with her. She wouldn't be a "big signing" in terms of an initial draw, but I'd consider her a potential "big signing" in terms of narrative value and skillset and weight depending on how she is used. I see great potential for fun, effective storylines and better-than-the-norm matches. Whether than translates into ratings, I don't know, but I'll have fun.

[PeterHilton]

I agree with that. If I were to put money on it, I'd say Mickie won't bring an influx of fans with her. She wouldn't be a "big signing" in terms of an initial draw, but I'd consider her a potential "big signing" in terms of narrative value and skillset and weight depending on how she is used. I see great potential for fun, effective storylines and better-than-the-norm matches. Whether than translates into ratings, I don't know, but I'll have fun.

 

Absolutely.

 

I look at it in terms of "if this were my diary, would I sign her? could I write a storyline here? " and Mickie (or someone like her) is nothing but a plus in that regards...she's a bubbly face who's a solid fan favorite in a division with a bunch of natural heel types.

 

EDIT: I'd have chase the title for a bit, then win it and defend against a reunited TBP and Tara as the wildcard heel.

[Self]

Absolutely.

 

I look at it in terms of "if this were my diary, would I sign her? could I write a storyline here? " and Mickie (or someone like her) is nothing but a plus in that regards...she's a bubbly face who's a solid fan favorite in a division with a bunch of natural heel types.

 

Totally. If this were TEW I'd instantly snap her up. As her LayCool feud pointed out (but failed to capitalise on) Mickie's got great potential as a surrogate for awkward teenage girls who like (or could potential like) wrestling. "You don't have to look like a supermodel, you can be awesome just the way you are". A role model to girls with body issues, even while selling calenders and sexy 8x10's to blokes.

[The Final Countdown]

Don't disagree with anything you're saying there; just think that there are probably more and better ways to differentiate themselves which WILL draw fans than a 'serious' women's division.

 

It'd be a bonus...but not essential

I'd agree with this. I think a legit women's division would be a positive for TNA in establishing a brand identity, but by no means is it crucial to their success. It'd just be one positive step in that direction.

[Stennick]

And that was what I was trying to adress as there is not sufficient evidence either way for us, now if we had minute by minutes and an overview of what caused people to tune in in the first place (total product appeal) then we could have this discussion, and that there where a lot of mitigating factors that would not allow you to put the up the Lacey strip as evidence that it does.

 

Hyde I think Crownsy pointed out that they hyped that strip tease during the entire show. That was the main event of the evening and people were expecting it. Its not like this was just a random brawl that ran over this was nearly the focus of the night as far as that storyline went.

 

Also I am not saying that Sex appeal does not have drawing power but that a very good match/angle without sex appeal can have similar drawing power.

If the ending of good match off Kim vs Kong, or to lessen sex appeal, Kong vs bald Roxxi was in said overrun it might have even been higher.

 

Hyde I like you but I think your nuts if you believe for a moment that more people or the same amount of people would click over for Kong vs. bald Roxxi as they would Lacey's strip tease. Numbers are great but common sense has to be used as well. Thats like saying that Hulk Hogan could have been a better technical wrestler than Bryan Danielson in 2005 but since we didn't see Hulk do that we can't speak on it either way. You like wrestling and you personally would maybe rather see that than a strip tease that you know can't end how we all want. That being said 99% of casual wrestling fans do not care about Kong vs. Bald Roxxi and would not click over from Mae Young giving birth to a hand to see that match up. Its not a draw and was never shown to be any more of a draw than the BP are.

 

The bottom line is the KO division drew well with Kong, Roxxi, etc. There was NO drop in the KO numbers when the BP took over as the division's sole focus. You can't say "draw like they used to" when their drawing as good today as they did back then. What you mean to say is having Mickie will make the wrestling part of the Knockout division as good as it used to but drawing power will do virtually nothing.

 

Mickie is talented and storyline wise they could do some fun stuff with her but to say that the wrestling quality being bewtter with Mickie there will increase any numbers isn't happening. The KO division has not fallen ratings wise and as pointed out earlier if somebody looked at the top ten KO ratings I bet the BP would dominate that statistic.

 

You enjoy women's wrestling and thats fine but I would venture to say if they choose to be different re inventing the X Division among other things would do the same trick and possibly have better results. Women wrestling could be something to different but I wouldn't list that in my top five things to change to make TNA's product different.

[crownsy]

Totally. If this were TEW I'd instantly snap her up. As her LayCool feud pointed out (but failed to capitalise on) Mickie's got great potential as a surrogate for awkward teenage girls who like (or could potential like) wrestling. "You don't have to look like a supermodel, you can be awesome just the way you are". A role model to girls with body issues, even while selling calenders and sexy 8x10's to blokes.

 

See, I thought that stroyline was so contrived because if Mickie is overweight, then give me an overweight girl anyday.

 

Mickie might not be traditional rail thin supermodel, but to me she's smoking hot.

 

Not taking her first in a hotness draft, that goes to velvet or mArlyse, but the idea that Mickie isn't a beautiful women makes no sense to me.

 

Personal taste I guess

[Stennick]

Mickie James is smoking hot and very few guys are going to get with something better looking than her.

[Self]

See, I thought that stroyline was so contrived because if Mickie is overweight, then give me an overweight girl anyday.

 

Mickie might not be traditional rail thin supermodel, but to me she's smoking hot.

 

Not taking her first in a hotness draft, that goes to velvet or mArlyse, but the idea that Mickie isn't a beautiful women makes no sense to me.

 

Personal taste I guess

 

I always thought that was the point. LayCool make fun of Mickie for not representing today's "size 0" standards of beauty. However, Mickie is smoking hot is a different way, and through trials and tribulations she realizes this, becomes comfortable with herself, and gets revenge on the bullies for making her doubt herself. Thus empowering any women in the audience with similar issues.

 

However, WWE bungled it in many ways. Having the announcers sharing in making fun of Mickie gave undue credibility to LayCool's claims. They (or at least the lead announcer) should have been constantly reinforcing the idea that she is actually a stone cold fox.

[Hyde Hill]

Ok ok point taken sex sells and I was not disagreeing with that just that non sex could maybe also sell. Especially in the case of Kong as I really felt she was a special attraction.

 

Anyway moving on. Saw this on PWI about the AJ vs Sabu match:

 

As you would expect there were a bunch of good spots here, and I personally am really getting a kick out of seeing Sabu get one more shot in the mainstream. If nothing else, he actually sells moves and spots, something a lot of younger talent could learn from.

 

Seriously? Where we watching the same match? I thought Sabu's selling, timing and psychology where bad if not terrible. OK he didn't really botch anything this time but it wasn't good. And if you factor in who he was in the ring with makes it even worse.

[Stennick]

Sabu should never be looked at as a man for selling. Of course I spared myself and didn't watch the match so maybe he' became a good seller since 2006

[The Final Countdown]

If nothing else, he actually sells moves and spots, something a lot of younger talent could learn from.

Sabu??? SABU?!!

[spikedave]

My second blog is up about tna

http://tnauk.wordpress.com/2010/09/27/the-good-the-bad-the-tna/

[juggaloninjalee]

As I said before. Sabu VS AJ Styles was one of the worst matches I have seen in a long time! Sabu looked terrible and made AJ look bad. Although AJ didn't help matters in this match.

 

I like Sabu and AJ too. This match was up there with their worst matches ever though.