The Official TNA / Impact / GFW Discussion Thread

[Johnny Fenoli]

Speaking of Matt Hardy:

 

http://i54.tinypic.com/syqfl1.jpg

 

Buff Hardy.

 

Someone looks like he doesn't care about "testing" anymore...

[crownsy]

Someone looks like he doesn't care about "testing" anymore...

 

could he be sucking in his gut anymore?

[Self]

Mickie James may not bring a whole bunch of fans with her to TNA (maybe she will, maybe she won't, I simply don't know) BUT she could be an integral part of the Knockout's division. Currently, the Knockouts lack that strong babyface character (the old Gail Kim role) I think Angelina Love & Velvet Sky were the main two babyfaces last time I watched, but they really weren't coming across to me all that likeable or over in the role. Mickie James on the other hand is a very bubbly, likable sort, and has somewhat of a reputation as a "good wrestler". She could be the strong babyface character the Knockouts division need right now. You can build a long-term storyline around her and grow your fanbase in that way.

[PeterHilton]

Mickie James may not bring a whole bunch of fans with her to TNA (maybe she will, maybe she won't, I simply don't know) BUT she could be an integral part of the Knockout's division. Currently, the Knockouts lack that strong babyface character (the old Gail Kim role) I think Angelina Love & Velvet Sky were the main two babyfaces last time I watched, but they really weren't coming across to me all that likeable or over in the role. Mickie James on the other hand is a very bubbly, likable sort, and has somewhat of a reputation as a "good wrestler". She could be the strong babyface character the Knockouts division need right now. You can build a long-term storyline around her and grow your fanbase in that way.

 

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.

 

Except for a tiny tiny segment of the audience, no one really cares that much about women's wrestling and as long there's a sufficient amount of T&A the results will be the same regardless of storyline

[cappyboy]

Except for a tiny tiny segment of the audience, no one really cares that much about women's wrestling and as long there's a sufficient amount of T&A the results will be the same regardless of storyline

 

But here's the rub in that. How many really know sufficent female talent? Look at the last couple decades in the form in the US, the greatest exporter of the sport. Things may be looking comparatively up. But the recent generations have been pretty sparse.

 

Sure, you've had SHIMMER and the Knockouts divsion the last few years. And WWE's division is better now than it was ten years or so ago. But SHIMMER's a hole a in the wall and the vast majority are only going to be able to see them on DVD or on Youtube after the fact. The Knockouts work in a company that hasn't made itself near visible enough for what they claim they want to be. And that leaves the E. Who while their talent has trended the right direction over the last decade is still pretty meager in the grand scheme of things.

 

You go back to the 90's and the women's niche was actively being shredded for much of the decade. Think about Teri Power AKA Tori. In 1990 or so when she first started to get noticed, she was deemed THE blue chip prospect of the scene. But by the time she arrived in the E and became Tori, the places where she could have developed that potential and become the future legend folks saw early on had all essentially dried up. At least on these shores. The E made a brief bid at a division in the Alundra Blayze period, WCW's was pretty much an afterthought and then a lot of nothing as far as the average bear was concerned.

 

You essentially have to go back to the Richter vs Moolah era to get to a time where talent and visibility really merged. Not saying this is the only problem of course. And I do recognize that was a bit of a golden age. Er go, difficult to impossible to reproduce. But the fan base has been getting snack food women's wrestling for so long, one does have to wonder how much of the current fan base knows the potential of the form. Heck even a lot of now veteran promoters haven't operated in a time when the top female talent had the visibility they deserved. So even with all other conditions being ideal, I can't say I'm surprised only a tiny segment cares. It's only that tiny segment that really knows. Even if all of them.

[PeterHilton]

And...?

 

Not to be a jerk, but until someone shows that you can draw significantly more fans with truly talented women's workers than you could with a division full of former models and dancers (like the E has and TNA has moved to) then I have absolutely no reason to argue that a promoter or company should be looking for talent.

 

Wrestling is a work. It's a business. The women who have generated real money have been women like Sable, Trish, Lita, Stacey Kiebler, Torrie Wilson...they had 'skill' to varying degrees, but they were all also extremely attractive.

 

Even TNA's biggest successes in the KO division came when TBP were at their height.

 

Some of the WWE's biggest rated segments ever were during the Diva Search.

 

The only woman that could be called 'unattractive' that was a success in the WWE in the last 2o years was Chyna.

 

I understand your point that maybe no one cares because no one has really been exposed to really talented women.But maybe the reason no one has tried putting talented women on a major stage is BECAUSE no one care.

 

If you can generate the exact same revenue and ratings with bimbos with giant implants as you can putting on a women's wrestling clinic, then what's the point?

[Hyde Hill]

Didn't Kim vs Kong draw some good ratings?

 

And it isn't so much that it draws on it's own but that it can maybe draw as part of an overall identity, same goes with tag team and X wrestling. It can help in brand identity by either being more slutty then the E, which it seems they are focussing on now. More competitive then the E, Kim vs Kong. Or when it was at it's height both TBP + Kong vs Kim.

 

Let's just reiterate my point in that it can possibly be a draw as part of a total product but not on it's own. The fact is that there is little evidence of this as it has A) never really been tried and B) the wrestling audience has been conditioned to look down at it.

 

Also on the major/big signing I want to make it extra clear that TNA itself never commented on it being one. It was the sheets that called it one.

[SaySo]

Hammerstein Ballroom

http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/9546/hammerstein.jpg

[crownsy]

Didn't Kim vs Kong draw some good ratings?

 

And it isn't so much that it draws on it's own but that it can maybe draw as part of an overall identity, same goes with tag team and X wrestling. It can help in brand identity by either being more slutty then the E, which it seems they are focussing on now. More competitive then the E, Kim vs Kong. Or when it was at it's height both TBP + Kong vs Kim.

 

Let's just reiterate my point in that it can possibly be a draw as part of a total product but not on it's own. The fact is that there is little evidence of this as it has A) never really been tried and B) the wrestling audience has been conditioned to look down at it.

 

Also on the major/big signing I want to make it extra clear that TNA itself never commented on it being one. It was the sheets that called it one.

 

I'll out myself as a typical mid 20's wrestling fan and put out there that even when i don't have time to watch the entire TNA show on my DVR, i FF to TBP entrance and match.

 

I think it can, as you said be a nice + to a show, but it wont draw on it's own other than because a significantly disproportionate % of wrestling fans are males, age 18-45

 

Do I like it when the women workers are skilled and actually put on a good match? yes, thats alot easier to sit through.

 

Am i in it mostly to see extremely attractive women in tight costumes?

 

yes, absolutely.

 

I appreciate them as workers in the industry, but for the most part I'm there for the eye candy and pleasantly surprised when the women can compete at a high level as well.

[PeterHilton]

I appreciate them as workers in the industry, but for the most part I'm there for the eye candy and pleasantly surprised when the women can compete at a high level as well.

 

That's my point really

 

If a woman is hot + can wrestle = fans like it

 

If a woman is hot + can't wrestle for crap = fans pretty much still like it

 

If a woman is ugly + can wrestle = bad for business

 

So what's the point in trying so hard to find talented workers if the results is the same, so long as they're hot?

[Hyde Hill]

If a woman is hot + can wrestle = fans like it more.

 

If a woman is ugly + can really wrestle + Has it factor (Kong) = enough fans like it.

 

 

If competitor is only B ( just hot) and you have A (hot and can go) you have extra attraction.

 

And I am talking base ratings not segment ratings.

[Hyde Hill]

Spoiler from a house show. Yes you read that correctly.

 

TNA Wrestling BREAKING NEWS: The Amazing Red became the NEW TNA X Division Champion at Thursday night's live event in New York City, using his flip piledriver finisher to defeat Jay Lethal! Check out photos from Red's big win

 

All I can say without giving too much away is WTF.

[PeterHilton]

If a woman is hot + can wrestle = fans like it more.

 

If a woman is ugly + can really wrestle + Has it factor (Kong) = enough fans like it.

 

 

If competitor is only B ( just hot) and you have A (hot and can go) you have extra attraction.

 

And I am talking base ratings not segment ratings.

 

Kinda think you're kidding yourself there

[cappyboy]

And...?

 

Not to be a jerk, but until someone shows that you can draw significantly more fans with truly talented women's workers than you could with a division full of former models and dancers (like the E has and TNA has moved to) then I have absolutely no reason to argue that a promoter or company should be looking for talent.

 

Wrestling is a work. It's a business. The women who have generated real money have been women like Sable, Trish, Lita, Stacey Kiebler, Torrie Wilson...they had 'skill' to varying degrees, but they were all also extremely attractive.

 

Even TNA's biggest successes in the KO division came when TBP were at their height.

 

Some of the WWE's biggest rated segments ever were during the Diva Search.

 

The only woman that could be called 'unattractive' that was a success in the WWE in the last 2o years was Chyna.

 

I understand your point that maybe no one cares because no one has really been exposed to really talented women.But maybe the reason no one has tried putting talented women on a major stage is BECAUSE no one care.

 

If you can generate the exact same revenue and ratings with bimbos with giant implants as you can putting on a women's wrestling clinic, then what's the point?

 

And once again, there's a key flaw in your argument here. You're assuming that talent vs sex appeal is a zero/sum game. That's why the problem I was posting about exists. Sure you may get the occasional Chyna or Awesome Kong or Toni Rose. But from what I've seen, you look back over the course of women's wrestling down through the years and many of the most successful and talented were also extremely attractive by the standards of their respective time. Too many people want to engage in your limited thought process. They box themselves in by making talent vs sex appeal an either/or issue when it need not be.

 

 

 

And it isn't so much that it draws on it's own but that it can maybe draw as part of an overall identity, same goes with tag team and X wrestling. It can help in brand identity by either being more slutty then the E, which it seems they are focussing on now. More competitive then the E, Kim vs Kong. Or when it was at it's height both TBP + Kong vs Kim.

 

Let's just reiterate my point in that it can possibly be a draw as part of a total product but not on it's own. The fact is that there is little evidence of this as it has A) never really been tried and B) the wrestling audience has been conditioned to look down at it.

 

Right on, Brother Hill. You're totally talking my language here. I wouldn't ever ask women's wrestling to be a national product on its own. Even going back to the Billy Wolfe days of the ladies being split off as their own troupe for the first time, it was a niche product. But that product can most certainly be a part of brand differentation. The Knockouts are a good example of that. As could be the Richter/Moolah years.

 

Actually I'd say the Richter/Moolah years might be the best one. They didn't get supporting roles in Hulk Hogan's wrestling cartoon by accident. They were there as a nod to the little girls who loved Wendi and there were lots of them. So I don't know I'd say A as much. Although it has been longer than a sizable chunk of the current target audience has been alive if you feel you need to go back to Richter/Moolah.

 

As for B, I'd say that was the either/or thinking rearing its ugly head again. It was the 90's where the either/or thinking really became the dominant approach. Never mind that examples against it stretched from Bambi and the Magnificent Mimi and arguably Medusa all the way back to the likes of Mae Young and Stella Stekker.

 

To give Peter's post credit, he described the allure of the either/or thinking well. He did a good job of establishing the whys and wherefores that make it the easier viewpoint. He did nothing to convince me it was the right one but he did lay it out well.

[PeterHilton]

And once again, there's a key flaw in your argument here. You're assuming that talent vs sex appeal is a zero/sum game. That's why the problem I was posting about exists. Sure you may get the occasional Chyna or Awesome Kong or Toni Rose. But from what I've seen, you look back over the course of women's wrestling down through the years and many of the most successful and talented were also extremely attractive by the standards of their respective time. Too many people want to engage in your limited thought process. They box themselves in by making talent vs sex appeal an either/or issue when it need not be.

 

 

No I'm not. I'm saying that sex appeal is the selling point and that talent is an additional - and for the most part, unnecessary - feature.

 

The people will pay to see sex whether they're talented or not.

[Hyde Hill]

Kinda think you're kidding yourself there

 

So you are saying Kong wasn't a draw? If more people where inclined not to watch then people liked seeing her then Ok. I for one liked seeing her as part of the total product.

[Hyde Hill]

Also not so much saying that it is either Either or Or (lolz) but that it does have an effect, also not discrediting or disagreeing with Peter more adding.

[Hyde Hill]

On the spoiler highlight to read:

 

Just realised that their next house show will be in New Jersey, Lethal's home town, still posting this by TNA pre Impact is not smart imo. Having it happen just after his win and getting his momentum semi restored is not smart imo. Posting it on facebook and now TNA website and thus aknowledging it is not smart.

 

If they wanted to increase house show attendance via a title change have the KO title or the tag KO titles switch as they aren't cared about much nowadays or the TV title since AJ is not defending it and it frees him up for the world title. If you want to keep the belt within Fourtune then just make it an elimination three way and have Morgan win it.

 

If you wanted Red to have success in his home town then make it a non title win.

 

So I understand the decision and it is not really a big deal but it's just not smart booking imho. Also sorry for the initial overreaction.

 

Lethal could also be injured or something though which would explain it. Not that I wish something like that on Lethal

[PeterHilton]

So you are saying Kong wasn't a draw? If more people where inclined not to watch then people liked seeing her then Ok. I for one liked seeing her as part of the total product.

 

I'm saying she had no noticeable effect on ratings..so no...she was not a draw in particular

 

But who WAS featured in one of TNA's highest rated segments ever? Lacey Von Erich. In a strip tease.

[Hyde Hill]

In over run if I remember correctly on a show that was drawing well anyway.

[Stennick]

Peter is dead on, show me how Kong has out drawn Lacey Von Erich who is the hottest girl on the roster (arguable) and the least talented (not arguable).

 

That strip tease drew bigger ratings than Flash, Kong, Cheerleader and every other "good" Knockout.

 

Show me how these "good" knockouts have ever out drawn the hotter less talented ones. The BP's have always been the biggest draws on the roster difference is now they are the focus as well as the draws.

[Hyde Hill]

The striptease was overrun on one of their relatively higher rated Monday shows and did a 0.97 it was the april 5th show and an other segment did better in the show.

 

Source torch via: http://fans.wwe.com/go/thread/view/4517/23093677/TNA_iMPACT!_4510_Ratings_Breakdown&post_num=4 and to confirm: http://www.truesportscore.com/forums/wrestling/21084-4-5-10-raw-tna-ratings.html

 

As we do not have minute by minutes I can't say for sure what does and does not draw from a segment standpoint, and neither can others and as I don't have data what the reasons are people tune in in the first place neither can I expound on that.

 

Was Kong for me and possibly others one of the reasons to tune in? Yeah.

 

Was her leaving a cause for me to stop watching? No.

 

Would her and other talent that I like leaving and/ or the weakening of other parts of TNA's product which I like cause me and possibly others to stop watching? Yeah.

 

If for instance TNA had not given me back Anderson, Hardy, RVD and the Pope, Lethal and guns pushes and other stuff to balance it out I prolly would have left already because of the losses.

[crownsy]

In over run if I remember correctly on a show that was drawing well anyway.

 

you remember incorrectly.

 

That was the ME for the night, and while the entire show drew well for TNA, that particular segment jumped something like .3.

 

If someone wants to go back far enough, i think we discussed this in the thread, how a strip tease segment featuring lacy and daffney during a crazy briefcase swap of the title had the most significant ratings bump of the night.

[crownsy]

The striptease was overrun on one of their relatively higher rated Monday shows and did a 0.97 it was the april 5th show and an other segment did better in the show.

 

Source torch via: http://fans.wwe.com/go/thread/view/4517/23093677/TNA_iMPACT!_4510_Ratings_Breakdown&post_num=4 and to confirm: http://www.truesportscore.com/forums/wrestling/21084-4-5-10-raw-tna-ratings.html

 

As we do not have minute by minutes I can't say for sure what does and does not draw from a segment standpoint, and neither can others and as I don't have data what the reasons are people tune in in the first place neither can I expound on that.

 

Was Kong for me and possibly others one of the reasons to tune in? Yeah.

 

Was her leaving a cause for me to stop watching? No.

 

Would her and other talent that I like leaving and/ or the weakening of other parts of TNA's product which I like cause me and possibly others to stop watching? Yeah.

 

If for instance TNA had not given me back Anderson, Hardy, RVD and the Pope, Lethal and guns pushes and other stuff to balance it out I prolly would have left already because of the losses.

 

 

Are you kidding me with this?

 

This show was up against raw, which went over too. what does it being the overrun have to do with anything?

 

The one segment that beat it was an awesome match at the 10 oclock hour. it smoked every other segment on the show that didn't have the KO's in it by .20

 

not a single Q on that show besides the angle match even came close.

 

The other high rating of the final hour (the .93) was a semi-racy angle involving lacy and TBP setting up the M/E before the angle/anderson ladder match

 

The .98 was RVD's debut and durm roll....a knockouts interview that Lacy was in.

 

If anything, all this data proves is that the only time people flipped over from raw was to look at this

 

http://www.onlineworldofwrestling.com/pictures/b/beautifulpeople/12.jpg

 

 

I mean, if you want to enter this as evidence to counter the previous argument that the KO's don't draw, then that's a decent argument.

 

But it's horrible evidence to try to prove that unattractive female workers who can actually wrestle (kong) can even hang with the draw of extremely attractive women who cant (lacy/velvet)

 

All you've shown is that when the hot chicks were on, people turned over from watching dudes in spandex on raw to catch LVE and velvet sky doing a pg-13 striptease, which is in fact me and pete's point.

 

That while Sex + talent out draws Sex alone, talent is a small part of the equation.

 

EDIT: wait, wasn't that an 8-10 show?

 

That makes the fact that the striptease segment was an overrun even more irrelevant, Raw had a match on and people still flipped to check out lacy do a bikini show.

[Stennick]

This thread belongs to Crownsy all that enter pay your respects because he just OWNED it.