Monday, October 19, 2009

TNA's WrestleMania?

TNA's biggest event of the year was tonight, but you wouldn't know about it even if you asked them. I'm sitting here at 1 am on Sunday night/Monday morning, trying to find results of TNA's PPV, Bound for Glory V. This is the TNA equivalent of WrestleMania, so for something that important, why do I have to go to Wikipedia to get the results of the show?! This is pathetic, WWE.com gets Superstars results up at 9:01, right there in the middle of the main page with a big headline and photos, but two hours after their biggest show of the year and all I'm seeing at tnawrestling.com is a graphic for next month's PPV? I know they'll be up soon enough, but even then, it'll probably be some nondescript link on a sidebar or I'll have to navigate throughout the entire site to find something. Why should I care what happens in this company when they apparently don't want me to know?

What makes this even more hilarious, since this is their BIG event and all, TNA raised the price of the PPV by $10. Hey, WWE gets away with it for WrestleMania, so why can't TNA? Well because WrestleMania is four hours long, charging extra money for extra content makes sense, but Bound For Glory was just another PPV. From what I understand, the set looked like your run of the mill Impact taping and the matches weren't much different either. The event was headlined by AJ Styles vs. Sting, in what may be Sting's final match, but from all accounts, even that fell flat due to an abrupt ending. What do you expect when the promotional materials feature an awful picture of Sting, who looks like he's wearing a fleece sweater? TNA lacks the ability to make anything feel important or special, and I genuinely feel bad for Sting, having wasted the twilight of his career in a company that cannot appreciate a star of his magnitude.

It's almost cliché to bash TNA at this point, but when they're claiming "WE ARE WRESTLING" after continuous disappointment, you have to laugh at the stunning lack of self-awareness. The sooner TNA stops pretending that they're a legitimate wrestling promotion and actually works toward presenting a more professional product, they might actually find some success. Right now though, they're redefining the term "bush league."

10 comments:

  1. Lol at your sting comment!

    had to look it up, ya, looks pathetic!

    Any ppv in 2009 featuring Big Poppa Poop and Grandaddy Nash falls flat in my humble opinion!

    ReplyDelete
  2. och, did tna need some burn oitment?

    ReplyDelete
  3. How can you honestly criticize something that, seemingly, you didn't even watch?! That's a tad hypocritical, especially when you claim to present a fair assessment of what goes on between the ropes.

    Comparing TNA Bound For Glory to WrestleMania is unfair, too. TNA as a company has been around for 7 years, and TNA has only ever presented 5 Bound For Glory pay-per-view shows. How long has WWE being around? Over 50 years. How many WrestleMania's have they produced? 25 in total.

    I don't know where your "all accounts" are coming from, but various fans, and bloggers from even professional news corporation's wrestling coverage says that the show was, if nothing more, entertaining.

    I don't tend to agree with much that TNA do. In fact, their product can be a tad confusing at times, but you can't honestly sit here and talk trash about a show and a company that A) you didn't seem to have watched, and B) you've never really had a good thing to say about TNA in the first place.

    TNA are giving AJ Styles, Matt Morgan, Hernandez, Eric Young, The British Invasion and Abyss a chance to shine. But do you give them credit for that? No.

    Sure, TNA doesn't have the hype machine that the WWE does. TNA doesn't have the production capabilities that WWE have. But how could they? WWE are at least 50 years older.

    Anyway, that's just one person's opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'm not criticizing what goes on inside TNA's ring. TNA has all the tools to present an entertaining in-ring product and I never bash them for that.

    What I'm complaining about is TNA's presentation. You don't need 50 years of history to have a hype machine or create a product that looks slick and professional. You don't need to be WWE to update a website with ongoing PPV results... hell I can do that and I'm just one guy with a blog.

    This is TNA's premiere event, the show that they charge $10 more for, but the PPV set looks like any other, the length is the same, they have a whopping 15 photos from the event on their site (last week's Superstars had 24 on WWE.com), they didn't have results on their site until this morning, etc.

    This isn't about who's getting pushed or who's got a chance to "shine," it's about a company that is the #2 promotion in the country, but it's merely by default. Like I said, I'm sure the in-ring action was fine, but no one's really abuzz about the event like they would be after a WrestleMania, or even a SummerSlam or Royal Rumble. Why? Because TNA lacks the ability to make anything feel special. Case in point, Sting... him even being in TNA should've been a HUGE deal for them, but instead of becoming their version of The Undertaker, Sting's just another TNA wrestler and his potential retirement should've been treated with as much gravitas as Ric Flair's.

    I don't have anything good to say about TNA because they've done very little worthy of praise in the last five years. They've blown almost every chance to make a major star - Raven, Jeff Hardy, Rhino, Monty Brown, Samoa Joe, Christian Cage, etc. - they've practically abandoned everything that set them apart from WWE, and they can't capitalize on any opportunity that's presented to them.

    I want to see them succeed and provide genuine competition in an industry starved for it, but with this kind of amateur hour presentation and lazy promotion, I feel like competition will come from Ring of Honor before TNA.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Point taken. I see where you're coming from a bit better now.

    Sorry if I chewed your ass a little bit there. Bad day.

    It's nice to have a discussion about wrestling though.

    ReplyDelete
  6. It's all good... I like when people don't agree with me. If every comment was someone saying "right on!" then we wouldn't be having much of a discussion. Please express your opinion any time, agree or disagree, but especially disagree. Haha.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I might write a guest host column for your consideration about TNA vs. WWE, Razor. A lot of criticism about the WWE since 2002 - such gems like how the product should return to the Attitude Era, the WWE style of wrestling, glass ceilings with pushes - have been taken up by TNA to make them the alternative, but have consistently failed at each task. What people should realise that when you look at TNA, your appreciation for the WWE goes up tenfold. TNA is nothing more than a sneering, cynical, cheap rip-off.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I think you're taking everything out of context Razor. You can't compare WrestleMania to Bound For Glory for obvious reasons. You can't judge a PPV off the set (which I thought looked pretty good from past TNA PPVs). I agree with you though about TNA charging the $10 extra dollars though. That's a bit steep especially with keeping the show 3 hours.

    Also the majority of last night's card were A LOT better than your "run of the mill" Impact match. Keyword: Majority. Worth $40? No, but you're stretching it a little with this post Razor.

    I'm not a big TNA fan, especially with the product they've put out the last couple of years, but I thought Bound For Glory was a pretty good PPV.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Again, I'm not judging the PPV based on in-ring action, I know TNA's talent can bring the goods. And I'm not comparing BFG to WrestleMania, I'm talking about TNA's inability to make anything feel important.

    I don't expect TNA to sell 70,000 tickets and to build some elaborate WM-esque set, but I expect something different when it's your premiere event. Is there anything on this PPV that couldn't have been on Hard Justice, No Surrender, or any other TNA PPV? Or a REALLY good Impact? Considering how often they give away major matches - especially major gimmick matches - with little hype, I don't think it'd be out of the realm of possibility. That is a problem, especially when you're charging $10 more for something that's supposed to be a big deal.

    And that still doesn't solve the major issue - the fact that TNA didn't even treat it like a big deal. Sell it to me, give me a reason to watch, make me upset that I missed it, do SOMETHING! Instead I go to their website and find nothing, that's another problem.

    TNA has the talent, they have the tools, they even have a very patient financial backer, but for seven years, they've failed to put it all together in one sleek package. I'm not expecting WWE levels of production, but TNA's not even on the same level of WCW in its dying days. It lacks any uniqueness that set ECW apart and is now setting ROH apart. If TNA wants to be the legitimate #2 promotion in America, they've got to start giving people a reason to care.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I was talking about this the other day with a mate of mine, it's obviously not a major point, but TNA's lack of trying to do anything special for their big PPV's really makes them seem even more bush league in my opinion.

    Would it really take so much time or effort of money to maybe, I don't know, change up the ring ropes to a different colour? Maybe do something like add the BFG logo to the centre of the ring? Hell, just hang a freakin' cardboard Bound For Glory sign somewhere around the HD Screen's or something. It really wouldn't take much work to just add that little something to the arena to make it a little more obvious that this isn't just another episode of Impact.

    Hell, even the old ECW would splash out occasionally and have the logo in the centre of the ring. It's just little things like this that would improve the presentation and add that little bit extra to the show, which TNA really needs.

    ReplyDelete