| The General Impact Thread; Discuss random Impact things here | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 9 2005, 01:43 PM (373 Views) | |
| Boyd is RAW | Dec 1 2005, 04:44 PM Post #26 |
|
Unregistered
|
Ratings, ratings, ratings... Do you know that one of the most garbage matches in the history of the WWE also garnered the WWE's highest ever ratings? You might have heard of it. It was called Halftime Heat. In my opinion, ratings mean nothing but hype. |
|
|
| Snowman | Dec 1 2005, 04:50 PM Post #27 |
|
The Snowman Cometh
![]()
|
Look, bottomline, X Division is awesome.....i never said it wasnt, but it is nothing more than a spotfest. Not one person is a "technical" wrestler....no Benoit's, Hart's, Dynamite's, Perfect's, anyone. They have young talent, yes. But, there main event SUCKS. Bottomline. Look at their main event. Jarrett Rhyno Christian Monty Nash Abyss Raven Gunn Hardy Man that is a stacked main event..... :roflmao: A bunch of has-beens....and a bunch of never-was' |
![]() |
|
| Q-BZ | Dec 1 2005, 04:53 PM Post #28 |
![]()
|
The show sucks, kid. Except for the X-Division. There's no amount of markisms or excuses you can invent to change that fact. 0.5 means more people are watching paint dry than they do this shit. These are CONSISTENT numbers, WEEK AFTER WEEK AFTER WEEK. In this case, these WRETCHED numbers and buy rates DO speak for themselves. Sorry if the facts aren't to your liking. I figured I couldn't get a straight answer to my question. Why is that so hard? Here, I'll throw out a bone outright: If TNA put on say, an hour long show, in prime time, live, and it was striclty X-Division kicking ass and doing their thing - more often than not, THAT one hour show would probably be better than any given hour of most WWE shows here in recent times. Fair enough? I'll go that far with it, under certain circumstances. But I still want SOMEONE to explain to me HOW in the hell TNA AS A WHOLE could EVER be considered a better product, overall, than the WWE, flawed as it is? That's all I want. Please. Don't get me, or anyone else, wrong Boyd: We're not trying to trash TNA, but it's frustrating to see the obvious and needless squandering of what could be great potential. The politics are utterly killing this company. They're already a repeat of last days WCW, for the most part. I think a lot of TNA's "fans" see through the lenses of potential vs. actual reality. Nothing would make me, and probably everyone else here, happier than if TNA were TRULY a viable alternative and strong competitor against WWE. We'd all benefit from that, since we all know: Competition FORCES quality. And we just don't have that. TNA simply is not anywhere close to being a threat or viable competitor, at least not yet. Talk about timely! Get a load of this blatant spin from TNA themselves, that just came out.
LOL. The hyped title is the giveaway for the BS we're about to be fed. Their definition of "delivering" and mine are two very different things, that's for sure.
WOW! Stop the presses! That's HOT!
Says who? Percent of what? What the hell does this even mean?
:roflmao: THIS is IMPRESSIVE?! :roflmao:
The crack of dawn, more like. It's not rocket science to suggest that maybe if you didn't put your damned show on so late at night, on Saturday no less, maybe you could at least break that big 1.0 barrier.
Alternative, my ass.
The X-division does.
Source: TNAWrestling.com I'll agree with this to a point although I think Snowman was dead on with this:
At least the TNA propoganda here didn't make the mistake of naming most of those guys in this PR release. Even they know better than that. Wow. That piece gave me a nice chuckle. |
![]() |
|
| Stinger | Dec 1 2005, 08:10 PM Post #29 |
|
The Admin is Here!
![]()
|
TNA is fun to watch in small doses, I just can't ever seem to really get into it for a long amount of time. Nothing they do really interest me. Sure the X Division is fine, but nothing stands out about it. It's WCW's cruiserweight division, only WCW had characters. Who is Austin Aries? Chris Sabin? What sets these guys apart from the next? All the flipping in the world won't get you over with a large audience. Another thing about the X Division is, for every techincal match they have, they have spot crazy matches. One or two spots a match are fine, but when an entire match is nothing but spots, it really shows just how fake it all is. Jarrett is a joke. Raven is now a joke. Monty Brown is probably one of the most annoying guys on the roster, and has never impressed me. AJ Styles is good, but not nearly as good as a lot of people make him out to be. The 4-Live Cru is a joke. Team 3D has long been stale. Sabu is only good in hardcore settings. Christian Cage Samoa Joe Christopher Daniels Abyss ^The only 4 guys in TNA to hold my interest. Not surprisingly, they're each talented in their own way and have characters. And Impact's ratings will never increase as long as they continue on with Jarrett in the main event, shitty squash matches, and the worse backstage segments ever. I didn't watch nor tape last weeks show, and don't feel like I missed anything at all. Everytime TNA comes close to getting on the right track, they screw it up and go right back down to being 90% crap. |
![]() |
|
| Snowman | Dec 1 2005, 09:38 PM Post #30 |
|
The Snowman Cometh
![]()
|
I'm sorry but Abyss is nothing to me, he is nothing more than a mankind knockoff. Until they change his look I won't care, it's a blatant ripoff. Jeff Hardy....nothing. He hasn't given two shits about the buiz since Hunter squashed him. Jeff Jarrett has NEVER been a credible world champ, he is a mid-carder bottomline. But his stranglehold on this buiz is the only reason he is champ. Monty Brown is good in small doses, but his finisher is weak and he comes off annoying. Raven is a has been. Sabu is washed up, body depleated. Rhyno could be big but no one pushes him. Kip James/Gunn hasn't been good since 99, and even with his King of the Ring push they couldn't do anything with him. 3 Live Kru......please! Talk about a stale gimmick. Road Dogg/James was a one trick pony, he truely is living proof of the Armstrong curse. Konan....his gimmick is the same as his NWO days....that was almost a decade ago....MOVE ON! And K-Kwick or whatever the hell they call him has flashes of brilliance but his look is the same as his tiny stint in WWE....redo! AJ Styles is great, but he has not shown anything new in a few years, his gimmick is the same as his heel gimmick....REDO! Fallen Angel, good performer, gimmick is growing stale. Rest of Roster.....simply put: WHO THE HELL ARE THEY?????!!!!! |
![]() |
|
| Cav | Dec 2 2005, 01:49 AM Post #31 |
|
I ran ball with Mickie James' father. Watch red shorts!
![]()
|
I read that "press release" from TNA and Spike, and that's crap. Spike was hoping TNA would get ratings above the range WWE's throwaway Velocity was getting, and it hasn't. And I don't know how it's averaging an 0.8 when it hasn't even reached that mark in a month or so and has only been on the air for two months total. Ratings can be overanalyzed Boyd, but they're not "all hype." If that's all it came down to, every show WWE promoted ahead of time would be through the roof like it was five years ago. There's no such thing as "all hype" in the wrestling industry anymore, because the industry isn't hot enough to consistently do the amazing ratings it did five years ago and there are too many fans who are too smart for their own good to even try to enjoy the show anymore. That's why ratings can be tough to analyze period, except to see if your core audience is still there. I like the X-Division, but guys like Snow make a good point about too many spots. I won't go much further into it than that, because I've had the debate/argument several times over the past few years even. There's this wave of spot-happy wrestling running rampant in the indy's, and alot of the time that's what I see when I watch TNA. Planchas are nice, but multiple versions of them do not make a match. These X matches can be cool, but they don't touch Shawn Michaels/Kurt Angle, Eddie Guerrero/Rey Mysterio and so forth. As for Monty Brown, he is a scrub in my opinion in terms of the wrestling industry. His promos, with the screaming and howling and all of that shit, and then that Pounce move he does, are all just crap as far as I'm concerned. I gave him many a chance and he's done nothing for me whatsoever. He has my respect for playing in the NFL, but beyond that, I don't think he cuts it. Abyss is okay, but trying to raise him up and cut down the Undertaker at the same time is a disgraceful statement. I'm gonna say this right now, no matter who's a fan of Undertaker and who isn't. The fact is, Undertaker is THE BEST BIG MAN IN THE HISTORY OF THE BUSINESS BAR NONE AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW. He's more agile even at age 40 than Abyss or most other big guys are, and he can get in there and have a good match with a guy whether he's a brawler or technical wrestler. When the likes of Bret Hart (in his Calgary Sun column) and Kurt Angle (on Undertaker's DVD) call you one of the top guys they've ever worked with, you know that means something. You mentioned the tacks and all that stuff with Abyss. Tack scars don't make a Superstar great, and even if they did, Undertaker has gone there. He gave his body up on the bed of tacks with Mankind in the Hell in a Cell in 1998. I know Abyss has gone there a few times I think, but so what? It means little. I know people like who they like, and that's fine. But I couldn't let the Undertaker comment slide. I get tired of the "Taker sucks" comments and shit like that. The man is insanely over and STILL one of the top Superstars in the industry. He doesn't suck. Have some of the feuds he's been put in the last two years sucked? Yes, but everyone has that. You like TNA Boyd, and that's cool. But I don't think it's better than WWE in any way other than some of the X stuff. That's my opinion. |
![]() |
|
| Q-BZ | Dec 2 2005, 08:00 AM Post #32 |
![]()
|
There isn't anyone on the TNA roster that could lick the Undertaker's shoes. Certainly not someone like Abyss. The sky is blue, by the way. |
![]() |
|
| Boyd is RAW | Dec 2 2005, 01:16 PM Post #33 |
|
Unregistered
|
The Undertaker shouldn't have enough money to buy shoes. He should be shining them in somewhere like Hoboken. He's old, and pushes down talent. He no-sells, even when he has a non-Phenom gimmick. Ever heard of Undertaker and Kane versus Kronik? :dascool: Cav, have you ever seen AJ Styles sell The Pounce? He bounces all over the place like he's been hit buy a bus and it makes the Pounce look GREAT. Also, Lance Hoytt is an exceptional talent. If you think Undertaer is good, then you should see some of teh shit this guy pulls off. It's not on the level of Paul Burchill, but the guy hits an awesome moonsault and his Van Terminator was the single greatest big man move I've ever seen. In my opinion... Abyss vs Lance Hoytt > Rey vs Eddie |
|
|
| Q-BZ | Dec 2 2005, 01:18 PM Post #34 |
![]()
|
Kid, you bury yourself with your own words. :roflmao: |
![]() |
|
| Boyd is RAW | Dec 2 2005, 01:23 PM Post #35 |
|
Unregistered
|
I enjoy these debates, Q. It's a shame I lose them all. :( |
|
|
| Q-BZ | Dec 2 2005, 01:34 PM Post #36 |
![]()
|
I think you'd find you would do well if you actually answered direct questions that people ask you. Like me for example: I'm really not trying to be a jerk to you, but when you write something, and I'm not sure I understand it, and I ask you to elaborate or explain what you mean and how you got there...if you DID that...that might help. ;) Maybe I stil won't agree with you, but at least I'll UNDERSTAND where you are coming from. :) The Undertaker. Given his ENTIRE career, which has not been perfect, of course (he's had his share of duds with Kronik, Kamala, etc.)...are you really trying to tell us that you believe that there's anyone on TNA that can really touch him and what he can do in the ring even now, at his age? Of course he's been in some dud matches, like anyone else.
These are young guys in the prime of their youth. OF COURSE they can move better and do things in the ring that the Undertaker can no longer do. But are you really going to tell us and try and argue that these TNA wrestlers, IN THE HERE AND NOW, beat and excel the Undertaker and his entire career? Or let's make it fair and accurate: The Taker in his prime compared to these guys. MAYBE AJ or Lance could have a legacy someday, 10-15 years from now, equivalent to what the Taker has now. It's possible. But I don't think anyone would reasonably put them on the same level with Taker, here and now. It's amazing how lithe and well the Taker can still move, given his age and how many years he's put into the business. Surely you're not going to disagree with that, are you?
That's pretty disrespectful to a Hall of Famer, isn't it? While I certainly have not been thrilled with Taker vs. Heidenreich, Taker vs. Reigns, or even Taker vs. Orton that much, and there is some truth to your criticism...are you really going to dismiss someone like this out of hand? I'm not a big fan of the Deadman gimmick. I've never made any secret about that. And Taker is well known in the business for this: If he likes you, he'll make you look like a star. If he hates your ass, you're doomed. Now, I ask you: Doesn't Taker deserve credit for helping to put both Orton and Lesnar over the moon, repeatedly, I might add? Two recent, young talents?
That simply makes me sad. C'mon now. Abyss?!?! |
![]() |
|
| Boyd is RAW | Dec 2 2005, 02:39 PM Post #37 |
|
Unregistered
|
The Undertaker, in my opinion, is a bad wrestler. He is the leader of the NEW clique. He puts down young up-and-comers and puts over ass-kissers. That is all. |
|
|
| Q-BZ | Dec 2 2005, 02:43 PM Post #38 |
![]()
|
You are wrong and I know you couldn't back this up with anything concrete. The Undertaker's career over the last 20 years speaks for itself and his spot in any wrestling Hall of Fame is assured. That is all. |
![]() |
|
| Snowman | Dec 2 2005, 03:33 PM Post #39 |
|
The Snowman Cometh
![]()
|
Taker put over Cena when he had no gimmick...he was a young pup wet behind the ears. He tried to put over OJ, but damned if OJ just didnt totally suck. He put over Brock BIG TIME! He is putting over Orton, he put over Kane, shall I go on???? And the worst part is....I don't care for Undertaker....haven't since I was a kid, but he sure as hell has my respect. The only place Taker won't put someone over is Mania....and when your record is this long with no losses, I wouldn't put anyone over either. I mean it's not like he's hogging the title or anything **Cough-TripleH-Cough** |
![]() |
|
| Stinger | Dec 6 2005, 02:54 PM Post #40 |
|
The Admin is Here!
![]()
|
35,000 buys is sad for what was suppose to be "WrestleMania's equal". And I see TNA still hasn't gotten the message for their program, having done nothing to bring in new viewers. Hell, I haven't watch the past 3 weeks worth, but do plan on watching Thursday... which will determine when I watch next. |
![]() |
|
| Cav | Dec 6 2005, 03:58 PM Post #41 |
|
I ran ball with Mickie James' father. Watch red shorts!
![]()
|
I watched this last edition of iMPACT!, and it was crap. Nothing like a main event of Simon Diamond, David YOung and Elix Skipper vs. Raven.... Garbage, that's what that was.... |
![]() |
|
| Q-BZ | Dec 6 2005, 03:59 PM Post #42 |
![]()
|
:roflmao: I'll say this much: They have some real masters of hyperbole working in that PR department! :roflmao: |
![]() |
|
| The Sandman | Dec 11 2005, 04:41 PM Post #43 |
|
2007 ACC Champions
![]()
|
Saying that should be a bannable offense. If you honestly believe that, then you're wrestling IQ is less than that of a jar of peanut butter. I'm sorry, but you are a blithering idiot if that's truly your opinion. |
![]() |
|
| Q-BZ | Dec 11 2005, 05:40 PM Post #44 |
![]()
|
:owned: :owned: :owned: Did someone say the magic "b" word? :P :bann: |
![]() |
|
| The Sandman | Dec 12 2005, 07:11 PM Post #45 |
|
2007 ACC Champions
![]()
|
When it comes to TNA, you know what you're gonna do??? Posted Image [size=7]YOU'RE GONNA EAT THAT SHIT UP WITH A SPOON!!![/size] :cruise: |
![]() |
|
| Boyd is RAW | Dec 13 2005, 02:57 PM Post #46 |
|
Unregistered
|
I'm sorry, I'm not quite a fan of ill-legitimate fathers in my wrestling, as well as 'Kid On A Pole' matches. Abyss vs Lance storm was one of the best big man matches I've seen in a while, and just because Eddie died doesn't make me like that match. |
|
|
| Q-BZ | Dec 13 2005, 04:25 PM Post #47 |
![]()
|
You don't know what you're talking about. I agree with Sandman's assessment 100 percent.
Well said! |
![]() |
|
| The Sandman | Dec 14 2005, 12:20 PM Post #48 |
|
2007 ACC Champions
![]()
|
What does the stipulation or storyline have to do with the quality of the match? Eddie and Rey put on some excellent matches that we all enjoyed despite not being big fans(to say the least) of the whole Dominique angle. Eddie passing has nothing to do with this. I don't have a problem with Abyss or Hoyt(other than he's Test 2K5), but saying they put on better matches than Eddie and Rey is beyond comprehension. |
![]() |
|
| Q-BZ | Dec 14 2005, 12:42 PM Post #49 |
![]()
|
Try: ZERO comprehension. As in: No thought or understanding of what constitutes a good wrestling match or knowing what wrestling is about, in general. Otherwise known as...now sing along with the Q folks because you all should know these lyrics all too well by now: Not knowing what you are talking about. |
![]() |
|
| Cav | Dec 14 2005, 03:39 PM Post #50 |
|
I ran ball with Mickie James' father. Watch red shorts!
![]()
|
Despite all of this, I'm trying to figure out how Abyss vs. LANCE STORM was one of the best BIG MAN matches he's seen in awhile.... Scroll up and read that post, lol.... Bringing Eddie's death into the debate is nonsensical. Nobody said he and Rey had better matches because Eddie is now dead. That would be almost as much of an off-base statement as anything hinting that Monty Brown is worth two shits. I'm gonna say this Boyd, and this really isn't your fault because it's more the state of the game nowadays: It really disappoints me that, here in 2005, we have kids at 12 years of age who are talking about wrestlers no-selling and playing backstage politics and all of that jive. Q, Sandman, Snow, do you all remember when we were 12? We were watching the shows out of pure excitement and interest in the characters, matches and angles. Of course the 'net has tainted this as we've grown older, but at 12 years old it upsets me that we have young fans concerning themselves with this crap. Not to say all kids that age do so, because my 12-year-old cousin watches and likes who she likes without knowing about any of the "unimportant" stuff. But it disappoints me that Boyd and probably boatloads of other kids do read this crap on the internet. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · United Wrestling Front · Next Topic » |






2:24 AM Jul 11