PDA

View Full Version : if tna fired Bisch, hogan, and Russo, and hired Heyman..pushed the young talent...



Murphdogg4
09-03-2011, 10:06 PM
And started making really great tv, anyone else think certain people would still talk trash about them?

HCollins-TNA1
09-03-2011, 10:11 PM
Most in likely cause they isn't the WWE..... How many people hates Heyman...... more then one know I would guess...

tnafanwwehater
09-03-2011, 10:41 PM
And started making really great tv, anyone else think certain people would still talk trash about them?

I am sick of people saying tna doesnt push the the talent. people who watch this do u even watch the freaken show. seriously. u think seth rollins will draw if hes put on a main event. do u think cm punk draws as a main event. guess what the highest rated segments for impact are usually the hogan segments. As for heyman the man is a freaken moron with a huge ego. He thinks he deserves ownership of a company just because hes coming in.YEAH RIGHTH!!! ecw would probably be alive if his ego wasnt so big. he Made horrible business decisions for ecw and thats why they are a thing of the past now. russo is bad but honestly heyman with full controll i doubt tna would last long since he doesnt listen to anyone. and yes people would still trash tna bcuz its the underdog and different and people hate different. thats why the wwe puts the same matches every week and people still watch.

Reichwulf
09-03-2011, 10:46 PM
Most in likely cause they isn't the WWE..... How many people hates Heyman...... more then one know I would guess...

I'm a paul heyman kind of guy, i used to love it when he was ecw and even when he was an announcer for wwe.

i'd happily take him and replace eric & hogan

HCollins-TNA1
09-03-2011, 10:49 PM
I'm a paul heyman kind of guy, i used to love it when he was ecw and even when he announced for wwe.

As a manager he's alright.... as a announcer he was alright..... creatively he's alright.... but business wise he sold his self out.....

ratedy2jayz
09-03-2011, 10:50 PM
I am sick of people saying tna doesnt push the the talent. people who watch this do u even watch the freaken show. seriously. u think seth rollins will draw if hes put on a main event. do u think cm punk draws as a main event. guess what the highest rated segments for impact are usually the hogan segments. As for heyman the man is a freaken moron with a huge ego. He thinks he deserves ownership of a company just because hes coming in.YEAH RIGHTH!!! ecw would probably be alive if his ego wasnt so big. he Made horrible business decisions for ecw and thats why they are a thing of the past now. russo is bad but honestly heyman with full controll i doubt tna would last long since he doesnt listen to anyone. and yes people would still trash tna bcuz its the underdog and different and people hate different. thats why the wwe puts the same matches every week and people still watch.

Well Seth Rollins was the champ for ROH and he did well and CM Punk draws for the WWE now, but what the hell do they have to do with TNA pushing younger talent?

Rich Cranium
09-03-2011, 10:56 PM
As a manager he's alright.... as a announcer he was alright..... creatively he's alright.... but business wise he sold his self out.....

Very true about the business side. There was a point in time when many ECW wrestlers were receiving bad checks. Some guys left and some stayed.

tnafanwwehater
09-03-2011, 11:14 PM
Well Seth Rollins was the champ for ROH and he did well and CM Punk draws for the WWE now, but what the hell do they have to do with TNA pushing younger talent?

i say this because people want people to get pushed. and tna is doing fine with the pushing they are pushin crimson, both of the beer money guys. u cannot push everybody only certain people.

Sony
09-04-2011, 12:13 AM
Heyman is vastly overrated imo! Why do most fans believe Heyman will turn TNA's fortune around? He gets all this credit for ECW, but what exactly did he accomplish with ECW?
lets see, he sold out large arenas... damn, they were only small venues, bingo halls, and gyms! He made the ECW wrestlers stars while working for him....nope, they became stars after joining WWE and WCW! He garnered huge ratings....no, ECW had a fanatic following but it was a cult following! He had great storylines to draw in the crowds....not really, ECW selling point was the violence, it was not the storylines that drew in the viewership. He had a business mind to build his business...nope, he actually ran ECW to the ground due to his poor money management! He had a love for the business...nope, it seems he has a love for the money and power. Why else would he line his own pockets before paying his workers to ensure they will be loyal to his brand and why else would he refuse another chance in the wrestling industry if not given full control.
I liked ECW just as much as the next guy, but I don't understand why it's fans keep turning a blind eye to the past! Is it because the fans are nostalgic? Or is it because they are hoping for the great white hope in Heyman? I don't get it!
Heyman already said that he would make TNA a hybrid of wrestling and MMA during an interview because MMA is the wave of the future. Doesn't sound to appealing in my opinion, but to each their own.

Peter Kaymakcian
09-04-2011, 12:24 AM
@tnafanwwehater
1.) Other then Crimson and Matt Morgan what you talent are they really pushing because in my main event title match for the last seven PPVs I've only seen Kurt Angle, Mr. Anderson, Jeff Hardy, Sting, and RVD. So please enlighten me on who they are really pushing. I would love to know who they are pushing.

2.) Beer Money is going to be split up soon so they can test the waters for a Robert Roode singles run, but we all saw how that worked out for Hernandez and LAX. The only titles he's held after breaking up with LAX was a tag title run with Morgan and now a tag title run with Mexican America.

3.) If TNA were pushing the right people they wouldn't be in the low ones as far as ratings are concerned. And considering a Hogan promo draws just as much as a Samoa Joe match/promo I don't think your argument has a leg to stand on.

@Sony

1.) Heyman gets a lot of credit because unlike WCW and WWF he was able to turn a small budget company like ECW into a namesake company. He was the biggest part of ECW creative back then and honestly a lot of wrestling historians will agree with this statement that if Heyman had money backing him like WWF and WCW had ECW would probably still be around today.

2.) I don't think it was just the violence it was also the characters who were mainly created by Heyman. Also before ECW wrestling wasn't as violent as it was in the 90s. The Attitude Era and the Hardcore Division was based off of Heyman's idea which was ECW.

@Murphdogg4

1.) Would people still talk crap about TNA? No, unless they were a WWE mark, because Heyman would've done the one thing each and everyone of us wants TNA to do put the belts on the young guys. Heyman admitted this that he told Dixie she would have to fire her legends and that she could keep one. Dixie balked at the idea because she didn't want to risk her precious one ratings that guys like Sting, Nash, and Booker were bringining in at the time.

Sony
09-04-2011, 12:37 AM
@ Peter... you say if Paul Heyman had the money ECW would still be in business, with that Logic, if WCW wasn't losing money they would still be in business. If I had money I would be driving a brand new Porsche! The fact remains that Heyman didn't have the money because ECW itself wasn't garnering him enough money and the money it did garner him, he mismanaged. If ECW had a higher viewership, networks would be throwing money down his throat in order to air his product on their stations...but it didn't happen!

2) What household names did Heyman develope...the Dudley Boyz, RVD, Tazz? they all became household names after they joined WWE. Same goes with Benoit, Eddie, Rey Mysterio with WCW. As far as attitude is concerned I disagree. ECW identity was violence not attitude. WWE embraced attitude not trying to copy ECW but to copy WCW. WCW, with the NWO angle, was the catalyst for WWE's attitude.

HCollins-TNA1
09-04-2011, 12:47 AM
Heyman had to borrow money 1st he went to Bischoff and WCW and company to work with him and Bischoff shot that down... Then in 1997 he went to Vince to they did several talent exchanges off and on from 1997 to 2000 when ECW shut down...
He sold out ECW working with the WWE.... It common knowledge.... Heyman struggle in and with money..... It took ECW 7 years to get a decent TV deal..... Took TNA 3 years....

Peter Kaymakcian
09-04-2011, 12:54 AM
@ Peter... you say if Paul Heyman had the money ECW would still be in business, with that Logic, if WCW wasn't losing money they would still be in business. If I had money I would be driving a brand new Porsche! The fact remains that Heyman didn't have the money because ECW itself wasn't garnering him enough money and the money it did garner him, he mismanaged. If ECW had a higher viewership, networks would be throwing money down his throat in order to air his product on their stations...but it didn't happen!

2) What household names did Heyman develope...the Dudley Boyz, RVD, Tazz? they all became household names after they joined WWE. Same goes with Benoit, Eddie, Rey Mysterio with WCW. As far as attitude is concerned I disagree. ECW identity was violence not attitude. WWE embraced attitude not trying to copy ECW but to copy WCW. WCW, with the NWO angle, was the catalyst for WWE's attitude.

1.) Difference WCW had a multi-billion dollar corporation behind them. Heyman didn't even have a guy with a six figure income behind him. You may have just pulled the stupidest argument I have ever seen in my entire life. Comparing WCW's Financial Situation with ECW's Financial Situation. You know what else might be a fair comparison while we're at it a lemonade stand vs a Target.

2.) Taz beat Kurt Angle in his debut match with the WWE and also yes Taz was a household name while in WCW, same with the Dudley's, and with RVD. RVD joined WWF during the Invasion Storyline and he was known right off that bat. Also Sabu, Raven, Tommy Dreamer just to name a few. Also I love how you didn't acknowledge the part about the Attitude Era and the Hardcore Division both being based off of Heyman's brain child ECW.

Peter Kaymakcian
09-04-2011, 12:56 AM
Heyman had to borrow money 1st he went to Bischoff and WCW and company to work with him and Bischoff shot that down... Then in 1997 he went to Vince to they did several talent exchanges off and on from 1997 to 2000 when ECW shut down...
He sold out ECW working with the WWE.... It common knowledge.... Heyman struggle in and with money..... It took ECW 7 years to get a decent TV deal..... Took TNA 3 years....

TNA also had Panda Energy backing them. Also didn't you just use Spike TV as an excuse for TNA's low ratings? So what your saying is that the TV deal that is decent is what led TNA into their low ratings? If that's a decent TV deal please show me a bad one because that would be quite funny. Unless you mean their TV deal with Fox which Fox ended because they didn't see TNA as a good investment.

HCollins-TNA1
09-04-2011, 01:51 AM
TNA also had Panda Energy backing them. Also didn't you just use Spike TV as an excuse for TNA's low ratings? So what your saying is that the TV deal that is decent is what led TNA into their low ratings? If that's a decent TV deal please show me a bad one because that would be quite funny. Unless you mean their TV deal with Fox which Fox ended because they didn't see TNA as a good investment.

Very different.......
WCW had Ted Turner and Turner Broadcasting.....
WWF/WWE had no one although was on USA....
ECW had no one at all except a few syndication runs... in local markets.... then Paul went to Vince and struck a deal to work together and that where Heyman made the mistake.... the money he owed Vince....
As for TNA being owned by Panda Energy.... PE is nothing more then a feeder, only giving what money needed to survive....
Same for ROH for the most part.... they have the TV deal even though it syndicated but more wide range then ECW... Sinclair will only feed the money needed to survive...

HCollins-TNA1
09-04-2011, 01:59 AM
TNA also had Panda Energy backing them. Also didn't you just use Spike TV as an excuse for TNA's low ratings? So what your saying is that the TV deal that is decent is what led TNA into their low ratings? If that's a decent TV deal please show me a bad one because that would be quite funny. Unless you mean their TV deal with Fox which Fox ended because they didn't see TNA as a good investment.

Yes Spike isn't a top 20 or 25 network.... they isn't on every TV either cause the cable or satelite company don't carry it or other reasons...
TNA isn't getting low ratings the month or so they did last year was cause of going head to head on Monday night with Raw...
The TNA Fox sports deal was nothng but to test the waters of a weekly show.... Look how far they have came since then.... Both sides was looking elsewhere at the time to....

Peter Kaymakcian
09-04-2011, 02:10 AM
Yes Spike isn't a top 20 or 25 network.... they isn't on every TV either cause the cable or satelite company don't carry it or other reasons...
TNA isn't getting low ratings the month or so they did last year was cause of going head to head on Monday night with Raw...
The TNA Fox sports deal was nothng but to test the waters of a weekly show.... Look how far they have came since then.... Both sides was looking elsewhere at the time to....

No just no. Until you post something worth while for me to comment on this is done. I'm not wasting my time anymore. So that means if you see something I wrote don't comment on it unless you have something worth while to say as a response. And I don't mean your ludacris idea that me counting Kurt Angle's actualy number of TNA title reigns 5 is cheating because it validates my argument and is an actual fact. Or your ludacris idea that Stone Cold was main eventing WCW when his two single title reigns both the US title doesn't even add up to a month. So until you have something worth while to post keep your ideas to yourself.

Sony
09-04-2011, 02:17 AM
1.) Difference WCW had a multi-billion dollar corporation behind them. Heyman didn't even have a guy with a six figure income behind him. You may have just pulled the stupidest argument I have ever seen in my entire life. Comparing WCW's Financial Situation with ECW's Financial Situation. You know what else might be a fair comparison while we're at it a lemonade stand vs a Target.

2.) Taz beat Kurt Angle in his debut match with the WWE and also yes Taz was a household name while in WCW, same with the Dudley's, and with RVD. RVD joined WWF during the Invasion Storyline and he was known right off that bat. Also Sabu, Raven, Tommy Dreamer just to name a few. Also I love how you didn't acknowledge the part about the Attitude Era and the Hardcore Division both being based off of Heyman's brain child ECW.
Its not comparing financial situations, its making an example of your stupid statement saying "if heyman had money, he would still be in business"....NO FUCK SHERLOCK. Heyman didn't have money because his management skills and his product was not up to par with the other 2 organizations. If Heyman had any management skills, maybe, just maybe ECW would have slowly grown, but it didn't because heyman in reality was the cancer that killed ECW. As far as RVD, Dudleys, ect being household names in ECW.....what the fuck are you smoking. they became household names after the became WWE superstars. You say TAZ beat Angle in his debute match....NO FUCK. lets see...lets have a debuting wrestler who we hyped up for weeks lose his first match during a PPV. No fuck they had him win. He beat Angle to give him some credibility right of the bat. get over yourself.

HCollins-TNA1
09-04-2011, 02:37 AM
No just no. Until you post something worth while for me to comment on this is done. I'm not wasting my time anymore. So that means if you see something I wrote don't comment on it unless you have something worth while to say as a response. And I don't mean your ludacris idea that me counting Kurt Angle's actualy number of TNA title reigns 5 is cheating because it validates my argument and is an actual fact. Or your ludacris idea that Stone Cold was main eventing WCW when his two single title reigns both the US title doesn't even add up to a month. So until you have something worth while to post keep your ideas to yourself.

You the one making it harder for yourself to be proven right..... You can't accept being wrong or having the lack of knowledge of wrestling.... of how things works or is working..
Well I'm done with you or so I hope.....

Daddyj1
09-04-2011, 03:25 AM
I do know that you can blame spike tv in a minor way. WWE,ECW,ans TNA hav all now been on spike tv. Although under different names, still the basic channel. No ECW star was a household name till they came to WWE. They were a name only with the Few people that new ECW. Even the ones that went to wcw werent shit till wwe. Being Benoit, Eddie, Dean Saturn, Rey, Big show, Etc...even Mick Foley. Hogan wasnt shit in WCW till the NWO storyline, by then he was already getting stale. TNA could do much better with som ereplacements, just I dont thin the talent or Hogan and Bischoff need to be replaced. THey are only doing what they are told. THey do not really own part of the company, they are onscreen empoloyees of Dixie Carter. Russo is a writer, and NOONE has ever said anything good about the guy. Just saying

Mikeyboy7777777
09-04-2011, 05:45 AM
i will answer your question in as few words as possible haters gonna hate people will always bitch about it even if it's precisely what they wanted they'll just say that wasn't what they wanted and hate some more don't you just love the wrestling business?:D

the wrestling shade
09-04-2011, 06:29 AM
Ofcaurse they will keep talk trashing them. Mainly IWC or the dirt sheet sites because the IWC has like the worst critics in wrestling today. they mention everything from little to big. most of the times i think they demand too much. so yeah they will keep trashing TNA.

jhorton1215
09-04-2011, 10:12 AM
TNA shouldn't be worry about which WWE reject they should sign. They need to worry about expanding their fan base, going on the road, and doing what's best for BUSINESS! Otherwise they will be bankrupt and gone pretty soon. I don't want to see that.

I can't stand watching TNA anymore, but I used to enjoy the product a few years back. I can't say that anymore.

HCollins-TNA1
09-04-2011, 10:27 AM
I do know that you can blame spike tv in a minor way. WWE,ECW,ans TNA hav all now been on spike tv. Although under different names, still the basic channel. No ECW star was a household name till they came to WWE. They were a name only with the Few people that new ECW. Even the ones that went to wcw werent shit till wwe. Being Benoit, Eddie, Dean Saturn, Rey, Big show, Etc...even Mick Foley. Hogan wasnt shit in WCW till the NWO storyline, by then he was already getting stale. TNA could do much better with som ereplacements, just I dont thin the talent or Hogan and Bischoff need to be replaced. THey are only doing what they are told. THey do not really own part of the company, they are onscreen empoloyees of Dixie Carter. Russo is a writer, and NOONE has ever said anything good about the guy. Just saying

Have to disagree without WCW Beniot, Eddie, Dean,Perry, or Big Show all most likely wouldn't be signed to WWE..... People consider Beniot, Eddie, Dean, and Saturn when they left WCW to be the biggest jumps or lost of WCW of all time.....
Big Show who knows where he would been without WCW or Hulk Hogan pushing him in the mid 90s......
As for Hogan he was something when he 1st came to WCW in 1994, all the media attention they gave him, from Larry King to having him go on Regis and Kathy Lee and Entertainment Tonight and his show Thunder in Pardise... Then after about a year all the hype died down.. and thus the NWO storyline created to build Hogan into a badguy..

Rassling_Fan
09-04-2011, 11:17 AM
Heyman is vastly overrated imo! Why do most fans believe Heyman will turn TNA's fortune around? He gets all this credit for ECW, but what exactly did he accomplish with ECW?

-Before WCW, he was the one who brought Lucha Libre and the Japanese Style of Wrestling to America. That, combined with the nWo (an idea originally from New Japan Pro Wrestling) made WCW into the threat to the WWE.
-Before WWE, he was promoting the stuff you saw in the Attitude Era. The violence, the swearing, the beer drinking, all were done by ECW before the WWE. That made WWE win the Monday Night Wars.
-You said those in ECW only became big stars after joining WWE or WCW. If it wasn't for ECW giving them exposure would that be the case? Would WCW and WWE notice these guys if it wasn't for ECW?

He was a bad business man because he was a wrestling promoter against two mega giants in the business. Heyman had the ideas that would make good business, but not the money to back it up. WCW had Ted Turner money, spending it like if it was out of style. But once that ship sailed we saw they sunk fast. No one was willing to work with it and Bishoff wouldn't touch them without a TV deal.

No one truly knows if Heyman's strategy would work. But would giving him the chance hurt TNA? Dixie gave control to Russo who's claim to fame was creating the Attitude Era and causing the biggest lost of money to WCW in a year. And Bishoff is an executive producer who only claim to fame is ONE good idea.

HCollins-TNA1
09-04-2011, 11:28 AM
-Before WCW, he was the one who brought Lucha Libre and the Japanese Style of Wrestling to America. That, combined with the nWo (an idea originally from New Japan Pro Wrestling) made WCW into the threat to the WWE.
-Before WWE, he was promoting the stuff you saw in the Attitude Era. The violence, the swearing, the beer drinking, all were done by ECW before the WWE. That made WWE win the Monday Night Wars.
-You said those in ECW only became big stars after joining WWE or WCW. If it wasn't for ECW giving them exposure would that be the case? Would WCW and WWE notice these guys if it wasn't for ECW?

He was a bad business man because he was a wrestling promoter against two mega giants in the business. Heyman had the ideas that would make good business, but not the money to back it up. WCW had Ted Turner money, spending it like if it was out of style. But once that ship sailed we saw they sunk fast. No one was willing to work with it and Bishoff wouldn't touch them without a TV deal.

No one truly knows if Heyman's strategy would work. But would giving him the chance hurt TNA? Dixie gave control to Russo who's claim to fame was creating the Attitude Era and causing the biggest lost of money to WCW in a year. And Bishoff is an executive producer who only claim to fame is ONE good idea.
Actually Bischoff had several good ideas he did in WCW....
1. Signing Hulk Hogan.. who would had done that after the steriod hearings of the early 90s?
2. Competeing with WWE on Monday nights.... Both feds was pulling decent numbers even WCW...
3. the Monday Night Wars.....
4. the cruiserweight division...
Just to name 4 that comes to mind..

helmsley
09-04-2011, 12:02 PM
And started making really great tv, anyone else think certain people would still talk trash about them?

and if unicorns arrive and make impact a very happy place and they give happy pushes to everyone..................yep, not gonna happen either

Rassling_Fan
09-04-2011, 12:02 PM
Actually Bischoff had several good ideas he did in WCW....
1. Signing Hulk Hogan.. who would had done that after the steriod hearings of the early 90s?
2. Competeing with WWE on Monday nights.... Both feds was pulling decent numbers even WCW...
3. the Monday Night Wars.....
4. the cruiserweight division...
Just to name 4 that comes to mind..

1- The same people who would hire him to do movies and his own TV Show. That same show "Thunder in Paradise" was also on Turner's channel.
2-3- Aren't they the same idea? And eventually, that idea turned bad for WCW when they began to lose money trying to compete.
4- Actually, not really. The Cruiserweight, or essentially the Light Heavyweight Division, already existed before Bishoff. Bishoff just hired more Lucha Libre and Japanese wrestlers.

Peter Kaymakcian
09-04-2011, 12:04 PM
1- The same people who would hire him to do movies and his own TV Show. That same show "Thunder in Paradise" was also on Turner's channel.
2-3- Aren't they the same idea? And eventually, that idea turned bad for WCW when they began to lose money trying to compete.
4- Actually, not really. The Cruiserweight, or essentially the Light Heavyweight Division, already existed before Bishoff. Bishoff just hired more Lucha Libre and Japanese wrestlers.

Don't waste your time he's a TNA Mark. Trust me I've been through this with him. Honestly best bet is to ignore.

HCollins-TNA1
09-04-2011, 12:06 PM
Don't waste your time he's a TNA Mark. Trust me I've been through this with him. Honestly best bet is to ignore.

I'm a wrestling MARK unlike you who seems to distort history and knowledge.... Best to ignore you if anyone...

HCollins-TNA1
09-04-2011, 12:09 PM
1- The same people who would hire him to do movies and his own TV Show. That same show "Thunder in Paradise" was also on Turner's channel.
2-3- Aren't they the same idea? And eventually, that idea turned bad for WCW when they began to lose money trying to compete.
4- Actually, not really. The Cruiserweight, or essentially the Light Heavyweight Division, already existed before Bishoff. Bishoff just hired more Lucha Libre and Japanese wrestlers.

over looked 3 and you right 2 and 3 are the same...
other then compete with WWE...
true, the cruiserweight was the light weight... but he also had a hand full of talent from the Power Plant that was cruiser weights... Billy Kidman being one..

Peter Kaymakcian
09-04-2011, 12:11 PM
I'm a wrestling MARK unlike you who seems to distort history and knowledge.... Best to ignore you if anyone...

Your a moron. You can't comprehend the fact that counting a guy for the number of title reigns he has is accurate. You think Stone Cold got his main push in WCW. You are an idiot. Now me on the other hand I am a wrestling fan. I hate what both WWE and TNA is doing at the moment. I hate how WWE is using John Cena as their poster child since I think to be a wrestling poster child you should be good at wrestling. I hate how they waste talent like Christian. I hate how their pushing Mark Henry. I hate how TNA's poster child is Sting, Angle, and Hogan. Not one of them was a TNA Homegrown Talent. Angle is the only one in that group who should still be apart of any wrestling organization.

HCollins-TNA1
09-04-2011, 12:13 PM
-Before WCW, he was the one who brought Lucha Libre and the Japanese Style of Wrestling to America. That, combined with the nWo (an idea originally from New Japan Pro Wrestling) made WCW into the threat to the WWE.
-Before WWE, he was promoting the stuff you saw in the Attitude Era. The violence, the swearing, the beer drinking, all were done by ECW before the WWE. That made WWE win the Monday Night Wars.
-You said those in ECW only became big stars after joining WWE or WCW. If it wasn't for ECW giving them exposure would that be the case? Would WCW and WWE notice these guys if it wasn't for ECW?

He was a bad business man because he was a wrestling promoter against two mega giants in the business. Heyman had the ideas that would make good business, but not the money to back it up. WCW had Ted Turner money, spending it like if it was out of style. But once that ship sailed we saw they sunk fast. No one was willing to work with it and Bishoff wouldn't touch them without a TV deal.

No one truly knows if Heyman's strategy would work. But would giving him the chance hurt TNA? Dixie gave control to Russo who's claim to fame was creating the Attitude Era and causing the biggest lost of money to WCW in a year. And Bishoff is an executive producer who only claim to fame is ONE good idea.

The only thing with Heyman he screwed with the wrong people in the business.... He had the NWA title threw in the trash, which sent outrage all over the World... He double crossed many people Jim Cornette, Bill Watts, Jim Ross, and etc.... He worked with anyone to get money to pay ECW... see WWE ECW Invasion 1997...

HCollins-TNA1
09-04-2011, 12:20 PM
Your a moron. You can't comprehend the fact that counting a guy for the number of title reigns he has is accurate. You think Stone Cold got his main push in WCW. You are an idiot. Now me on the other hand I am a wrestling fan. I hate what both WWE and TNA is doing at the moment. I hate how WWE is using John Cena as their poster child since I think to be a wrestling poster child you should be good at wrestling. I hate how they waste talent like Christian. I hate how their pushing Mark Henry. I hate how TNA's poster child is Sting, Angle, and Hogan. Not one of them was a TNA Homegrown Talent. Angle is the only one in that group who should still be apart of any wrestling organization.

But counting double in you counts.... Reality their been 17 times the TNA changed hand... Reality it only 8 men to hold the TNA title...
Austin was pretty much pushed in WCW up till his 1st neck injury/ release/firing.... He was the #2 guy in the company..
Agree with Cena, but he draws the money and kids and women fans.... Agree with Christian but the WWE never liked him for some odd reason?? Agree with Mark Henry, but he only getting a minor push cause of Show coming back...
As for TNA poster childs Sting maybe.... Angle maybe, Hogan in no way but they associate his name with the brand.... Why didn't you mention AJ he's always the go to guy....

Daddyj1
09-04-2011, 12:35 PM
Have to disagree without WCW Beniot, Eddie, Dean,Perry, or Big Show all most likely wouldn't be signed to WWE..... People consider Beniot, Eddie, Dean, and Saturn when they left WCW to be the biggest jumps or lost of WCW of all time.....
Big Show who knows where he would been without WCW or Hulk Hogan pushing him in the mid 90s......
As for Hogan he was something when he 1st came to WCW in 1994, all the media attention they gave him, from Larry King to having him go on Regis and Kathy Lee and Entertainment Tonight and his show Thunder in Pardise... Then after about a year all the hype died down.. and thus the NWO storyline created to build Hogan into a badguy..

Right, the Hogan to WCW was huge, only for a short time. The NWO is what brought the ratings. As you said the hogan shit died down. However, The rascals and rey and big show were big names for WCW, they were not HOUSEHOLD names till they all joined WWE. After joining WWE there names skyrocketed and made big bank. Rey, Jericho, Benoit, Eddie, none of them would have been a world champ had they stayed with WCW. Hell do you think if EDGE would have stayed in WCW as Sexton Hardcastle he would have become World Champ? What about A.J styles-Air styles in WCW He wouldn't be who is now had that worked out. Or how abour Batista, had he stayed with WCW at the power plant, where the hell would he be now, besides being part of the MIA with Sgt rection and General booker.

helmsley
09-04-2011, 12:41 PM
Your a moron. You can't comprehend the fact that counting a guy for the number of title reigns he has is accurate. You think Stone Cold got his main push in WCW. You are an idiot. Now me on the other hand I am a wrestling fan. I hate what both WWE and TNA is doing at the moment. I hate how WWE is using John Cena as their poster child since I think to be a wrestling poster child you should be good at wrestling. I hate how they waste talent like Christian. I hate how their pushing Mark Henry. I hate how TNA's poster child is Sting, Angle, and Hogan. Not one of them was a TNA Homegrown Talent. Angle is the only one in that group who should still be apart of any wrestling organization.

you are absolutly no wrestling fan, you are just bitchin about everything

Peter Kaymakcian
09-04-2011, 01:41 PM
you are absolutly no wrestling fan, you are just bitchin about everything

Yes because even if you don't like something you should just put up with it. That's smart. That is exactly how progress gets done. That's how African-Americans got equal rights by not saying or doing anything. That's how women got the right to vote. I can keep going if you want.

Also I don't complain about promotions like Chikara, ROH, DG USA, NJPW, AAA, Lucha Libre USA(when it was on MTV 2) because unlike the WWE and TNA they give me what I want. Good wrestling. I loved Destination X because they gave me what I want. Good wrestling. You see the key words here are good and wrestling.

Automatic
09-04-2011, 01:45 PM
Paul Heyman is overrated.

helmsley
09-04-2011, 01:47 PM
Yes because even if you don't like something you should just put up with it. That's smart. That is exactly how progress gets done. That's how African-Americans got equal rights by not saying or doing anything. That's how women got the right to vote. I can keep going if you want.

Also I don't complain about promotions like Chikara, ROH, DG USA, NJPW, AAA, Lucha Libre USA(when it was on MTV 2) because unlike the WWE and TNA they give me what I want. Good wrestling. I loved Destination X because they gave me what I want. Good wrestling. You see the key words here are good and wrestling.

nice! you mentioned plenty of companies! im sure you havent seen them , aaa is just a mexican version of tna,

and no, i dont mean put up with it, but you can bitch all you want about tna and wwe and nothing will change, because you cant do anything to change it, so youre just bitching because you like it, progress was made by people who COULD make it. but please bitch on....

capn-edu
09-04-2011, 01:54 PM
nice! you mentioned plenty of companies! im sure you havent seen them , aaa is just a mexican version of tna,

and no, i dont mean put up with it, but you can bitch all you want about tna and wwe and nothing will change, because you cant do anything to change it, so youre just bitching because you like it, progress was made by people who COULD make it. but please bitch on....

i disagree AAA is not the mexican tna...
but other than that sir you are right

helmsley
09-04-2011, 01:56 PM
i disagree AAA is not the mexican tna...
but other than that sir you are right

yeah, maybe i exaggerated in that part

Murphdogg4
09-04-2011, 01:59 PM
Paul Heyman is overrated.

Have to respectfully disagree with you here, Heyman was more inovative then any other wrestling booker in the last 25 years. WWE's Attitude era was Russo just doing a watered down version of ECW. The question is not how did ECW fail but how in the hell did it get as far as it did? A small indy promotion out of Philly got on ppv and national tv, should never have happend. Little things we take for granted in wrestling now were started in ECW. Go watch some WWF tv from 92-95, while the Bonny Donna's were fighting the Godwins in "slop bucket matches', in ECW Pitbull 2 was powerbombing Francine through a table from the top rope.

Peter Kaymakcian
09-04-2011, 05:37 PM
nice! you mentioned plenty of companies! im sure you havent seen them , aaa is just a mexican version of tna,

and no, i dont mean put up with it, but you can bitch all you want about tna and wwe and nothing will change, because you cant do anything to change it, so youre just bitching because you like it, progress was made by people who COULD make it. but please bitch on....

No the fans are the ones in control because we are the ones buying the stuff. So if the fans who don't like the product stop buying the product which I have done then the company will make changes. The problem is people like you who think I'll just watch crap and hope for the best. Not this fan. I started watching Raw again during CM Punk leaving and stopped right watching when Nash came back on TV and Cena was put back in the main event. Is one viewer going to change the entire industry? No and I know that, but I also know I can try and be apart of the solution rather then the problem.

And your 100% right because I was totally just naming all those companies just so you could guys could think I'm cool. Darn you figured me out. Man now the internet community which I care so much about is going to think I'm lame. Great argument there buddy. Any other gems. Maybe next you could question my looks and my social life. Those are also gems for proving a point as well. Actually arguing for your point is just an idiotic way of making your point.

Marx
09-04-2011, 06:50 PM
Heyman was more inovative then any other wrestling booker in the last 25 years.

I agree with Automatic. Heyman was in over his head and too much into micro management... which cleared the room for guys like Raven and Sandman to do their thing. Mick Foley delivered awesome moments on the mic: Heyman didn't write that, he just let Foley have a go. Same goes for the short Austin-stint, same goes for Raven. On the wrestling side: he didn't learn Sabu, Tazz, Terry Funk, Mike Awesome, and Shane Douglas how to do their thing.

He gets (and takes) a lot of credit for bringing the luchadors, which is a way is true: he was the first 'big' promotion to try it. But he didn't scout them: he just talked to Konnan and Konnan proposed to bring some guys over. I don't want to bad mouth Heyman too much, but I do believe he gets too much credit for something I doubt he planned. I don't think he planned to let the creative wrestlers do their thing: they did it while he was trying to run a whole promotion mostly by himself.

He clearly had no control. New Jack tried to kill a fellow wrestler. New Jack bladed a 17-year old kid who Heyman let enter a ring as a replacement. Foley almost burned down the building. Raven tied Sandman to a cross whilst Kurt Angle was in the stand to see if he wanted to be a part of ECW. Really, if you are certain you want mister America (at that time) Kurt Angle to join - and Kurt seems to have explicitly told Heyman he doubted the content - you make sure to check if someone plans to crucify.

That being said: he wheeled and dealed ECW to a big deal, much bigger than anyone had expected, had a great impact, so I don't want to knock him completely. But he is overrated.

Murphdogg4
09-04-2011, 07:19 PM
back in those days NOBODY scripted anyone's interviews in ECW, WCW or the WWF. There were no writers back then. Heyman was a booker and a damn good one, he came up with legendary angles, was able to bring out the strenths in a wrestler without showing their weakness. Little things like the three way dance match were brought to prominance by Heyman. I'm not saying he was good on the financial side, but from a creative standpoint he was the most inovative booker in the last twenty five years. maybe since Bill Watts heyday in Midsouth.

helmsley
09-04-2011, 07:41 PM
No the fans are the ones in control because we are the ones buying the stuff. So if the fans who don't like the product stop buying the product which I have done then the company will make changes. The problem is people like you who think I'll just watch crap and hope for the best. Not this fan. I started watching Raw again during CM Punk leaving and stopped right watching when Nash came back on TV and Cena was put back in the main event. Is one viewer going to change the entire industry? No and I know that, but I also know I can try and be apart of the solution rather then the problem.

And your 100% right because I was totally just naming all those companies just so you could guys could think I'm cool. Darn you figured me out. Man now the internet community which I care so much about is going to think I'm lame. Great argument there buddy. Any other gems. Maybe next you could question my looks and my social life. Those are also gems for proving a point as well. Actually arguing for your point is just an idiotic way of making your point.

thanks you!

Peter Kaymakcian
09-05-2011, 04:08 AM
thanks you!

1.) It is "Thank you" not "thanks you"

2.) So you bold only a fraction of my post to try and make it look like I agree with your statement. Well maybe you'll get lucky and the Internet Wrestling Community will only read the bolded part.

3.) If you read further I go onto say, "but I also know I can try and be apart of the solution rather then the problem." You see I know it is impossible for one single fan to take down WWE, but what happens when that one fan becomes two, and then those two fans double, and then they double and double and double and double and double and just keep on doubling till its one million fans? Then change will happen. However the only way this will happen is if people will stop allowing WWE and TNA to give them crap and just accept it.

HCollins-TNA1
09-05-2011, 11:52 AM
No the fans are the ones in control because we are the ones buying the stuff. So if the fans who don't like the product stop buying the product which I have done then the company will make changes. The problem is people like you who think I'll just watch crap and hope for the best. Not this fan. I started watching Raw again during CM Punk leaving and stopped right watching when Nash came back on TV and Cena was put back in the main event. Is one viewer going to change the entire industry? No and I know that, but I also know I can try and be apart of the solution rather then the problem.

And your 100% right because I was totally just naming all those companies just so you could guys could think I'm cool. Darn you figured me out. Man now the internet community which I care so much about is going to think I'm lame. Great argument there buddy. Any other gems. Maybe next you could question my looks and my social life. Those are also gems for proving a point as well. Actually arguing for your point is just an idiotic way of making your point.

To a point..... a company isn't going make a change unless it will work or if it for the best interest of them and those who enjoy their product...

Rassling_Fan
09-06-2011, 07:38 AM
To a point..... a company isn't going make a change unless it will work or if it for the best interest of them and those who enjoy their product...

And that's why TNA won't be a threat to WWE. Sometimes you have to take a risk if you want to be successful. The Attitude Era was a successful risk for the WWE, losing some of their older fans for the newer, younger crowd.

HCollins-TNA1
09-06-2011, 11:33 AM
And that's why TNA won't be a threat to WWE. Sometimes you have to take a risk if you want to be successful. The Attitude Era was a successful risk for the WWE, losing some of their older fans for the newer, younger crowd.

They did and more the less it failed with the short reborn Monday Night Wars.....
Like I said if it don't benefit one or the other the company or fans, they want take the risk... But if it does why not take it???

Rich Cranium
09-06-2011, 11:36 AM
They did and more the less it failed with the short reborn Monday Night Wars.....
Like I said if it don't benefit one or the other the company or fans, they want take the risk... But if it does why not take it???

Well WWE has the money and resources to take risks and still be able to move forward. I don't know that TNA has the same.

Automatic
09-06-2011, 11:42 AM
They did and more the less it failed with the short reborn Monday Night Wars.....
Like I said if it don't benefit one or the other the company or fans, they want take the risk... But if it does why not take it???

That was a stupid decision to begin with. How can anybody with a decent sense of mind expect that a show with an average rating of 1.2 is able to compete with a similar show that has a 3.2 rating?

TNA has a lot of things to do, before they can even think of competing with RAW.

HCollins-TNA1
09-06-2011, 11:52 AM
That was a stupid decision to begin with. How can anybody with a decent sense of mind expect that a show with an average rating of 1.2 is able to compete with a similar show that has a 3.2 rating?

TNA has a lot of things to do, before they can even think of competing with RAW.

I don't know if you seen that one video on another thread but Jerratt said 'if they knew then they wouldn't haven't took the risk...
TNA has lots of growing to do before they will be serious threat for the WWE... right now they can take on WWE B and C and D-Web shows... But is a long way from taking on WWE A show...

Rich Cranium
09-06-2011, 11:54 AM
I don't know if you seen that one video on another thread but Jerratt said 'if they knew then they wouldn't haven't took the risk...
TNA has lots of growing to do before they will be serious threat for the WWE... right now they can take on WWE B and C and D-Web shows... But is a long way from taking on WWE A show...

If Matt Hardy had not been fired, they could of had him challenge Zach Ryder for the Internet championship!

SilverGhost
09-06-2011, 11:56 AM
TNA moving to Mondays was the worst decision I have seen.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mH1xm2fOXD4

Automatic
09-06-2011, 11:57 AM
I don't know if you seen that one video on another thread but Jerratt said 'if they knew then they wouldn't haven't took the risk...
TNA has lots of growing to do before they will be serious threat for the WWE... right now they can take on WWE B and C and D-Web shows... But is a long way from taking on WWE A show...

That's just a lame excuse for their retarded decision, because they could've known it if they'd just looked at the ratings.

HCollins-TNA1
09-06-2011, 12:01 PM
That's just a lame excuse for their retarded decision, because they could've known it if they'd just looked at the ratings.

I think someone was feeding TNA the wrong info that why they went head to head with WWE and failed USA Network is a top 5 or 10 cable network... Spike is lucky to make the top 25 if they ever do...

Automatic
09-06-2011, 12:02 PM
TNA moving to Mondays was the worst decision I have seen.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mH1xm2fOXD4

Dixie's such a tool.

Murphdogg4
09-09-2011, 04:08 PM
whoever started this thread is a jackass. A good looking well endowed one though.

Rassling_Fan
09-09-2011, 06:57 PM
They did and more the less it failed with the short reborn Monday Night Wars.....
Like I said if it don't benefit one or the other the company or fans, they want take the risk... But if it does why not take it???

There's risks and then there are bad ideas. Competing against WWE on Monday was a risk for WCW. Competing against WWE on Mondays when your ratings aren't even close to theirs is a bad idea for TNA.