We all know that TNA has them. Issues with storylines, issues with pushes, issues with talents... TNA has issues in many regards. I love TNA and I am one who is quick to defend them. They are the counter to WWE that I need. I enjoy the roster they have and the matches that they put out. Some complain by screwy finishes to matches while others express their dislike for the halted pushes to certain stars. Those to me are personal preferences to how someone would book a show; this thread is more towards the idea of three major issues that affect the company on a bigger level than what I would like to see as a fan. Let's take a look at the 3 issues I am going to bring into question.
Spike TV - Many people are attributing Spike to be the reason as to why we are seeing Rampage and Ortiz on Impact. Spike has been the home for TNA since 2005. I thought that this move was for sure a step up from Fox Sports. The show felt a bit "bigger" being on this network. Fast forward 8 years and it seems as if the Spike/TNA union has been beneficial, to a point. I like the fact that Spike seems to be "invested" in the TNA product, but are they affecting too many decisions that TNA is making? Are they failing to provide enough financial backing, advertising, or screen time to the company? Are they using TNA as a stepping stone in order to attempt a recreation in the success they once had with UFC by requesting talent from Bellator to be focused on one of their more "reliable" (yes, I use that loosely) shows on their network? Personally, I think what TNA is doing to cater to the requests of Spike will help in negotiations, but is it affecting the TNA product in such a negative way that it warrants the attempted movement to a different network? I don't think so.
Hulk Hogan - Let's face it; when it comes to name recognition in the wrestling business, you can't get much higher than Hulk Hogan. Coming into this, I saw it as a viable alliance between TNA and this talent because I figured Bischoff (who I think benefits TNA when off screen) was attached. What I wasn't wanting was Hogan returning to an in-ring talent or as the main focus of the TNA product; which I was disappointed by on both levels. I think Hogan is a viable talent as a GM of the show, but it still seems TNA focus more time on Hogan than they should. I think this is due to the amount of $$ they spend on Hogan. How could they not feature one (if not the) higher paid talents on the show as much as possible. Hogan still gets the reaction from fans in the arenas because, let's face it, it's Hulk Hogan. But does his name recognition warrant the funds spent on him? Does focusing the show around this higher paid talent result in increased viewership for the show? Could TNA even get rid of Hogan or would Spike TV executive cut Dixie off at the knees if she chose to let him go? What is it that Hogan is truly providing TNA?
Dixie Carter - She's the head of the company. Ultimately, success or failure should fall upon her shoulders, correct? Honestly, if TNA closed today I think Dixie would be 1 of 3 who were noted as the reasoning behind TNA's failure and not take the sole responsibility that would follow other "Head of the Company" in that situation. Dixie is a genuinely nice person, if unbearable on the screen. She seems to do her best to show her appreciation towards Impact fans and interact with them as much as possible. She has shown interest to the point of crediting the fan demands as the reasons for moving TNA to a live program and even moving out of the Impact Zone. But let's face it, if it's a good decision or bad, it comes down to Dixie being the one to sign off on it. Was bringing in Hogan and Bischoff a genuinely beneficial business decision if the ratings are where they currently sit? Was moving the Impact show on the road financially the smartest move for her company? Is her catering to the requests of Spike TV going to be worth the risk of turning off her core audience who has remained long enough to keep their numbers steady? Is she doing everything possible to bring in new fans to the show?
Personally, I think Hogan is the top issue with TNA at the moment. Not in his role, because I can buy Hogan as the GM. But in what it takes to keep Hogan a pivotal character on TNA programming. Hogan is a character whose salary might be used toward new or younger talent. His time required to be used on Impact programming to justify his existence on the roster could be spent on in-ring time, or for storylines outside of just the major ones the show is focusing on. Hogan is a great talent for who he is and the name he brings, but in the role he currently fills, I don't think he warrants the price tag and time needed on screen... Especially when they could use someone such as Sting to fill a similar role without the need to spend as much time of 2 hours per week show focused on him.
But that's just my opinion, what about you guys? If you could change one these issues, which would it be?