Jump to content
Fan Clubs (beta)

Open Club  ·  55 members  ·  Free

Wrestling

Is TNA worthy of being one of the "Big Two"?


Guest Smurf

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest the HiTman
Too much of a gulf..but they must be classed as one of the big two...give TNA time and they might settle...it could take a few more years yet...then we wil see the best from both the WWE and TNA.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If not TNA who else? They were just here in Canada and all they could get at a house show was just over 4,000 paid attendance compared to a RAW taping at the ACC which drew close to 20,000 or Wrestlemania a few years ago which had an audience of over 55,000. The best thing about TNA is we get to see the wrestlers that WWE has released, it is also the worst thing for them too, they need to develop their own talent pool in order to rival the WWE. It's going to take awhile but TNA is refreshing to watch sometimes I find Raw and Snackdown boring. It is the same thing over and over again but I watch anyway.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The concept of TNA being in the same vein as WCW were to WWE, is flawed. TNA are a much smaller company than corporate WCW. There really is no big two, or three (ECW) anymore. That npotion died with WCW. WWE have a monopoly of sorts on the business, they are the given, accepted wrestling promotion. TNA are oficially big enough to be considered an alternative and not just another indy looking to make it big, but not big enough to be direct competition, not for the time being anyway. Actually does it even matter?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest the kev
Well considering TNA is only 5 years old they have come a long,long way. Give them a few more years and they will be a genuine competitor to WWE. Saying that it says something when people like Kurt Angle,Christian Cage,Booker T etc actually decide to leave the WWE for TNA. TNA is bigger now than the original ECW ever was.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well considering TNA is only 5 years old they have come a long,long way. Give them a few more years and they will be a genuine competitor to WWE. Saying that it says something when people like Kurt Angle,Christian Cage,Booker T etc actually decide to leave the WWE for TNA. TNA is bigger now than the original ECW ever was.
Out of the three names you mentioned, only Christian really left of his own accord.

 

Kurt was fired for not listening to advice. Sure he's been great in TNA (not so much when he's given a mic away from the wrestling arena), but I still think he should have taken at least six months off to take a break regardless.

 

Booker T left in a huff because WWE overlooked his indy fed as a developmental area. Add in to the fact he was suspended under the Wellness Policy and you have someone who jumped before he was pushed. It's hardly deciding that TNA is a better prospect than WWE.

 

As for your comment on TNA being bigger than ECW ever was. I'm sorry, but I just can't see it. And until TNA start to go on the road more often, they will never challenge ECW's legacy, even though Vince is doing his best to do that all by himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest jim vs shark

It's reached that position where people who are really really frustrated with WWE with think *ooh what's TNA*.

 

It's hard to define their size on attendances because for the most part in TNA's history theyve kept mostly to Universal Studios, and only recently have they branched out into other venue, whereas WWE have had well over 20 years to try their market in every area of USA, and know which places to avoid

 

Their Buyrates and ratings however do suggest they have a LONG way to go

 

As soon as all the rumours are cleared about them losing money every step of the way, they might stand a chance. Other than Meltzer always condemning them and a Konnan shoot interview there isn't really any major evidence to whether they actually make money or lose money, and if there is please link me to it

 

oh and btw

 

TNA is bigger now than the original ECW ever was.

 

their image makes them look bigger than ecw ever was

ECW never tried to make themselves look bigger than they were, maybe even the opposite with their just plain dirty production values. TNA puts loads into decent production to make them look bigger than they really are at the moment and that they believe their own hype

 

now notice how tna have never really taken on new york.ecw events across america could draw an average of 4000-6000, even in New York, which is WWE's turf and it's through history that's been well-known. Bound for glory, their "big ppv" only drew 4400 fans in Atlanta, and that was with Adam "Pacman" jones buying 1500 tickets to give out to children in schools who were good and got high grades. TNA have been to New York for a few appearances at the fairgrounds, but make fans pay for the show in New York and theyd flop.

 

there are no real records for ECW buy-rates otherwise they would probably show up TNA's current progress as well

Edited by jim vs shark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Dave7g
And until TNA start to go on the road more often, they will never challenge ECW's legacy, even though Vince is doing his best to do that all by himself.

 

Vince is challenging ECW's legacy?

 

I suppose that's one way of looking at it.

 

Also, of course TNA is in the "big two" by default as they are the 2nd biggest wrestling promotion in the US.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vince is challenging ECW's legacy?

 

I suppose that's one way of looking at it.

I meant not in a good way, in that he is subverting (intentionally or otherwise) the legacy of which I speak, bringing it down with "his vision of Extreme". I fear that this incarnation of ECW is what it will be remembered as when the younger fans grow old.

 

I have a feeling that, for no other reason than bragging rights, Vince will do all he can to have this ECW run for longer than the real ECW.

 

I enjoy the ECW brand when I watch it, but that's because I've stopped comparing it to the past and don't think of it as ECW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest G.I.Joe

TNA are not serious competition for the WWE.

 

Here's how I see it.

TNA are pulling everything out, new gimmick matches, PPV's filled with silly gimmicks, hiring most of the guys WWE fire...

Still they recieve, at most, a 1.1 rating (correct me if I'm wrong).

TNA draw about a 1/5 of the crowd WWE do, at any given time.

 

The WWE is a worldwide known company, known for wrestling, entertainment, and sometimes both at the same time. Let's not pretend WWE is perfect. They have plenty of flaws. However, I don't think it's all accidental, or just silly. I believe WWE have acknowledged TNA, but quietly, and without worry. WWE's worst rated show still gets a better rating than TNA, so Vince can't be all that bothered about them. He could easily make the ECW brand more appealing, he just won't. I believe Vince could increase the ratings of ECW, its just that his beloved WWE comes first, and rightly so.

 

WWE storylines might be rubbish, and almost worth avoiding, but if by some miracle, TNA becomes competition, I feel you'd see a huge increase in the quality of WWE shows.

 

TNA hasn't been helped by being dropped by the NWA.

 

McMahon is giving TNA time to believe they are competition, but when it really comes down to it, TNA will go straight out of business...

 

...because Vince is the Father of Professional Wrestling, and will crush any competition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TNA can be considered one of "the big two", as long as no one makes the mistake of seeing TNA as competition. TNA are nowhere close to WWE at all. WWE are making money hand over fist. TNA are barely breaking even. TV ratings are in WWE's favour, as are buyrates, attendences, star power, production, etc. Hell, booking too, going by the current products. TNA can't even brag about having a better product anymore, because Impact has been the most consistantly awful wrestling show ever. Certainly of my generation. Even Thunder was better than this.

 

TNA may still be around come 2010, but they'll be in the same position they are now. They will only rise in prominance if they overhaul their entire company, change the product and, quite honestly, if WWE suffer an excrutiatingly awful fall from grace. I mean lose money majorly, lose TV, PPV buys, attendances down to their hundreds, lose their big stars, etc. And that's not going to happen any time soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is TNA worthy of being one of the "Big Two"? asks the thread title.

 

There is no big Two there is WWE then a huge gap then TNA then another gap and all the rest. There is a big one and a lot of followers in other words. Can TNA be as big as WWE? No, not in the current way it is run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest the kev
TNA will never be as big as WWE but i would consider it to be one of the big two. If i was a young wrestler and i got signed by TNA i would feel as if i had 'made it'. I don't believe that TNA is trying to beat WWE anyways,they just want to co-exist.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Gooneronastick

If you could take the TNA product and give it the WWE budget, we MIGHT have a "big two".

 

To answer the question, no TNA is not worthy of being in the big two because there isn't a big two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest daredevil62004
TNA can only be considered one of the big two because their on national television and have monthly PPV's. If ROH had this, I would consider them number two with TNA being number three. Hopefully this will happen soon.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Jayfunk

i would say yes if only for there in ring ability. it is far greater than the wwe

 

and besides the way i see you could compare the companies as follows

 

WWE = WWF

TNA = WCW

ECW = ROH

 

for the style of wrestling they offer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Jimmy Redman
TNA are the second largest wrestling company in the US, but that doesnt make them one half of a 'Big Two'. They're not 'big', and are nowhere near the level of WWE, which is the point of the 'Big Two' label.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe that TNA is trying to beat WWE anyways,they just want to co-exist.
They are trying to beat WWE. Every company wants to be #1, and the fact that TNA acknowledge WWE a lot more than WWE mention them shows that TNA are trying to compete.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest DarkMatchJobber
TNA is bigger now than the original ECW ever was.

 

I think that's ridiculous because ECW was considered big enough that the WWF and WCW raided their talent roster in order to handicap them at every opportunity!

 

ECW was so big they attracted people from all over the world to come and watch their shows in a frickin' bingo hall!

 

ECW also booked their talent a lot better and made a solid effort to hide the weaknesses of their talent as well as giving them the freedom to develop their characters and even reignite their careers (Bam Bam Bigelow and Johnny Polo before he became Raven for example).

 

I don't see TNA letting anybody reinvent themselves (Black Reign being a poor rip off of Goldust) and that's one of their biggest problems.

 

Also ECW was considered big because they didn't try to emulate the WWF or WCW presentation of wrestling,they stuck to what they thought would attract fans and it worked,sure their finances sucked but who cares when they gave years of entertainment?

 

If TNA went back to pushing the X division guys as the greatest thing to hit the earth since the invention of the wheel they'd be flying high but all the while they're trying to present a WWE-style product they'll be considered a distant rival.

Link to comment
Share on other sites




  • Join the Club!

    Become a member to participate in the forums and our Fan Clubs.

  • Latest Club Activity

×
×
  • Create New...