411mania.com: Wrestling - My Take On 12.15.09: WWE vs. TNA

INTRO!
Welcome back to a special edition of My Take On. Due to my administrative duties here at 411, I do not write very much any more for the wrestling zone, but sometimes I get the bug to write. The biggest news as of late has been the story of TNA going head to head with WWE on January 4th. Many of you know that I have been a supporter of the TNA product since day one. I have been through the good (great matches), the bad (Russo's hectic booking) and the ugly (midgets jerking off in trashcans) and more. But the fact is this; I am a wrestling fan. TNA pisses me off, but they also deliver some damn good matches and have a talent roster of guys I enjoy to watch. WWE pisses me off, but they produce things I like to watch. ROH pisses me off, but they deliver shit I want to watch. Wrestling is and always has been a bi-polar business for me. There is always shit I love, and then there is always shit I hate. I warn you now, as much as I like TNA, this column will come off as very negative. I am not doing this to "be mean", I am just sharing my opinions. I want TNA to succeed, but I feel that this is a war that they simply are not prepared for…

VS.

TNA IS UNARMED FOR THIS WAR
"Isn't that just like a wop? Brings a knife to a gun fight." That may not be the EXACT quote from The Untouchables, but it is what I think about when I heard that TNA was going to challenge WWE on Monday a Monday night, live. While it may not be the right move, on many levels, I do respect Dixie Carter for actually going for it here. They have been stagnant for a while, same rating, low buyrates, low house shows, so she went out and got a big gun. She signed Hulk Hogan, and she will use him to go against WWE. I admire that, but I have to say, those of you thinking that this will lead to a magical resurgence of the Monday Night Wars need to calm down. There is a reason that the "Monday Night Wars" worked the first time, the stars were aligned. The thing you have to remember is this. WCW was on the rise. They had Hogan, they had Sting, they had Savage, they had Flair and they were growing while WWE was having rough times. On top of the growth that they were experiencing, they were on a level playing field as far as history goes. Most WCW fans were NWA fans, the history, to some, of the NWA and WCW are one in the same and a lot of that has to do with the association with the Saturday Night program. WW,F at the time, was playing off of the history of Vince Sr., the WWWF and what they had grown into. WCW had a large audience, many never realized it. Billionaire Ted loved his wrestling, he was behind it, and Eric Bischoff had the balls to want to go head to head, and since he could sell ice to Eskimos, he talked Ted into it, and the rest, as they say is history. TNA doesn't have that. Yes they have names. They have Hulk Hogan, Kurt Angle, Team 3D, Kevin Nash, Scott Steiner, Mick Foley and other names wrestling fans know and recognize. The roster is good, but they don't have the ammunition to battle the beast that is the WWE. It may be a good one shot deal to attract new viewers for Thursday nights, but then again, they have to keep them, and with the history that the company has, I am not sure that they can, at least not the way they produce TV.

BRING BACK THE 80's LOGIC AND YOU WILL HAVE AN ALTERNATIVE

The funny thing to me is that today's fans will bash something that they do not understand. Obviously I do not mean all of you, but the newer, younger fans, you are the ones I am talking too. Jim Cornette is constantly bashed because "he is out of touch" with wrestling today, due to the perception that he wants wrestling to be like the 80's. The fact of the matter is this, you are wrong. Jim Cornette doesn't want current day wrestling to be "old school" the way you are thinking. What people like Jim Cornette and myself want is for wrestling to go back to the 80's LOGIC. Go back and watch some GOOD 80's wrestling, Crocket era shit, Bill Watts shit, and tell me what you see. You will see characters that people go ape shit for wrestling a JOB GUY. Why? Because they made you care. They built up the guy, they put him in the right position, they crafted his win/loss record, they carefully built feuds, and when the feuds would escalate; they climaxed with something special. Let me explain further.

Use People To Their Strengths: One thing that TNA needs to remember is that to everyone can do everything well. AJ Styles may be phenomenal in the ring, but he is average on the mic. I am not saying that he doesn't try, but an AJ Styles promo will not make me want to buy his match. That's just an example. TNA needs to realize that not everyone is an actor, and that by forcing them into situations where they have to act in these awful backstage segments, they make them look bad. I wanted to see the three-way rematch with AJ, Joe and Daniels, but their backstage "scenes" were horrible and almost turned me off. AJ does his work in the ring, allow him to do that. Daniels cuts a great thinking man's promo, allow HIM to do that. Samoa Joe cuts intense "I want to kill you" promos, allow his to do that. Don't ask them to produce a love triangle scene from The Young and the Restless, because it will fail. That is just one example, but the company need to sit done, look at the great roster thy have, and make a "Can", "Kinda" and "Can't" list for each. That way when they are booking angles and such, they will not try to ram a square peg into a round hole. Using people properly will always make the product better.

Contrary To Popular Belief, Wins And Losses Mean Something: I see a lot of talk about this, and I guess part of this is the fact that Vince has conditioned fans to his "entertainment" brand over the years. But yes, wins and losses DO mean something. Do not get me wrong, they are not the end all be all when it comes to wrestling and building up a performer, but they surely can help. Some will say that winning means nothing in the modern era, but that is not the case. The Samoa Joe vs. Kurt Angle feud, overall, did good business for TNA. Why? Because Angle was the hot name coming from WWE, and Joe has not been pinned or submitted some shit like 18 months. People got into that, and the win/loss record played into that. I have constantly said that when building up a contender or a new star that you have to be very careful WHO they lose too and HOW they lose. Let's take Matt Morgan. He loses in a GREAT match with Angle at Bound For Glory. That loss doesn't hurt him at all, because he hung with Angle and had the best match of his career on that night. It is a loss, but it was a loss to a star and a loss in a great back and forth match. That is losing without getting hurt. Now lets take Hernandez. He had been a guy that TNA has wanted to build up, and possibly for a BIG title push. On Impact last week he lost, clean, to a spear by Jesse Neal. This match was basically the same match that we will see on PPV in two weeks, another argument there, but WHY would you have the guy you are looking to push drop a fall to a guy that is not over? Sure, we can argue that it is great for Jesse Neal, but the fact is that he is not a star and never will be a star, no matter how many over guys job for him. That is an example of a loss that hurts a guy. Hernandez, as I like to say, is JUST ANOTHER GUY.

Stop The Gimmick Madness And Make Shit Mean Something: The difference between older and newer fans is pretty obvious. Older fans want to watch the story unfold and culminate in a grand spectacular, while newer fans enjoy gimmick PPVs and giving away 4-minute ladder matches and the like. TNA has constantly committed crimes against the gimmick match for years now. At the beginning they did well, holding of their first cage match for a YEAR into the company's birth, but lately, lately they have shown exactly why they do not get it. A prime example of this is the Lockdown PPV. I actually like the Lockdown PPV, and through out the company's history, the Lockdown PPV has constantly been one of their better PPVs. While a whole PPV of cage matches can be debated, the fact of the matter is that they COULD make it work. But in the last few months, they have put on THREE cage matches, Tag Team Lethal Lockdown, Kong vs. Tara (a first time singles match no less), Beer Money vs. the Invasion (ON FREE TV) and will be putting on Angle and Wolfe in a cage match. And this is the problem. If you are going to have an all cage match PPV, you CANNOT give away cage matches through out the year. It simply devalues that PPV, which has also traditionally sold better than any other TNA PPV. Desmond Wolfe has been with TNA foe a little over two months, and he is already heading into a second PPV match with Kurt Angle. That is all right, but the fact that they are jumping to a triple stipulation cage match shows that Russo's ADD booking is hurting the company. Wolfe vs. Angle is a program that should have culminated with the Three Degrees of Pain at Lockdown, not at the December throw away PPV. This is something that TNA does all the time. If TNA would think about things, and slow down and use the logic of the 1980's with the great athletes and cutting edge shit we have now, they would be great. Doing that would make you an alternative to the WWE, and it is simple, likely too simple.

THE FOUR HORSEMEN OF THE APOCALYPSE
Some people have hopped on the Vince Russo/Ed Ferrara hype train and think that they are the solution to TNA. I hate to say, but I have never been a fan of these guys. Russo constantly frustrates me as a booker. While I WILL give him credit for trying to give everyone an angle, that is about as far as I will go. The Vince Russo style of booking just does not work, and constantly hurts the company. Here are a few examples..

Men Holding A Woman's Title (Bruce, Cody Deaner)

Constantly Rushing Feuds (Joe vs. Angle, Angle vs. Wolfe)

Booking Feuds To Go Too Long (Robert Roode and Eric Young)

Using Wrestling As A Bumper For His Backstage Skits

Cramming Four Hours Of TV Into Two Hours On A Weekly Basis

Abusing The Gimmick Matches As Mentioned Above

Giving Away First Time Matches On Free TV

Being A Writer And Not A Booker (A writer writes his shit, and then tries to cram a pair of bodies into it and hopes it works. A booker takes two guys, and then crafts the story around them and continues to craft it all the way to its conclusion.)

Ed Ferrara is Russo's lap dog, and is no better in my opinion. As a booker, he may very well be a nice guy. WCW thought that they were the shit, but it turns out that they were shit. Don't get me wrong, WCW put some handcuffs on them, but really, they did some shit. And then you take Hogan and Bischoff and add them into the equation. While I have been on record (as far as distribution and such) that they can help the product, they aren't much better. Hell, last week's Impact was vintage WCW with Nash in charge. I thought I was watching WCW Thunder. These four men played a huge part in the downfall of WCW, and while at one time they made money, they also lost more money than GOD when they were collectively in charge. That scares me.

CONCLUSION
I will keep this short. This was negative. I sounded like I had a severe case of sandy vaginitis. I want to be wrong. I want TNA to succeed, I want WWE to feel threatened and pick up their game, I want another Monday night revolution and I want the world to be made of candy and free strippers. But the facts do not support that right now. Here is something from a column I wrote back in 2007 when TNA finally got two-hours on Thursday night, THE ONE THING they said they needed to succeed…

You have gotten everything that you have said that you needed to succeed. Everything you needed to compete, to be the best wrestling company in the world. October 4th 2007 will come and go, and you get a grace period because one week means nothing. But after 6-8 weeks come and go, and if you are still doing a 1.1 rating and 20,000 PPV Buys, I don't want to hear anymore excuses. What could you possibly say? You have gotten everything you "needed." Two hours, mainstream attention, a great roster, prime time, monthly PPV, star power, you got it all. You are now officially out of excuses. I stayed with you and supported you through out all of this, and will probably be here until the end, whenever that may be. But this is it; this is the time. This is your time. If you cannot succeed now, don't blame the fans that have supported you through the years. Don't blame me or others for a harsh review. Don't look any farther than where ever you may be sitting, because you have no one to blame but yourself.

By the way, I hope everything I wrote is completely wrong and that TNA succeeds, because it would be for the best of the wrestling business.

TWITTER
CSONKA TWITTER!
http://www.twitter.com/411wrestling
http://www.twitter.com/411moviestv
http://www.twitter.com/411music
http://www.twitter.com/411games
http://www.twitter.com/411mma

If you haven't already, make sure you bookmark 411 or better yet, set us as your homepage! As always, thanks for choosing 411 for all of you pop culture needs!

Post Comment (68) | Email Larry Csonka | View Larry Csonka's 411 Profile

Send To Friend |

Stumble It! |

Digg It! |

Please add your comment below.

If you are registered, you can login and post under your registered name. If not, you can post as a guest or register.

* Please note that 411 moderates all comments. Your comment will show up on the site after it has been approved by an editor.

Name :

Comment :

Remaining Characters :

2800

Comments (68)

Most problems relate to the WWE as well. The gimmick match problem for example is much much worse with WWE. Hell in a Cell PPV, Submission PPV, Elimination PPV, TLC PPV. The TLC PPV and Extreme Rules PPV for example are almost the same thing. Nevermind that theres been Ladder matches at Wrestlemania, and the main events of Extreme Rules, Summerslam, and TLC. Crazy.

Posted By: YourGuestHost (Guest) on December 14, 2009 at 11:23 PM

Joe was great in those backstage promos with AJ and Daniels. It was refreshing to see him playing mind games rather than just constantly screaming. The mystery attacker constantly assaulting AJ was the problem.

Posted By: Guest#0997 (Guest) on December 14, 2009 at 11:23 PM

WWE is Dying

Posted By: sorry (Guest) on December 14, 2009 at 11:27 PM

Once Russo got control a few months ago, and Cornette and Jarrett's supporters were cleared out, the TV product improved *significantly*. Think about that before you trot out the old Russo cliches.

Posted By: Donners (Guest) on December 14, 2009 at 11:41 PM

As a huge TNA fan, and ok...I'll even admit to being so huge a fan that I easily sail into "MARK" territory., I was anxious to read this. I generally enjoy your contributions to 411, so that made me even more curious about your thoughts.

Now I get to share mine:

You make some very valid points, some of the things you mentioned I'm not keen on myself. but as "yourguesthost" said, alot of those you can attribute to WWE as-well. In the last year, for instance, WWE has gone gimmick match crazy too. I would however, like to see TNA make better use of thier gimmick matches. How many Impact! 3-5 minute cage/ladder/streetfight matches can you see before they stop mattering. If they did them as often, but gave them more attention and, more importantly, time...then the problem wouldn't be so glaring.

I do think you were too harsh on Russo. I kind of feel bad for the guy sometimes, this is a guy that, no matter how good or bad he does in the rest of his time involveved in this business will always be remembered the same way and for the same things. Every booker has thier tendencies, and although some of Vince's can be glaring, there is not one of those that you can truly attribute ONLY to him. Other bookers have/do do the same things.

I'd also like to add that people are quick to forget his positives. Both in WCW and TNA he's shown, repeatably, his desire to push younger talent and try to make new stars, as opposed to relying on established ones. Hell, he has had the book for THREE of AJ Styles Four World title reigns, including his first, when everyone was clamouring for Raven to win it.

He also has shown that if you show up ready to work, he will use you. He always tries to find gimmicks/characters to fit his performers (sometimes the results are good, sometimes not) and will give everyone oppurtunities to speak and connect with the crowd. Before Russo the entire X division pretty much had the same exact gimmick (small guy who can wrestle and does nothing else) true inring fans don't mind it, but the casual fan wants a character they can get behind or root against. Russo delivers that.

Overall an decent read, though abit one sided.

Posted By: Pat (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 12:16 AM

Very good points, Csonka. Can't wait to see what Jan 4th will be like.

Posted By: Guest#4162 (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 12:42 AM

He's telling the truth. The problem between the 80's and now is that they have to figure out a way to build guys up without the jobber matches. For TNA, with two hours of tv a week, it is hard to build up a roster of guys. The WWE has six hours and 4 different shows to build up guys. It takes money and confidence from the network in order to have tv time like that. It also takes having a big star who you can build a company around. Ever since the 60's, mainstream companies have had "the guy" to build their roster and talent around. It's hard for TNA to do that with just two hours a week, some house shows, and 12 PPVs a year.

Posted By: Guest#7077 (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 12:43 AM

"they also lost more money than GOD"
- That made no sense whatsoever, but dammit, it was funny.

Posted By: WilliamMorgan (Registered) on December 15, 2009 at 01:02 AM

How lucky are WWE and TNA to have an all-knowing guy who has never run a wrestling company tell them how to run their businesses.

Posted By: Alan (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 01:02 AM

Attempting to divert the point to WWE making some of the same mistakes is just silly. They are the most successful wrestling promotion in the history of the world. TNA cannot simply make the same mistakes and think themselves to "Well, WWE did it too." In order to challenge and surpass WWE, they need to be virtually flawless.

Posted By: WilliamMorgan (Registered) on December 15, 2009 at 01:08 AM

Lol. It's funny how far Csonka's head is up his own ass. Since when you have been a expert on the wrestling business? From the way you've written this it's as if you think you're some grizzled ex-champion vet who has seen it all, rather than just some nobody who failed miserably and now just edits a website full of smarky assholes. Seriously, it's pathetic.

Posted By: Guest#0723 (Guest) on December 14, 2009 at 11:07 PM

you of all people shouldn't be calling everyone else smarky assholes douchebag

Posted By: Guest#0415 (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 01:09 AM

"Men Holding A Woman's Title"
Kind of like at this years Wrestlemania?

"Abusing The Gimmick Matches"
Kind of like how WWE has a PPV dedicated to elimination chambers (No Way Out), gimmick matches (Extreme Rules), submission matches (Breaking Point), Hell in a Cells (Hell in a Cell), and Tables, Ladders, and Chairs (TLC)?

"Giving Away First Time Matches On Free TV"
Kind of like how the WWE recently gave away Undertaker vs. Chris Jericho, possibly the biggest 1st time match left?

Posted By: Nevermore. (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 01:11 AM

You know these 'terrible' themed PPVs have all increased their buyrates, which were struggling.

So again, WWE does a unique and different concept, the IWC shits allllll over it, and it is profitable.

Posted By: WAH WAH (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 01:49 AM

All good points, Csonka, and the TNA marks need to put their company in perspective against WWE and realise that no matter how many of these points apply to WWE as well, the bottom line is that

THE WWE ARE THE WRESTLING STANDARD IN TERMS OF REVENUE, TV RATINGS, LIVE ATTENDANCE

and a dozen other things I didn't mention.

If TNA want to succeed, they could do a lot worse than listening to a passionate fan like Csonka.

Posted By: AngryTas (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 01:56 AM

That was written in 2007, and they were getting a 1.1 rating even then.

TNA will just never 'grow' and make some big money. As said-we all want TNA to do well, but it just is not 1994 anymore, and it won't happen.

Posted By: Sad.... (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 02:04 AM

Lol. It's funny how far Csonka's head is up his own ass. Since when you have been a expert on the wrestling business? From the way you've written this it's as if you think you're some grizzled ex-champion vet who has seen it all, rather than just some nobody who failed miserably and now just edits a website full of smarky assholes. Seriously, it's pathetic.

Posted By: Guest#0723 (Guest) on December 14, 2009 at 11:07 PM

LMAO!!!!! 2 INFINITY

Posted By: DoubleADaGreat (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 02:07 AM

He has spoken!

Posted By: Freeman (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 02:12 AM

Lol. It's funny how far Csonka's head is up his own ass. Since when you have been a expert on the wrestling business? From the way you've written this it's as if you think you're some grizzled ex-champion vet who has seen it all, rather than just some nobody who failed miserably and now just edits a website full of smarky assholes. Seriously, it's pathetic.

Posted By: Guest#0723 (Guest) on December 14, 2009 at 11:07 PM

You're the one who's pathetic you prick,some little prick who lives in his parent's basement,trash talking to everyone over the net,i bet if you said that to Csonka's face you'd get you're ass whipped boi

Posted By: Guest#9789 (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 02:40 AM

Very good article, loved hearing your thoughts and glad someone has put forward the point of the 80's way of booking, and running a wrestling promotion. Just because it was many years ago and the wrestling industy has dramtically changed, that doesn't mean the formula for booking feuds, and even putting together matches is dead, and an old tired view of doing things.

TNA and WWE, their use of gimmicks is terrible, TNA in my opinion have been far worse. Yes, WWE have gimmick PPV's, but TNA have been doing tiresome and quite frankly stupid gimmick matches for years. Anyway, keep up the good work Csonka.

Posted By: Steven (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 03:16 AM

"Using people properly will always make the product better."

Way to state the obvious man.

Posted By: Guest#3841 (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 03:30 AM

Lol. It's funny how far Csonka's head is up his own ass. Since when you have been a expert on the wrestling business? From the way you've written this it's as if you think you're some grizzled ex-champion vet who has seen it all, rather than just some nobody who failed miserably and now just edits a website full of smarky assholes. Seriously, it's pathetic.

Posted By: Guest#0723 (Guest) on December 14, 2009 at 11:07 PM

Oh, The Irony!!

Posted By: Guest#0491 (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 04:01 AM

Lol. It's funny how far Csonka's head is up his own ass. Since when you have been a expert on the wrestling business? From the way you've written this it's as if you think you're some grizzled ex-champion vet who has seen it all, rather than just some nobody who failed miserably and now just edits a website full of smarky assholes. Seriously, it's pathetic.

Posted By: Guest#0723 (Guest) on December 14, 2009 at 11:07 PM

OK, so rather than counter-argue any of Csonka's points, you just call him out for sounding like a smug know-it-all? You're the one who's pathetic. I don't even know why you wasted your time posting that comment.

Posted By: A-Ron (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 05:35 AM

I can't believe there are Csonka haters on this site, hes the only writer who's opinion is unbiased and accurate across all the sections he writes on. Great Column im a supporter of TNA but I completley agree.

Posted By: Kev (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 05:49 AM

I am even more negative than Csonka in some points... I fear Hogan will bring some of his buddies along for the ride. Given how crazy TNA has historically been for the WWE rejects, I shudder at the thought of them getting a chance to "work" with Ed Leslie, the Nasty Boys etc...

Posted By: woody (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 08:03 AM

Does anybody else think WWE will try to crush TNAs Monday show by gettign the Rock to guest host Raw on Jan 4th?

After all, Rock > Hogan, because he left the business before he got really stale (as opposed to Hogan who stayed in it for 18 years after getting really stale.)

Posted By: Quimby (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 08:09 AM

Who cares about pretend sports

Posted By: Guest#9358 (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 09:14 AM

the way i see it hogan is using TNA just for one more shot at vince/WWE, if it works great he will take all the credit away from the talent of TNA. But if it fails (im thinking it will) he gets to walk away while everyone at TNA gets to pick up the pieces that are left behind!

Posted By: foldy69 (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 09:15 AM

God bless you Larry Csonka, I will take this on board and we shall succeed!

xxx

Posted By: Dixie Carter (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 09:31 AM

LOL Conska, give it up I diodn't even read

Posted By: Guest#4519 (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 09:58 AM

This is nothing new... There are very few 'characters' in the WWE anymore... Gimmicks aside apart from the odd catchphrase here and there, there are very few all round talented wrestlers. You look at how few mid carders are given the opportunity to get backstage time which is the absolute way to get over. Santino is probably consistently the most entertaining 'superstar' in the WWE. Jericho, HBK, HHH, they've been doing this shit for years. But why should I care about Swagger, Bourne, McIntyre, Ziggler etc.. who the fuck are they ? Why should I care ? Wrestling is a male skewed soap opera, and if you don't have any plotlines or character it's therefore devoid of entertainment (except for the wrestling).

It's just become tired and lazy - unfortunately TNA hasn't been able to capitalise on that - you would beat WWE just on wrestling alone...

Posted By: dj_bollocks (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 10:15 AM

Well Larry, I'm sure you don't recall but I've been emailing and commenting to you about TNA for almost 5 years and I can say without a doubt we are 100% in agreement.

Just like back in the day when Jarrett couldn't pull the trigger and put other talent on top of the card. They have now exchanged 1 problem for another. Yet, as history tells us, Russo is much more difficult to get rid of and NEVER pays any dividends.

To many others commenting:
This article is not about WWE. There is a common misconception that if you don't like TNA then you're a WWE mark or vise vera. There is no truth to that. None at all. Pointing out what TNA is doing wrong and how they can correct it to be an alternative to WWE is logically going to point out some topics where they are similar. Obviously. Get with it folks. In summary:

TNA does not get "better" because you're saying WWE is bad. It is entirely possible (and in fact often true) that BOTH companies offer a shitty product ignoring the fundamentals of good wrestling TV. That is one of his points, try not to look so ignorant.

Posted By: Andy (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 10:31 AM

Why are you all so delusional? Has forcing yourself through RAW every week during this near decade long borefest really desensitized you to how BAD it has gotten and how GOOD wrestling could be?? TNA doesn't have to do much to be a better alternative on Monday nights right now. Seriously.

You know who would really give TNA a big push though? Orton. I wish there was a way he could leave WWE.

PS - Dixie in a bikini match. 5.0 rating.

Posted By: C (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 10:39 AM

Anyoen who thinks it is bad to give away a good free match on tv is a moron. Im not buying any TNA ppvs and no-one else is. Stop complaining about getting something good

Posted By: AG Awesome (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 10:41 AM

I would like to add that if they did the 80s booking you describe, Id watch them forever and not complain once. I disagree with you hating on the Angle vs Wolfe feud. It may be early, but it has been far from bad. Probably the best thing on TNA besides Steiner promos.

They dont even talk about AJ as champ anymore :-(

Posted By: AG Awesome (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 10:45 AM

TNA isnt really going to war with WWE yet. What they are doing is smart. They are gauging their audience. They have a one shot deal on Monday night against Raw and will see what the ratings tell them. The whole "we are going to war" stuff is hype. Try to make people start to care again about wrestling. Remind them of a time when they did care. If the ratings suck, who cares? TNA Impact is still on Thursday nights and will just continue there for a while longer.

WWE is putting out the worst product they ever have at the moment as well. They pull lame stunts just to get over on the internet which is complete garbage. Lets put the belt on one of HHH buddies who hasnt done anything yet. Because putting IC gold on young guys like MVP, Shelton, Kennedy, etc etc worked so great...

TNA sees how awful their cookie cutter shows are and are going to see where they stand while they are as strong as ever. Will it work? No. During the real Monday night wars it took more than one week to pull the audience over, no matter how good the show was. It should be no difference now.

PS. Larry is a moron. Stick to stealing week old news from other websites to post and even the more than occasional MMA news in Wrestling section because the MMA guys moms sisters friend once went to a WWF SuperStars taping.

Posted By: Champ (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 11:14 AM

Damn that first comment was ether.

Posted By: Foolio (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 11:27 AM

Most of your examples are older ones and not that recent. Until a few months ago, Jeff Jarrett and Dutch Mantell were booking the show, and Russo was simply one member of creative. It has really only been since Jarrett took the "leave of absence" that Dixie cleaned house and put Russo in charge.

I think Desmond Wolf/Kurt Angle was and is exciting, and it really got everyone talking. I watch Impact online most weeks and I haven't seen any gimmick matches recently. The backstage segments with AJ, Joe, and Daniels weren't the greatest angle of all time, but I never thought it was bad, unlike many backstage segments in both companies.

Honestly TNA isn't doing anything as stupid as having a leprechaun beat Chavo every week or having Santino in a dress. I think you have valid points but you aren't blaming the right people.

Posted By: kenb3 (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 11:32 AM

I agree with everything you said. As an older fan, I think that I am the audience that TNA wants. They could get if they stop rushing and start doing things that make sense. But WWE should not underestimate them. That was what they did with WCW, and it almost killed them. The only reason WWE died wasn't because Vince shot them, WCW shot themselves. If they keep Jeff Jarrett around to keep his vision alive and give him the creative control, then TNA has a chance. If it's up to Nash and Russo, they will die a slow painful badly booked death.

Posted By: awsome69 (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 10:54 AM

I call a bit of bullshit on that also,as J e double eff nearly killed his own company by being Triple J for a long long time,the fans have clamored for it for years,and dixie just keeps ignoring it a heading in the other direction.

The easy fix is in a word Heyman,it wont happen at this stage,but a Heyman booked show under any umbrella puts ass's in the seats and money in the bank(just dont heyman touch said money).

This could be a spike tv issue,i have no idea,if it is a spike tv issue then simply do the next best thing and hire heyman jr gabe sapolsky,i mean how hard is it to lure him away dragon gate anyways?

He HAS to be cheaper then russo/fafarra/hogan/sleazy e

TNA you want to by MY alternitive to WWE?
Give me sapolsky(better yet paul.E) and Damore.
Give me main event that dont end in screwjobs two or three times a month.

Use very over talent like the MCMG's in wrestling match's,take Joe's kid gloves off and let him murder a few people.
You wanna have a squash,give me Joe vs Deaner(after the womens title bs am i the only one that wants to see him murdered?) 15 min bloodbath.

Dont have your highly touted womens aqusition disolve into a crying wreck months after arriving without meaning.

Dont have the emotional "Mania" moment that doesnt mean anything.

He who shall not be named and guerrero's hug ment something,dont try and force these moments,it comes off shallow and weak.
Do give stiner more mic time,and tag match's that work to his strength's at this stage of his career.
Turn the heat up in your tag team ranks by having a 15 to 20 min tag match weekly,and rotate the amazing teams you do have ala E&C,hardys,Dudley boys,New age outlaws era.
Your tag teams are already boiling hot,and pushed a little harder could easily set fire.
Sign the briscos asap(and DONT CHANGE THEM ONE BIT)
Your secondary title needs meaning,you know why the ECW TV title ment so much?
RVD and the fact that he defended it like it was the world title night in and night out,it's the world title you can defend weekly if needed.
Rechristen that shitty legends title a tv title and i donno DEFEND IT ON TV.

Plug raven into a headset next to taz.
Foley...start ODDITIES 2.0.

Posted By: Showster (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 11:40 AM

THE WWE ARE THE WRESTLING STANDARD IN TERMS OF REVENUE, TV RATINGS, LIVE ATTENDANCE and a dozen other things I didn't mention.
If TNA want to succeed, they could do a lot worse than listening to a passionate fan like Csonka.

Posted By: AngryTas (Guest)

AngryTas is 100% correct. I would like to expand on his post. WWE is the standard bearer for professional wrestling. The worked long and hard to get where they are today. 30 years ago, they were the little company that could. Vince Jr took over the promotion and surrounded himself with knowlagable, capable people and by the mid 80's had taken over the wrestling scene!

TNA has a LOT more to do if they want to get anywhere near WWE's success. They have to focus on what they can do better than WWE and work on perfecting that, instead of challenging WWE head to head. This is a battle they cannot win as the company stands today.

TNA struggles to sell out The Impact Zone and their ppv's have some of the saddest buyrates. WWE sells out major arena's all over the world! There is hardly any WWE show that is not sold out!

As much as some of you hate hearing this, the attitude era was the exception to the WWE business model. WWE has always worked best as a family friendly company.

Let TNA be the edgy, R rated wrestling show if it wants to be. Maybe it can carve a niche that way. TNA has the most loyal fanbase in the world(as seen by the consistent 1.1 rating)! The only problem is, they can't seem to gain any NEW fans along the way.

Until someone steps up and gives TNA a concrete direction to pursue, they have no hope of competing with, much less beating WWE. I am a WWE fan through and through, but I would not begrudge TNA coming in and making it interesting.

I want to be interested in TNA, but I just can't be. I read the Impact recaps and the PPV results and don't feel like I am missing anything. Hulk Hogan is not the answer. If anything it would make me less inclined to watch TNA, and that is saying something.

I lived through Hulkamania. I understand Hogan's contribution to the business and his historical importance. The problem with Hogan is that it will always be about what is best for Hogan and NOT what's best for TNA.

Other things set WWE apart from TNA. Production values,DVD creation, library rights. Say what you will about Vince, but he loves his company and would do whatever he needs to make it work. Dixie, not so much. Until that changes, nothing will change.

Gimmick matches and bad booking decisions - WWE can afford to take these chances and if they fail, it is not a big loss to them. TNA does not have this luxury! When Vince and Co. came up with the idea for Wrestlemania, people thought it was crazy. Now, people pay $750.00 for a rignside seat. Food for thought.

Posted By: AndreFan (Registered) on December 15, 2009 at 11:43 AM

Anonymous asshats with chips on their shoulders aside (it's called "opinion," morons, get a high-school education before you criticize someone for sharing theirs), this is a pretty good summary of the challenges that TNA faces here. The WWE has major network support, a strong house show network, and momentum. TNA now has arguably the most recognizable wrestling icon ever to run up the flagpole; the problem is that Hogan hasn't had an original idea in more than a decade, and the cronies he works with are very similar.

TNA's booking is brutal. Russo is a leech on the ass of the wrestling industry, and his cronies are leeches on *his* ass. What they've done by adding Hogan is give themselves a rallying point - a bright-orange light that should be used by the company (if it had writers/bookers that weren't smug, self-serving assholes) as a launching point, not as a central figure drawing the rest of the company into a vast fake-tanned vortex of suck.

TNA has a lot of young, great stars; as Csonka says, they need to be able to do what they do best, not be forced into actions that they aren't comfortable with (AJ on the mic, most any of them acting in those brutal vignettes). Hogan, I fear, won't let them do that.

As for Jan. 4, I think we got the tease last night for what the 'E has planned with the suggestion that Bret host RAW. They do that, I know what I'm watching, and it won't be another Russoriffic show...

Posted By: Tony (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 11:50 AM

These points are all indicative of the problem with wrestling in general. The greatest problem is that wrestling is a business that isn't treated like a successful business. Nepotism, a management style that encourages employee politics, a vaudevillian business model, and a lack of long-term planning handicap wrestling. Promotions don't even definitively know why people buy their product, they just take the main event as the reason. However, since these aren't concerts and wrestlers aren't treated like global musical groups anymore, that style doesn't work. Wrestling sucks because it's not in the 21st century, not because it should be in the 80's. The 80's just happened to have a lot of great wrestling because it was the Wrestling Boom. Bill Watts' UWF was like Paul Heyman's ECW. During boom periods, it's not generally the moneymaker that produces the most critically acclaimed product.

The greatest thing wrestling can do now is to update the business model, which will improve all other sides of the business, and to STEAL,STEAL,STEAL! Take from Japan, Mexico, Europe. Hell, if they have wrestling in South Africa, them, too. Then put their spin on it. I've noticed that the guys with the last word in booking always try to trumpet themselves as creative geniuses. That is a bad attitude. And, yes: I'm a douchebag, smarky asshole, failed nobody...

Posted By: ThePants (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 11:51 AM

I think that one thing NEITHER company realizes is the times in which we live.

I think going back to the LOGIC of 80's booking, when it was right, is a good idea... however, you can look at any era and find "right" booking.

The problem has been long forgotten, when the E broke with Kayfabe and started calling it entertainment to get away from the athletic commissions that was the beginning of the problem.

The shock value of ECW and the Attitude Era are long forgotten, not that I want that to be the norm again.

There has to be someone out there (Heyman and Cornette) that could book a solid promotion that would grow in small steps before trying to go to the levels TNA has tried to attain. They look "small time" because of how they do their tv. Instead of doing a sort of "shot gun" style (ala the original ECW) they tried to get that "big feel" right out of the gate... that's not a good way to go as you can't sustain it.

Their marketing sucks, their booking sucks, the only thing they have going for them is their talent.

But they won't ever get it. I fear we are watching the demise of yet another wrestling company...

There have been FAR better companies that are no longer in business since McMahon decided to take over the world and no, I'm not advocating territories again.

WCCW had, arguably, the best talent ever assembled and they couldn't sustain the momentum. The seedy underbelly of wrestling took it away.

WCW was the last bastion of hope and they lost. TNA should just stick to providing great house shows (I recommend you go if you actually are a fan) and do PPV's maybe every 3 months to be able to build up interest.

They have at least 1 million people watching their shows, they could get at least 10% of them to buy PPV's but can't. Time to look at your marketing strategy and do something out of the box.
DO NOT follow the pattern of WWE, they are doing what works for THEM. Find what works for YOU and do it the best you can.

Not that anything I have written matters, the things will be what they will be.

I might as well write how I want Jerry Jones to fix the Cowboys, I've got about as much chance of making a difference.

WCW once asked viewers to submit ideas via their website. I actually saw 1 small idea I sent in be done (whether it was from me or someone else thought it) and maybe TNA should give that a shot.

Maybe give the fans 1 match a week where online voting determines who wrestles who - and limit who it can be. Use guys like WE who are in need of attention but not yet ready for Main Event status or something...

What do I know, nothing, I know.

Posted By: Guest#4558 (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 12:13 PM

Correction to previous post - ringside seat, not rignside seat.

Posted By: AndreFan (Registered) on December 15, 2009 at 12:15 PM

Who cares about pretend sports

Posted By: Guest#9358 (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 09:14 AM
----------------------------------------
Seems like you do by being on here and posting.

Posted By: Stanton75 (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 12:38 PM

TNA averages 400 people to each house show
400 FUCKING PEOPLE!!!!!!
0.7 Rating on the 4th

Posted By: Scot Hall (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 01:07 PM

The only people I’ve seen hyping up this supposed new “Monday Night War” are the writers on this website and people in TNA. Maybe you should tell some of your fellow writers to “calm down” as well.

Posted By: Oasis220 (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 01:38 PM

TNA pulls out a knife, WWE pulls out a gun, TNA sends WWE to the hospital, WWE sends TNA to the morgue. It's like the crips and bloods all over again.

Posted By: Cesarmania (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 01:57 PM

You claim to be an "expert" Csonka, and I generally agree with your opinions, but you dropped the ball on this one.

Not in listing the problems TNA has. They're well-documented, and have been bitched about ad nauseum in the past. (Even though apparently you haven't watched the shows recently)

The problem is, this isn't the 80s any more. You're saying "slow things down", but you fail to mention that in the 80s, they had no choice. They had 4 big shows a year back then. It was EASY to book for those 4 shows.

You also fail to mention that 90% of televised shows were jobber matches. You didn't have to figure out a way to make Tully/Dusty interesting, because, outside of promos and "attacks", you rarely saw the participants in the ring at the same time until the big match.

You also complain about Wolfe and Angle. While I agree that they rushed Joe/Angle, I think they've handled this perfectly. This isn't a top-tier WWE guy coming in and facing a top-tier TNA guy, where people would be chomping at the bit for the feud to occur. This is a virtual unknown (for anyone outside of indie fans, that is) coming in and facing a top-tier TNA guy.

He needed to make an impact to have anyone care about him, and he did. And TNA is better for it. Would you prefer he spend 6 months in a feud with Rhyno just so you could feel he "spent enough time"?

In the 80s, there were always cases when "unknowns" came in and feuded with top-tier talent. For some reason, you think it "worked" back then, but doesn't work now.

Do I think that TNA will "beat" WWE right now? Of course not. Do I think Hogan is the answer? Probably not (unless they use him the right way, which is using him to garner attention while the booking remains solid).

As for the poster above who said Dixie doesn't love TNA, that woman helped clean up the original TNA Asylum. Literally. She helped paint bleachers, got the sets ready, and, as far as I can tell, has put everything into the company. You may not like TNA, but, from what I've seen, she's just as dedicated to it as McMahon is to WWE.

Posted By: Jimbob Jones (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 02:08 PM

So the over under is a 1.0 for Monday Night for TNA....pretty sure NOBODY will care outside the 400 fans (300 of which are probably repeat fans who come every week) who will be in attendance and the family members watching at home.

Hey Let's start a revolution in Wrestling..and who will lead this revolution well Hulk Hogan, Bischoff, Mick Foley and Vince Russo of course!!

Nothing says fresh and new like these set of guys....boy I just CAN'T WAIT to see what these crazy guys will do next....Hey I got an BRAND NEW IDEA!!! Let's get a group of Outcasts who come in to try and "Take over" TNA!!! We can call them.....the...NEW WORLD ORDER...hey that hasn't been done before has it....DAMMIT IT'S THE REVOLUTION WE HAVE ALL BEEN WAITING FOR...

When TNA decides to get REALLY serious about become an alternative and maybe let Jim Cornette let some of his ideas out or Paul E (who revolutionized the sport back in ECW, changed both the WWE and WCW) then maybe JUST MAYBE you have a chance.

Until then enjoy your 1 rating and 400 fans

Posted By: Phil (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 02:25 PM

I totally agree with all your points here, Csonka. Nice piece.

Side note: How about less liberal usage of the word "shit" for the noun you actually want to put in? It sounds better.

Posted By: The Other Ryan (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 02:37 PM

Vintage Csonka! Seriously though, I enjoyed this, because, well, I miss Csonka opinion columns. Say what you will about the guy having an ego or being too negative, he has his opinions for a reason and backs them up. Those of us who were WCW fans til the bitter end know what he's talking about, and we're all cringing at what may happen/is happening to TNA. It could be a great company, but they just keep sabotaging themselves without seeming to realize it.

Looking forward to My Take coming back.

Posted By: This is 411 (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 03:29 PM

There are plenty of good points here. However, in this day and age I don't believe with the number of tv shows and ppvs each month that the old school "buildup of feuds" is going to work. Back in the day when you had 2-3 months between big ppv shows you could do that. I don't think it can be one anymore. Especially with TNA having 11 hours of tv and ppv time a month.

Posted By: Jake Fury (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 04:00 PM

Csonka I agree with all of your thoughts, but the arrogance that you seem to trot out during your columns is amusing.
Plus Jim Cornette will never be relevant in a major wrestling company again...which I am so thankful for, as I cannot stand that man one bit, I don't want to see pure wrestling all the time i.e RoH and neither does the casual fan

Posted By: Observer (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 04:01 PM

Screw the haters. Great column Czonka. Especially liked how you quoted your own 2007 column. It's True... It's D@mn True

Posted By: Save.Us_Y2J (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 05:25 PM

Good Post Csonka. I agree with just about all of this article with the exception that the WWE has done the same stuff that TNA is doing in the past 5 to 7 years. The only reason that no one notices is because the WWE is already on top with no competition. No one can truly tell how good or bad your stuff is until it is measured against something fairly equal. I agree with a few other people who said that TNA is going to have to be almost flawless in order to compete. Exploiting WWE's weakness and short comings such as short short matches, stupid story lines, and little in ring time.

Posted By: TheRockDJM (Registered) on December 15, 2009 at 05:37 PM

Anyoen who thinks it is bad to give away a good free match on tv is a moron. Im not buying any TNA ppvs and no-one else is. Stop complaining about getting something good

Posted By: AG Awesome (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 10:41 AM

Exactly today's fans are not gonna sit through two hours of jobber squash matches. Most bookers who aren't still living in 1983 abandoned that formula for a reason.

Posted By: Guest#2506 (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 05:39 PM

Glad to see the return of one of my favorite columns, even if it has to be an irregular feature.
I've think you've got this dead on and it sums up exactly why I don't watch TNA. I like Sting, Joe and Matt Morgan. I enjoy watching Kurt, Kong, Tara and Scott Steiner but I can't sit through the bs that passes for a show to she them anymore. It isn't worth my time.

Posted By: Pete (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 05:50 PM

Anyone, and I do mean anyone that doesn't think TNA has better athletes and wrestlers than WWE right now, is kidding themselves, and doesn't really know what the hell they are talking about. And put aside the fact that while TNAmight not use them correctly they surely use the young gus better than WWE does,

typical WWE "push". Throw someone into a match 6 weeks out of the gate, give them a belt to hold. meaningless or not. Then have them lose it to someone even newer than them. Then after they lose the belt have them face off against the flavor of the months guy. heel or face depending on the pushee. Then let them have some out of the ring brawls building more credibility for the young guy, and then have the young guy lose (sometimes looking good sometimes getting destroyed) at the PPV. Then let that guy simpley disappear again. Go down the list....Carlito, MVP, Kofi Kingston, Morrison, Masterpiece, Umaga (RIP), Kennedy, Benjamin, CM Punk (although he did make it sort of for a month). And a litany of others. granted some of these guys got hurt or flunked wellness tests, but does it really matter? Same shit different guy. Joining that list soon will be the Miz, Dolph ziggler, Sheamus (despite being HHH butt buddy), and that guy who just beat Morrison.

So while the WWE has some moderate talent it really doesn't compare to what TNA has when they throw out their full roster. All the WWE does is do a good job of fooling people into thinking someone is good or at least better than what they really are.

Simpley start a list and figure it out for yourselves. Even if you're a DX nob or a orton freak you run out of names pretty quickly. You have Jericho, Punk, Cena (some might not), Morrison, Christian (opinion), Kozlov (totally misused), and if you want to reach, HBK and Undertaker (both clearly passed their primes). TNA has Angle, Samoa Joe, Styles, Roode, Pope, Nigel, Daniels, Lashley (not for me but a name), Kaz/Suicide, rhino, Abyss (not used right), Amazing red (evan bourne but better), MCMG, Morgan and hernadez(opinion), shiek maybe if used right. Reach and throw in Sting, Steiner, and Nash for name recognition.

And of course TNA has the Beautiful People. So that is a slam dunk right there.

Give these guys a few shows to learn, and Bischoff to teach them how to produce and who knows. Everyone forgets about Bischoff he is an after thought, but he is basically what made that deal. in all honesty I would find it easier for them to have wanted Bischoff from a business stand point and just let Hulk come along on the coat tails and name recognition. All the hype and talk IMO is strictly kayfabe. I dont think Hogan has word one to say about anything other than using his name.

Bischoff is the man, as long as he learned the first time around.

Posted By: Rich (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 06:02 PM

Great column! Still my fave at 411. Vintage Csonka!!!

Posted By: MachoManFanStill (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 06:10 PM

I hate you Larry. Try running your own wrestling and see where it gets you. Have you ever thought about killing yourself or quitting 411? It would be very beneficial to the IWC.

Posted By: Captain_Snackpipe (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 08:48 PM

Foley...start ODDITIES 2.0.

Posted By: Showster (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 11:40 AM

LOL...I was on board all the way until that last line.

Posted By: Guest#9814 (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 10:20 PM

Foley...start ODDITIES 2.0.

Posted By: Showster (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 11:40 AM

LOL...I was on board all the way until the last line.

Posted By: Scott in Chicago (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 10:21 PM

Lots of good responses to this one. I'm old enough to vividly remember the territorial days first-hand and I agree with Larry that lessons can be learned from that era. Should TNA turn the Impact Zone into the Spike Superstation studios and have two hours of squash matches and interviews? Of course not. But there was something to be said about the attention to detail and the creative freedom given to some of the wrestlers on the mic. This led to people actually caring while suspending disbelief and throwing themselves into the matches. Does anyone think that Ric Flair or Tully Blanchard's diatribes were scripted by a hack TV writer? This is why you had nuclear heat whenever Dusty Rhodes, Magnum TA or the Road Warriors faced off against the the Four Horseman. The fans believed these guys had a genuine hatred and wanted to kill each other. Look no further than the Von Erichs vs. Freebirds to see how a feud could carry a territory for years on end. Obviously short attention spans and 12 PPVs a year kill the chances of developing a long term feud but even half of that effort is a step up.

Posted By: Scott in Chicago (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 10:35 PM

WWE is the standard bearer for professional wrestling. The worked long and hard to get where they are today. 30 years ago, they were the little company that could.

Posted By: AndreFan (Registered) on December 15, 2009 at 11:43 AM

LOL...."the little company that could." Vince Jr. was handed a large territory in the densest population area of the U.S. that was already established for 25 years. MSG was selling out long before anyone uttered the word "Wrestlemania." There's no denying that Vince took it to the next level and I'm not denying his legacy but let's not get silly here with the revisionist history.

Posted By: Scott in Chicago (Guest) on December 15, 2009 at 10:44 PM

"Obviously short attention spans and 12 PPVs a year kill the chances of developing a long term feud"

I'm sorry scott, but I'd have to disagree with this statement.

All it takes is a little "oustide the box" thinking (and willingness by the people in the feud) to make it work.

Look at the HHH/HBK feud not too long ago. It was basically a brilliant year-long feud that colminated in an awesome 3-way match at WM XX.

Look at the person who shall not be named chase for the gold. After he came close a couple of times (and a classic vs. Kurt Angle at 2003 Royal Rumble), he finally won the RR and the big one at WM in a classic moment. And this was a LONGER feud than the above one.

Heck, I believe there is a recent one involving Jeff Hardy's chase for the gold with HHH.

All it takes is a little motivation by "creative" and you could still have a slow-burning feud. It's just that the current flow of creative is that the viewer's have the attention span of gnats and want thier blow-off match now, and this is the problem.

I would like to see an ACTUAL poll of people who watch wrestling, I guarantee that this train of thought is wrong and people would rather watch a quality feud vs. a quick one. A person could become more involved in one (which after all is why pundits consider this a male soap opera).

But, again, that is an issue due to the fact that the E likes to shovel ACTUAL soap opera bullcrap down our throats! And the "creative" staff is just a bunch of hollywood writer wannabes and know NOTHING of the business.

So, I see a lot of people becoming disenfranchised (like I have), and not wanting to invest any time in either TNA or WWE. So, basically, I feel the anemic state of Pro Wrestling will eventually slowly bleed itself out. And I really don't see if the bloodletting will resulting in good progress, or potentially kill it.

Only time will tell, I guess. But I do have to agree, I REALLY miss those days as well. And I was mainly around during the 1992-2003 era, which is really bad because of the pathetic state wrestling seems to be in currently.

Posted By: Paul from Texas (Guest) on December 16, 2009 at 02:53 AM

"Using people properly will always make the product better."

Wow, so insightful.

Posted By: Bob (Guest) on December 17, 2009 at 06:20 AM