Shining a Spotlight 1.26.12: Favortism
Posted by Michael Weyer on 01.26.2012
A look at how going a bit too far for your favorites doesn't make you a better fan.
One of the most fascinating stories of this NFL season has been the saga of Tim Tebow. It's gotten a lot of talk from folks saying he's great to other saying he's overrated and that's without bringing up the religious aspects. The real standout has been ESPN's Skip Bayless, who has basically become the greatest Tebow mark on the planet. Every week, he would go on massive tirades on how this man was "a competitive force of nature, all he does is win," and how everyone around him was jealous. Bayless even went so far as to suggest that John Elway's comments about Tebow not being ready were because he was afraid the man would surpass Elway as the greatest Broncos quarterback ever.
This has gotten Bayless more than a few reactions from colleagues, especially the ever-outspoken Stephen A. Smith, who has literally gotten out of his chair and walked off when Bayless makes statements like Tebow being a better runner than Michael Vick. During a recent talk, when the Broncos were eliminated from the playoffs, Smith finally explained the key issue with Bayless' Tebow championing which was that in the twenty years they've known each other, Bayless has talked about guys like Tom Brady, Brett Farve, Aaron Rodgers, Joe Montana, both Mannings and others being great but all having flaws. So, it made no sense how Bayless could run down these guys (each of whom had won at least one Super Bowl) as being flawed yet choose this "marginal talent" to elevate to a level of perfection he has yet to achieve.
I'm sure many see where I'm going with this as there's quite a few guys in wrestling who are seen are overrated and such. There are also those who folks champion despite the fact so many other fans are against them. These opinions have been around for as long as the business but the rise of the IWC has only made them more widespread and also led to some becoming "fact" among fans. It can be a sometimes troubling aspect that I've discussed before but bears repeating as it speaks a lot to fandom in many ways.
Favortism
We all have our favorites, that's for sure. The performers or movies or such that we all admire and hold dear to. Also, many of us have likes and dislikes the rest of the world can be against. In an issue of his classic comic book Starman, James Robinson has hero Jack Knight, told he may be the only person to stop a threat, reply "I'm also the only person who prefers The Two Jakes over Chinatown." It's a great line because so many of us hold to beliefs or likes that the rest of the world can't seem to grasp. That's been around for quite a while but the Internet has only affirmed these beliefs as well as giving rise to the idea that you have to be on one side or another of your likes or there's something wrong with you. I'm a huge fan of the site Television Without Pity which does fun recaps of shows but I notice they have the annoying habit of championing shows big-time (Heroes, Glee, Chuck) but as soon as they hit a small rut, turn on them big as being utter crap. Heroes is a great example of a show that was adored (maybe a tad too much and that's speaking as a huge fan of it) in its first season only to have the following ones (nowhere near as bad as critics say) be ripped to shreds. The troubling aspect of that is how this wave of slamming grew, that bashing the show became the "in" thing to do and woe if you tried to defend it.
I don't mind the fact that people hate the Star Wars prequels, that's their right. What I hate is this whole elitist mentality that if you don't loathe them with a passion, you can't be a "real" Star Wars fan. When I did an entry on the Blu-Ray set of the films for the 411 Movie Awards, I talked of how I still liked them despite their flaws and tinkering by Lucas and how folks slammed me for it. Sure enough, right in the comments for the Awards, someone wrote that my words proved I wasn't a "real" fan. It extends to love for various directors as well; Rolling Stone's Peter Travers just assumes anything Martin Scorsese does is automatically awesome, ranting when Shutter Island wasn't nominated for an Oscar despite it clearly not being the man's best work.
The Internet has just added to that with guys posting "best of" lists that show their bias. 411mania was ripped a lot by folks when we chose X-Men First Class as the best movie of 2011 over other critical favorites. Every guy who does reviews has to have a tough skin for the inevitable "are you nuts, this thing sucks" or such comments. Some folks go really overboard like Entertainment Weekly doing at least three covers a year for Twilight among other stuff. The fact is, we all have stuff we champion over others and that especially goes for wrestling.
Some guys can have rather odd likes and dislikes. For a man who has an entire website devoted to the worst of wrestling, it's odd that RD Reynolds is the only guy I know who talks of Zach Gowen being a "can't miss prospect WWE blew." Scott Keith has been famous for his love of Owen Hart and other Canadian guys. As for me, I'm a mark for Ricky Steamboat and I'll defend John Cena whenever I can, seeing him as nowhere near this horrible worker others do. In fact, the Cena hate is something that shows this annoying mentality of fans as it really strikes me that many boo Cena less because they really dislike him and more because it's supposed to be the "cool" thing to do. Giving up what you believe in just to fit in with others is never a good thing to do. Sadly, it's something that seems to happen a lot in the IWC and just makes it harder for us to be taken seriously as a majority of the fanbase. Every time I talk about TNA, I'll get a dozen guys talking like the company is not only equal to WWE in power but on the verge of putting McMahon out of business. It's like how ECW has been elevated to a much larger status than it truly attained, folks wanting to cling to their memories of it being great and that's the mentality that leads to problems.
Going Against the Flow
I'm used to taking stands folks find unpopular. One of my biggest is Rob Van Dam. He's a good worker but never saw him as the incredible icon so many others did. I've said it before but I still get annoyed watching the crowd at the "One Night Stand ‘06" match chanting "shame old shit" at Cena while cheering a guy who hasn't changed his moveset since 1999. I never bought into Jeff hardy as a real main-event level star, he was skilled but something just threw me off about him and his problems just seem to prove that. Of course, a lot of fans refuse to admit to such things, still pushing guys hard even if they fall flat at times. It might be that hard thing about changing our minds but sticking to these faves even when they're clearly not the mega-stars you insist they are makes you seem a bit foolish at times.
It's not like I'm a guru when it comes to seeing future stars. I thought HHH, the Rock and Cena had potential but not the mega-stars they would become. I figured Kennedy would go a bit further than he has, ditto for some guys like Ahmed Johnson and others. It really is tricky figuring out who can and can't make it as a future star, sometimes it's a combination of factors. Austin needed the "Austin 3:16" speech to take off, Rock had to go heel and Cena had to take on his goofy rap character first. It's hard just pushing someone if the fans don't take to him. That's a key thing so many of us in the IWC don't get which ties in to fandom as well.
A common comment I see a lot of is "if the IWC did the booking, WWE would be out of business in a year." I fully acknowledge WWE can use a bit better planning but I've heard from guys who have booking experience saying it's a hell of a lot tougher than you think it is. I enjoy Daniel Bryan a lot, a favorite but I don't think he's a guy fans flock to. I'm a major Ricky Steamboat mark, man was a genius in the ring but I acknowledge he wasn't the guy flashy enough to carry a company. It really strikes me how so many guys the IWC champion are ones who, frankly, don't have that main event promise and ability to be the stars a company needs to survive. It's not just being great in the ring, being a wrestling star also means real flash and charisma. Dean Malenko was a master technician but would you count on him as a world champion in WCW? A lot of folks don't get that, they don't understand you need someone not just good in the ring or on the mic but really able to handle the pressures as far too many guys can't (see RVD and Jeff Hardy).
One thing that affects judgments is time. When I posted my list on the worst of wrestling in 2011, I had a lot of comments on "this was the worst year in wrestling ever." Fact is, I can remember far worse like 1993 and '95. This sort of mentality changes a lot of opinions. Star Wars can be seen as totally awesome to a young kid, we didn't see the flaws the original films had but judged those of the prequels by an impossible standard. Likewise, a lot of us who grew up in wrestling in the glory periods of the ‘80's or late ‘90's judge it a bit harsher, not quite getting the fact you can't replicate the feeling of those times anymore. It's why the various attempts to recreate ECW have failed, you can't see it the same way with this promotion breaking out big-time amid the cartoonish antics of the bigger promotions. Of course, a lot of the ECW fanatics don't see it, always snapping that the new ECW failed because of WWE ruining it, not understanding you can't go back to 1996 all over again. Ditto for why the New World Order revivals never took either, you just can't copy that all over again. But somehow, a lot of people have it in their heads that you can just roll back time, not understanding that the world has changed and so have they.
Indeed, it's telling how I've seen a lot of IWC guys shift opinions on favorite stuff. Scott Keith once stated that Vince practically murdered Owen Hart but now has backed off a bit, citing it as an accident and also gives respect to the once loathed Shawn Michaels. I've seen guys who once ripped Vince McMahon over every little thing also change their stands, realizing the man really does like and want to help his workers. On the other hand, Ric Flair's personal issues have led to a lot of folks no longer seeing him as the admirable figure he once was and I don't think I need to mention the change in thinking about Benoit. Holding onto a favorite is admirable but continuing to do so in the face of logic is something else. Hogan and Flair were the true icons of their time but seeing them in the ring today is downright painful. It also pertains to how newer guys can face either slamming or instant love, no real midway point. On his blog, Keith has been reposting reviews of past Royal Rumbles noting how Cody Rhodes became a not-so bland worker and his surprise how Ryder went from Edge flunky to one of his favorite guys in only a couple of years. It takes a while sometimes for folks to take off right and be able to click and to look down at their chances just because you're not a fan of them just makes it harder.
There's nothing wrong with having favorites, that's why you're a fan. There's nothing really wrong with championing them either. But you have to try and balance that out with a bit of reason at times. I'm a huge fan of guys like Steamboat but acknowledge how they may not have been the epic draws most paint them as. I enjoy Haas and Benjamin a lot so didn't want to face how poor their ROH tag team title run was for a while. Yet in wrestling, folks will let their favoritism get the best of them, ignoring the flaws in a worker or even a company and elevating some guys beyond their stature. That also pertains to putting down folks as being crap just because you don't like them. You don't like Cena, ok, but you can't say the man is not a star, he's proven himself at that level far better than a lot of IWC darlings. You love TNA, ok, just don't make the mistake of thinking they're the equal to WWE now. Being a fan is more than just cheering your favorites, you also have to see how others perceive them and be open to your own beliefs changing. Doing that might just let you see them in a better light and appreciate the business even more.
Michael Weyer continues to show why he's one of the best columnists on this website and usually my favorite read of the week - keep up the good work, Mike.
Posted By: Nick M. (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 12:58 AM
I can't believe you went to all of the trouble to write this piece only to avoid the big elephant in the room...411wrestling's treatment of TNA.
Posted By: Guest#8389 (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 01:09 AM
I don't hate Tim Tebow, but I HATE the hype around him. He is overhyped and overrated. ESPN talks about him too much it's sickening. Skip Bayless is the worst person on ESPN and the main reason Tebow has all this overhype. He should be fired, he says stuff just to get a reaction out of people(like a troll who writes the shitwich on 411wrestling). Now people on this site like to use Tebow pics, makes me sick. Rant over
Good column, but yeah I'm sick of Tebow.
Posted By: Still Guest#8287 (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 02:07 AM
ohhh, yeeees, John Cena is totally better than RVD ever was...
Posted By: Guest#6164 (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 05:36 AM
Once again, great column!
Posted By: The Great Capt. Smooth (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 06:18 AM
Had to put the article on pause for a second. I will read the rest in a second.
Shutter Island. Scorsese made a genre flick, and he did it with skill. While it isn't his BEST movie, it was good, and considering this was the year they expanded best picture to 10 nominees, they could have made some room for him. The Blind Side was a nominee that hasn't held up at all, and as much as I loved District 9, I'd have understood if Shutter Island was in there instead. Even and Education or A Serious Man could have been replaced. Won? Not that year. No way. But nominated... I can see it.
Also, do you think that Oscar nominations have to compete with the nominees' own back catalog? Cause that's weird. "Not the man's best work". I guess Hugo shouldn't be nominated at all then? Cause while it's one of the better movies this year, it's not Scorsese's best.
Posted By: Carlos (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 06:29 AM
The rest of the article was fine. But while championing your fave has a host of problems, the flipside is the arbitrary dislikes everyone has. People get JUST as vocal and obnoxious when you like someone they don't. "How the heck can you cheer for Santino. He's a stupid comedy hack who can't wrestle." And even wrose is when you disagree about something that simple and inconsequential, often times one of you just shuts down and stops listening.
Everyone's wrong but me. That's the mindset.
Posted By: Carlos (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 06:37 AM
I agree. WWE fans tend to take things a bit too far. Tghey just have to admit that TNA Wrestling has captured the audience attention and are a legit competitor to the WWE.
Posted By: Bill (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 08:16 AM
Good column. I do think TNA fans are hyping TNA too much. Yes, TNA is the most popular promotion and is producing better programming than the WWE but they are still new in the wrestling game.
Posted By: Jason (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 08:17 AM
Yeah, fans can get a little too passionate. I am a TNA fan, and I know they are equal to the WWE, but I don;t like to rub it in the WWE's face, you know.
Posted By: Kern (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 08:19 AM
"ohhh, yeeees, John Cena is totally better than RVD ever was..."
Did he say that?
Posted By: Guest#8496 (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 08:20 AM
Yeah, I see the writers point. I am a big WWE supporter but I have to be fair and admit that TNA Wrestling is a better promotion and is on equal terms to the WWE right now.
Posted By: Jaso (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 08:48 AM
Michael is right. Color me guilty. I am a big time fan of TNA but even I have to cool my jets when promoting TNA as the one to knock WWE out of business.
Yes, TNA has grown in viewership and are spending 90% of their time touring, taping Impact and PPV's on the road and are making an excellent profit.
But I think I let my fandom take me little too far. TNA is superior but they will take over the WWE...Yet.
Posted By: Walter (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 08:51 AM
Yes, I am a bit of a lunatic when it comes to TNA. They are my favorite promotion.
Is TNA equal to the WWE?
Yes, yes they are equal. But TNA is not ready to overtake the WWE. As a fan I realize that.
Posted By: quicey (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 08:54 AM
WWE fans can be a bit too passionate. I agree with those sentiments. They should take a step back and admit that TNA is providing fans with a great alternative and are on equal footing with the WWE.
Posted By: Hoodie (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 08:55 AM
"In fact, the Cena hate is something that shows this annoying mentality of fans as it really strikes me that many boo Cena less because they really dislike him and more because it's supposed to be the "cool" thing to do."
Overall, this is a really solid article. However, you lose a lot of your credibility with the above line.
Cena has a lot of very glaring flaws and they're the same flaws that many of his detractors trumpet. I grant you that chanting "same old shit" at Cena while he's up against RVD is hypocritical... but it's also still true.
Cena is formulaic. He does typically need garbage matches to shine. His promos are uninspired and recycled. His character is bland and baseline. Those are all strong points that - while you might not agree with any or all of them - you can't pretend that they're baseless.
This whole concept of not being able to deny his star power? Well, call my naive or not well read if you must but I have NEVER seen anyone do that.
I get that Cena is the man. I get that he's a good dude who works his butt off for the company. But hard work is not necessarily good, entertaining work.
Honestly? When you talk about played out talking points that are automatically regurgitated as a reflex, the best example of that is Cena fans. It's impossible to criticize the man without someone saying, "He's a company man!" or "You just hate him because it's cool!"
It's a two-way street man. If you don't realize that then you come off as just another elitist who talks a big game but doesn't realize he should take his own advice.
Posted By: Ron Mexico (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 11:03 AM
Great column, and that was before you referenced Starman, my favorite comic. Kudos.
Posted By: Guest#8805 (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 11:24 AM
You lost all cred when you said Cena isnty a bad wrestler. Did you see his badfly applied abdominal stretch at MITB 2011? Or his hilarious chest bump into the corner v Ryder a few months ago?
Or how about his always wrongly applied STFs? I can go on and on.
Posted By: Gary (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 11:25 AM
Man this was a great read! Wes Kirk could learn a whole lot from you Michael!
Posted By: Ben (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 12:32 PM
Good Article. I do think those of us who watched wrestling in the 80's and 90's were spoiled, however.
When guys made it to the WWF and WCW(including JCP), they'd already had years under their belts. Younger guys were in tag teams or were flat out jobbers (the no gimmick kind). Guys became main eventers in their 30's.
Now, I see articles how some guy or other in his early/mid 20's is ready for the main event after being with WWE for a year or two. Even stranger, a 40 year old like Christopher Daniels is referred to as a young guy over and over.
Part of this comes from WWE's developmental territory. WWF got seasoned performers without having to pay for the seasoning. WWE is paying guys to learn and want a return on investment.
I think a lot of your topic comes down to personal bias and the false belief we really have inside information. We don't know what these guys are like when the camera is off. Do they put in the time or are they slacking off? We've seen plenty of guys in sports make due with their natural talents and not put in the film work. Some guys just don't have the drive. Lebron James is a fantastically talented player, but he doesn't appear to be the leader and have the intense need to win that Michael Jordan had. I'm with you in that I never saw Jeff Hardy as the face of a company. He's shown that he can't handle that kind of pressure. AJ Styles doesn't connect with the casual fan. Time will tell if Bobby Roode can.
Posted By: Carl (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 12:51 PM
True, favoritism does pop up in wrestling. But don't you betray yourself here by saying TNA isn't in WWE's league? So what if they're not, they're still a good promotion.
Also, your columns are always thoughtful and penetrating, but you tend to repeat yourself ad naseum. RD only said Gowen was a "can't miss" prospect once...and again, he's entitled to his opinion. This also has to be the 200th time you've mentioned RVD and the irony behind One Night Stand. We get it, you can bring up another point or wrestler now. Are you sure you're not turning against the IWC to be a cool basher like you claim so many fans do?
Posted By: Guest#0533 (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 01:09 PM
"Also, your columns are always thoughtful and penetrating, but you tend to repeat yourself ad naseum. RD only said Gowen was a "can't miss" prospect once...and again, he's entitled to his opinion. This also has to be the 200th time you've mentioned RVD and the irony behind One Night Stand. We get it, you can bring up another point or wrestler now. Are you sure you're not turning against the IWC to be a cool basher like you claim so many fans do?"
-Posted By: Guest#0533-
I agree with this. Right on, my friend!
Posted By: Will (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 01:14 PM
I really liked Shutter Island lol. I enjoyed the column, it's an interesting topic. I catch myself doing this too where I blindly defend my favorites, but I'm usually good at realizing their flaws as well. For instance, I've been a huge Randy Orton fan since his match with Mick Foley at Backlash 2004. I think he's great and I think he owned 2011. That being said I can admit that he relied on chinlocks way too heavily for a while, he has a temper and attitude problems, and that sometimes he is so committed to character that it makes his in ring work suffer.
Another is Shawn Michaels.I've always been a huge Shawn Michaels fan but everyone knows the stories from the 90's.
Part of being a fan is realizing and acknowledging the good and bad of our favorites. I love Randy Orton, but his main event with HHH at WM25 sucked. Benoit is my favorite wrestler of all time. But he killed his wife and son. You can't ignore or excuse that.
Posted By: AmericanWolves (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 02:12 PM
I agree with how people are too quick to say, "this was the worst year in wrestling" because they look back to earlier times and it's an unfair comparison. I thought 2011 was a great in ring year. If were just looking at in-ring wrestling wise, I'll take 2011 over 1998 or 1999 two years people beg to come back. But in 1998 and 1999 the WRESTLING wasn't all we remember it to be in my opinion. A few years from now people will say "Man 2015 sucked I wish we could go back to 2011"
Posted By: Guest#8111 (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 02:16 PM
First of all, in terms of Tim Tebow, I earnestly believe that most of the "hate" of the guy came from the sense that, as an NFL quarterback, he appeared to be utterly devoid, of the tools needed to be an NFL quarterback, yet folks were championing him as the "Second Coming", no pun intended, and doing so with impunity for reality.
He had the desire to play football, had a personal character that folks could admire, and seemed to have the ability to talk his team, and himself, into believing that he was going to win.
During the stretch, when everything was going well, things even got to the point that personalities, even some respected sports journalists and opinion-makers, were implicitly pointing to divine intervention, on Tebow's behalf.
And then the bubble popped; the Tim Tebow, that everyone watching saw in his play and stat line, started to show up on the scoreboard. He "was what we thought he was", and he flopped.
Now, I'm not saying that Tebow has no chance, of becoming more than just hype; there's enough raw material, from what I've seen, to turn him into something serviceable.
Still, he's gonna need a lot of work; work that he'll likely not get, for the situation that he's in. He needs to rebuild his entire throwing motion, learn how to effectively move around in the pocket and, to be blunt, he needs to be taught how to read, at the very least, half the field, through a 1-2-check passing tree.
You utilize the football tools that he does have, his threat as a runner, and you serve his QB deficiencies, and you've got the makings of something.
In a perfect world, for Tebow's sake, the Broncos end up with Peyton Manning, for his final two years, they bring in a stud QB coach to work with Tebow, and they focus on having Tebow emulate Donavan McNabb, about as high a watermark as Tebow's skills will take him.
Posted By: scipio2009 (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 03:49 PM
"TNA is the most popular promotion" and "TNA is making a great profit?" Seriously guys? TNA hasn't in fact made a profit in their ten-year history. They have yet to be in the black. As for TNA being the most popular, look at the ratings. They're lucky to crack a 1.5. Check your facts please.
Posted By: Wow (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 03:51 PM
Now... onto wrestling.
-The Cena hate, as I've said many a time, and this is speaking for the rational critique, is partly as a result, in my opinion, of a significant chunk of the audience, after buying into the progression and development of "The People's Champion" John Cena (Tmp), being disgusted with the way 'their guy' was turned into some nonsense vanilla "Real American Hero/Soldier", in the name of chasing the bucks.
The WWE took all the "edge, scrapes, scars and flaws" of John Cena, the things that got him over in the first place, and sanitized him, and folks still haven't forgiven them for that.
-The whole TNA reaction, as far as I'm concerned, is far more a reaction to the "no other promotion but WWE should be even considered worth mention"-bias than a "TNA is the best thing, since sliced bread"-bias.
As an unapologetic fan of TNA, since about 6 months into Year 1, for a while, and the return to TV, I can honestly say that, in addition to being able to watch some great pro wrestling, I've had to sit threw my share of crap. For every Styles/Daniels/JOE saga, there was sitting through the no-name flippity flop of Generic Wrestler Z; for every "Raven fulfills his destiny" push, there were angles that had no business being on TV; for every "Sports Entertainment Xtreme" or "Planet Jarret" epic-ness, there were also many a storyline, pushed so far past it's usefulness that the whole arc suffered. Like every wrestling promotion, TNA has had, and will continue to have, it's mistakes and faults, "warts and all".
Still, in the face of having someone, out of some belief in their "betterness", argue that I shouldn't find any enjoyment in TNA, or any non "greatest of all-time, WWE", as is constantly done on this site and others, it is beyond normal, in my opinion, to have someone adamantly defend their enjoyment of TNA, or any other promotion, ignoring all faults that could be found, in the name of speaking for a product that they, personally, find entertaining.
-RVD, instead of being "overrated" IMO, is simply getting a "receipt", on all of the recognition that he should've been receiving during his 2-year ECW World TV Championship run. Looking back, the work during that run was mostly pretty good, and it's a shame that injury prevented him from being "the guy who saved ECW", and the recognition that would've come with, pending Heyman's "business sense" not wrecking things, prevent the complete consolidation of the U.S. wrestling audience.
-Cody Rhodes, ever since his time tearing things up in OVW, has always had "the goods"; all he needed was an opportunity.
-Zac Ryder came out of so "deep in left field", that I'm still shocked that he's making his run.
Posted By: scipio2009 (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 04:39 PM
-Cody Rhodes, ever since his time tearing things up in OVW, has always had "the goods"; all he needed was an opportunity.
-Zac Ryder came out of so "deep in left field", that I'm still shocked that he's making his run.
Posted By: scipio2009 (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 04:39 PM
I agree. The first time I saw Cody Rhodes was when he inducted his father Dusty Rhodes and I remember thinking, "man this guy is eloquent, he has great charisma. he can be somebody" and now coming into 2012 he has become one of my favorite Wrestlers. Amazing how that works sometimes. Him and Dolph Ziggler. From humble beginnings no doubt.
Posted By: Guest#7017 (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 06:56 PM
I think that TNA marks are the most delusional bunch on the internet while the WWE marks are the craziest.
Can TNA become competition? Sure they can.
Will TNA put the WWE out of business like people like Spencer Mallard and Latex claim they will? Hell no. WCW had the perfect opportunity to put what was then the WWF out of business back in 1998 and they failed. And if TNA tries to do it, they will fail too.
When push comes to shove, WWE will show TNA why they have been in business for over 50 years and why they will be in business for another 50 years and beyond. Not wishing or predicting death for TNA, just saying that WWE will not die.
Posted By: Guest#8267 (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 06:58 PM
I agree. WWE fans tend to take things a bit too far. Tghey just have to admit that TNA Wrestling has captured the audience attention and are a legit competitor to the WWE.
Posted By: Bill (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 08:16 AM
Good column. I do think TNA fans are hyping TNA too much. Yes, TNA is the most popular promotion and is producing better programming than the WWE but they are still new in the wrestling game.
Posted By: Jason (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 08:17 AM
Yeah, fans can get a little too passionate. I am a TNA fan, and I know they are equal to the WWE, but I don;t like to rub it in the WWE's face, you know.
Posted By: Kern (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 08:19 AM
Yeah, I see the writers point. I am a big WWE supporter but I have to be fair and admit that TNA Wrestling is a better promotion and is on equal terms to the WWE right now.
Posted By: Jaso (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 08:48 AM
Michael is right. Color me guilty. I am a big time fan of TNA but even I have to cool my jets when promoting TNA as the one to knock WWE out of business.
Yes, TNA has grown in viewership and are spending 90% of their time touring, taping Impact and PPV's on the road and are making an excellent profit.
But I think I let my fandom take me little too far. TNA is superior but they will take over the WWE...Yet.
Posted By: Walter (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 08:51 AM
Yes, I am a bit of a lunatic when it comes to TNA. They are my favorite promotion.
Is TNA equal to the WWE?
Yes, yes they are equal. But TNA is not ready to overtake the WWE. As a fan I realize that.
Posted By: quicey (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 08:54 AM
WWE fans can be a bit too passionate. I agree with those sentiments. They should take a step back and admit that TNA is providing fans with a great alternative and are on equal footing with the WWE.
Posted By: Hoodie (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 08:55 AM
Great column, Weyer. Too bad your comment section is ruined by this one guy who posts under multiple names (see quoted above).
Posted By: Guest#5160 (Guest) on January 26, 2012 at 08:57 PM
I think that TNA is holding it's own against the WWE and are on equal terms with the WWE.
That's not me being an an overzealous fan, I am just speaking the truth.
Posted By: xema (Guest) on January 27, 2012 at 09:21 AM
I think that TNA is holding it's own against the WWE and are on equal terms with the WWE.
That's not me being an an overzealous fan, I am just speaking the truth.
Posted By: xema (Guest) on January 27, 2012 at 09:21 AM
Interesting how one can be wrong on the "truth"...
Posted By: Guest#5218 (Guest) on January 27, 2012 at 01:26 PM
I think that TNA is holding it's own against the WWE and are on equal terms with the WWE.
That's not me being an an overzealous fan, I am just speaking the truth.
Posted By: xema (Guest) on January 27, 2012 at 09:21 AM
That is not the truth it is a lie. tna is nothing compared to the WWE. Just the facts!!
Posted By: elvylanda (Guest) on January 27, 2012 at 05:53 PM
RVD is over rated. John Cena is a good wrestler, and this column was well written.
Posted By: Who (Guest) on January 28, 2012 at 08:07 PM
Copyright (c) 2011 411mania.com, LLC. All rights reserved.
Click here for our privacy policy. Please help us serve you better, fill out our survey.
Use of this site signifies your agreement to our terms of use.