WWE vs TNA

pudgey22

Hi all,

I've been watching TNA for the last few months, i enjoy it. Used to be a fan of WWF/WWE back through the 90's when I was going through school but it got a bit childish i thought and interest faded.
From you all who are watching both, which do you prefer, TNA or WWE??
Pros and cons of both?

TheCandystripes

Interesting you should say that Pudge. TNA is the FUTURE. Hulk Hogan is gonna come in and shift the nature of wrestling as we know it not seen since 1997.

YOU are the type of fan TNA wants to win over, the person who loathes this new WWE direction and wants a fresh alternative. TNA is that alternative.

TNA has such a strong roster, look at the state the WWE is in now, jack swagger lmao who is that noob?

WWE beats TNA in production, but everything else TNA is dominating WWE. Dude you haven't even seen the best of TNA yet. We have a lot to look forward to.

currythis

TheCandystripes wrote: »

Interesting you should say that Pudge. TNA is the FUTURE. Hulk Hogan is gonna come in and shift the nature of wrestling as we know it not seen since 1997.

YOU are the type of fan TNA wants to win over, the person who loathes this new WWE direction and wants a fresh alternative. TNA is that alternative.

TNA has such a strong roster, look at the state the WWE is in now, jack swagger lmao who is that noob?

WWE beats TNA in production, but everything else TNA is dominating WWE. Dude you haven't even seen the best of TNA yet. We have a lot to look forward to.

You're not employed by TNA by any chance are you?!

TheCandystripes

Not yet

TheCandystripes

TheCandystripes wrote: »

Interesting you should say that Pudge. TNA is the FUTURE. Hulk Hogan is gonna come in and shift the nature of wrestling as we know it not seen since 1997.

Hulk Hogan? Future?



... In 2009?


TNA are just WCW 2 in my eyes. They keep on trying the "sign a big star, the fans will follow" trick and it's not working for them.

I prefer WWE.

pudgey22

I'm already watching TNA every week, i'm very wary of the Hulkster coming in..All this talk of change, with Taz(z?) and Mike Tenay telling us all that change is a good thing,we all love change, what's wrong with change rubbish.
I hope the Jim "The Anvil" Neidhart fight a few weeks ago is not the type of change we can expect.
How's WWE doing these days, is it as good/better than TNA on a weekly basis?

D2D

TheCandystripes wrote: »

Interesting you should say that Pudge. TNA is the FUTURE. Hulk Hogan is gonna come in and shift the nature of wrestling as we know it not seen since 1997.

YOU are the type of fan TNA wants to win over, the person who loathes this new WWE direction and wants a fresh alternative. TNA is that alternative.

TNA has such a strong roster, look at the state the WWE is in now, jack swagger lmao who is that noob?

WWE beats TNA in production, but everything else TNA is dominating WWE. Dude you haven't even seen the best of TNA yet. We have a lot to look forward to.

I prefer WWE. I think it's much better than TNA in nearly everyway.

In the ratings, TNA draws a 1.1/1.2 while Raw gets a 3.0/3.1/3.2; SD gets a 2.0/2.1/2.2 and ECW gets a 1.1/1.2 every week.

I believe WWE have better storylines than TNA. TNA's storylines are way too complex to undersand.

WWE has the superior roster, although there're a number of TNA superstars I'd like to see on it such as AJ, Joe, Daniels etc.. WWE have the likes of Swagger, Sheamus, McIntyre, Morrison, Ziggler, Danielson, Low Ki, DH Smith, Tyson Kidd, Miz, Cody, Ted, Bourne and Kingston to name a few for the future.

I don't want to start on Hogan but I can see his and Bishoff's ego's getting the better of them.

Machismo Fan

Deleted User wrote: »

TNA are just WCW 2 in my eyes. They keep on trying the "sign a big star, the fans will follow" trick and it's not working for them.

Contrasts between WWE and WCW can easily be made aswell. Over reliance on celebrity and treatment of celebrities as bigger stars than your own and a lack of establishing new young talent with a distinct over-reliance on the same names every month.

D2D

pudgey22 wrote: »

How's WWE doing these days, is it as good/better than TNA on a weekly basis?

I think it is.

Raw was really stale but is starting to push the younger superstars now

Sheamus vs Cena at TLC

and the Team Miz vs Team Morrison match at Survivor Series

SD is the wrestling show of WWE, watch it to see the best wrestling WWE has.

ECW is where the newbies come in and show their talent. The Christian vs Regal in Sheffield shows what potential the show has.

Superstars is just a show where the jobbers/newbies (Wang Yang, Kung Fu Naki, Tyler Reks, Zack Ryder etc..) fight.

Machismo Fan

Dare_2_defy wrote: »

WWE has the superior roster, although there're a number of TNA superstars I'd like to see on it such as AJ, Joe, Daniels etc.. WWE have the likes of Swagger, Sheamus, McIntyre, Morrison, Ziggler, Danielson, Low Ki, DH Smith, Tyson Kidd, Miz, Cody, Ted, Bourne and Kingston to name a few for the future.

Being honest, I think TNA are much better equiped for the future than WWE. Out of all those names I only see future main eventers in Swagger, Morrison, Kofi and DiBiase. All the others I only see solid mid card and upper-mid card acts. Whereas I see stars in Storm, Roode, Styles, Sabin, Hernandez, Pope, Morgan, Daniels, Joe, Wolfe, Abyss and even Magnus if he continues to develop not to mention Kong, Hamada, Sarita and Flash in the KO division (and many of these people would have achieved star status long before now if it wasn't for the last three years of booking).

pudgey22

Where can i watch WWE on sky.. the unedited stuff, i cant stand when you see someone with a chair,then it's cut to the crowd and you see your man on the floor, it's so stupid to watch.

TheCandystripes

lol pudge. guess what we won't be seeing chairs and any thing like that in wwe or should i say wwe playschool. its to riské apparently for vince.
what happened to wwe? it sold its soul.

D2D

pudgey22 wrote: »

Where can i watch WWE on sky.. the unedited stuff, i cant stand when you see someone with a chair,then it's cut to the crowd and you see your man on the floor, it's so stupid to watch.

What time do you watch WWE??? If it's after 10pm, it should show the chair-shots etc

TheCandystripes wrote: »

lol pudge. guess what we won't be seeing chairs and any thing like that in wwe or should i say wwe playschool. its to riské apparently for vince.
what happened to wwe? it sold its soul.

You really love TNA, don't you??

WWE selling it's soul is a bit harsh. Vince only turned it into PG for the kids. They're the viewers Vince wants so they'll keep watching in the future. Unforgiven 08 was TV-PG in America but watch the unsantioned match between Y2J/HBKand at No Way Out 09, watch Shane McMahon/Orton

Machismo Fan

Dare_2_defy wrote: »

WWE selling it's soul is a bit harsh. Vince only turned it into PG for the kids. They're the viewers Vince wants so they'll keep watching in the future. Unforgiven 08 was TV-PG in America but watch the unsantioned match between Y2J/HBKand at No Way Out 09, watch Shane McMahon/Orton

I've always found this statistic interesting in regards WWE going PG:

http://corporate.wwe.com/company/overview.jsp

#Balanced age distribution with 78% of the audience over the age of 18

* 21.8% of our audience is under 18 years old
* 23.1% of our audience is 18-34 years old
* 24.6% of our audience is 35-49 years old
* 30.5% of our audience is 50+ years old

D2D

Machismo Fan wrote: »

I've always found this statistic interesting in regards WWE going PG:

http://corporate.wwe.com/company/overview.jsp

:eek::eek: Wow

flahavaj

Machismo Fan wrote: »

I've always found this statistic interesting in regards WWE going PG:

http://corporate.wwe.com/company/overview.jsp

Its not the % that are under 16 thats important, its the % of merch bought by them that would be more interesting. I don't know what it is for sure, but I'm willing to bet its a sizeable chunk.

flahavaj

Machismo Fan wrote: »

Being honest, I think TNA are much better equiped for the future than WWE. Out of all those names I only see future main eventers in Swagger, Morrison, Kofi and DiBiase. All the others I only see solid mid card and upper-mid card acts. Whereas I see stars in Storm, Roode, Styles, Sabin, Hernandez, Pope, Morgan, Daniels, Joe, Wolfe, Abyss and even Magnus if he continues to develop not to mention Kong, Hamada, Sarita and Flash in the KO division (and many of these people would have achieved star status long before now if it wasn't for the last three years of booking).

The day these guys bump a buyrate for a PPV is the day they can legit call theselves stars. And Joe, Styles, Daniels and Abyss have been around years, they're hardly the future. You could include Punk, Cena and Orton on the WWE list of future stars by that logic.

Including a guy like Pope, a WWE reject, on your list is a bit much as well.

Machismo Fan

flahavaj wrote: »

The day these guys bump a buyrate for a PPV is the day they can legit call theselves stars.

Including a guy like Pope, a WWE reject, on your list is a bit much as well.

The way Pope has carried himself since joining TNA has screamed star every time he's been on the screen. WWE lost out big time with him. Those guys I named are guys that if they were booked right long term could actually draw and are much better equiped to draw in my opinion than the likes of Sheamus, McIntyre, Ziggler, Miz, Rhodes and the Harts.

Machismo Fan

flahavaj wrote: »

You could include Punk, Cena and Orton on the WWE list of future stars by that logic.

I would actually because in five years+ time they should be in the forefront of the company in the same way Styles, Joe and Abyss should be for TNA (I'm discluding Daniels because of his age). It's just a case of who's going to be up there with them.

flahavaj wrote: »

Its not the % that are under 16 thats important, its the % of merch bought by them that would be more interesting. I don't know what it is for sure, but I'm willing to bet its a sizeable chunk.

I agree, the under 16's do buy a lot more merch and probably attend more live events. But PPV buys and DVD's would probably be more targeted towards the older market and it's one of the reasons PPV buys are down in my opinion. They're only targeting their product at a small percentage of their audince rather than trying to give something for everybody most of the time.

flahavaj

Machismo Fan wrote: »

The way Pope has carried himself since joining TNA has screamed star every time he's been on the screen. WWE lost out big time with him. Those guys I named are guys that if they were booked right long term could actually draw and are much better equiped to draw in my opinion than the likes of Sheamus, McIntyre, Ziggler, Miz, Rhodes and the Harts.

Cruiserweights don't draw though.:pac:

Also how are they better equipped though? Personality, wrestling skill......?

Machismo Fan

flahavaj wrote: »

Cruiserweights don't draw though.:pac:

Also how are they better equipped though? Personality, wrestling skill......?

Definately wrestling skill and in most cases for me personality. Too many of those that come through WWE Developmental are cookie cutter wrestlers. I can't see the likes of McIntyre and Sheamus carrying PPV main events to a world class standard.

chopperbyrne

TheCandystripes wrote: »

lol pudge. guess what we won't be seeing chairs and any thing like that in wwe or should i say wwe playschool. its to riské apparently for vince.
what happened to wwe? it sold its soul.

There is no point arguing/debating with you as you are ridiculously single minded and refuse to acknowledge anything good about WWE.

flahavaj

Machismo Fan wrote: »

Definately wrestling skill and in most cases for me personality. Too many of those that come through WWE Developmental are cookie cutter wrestlers. I can't see thelikes of McIntyre and Sheamus carrying PPV main events to a world class standard.

They're better workers than Morgan or Abyss IMO. And probably have better charisma than the likes of Daniels.

Don't get me wrong I think the world of lads like Styles, Daniels and Joe, but I seriously doubt their ability to draw PPV buyrates from a casual non-smark audience.

I jokingly said earlier that cruisers don't draw, but history says that apart from Rey, they don't.

flahavaj

TheCandystripes wrote: »

lol pudge. guess what we won't be seeing chairs and any thing like that in wwe or should i say wwe playschool. its to riské apparently for vince.
what happened to wwe? it sold its soul.

The only thing WWE sold lately is merch and PPV's, by the shedload, my friend. In numbers that TNA could never hope for even in their wildest and wettest dreams.:pac:

Machismo Fan

flahavaj wrote: »

They're better workers than Morgan or Abyss IMO. And probably have better charisma than the likes of Daniels.

Don't get me wrong I think the world of lads like Styles, Daniels and Joe, but I seriously doubt their ability to draw PPV buyrates from a casual non-smark audience.

I jokingly said earlier that cruisers don't draw, but history says that apart from Rey, they don't.

I agree that they're better workers than Morgan but I have to disagree regarding Abyss. The man is an incredible worker when he's not busy being bogged down in a constant stream of gimmick matches. He can bump like a maniac for his size and he just hasn't been booked well in TNA for years. As a face or heel he could have done great business for TNA if they ever built him up properly. Didn't Unbreakable draw one of TNA highest PPV buyrate ever for them at the time? And that was at a time where TNA weren't even on TV at all.

If TNA could have maintained that aura Joe had in 2005/6 he could have carried TNA to a whole new level but Russo had him jobbing to Tomko six months after Russo got the book. Ever since then TNA haven't treated Daniels with any respect and the booking of AJ was up and down. Storm and Roode (who I think have infinite potential) have never been booked strongly. TNA's lack of drawing for me comes down on their booking not their talent.

flahavaj

Machismo Fan wrote: »

I agree that they're better workers than Morgan but I have to disagree regarding Abyss. The man is an incredible worker when he's not busy being bogged down in a constant stream of gimmick matches. He can bump like a maniac for his size and he just hasn't been booked well in TNA for years. As a face or heel he could have done great business for TNA if they ever built him up properly. Didn't Unbreakable draw one of TNA highest PPV buyrate ever for them at the time? And that was at a time where TNA weren't even on TV at all.

If TNA could have maintained that aura Joe had in 2005/6 he could have carried TNA to a whole new level but Russo had him jobbing to Tomko six months after Russo got the book. Ever since then TNA haven't treated Daniels with any respect and the booking of AJ was up and down. Storm and Roode (who I think have infinite potential) have never been booked strongly. TNA's lack of drawing for me comes down on their booking not their talent.

I don't think I've ever seen Abyss in a non-gimmicked match that was anything special.

And even if Unbreakable drew a good buyrate for them at the time it still wouldn't have been close to 100,00 US buys. Which is tiny.

Tricity Bendix

Hogan is the future? Not even the most die-hard Hulkamaniac would claim that.

If I had to choose between TNA and the WWE, I'd go with TNA. Their women's division is incredible, and they seem to give plenty of time over to character development. I could tell you what character every single wrestler on TNA plays, but I haven't a clue who Evan Bourne is, up until recently Kofi was another unknown, and Matt Hardy seems to be in full reverse in terms of developing a unique character.

Machismo Fan

flahavaj wrote: »

I don't think I've ever seen Abyss in a non-gimmicked match that was anything special.

And even if Unbreakable drew a good buyrate for them at the time it still wouldn't have been close to 100,00 US buys. Which is tiny.

Kurt Angle vs. Abyss No Surrender 2007. Great match and gimmick free. While tiny yes, but considering how TNA does in general these days with 'bigger' names, between 30-40 thousand (unfortunately I can't find a source but that's a number I remember reading) back then isn't bad by any means.

pudgey22

So which do, you all who actually watch both, prefer in terms of 1) Wrestling skills
2) Entertainment?
And what channel can i get unedited coverage of WWE??

flahavaj

Machismo Fan wrote: »

Kurt Angle vs. Abyss No Surrender 2007. Great match and gimmick free. While tiny yes, but considering how TNA does in general these days with 'bigger' names, between 30-40 thousand (unfortunately I can't find a source but that's a number I remember reading) back then isn't bad by any means.

Best way I can put it is can you legitimatley, unbiasedly(probably not a word) see the likes of Abyss, Styles, Daniels, Roode, Storm headlining a Wrestlemania for WWE?

I can't.

Machismo Fan

flahavaj wrote: »

Best way I can put it is can you legitimatley, unbiasedly(probably not a word) see the likes of Abyss, Styles, Daniels, Roode, Storm headlining a Wrestlemania for WWE?

I can't.

Can you see Sheamus, McIntyre, Ziggler, Swagger, Miz, Rhodes and even Morrison and Kofi to a lesser extent headlining a WrestleMania?

chopperbyrne

pudgey22 wrote: »

So which do, you all who actually watch both, prefer in terms of 1) Wrestling skills
2) Entertainment?
And what channel can i get unedited coverage of WWE??

They're even on wrestling skills, despite what some will say.

On entertainment, with the exception of PPV matches, WWE wins hands down as they actually have sensible booking.

TNA has lots of potential, but every time it looks like they're living up to that potential they do something stupid and it takes them 6-9 months to recover from it.

flahavaj

Machismo Fan wrote: »

Can you see Sheamus, McIntyre, Ziggler, Swagger, Miz, Rhodes and even Morrison and Kofi to a lesser extent headlining a WrestleMania?

Someday, yes.

rossie1977

Machismo Fan wrote: »

Can you see Sheamus, McIntyre, Ziggler, Swagger, Miz, Rhodes and even Morrison and Kofi to a lesser extent headlining a WrestleMania?

its funny i have a bet on with a few friends that sheamus and mcintyre will headline WM30, mcintyre has everything that vince loves, i met him in belfast last week, great attitude, huge guy with a great look, sheamus too, both remind me of orton circa 2002 actually

rossie1977

TheCandystripes wrote: »

TNA has such a strong roster, look at the state the WWE is in now, jack swagger lmao who is that noob?

jacob "jack swagger" hager was one of the top college wrestlers in america when vince signed him up, again the guy has everything vince loves, legit 6'5 260lb. vince isn't going to push swagger straight away after lesnar and lashley bailed on him and with carrot of mma dangling too, swagger will have to prove his loyalty and if he does expect to see a huge star

Machismo Fan

flahavaj wrote: »

Someday, yes.

Then what the hell is the difference between them and AJ for example? AJ's the better wrestler, he's more or less the same height as Ziggler, Kofi and Jo Mo and he can cut a better promo than Morrison and Ziggler and has more personality. For me Roode and Storm are the total package, they can both cut a hell of a promo, they both have personality and they can both wrestle to a really high standard. If any of those three were in WWE people would instantly rate them higher than Ziggler, Kofi or Swagger and that's the only difference, they're not in WWE.

Machismo Fan

rossie1977 wrote: »

jacob "jack swagger" hager was one of the top college wrestlers in america when vince signed him up, again the guy has everything vince loves, legit 6'5 260lb. vince isn't going to push swagger straight away after lesnar and lashley bailed on him and with carrot of mma dangling too, swagger will have to prove his loyalty and if he does expect to see a huge star

Wasn't Swagger JR's last signing? That man has a tremendous eye for talent.

flahavaj

Machismo Fan wrote: »

Then what the hell is the difference between them and AJ for example? AJ's the better wrestler, he's more or less the same height as Ziggler, Kofi and Jo Mo and he can cut a better promo than Morrison and Ziggler and has more personality. For me Roode and Storm are the total package, they can both cut a hell of a promo, they both have personality and they can both wrestle to a really high standard. If any of those three were in WWE people would instantly rate them higher than Ziggler, Kofi or Swagger and that's the only difference, they're not in WWE.

AJ's a midget, legit. If he was in WWE, he'd be treated and booked at about the level Evan Bourne's at.

Machismo Fan

flahavaj wrote: »

AJ's a midget, legit.

AJ's an inch or two shorter than Kofi, Ziggler and Morrison. Storm and Roode then, they're the same height as those three.

flahavaj

Machismo Fan wrote: »

AJ's an inch or two shorter than Kofi, Ziggler and Morrison.

I don't know about that now, I've stoopd beside him and hes TINY. Kofi's a pretty lanky fella.

rossie1977

Machismo Fan wrote: »

Then what the hell is the difference between them and AJ for example? AJ's the better wrestler, he's more or less the same height as Ziggler, Kofi and Jo Mo

morrison and miz are deceptively tall guys, both around 6ft-6ft1, AJs about 5'8

flahavaj

Wiki has AJ down as 5'11". No way in the world thats true, I was towering over him the time I met him, but then again I'm a horse of a man.:pac:

Machismo Fan

rossie1977 wrote: »

morrison and miz are deceptively tall guys, both around 6ft-6ft1, AJs about 5'8

Everywhere I check has AJ listed at 5'10. And then what hope does Bryan Danielson have, he's about the same?

flahavaj

Machismo Fan wrote: »

Everywhere I check has AJ listed at 5'10. And then what hope does Bryan Danielson have, he's about the same?

Very little in fairness.

Like AJ would be, probably Evan Bourne level if hes lucky. Look at Gibson, every bit Danielson's equal, booked like a nobody.

Machismo Fan

flahavaj wrote: »

Very little in fairness.

Like AJ would be, probably Evan Bourne level if hes lucky. Look at Gibson, every bit Danielson's equal, booked like a nobody.

But I was talking about star quality and ability not how they'd be booked (I thought we kind of take it for granted that WWE and TNA can tend to do that pretty badly) and on those terms can you honestly say that Ziggler, Swagger, Kofi and Morrison are better or even more marketable than Styles, Joe, Storm and Roode?

flahavaj

Machismo Fan wrote: »

But I was talking about star quality and ability not how they'd be booked (I thought we kind of take it for granted that WWE and TNA can tend to do that pretty badly) and on those terms can you honestly say that Ziggler, Swagger, Kofi and Morrison are better than Styles, Joe, Storm and Roode?

Star quality is how they'd be perceived by a mainstream audience. They're not conditioned to accepting a guy who looks like AJ. Guys like Roode and Storm would have a chance but I don't think they're any better than anything WWE has bubbling under in the mid-card.

Somebody wastalking about TNA's future being brighter than WWE's. I'd argue that WWE have just as many if not more better prospects for the furture in their arsenal. Especially when guys like Joe/AJ/Daniels are pretty much veterans at this stage and in Joe's case showing serious wear and are hardly spring chickens.

rossie1977

i think there are a couple of things in danielsons favour, first he has friends on the inside and thats always an advantage and second there is a spot there that has been left vacant since benoits death and danielson is the prefect guy to fill that spot

TheCandystripes

:rolleyes:

vince was right he'll feed you marks any crap and you'll lap it up.

you'll be forced to eat humble buy when tna is the worlds leading promotion because its AWESOME.

flahavaj

TheCandystripes wrote: »

:rolleyes:

vince was right he'll feed you marks any crap and you'll lap it up.

you'll be forced to eat humble buy when tna is the worlds leading promotion because its AWESOME.

I love this guy.:pac:

chopperbyrne

TheCandystripes wrote: »

:rolleyes:

vince was right he'll feed you marks any crap and you'll lap it up.

you'll be forced to eat humble buy when tna is the worlds leading promotion because its AWESOME.

How old are you?

jaykhunter

TNA have the potential to be legitimate competition to WWE, but have several HUGE factors working against them. Nobody ever doubted the talent on their roster, just the idiots running/ruining the company.

For an off-the-cuff list of glaring problems/thinking behind TNA's product that suggest TNA (in their current form) can never hope to rise above their current stature : http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=63002830&postcount=21

Saying TNA is the future is wrong, because TNA are holding TNA back. They have too many problems stopping them growing. They've squandered the minor peak in interest earlier this year (ratings jumped from 1.1 to 1.3, and now back in the 1.0-1.1 range)....They've lost dearly this year in the PPV market (Slammiversary got 8,000 buys - WWE usually get around 200,000)

I honestly hope TNA can iron out all of their problems and live up to their potential. TNA doing well will force WWE's product to get better too, competition is good for everyone. Anyone who blindly loves TNA or WWE (i.e. can't see ANY fault with their product) shouldn't be engaged in a debate about it! (Do we have any Americans on the board :D:D just kidding )

That said, I've really enjoyed the last 2 TNA PPVs (Bound For Glory and Turning Point) and hope that the quality of their PPVs continue. I really do.