Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Jeff Hardy Heel
Options
-
18-11-2010 11:40pm#1Ok i've deliberately not made a comment on this till i gave it a chance to run for a bit as to give it a fair shake.
have to say i'm loving it - it really is a fresh departure for him.
he's not going for the usual just shouting i hate you at fans - he's going for the quiet sly psychopath angle that jake the snake was the best at. and anyone whos familiar with my posts will know i consider that to be no bad thing.
now a lot has been made of the belt issue and i actually like that too as it suits the angle that he is to have no respect for the title the company or anyone else and is just on an ego trip. so that it seems to be pissing everyone off is i think what is intended.
ok so i dont mean to be bigging up the decision making and booking of hogan/bischoff/russo but there are certain parts of this i like so far. other parts of it annoy me greatly but the hardy bit is working well thus far.
i would however like to see him established as more the focus of the group rather than bischoff who seems to be directing traffic - i'd love him to oust hogan from the group eventually and really come off as a twisted genius. i read somewhere that someone compared him to the joker(the heath ledger version) and i think it might not be a bad idea character wise well parts anyways i dont want hardy blowing up buildings and dressing as a nurse. but i think people are a little too willing to just crap on it cause its a TNA idea and some of their booking temps to be moronic.
anyways apologies if tis incoherent as i'm typing this and watching tv at the same time - just my 2 cents is all.2
Comments
-
good piece. I think once you get over the stupidity of turning Hardy heel (your biggest face aka money-spinner, without anyone to fill the void), creatively it's actually been pretty decent; far better than I'd thought TNA would have done. His promos are much better than usual, it's a whole new edge to him. He wrestles like a heel too. Made the best of a poor decision IMO.0
-
It has been a dismal fail. Hardy is not good enough to pull off a heel character and he has shown that. Only 300 people I think showed up to a house show with him on the card which says it all really. No one wants to see Hardy as a heel and when you have him coming out the next night after the heel turn saying rubbish like 'some people call me the antichrist of wrestling' (who the f*ck said that about him?) then it tells you how much thought and planning has gone into it.0
-
jaykhunter wrote: »good piece. I think once you get over the stupidity of turning Hardy heel (your biggest face aka money-spinner, without anyone to fill the void), creatively it's actually been pretty decent; far better than I'd thought TNA would have done. His promos are much better than usual, it's a whole new edge to him. He wrestles like a heel too. Made the best of a poor decision IMO.
It's not like Hardy really affected business for TNA at all though so it wasn't really that bad a decision - I doubt house show business now would be any different were Hardy a face and if it were it would only be marginal. While commercially it's made no difference to TNA, it's been all round quite entertaining. Hardy seems to revel in the character and his promos (particularly the eerie, almost robotic ones) have been very good. The iMPACT! Zone are even turning on him (particularly this week against Raven).0 -
bit early to be labeling it a dismal failure - i mean jesus its only in its infancy - all wrestlers and promotions feed lines like that out. its just a tag they can use - its far from the worse thing about the whole angle - i would agree that the angle suffers from a strong counter point to him - which agin isn't really TNA's fault as it was supposed to be anderson and his concussion put the boots to that - ironic i suppose seeing as how it was hardy that inadvertantly might have hurt his own heel turn by taking out his opposite number - although give morgan a chance sure why not?
i would offer that maybe styles should have been the one to turn face as myself included nearly all the fans really want to cheer for him - but having said that he has become a lot more comfortable as a heel in the last few months.
then in an effort to fill the void left by styles have moved mrgan up to a leadership type role - thus pissing off kaz and etc...... sorry off topic there.
but again i bring up the fact that the faults in his heel turn are not his per say but in the pushing or marketing of him - but there is a sense of just doing a hogan turn again in that they just did it to be contraversial rather than doing it cause its what his character or storyline wise - i just think that if it was in the wwe peole would not have been half as quick to condem it i recall things like punk & coles heel turns for example being given a bit of time to mature and develop.
i'm not saying everyone here but it just seems people are far too quick to condem it - i even say people giving out about turning point - not having seen it and baseing their opinion on a spoiler report and i've read a couple different ones of it and they couldnt have told a more diferent story but having watched it myself it was not bad at all - ok the rvd dreamer match kind of killed the crowd a bit but they were working on the fly when dreamer broke his wrist - but the rest of the card was solid. ( damn tangent again, sorry)
i just think he's doing well so far and i do see in him the potential to be good in this role - i really enjoyed punks heel work in the last year and i think jeff is going for something similar.0 -
It's not too early to dismiss a terrible idea. The public already have. The ratings for the show after the heel turn were telling. They dropped faster than Brian Cowen's approval rating. They won't be able to salvage this and it won't win them fans or make them money. It's a fail.0
-
Advertisement
-
i just think he's doing well so far and i do see in him the potential to be good in this role - i really enjoyed punks heel work in the last year and i think jeff is going for something similar.
What'll help him down the line is that he has a lot of top faces to work with - Angle, Anderson, RVD and even Sting should make his work load a lot easier than it was against a newly turned Morgan (though even that match might go better at Final Resolution as the crowd seem to be rallying behind Morgan and the booking of him has been strong lately). He won't have to work as hard to get heat against them. Overall I'm enjoying it so far and being honest his promos and little subtle gestures have been a highlight of iMPACT! for me in recent weeks.Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »It's not too early to dismiss a terrible idea. The public already have. The ratings for the show after the heel turn were telling. They dropped faster than Brian Cowen's approval rating. They won't be able to salvage this and it won't win them fans or make them money. It's a fail.
TNA's rating will never change under the current regime. Hardy and Immortal held the really strong rating on the first show post-BFG, it was the rest of the show that turned people off. Hardy can't be blamed for that.0 -
Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »It's not too early to dismiss a terrible idea. The public already have. The ratings for the show after the heel turn were telling. They dropped faster than Brian Cowen's approval rating. They won't be able to salvage this and it won't win them fans or make them money. It's a fail.
haha love the cowen reference. i see what you mean though but i'd just be a little more willing to see how it goes. like if he had a really strong counter point to him then you'd generate some serious interest - anderson and indeed sting when he wants to be are excellent on the mike and can generate good crowd buzz.
i actually think if they do this right they can elevate some of the TNA originals to bona fida main eventers.
ok tangent warning - its becoming a bit of a recurrent theme in my posts my apologies about that - right here it goes. hardy goes out of his way to destroy everything TNA so starts eliminating all TNA people - refs, security, backstage heads, announcers, slowly and quietly moves through the active roster. nobody notices this and one day storm and styles are talking about how they are TNA originals and hardy smirks and says thats right you are! and laughs or something and then engineers to get rid of them. but right i'm thinking that storm be the one to be sacrificed and then the rest of them stay aligned to hardy out of fear and he's all smug and happy with himself. then have storm rally all the old TNA originals together to attack him and try to take back TNA have a big blowout brawl spanning over a few weeks and keep ruining hardys matches and plans eventually have a match between storm and hardy if storm wins the originals win back their contracts if not they **** off for good or some other forefit - then in the deciding match have roode who had previously been nothing but loyal to hardy turn on him for his old tag team partner and then split the roster in two and have one funded by dixie one by bischoff/hogan/ hardy and hopefully create yourselfs some new main eventers - preferably roode and storm as i think they have all the skills to do it - one of the ideas i had was like beer money win the tag straps and hardy is still world champ have either jarrett abyss or whoever as the TV or whatever they are calling it then put all 3 titles up for grabs in an tag team elimination either ladder or steel cage or whatever give them like a good 45mins - 1hour - have beer money go over - new champs - big draw! hopefully - well in my head it works anyway -
sorry mad tangent just kinda poured out of my brain on to the keyboard0 -
Machismo Fan wrote: »TNA's rating will never change under the current regime. Hardy and Immortal held the really strong rating on the first show post-BFG, it was the rest of the show that turned people off. Hardy can't be blamed for that.
But the people who tuned in to see Hardy never returned in the following week. Are you suggesting that other aspects of the show are responsible for the hundreds of thousands of viewers who tuned in only to never come back? I wouldn't blame Hardy for being a turn off in the sense that it's not his fault he sucks in the role. I feel he is a great babyface who should have been pushed hugely as one but, as you say, the current regime won't be capable of improving matters long-term.ayatollah wrote:haha love the cowen reference. i see what you mean though but i'd just be a little more willing to see how it goes. like if he had a really strong counter point to him then you'd generate some serious interest - anderson and indeed sting when he wants to be are excellent on the mike and can generate good crowd buzz.
i actually think if they do this right they can elevate some of the TNA originals to bona fida main eventers.
Main eventers in a TNA sense? I don't think that counts for a lot. None of the TNA originals ever became stars in the mainstream. Joe was probably their best chance all those years back and they messed it up. Hardy was a great coup for the company, one of WWE's top guys, yet they have turned him heel thus destroying the chance of him being a draw for the younger fans. The only ones who will perceive him as 'cool' now are the ones who probably didn't hate the guy in the first place and would have accepted him as he was. I think turning him heel was a catastrophic error even by TNA standards.
They generated an interest in the heel turn the first week more out of shocked bewilderment, like WWE would experience if Rey turned heel, and just as I'm sure would happen if WWE were dumb enough to do that (and I doubt they are), people have tuned out.
It's the dumbest heel turn I can ever recall. People often cite Austin turning heel in 2001 as a dumb move because it lost the WWE money and people never accepted the turn. I take that point on board but at least the WWE were making some money and Austin could be entertaining in the role. In TNA's case, they are losing money and have turned one of their most popular guys into a villain, and he is nowhere near capable of being an entertaining heel on the scale of a heel Austin.
My prediction is that he will be turned babyface some time in early to mid 2011, assuming he is there, and that the whole sorry angle will be quickly forgotten about. Before that we'll probably have to face some silly storyline with his brother ('The Angelic Diablo') vs Jeff ('The Antichrist'). I don't see that having any substantial long-term positive gain and so they will likely turn the two into the Hardy Boyz team again. It's just an endless cycle of illogical Russo sh*t, wash it off, then do it again.0 -
wow MNG you really hate heel Hardy :pac: you're all over this thread!0
-
jaykhunter wrote: »wow MNG you really hate heel Hardy :pac: you're all over this thread!
HA he is like the Boards Antichrist
0 -
Advertisement
-
Furious-Red wrote: »HA he is like the Boards Antichrist
My heel turn will be way more epic. :pac:0 -
Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »But the people who tuned in to see Hardy never returned in the following week. Are you suggesting that other aspects of the show are responsible for the hundreds of thousands of viewers who tuned in only to never come back? I wouldn't blame Hardy for being a turn off in the sense that it's not his fault he sucks in the role. I feel he is a great babyface who should have been pushed hugely as one but, as you say, the current regime won't be capable of improving matters long-term.
Yes. Because Hardy is clearly quite good in the role, it was the rest of the product that turned people away - the numbers support that.
http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/TNA_News_1/article_44551.shtmlFirst Hour Break Down
Impact opened with a 1.53 rating in Q1 and continued to a 1.52 rating in Q2. After the peak level of the show, Impact dropped to a 1.41 rating in Q3 for the backstage segment with Dixie Carter, Bischoff, and Hogan.
Impact then increased slightly to a 1.42 rating in Q4 for the first match of the show with the five-second Knockouts Title change, followed by backstage footage of JWoww interacting with the Beautiful People.
Second Hour Break Down
The second hour opened with a slight increase to a 1.43 rating in Q5. It was the peak rating for the second hour with the Jeff Jarrett and Kurt Angle confrontation.
From there, Impact dropped to a 1.35 rating in Q6 for the non-hyped Samoa Joe vs. Abyss match and Bischoff's backstage segment with Miss T. and Anderson.
In Q7, Impact increased slightly to a 1.37 rating for the unhyped Fortune vs. The Pope handicap match and the beginning of "The Shore" segment.
Impact then bottomed-out in Q8 with a 1.23 rating in Q8, dropping from the 1.37 rating in the previous quarter-hour. Q8 featured JWoww's appearance on the show confronting "The Shore" and two commercial breaks leading to the Impact over-run/Reaction start.
Hardy and Immortal held the audience into the second quarter hour and the rest of the show drove them away, never to come back. No matter how good a particular angle is in TNA, the rest of the show will drive people away - so the Hardy turn is not the failure - the rest of the product is.0 -
oh god hardy as a heel is brutal in tna he just cant pull it off he and the stupid belt look retarded0
-
Machismo Fan wrote: »Yes. Because Hardy is clearly quite good in the role, it was the rest of the product that turned people away - the numbers support that.
http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/TNA_News_1/article_44551.shtml
Hardy and Immortal held the audience into the second quarter hour and the rest of the show drove them away, never to come back. No matter how good a particular angle is in TNA, the rest of the show will drive people away - so the Hardy turn is not the failure - the rest of the product is.
You say Hardy is clearly quite good in the role yet the extra viewers who were tuning in had not yet seen him in the role. That was why they had tuned in - out of grim fascination to see how it would pan out. It worked so fantastically well that these extra viewers have not come back since. Post up the ratings from successive weeks and we will see how truly successful it was.
You are giving the Hardy heel turn a free pass and blaming the exodus of viewers on the rest of the show but they are all written by the same group of clowns. The Hardy heel turn is a product of the product. If it had worked more viewers would have braved the other crap to see if he would appear again, or would have returned in later weeks. The conclusion I would therefore draw is that it has been the epic fail most expected it to be.0 -
Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »You say Hardy is clearly quite good in the role yet the extra viewers who were tuning in had not yet seen him in the role. That was why they had tuned in - out of grim fascination to see how it would pan out. It worked so fantastically well that these extra viewers have not come back since. Post up the ratings from successive weeks and we will see how truly successful it was.
You are giving the Hardy heel turn a free pass and blaming the exodus of viewers on the rest of the show but they are all written by the same group of clowns. The Hardy heel turn is a product of the product. If it had worked more viewers would have braved the other crap to see if he would appear again, or would have returned in later weeks. The conclusion I would therefore draw is that it has been the epic fail most expected it to be.
Not at all, people won't watch 100 minutes of crap to see 20 minutes or less of something good.0 -
Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »You are giving the Hardy heel turn a free pass and blaming the exodus of viewers on the rest of the show but they are all written by the same group of clowns.
Yet you watch it so what does that say?Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »The Hardy heel turn is a product of the product. If it had worked more viewers would have braved the other crap to see if he would appear again, or would have returned in later weeks. The conclusion I would therefore draw is that it has been the epic fail most expected it to be.
How could it be an 'epic fail most expected it to be' if no one seen it coming?
You cant write something off when its a few weeks old as an epic fail? Considering the fact you believe he is so bad in the role means he must have you watching for a start?0 -
Yet you watch it so what does that say?
I haven't watched since the episode after the turn. I keep aware of the general gist of things by reading reports as I'm a fan of many of the guys on the roster and fascinated how a company losing money and turning out such shoddy writing can still keep the same fools employed.HBK wrote:How could it be an 'epic fail most expected it to be' if no one seen it coming?
You cant write something off when its a few weeks old as an epic fail? Considering the fact you believe he is so bad in the role means he must have you watching for a start?
The heel turn flopping was what most people expected when they saw it. Have a read of the reaction on this site and elsewhere.
Of course you can write off something terrible that quickly. The fact it's a few weeks old doesn't negate it being an epic fail. If the WWE turned Rey heel I wouldn't need to give it time to realise it was a shockingly stupid decision due to how over he is with younger fans and the fact he is cut out to be a babyface.
On your third point see what I said at the beginning. There is a will amongst most fans to see TNA do well and for there to be competition in the industry. Unfortunately the show is written by clueless jokers like Russo who will never take the company in the right direction. Defending the poor writing is counter-productive.0 -
Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »I haven't watched since the episode after the turn.
Then how can you reasonably judge how well Hardy is doing in the role?0 -
Machismo Fan wrote: »Then how can you reasonably judge how well Hardy is doing in the role?
Your question implies that my judgement on the turn is not reasonable because I am not giving it more time. I have already explained that I feel the following night after the turn vindicated my initial suspicions on how it would turn out. Reading subsequent reports and listening to those who are watching it further confirms to me that I am right to be avoiding the show at the minute.0 -
Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »Your question implies that my judgement on the turn is not reasonable because I am not giving it more time. I have already explained that I feel the following night after the turn vindicated my initial suspicions on how it would turn out. Reading subsequent reports and listening to those who are watching it further confirms to me that I am right to be avoiding the show at the minute.
No, business wise Hardy's turn has made no difference - there's no question about that. But you said earlier:Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »I wouldn't blame Hardy for being a turn off in the sense that it's not his fault he sucks in the role.
How do you know that Hardy sucks in the role if you've only watched one week out of six? Most people seem to agree that Hardy's done a pretty good job so far and will only get better when opposing stronger more established babyfaces.0 -
Advertisement
-
Machismo Fan wrote: »No, business wise Hardy's turn has made no difference - there's no question about that. But you said earlier:
How do you know that Hardy sucks in the role if you've only watched one week out of six? Most people seem to agree that Hardy's done a pretty good job so far and will only get better when opposing stronger more established babyfaces.
Again you seem to think that I need to give this angle more time before crapping over it. I have seen enough - just like the hundreds of thousands of Americans who never came back to watch after the initial buzz compelled them to tune in the night after the turn. Doing a pretty good job and facing more established babyfaces won't take the company forward. House show attendances are down and ratings are what they were before Hogan and others came in on their fat contracts. A recipe for disaster.
I'll put it like this - if I submit 6 chapters of a book idea to several publishers and they all hate the first chapter and therefore refuse to read the rest, whether the other chapters are better becomes irrelevant. I have already lost the sale.
TNA can try and persist with the heel turn and Hardy may well get better in the role but he is not going to be a better heel than he is a babyface, he is not going to be as HELPFUL to the company as a heel, and ultimately the company will gain nothing from this.0 -
Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »Again you seem to think that I need to give this angle more time before crapping over it. I have seen enough - just like the hundreds of thousands of Americans who never came back to watch after the initial buzz compelled them to tune in the night after the turn. Doing a pretty good job and facing more established babyfaces won't take the company forward. House show attendances are down and ratings are what they were before Hogan and others came in on their fat contracts. A recipe for disaster.
I'll put it like this - if I submit 6 chapters of a book idea to several publishers and they all hate the first chapter and therefore refuse to read the rest, whether the other chapters are better becomes irrelevant. I have already lost the sale.
TNA can try and persist with the heel turn and Hardy may well get better in the role but he is not going to be a better heel than he is a babyface, he is not going to be as HELPFUL to the company as a heel, and ultimately the company will gain nothing from this.
But he wasn't helpful as a face either as they had no idea how to use him. TNA's house shows took a similar slump this time last year with Styles vs. Daniels vs. Joe in the main events (which is probably why TNA don't have anymore house shows this year).
It wasn't Hardy that drove people away - I've illustrated that. People were willing to give Immortal a chance and it seemed to hold their interest but the rest of the show (the same show these people most likely gave up on before) is what drove them away. With TNA under the current creative regime, business will not change - that's a fact. They've proven themselves incompetent time and time again over the last four years, so when it comes to TNA all you can hope for is a bit of entertaining TV and some good characters and I think Hardy's segments tick both those boxes. Hardy did a good job of the post-BFG show and he's done a good job on every show since - problem is they still haven't built the show around him like they should have - he's been reduced to mere cameos most weeks.0 -
Machismo Fan wrote: »But he wasn't helpful as a face either as they had no idea how to use him. TNA's house shows took a similar slump this time last year with Styles vs. Daniels vs. Joe in the main events (which is probably why TNA don't have anymore house shows this year).
It wasn't Hardy that drove people away - I've illustrated that. People were willing to give Immortal a chance and it seemed to hold their interest but the rest of the show (the same show these people most likely gave up on before) is what drove them away. With TNA under the current creative regime, business will not change - that's a fact. They've proven themselves incompetent time and time again over the last four years, so when it comes to TNA all you can hope for is a bit of entertaining TV and some good characters and I think Hardy's segments tick both those boxes. Hardy did a good job of the post-BFG show and he's done a good job on every show since - problem is they still haven't built the show around him like they should have - he's been reduced to mere cameos most weeks.
He was their most popular guy in terms of fan interaction events wasn't he? He also had a great match with Angle earlier in the year that was ruined by the usual whackiness. Sure he could have been utilised better (what guy there couldn't?) but a heel turn wasn't required in this instance.
I don't get how you can defend the Hardy/Immortal stuff and yet acknowledge that the creative team are dropping the ball.
I've said plenty on this already so I'll wrap up my view on it. It seems to me that TNA have a core audience around the 1.0-1.2 level. An audience that would watch even if Hogan and Hardy left tomorrow. As a result I don't see the point in storylines that won't attract any new viewers and which only serve to play into the kind of short-term thinking that the company has been doing for years, and which has kept them at the level they are at. There is a desire to see the company do better for the sake of wrestling as a whole but booking for the sake of shocks and swerves, heavy emphasis on guys who ought to be out of the limelight, tactics and strategies that worked in an era that's now gone (NWO etc.) all this stuff does is keep TNA in the rut it has been in for yonks.
To me, TNA play to the TNA audience and not to the wrestling fan audience. In other words they serve up this stuff that the hardcore fans will watch anyway and don't think outside the box and think of how they can get those extra hundreds of thousands watching.
They acquired a major WWE star in Hardy, who was over huge with the wrestling fan audience, and they made him into just another unimportant TNA guy. Now he is a heel. Any momentum he may have brought is gone and the company which has failed to make a genuine star in all these years have managed to go and spoil one that had been made elsewhere. The only way things will change is if the loyal fans recognise this tripe for what it is and force changes.0 -
And it all comes back to the problem that's plagued TNA since it's very inception - the booking. I don't care if they turn Hardy heel, I don't care what they do as long as they do it right, which the current regime has never done. Nobody will truly know if a well executed Hardy turn with him being the focus of the show and with a good overall product to back it up would've worked. It's not a problem with Hardy's performance nor is it a problem with turning him heel (because lets be honest they weren't using him in a way to expand the company anyway) - it all goes back to the failure of the booking team. I'll never know why Dixie keeps them around because she can't be that oblivious to the facts, but they need to go.0
-
Im actually enjoying Hardys turn , i was kinda skeptical at first but imo he is pulling it off. What they have done right is not to have him do the usual big heel turn and come out and talk crap about everyone for ages , they seem to be doing the quick promos which really work because they hide the fact that Hardy is not great on the mic and they are only a few seconds long helps.
The only thing he needs to do is get a few more moves since all he does is twist of hates loads of times0 -
I am liking it as well. I think he pulls off the disturbed emo quite well tbh. Its very early days, far too early to decide whether it is a success or a failure, but it is most certainly off to a decent start.0
-
I am liking it as well. I think he pulls off the disturbed emo quite well tbh. Its very early days, far too early to decide whether it is a success or a failure, but it is most certainly off to a decent start.
Nothing more hateable than a disturbed emo, can't believes no ones thought of the gimmick before tbh.0 -
Hardy has had a great run as a heel, and is doing much better on the mic than he ever did as a face. I did a piece for a future issue of FSM on the Hardy heel turn and why it's a good idea for TNA and Jeff, so when that's out I recomend checking it out (BANG BANG!)0
-
**** red i see you're heading to the gaslight anthem - heading there myself - just checking bus times here - should be an epic gig!0
-
Advertisement
-
the problem with heel-turning Hardy is they had to get rid of most of his aerial moves, which is struggling to impress without. The Tutenkhamun-Orlando Jordan hybrid belt doesnt do him any favours.
The one good thing that has come out of it is the Morgan face turn, he's been owning the crowd0
Advertisement