The Raw King

I would love for all to contribute to this thread. Basically I am going to talk about the pros and cons of both TNA and WWE, and see which one is beter. I want all fo you to add to it.

WWE:
Pros:
-WWE Has the star power, if you look at their roster, it has tremendous names. Triple H, HBK, The Undertaker, John Cena(Although i do believe he is over rated).
-WWE has a strong group of young stars that will hopefully step up soon. We have CM Punk, John Morrison, The Miz, MVP and we had Kennedy.
-WWE Has some of the best broadcasters. Jim Ross and Jerry Lawler are the kings(no pun intended) of broadcasting. TNA's Mike Tenay isnt too bad, but he is no Jim Ross.
-The Money! Vince has got a great deal of money, which just gives the product a better deal.
CONS:
-WWE is currently at a dry and stale place, they dont make new starrs as much as they should. I mean the last real stars they made were John Cena, Orton, Batista and Edge, whom all came from the same exact time zone.
-BOORING! They need to work more on their storylines, or work more on the in ring stuff.
-No CWS! Bring back the crusierwieghts! We need that Human crashing excitement!

TNA!:
Pros:
-Better Wrestling, TNA seems to focus alot more on what happens in the ring then what happens outside of it.
-SHIT LOAD OF YOUNGSTERS! TNA is the company for the new generation. Look at AJ Styles, Daniels, Eric Young and the others in TNA.
-Big Names help Small Names. We see alot of Kurt Angle and Sting putting over the youngsters.
Cons:
-Not good storylines. I give them props, they do try. So good job! They just need to try harder.
-Let the youngsters shine more! Even though TNA does help the young guys out, they dont help them enough.
-Bye Bye Mike Tenay. This guy is annoying. i would rather have Todd Grisham then Mike Tenay.
-Bring in a real authority figure. Mick Foley is just not cutting it.





Anyone agree? Disagree?

__________________

King Steventon

How does TNA have better wrestling? Like, seriously?

Daniels and Styles aren't really what you'd consider youngsters either, though they do have some greenhorns like Terry and Morgan.

Who has Angle really put over? Sting just put over Styles, who else?

__________________

Tommy Platinum

Yeah really. Daniels being young and Sting putting over young guys are two comments which always confuse me. Sting is 50 years old and has only put over one guy. He's also been in the main event of Bound For Glory for the past 4 years, winning 3 of those matches. I personally call that hogging the spotlight and holding down talent.

The only way you could think TNA has better wrestling is if you happen to be a mark for total spotfests with no structure.

__________________

horrorfan_1986

Despite the fluke win, I would say he put over Jay Lethal. Lethal going over Angle should have been a huge moment. The only problem was that TNA failed to capitalize on it. Angle did his part, but TNA dropped the ball.

__________________

Tommy Platinum

Considering it was Angle's 2nd match of the night and he was focusing on his World Title match later in the night, I'd say you're being very generous.

__________________

horrorfan_1986

The first match was pretty much a handicap match against Ron Killings. Not to mention it was barely five minutes long. I highly doubt it took too much energy out of Angle.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 20 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

__________________

Tommy Platinum

Well it was still booked to look like the only reason Lethal won was that Angle had to wrestle three times. He clearly wouldn't be concentrating on Lethal when he had to defend his World Title later in the night. All that combined with the finish makes it a pretty cheap way to put somebody over. I'd call that overprotected, and if it was Triple H everybody would complain.

__________________

King Steventon

Why do I remember you saying the exact opposite like this time last year?

__________________

horrorfan_1986

We're not just talking about any dime a dozen wrestler. This was Kurt Angle, the guy TNA was making out to be the best wrestler in the company's history. He had a tag match with lowcarder and a football player who couldn't actually get physical, a second match against an X-Division wrestler who was fighting to just be considered a midcarder and finally a main event against a midcarder who maybe once a year gets thrown in a main event (TNA's version of Kane). Maybe it's not something that would of been easy for the common TNA wrestler, but for the "Best wrestler of all time" it was very possible to win.

The match was good, despite not being as great as some members of the IWC made it out to be. But it was also Jay Lethal's highest profile match of his career. Winning was a great opportunity to push him hard. Seeing how Angle was several rungs higher than him, Lethal looked great even if it wasn't a dominant win.

__________________

horrorfan_1986

Opinions change and at times I become less hostile towards shit. Personally, my argument last year was flawed. Everything I pointed out already in this thread discredits what I said before.

__________________