This is a discussion on TNA vs ECW within the TNA Discussion forums, part of the Wrestling Forums category; I was just watching a bit of Lockdown PPV, we get quite a bit of TNA over here but not ...
Welcome to Wrestling Clique Wrestling Forums
Hello and Welcome to WrestlingClique - Wrestling Forums!
We are the premier wrestling forum and your source for wrestling news and rumors, wrestling divas, wrestling gifs, sports discussion, e-feds, writing and more. Wrestling fans participate in active discussion on all the major wrestling leagues and events including WWE, ECW & TNA pay per view events, live wrestling streams, wrestling video games, collectibles, and other wrestling related products and services.
You're currently viewing our site as an unregistered guest which means you are limited to most discussions and features.
Take a few minutes to browse around, and if you like what you see, Register a free account to gain access to :
• Richer content, access forums that are not viewable by the public.
• Complete access to post topics, respond to polls, communicate privately (PM), take part contests, arcade, photo sharing, networking, groups.
• Create your personal profile and bio
• Meet and Chat Live with other members who share similar interests
Registration is simple and fast. Won't take you more than a minute and of course it's completely free.
So Join our Community today!
Location: Gated residence 40 miles outside London.
Posts: 17,601
vCash: 500
Rep Power: 141
TNA vs ECW
I was just watching a bit of Lockdown PPV, we get quite a bit of TNA over here but not real up to date stuff. Just got me thinking about the similarities between ECW and TNA. The financial problems, the smaller performers, the smaller fixed arena, the use of cruiserweights. Apart from real hardcore stuff and being able to do more risque things like they did in ECW I actually feel there are a lot of similarities between the two. To those who have seen both companies how would you compare them? Did you enjoy one a lot more than the other, and why?
__________________ A throne is just a bench wrapped in velvet
I was just watching a bit of Lockdown PPV, we get quite a bit of TNA over here but not real up to date stuff. Just got me thinking about the similarities between ECW and TNA. The financial problems, the smaller performers, the smaller fixed arena, the use of cruiserweights. Apart from real hardcore stuff and being able to do more risque things like they did in ECW I actually feel there are a lot of similarities between the two. To those who have seen both companies how would you compare them? Did you enjoy one a lot more than the other, and why?
Dont seem that similar to me. A ton of ECW storylines were very risky, and it was a ton of hardcore crap.
I do agree they are similar in mexican cruiserweights etc...
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
I think that TNA is a toned down version of ECW, in terms of storylines and hardcore action. The atitude of the wrestlers is very similar, in that they go out and give 100% and go balls to the wall every time. I think that ECW was more influential on the entire industry in their first 3 years than TNA has been in theirs. I think it would be very hard for any company to come to near to ECW in terms of action, truely original storylines and the passion of their fans. But then I am a self confessed ECW mark, so I am bias
I think they were more alike whe TNA was nothing but PPVs and could do anything they wanted every week and not have to worry.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. - To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. - To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. - To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. - To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. - To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. - To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. - To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
They are simliar in the points that Bulldog brought up, but from an in-ring standpoint it is like night and day.
TNA brings wrestling back to a time of rankings and belts being the feud. TNA doesn't really have storylines other than guy A fighting guy B for the title, etc.
ECW was innovative. You mention the hardcore style, the risky storylines (or shock tv) and the mexican lucha libre. They also brought the new fast paced technical aspect into the fold. Guys like Angle and maybe even Shelton Benjamin would be examples of this that we see today. ECW also had a lot of poor booking, but for the most part Paul was a genius and way ahead of his time. WWE should use him in some capacity at all times. Just don't let him run anything to do with Financial issues.
I liked ECW a lot better, but TNA is ok and was a nice alternative to WWE while WWE was struggling. But now WWE is getting alot better and with TNA having no tv deal as of yet, it's going to be a hell of a lot harder for me to follow that brand.
Linear Mode
