TNA Over WWE!

Mikk · 08-15-2005, 11:09 PM

Why, in my opinion, TNA is currently better viewing than WWE.

First, these are only my feelings on this, do not take offence or anything personal, there my views.

So in TNA at the moment, we have proper wrestling and decent matches. In WWE we are seeing the same things repeated time and time again and the new writers they have employed seem to be trying to turn it into an actual soap opera with occasional wrestling thrown in. WWE does have the talent to produce good entertainment but when most of the show is filled with nothing but mindless talking and segments that donâ€™t need to last as long as they do and then throw a 5 minute match into it to break up all the segments, it gets boring. TNA however is pretty much all action partly because they only have a 50 minute show. But in those 50 minutes there is more wrestling than 2 hours of raw and smack down.

TNA also uses its talent correctly, WWE has stuck a number of good stars and turned them into useless chumps, e.g. Super Crazy, Simon Dean, Chavo Guerrero, Frankie Kazarian {now looks to be leaving}

They may be getting exposure on TV but none of them are challenging for even the cruiserweight title which is a big mistake. I mean they currently have the strap on Nunzio, give it to one of the mexicools and let them fight between each other over the title and throw others into the mix.

Although TNA only has 2 singles titles, the feuds surrounding them are good, I mean take the x-division tournament eventually won by Samoa Joe, excellent entertainment in all the matches and ended up pushing a new comer to TNA to possibly de-throne Christopher Daniels. And this is where TNA is going right, there pushing the new talent they acquire. Rhino has shot to the main event but that is because he was WWE and a massive signing for TNA.

TNA have though had and invented some incredible matches. King of the Mountain, Ultimate X, Six Sides Of Steel {I know a cage but bigger} and with these they have done things that WWE would be scared to do. Elix Skipper comes to mind in the Six Sides Of Steel.

This kind of proves to me TNA is a credible competition to WWE in the next few years, and TNA has wrestlers people want to see and donâ€™t mind there stars going to places like ROH and other independent feds and that is a good thing because it improves them and produces a better quality wrestler when they appear on TV, unlike WWE who have house shows and have there wrestlers fight the same people night in night out.

TNA Is expanding fast and its not going to be long before we see it rival WWE.

Those are my thoughts, thank you for reading.

K Jay · 08-16-2005, 03:44 PM

I dont think anyone could possibly argue with this post... however your sig is a different matter.

Jackie Pies · 08-16-2005, 04:54 PM

haha, yeah, I was gonna put that I agree w/ everything in that post except the lovely Christy part. ha ha, even though that pic is likely the best Christy pic I've ever seen.
but I agree, TNA is pretty good about pushing a variety of guys w/out switching the title over too often.
I may not be a huge shocker or samoa joe fan, but I recognize their talent and I see why new guys (who aren't always WWE rejects as someone else pointed out) like this are pushed.

hell, even Sharkboy matches are becoming more interesting than about 75% of the stuff on WWE.

Tyler Durden · 08-16-2005, 05:02 PM

I absolutely love watching the TNA PPV's, for a fan of wrestling they are very good. However, in terms of putting them over WWE.....nah. WWE puts on about four hours of new television each week and has a demanding house show circuit. They simply can't afford for their contracted performers to pick up injuries wrestling a higher risk style so often. I enjoy TNA but putting it above WWE has to be "qualified".

Brandon · 08-16-2005, 05:37 PM

I still like WWE better because they have most of the people I love like Triple H, HBK, Shelton, Jericho, Angle, etc..

However, The TNA PPVs are very good..I've seen most of them. I saw the one on Sunday and that was also pretty decent. I don't like Shocker, but I love Samoa Joe. That guy has talent.

And of course, I love AJ, Petey, Daniels, Sabin, Shelley, etc..so I do like TNA. They have come a long way in a short period of time. And I'm happy they aren't bringing in old WWE guys anymore. Rhino was a good signing. I don't want to see the likes of Hall, Nash, DDP, they have nothing left to offer the business.

Dr. Giganto · 08-16-2005, 06:00 PM

While I agree with the overall gist of your post, I will offer the flipside to it

The main advantage that WWE has is in its production. Its simply a crisper, better-produced show, because they have the money/resources to do so

History is also an advantage. When discussing WWE, we can discuss Hogan, Sammartino, Macho Man, Foley, etc. Since it is still a new company, TNA doesnt have the history that WWE has, and they cant play off of it, like WWE did on Monday night with HBL/Bret

Plus, they have HHH. And he's the best ever

Mikk · 08-16-2005, 09:02 PM

I do see what you mean about the history of TNA. TNA as a company has only been running a few years but the NWA has been around since 1948 and i think that history can match wwe's any day.

Oh and the banner has been changed.

TNA Over WWE!

This is a discussion on TNA Over WWE! within the TNA Discussion forums, part of the Wrestling Forums category; Why, in my opinion, TNA is currently better viewing than WWE. First, these are only my feelings on this, do ...