Bound for Glory: Is it convincing as the Wrestlemania of TNA?

Tommy Platinum · 04-22-2008, 08:16 PM

Bound For Glory is now firmly established as TNA's premier PPV, as TNA's equivalent of Wrestlemania. Card wise, the show is usually stacked and is therefore convincing as the top PPV. Last year especially, I felt it was a thoroughly good show throughout, especially the very good Cage v Joe match.

However, the main thing about Wrestlemania is that it defines eras, creates great moments which stand the test of time, and puts over new stars, or at least helps to create them. We all know the examples of new eras being introduced (HBK winning at WM 12 etc) and immortal moments being produced (Hogan/Andre etc)

TNA's booking of Bound for Glory, especially the latest, and in particular the main event, ruined this feeling that we are seeing history made in the company. Sting winning the title, in a fairly good but not classic match, and then losing it immediately, really cheapened both the TNA title and Bound for Glory as a PPV.

Do you agree? Are TNA even trying to make it a Wrestlemania style PPV, or just the PPV with the strongest card?

Flip · 04-22-2008, 11:04 PM

TNA is still new, and I think they've only had 3 or 4 Bound for Glory's. It is kind of like Wrestlemania but it is still different. It features the biggest main event possible for that year. For example: Sting vs Jarret and Sting vs Angle. Both matches were very good and so were the undercards.

It is their biggest pay-per-view of the year, but it doesn't have to put over the new talent. Obviously TNA isn't trying to put over as much young talent at this time. They're still trying to get their name out, so building new stars shouldn't be a main concern right now. Having Sting vs Angle in the main event is a huge draw. I'd say maybe in 3 years they should worry about putting over young stars if they have big crowd base.

But at this time, Bound For Glory is where they put on the best show they can.

Tommy Platinum · 04-23-2008, 09:10 AM

Do you not think that Angle losing and winning it back immediately harmed that though?

Flip · 04-23-2008, 10:18 PM

Harmed what?

It may harm the importance of the match, seeing as how Angle only lost the belt for 2 weeks. But they did put on one hell of match at Bound For Glory, and they gave the fans what they wanted. I think it was better to have the face win, even though he would lose it 2 weeks later. It was the main event at the biggest TNA PPV of the year and they wanted it to be a happy ending. No one knew at the time that Sting was only going to lose the title two weeks later.

Bound for Glory: Is it convincing as the Wrestlemania of TNA?

This is a discussion on Bound for Glory: Is it convincing as the Wrestlemania of TNA? within the TNA Discussion forums, part of the Wrestling Forums category; Bound For Glory is now firmly established as TNA's premier PPV, as TNA's equivalent of Wrestlemania. Card wise, the show ...