TNA's wrestling is overrated. Yes, I'm being serious. Mainly, its the wrestling style they fight. You do get some phenomenal matches in TNA, don't get me wrong, but on the whole their style of wrestling annoys me. Its not just that they portray people to be spot-monkeys (cause they overuse spots a lot), but its the lesser wrestlers. There is no psychology in the ring. Someone does a drop-toe-hold, then jumps to put them in a hammerlock before breaking the hammerlock and going into a headlock. Where's the purpose in that? And it happens all the time. Its weird, because in RoH the same superstars would have done drop-toe-hold and then probably a headlock or a leg lock. Guys in TNA generally have good chemistry together, I'll give them that. However, there is a serious lack in selling. Lots of guys in TNA will take a suplex and get up straight after. Yes it makes the match more fast and pretty and entertaining, but where's the selling in that? Its like getting punched in the face and saying "doesn't hurt". Suplexes are done so that the damage is minimal - so you could easily get up quickly if the Suplex was done as professional wrestling intends. But that's not selling the move. This is mainly why I'd rather watch Smackdown than iMPACT.
I want TNA to do well, and I think they will. They have good matches, but they have to drift away from almost every match being pretty wrestling with perfectly timed manouevers and move onto good psychological mat wrestling.
Don't agree?
Prove me wrong.
0
Stu's Prove Me Wrong Segment - Part 2
Started by
Guest_Stu_*
, Jan 05 2007 06:45 PM
3 replies to this topic
#2
magi9088
-
- Code-X Member
-
- 2,085 posts
Code X's Spirit Squad Mark
- Gender:Male
- Location:New Orleans, Louisiana
Posted 06 January 2007 - 03:21 AM
I agree with you, but I'll give it a shot at disproving you.
Basically, in TNA, they are time constrained ... severely. Now, in order for them to set up the amazing 3 hour PPV's that they put on, they need to set up enough of the matches, with some sort of build up. Yes, there are matches on the PPV with no build up, but most of them need to have something going in. Now, lets say that each match is about 20 minutes. That would give you 3 matches per hour of the PPV. With 3 hours of PPV plus one match on the pre-show, they would have 10 matches. Now, in order to do that on a one hour a show per week for four weeks, they would need to almost just each week do a certain percentage of the matches, leaving all of the matches with one week's worth of build up. Now, that would severely diminish the value of the PPV's which is their selling point. In order for that to work, they need to make the matches watchable, while taking as little time as they can, in order to fit in a few promos as well as the number of matches that they will need to build up even slightly at least 6 or 7 of the 10 matches. As such, they need to worry less about psychology and more about attracting and keeping the attention of the fans. This leads to the overuse of the spots, the diminished selling, and the seeming lack of psychology. So, the seemingly less than great wrestling, is only in order to set up the match at the PPV, which will be given the time that it takes to allow the wrestlers to use the psychology that you are asking for as well as selling the maneuver the way that they normally would, instead of the "quick sell" that they need to use on IMPACT!. Therefore, once TNA gets a weekly two hour slot, the problem should really remedy itself, due to the fact that the wrestlers will no longer need to be hurrying the match along. This means that TNA does not have poor wrestling, but rather wrestling that suits their audience and timeslot.
Basically, in TNA, they are time constrained ... severely. Now, in order for them to set up the amazing 3 hour PPV's that they put on, they need to set up enough of the matches, with some sort of build up. Yes, there are matches on the PPV with no build up, but most of them need to have something going in. Now, lets say that each match is about 20 minutes. That would give you 3 matches per hour of the PPV. With 3 hours of PPV plus one match on the pre-show, they would have 10 matches. Now, in order to do that on a one hour a show per week for four weeks, they would need to almost just each week do a certain percentage of the matches, leaving all of the matches with one week's worth of build up. Now, that would severely diminish the value of the PPV's which is their selling point. In order for that to work, they need to make the matches watchable, while taking as little time as they can, in order to fit in a few promos as well as the number of matches that they will need to build up even slightly at least 6 or 7 of the 10 matches. As such, they need to worry less about psychology and more about attracting and keeping the attention of the fans. This leads to the overuse of the spots, the diminished selling, and the seeming lack of psychology. So, the seemingly less than great wrestling, is only in order to set up the match at the PPV, which will be given the time that it takes to allow the wrestlers to use the psychology that you are asking for as well as selling the maneuver the way that they normally would, instead of the "quick sell" that they need to use on IMPACT!. Therefore, once TNA gets a weekly two hour slot, the problem should really remedy itself, due to the fact that the wrestlers will no longer need to be hurrying the match along. This means that TNA does not have poor wrestling, but rather wrestling that suits their audience and timeslot.
#3
DoubleJ
-
- Code-X Member
-
- 769 posts
Code-X Superstar
- Gender:Male
- Location:Hazard, KY.
Posted 06 January 2007 - 03:27 AM
They only have an hour. TNA is like ECW, but you don't remember Impact as well because they squeeze in everything they possibally can. TNA tries to have 4-5 matches on Impact whereas ECW generally has 3-4 so you remember the FBIs match more than you remember the Abyss squash match.
#4
Sℓϊм™
-
- Code-X Member
-
- 6,254 posts
Boston Red Sox| O4 & O7 CHAMPZ!!!!
- Gender:Male
- Location:Bodymore|Murdaland
- Facebook:Like Me
Posted 08 January 2007 - 06:03 PM
I can't prove you wrong because I agree. I watched TNA wwhen it first came on Spike. There matches seemed so plan that it wasn't funny. I remember when it was Hardy vs. Abyss in a ladder match. Hardy did so many stupid moves he usually don't do and they made Abyss look like the baddest wrestler ever. I just don't like how things came to together as you can say.
