TPWW Forums - View Single Post

**#1-norm-fan** · 07-29-2014, 04:00 AM

Just read a pretty well written article about the real reason why TNA could not compete with WWE. It's about 8 months old apparently but I think it puts everything into words perfectly.

http://www.denofgeek.us/other/wrestl...nt-catching-on

It's pretty long so I'll quote the main paragraphs...

"Though TNA may have had the right idea, the WWF did something very smart. Regardless of how anyone feels about the infamous "Invasion" storyline (Who better than Kanyon?), the WWF made sure it was clear that WCW and ECW were now part of their organization. Moving into the WWE era, the company began to acknowledge the histories of these and other organizations and marketed videos from the acquired catalogs. In short, the WWE decided that it was the culmination of all wrestling past and the fans, for the most part, acquiesced. TNA found themselves in a bad position. Though many of the staff and talent had legitimate claims to historic events in wrestling history, TNA couldn't show it. It was a new company with no real history. As badly as TNA may have wanted to be, they simply were not WCW. They couldn't act like something had been stolen from them, and in all honesty, couldn't hold their version of the NWA World Title in the same light as the WWF World Title. After awhile, they had to move on.

In 2007, TNA parted ways with the NWA and proclaimed then champion Kurt Angle as TNA World Heavyweight champion. This is a good place to pause and look again. I alluded to this earlier, but it is around this era that it becomes most important. One of the defining characteristics and tools of professional wrestling is the ability to tell stories over long periods of time and develop talent into something greater. To do this, you need a preexisting infrastructure of talent to work from. Basically, you need the history to make the present more important. Knowing that John Cena held the same belt as Shawn Michaels and Randy Savage enriches the story immediately. This principle was not in place in the early days of the sport but became an essential part of competition as time moved on. By the time it became indispensable, it was really only the (real) NWA, AWA and WWF who remained anyway. In 2007, only the WWE remained. This posed a big problem for TNA.

Without an impressive title lineage, TNA had to place WWF/E's former stars on their roster to create an infrastructure. Yes, TNA had developed some talent to a main event level, but they did not have the drawing power of the more familiar talent. This seems to be a sound logic, it worked for WCW in the late 90s and even led to their most successful angles. However, there is one major distinction that made all of the difference. When wrestlers like Hulk Hogan and �Macho Man� Randy Savage jumped from WWF to WCW, it was already long established. They weren't competing for some new title, but a title lineage that (arguably) stretched decades and maintained its relevance. Throughout their competition, there was always an argument about whether it was WCW or WWF that possessed the true world champion. When WWE talent jumped to TNA, they looked like big fish in a small pond. Worse than this, public perception was that these talents were the WWE's refuse, and who weren't fit for the big leagues anymore. After all, why would they be working towards a title that meant so much less than the one they had already had? It is this stigma that hurts TNA to this day."

He also goes into some ways TNA could (have) compete(d)...

"TNA must find a way to truly innovate, until then they will be stuck playing by someone else's rules. If they want to be competition, they have to figure out what the next evolution of professional wrestling is and not rely so heavily on the last one. ECW did this to an extent, but cannot act as an example. I believe through what they've shown over the years that TNA wishes to be true competition for WWE. They've snapped up major stars and even went head to head with Raw for a time. ECW was a promotion that relied heavily on being the underdog and insulting the two major promotions it ran alongside. I went into this in a bit more detail in a previous column, but in short, ECW had its glory because it was not real competition and didn't try to be. Plus, copying ECW isn't innovation either. Innovation in this case may be breaking a rule, taking wrestling out of its comfort zone. Yes, this is a risk. Moving away from what has traditionally worked always is, but fortune favors the bold. WWE has mastered a formula to an extent where they acquired the rights to nearly everyone who was ever great at it. Changing part of the formula may be the only way to gain an upper hand. I won't claim to have a comprehensive solution (unless you want to hire me to find one, I'm sure I can come up with something), but I think I know where to start.

As I pointed out earlier, one of the most damaging problems TNA has in a traditional Wrestling environment is its lack of title lineage. They have the talent and, in turn, some of the matches, but they don't have the belt. Perhaps the solution is taking the focus off the belt and putting it on the talent itself. Maybe, you don't need a belt. Maybe in this promotion, wrestlers are ranked by the prestige of who they have beaten and seek out the fights that they have yet to win. This allows the veterans to keep their importance while giving the newer talent cite-able accomplishments. It's a little "Street Fighter," but we're talking about starting a new era, something like that might work. By doing this, you would change the infrastructure of the promotion without losing every aspect of traditional wrestling. Matches would be pretty much the same, as would the storytelling but the ultimate goal would be something unprecedented. Or maybe build a year long tournament, where there is a champion, but the belt is contended for in a style more like the NFL or MLB, leaving you with a champion who simply cannot rest on his laurels while the other wrestlers compete for a title shot. Or maybe you contract wrestlers for short periods, constantly rotating your roster, then build for the return of a favorite. The point is that there are real options and real ways to play with the structure of traditional professional wrestling. If TNA starts doing something drastic, even if it doesn't work it would be no worse than the slow fade they seem to be going through. The WWE knows how to play The Game (sorry) and that won't change."

07-29-2014, 04:00 AM	#7763
#1-norm-fan Resident drug enabler Posts: 45,473	Just read a pretty well written article about the real reason why TNA could not compete with WWE. It's about 8 months old apparently but I think it puts everything into words perfectly. http://www.denofgeek.us/other/wrestl...nt-catching-on It's pretty long so I'll quote the main paragraphs... "Though TNA may have had the right idea, the WWF did something very smart. Regardless of how anyone feels about the infamous "Invasion" storyline (Who better than Kanyon?), the WWF made sure it was clear that WCW and ECW were now part of their organization. Moving into the WWE era, the company began to acknowledge the histories of these and other organizations and marketed videos from the acquired catalogs. In short, the WWE decided that it was the culmination of all wrestling past and the fans, for the most part, acquiesced. TNA found themselves in a bad position. Though many of the staff and talent had legitimate claims to historic events in wrestling history, TNA couldn't show it. It was a new company with no real history. As badly as TNA may have wanted to be, they simply were not WCW. They couldn't act like something had been stolen from them, and in all honesty, couldn't hold their version of the NWA World Title in the same light as the WWF World Title. After awhile, they had to move on. In 2007, TNA parted ways with the NWA and proclaimed then champion Kurt Angle as TNA World Heavyweight champion. This is a good place to pause and look again. I alluded to this earlier, but it is around this era that it becomes most important. One of the defining characteristics and tools of professional wrestling is the ability to tell stories over long periods of time and develop talent into something greater. To do this, you need a preexisting infrastructure of talent to work from. Basically, you need the history to make the present more important. Knowing that John Cena held the same belt as Shawn Michaels and Randy Savage enriches the story immediately. This principle was not in place in the early days of the sport but became an essential part of competition as time moved on. By the time it became indispensable, it was really only the (real) NWA, AWA and WWF who remained anyway. In 2007, only the WWE remained. This posed a big problem for TNA. Without an impressive title lineage, TNA had to place WWF/E's former stars on their roster to create an infrastructure. Yes, TNA had developed some talent to a main event level, but they did not have the drawing power of the more familiar talent. This seems to be a sound logic, it worked for WCW in the late 90s and even led to their most successful angles. However, there is one major distinction that made all of the difference. When wrestlers like Hulk Hogan and �Macho Man� Randy Savage jumped from WWF to WCW, it was already long established. They weren't competing for some new title, but a title lineage that (arguably) stretched decades and maintained its relevance. Throughout their competition, there was always an argument about whether it was WCW or WWF that possessed the true world champion. When WWE talent jumped to TNA, they looked like big fish in a small pond. Worse than this, public perception was that these talents were the WWE's refuse, and who weren't fit for the big leagues anymore. After all, why would they be working towards a title that meant so much less than the one they had already had? It is this stigma that hurts TNA to this day." He also goes into some ways TNA could (have) compete(d)... "TNA must find a way to truly innovate, until then they will be stuck playing by someone else's rules. If they want to be competition, they have to figure out what the next evolution of professional wrestling is and not rely so heavily on the last one. ECW did this to an extent, but cannot act as an example. I believe through what they've shown over the years that TNA wishes to be true competition for WWE. They've snapped up major stars and even went head to head with Raw for a time. ECW was a promotion that relied heavily on being the underdog and insulting the two major promotions it ran alongside. I went into this in a bit more detail in a previous column, but in short, ECW had its glory because it was not real competition and didn't try to be. Plus, copying ECW isn't innovation either. Innovation in this case may be breaking a rule, taking wrestling out of its comfort zone. Yes, this is a risk. Moving away from what has traditionally worked always is, but fortune favors the bold. WWE has mastered a formula to an extent where they acquired the rights to nearly everyone who was ever great at it. Changing part of the formula may be the only way to gain an upper hand. I won't claim to have a comprehensive solution (unless you want to hire me to find one, I'm sure I can come up with something), but I think I know where to start. As I pointed out earlier, one of the most damaging problems TNA has in a traditional Wrestling environment is its lack of title lineage. They have the talent and, in turn, some of the matches, but they don't have the belt. Perhaps the solution is taking the focus off the belt and putting it on the talent itself. Maybe, you don't need a belt. Maybe in this promotion, wrestlers are ranked by the prestige of who they have beaten and seek out the fights that they have yet to win. This allows the veterans to keep their importance while giving the newer talent cite-able accomplishments. It's a little "Street Fighter," but we're talking about starting a new era, something like that might work. By doing this, you would change the infrastructure of the promotion without losing every aspect of traditional wrestling. Matches would be pretty much the same, as would the storytelling but the ultimate goal would be something unprecedented. Or maybe build a year long tournament, where there is a champion, but the belt is contended for in a style more like the NFL or MLB, leaving you with a champion who simply cannot rest on his laurels while the other wrestlers compete for a title shot. Or maybe you contract wrestlers for short periods, constantly rotating your roster, then build for the return of a favorite. The point is that there are real options and real ways to play with the structure of traditional professional wrestling. If TNA starts doing something drastic, even if it doesn't work it would be no worse than the slow fade they seem to be going through. The WWE knows how to play The Game (sorry) and that won't change."