
Last night NWA TNA held their first Sunday
night pay-per-view. The Wednesday night bargain shows had been scrapped
when it became clear that there was no limit to how low the buy rates
could sink. Seven thousand would be considered a good house show number
for any company but not a good PPV buyrate. So, for three prime time
hours, the fans of TNA could sit back and watch thirty dollars worth of
total non-stop action. I admit I've seen very little TNA. There was a
brief time when downloading Impact was both feasible and advisable. Now it
is neither. So I'm not planning to review the show, more just ask how a
company could have made the mistakes TNA made. They're only in business
because they've got a sugar daddy in the form of Panda Energy (what is it
about pandas having such a big say in wrestling?) The "if only" in "if
only ECW or WCW had had Panda's money..." is a big one. Particularly ECW
as they never had the money to match the effort. WCW had the cash but blew
it at a rate that is hard for the human mind to truly comprehend.
The biggest single thing missing from TNA is a buzz. People don't talk
about them as they did ECW, as they do the latest underground band or cult
indie film. The internet features lots of talk and commentary about TNA
but it is largely negative. Which is unfortunate as the one dictate that
Panda have issued is that they won't spend money on anything that doesn't
generate revenue. Which, given that nothing in TNA generates revenue, is a
bit of a problem. Luckily the internet is here - full of people who will
spread the word about things they like. But instead of playing to the
internet audience TNA has decided to ignore their wants. WWE cannot market
itself to the internet fans. There aren't enough of them to make WWE
money. But TNA needs the net fans. Who else knows that TNA's TV show is on
at 3pm on a Friday on a station no one watches? Internet fans. Hell, I
know it and I'm three thousand miles away from the nearest FSN affiliate.
If it is possible to speak for "the internet" it is probably fair to say
they loved ECW, hated the last few years of WCW, like but don't yet adore
ROH, are split on CZW and find the first half of the 1990s WWF product
unwatchable.
TNA seems to be stuck in a loop of the last years of WCW combined with
what may turn out to be the last years of WWE. For one thing there is
Vince Russo. Russo is often blamed for everything bad in wrestling. About
as often as he takes credit for everything good in wrestling. His belief
in an audience which wants constant swerves (regardless of logic) lead to
the death of storyline logic, something the business still hasn't really
recovered from. Russo doesn't believe in long matches - he believes in
"crash TV" - the format where something new happens every couple of
minutes to stop people changing the channel. The problem with crash TV is
that it burned its audience out. What would once take three months was
taking ten minutes to play out. It made for good entertainment but it is
impossible to maintain such a pace without sacrificing your sanity.
Russo's fingerprints have been on TNA from the beginning and, since they
lied from day one about his involvement, no one will ever truly believe
he's gone.
Perhaps the only man in the business who still believes Vince Russo is a
genius (aside from Russo himself) is Jeff Jarrett. Which is unfortunate as
Jarrett is the most important man in TNA. Jeff Jarrett was a running joke
in the business throughout its boom. He'd go from WWF to WCW and back
again every couple of years. People would give him huge pushes and he'd
deliver disappointing results. The fans hated him as a face and were bored
of him as a heel. The two companies were desperate to sign each others
talent so he always got a job but neither side ever tried to keep him once
his deal was up. His only value was being a guy "stolen" from the other
side. These days he's the NWA world champion and the centrepiece of TNA.
He dominates every aspect of TV and no one really gives a toss about him.
He never elevates anyone who might threaten his spot, his matches are
predictable and he's actually become a liability for his company. Which is
a good way to describe two other men from the industry - Dusty Rhodes when
he ran Jim Crocket Promotions into bankruptcy and HHH as he watches TV,
PPV and house show numbers sink lower every quarter. When a guy books
himself on top and isn't over it kills the company. Not only is he
damaging the present, he's actually eliminating the future. Jarrett needs
to become part of the team rather than the "King of the Mountain" because
no one thinks he's a star let alone a top star and certainly not THE top
star.
It's not all bad news for TNA. Or at least it needn't be. Current head of
talent relations at WWE is John Laurenitis and he has some strange ideas
about wrestling. Whether they're his own or he's just copied Vince
McMahon's past philosophies as an attempt to impress the boss we don't
know. But he's pushing the idea of lots of big dumb guys who look scary
but can't wrestle. It is well known that if you're a small guy in WWE or
WWE Developmental then you might get a low paying slot if you are lucky
enough to get a humiliating gimmick. You'll make no money and you'll get
sacked with no notice whenever they need to cut a few thousand off the
payroll. If you're a big dumb guy you'll have a job for years. TNA already
has a lot of the smaller guys that accepted they had no future with WWE.
They should be using these guys to provide an alternative to big dumb guys
having rubbish matches. And that’s not just meaning the really tiny guys
who all look the same. Shawn Michaels, Chris Benoit, Eddie Guerrero, Chris
Jericho – these are all wrestlers who wouldn’t get a look-in in today’s
WWE if they were just starting out. If Jeff Jarrett is determined to push
himself as the top star then at least he could have some good matches.
If TNA’s PPV last night had
three great matches (and three of the matches had the potential going in)
then there would be a buzz. People tolerated the main event crap in WCW
because the undercards were often so good. Match of the Year candidates on
every show. Bouts that are being released to high acclaim on DVD in 2004.
Do any of the current WWE matches look like being bound for that kind of
greatness? Do we even remember much about the last WWE PPV? TNA officials
would say that ECW went out of business because they marketed themselves
to too small a fan base. When the time came to expand there wasn’t enough
support to sustain it. That’s a very simplistic assessment but if you want
to be simplistic then ECW was largely self sufficient from 1993 to 2000
(certainly when compared to TNA who got through their initial budget in a
matter of weeks and are still haemorrhaging cash by the bucket full). ECW
fans appreciated quality matches, WWE fans want quality matches, TNA are
missing their chance to fill the gap with quality matches.
So, in short, there are two
companies in America right now. One is boring the fans with a stale and
predictable product and the other is doing absolutely nothing to
capitalise on it.
|