FORUM HOME > Wrestling > TNA
TNA Fails!

JakePosted on 02/17/07 at 22:01:38

source: Pro Wrestling Torch

Last night's airing of TNA Impact took a huge hit in the ratings as the show drew a 0.59 rating going head-to-head with a special Thursday night airing of WWE RAW. Last week's show drew a 1.1 rating, and thus there was a 47% decrease in viewership this week. This was the least watched edition of Impact in the show's history since the move to Spike TV. Additionally, the two hour replay of 'This is TNA!' that preceded last night's Impact drew an even lower rating, a 0.48 cable rating.
Best bit, it makes that pill-popping idiot Kurt Angle look even more crazy. :D
AnubisPosted on 02/17/07 at 23:58:07

Well, guess I was wrong about them not sharing any of the same audience.  I didn't think either show was gonna mover in the ratings because I assumed they drew two entirely different audiences.

Still, I can't figure out how anyone can like WWE, I really can't.  To me, WWE is like peas; I can't stand them, and I can't rationalize how anyone else can.  It's a complete mystery to me.  Kinda like how I can't figure out how American Beauty won an Academy Award.
JakePosted on 02/18/07 at 00:06:28

On 02/17/07 at 23:58:07, Anubis wrote:Well, guess I was wrong about them not sharing any of the same audience.  I didn't think either show was gonna mover in the ratings because I assumed they drew two entirely different audiences.

Still, I can't figure out how anyone can like WWE, I really can't.  To me, WWE is like peas; I can't stand them, and I can't rationalize how anyone else can.  It's a complete mystery to me.  Kinda like how I can't figure out how American Beauty won an Academy Award.
I like peas.

The bestest bit... I watched iMPACT! instead of RAW.

I prefer TNA to WWE, but I'm just so tired of promos that are nothing but WWE bash-fests.

Maybe this will be the kick in the ass they need to get things right?
Snabbit888Posted on 02/18/07 at 19:44:05

For me, WWE's main advantage over TNA?  They don't come off like whiny bitches by spending most of their shows trying to hurt the competition rather than help themselves.

TNA has glimmers, but I haven't been even remotely interested in watching it in months.  They're suffering from the same ol' trying to catch lightning in a bottle thing.  It's disappointing, because they have the talent to be doing much better.

And peas rule.
HugeRockStar760Posted on 02/18/07 at 22:46:12

That's only because the WWE is the number one wrestling promotion right now. If the roles were reversed, the WWE would be doing the same things TNA are doing because history proves it. Just go back to when Vince was whining about "Billionaire Ted" and how it wasn't "fair."
Rick GarrardPosted on 02/19/07 at 02:15:48

Actually Greys Anatomy stole both of their audiences as it was part two of a three part episode.
HugeRockStar760Posted on 02/19/07 at 02:52:03

On 02/19/07 at 02:15:48, Rick Garrard wrote:Actually Greys Anatomy stole both of their audiences as it was part two of a three part episode.
The WWE rating was only .3 worse than it was last year for the Thursday RAW. It had nothing to do with an overrated medical "drama."
Snabbit888Posted on 02/19/07 at 19:48:14

On 02/18/07 at 22:46:12, HugeRockStar760 wrote:That's only because the WWE is the number one wrestling promotion right now. If the roles were reversed, the WWE would be doing the same things TNA are doing because history proves it. Just go back to when Vince was whining about "Billionaire Ted" and how it wasn't "fair."
It's also fair to note that during that time, WWF wasn't firing the only shots.  WCW was giving out RAW results and the like.  WWE isn't bullying TNA around or trying to hurt them in any direct way.  Sure, Vince was whiny, but at least he was provoked.  He had to do SOMETHING.  Whining probably isn't the best route, but eh.

In summation, TNA's anti-WWE bitchfest would at least look justifiable if, you know, WWE was doing ANYTHING to them beforehand.
pszPosted on 02/19/07 at 20:53:16

You mean other than employing them and putting them in main events at PPVs?
JustinPosted on 02/19/07 at 23:34:20

You mean other than employing them and putting them in main events at PPVs?
HUH?
Snabbit888Posted on 02/20/07 at 02:50:09

Yeah, can't say I follow.
PulsarPosted on 02/20/07 at 06:47:45

I think he's referring to ex-WWE wrestlers. (PS Kurt Angle is their #1 commodity right now, Joe #2...so yeah, they should put them high up there)
AllPowerfulGARTHPosted on 02/20/07 at 13:16:51

On 02/19/07 at 02:15:48, Rick Garrard wrote:Actually Greys Anatomy stole both of their audiences as it was part two of a three part episode.
I have really serious doubts that pro wrestling and "Grey's Anatomy" share a significant portion of the same audience.

Ask me about "24," though...
pszPosted on 02/20/07 at 15:49:27

In summation, TNA's anti-WWE bitchfest would at least look justifiable if, you know, WWE was doing ANYTHING to them beforehand.
You mean other than employing them and putting them in main events at PPVs?
Basically, about the only thing WWE did to TNA before-hand was putting THIER talent on PPVs for title matches and making them famous.
Rick GarrardPosted on 02/21/07 at 01:22:08

Actually Greys Anatomy stole both of their audiences as it was part two of a three part episode.      


I have really serious doubts that pro wrestling and "Grey's Anatomy" share a significant portion of the same audience.

Ask me about "24," though...
What's even funnier is that they spent all the time, effort and money to air the 2 hour Dog Show RAW replacement on Monday and instead of seeing a spike in the ratings on Thursday's Impact, they see a just greater than half of normal decline.  Something says to me that Monday's "PPV Clip show" of TNA's best probably pissed off some of the loyal PPV buyers when they gave away some of the matches for free.  And yes 24 is probably more responsible for stealing ratings... or perhaps whatever show was on Animal Planet... perhaps a replay of the Monday Dog Show from USA?!  ;)