-          Jeff Jarrett being NWA champion

-          A bad time slot

-          A short one-hour format

-          Being moved around and/or being pre-empted

-          Having Rhino as the #1 contender

-          Scott D’Amore being Scott D’Amore

-          The Morphoplex ads

What’s my opinion?  Since Impact’s debut on Spike there hasn’t been a sense of “urgency” in the product. The shows being presented are good but they’re not the type of show that should be presented in order to grab new viewers.  TNA is acting like WWE fans are out searching for an alternative and will jump on anything that's different. 
 
Well…they’re not.  
 
Sorry TNA, but as a disgruntled WWE fan I have no desire to sit and watch America’s Most Wanted spend seven minutes in the ring with the likes of Sonny Siaki & Apollo.  I don’t want to watch Kip James in any match, even if it’s just a minute long.  I’m sick and tired of seeing Monty Brown try and do his best Ultimate Warrior promo impression every week.  And if I don’t have to watch Ron Killings make a fool of himself dancing like he was one of the Bee Gees on crack ever again it will still be too soon.
 
Don’t get me wrong, I’m a TNA fan.  I review Impact each and every week.  I really enjoy the product overall. I’m just trying to put myself in the frame of mind of a casual fan, not a fan as “Internet savvy” as myself.
 
TNA is supposed to stand for “Total Non-Stop Action.”  If that's the case, why am I watching Rhino in the main event?
 
I think TNA knows what they need to do.  The question, it seems, is do they plan on doing it? 
 

Item # 4 – Chris Benoit will face Booker T in a “Best of Seven” series for the U.S. title.
 
Paging 1998…your idea called.
 

***
 

Pillar to Post
 
Each and every week I’ll ask two posters from the WorldWrestlingInsanity.com message board three questions on the hot topics du jour and ask for their thoughts and insight.  Ladies and gentlemen, this week I give you two more great posters… the pride of Scotland aaron24wood and the master of disaster himself, the Royal Dutch of Dukes!
 
1. Agree or Disagree:  The decline of Impact's ratings should cause serious concerns within TNA management.
 
Aaron24wood:  I would have to disagree.

Isn’t it ironic that one of the Internet’s poster child’s, Christian, turns up and suddenly the ratings drop? I kid, I kid. But seriously, I wouldn’t say that TNA management should be overly concerned at this precise moment. Certainly, the last thing they should do is start looking for quick fixes, such as bringing in a “legend” for a one shot deal, only to have them go over the home-grown talent and disappear again.

The Internet’s favorite theory at the moment seems to be pinning the blame on the shifting of its timeslot when it had its special show. I don’t necessarily buy into that theory because the WWE has showed that their fans can find their TV with all (if not more) people tuning into RAW on USA, and just about as many people finding Smackdown on the worst day possible. Wrestling fans will find the show they want to watch, and although I haven’t yet seen the last two weeks worth of shows (as being in the UK, we are some 5 weeks behind), they read to be fairly solid shows, at the very least, and with no discernible drop in quality to the previous shows, so you never know…it may hold some water.
 
Royal Dutch of Dukes: Disagree.

It's tenure on Spike has barely begun, pushing the panic button at this point is premature, though they should get the title off of Jarrett and onto Christian or Monty Brown as soon as humanly possible while they continue to build Joe up to be a Samoan cross between Vader and Ken Shamrock in the X Division and feud him with Daniels, while slowly transitioning Styles back to the main event picture. Simple, baby steps are what's needed at this point, there's no need to go into full blown Chicken Little mode, the ratings are bound to fluctuate at this stage in TNA's life on Spike.
 
2. Agree or Disagree: The Raw vs. Smackdown storyline proves that the brand split is working.
 
Aaron24wood:  I’m loathed to disagree, but I may have to.

Personally, I’m all for this storyline. I’m really quite enjoying it. The storyline is showing that the split is working because if you look at the two teams, then the only thing they have in common is loyalty to their brand and some dislike for the other. Just look at Batista/Orton and HBK/Masters. There is either a feud happening currently between them (in Batista/Orton) or a recently played-out one (HBK/Masters) Also, Smackdown’s seemingly genuine grievance at being seen as the “B” show sells the over-riding idea.

However, the reason I have to disagree with the notion is that I wonder how many fans are buying it. To me, it’s clear that Smackdown is being the plucky underdog looking for respect, while RAW is playing the arrogant, cocky bully. However, so many people I see posting all over the Internet are mired up in “Is JBL a face now?”, “Is Big Show supposed to be a heel”, “Don’t Orton and Batista have a match?” and the like. Hell, just look at the rather confused and then apathetic response they got on RAW. JBL was cheered for standing up for Smackdown and calling out Chris Masters, but then the second that Bischoff gave JBL a match with Shawn Michaels, the crowd then cheered HBK. The crowd didn’t really know what to do, given that we, naturally, equate JBL as being a heel and HBK a face when this situation is the other way round. Also, it’s almost giving fodder to those people who want to see an end to the split, especially with those who are claiming that bringing both rosters together will open up fresh matches, as if that was a long term solution, though they are too short sighted to realize that bringing Undertaker and Kane or HHH and Batista back together isn’t making a fresh match, and when you have run out of fresh matches, what do you do then?
 
Royal Dutch of Dukes: Disagree.

To me, it felt forced from day one, as if Creative is so bereft of ideas that they have to resort to a manufactured quasi-"invasion" angle in place of an actual main event storyline on either show. Cena's feud with Angle was already boring and stale three weeks ago, and the writers seem to have no idea who to set up to be his next challenger or how, for that matter. Batista's injury and the death of Eddie Guerrero have severely handicapped the main event picture on Smackdown to the point that they'll probably put the title on Orton and resume the equally boring and stale Undertaker/Orton feud, so while the Raw vs. Smackdown storyline is probably the best option in the short term to focus on in order to hide the weaknesses of both shows title pictures, it's hardly compelling television, let alone proof that the brand split is worth continuing.
 
3. Agree or Disagree: The new WWE drug policy is legit and will work long-term.
 
aaron24wood: 

What I totally agree is that this new drug policy is absolutely genuine. I’ve not seen or heard anything to suggest otherwise, other than the cynicism and/or contempt of Internet fans. There has been pretty much full disclosure by Vince on it. Not only did he have a roster wide meeting, but he had it posted on the Internet. Having a video of something that isn’t part of a storyline is pretty surreal for the WWE. Also, it’s not as if the test entails Vince taking a urine sample, declaring it isn’t purple and so the wrestler must be clean. The intention is clearly there.

What I am wary of is the long term effect it will have. I mean, the fact that they USED TO have drug testing which was then clearly dropped says to me that after a period of time, the testing could be dropped under the pretence that no-one has been caught, and so there isn’t a problem.

To be fair to McMahon, anytime someone else has had a problem, it seems as though he’s offered to send them to rehab. I mean, he got Eddie into rehab, and then gave him a second chance, even after Eddie’s DUI. Also, I believe it’s widely believed that they tried to put Jeff Hardy in there, at least as far as I’m aware.

We may well get one or two failed tests for whatever reason. I’m betting even Kurt Angle is a bit edgy, but there is a slight possibility that once everyone on the roster has been done at least once, they may decide that they know what everyone is up to and so things will stay that way.

It’s certainly something that we, the fans, who are pretty much the industries “watchdog”, need to keep an eye on.
 
Royal Dutch of Dukes:

Neither, it's simply too soon to tell, but judging by Vince's past track record with this sort of thing, it's hard to be optimistic. With no real viable competition (TNA is at least a year and a half from being able to start even thinking about going toe to toe with the WWE, regardless of the WWE product being largely creatively bankrupt at the moment and the foreseeable future) and no real media or outside heat on him to take drug testing seriously, it will probably be upheld for the next 6 months to a year, at which point people will begin to forget the furor over Eddie's death and then it will be business as usual. The only real chance this new drug policy has of being anything more than a quick fix is the possibility that Vince will begin thinking about his own mortality as a result of Eddie's death and that that will make him get serious about keeping his employee's healthy. Aside from it being the right thing to do, it's also the best thing for the business, and while I hope that the threat of losing more multi-talented workers like Eddie and the possibility of negative publicity and attention from the federal government will spur Vince to get serious about the drug policy this time, but I wouldn't put money on it.


***