Which do you think is better? In my opinion, TNA is way better. WWE is now nothing more than a soap opera. ECW absolutely sucks. WWE also has the sam boring wrestlers, the same boring shows, and the same boring titles. TNA has great wrestling. The way they started there show last night is the REAL way to start a show. TNA has great wrestlers and great shows. Thankfully, not that mny titles. A few more big stars and few more little wrestlers nd they could be on their way to a 2 hour time slot! Whats your opinion?
2006-08-20 03:38:53 · 16 answers · asked by wwe fanatic 2 in Sports ➔ Wrestling
I like WWE but TNA is better.New ECW sucks, all it is talking and only 3 matches.RAW is really boring now because of all the talking.3 weeks before Backlash, Cena was talking for 6 minutes straight,then Edge comes along and rants for another 6, then Triple H comes out and adds an extra 5.That's 17 minutes of talking when you probably could of been having atleast 2 matches.Yeah, good going Vince.
Smackdown is better than RAW in my opinion because there's more wrestling.People don't want to see abunch of guys talk about nothing,people want to see high-flying action and wrestling.
TNA is better than WWE because the wrestling is better.Too bad it's only an hour long.There's more talent in TNA.The new ECW is basically the Hardcore division with ECW written all over it.The roster is full of old WWE rejects (Shannon Moore,Test,Big Slow).Oh yeah,don't forget about Count Chocula,I mean,KEvin Thorn.ECW shouldn't be on Sci-Fi.It should be on SpikeTV but neoooo,Vince said TNA would sue them for trying to steal away the fans.
I don't hate WWE, as a matter a fact, I went to the Great American Bash 2006.WWE is slowly losing it's touch.WWE is the past,TNA is the future.
2006-08-20 03:59:44 · answer #1 · answered by shatteryear 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
TNA! TNA! TNA!
TNA is by far the best, unless you really like soap operas, then Raw would be the best. There are already talks for a two hour show. Spike TV is very happy with the TNA and would like to give them a two slot. the only problem is they can it to them on another night and give it to them on the night they have it would break up the synergy between UFC Unleashed and Ultimate Fighter or run until 1 in the a.m. (here anyway)
However, sometime next month Raw will be delayed two hours becuase football or something. The currrent thinking is for TNA to host a two hour special during Raws normal time slot.
2006-08-20 06:29:49 · answer #2 · answered by ballistik696 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
TNA is better when it comes to matchs but when it comes to storylines wwe is better but if tna signs a good storyline writer then get a decent time slot there gonna be a froce to be reckon with wwe has overdone everything how many times can cena fight edge its getting old aloung with everything in tna they have Jarret vs Sting then someone else fights sting not Jarret sting 5 pay per views in a row so in the end TNA is way better
2006-08-20 04:47:52 · answer #3 · answered by Jared 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
TNA must become bigger and give Vince a strong competition just like the good old WCW and the Monday Night Wars, that would give Vince no choice to give a way much better show, the only I really hate about TNA is that non-sence 6 sided-ring.
2006-08-20 05:17:10 · answer #4 · answered by AbsoluteMart! 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I enjoy to TNA product in terms of wrestling,ACTUAL WRESTLING. I think I'll always catch WWE just because I grew up watching it and I know ALOT of it's history as well as witnessing it. I was at Wrestlemania X8 (Rock-Hogan) and being a little Hulkamaniac, it was great reviving Hulkamania that night!! I'll never forget that moment. But as for TNA, I truly think they should get more than an hour because it seems they are rushing and squeezing things just to try to fit it in an hour.
2006-08-20 03:47:41 · answer #5 · answered by jamcit can am connexion 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
TNA. You're right, WWE has become more like a big soap opera, where as TNA is wrestling at its best.
2006-08-20 03:42:34 · answer #6 · answered by Jason N 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
WWE is, was & always will be better in my opinion. The reason they aren't as high-flying is because they're almost always on tour and can't risk the injuries. An Paul London is just as good as AJ Styles...just thought I'd throw that out there.
2006-08-20 04:36:29 · answer #7 · answered by The1andOnly 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I prefer WWE but TNA is better. If that makes ANY sense?
2006-08-20 04:04:48 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i like UFC
they are real men who really use martial arts and really fight.
WWE and TNA is a fantasy for 14 year old boys, which of course has its place
but, I like UFC
PRIDE is ok, takes place in Japan but has international fighters.
i prefer the UFC for the octagon and the announcers are better.
2006-08-20 03:57:04 · answer #9 · answered by georgia 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Is still like the WWE .. i like the fasct that it is a big soap opera
2006-08-20 06:54:10 · answer #10 · answered by Belledeau Brat 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋