I like bth of them, but in TNA you can see the mistakes and in the WWE you can sometimes.
2006-12-27 13:48:38 · 23 answers · asked by julie c~actress and WWE&TNA_FAN! 5 in Sports ➔ Wrestling
WWE, due to its ownership being around longer and knowing the game better
2006-12-27 13:55:51 · answer #1 · answered by singledad 7 · 1⤊ 4⤋
Ring of Honor is better than both of them. If you don't know what I'm talking about, do yourself a favor and find out. But to pick between WWE and TNA, I'd go with TNA because they seem to be willing to give the entire roster a chance to shine rather than the same 5 guys getting the spotlight in WWE. What most fans fail to pay attention to is the entirety of the show, rather than what T-shirt DX is shilling this week or how many times HHH is going to spit out his water. WWE has the production values and knows how to make the product look "big time." Unfortunately, once Vince decides to push a guy, we keep getting them...again...and again....and again. That's why we keep seeing HHH, Orton, and Batista over and over again. There are so many better actual wrestlers than those juicers but Vince loves his body builders. TNA is starting to try different things, a more "Crash TV" style of production that gives everyone on the show something to do, not stand around like dunces while waiting for the main event. The good thing about this is if you don't like the first segment, wait five minutes and there's something else. If you don't like the comedy, they'll get you with the cruiserweights. If you don't like them, then wait for an intense Kurt Angle promo. Really, what else is Raw other than the DX and John Cena show? I've got nothing against Cena and Michaels, but when you stop and think of how the boss' son-in-law always makes himself look so unstoppable, it's just sickening. I don't even bother watching Raw much, certainly not all the way through anymore. Put it this way - WWE is sports entertainment. TNA is pro wrestling. I'll go with pro wrestling.
2006-12-28 03:43:40 · answer #2 · answered by HP L 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
TNA all the way
WWE has CENA the biggest reason to HATE WWE one of the worst wrestlers EVER in the history of wrestling
TNA has Petey Williams one of the reasons to watch
WWE had Ric Flair an over the hill ego-maniac that wont retire
TNA had Samoa Joe, Kurt Angle,Christian Cage, Christopher Daniels, Jerry Lynn :The X-Division the six sided ring
however
WWE has Jim Ross and Jerry Lawler-great commentary
TNA has Tomko and Konnan-two of the worst
also WWE has Victoria and Mikey James-two of the better female wrestlers
2006-12-27 16:20:01 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Look at all the people above me. All of them chose WWE. Why? Because the WWE is a better company. It has more viewer ratings, more experienced and talented wrestlers, has been there the longest, and has way more competition that TNA. If all of these answers say WWE, then can't you figure out that the WWE is better? Also, maybe TNA would probably get more fans/viewers if they actually moved around the country, and not just stayed in Orlando.
2006-12-27 14:03:17 · answer #4 · answered by ViVa La inDiA 3 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Julie, TNA is wrestling. It was never meant to be about glitz and glamour and high production value. In TNA you get actual character development within the context of in ring action. TNA offers a more athetic in ring product which is prone to more mistakes since it requires more in ring ability and risk taking. WWE has very little for mistakes, as you put it, since the matches are very 'safe' meaning they take very few risks. If you can find any of the three way matches between Samoa Joe v. AJ Styles v. Christopher Daniels I guarentee you will recognize what the finest example of US pro wrestling in this era is. TNA.
2006-12-27 16:23:42 · answer #5 · answered by r-factor 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
well since raw has gotten boring and i been watching smackdown more i'll say both except the raw part its the reason why wwe sucks is because all the losers on raw except mcmahons. and tna is getting better alright but needs to be on tv more like 3 times a week 2 hours or 3 hours.
2006-12-27 15:06:52 · answer #6 · answered by mamas_grandmasboy06 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
WWE! TNA is utilising wrestlers that have been fired or retired from the WWE. I advise I constantly enjoyed WWE. Yeah now it variety of sucks yet precise now could be surely getting greater effective. TNA has very ingenious and sturdy tale strains yet has no longer lots wrestlers and kinda sucks. human beings could say TNA is greater effective because of the fact they like it greater effective yet, yet in overall WWE is greater effective (additional money, greater followers, greater entrainment, greater wrestlers, greater merchandises, and etc)
2016-10-28 12:35:21 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
WWE is way better TNA is not even in the same field as WWE. WWE has many great talented athletes, where TNA best thing is their X Division. Many of WWE's talent are best at grounded the high flyers so I would have to go with WWE!!!!
WWE:
John Cena
Batista
Triple H
Shawn Micheals
Randy Orton
Jeff Hardy
Bobby Lashley
CM Punk
just to name of few!
To me there is no COMPARISON!!
2006-12-27 14:14:35 · answer #8 · answered by legendkillerlover 2 · 0⤊ 4⤋
TNA
the wwe is mere soap opera compared to TNA, i've seen episodes of eastenders with more fighting in them than a W(orst) W(restling) E(ver) programme
2006-12-27 18:17:12 · answer #9 · answered by Austin Darkora 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
TNA, because it's a WRESTLING and not a soap opera promotion. Even if you don't like Jeff Jarrett (I do like him), he is a better boss than Vince McMahon will ever be! TNA is still young and may have some mistakes, but they are on a good way and show us wonderful wrestling matches.
2006-12-27 14:04:27 · answer #10 · answered by iMPACT Player 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
TNA - I'm getting very bored with WWE - too many nasty ladies and not enough real wrestling matches. WWE is one nasty soap opera.
2006-12-27 14:26:48 · answer #11 · answered by happy_southernlady 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋