-Why are you little babies that adore Cena and Batista so much?
-Grow Up. TNA is wrestling. WWE = We were entertaining
-TNA IS THE BEST AND I'M NOT BIASED IT'S JUST THAT TNA IS BETTER AND ALWAYS WILL BE THAT'S WHY THEIR BOOKING IS SO GOOD AND ALL OF THEIR TALENT IS IN THIER PRIME AND THEIR GIMMICK MATCHES ARE EASY TO UNDERSTAND AND THEIR RING HAS SIX SIDES INSTEAD OF FOUR, etc, etc. Haha. Even the ring has more sides which means its more successful. LaWLzZz!!!
2007-11-16 10:29:46 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Wrestling
yeah tna is better. its more entertaining and they let their wrestlers do crazy moves.
2007-11-16 10:37:47 · answer #1 · answered by Hey Yo Chico 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Any Marks Are Biased Children, That Have Absolutly No Wresling Knowledge..
I Have To Admit, TNA is Wrestling. The Show is Definitly Not Organized Enough But They Have a Great Womens Division, Great X Division Ect..
Also The Christian Cage/Kaz Ladder Match, Beats [Just About] Any other Match The WWE Has Had in '07..
2007-11-16 18:42:09 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
LOL... You're not biased. Not at all. No logical explanation why you think WWE isn't up to your expectations.
Why do TNA kool-aid drinkers love their brand so much? You give no REAL explanations.
Their booking is a hot mess. What's so "good" about it?
Talent is in their prime? Name 5. I can't.
What does the complexity of gimmick matches have to do with anything?
The six sided ring was neat at first, but I'd rather see a more traditional 4-sided ring.
I watch TNA & WWE for the wrestlers that I like... not to shoot down one brand in favor of the others. One should watch all promotions because we love pro wrestling.
2007-11-16 18:55:55 · answer #3 · answered by Cena's hiptoss 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I like both organizations, and I don't like Cena or Batista. It isn't a good idea to assume that all WWE fans like Cena and Batista. The Undertaker is my favorite wrestler in the WWE and Kurt Angle, the top Champion on TNA, who by the way, was a former WWE superstar, is my favorite on TNA, although I have also been a fan of Sting. I am not a mark either for the record.
2007-11-16 18:47:49 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I have been a wrestling fan for about 30 years now and I agree that TNA is actually better than the WWE right now.
2007-11-16 19:17:17 · answer #5 · answered by komets.geo 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
So Sting, Hall, Nash, and the Steiners are all in their primes?
Ha.ha.ha....
TNA has the worst booking in all of professional wrestling. With the amount of talent that is on their roster Impact should be TEN times better than what it is.
TNA has some of the most complicated gimmick matches in the industry. King of the Mountain and Reverse Battle Royale have more confusing stipulations than any gimmick match in the WWE.
You are a biased TNA Sheep, and you are calling us marks?
Wake up you fool.
2007-11-16 18:37:12 · answer #6 · answered by «G6260» 6 · 4⤊ 2⤋
tna seems as its held in a garage buh the only thing i like about tna is the wrestling moves that they use (high flying etc)
buh oce agin wwe tops tna
2007-11-16 18:36:15 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
TNA has all the has been wrestlers, and the WWE Rejects.
2007-11-16 18:35:08 · answer #8 · answered by deshi 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yeah Pacman Jones had a lot of natural wrestling ability. TNA and WWE both suck compared to ROH.
2007-11-16 18:33:46 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
ur prob tha smartest damn wrestlin fan on here everybody should switch to tna and stop wastin time on wwe its tryin come back but it is slowly so in the meanwhile lets see tna kill wwe like wcw
2007-11-16 18:36:20 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋