Gerweck.net

16 Responses

1. Kerry says:

   January 17, 2012 at 9:12 pm

   I’m honestly surprised they’ve lasted 10 years. They’ve slowly been declining the last 3 or 4 years, even before Hogan & Bischoff were brought in.
2. Henry Jones says:

   January 17, 2012 at 9:26 pm

   @Kerry, and they will last another 10 years
3. Sean says:

   January 17, 2012 at 9:29 pm

   It’s amazing and sad how far TNA has fallen. Five or six years ago, TNA was awesome. Now it straight up blows.
4. Tim says:

   January 17, 2012 at 9:40 pm

   Nice to see that “Impact Wrestling” wrestling is really dedicated to their rebranding and getting away from the TNA name. Morons.
5. cold says:

   January 17, 2012 at 9:49 pm

   Some of you MARKS kill me with the whole I thought TNA would be dead by now, jargon and rubish…

   Spike and TNA must be happy with 1.5 Million viewers weekly,

   If TNA doesn’t do it for you, then don’t watch.
6. fourtuneth wall says:

   January 17, 2012 at 9:56 pm

   Yeah, but if you count up the in-ring action, it was only an average of 4 years of wrestling. [/zing]
7. raven12516 says:

   January 17, 2012 at 10:03 pm

   I stopped watching TNA when they brought in Kurt Angle.
8. Tim says:

   January 17, 2012 at 10:07 pm

   I was just commenting on how they had this big rebranding last year getting away from the name and everything still has TNA on it. I like TNA better than other wrestling organizations.
9. Fisha695 says:

   January 17, 2012 at 10:14 pm

   @Time, It wasn’t a rebranding to get away from the TNA name, it was a rebranding to get rid of the “iMPACT” name. Sort of like how “Monday Night RAW” became “RAW is WAR” which became “RAW” which then became “RAW Supershow”.
10. Atlee Greene says:

    January 17, 2012 at 11:23 pm

    It’s sad that TNA has lasted longer than ECW. It’s shows that it is not always about quality.
11. Tim says:

    January 17, 2012 at 11:39 pm

    @Fisha, I always read they were trying to get rid of TNA because they would go into big corporate meetings and they were asked their companie’s name. Then they said we represent TNA and they got alot of nasty looks like “Tits N Ass”? Dixie and Hogan and more have said that they were trying to get away from TNA not Impact. I mean if they were trying to get rid of the Impact name then why name it Impact Wrestling.
12. David says:

    January 18, 2012 at 5:33 am

    Idiots, TNA actually is growing while WWE is declining.
13. Craptacular says:

    January 18, 2012 at 9:05 am

    @David… one thing is clear: WWE is GROWING UP not for the hardcore wrestling fans but for the children and girls that gives their money al the weeks (or makes a huge influence for men to buy every WWE product)…

    In fact it doesn’t matter the quality of wrestLing ‘CAUSE if you want the success of a mark… the only important thing is THE MONEY… MONEY, MONEY, MONEY, MONEY…
14. -J- says:

    January 18, 2012 at 10:03 am

    only thing I’ve seen TNA grow was more distant from what made them different and unique.

    x-division, home grown talent aside from a select few roode and storm come to mind, and knockouts have all taken a backseat to the ex wcw and wwe guys. Brand identity is in a state of crisis, they don’t even know what to call the damn promotion anymore.

    Not to seem hyper-critical but how is there significant growth in a product that can barely sell tickets domestically or internationally yet they have been in business for 10 years and air nationally?

    TNA is stagnant, and I used to be a TNA fan back around 2005-06 when it was a way more entertaining product.
15. Joan B. in S.C. says:

    January 18, 2012 at 5:06 pm

    Just had to give props to fourtuneth wall. Thank you!
16. echo says:

    January 18, 2012 at 8:10 pm

    How is TNA declining when they had their highest average ratings ever last year?