|
Post by PureHatred on Oct 14, 2006 0:04:05 GMT -5
Here's the other major difference between Jarrett and Trips: at no point in his entire career has Jarrett ever ever EVER been a draw.
misterb is 100% right. None of the guys that Jarrett has "pui over" have ever benefitted from their "push." TNA's booking of Jarrett borders on the ludicrous and Christian's run was derailed by the fact that even though he was the champion, he was never treated as the star of the show and his feud was never the primary storyline.
Rhino came off looking like a joke and he's really nothing more than a glorified midcarder.
Joe is sort of a wait and see proposition.
As for the Raven situation: he was absolutely the most popular, over worker on the roster and the contract situation was a BS excuse. Not only did him not beating JJ completely kill the company's momentum, but when he finally did get the tile shortly before Impact debuted he didn't have long-term deal in place either.
This debate has been done to death on these boards and I'm still stunned that anyone thinks that what Jarrett does is good for business. He's not a draw and if it wasn't for the fact that he has the ownership wrapped around his fingers there's not a single reason why he would be headlining a major wrestling company. If you take away his backstage influence he has nothing going for him.
|
|
|
Post by Splattercat on Oct 14, 2006 10:36:41 GMT -5
Off topic: Welcome back PH...Good to seeya...
|
|
|
Post by Mad Dog on Oct 14, 2006 13:01:05 GMT -5
It was company policy. One thing early TNA did right was make sure the WWE couldn't sign their champions away. Remember the XWF? They signed Curt Hennig for no other reason than to mess that company up.
|
|
|
Post by PureHatred on Oct 14, 2006 18:38:35 GMT -5
It was company policy. One thing early TNA did right was make sure the WWE couldn't sign their champions away. Remember the XWF? They signed Curt Hennig for no other reason than to mess that company up. OK..realistically, do you honestly think the WWE would've signed Raven back after the way his run went there? or more importantly, would Raven have been willing ot go back to the WWE? Scoot Levy has shown a history of turning down money to stay in a company where he's happiest. He hated the WWE, he hated the bookers, and he wasn't going back. It was a dumb decision and it completely killed Raven's heat and derailed the company's momentum at the time. And regardless, it still doesn't change the fact that Jarrett has consistently used his influence to keep the focus on himself to the detriment of the company. Any other reasoning beyond JJ's selfishness is just making excuses.
|
|
|
Post by misterb on Oct 14, 2006 23:59:06 GMT -5
Mad Dog, I completely agree with many of your points about HHH. HHH is a huge reason why I have stopped watching wrestling as much as I used to. But, under no circumstances am I ever going to say that I think Jarrett is a better heel than HHH.
Yes, HHH does many anti-heel things during his whole "I'll rule Raw as a heel" run, but a lot of the things you mentioned Jarrett doing are passe in today's wrestling world. Fans don't care about the tactics - that's USWA-esque. (Sorry, Memphis and Dallas fans, but that's what I always think after reading Foley's book.) They care about the personalities. Big Show hasn't won many matches by using "heel tactics" in ECW - he's been booked as a heel and used as a heel, and he's gotten over as a heel. (As much as anyone in ECW is over.)
The question is, would Jarrett ever put Angle over? In the short term, yes. In the long term,, he would find a way to make sure Angle falls back, just the way HHH has done for years now. It's killing WWE, and it's pretty much already killed TNA.
|
|