Why WWE is still better than TNA?

Canada
May 29, 2009 6:25pm CST
i have seen some people prefer TNA more than WWE. i tried to watch TNA but i got bored after watching some promos. most of the TNA storylines and characters look plain stupid and pointless to me. for example, let's talk about tna characters. there are characters like "shark boy" and "curryman", i mean come on what kind of names are those. these names sound very childish and they don't sound serious at all. tna matches are okay but overall they need to put more effort in my opinion. here's a list why i think WWE is still better than TNA: 1. WWE can promote a match much better than TNA, a very simple match can get overwhelming publicity in WWE compared to TNA. 2. WWE is in the business for a very long period of time, therefore they have more experience. 3. TNA has too many unrealistic characters while WWE has mostly serious but simple characters. the list goes on and on. what i am trying to say is, no matter what tna does wwe will still be the better.
4 responses
@flyhun (28)
• Germany
31 May 09
Yeah, it's true that WWE is still or will always be better than TNA. Seriously, it's so hard to beat them. That's a billion dollar company which has been around for decades. How big is it? Like 20 times as big as TNA? It takes a lot for TNA to beat WWE cuz first off, they need the budget and secondly, they need a creative team that creates very, very good storylines. But nowadays, it's real hard to create a good storyline even in WWE. And besides, TNA holds impact only in Orlando while WWE travels around America for their shows and even go overseas quite regularly.
1 person likes this
• Canada
3 Jun 09
tna has some great superstars, but like you said their storyline is no good. i am not saying wwe's storyline is really great but at least it's better than tna's.
• United States
30 May 09
TNA may not be able to match WWE in some areas, it does match them in match quality. For a smaller company, they do a really good job and have a 2 hour show. They may have WWE's throw aways, but isn't the current ECW champ a former TNA wrestler - meaning that WWE also looks to TNA for talent and a lot is said for that.
1 person likes this
• Canada
30 May 09
current ecw champion is a former tna superstar? yes that's right, but that former tna superstar was a former wwf superstar. remember christian was in wwe before he went to tna. so in one sense, he actually came back where he belongs.
@dreamr802 (985)
• United States
29 May 09
I agree with you. My boyfriend loves watching wrestling of any kind, so I have learned to deal with it. LOL. But compare the two, I like WWE vs. TNA. I think TNA can be stupid at times...I don't like the main event mafia I think Booker T is soooo annoying! But yeah I like WWE the best too.
• Canada
29 May 09
booker t did a very decent job back in wwe but not sure how he is doing in tna (since i don't watch tna). i think tna sounds very lame, at least wwe has some interesting plots.
@sheetalnr (586)
• India
16 Oct 09
I agree with that. The problem with TNA i feel, is that they do not manage their talent properly and they do not have outstanding matches on PPVs other than the X division wrestlers and few exceptions.