Thread: Big stars that didn't draw
View Single Post
Old 03-09-2011, 01:13 AM   #5
Jordan
It's a blood match!
 
Jordan's Avatar
 
Posts: 27,382
Jordan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jordan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jordan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jordan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jordan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jordan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jordan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jordan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jordan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jordan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jordan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jordan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jordan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisat928 View Post
Have drawn.

Have drawn.

Have drawn.

Yes, they may have been draws at one time, but they ain't done shit for TNA. Their sub-10,000 PPV buys prove that pretty well.

A good PPV buy rate is 10% of your average TV audience.

TNA averages 1.1 million people per week. That should translate into 110,000 PPV buys. TNA is lucky to get 1%, many times it's below that.

This proves no one in TNA is a draw.
You raise valid points, but the talent is not to blame it is the who damn production. From the studio audience to the creative, the ADD booking style and alignment changes. Sting is a draw, Jeff Hardy is a draw, Kurt Angle the same... Hell even RVD, the thing is their name was interesting for a few moments, until creative made them so run of the mill and uninteresting that they couldn't draw if they tried.

So your right and wrong in a lot of ways. But in the case of TNA, let us never blame the talent, because they do have a great roster that could be really good but their creative makes it unbearable. TNA itself is an "anti-draw" by this point. To me there is nothing they can do except withstand the test of time and give me a few good years so that basically their entire history is forgotten and replaces with goodness.
Jordan is offline   Reply With Quote